Jesus loves you...

[kirigirisu]

Quack quack quack yourself, Stevie. I've got another flight to catch.

Hope you're having fun. I know I am

Awaiting your so-called "last words" (yet again)...

[n2shotokai]

Sometimes, life is a disappointment. Sometimes, YOU'RE the disappointment

You truly need to work on those self-esteem issues. But remember, "Jesus loves you"!

I've got another flight to catch.

You try way to hard to present yourself as a so-called "mature martial artist" (look at me, I'm important going on a flight yet again, NOT). Perhaps when you graduate High School you will be all that you want to be. Best of luck to you in the new year Billy!

[william northcote]

Well from a nice discussion to a slagging off of everyone. I am going to unsubscribe from this one, to many have turned it into a bad mouth each other thread.

The quicker you guys or okama's get you act together, the quicker we can be nice people. Have fun in the slagging off, I am out of here.

[Onmitsu]

Anyway, my beliefs are based on science.

Tony, It's nice to hear you admit that you will always be wrong, as science often is.

Once I thought I was wrong....alas, I was mistaken.

[Kimpatsu]

Originally posted by Onmitsu
Tony, It's nice to hear you admit that you will always be wrong, as science often is.

Are you serious? Or do you just not know what science is?

[Onmitsu]

Are you serious? Or do you just not know what science is?

Yes, Tony I know what science is. Science is your religion.
by the way some UK scientist are having a rough go of it here recently:

from BBC NEWS
Beagle 'might be in a crater'

Did Beagle fall down this crater?
Beagle 2 may have fallen down a crater on Mars recently discovered near where the lander was due to touch down, scientists on the project have said.

Scientists said there was a remote possibility it landed in the crater, which may be about one kilometre wide.

If this is so, there is "no way" it can communicate with Earth, but scientists stressed this scenario was "unlikely".

Professor Colin Pillinger, lead scientist on the Beagle 2 project, said this was the "absolutely worst case scenario". But he added: "We'd have to be incredibly unlucky that it went right down this crater."

The crater is roughly in the centre of the "landing ellipse" on Mars where Beagle was supposed to have landed on Christmas Day.

Scientists have now set up a "tiger team" of top experts to work through all possible reasons for the silence.?

[Kimpatsu]

Originally posted by Onmitsu
Yes, Tony I know what science is. Science is your religion.

Once again proving that you don't know what science is. Read this article to learn more.
As to the Beagle 2, what exactly is your point? It certainly didn't fly all the way to Mars under the power of prayer.

[bruceb]

How convenient.

Jesus loves me.

Jesus is dead.

Anymore perverts want to say they love me?

Us pagan Romans would be happy to unite ya all with your sissy God....

(that may not be the right way to look at this subject, but is certainly is another way to interpret the facts, isn't it.)

Just kidding ..... for those of you with less than common sense that is a very old joke, not a post.

[Kimpatsu]

Bruce Baker, once again proving that god loves the afflicted...

[Cady Goldfield]

Science isn't "wrong," it is a process by which we sift through all of the possibilities, eliminate the impossibilities, glean through the improbabilities, and eventually arrive at the truth.

The beauty of science, is that it allows us to be wrong, wrong again...until we've discarded the wrong solutions and discover - through scientific proceedure - the right ones. How many generations believed that the universe orbits around the Earth, until the process of science proved the opposite to be true?

What one might see as science as being often "wrong," is just a mid-step in that process.

[Onmitsu]

Tony,
You're an intelligent guy and I admire you for that. What I find offensive is your arrogant assertion that anyone who believes in anything outside of what can be directly observed with their five senses is somehow ignorant or defective. It's no less prejudice than slagging off on someone for the color of their skin. Weather YOU think someone's belief is irrelevant or misinformed is not the point. Having respect for their belief is. I know what I believe and I believe what I know. My skin is not so thin that I would let someone else's opinion hurt my feelings. I respect your humanism and belief in science. It's too bad that your intellectual pride doesn't allow you the same respect for others.
By the way, thanks for the link. I disagree with the author but interesting non the less.

[Tamdhu]

Science is to be heartily thanked for the knowledge, medicines and technologies that have helped us to live longer, healthier lives.

Religion and spiritual teachings have been of tremendous service in bringing hope, comfort and focus to people and communities facing hardships for which no simple logical answer exists.

Both have given birth, also, to their own share of atrocities, of which we all are aware.

The freedom we now take for granted (in the US, at least) is, in fact, a product of the actions of people inspired and bolstered by some degree of religious faith and conviction, using the tools and methods of science to persue those ends.

If we prove to be successful in our seeming eagerness to throw out the one or the other, we run a very grave risk of becoming either a bunch of mumbling bead-fondling Luddites, or another secular, Orwellian State, in which free speech and free thought become the heretical enemies of some self-imposed logical fantasy of 'Brotherhood and Equality Mandated by Force' or what-have-you.

Balance really is important. If you can't pull something of value in terms of comfort and wisdom from 'Do unto others as ye would have others do unto you', or the anecdotal teachings and parables of Jesus, or the Ten Commandments, regardless of your beliefs concerning the unprovable (but nonetheless tremendously powerful) assertions of God and Life Eternal, then I daresay you're not really 'thinking' as much as you might like to 'think' you are. If, as you read your Bible and dream of the glories that await you in Heaven, you neglect to give some thanks for the lights that let you read as far into the night as you wish, and the heating system that keeps your children snug in the dead of winter, then your 'faith' may be taking a little too much for granted.

[bruceb]

Originally posted by Kimpatsu
Bruce Baker, once again proving that god loves the afflicted...

Maybe ... but in a week or so ... when you finally get it ... people will look at you as you laugh ... they will wonder who this lunatic is, and what he is laughing at.

Yep, god does love us lunatics ....

[Kimpatsu]

Originally posted by Onmitsu
Tony,
You're an intelligent guy and I admire you for that. What I find offensive is your arrogant assertion that anyone who believes in anything outside of what can be directly observed with their five senses is somehow ignorant or defective. It's no less prejudice than slagging off on someone for the color of their skin. Weather YOU think someone's belief is irrelevant or misinformed is not the point. Having respect for their belief is. I know what I believe and I believe what I know. My skin is not so thin that I would let someone else's opinion hurt my feelings. I respect your humanism and belief in science. It's too bad that your intellectual pride doesn't allow you the same respect for others.
By the way, thanks for the link. I disagree with the author but interesting non the less.

Greg, I don't assert that our own five senses are the limit to information gathering, so you're wrong again. What I find offensive is this clinging to superstition in the 21st century. Richard Dawkins is right; we need the meme to spread to teach people that religion is both utter nonsense and morally bankrupt.
Have you read the Blind Watchmaker? I heartily recommend it.

[Kimpatsu]

Originally posted by Tamdhu
Religion and spiritual teachings have been of tremendous service in bringing hope, comfort and focus to people and communities facing hardships for which no simple logical answer exists.

John, this sentence demonstrates your misunderstanding, and lack of rational thinking. It should read, "...for which no logical answer has yet been provided".
Do you see the difference?

Originally posted by Tamdhu
Both have given birth, also, to their own share of atrocities, of which we all are aware.

"If knowledge has given birth to problems, I have no confidence in ignorance to solve them"--Isaac Asimov

Originally posted by Tamdhu
The freedom we now take for granted (in the US, at least) is, in fact, a product of the actions of people inspired and bolstered by some degree of religious faith and conviction, using the tools and methods of science to persue those ends.

Utterly untrue. American freedoms were granted by people who had the wisdom to keep church and state separate. Ben Franklin was an agnostic. This is an old canard that has been utterly refuted in the past, but it doesn't stop people with their own religious agenda to promote from repeating the same worn-out lie.

Originally posted by Tamdhu
If we prove to be successful in our seeming eagerness to throw out the one or the other, we run a very grave risk of becoming either a bunch of mumbling bead-fondling Luddites, or another secular, Orwellian State, in which free speech and free thought become the heretical enemies of some self-imposed logical fantasy of 'Brotherhood and Equality Mandated by Force' or what-have-you.

More nonsesne. Another worn-out lie. You can go do what you like, John; we criticla thinkers just don't want it to touch us in any way. Lock yourself in church by all means but do not attempt to teach your superstitions in school, and do not attempt to bring it into the public arena in any way. Why is it that theists automatically assume that not only do they know best, but also that their actions are automatically in everyone elese's best interests?

Originally posted by Tamdhu
Balance really is important.

"If two people dosagree, it is not necessary that the answer lies somewhere between the two viewpoints. One of them can simply be completely wrong"--Richard Dawkins.

Originally posted by Tamdhu
If you can't pull something of value in terms of comfort and wisdom from 'Do unto others as ye would have others do unto you', or the anecdotal teachings and parables of Jesus, or the Ten Commandments, regardless of your beliefs concerning the unprovable (but nonetheless tremendously powerful) assertions of God and Life Eternal, then I daresay you're not really 'thinking' as much as you might like to 'think' you are. If, as you read your Bible and dream of the glories that await you in Heaven, you neglect to give some thanks for the lights that let you read as far into the night as you wish, and the heating system that keeps your children snug in the dead of winter, then your 'faith' may be taking a little too much for granted.

Why do you think the Golden Rule was created by Xpianity? It also exists in Buddhism, Janism, Sikhism, and the Humanist Manifesto.
The parables of Jesus are as pointless as trying to draw laudable moral homilies from other fairy tales, such as Jack and the Beanstalk or Cinderella. And dreaming of what doesn't exist (Heaven) is stupid. The existence of god can be determined scientifically (empirically), because the claim of said existence is a scientific claim, and can be examined as such. And guess what? Said claims fail every time. What is also ridiculous is that your god (which you even write with a capital "g") isn't the god for which there's the best argument, or the god with the best cathedrals, or the best hymns; your god is the god of your parents and of your peers. Religion is inherited, rather than persuaded by reason. (This is axiomatic; there are no actual reasons for believing. Faith is a copout because it is belief without evidence.) And if that doesn't highlight the absurdity of the charade that is religion, then I guess nothing will.