97
   

Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

 
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Sun 6 Apr, 2008 03:55 pm
suspendi
Quote:
Can't you see that the "conspiracy" wants everybody down in the dumps so it can exploit the results? With fake palliatives, correctives, treatments and endless spouting.


Oh, you are interested in a conspiracy? Im sorry, this is the Intelligent Design Thread. Conspiracy threads are under the direct ownership of members ZIPPO a,nd BLUEFLAME.
0 Replies
 
Diest TKO
 
  1  
Sun 6 Apr, 2008 04:17 pm
Francis wrote:
Diest TKO wrote:
.. but whether or not some individuals can function in a society without religion..



Where's that?


You cut my statement in half.

T
K
O
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Sun 6 Apr, 2008 04:55 pm
How far is a light year in a leap year?

Bearing in mind that there is an infinite number of leap years because a quarter of infinity is infinity and so those billions of year old galaxies, some of which ceased to exist before life appeared on earth, are not as old as these scientists are making out, or as young, despite photographs of them looking so cute and all, studio shots one might say, and serve only to make the aforesaid scientists look good even while they are shooting you a load of bullshit.

Have you any idea how far light can travel on Feb 29th?

Error is an understatement.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Sun 6 Apr, 2008 06:25 pm
Thats your barroom problem spendi . It oughta keep your dypso friends busy for a month or two.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Mon 7 Apr, 2008 03:12 am
We solved in a few seconds fm but then we remembered that it bends.

Quote:
Oh, you are interested in a conspiracy? Im sorry, this is the Intelligent Design Thread.


I thought they were synonyms.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Mon 7 Apr, 2008 03:58 am
Heres a really clear view of Wesetrn US and Canada from multiple scans by the Multi-Angle Imaging SpectroRadiometer. The neat thing is how well the "Snake River Plain" shows up. This is the flat feature in the center of the photo and is interpreted as a moving crust over a "hotspot in the upper mantle".VERY CLEAR SATELLITE IMAGE

This also includes one of the best shots of the San ANdreas Fault zone
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Mon 7 Apr, 2008 04:08 am
spendi
Quote:
We solved in a few seconds fm but then we remembered that it bends.


Good for you spendi. I can hear the barroom discussion even now.

"Whash a SHpeeda light on a leap day ?"

"WHAaat"?

"I shed washa shpeeda light on a fuggin leap day, you Materialist shwine"

"Issa SHame as any other day, you shmelly olle fart"

"Oh yeah ash right", gimme another fuggin beer while I recall my CHarlemagne"

"NOOO Pooftaahs" (O wait, I get my accents mixed up, that was Australian)
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Mon 7 Apr, 2008 09:37 am
A few recent travesties by AIDs-ers.

No 1-Bernie trolls in with some stuff about call-girls and spanking. For what reason I don't really know but he said he just had to post it somewhere. And it was a mere incident in a world of a myriad incidents every minute.

Here's another from the Daily Mirror under a heading LAYING THE TABLE-

Quote:
Arthur Price, 40, has been charged with public indecency after he was taped having sex with his patio picnic table in Bellvue,Ohio.


I gather from associates who listen to the radio that the hole in which the parasol fitted was the mover and shaker in the event.

Mr Mosely hasn't been charged with anything so far as I know.

No 2- I get accused of trolling despite my known contribution to this thread and Bernie is let off unscathed. It looks like a troll is an IDer. Hadn't you better let Wiki know?

No 3- TCR accuses me a frightening people off the science forums, he must think you are all twembling yikkle violets and Foxy is on the record as having been driven off this thread by AIDs-ers.

No 4- Settin'Aah-aah compliments Francis for being "astute" because he said something I have been saying from the beginning and takes the opportunity to show off his command of French.

No5- fm is gobsmacked over my light science and segues into saying we are all too drunk to speak properly in the pub.

And there are many other examples.

I think light travels 16,070,400,000 miles on Feb 29th. Or 10,800 times the distance to the sun.

Abell 1835 IR 1916 is said by scientists to be 13,230 million light years away so there's a lot of Feb 29ths in that.

And it goes even dafter on the infinitessimal side.

I was watching NASCAR on the plasma screen and it suddenly struck me that there were the modern scientists. Forever in Blue Jeans was playing on the Juke Box. The science of emotions.

The Mad Scientist is a cliche and those nerds in the labs with their hornrimmed spectacles who clock off at 4 pm to go home to mow the lawns and clean their cars are all as sane as sane gets. The real madmen now are that NASCAR lot.

The producer who was switching from camera to camera, split screening and all the other tricks must be very much like the organist in a cathedral playing Bach.

That's ID. Beautiful television. Stunning. The future.

You define it your way if you want but don't think I don't know your reasons. You're a bunch of old-fashioned fuddie-duds who can't keep up.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Mon 7 Apr, 2008 11:02 am
Dont worry spendi, when you screw it up, we can fix it.
0 Replies
 
Wolf ODonnell
 
  1  
Mon 7 Apr, 2008 11:44 am
I see Spendi is still linking irrelevant crap to a pro-scientific stance, calling it the result of anti-ID, without proving that the irrelevancies has anything to do with being against a spurious piece of bad theology (ironically known as Intelligent Design) in the first place.

P.S. The IAU recommends that in calculating a light-year, you use the figure 365.25 days. Astronomers use parsecs.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Mon 7 Apr, 2008 02:08 pm
I was merely offering examples of where the AIDs-er's general mental state gets a person who adopts it. I had no expectation that an AIDs-er would approve of my doing so.

And I don't recall seeing the parsec in use on here.


Quote:


I notice you have failed to address the main point which is another astonishing feature of the AIDs-er's mind set.

Are you scared of discussing the psychosomatic problem and the one about religion being a necessity in a society. We are all aware that individuals can do without religion in a religious society.

The NASCAR ceremonies are entirely religious in respect of the emotional needs of the congregation. The "near" death experience. Which one driver claimed is fixed like wrestling.

Why did an AIDs-er call me a troll and not Bernie? Answer- because he hasn't a scientific bone in his body and is against religion for personal reasons associated with him wishing to do something religious people condemn.

I'm here to tell him that those things are wrong and the more they are rejected the closer we will come to the smash-up. And that AIDS-ing is merely a justification for degenerate behaviour and nothing to do with science which is why no serious scientist backs it. Hence its popularity in cityscapes noted for amorality which is a meaningless word to an atheist.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Mon 7 Apr, 2008 02:12 pm
Any plonker can assert that Intelligent Design is a " spurious piece of bad theology."

Explanations are required.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Mon 7 Apr, 2008 03:10 pm
and any plankton brain can assert that it is good science.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Mon 7 Apr, 2008 03:35 pm
I have not just asserted it. What it is fm is that you have forgotten my 3 years of contributions to this discussion and are merely considering my last post and quietly skirted by the previous one with your eyes averted. If we have to begin everything we say as if nothing had been said previously we would be forever introducing ourselves.

And my contributions have been inhibited by what the elected representitive from Louisiana called "controversial issues" which I have only risked hinting at. When I said that I had one hand tied behind my back I meant it but I expect you have forgotten that as well.

I have shown that Science and our Religion are intimately connected and are the foundation stones of Western society and challenged AIDs-ers to show how we can do without one of them and rely on the other in future. And you have all shied away from that and have offered not one glimpse of your vision for the future with total reliance on Science.

And we don't accept that total reliance-well then? We keep Religion. Which is evolving and quite rapidly in Darwinian timescales and fast enough for me to see it doing so if not you. But I read class literature so I have an advantage. And that's all interconnected too. And I don't forget what was in previous books when I start the next one. Poor literature is all disconnected. That's why I mention the authors I do so that some might be Abled 2 Know about all this stuff.

I've taken on the cliched names and you the fashionable ones.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Mon 7 Apr, 2008 06:32 pm
Like the drug industry took on all the shaman cures, analysed them, synthesised them and gave them all new names so they could pretend they had designed them.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Mon 7 Apr, 2008 07:38 pm
spendi
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have not just asserted it. What it is fm is that you have forgotten my 3 years of contributions to this discussion and are merely considering my last post
.Oh , on the contrary. I am factoring your 3 years of "contributions" , most of which were like some wino dribbling tobacco juice , and cursing at passing traffic. Youve never come close to making a compelling argument on almost any topic other than mere random recall and "force fitting" of crazy quilt quotes into the discussion. Thats just gibberish. Ill rest my case on te grounds that you are an intelligent , albeit , superficially informed person re:the technical areas of your posts

Quote:
I have shown that Science and our Religion are intimately connected and are the foundation stones of Western society and challenged AIDs-ers to show how we can do without one of them and rely on the other in future. And you have all shied away from that and have offered not one glimpse of your vision for the future with total reliance on Science
. You have shown nothing of the sort. In order to make this point, please try to add some scholarly evidence .(cf H.Wendt, Frank Spencer, or I Tatersall). Your "cases" are based upon thixatropic grounds of logic and personal convictions. I shall not deny your rights to believe whatever you wish, but Im not going to endorse it as anything worth more than a can of spit
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Tue 8 Apr, 2008 03:54 am
Obviously!

But I must have said half-a-dozen times that I have no personal convictions. So your "factoring your 3 years of "contributions" " isn't working as well as you seem to think it is. What personal conviction do you think I might have?

and-

Quote:
most of which were like some wino dribbling tobacco juice , and cursing at passing traffic


is mere literary trifling besides which it is official policy these days to curse the passing traffic as a brief glance at the regulations relating to traffic clearly shows and no self respecting wino gets by on 3 pints of beer a day. You sure do have a puritanical streak regarding alcohol fm.

3 pints of 3.2% for a man of my size and activity does not take me above the limit here for driving. Not that I do drive mind you and-

Quote:
But the scientific medical fact is clear: drinking alcohol in moderation is associated with better health and greater longevity than is either abstaining or abusing alcohol.


and I smoke in moderation too and have never chewed the stuff ever. So your jibe is groundless. A fantasy.

Quote:
Youve never come close to making a compelling argument on almost any topic other than mere random recall and "force fitting" of crazy quilt quotes into the discussion.


Maybe not. You're only one reader. And the nature of the case renders nice neat categories impossible. The social organisation of modern complex societies is different from fossils and chemicals. Crazy quilts are quite popular.

I think I made a case that ros uses "troll" to mean someone he disagrees with. As an all purpose insult.

Quote:
you are an intelligent , albeit , superficially informed person re:the technical areas of your posts


Bertrand Russell explains somewhere that with modern specialisation the expert is superficial as soon as he leaves his very narrow field of experise. That we are all superficially informed on everything but our expertise and that is too technical to discuss with anybody not sharing it. The statement you made there is superficial.

Quote:
You have shown nothing of the sort.


A personal judgment not necessarily applicable to all readers and not something I can do anything about. I have shown that AIDs-ers will not answer any questions they don't wish to. Your post is an example.

Quote:
please try to add some scholarly evidence


I have quoted at length many sources which I have had to type out myself.

Quote:
Your "cases" are based upon thixatropic grounds of logic and personal convictions.


for readers information thixatropic means-

Quote:
The property exhibited by certain gels of becoming fluid when stirred or shaken and returning to the semisolid state upon standing.


Allowing the inappropriateness of the conceit I suppose I might plead guilty at a stretch.

I offered the suggestion that the future of science is in the emotional field as the limits of knowledge of everything else are being reached due to instrumentation difficulties. You have not addressed my idea that NASCAR is an essentially religious ceremony. A buzz. Emotional.

And you have not addressed the question of whether a society can do without religion which even two AIDs-ers agreed is the key question.

All you have are assertions with cliched insults interwoven. The crazy quilt of the stumped.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Tue 8 Apr, 2008 04:18 am
well, not really your best response spendi, but, I guess itll have to do. I suppose the only question that remains,

"Is 3.2 beer worth drinking at all, let alone building a life around?" Why not build it around art or music, or candy Korn?.

The rest of your post was merely the rewording of what I previously stated. SO, if Im being copied for effect, maybe Im a better writer than I previously thought.
Im sorry I cant dawdle, and dissect you line-per-line, but duty calls and rocks need pulverizing badly.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Tue 8 Apr, 2008 05:07 am
You really do need to explain why a stroll down to the pub at 22.40 hrs, drinking the health giving nutrient in 3.2% beer in the company of a few people one has known for years and strolling back again at 23.50 hrs (or so) can be classified in the way you have.

There is a lot going on in a pub which only regulars can fathom and most of it is quite interesting if one doesn't underestimate one's companions. I wouldn't like to say what my life is built around as I don't think in such narcissistic terms. Art and music play a part as do many other things such as A2K, sport, earning a living and suchlike mundane activities. Stuff just happens. I wander lonely as a cloud.

You would be a lot better writer if you put down all your opinions and just wing it.

VS Naipaul has a whole raft of opinions and look what a front-bottom he is.
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Tue 8 Apr, 2008 08:34 am
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.11 seconds on 07/01/2025 at 01:25:30