Remember Occam’s Razor? Hard to accept the side that needs to twist and ignore and lie about the physical evidence to create a complicated theory using only the words of pre-science creative writers.
In almost every way, the “Garden of the Gods at Colorado Springs” excursion at the annual meeting of the Geological Society of America (GSA) last year was a normal — even enjoyable — field trip. Standard geologic terminology was used in the accompanying field trip guide, and throughout the trip itself. The trip leaders discussed past events in terms of millions and billions of years. At each stop along the trip, the guides relied on orthodox geologic thinking, including a standard examination of sedimentary features and the nature of contacts between units.
But in reality, the trip was anything but a normal geology field trip. Instead, it was an example of a new strategy from creationists to interject their ideas into mainstream geology: They lead field trips and present posters and talks at scientific meetings. They also avoid overtly stating anything truly contrary to mainstream science.
But when the meeting is over, the creationist participants go home and proudly proclaim that mainstream science has accepted their ideas. It’s a crafty way of giving credence to creationism. But is there anything mainstream scientists, or the conveners of meetings and field trips, can or should do about it?
They’ll keep deflating the currency and doctors will keep dropping out of Medicare. The remaining doctors who take it will have a long wait list.
This is the backdoor to rationing.
See the thing is, there really isn’t a difference between the Ryan plan or hyperinflation. Except that in the latter case, people don’t understand it and won’t notice. And the two parties can continue the status quo, albeit a little different.
With the former (Ryan plan), you know things are being changed. With the latter (hyperinflation), benefits with funny money can’t buy as much.
The government is going to go the hyperinflation route. Just watch and see. The Republicans will participate in it too. Hence the talk of extending the debt limit temporarily.
Add: You might see protesters carrying signs “Keep your hands off my Medicare!” but you’d have a hard time explaining to seniors what hyperinflation is and they wouldn’t carry signs “Stop hyperinflation now!”.
Our government is slick.
#94 TeaDud
“You cannot expect religious people go against their religion”
That includes critical thinking skills apparently.
#84 Taxed Enough Already Dude said: “Therefore we have no motive to “twist it” and your charge we do is smear only.”
I will point out to you that I said in #78: “Why shouldn’t creationists twist science to fit their views? Scientist’s have been doing for years.”
The “smear” was not mine, but Uncle Dave’s headline. I was slamming Scientist who have been perverting science for their own political/social agendas.
Looking at the excessive amount of postings on this topic you’ve made, you need to step away from the computer and take a break. You’re attacking people (me) who are not necessarily in opposition to your own views.
#94 Taxed Enough wrote “But in no event would God reveal Himself physically as it is impossible, He is infinite and if He appeared in our Matrix, being ‘super substantial,’ our reality would cease to exist, no room left for it to inhabit.”
Your claim is contradicted by scripture. I can think of at least two occasions where the Bible says that your Creator appeared to Abraham, and did so in a physical form as Abraham was not in a sleeping/dreaming state. On one of those occasions (Gen 18), Abraham even killed a choice, tender calf and gave it to his servant to prepare a meal, and Sarah baked some special bread. This was all done to feed the Lord and his traveling companions. There are also a number of instances when the God of your Bible supposedly spoke in an audible voice, not just “speaking” through their imaginations. An obvious example of your god supposedly taking a physical form is with Jesus. Some sort of physical manifestation is not as impossible for an omnipotent deity as you claim it is.
Surprisingly, the Matrix didn’t implode or otherwise malfunction on these occasions, so maybe you’d better revise your Matrix theory. My feeling is that any deity capable of assembling the universe from subatomic particles without detailed instructions is probably powerful enough to appeal to one of our primary senses, and doesn’t have to rely on our imaginations. Wakan Tanka (the Great Spirit), worshiped by some Native Americans, appeals just as strongly to our imaginations, as do other deities, so any EXISTING god would have to meet a higher burden of proof than mere imagination in order to take the lead in the Deity Derby. So far, nothing sets your Creator apart from the other Creators who have been imagined, described, and worshiped throughout mankind’s history.
It’s truly amazing what lengths you’ll go to in order to “prove” such a moronic group of myths, all centered around a “loving” deity who viciously punishes those who reject him, even to the extent of killing their children. The absolute worst-case scenario is that YOURS is the deity who actually created us all, and he did so in his own image. That image is a very frightening one, although it would certainly explain why there seems to be so much evil in the world.
Whatever you might think of me and your perception of my hardened heart, the FACT remains that any deity who wants to be worshiped can vastly increase the number of his worshipers and their resolve to do his will with a simple manifestation of himself using the very senses that he supposedly gave us. Imagination does not count. I offer no proof, but to even the mildly intelligent, this is self-evident and logical. To true believers, it is not.
Tea Dude, I’m sending your script to Stephen King. We’re all living in Gods imagination. What a concept. He’ll have to fix up a lot of your illogic, but it should make for some great horror-fiction.
For instance, you say God reveals himself only to those who believe, and that is proof that he exists. Uh huh. Sort of like a salesman showing his exclusive single product ONLY to those who have already have bought one. You can’t expect people to be that stupid Alfred… it will ruin the whole god particle, spooky quantum matrix through a slit idea.
I would also edit out such things as “But in no event would God reveal Himself physically as it is impossible, He is infinite and if He appeared in our Matrix, being “super substantial,” our reality would cease to exist, no room left for it to inhabit.” Everyone who has read the Babble knows that God is a man. He’s probably very well hung too (wouldn’t you be if you had that power?) But since you plot relies on us existing in God’s thoughts in a matrix, I wouldn’t have him so easily defenseless to being able to reveal himself. Priests reveal themselves all the time. Besides, if our reality ceased to exist because God couldn’t keep a thought in his head and reveal himself at the same time, wouldn’t he look rather deficient for the task?
As I said… very interesting story idea that I’m sure Stephen could mold into something very entertaining, but it needs a lot of work.
#97, benefits with funny money can’t buy as much.
And people will accuse those of selling the goods of greed because the price (in dollars) is so high.
Went to the matinee the other day with my son. It cost us each 17 dollars before we got out of there (one popcorn, one drink, one water, one hotdog, and two tickets). The price for the movie was 8.50 just for a MATINEE ticket.
It’s bad now.
#105 LibertyLover, I feel your pain!
Oops, I guess that’s been used 😉
TEAD, let me get this straight. Your only proof for this is the bible? Do you have any corroborating evidence to back that up other than a feeling in your heart, your faith?
1 Corinthians 3:18
Do not deceive yourselves. If any one of you thinks he is wise by the standards of this age, he should become a “fool” so that he may become wise.
Sounds like you are getting a bit uppity.
Someday all religions, including Christianity, will be studied as mythology, alongside ancient Greek and Roman mythology.
observer —
HOW DARE YOU! If I truly wanted to expose myself, I would strike you down where you stand!
#25
You assume things exist now precisely as God intended, but scripture reveals in its opening pages that isn’t the case.
Oh. So your deity is fallible? That rules out both omnipotence and omniscience.
we claim He is infinite in power, omnipotent and also, omniscient. Being omniscient its clear He CHOSE to give His creatures free will, and grants their choices have an eternal effect.
First, you have contradicted yourself in the same post. Second, omniscient by definition means free will does not exist. You cannot logically claim that there is no information not possessed by your deity and also claim that there also exists beings which are able to make decisions which your deity does not already know the result in advance. By definition, the concept of omniscience and free will cannot coexist. They fundamentally contradict each other.
#59
And Occam’s razor clearly favors creationism as it is elementary a building has a builder.
Only a warped interpretation. Occam’s razor starts with two equal explanations. The explanation proposed by creationism does not in any way merit consideration as science much less a valid explanation for how life began. It would be akin to putting the explanation that the moon is made of green cheese on equal footing with the explanation that it is a big rock in space.
#77
No, he must not reveal Himself to satisfy idle curiosity, that would diminish Him
Convenient but still immoral. The consequence, so we are told, of not believing is an eternity of damnation yet somehow providing tangible, unequivocal evidence for belief is considered idle curiosity? Both “true” and non-true believers alike will be judged based on what you have said yet your deity feels no obligation to provide sufficient tangible evidence as to convince everyone that it is planning on judging? That’s immoral.
So these people are being deceptive about their beliefs. I wonder how God feels about liars?
#114 As it doesn’t exist I would say not much of a concern.
So, Alfred. What do you think about this commentary: http://huffingtonpost.com/jonathan-dudley/christian-faith-requires-_b_876345.html
“But beyond a certain point, this reasoning breaks down. Because no amount of talk about “worldviews” and “presuppositions” can change a simple fact: creationism has failed to provide an alternative explanation for the vast majority of evidence explained by evolution.”
You guys are looking for reason. A religious belief system has been hacked by someone who uses it to support misogyny, bigotry and other irrational viewpoints.
Most people, including people of faith, would be appalled by this thinking.
#117. You nailed It.
I might also add that humans are by and large a ‘cunning and controlling’ species due to large brains. A belief system is a perfect tool to use for mass control.
If my experience confirmed and collaborated by millions, in every race, nation, and tongue on earth, throughout history, cannot be trusted as evidence, by what law of logic are we to accept your beliefs?
Slick, but not an answer. Just because you may have lack of proof in one area does not automatically prove it in another. Have you ever heard of GroupThink?
And note, not every race/culture has the same beliefs. Look at Asia for starters.
121 — But the second law of thermodynamics demonstrates that without intelligent outside influence, molecules are always in the process of breaking down.
That’s part of your belief system? Really?
Lie, Damned Lies, and Statistics. Yes, it is statistically improbable that the DNA chain came into being on its own. But not impossible.
Flip a googleplex sided coin a googleplex number of times and eventually you get the result you want.
Combine a multitude of elements together and eventually you have something that, when combined with ambient energy (which could come from the sun as this would not be a closed system), is able to sustain itself.
Put enough of those self-staining items together and you have an organism.
The 2nd states that it wouldn’t return any energy to the surroundings. It would consume more than it produces.
Statistical inference. Read up on it.
The real argument is whether the Bible is allegorical or not. Since it must be allegorical as it is definitely not factual, all science can be interpreted in context.
TEAD: “#75 No, he must not reveal Himself to satisfy idle curiosity, that would diminish Him.”
Since he can’t or won’t reveal himself, the Dude must be kinda like the Tooth Fairy: very shy, weak, or non-existent. I’ll assume non-existent.
OTOH, if you want to attribute tornadoes, hurricanes, floods, etc. to him, maybe he’s just sadistic.
Holy good fuck !!! it must the end of the month and Alphie is out of his psychotic meds.
Proof of Alphie’s claim.
A rebuttal of Alphie’s claim.
Alphie riding shotgun.
TeaDud: “No, he must not reveal Himself to satisfy idle curiosity, that would diminish Him.”
TeaDud apparently doesn’t know what infinite, or omnipotent means. And I wouldn’t call knowledge that my immortal soul supposedly depends on “idle curiosity.”
Why doesn’t God reveal/prove himself? He doesn’t want to, says TeadDud. Which makes him sort of an asshole really.
TeaDude,
Your statement doesn’t even make sense. You are playing at semantic games. Figurative language is by definition metaphorical and not literal. You argue my point.
At least Linus van Pelt had the honesty and awareness to admit that, no matter how sincere his chosen pumpkin patch was, the Great Pumpkin never actually showed up. Less self-aware people believe that the Great Pumpkin lives in their hearts, and they want it so bad that their imagination readily delivers the experience.
#118
Why leave certainty for uncertainty, especially when the evidence DOES support Creationism precisely as taught in the inerrant Word of God.
A. Why stop believing in Santa Claus? Why trust in science at all when “God did it” is so much easier? TBH, I hope you believe that because you should also stop voting. Let god figure it out. You stay at home.
B. There is no evidence for creationism.
C. Which deity? There are many involved in creation stories.
#120
# 112 You assume things exist now precisely as God intended, but scripture reveals in its opening pages that isn’t the case.
Oh. So your deity is fallible? That rules out both omnipotence and omniscience.
Nothing I said indicated God is fallible, therefore your straw man is ruled out.
Swing and miss. You seem to have trouble seeing that you have contradicted yourself. If things did not exist as God intended, then they are accidents or mistakes; otherwise they would have been intended. If they are either accidents or mistakes, then your deity is not omniscient nor is it omnipotent or it would not have made those mistakes in the first place. Therefore your deity is fallible.
Learn how to use logic before you open your mouth and convince us you have no idea of what you are saying.
God’s omnipotence and omniscience isn’t affected by man’s choices, your straw man therefore kicked your ass.
You are a three year old arguing about Superman. Again, you are completely wrong. If there exists a being in which no piece of knowledge is unknown, then they know how the entire universe will play out from start to finish. They know where every atom will be at every moment in time. Thus, there is no free will. We are instead simply actors in a movie in which the outcome is already known. Every decision we make is known before we make it. Every mistake is known before we make it. There is no free will in that scenario.
You are a new golfer rejoicing at getting the high score.