LuckyJohn19 wrote:

Distant Claws - great explanation

Thankyou, if you want to learn about it read Stephen Hawkin’s “A brief history of time”, the book is designed for non physicists (i fill shelves for a living and didn’t study it at school) unlike other books it is casual and entirely descriptive and really opens your eyes, it is where all the stuff i said came from and there is a great deal to be taken in from it without commiting to a course. don’t let complexity discourage curiosity, physics is where i see the front of the religion debate and certainly where there would need to be a link between dimensions in order for us to somehow get to the next life if it exists. afterall i won’t dismiss what i have no way of knowing about.
i strongly recommend this book to everyone and i believe anyone given time and the right mindframe can learn anything, i explain some of this stuff to others and i promise nothing is beyond the understanding of anyone if explained well

IDM: Do you have Carlin’s first album, the one covered with photo vending machine pictures, in which he has no facial hair and short hair?  I found a copy in a cut-out bin at a Woolco store when I was a kid, over 30 years ago.  I had no idea who he was when I bought the album, it was like a dime or so, and I liked the album cover.

Yep, got it. It’s called Take Offs and Put ons. Wasn’t really his first album though it was his first solo album. He had one previously when he was part of the comedy team Burns & Carlin.

Sadie: This lovely soul--the one and only Quiet Beatle.

Ah, okay. I would have know that had it not followed my post about Carlin. I was frantically trying to remember George alive, and I’m sure it hasn’t been five years since the last time I saw him live, but it’s been close.

I would have know that had it not followed my post about Carlin.

I certainly hope Mr. Carlin hasn’t left us yet. He’s one of my favorite comedians as well. Do you have a favorite collection? I’m partial to “Napalm and Silly Putty.” “When Will Jesus Bring the Porkchops” was pretty good, although it recycled quite a bit of his earlier material.

George Carlin: I think I figured out why Americans are so stupid. Think about how stupid the Average American is. Well, HALF of ‘em are stupider than THAT!

I was just doing a search to make sure my favourite comedian is still with us - it’s not as if he’s old; he’s only ten years older than me - it all becomes relative. 

Hey Not Telling.

Missing links.

Please name all your direct forebears for the last 10 generations.  Since to exist you must have a mother and father, and them likewise, to exist you must have 2047 direct ascendants.  If you can’t prove they all exist, neither can you.

LH - the kid doesn’t do logic - it’s not part of his god’s plan.
Apparently blind faith is the trick ... the suspension of all reason.
As the actress said to the bishop: I don’t do tricks. 

Sadie: Do you have a favorite collection? I’m partial to “Napalm and Silly Putty.” “When Will Jesus Bring the Porkchops” was pretty good, although it recycled quite a bit of his earlier material.

I think all of the books have recycled old material somewhat, although Napalm seemed to have more original material. I actually prefer the live stuff more than the books because I love listening to the rhythm of his words and the way he uses language. If I had to pick a favorite, it’s probably be “You Are All Diseased”.

ntyb-no it doesn’t, maybe you need to look up.  i did, and it said,sacrifice-offering,slaughter,victim, scapegoat, a victim in sacrifice.

question for nytb- if your god is suppose to be all knowing, then he would know what a person would do and he would know what you are capable of, so why would he need to “test” you to find out?

hey… sry its been awhile… lets go with some of this stuff shall we?

sml---see statement below about leprechauns/fairies I believe, this would classify as another bitterness case… were this a court of law, i would have objectioin after objection at your slander adn leading the jury. the statement w/ “book of lies” would never fly in a court of law, when discussing the validity of the bible.  Grammer.... spelling… if you can read it, then its good enough… like i said… puntuation and capitalization AND DEFINATELY spelling takes to much time! 

Sexy Sadie… its cute when you think you are right… really now… it is impossible to prove a negative? ic… there is NOT a full-size african bull elephant inside your copmuter monitor.  hmmm… i rather think we could prove that satement dont you?  lets try another shall we? how bout.. “you cant prove a negative” well since we just did, we can prove that satement is false… alright.. that said… i DO see you point it is impossible to prove a negative we have no way of verifying… santa, to do everything he claims, couldnt exist… tooth fairy, would be might stretched… but we cant prove that one… i see your point… but in the area of ignorance you statement… while authoritative was wrong… next?
Zilch… thx for the offer.. i dont drink though… i like being fully alert… granted it IS predictable… but STILL is not understood.  teh reason someone gives you that analogy of the mesuring within a hair, is cause they want you to beleive tis accuracy… anyone can say that about thier work, but it doesnt make it so… um… what was said in the bible as to describing the earth?  also one reason of why we should regard the bible as more than a relic is cause it was written by over 40 different authors, over 1600 years and tehre are no contradictions, and also every prophecy barring those of end times, came true.  that is more than a relic.

LJ/// right… no response…

distant clause.... yupp… good call! that was my point! thx for the back up~

it dont matter… bummer u want me to use smaller words? or i could spell them corretly if you need that…

les… smaller words? or do you need em spelled right too?

LJ.... right… i am not arguing wiht that… USA… is immature… true… not slaves.. adn thats your bitterness with the constant trying to inflict yor hateful views by saying they killed women and children… the actions of a few do not represent the actions of a whole… thats amusing.... thats actually NOT the case… but it is pretty close… we have made wore on otehr people… come back here for reality… i come here to deliver reality… not get it.

Distant Clause… indeed.. tis a good book, although not entirely accurate some of his stuff is not in the least sietifically proven… but he is a good writer, and does explain a lot fo stuff quite accurately… but his word is certainly not acclaimed as scientific law…

KPG… if that man is your personal deity..that is sad… he is one of the greatest fools i have ever heard… anyone can BS>… and sound good to the ignorant… and that is what he has done… adn made much money…

SS… i bet i can scrape through life w/out ur sympathy… we shall see who has utter assynity… although i wish b4 you do find out the turth that you would take what is offered to you, but if not… we shall see… and the way i look at it, if i am right… you are screwed...i am lucky—if i am wrong- i am no worse off and you are no worse off… better safe than sorry!

LJ… not in the least… i would hope that someone would actually bring some real material instead of just ideas into htis… distinct C brough some great stuff to hte table… i didnt think it was a throw away… it was though provoking… and still hasnt been answered through sience… hawkings book as acredited as THEORY ... not fact.

DC… i agree this is a vital issue over differnet debates, cause we need to explain where we came from… and like you said, a big bang is hard to beleive… but so is creation… i chose one… that i think is a possible option.... in my opinion creation is just as possible as a big bang out of nothing....  casue wehre did nothing come from? its all very hard to understand… (for me) but i think it is great to try to deepen the mind so i like what you are brining! thx!

skipping some to ...

LAst HUSSAR… yall are so cute when you try to play the analogy game!!!! lets put it in a DIFFERENT light… let ME give an analogy… to meet evolution standards… all i would have to do is prove 2 of my ancestors… say 8 generations ago… no prob… thats actually the case… if i ahve to name all 2000 to prove my validity then evolution should have to have more than 4… does that make sense to you? but nice try! cute analogy, although entirley irrelevant

LJ… uh huh… show me logic… you have shown me possibilities…

jory… i dont know where you got that… lets try merriam webster…

an act of offering to a deity something precious

a : destruction or surrender of something for the sake of something else b : something given up or lost

it is jsut like you know what a dog is CAPABLE of.. but will he choose to do it… abraham was CAPABLE… but would he choose to do it?  MAn has a free will to make choices…

I hope yall will continue to ponder what is said, I hope that someday, you will be able t oanswer what happens after death…
yours truly…

..."you cant prove a negative” well since we just did,…

Nice try. You can prove that there is no chinchilla in your living room. You can also prove that there is not a pink leprechaun climbing on your shoulder right at this very moment. But what if someone tells you that the chinchilla and the leprechaun are both invisible and leave no traces of tactile evidence of their presences? You can’t logically disprove that. You have every reason to believe that your friend needs a good dose of Thorazine, but you can’t for certain prove him wrong. The same is the case with god and Santa Claus.

This does not, of course, imply that there is any good reason to believe in either god or Santa Claus, just as there is no good reason to believe in the existence of invisible chinchillas or pink leprechauns dry-humping your shoulder.

Nothing like the smell of comment trolls in the morning.

SS ~~~~~i am not saying that you can prove all negatives… but a blanket statement really shows your ignorance when you say you cant prove a negative. you can prove some negatives… but some obviously you cant… God… And invisible trollls get taht distinction… but like i said… i am right… i am happy… i am wrong… no losss.... you are right you are happy… you are wrong everything lost. yeah well i just slapped my shoulder… and there is no visible effect on me of that happeneing… so i think i am safe there…

Les--- mmmm doesnt it smell good!

Sincerely.... 

SRCT
(some random comment troll)

You’re starting to wear my patience thin. If all you’ve got to offer is Pascal’s Wager then move on to another site. We’ve been over that one many times before. It’s a flawed argument that oversimplifies.

What Les said. I don’t think you’re in any position to complain about other people “showing their ignorance,” NTYB.

The only white-skinned people y’all ever made war upon were Germans but that’s only cos they wanted to rule the world and hell .. that’s your job.

And the British (American Revolutionary War, War of 1812) Spanish (Spanish-American War), French (Undeclared War of 1788), themselves (American Civil War), France again and Italy (World War 2).

LAst HUSSAR… yall are so cute when you try to play the analogy game!!!! lets put it in a DIFFERENT light… let ME give an analogy… to meet evolution standards… all i would have to do is prove 2 of my ancestors… say 8 generations ago… no prob… thats actually the case… if i ahve to name all 2000 to prove my validity then evolution should have to have more than 4… does that make sense to you? but nice try! cute analogy, although entirley irrelevant

Dear “Mamatoldmeiamabasturd” I was meer ly aksing fro teh sam eproof thatyou want form evolushun iam beginin tos uspekt youcant provide that amny fourfavers as most of them weer cousinsat best and poss bro and sisin sum cases i realise that justb cause u cant doent meen u doent exsist teh fing abot a feory si that i doent hav to meshure evry rite angled triangle to kno that x^2 + y^2 =z^2

Now, I have been good enough to answer you in your language, is there any chance of you using English, with punctuation in the correct place and everything?

ntub-i looked
in 3 dictionarys, and it said nothing like that, the things i wrote were the exact words out of a dictionary, i saw nothing about offering a diety something precious, it said holacaust though to.a victim in sacrifice,not something precious offered to a diety,and it also said “giving something up for nothing in return”. i agree with that one. your probably looking it up in that dictionary in the back of the bible.whatever, go sacrifice yourself.

Not Telling, admidst a lot of other silly shit, tried to say this:

also one reason of why we should regard the bible as more than a relic is cause it was written by over 40 different authors, over 1600 years and tehre are no contradictions, and also every prophecy barring those of end times, came true.

NO CONTRADICTIONS? What planet are you from, son?
Here, take a look at this site and see jusr some of the Bible’s glaring contradictions....

NTYB spews forth with the following:

i am right… i am happy… i am wrong… no losss.... you are right you are happy… you are wrong everything lost.

Good ol’ Pascal’s Wager. Too bad it doesn’t provide a very good reason to believe in god(s). Let’s assume for a moment that there is a god. Pascal’s Wager does not provide any information on which god or gods may exist. Your inevitable assertion that it is the “true” Christian god is a matter of faith alone.

Nor does Pascal’s Wager explain anything about the appropriate behavior or beliefs the existence of a god would entail. What if the supposed god rewards skepticism and punishes blind faith? What if the god doesn’t require any belief in his/her/its existence at all?

Finally, you ask what does one have to lose by being wrong about belief in god(s)? Depending on the individual and the particular beliefs involved, there is potentially quite a bit to lose. I have no reason to believe in your god or your concepts of the afterlife. I do have every reason to believe that I am here now, and that the best I can do is enjoy the life I am living.

...we shall see who has utter assynity…

Presumably the person who can’t spell “asininity.”

...but a blanket statement really shows your ignorance when you say you cant prove a negative. you can prove some negatives.

You were the one who waltzed onto this site claiming that it’s possible to disprove Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy but not god(s). A silly thing to say in its own right, and I called you on it. I also modified my claim about when it is and is not possible to prove a negative. Now you accuse me of making blanket statements? Unbelievable.

also one reason of why we should regard the bible as more than a relic is cause it was written by over 40 different authors, over 1600 years and tehre are no contradictions…

If that were true then you’d see more rational people buying everything the Bible has to say.

/done feeding the troll

SS:

NTYB spews forth with the following:

It takes too much time to parse the prattle.

les- dont think its to oversimplified for yall.  Yall ready to give up… want me to leave?

SS- what i said to les.... goes for you.

Mick… yup i think thats about it though… thx for the facts.

LH.. finally someone who can type- although some of those were unnnescesary typos..

lets just look at some of the links…

Neanderthal man- found 1857 germany, believed to be mising link, later proved to have full sized brain, and stooped mainly due arthiritis, and lack of vitiamin d.

Cro-magnon discovered 1868 France.—again scientist decide that this is just eh remains of another human who lived and looked much the same as we do.

java man- approx 1890… Closer examination showed that the teeht were from an arangutan, and the thigh bone was from a modern man.

piltdown man -1911-- about 40 years later, this new missinglink was discovered to be nothing more than human bones, doctored t olook old, and it was also discovered that different parts fo this creature didnt all come from the same species…

so far.... tell me any missing link that has been found- your analogy was not accurate. i dont want every thing to be proved via evolution only 1 or 2… so far, none…

oh an not a chance… not a chance…

jory try looking on merriam webster, known as one of the more accurate dictionaries of the english language. 

KPG… i looked at that site… it is foolish and can manipulate a few verses by dragging them out of context, woo-woo… hold on, heres one here…

Which first--beasts or man?

GEN 1:25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
GEN 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

GEN 2:18 And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.
GEN 2:19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.

i am thinking he is trying to say in the second set, that animals were created after man, but it says “God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam” and that kinda seems like adam was already there… so not sure what he is thinking, if he is so foolish as that he cant even realize that verses dont have to be in chronological order, than wow…

SS… of course it is a matter of faith! 

mm hmm… you dont want to be responsible for yuor actions, so you desire to eliminate god.... dont thin kthats a new concept, many people have done that b4 you, and some try to create gods to fit thier lifestyles… so what you ahve to lose is the stuff, your consience, something you also cant get around- a consiene god implanted in everyone- your consience tellls you is wrong, but you want to tell it, its not wrong casue no one cares… like i said, nothing new there…

indeed,

i more or less modified my calim of not being able to prove the exsistience of TF/ Santa… but we did ascertain that santa is no phisically possible. and that was where i was going, you cant prove that god is not phisically possible. i guess you could say taht santa was a diety that would not be bound by the constraints of time… maybe that could be your god… i think thatd fit just bout perfect.

actually multiple rational adn brilliant people have bought/accepted what teh bible says.

ok im out… talk with yall later

Dear InbredBasturd
You don’t really believe in God, you just think you do. The Flying Spagetti Monster puts these thoughts into your head. You don’t think anything you type, you are just a puppet who will not go to heaven with his noodleness. Yours posts are those of an incosequential troll, and should be ignored apart from KPG et al to gather their friends to and laugh at your subnormal IQ and self importance. You are mentally and physically disabled, and can only type because the FSM controls your hands.

ntyb writes…

les- dont think its to oversimplified for yall.  Yall ready to give up… want me to leave?

Which just shows what a moron you are. I said it’s an oversimplified argument that’s long been refuted. There’s nothing to give up because you haven’t really said anything that’s a challenge yet.

You are about two more trollish posts from being banned, though.

Les, he’s either

1) a troll- in which case lets laugh at him but not reply

or

2) A fuckwit- in which case lets laugh at him but not reply.