Page 13 of 34 FirstFirst ... 38910111213141516171823 ... LastLast
Results 241 to 260 of 675
  1.    #241  
    By the way, I never stated that atheists could not know right from wrong. I asked the question, "Who decides what is right and what is wrong?" You said Society could decide, our nature could decide. But what makes our society more fit to decide what is right and wrong than any other animal on this planet?
  2. #242  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur View Post
    Shop, I don't know if you ever read Hitchhikers guide to the galaxy
    Not yet.
    Quote Originally Posted by surur View Post
    . In it there was a company who's main business was to create bespoke planets, but they would not just create a nice surface, but would actually include sedimentary layers and fossils and all the things that give an indication of a planet much older than it is. Even fjords.

    On Earth there are many many many indications that the earth is very old. Certainly older than 100 000 years, and its normally quotes at 4.5 billion years old. However it seems most creationist believe the earth is actually much younger, and the only explanation, if we do not discount all the processes, is that God set up the planet to look older to any intelligent being who would bother looking in to it, and therefore chose to mislead us as to the real age of the planet.

    Why would God do that?
    An inaccurate conclusion on my part does not equate to deceit on your part
    Quote Originally Posted by surur View Post
    On the other hand, he does some rather bizarre things in the Bible so I would not put that beyond Him.,
    Quote Originally Posted by surur View Post
    Maybe He hired Slartibartfast and that was just part of the package.

    Surur
  3. #243  
    Quote Originally Posted by Musicman247 View Post
    Atheist, from Greek atheos, godless : a-, without; see a-1 + theos, god - root Greek

    http://www.yourdictionary.com/ahd/a/a0495200.html
    Clever but wrong...Atheist from Greek theos meaning god, a - without, a+theos = without god.
    Have a great one...Doc D.

    Phillips VELO > Palm III > Palm V > Palm 505m > Treo 180 > Treo 300 > Samsung i500 > Treo 700p > HTC 6800 > Treo 800w > Treo Pro > Palm Pre > HTC Evo
  4. #244  
    Quote Originally Posted by shopharim View Post
    An inaccurate conclusion on my part does not equate to deceit on your part.
    An inaccurate conclusion on my part does not automatically equate to deceit on your part....

    But if I give you many many indications that something it true when its actually false, then I am misleading you. You may argue that God set the record straight in the bible, and that we should ignore all the physical evidence in front of our eyes, but I would say God is asking a bit much.

    Surur
  5. #245  
    Quote Originally Posted by backbeat View Post
    Wouldn't it be most appropriate for such a personal matter as one's religious beliefs be exclusively taught at home and/or a place of worship?
    Teaching someone about what the beliefs ARE is different than teaching someone what to believe.

    Chris
  6. #246  
    Quote Originally Posted by Musicman247 View Post
    By the way, I never stated that atheists could not know right from wrong. I asked the question, "Who decides what is right and what is wrong?" You said Society could decide, our nature could decide. But what makes our society more fit to decide what is right and wrong than any other animal on this planet?
    Two things

    1) We have an inherent benefit from seeing society and culture survive, so making laws and rules to promote our soecity is good for us.

    2) Why can we decide what is right and wrong better than another animal? Simply because we HAVE THE CONCEPTS of right and wrong.

    Chris
  7.    #247  
    Quote Originally Posted by cjvitek View Post
    IMO, the concept of omniscience contradicts the concept of free will.

    If somoen, anyone KNOWS what I am going to do before I do it (as omniscience would indicate) than I do not have free will, because the outcome is determined.

    I may have the appearance of free will, but I don't actually have it.

    Chris
    Just because you know how something will turn out, does not mean that the person doesn't make their own choices on how things happen.
  8. backbeat's Avatar
    Posts
    55 Posts
    Global Posts
    138 Global Posts
    #248  
    Quote Originally Posted by cjvitek View Post
    Teaching someone about what the beliefs ARE is different than teaching someone what to believe.

    Chris
    Quite true and I agree in principle. However, with political agendas being stuffed with funds, an open arena such as public education can be highly volatile ground. Local/regional religious or cultural bias seems to consistently seep through the cracks of our best intentions of neutrality.
  9.    #249  
    Quote Originally Posted by TreoNewt View Post
    Clever but wrong...Atheist from Greek theos meaning god, a - without, a+theos = without god.
    I copied and pasted directly from the online dictionary. I changed no part.
  10.    #250  
    Quote Originally Posted by cjvitek View Post
    Two things

    1) We have an inherent benefit from seeing society and culture survive, so making laws and rules to promote our soecity is good for us.

    2) Why can we decide what is right and wrong better than another animal? Simply because we HAVE THE CONCEPTS of right and wrong.

    Chris
    Where did those concepts come from?
  11.    #251  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur View Post
    An inaccurate conclusion on my part does not automatically equate to deceit on your part....

    But if I give you many many indications that something it true when its actually false, then I am misleading you. You may argue that God set the record straight in the bible, and that we should ignore all the physical evidence in front of our eyes, but I would say God is asking a bit much.

    Surur
    Radioisotope dating is faulty at best.

    In layman's terms it supposedly can tell when the last time a rock solidified from a molten state by measuring different isotopes found within the rock sample. Rock samples taken from the lava dome at Mt. St. Helens were dated to be between 350,000 and 2.5 million years old when in actuality the rock had formed from a molten state just 10 years before. The tests were performed by the Geochron Laboratories of Cambridge, MA.

    http://www.creationism.org/articles/swenson1.htm
  12. backbeat's Avatar
    Posts
    55 Posts
    Global Posts
    138 Global Posts
    #252  
    Quote Originally Posted by Musicman247 View Post
    I copied and pasted directly from the online dictionary. I changed no part.
    Thus describes a major part of the problem.
  13. #253  
    Quote Originally Posted by Musicman247 View Post
    Radioisotope dating is faulty at best.

    In layman's terms it supposedly can tell when the last time a rock solidified from a molten state by measuring different isotopes found within the rock sample. Rock samples taken from the lava dome at Mt. St. Helens were dated to be between 350,000 and 2.5 million years old when in actuality the rock had formed from a molten state just 10 years before. The tests were performed by the Geochron Laboratories of Cambridge, MA.

    http://www.creationism.org/articles/swenson1.htm
    If you knew how radio-isotope dating works you would know just after solidifying would be the worst time to do a test. The test measures the ratios of parent and decay products generated after 1000's of years of slow decay. Obviously just after solidifying nothing would have settled into a reliable pattern yet.

    Either way, while radio isotopes are the most reliable long term clock we have, there are various other methods which all indicate a much older age than 6000 years. There are plants which are older than that.

    Surur
  14.    #254  
    Quote Originally Posted by backbeat View Post
    Thus describes a major part of the problem.
    Hmm... was that a personal attack? I hope not. I was just trying to show "linkified" evidence of what I already knew.
  15.    #255  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur View Post
    If you knew how radio-isotope dating works you would know just after solidifying would be the worst time to do a test. The test measures the ratios of parent and decay products generated after 1000's of years of slow decay. Obviously just after solidifying nothing would have settled into a reliable pattern yet.

    Either way, while radio isotopes are the most reliable long term clock we have, there are various other methods which all indicate a much older age than 6000 years. There are plants which are older than that.

    Surur
    Can you show me a 6000+ year old plant?

    If you had read the article, the people sending the samples expected to get negative results. "A correct answer would have been "zero argon" indicating that the sample was too young to date by this method." Instead they got dates back.
    Last edited by Musicman247; 04/27/2007 at 11:03 AM.
  16. backbeat's Avatar
    Posts
    55 Posts
    Global Posts
    138 Global Posts
    #256  
    ^ Don't be so thin-skinned. The post characterized the problem appropriately. If I had said you were the problem, you'd have a point. That is not the case.
  17. #257  
    Quote Originally Posted by Musicman247 View Post
    Just because you know how something will turn out, does not mean that the person doesn't make their own choices on how things happen.
    Yes, it completely does.

    If I offer you a red ball, or a green ball, and for some reason I *KNOW* you will take the red ball, you may THINK you have a choice but the outcome is predetermined. You don't have the choice to take a green ball, because I know you will take the red one.

    Please explain to me that if I know you are going to take the red one (and there is no chance of me being wrong), then how you can have a choice? A choice, by definition, means you can take the red OR green one, but I already know you will take the red one. You may THINK you have a choice, but there isn't a choice involved.


    Chris
  18. #258  
    Quote Originally Posted by Musicman247 View Post
    Where did those concepts come from?
    What concepts? The concept of culture and society? Or the concepts of right and wrong? There are many ideas about how and why society and culture developed. As for where those concepts of right and wrong came from, I already posted that. We are going in circles.

    Chris
  19. #259  
    Just for the record I did not mean to teach children religion inn science class. teaching religion in religion class would be better.
    teach

    now a lot of people in this world believe that evolutio is a " World View" and is practice as such like a religion. I believe with others that creationism is a "World View" also.
    I am still tossed on that subject but I believe they should be taught side by side and the children told some people believe this some believe that.
    My children go to a christian school and they are taught about all religion around the world. That's what learnings about.
  20. #260  
    Creationism is a "world view", evolution is science.

    Surur

Posting Permissions