Human Condition

[Moviefan2k4]

You assume that Christian people...think that bad things only happen because Christians aren't running things.

How on Earth did you get that impression from my last message? What I was saying is that some of the most prevalent problems in this country are due to the fact that many Christians aren't stepping up to the plate. Instead, they simply allow nonbelievers to have large amounts of control over our legal, educational, and financial systems.

For example, most of the dinosaur books given to first-graders in the U.S. have on the first page, "they lived millions of years ago", a statement which has absolutely zero visually verifiable evidence to support it. No human being is currently alive to tell us for certain whether the Earth is actually 4.6 billion years old (which is the current claim), not to mention whetehr dinosaurs lived 65 million years ago. People believe that, but it is nowhere near a fact...it's a religion, and I personally believe that if we're going to teach one as fact in schools, we should teach the other as well, or neither at all.

 

[knowsbleed]

you were missed

 

[Gilpesh]

How on Earth did you get that impression from my last message? What I was saying is that some of the most prevalent problems in this country are due to the fact that many Christians aren't stepping up to the plate. Instead, they simply allow nonbelievers to have large amounts of control over our legal, educational, and financial systems.

Um... Sarah Palin's kid. I doubt there's a lot of nonbelievers with influence there... guess what, HER KID IS F**KING PREGNANT AT 17! That's a teen pregnancy.... in a house where by your logic, there shouldn't be one.

Nice job. And many of the problems in this country... ARE DUE TO AN IDIOT IN THE WHITE HOUSE RUNNING THINGS FROM THE BIBLE.

Really, this must be an act... no one is that stupid.

For example, most of the dinosaur books given to first-graders in the U.S. have on the first page, "they lived millions of years ago", a statement which has absolutely zero visually verifiable evidence to support it. No human being is currently alive to tell us for certain whether the Earth is actually 4.6 billion years old (which is the current claim), not to mention whetehr dinosaurs lived 65 million years ago. People believe that, but it is nowhere near a fact...it's a religion, and I personally believe that if we're going to teach one as fact in schools, we should teach the other as well, or neither at all.

Stop raping science. Or I'll start making s**t up about your religion.

 

[Arcturus]

Here we go again...

 

[BlackLantern]

can we stick to human behavior? I don't think a persons faith is indicative of whether they are a bad or good person....I think it's what we do with the time given that shapes us....

 

[Silverstein]

Um... Sarah Palin's kid. I doubt there's a lot of nonbelievers with influence there... guess what, HER KID IS F**KING PREGNANT AT 17! That's a teen pregnancy.... in a house where by your logic, there shouldn't be one.

Nice job. And many of the problems in this country... ARE DUE TO AN IDIOT IN THE WHITE HOUSE RUNNING THINGS FROM THE BIBLE.

Really, this must be an act... no one is that stupid.

Are you ****ing serious? Do you even know what you're talking about? Bush is not doing things from the bible. He was running things stupidly and USING the bible as a cover to have American idiots follow him and support him with a moral background. What better way to have countless bleeding heart, "Confederate flag toting" types follow you then to say you're the good guy working for the underdog.

DO NOT attempt to act as if clear facade has any kind of background now. You just want to argue. You don't know what you're talking about and no, it's not an act. Gilpesh, you seem to be that stupid.

Stop raping science. Or I'll start making s**t up about your religion.

Do NOT threaten him as if you have ANY kind of proof or validity to that statement. If you started "making stuff up", it would show what you're really about. And he was far from raping science.

Most of science is, as Moviefan put it, a religion. It's all guessing and hypothesis. If you knew anything about what you support so strongly, then you'd know that. Way to fail.

 

[Gilpesh]

You just want to argue. You don't know what you're talking about and no, it's not an act. Gilpesh, you seem to be that stupid.

That's what the internet is for. And I have accidentally learned that chocolate can be set on fire... so stupid is a clear possibility.

And fine, Bush is using the bible as cover. But the fact it is working is a bad thing... shouldn't every christian know better than letting him do that?

Do NOT threaten him as if you have ANY kind of proof or validity to that statement. If you started "making stuff up", it would show what you're really about. And he was far from raping science.

Um... really? He is throwing out many dating procedures that have been used to determine those numbers through testing, to claim that science is a religion and all about faith... and that's not raping science?

Most of science is, as Moviefan put it, a religion. It's all guessing and hypothesis. If you knew anything about what you support so strongly, then you'd know that. Way to fail.

If you knew anything about science... you'd know it was more than 'guessing' and that hypotheses are tested to find out if they are true or just blind guessing... then if the hypothesis is wrong... people throw it out, not change science to make it fit.

can we stick to human behavior?

Fine. I'll stop. But this definitely says something about it, how no matter what people believe in... they'll fight over it and there will be no middle ground between them.

 

[The Senator]

I highly doubt that. If they did, such things as school shootings, teen pregnancy, anti-Christian judges making ridiculous laws, and attempts to redefine the definition of marriage wouldn't be so prevlaent in our current society. The moral and spiritual fabric of the United States is slowly ripping itself apart, because Christians have generally not been fighting against the appointment of disbelievers into governmental authority. The original situation in the U.S. was that if you weren't a Christian, it was a near certainty you'd never hold public office. Now, it seems to be the reverse. Many liberals claim that Christians are unable to weigh circumstances objectively, an assertion which has next to no truth in it.

Wow. This post is so incredibly ridiculous my eyes fell out of my head from rolling around so hard.

You obviously don't pay attention to the news at all, do you? You know, considering every state where gay marriage was up for a vote voted to DENY homosexuals the right to marry. Meanwhile, there are only TWO Muslims in Congress, TWO Buddhists in Congress, a small percentage of Jews, and ONE atheist.

Furthermore, the moral fabric of the United States isn't being ripped out at all. This country is being held back by the same Christofascist ideologies you support, though you are too blind to see all of the people your beliefs are hurting in the process. Sounds real Christian to me-- force Christian principles on people even though they don't follow that faith.

I'll give you an example of what I'm talking about. The day after the Columbine shootings, Rosie O'Donnell said on her talk show, "We need more gun control!" Those two youngster broke more than 10 gun laws entering that school armed in the first place - I doubt any more would've slowed them down. There's also the likelihood that one of the shooters asked young Cassie Bernall, "Do you believe in God?", and shot her dead when she replied, "Yes".

You know what would have slowed them down? If they weren't sold the guns in the first place! Those kids were what, seventeen years old? Why were they sold such a large number of weapons in the first place? How were they able to get their hands on the materials needed to build the bombs they used?

Oh, that's right-- Rosie O'Donnell is a lesbian, so that must mean she's downright foolish because she hasn't seen the light, and God tells all of us that guns are awesome in the Bible.

I mean, you don't get it, do you? If these kids weren't sold the weapons in the first place, none of this would have happened.

Then again... I don't really know what this incident had to do with ANYTHING I said in my original post.

Agressiveness? In what way have I been unjustly harsh or critical? My opinions are based on the divine authority of Scripture, as well as wisdom I've gained from a few of my personal experiences. the only issue seems to be that I refuse political correctness every chance I get. I don't go out of my way to offend people, but I won't apologize if folks balk at my responses anyway.

Your aggressiveness can best be pointed out in the Michael Jackson/ Islam thread, where you discuss how "misguided" he is for following Islam, and the Modest Hot Women thread, where you FLIP THE **** OUT at the site of a woman's hand on another woman's face. Seriously... that is aggressive behavior, even for people who share similar beliefs as you do.

 

[Arcturus]

Science is NOT a religion. Science is based upon verifiable evidence. If anything, it's a neutral observation of facts. Claiming science is a religion is more of an ideological attack.

It's not 'guessing'. First of all there is a question one must answer. Then you must do your research, then you must come up with a hypothesis. It is then this hypothesis you must test over and over. One you've gotten your results, you need to analyze and gather data to form a conclusion. This is a lengthy process, it doesn't happen in the blink of an eye. Then it comes time to share your results.

I'm not trying to send this thread off coarse, if it hasn't already been derailed.

Back on topic, I guess.

 

[Carcharodon]

Do NOT threaten him as if you have ANY kind of proof or validity to that statement. If you started "making stuff up", it would show what you're really about. And he was far from raping science.

Most of science is, as Moviefan put it, a religion. It's all guessing and hypothesis. If you knew anything about what you support so strongly, then you'd know that. Way to fail.

I'm a scientist, and you're wrong.

Have a nice day.

 

[Silverstein]

I'm a HORRIBLE scientist (see below), and I think you're wrong.

Have a nice day. Because I can't tell it's nighttime.

Fixed.

 

[Carcharodon]

Fixed.

I live on the West coast. You are aware that the earth is spherical, it rotates at a (mostly) fixed rate, and it rotates in such a direction that sunlight reaches the East coast of the United States first, right?

...right?

Oh, dear. It seems I was expecting too much.

 

[Silverstein]

I'm trying to sound smart by talking down to him for speaking to me in East Coast timing. Yet I'm defending myself by claiming to have been speaking in my OWN Pacific/West coast specific timing. By my own words, I am disappointing and below expectations. This situation for me is also known as FAIL. Thanks for your time.

Fixed!

 

[LexCorp]

The human condition is being alive. There are biological standards and rules that we most follow and chemical necessities that command our daily functions, and the choices we make are lucid.

Society and intelligence are shown in ants, bees, and various other animals in our planet. Emotions are displayed in mammals very evidently, as are other obvious traits of being in our mammalia class.

But what makes us unique? What makes us have such command over the world around us.

I believe intelligence is the factor that separates man from monster, beast or burden. We can rationalize and work with the world around us, we can understand and develop solutions. We are, for all intents and purposes, awake.

Being awake can have it's problems, though. Having the ability to rationalize means that we can over analyze things that, while complex, are no so very confusing if you look close enough.

Some people believe there is a heaven or hell, some people believe that we become part of a universal soul, others believe various things. Then there are those that believe that there is nothing, only chaos. Life is random and the operations of the human condition are as adaptive to chaos as anything else in existence. We think, so we are.

With that philosophy, being dead would be the same as being alive. Rules and laws would really have no deeper meaning other than sustaining order in a naturally chaotic existence.

Laws, Order and registration would actually therefore be an anomaly in which we are trying to create something out of the opposite of what is.



But if you stop and think about it, isn't it odd that cold and dark seem to be standard to the universe? Isn't it odd that energy seems like something "extra" something...special?

We have categorized and documented many creatures on this planet. We have watched stars birth and die, and calculated even the possibilities of our own downfall. Yet here we are. Newborns in the sense of time, yet ancient within our own realm, what do we exist for? What is the purpose of the human condition?

We are a great creature. As I believe it we are born wild, not evil or good but a total mix. The world around us coupled with our natural core makeup creates us.

 

[Carcharodon]

I'm going to seriously fault somebody for not referring exclusively to East coast time because clearly I'm the center of the universe. Of course, this doesn't change the fact that I've been wrong about the nature of science this entire time. I'm trying to divert attention from it, actually.

Gee, you were up early.

Spoiler

See what I did there?

By the way, I'd love to see a response to my response to your initial post. I don't think you ever explained how being alive or dead are actually the same in any case.

 

[Moviefan2k4]

...hypotheses are tested to find out if they are true or just blind guessing...

True, and the point I was trying to make is that where such things as cosmic, chemical, stellar, organic, and macro-evolution are concerned, it's all based in theory, yet taught as fact to kids as young as first-grade! That's not even taking into account that American textbooks were completely rewritten in the mid-1960s with the specific purpose of pushing evolution into the classrooms...and all because the U.S. government was scared of the Russians' success with Sputnik.

 

[Carcharodon]

True, and the point I was trying to make is that where such things as cosmic, chemical, stellar, organic, and macro-evolution are concerned, it's all based in theory, yet taught as fact to kids as young as first-grade! That's not even taking into account that American textbooks were completely rewritten in the mid-1960s with the specific purpose of pushing evolution into the classrooms...and all because the U.S. government was scared of the Russians' success with Sputnik.

Evolution as a scientific theory refers only to populations of organisms, and the other categories don't follow the same rules and therefore are fundamentally different.

In any case, it wasn't all that long ago that I was in high school, and I was taught evolution as a theory. The problem is, I've already explained to you countless times that a "theory" is far more than simple speculation, and yet you either don't understand or insist upon ignoring that aspect, because it's far more convenient for you to dismiss if it's just a "theory."

I also love that you say so dismissively that it's "all based on theory," when a component of said theory is extensive experimental data and observational data. It's not something that somebody just pulled from their ass, and there is PLENTY of evidence to support it. Otherwise, it remains a hypothesis, not a theory.

You say that radiometric dating is flawed, but you have yet to provide a solid argument as to why. You argue that because no human ever laid eyes on dinosaurs millions of years ago, we can't say that they lived millions of years ago, though geologic evidence disagrees with you in addition to radiometric dating evidence.

I suppose I shouldn't be surprised. I've read your notion of how mountains have been formed, and know that when it comes to explaining science to you, there's no chance of getting through to you, either because you simply cannot understand or you refuse to understand.

So why should I expect you to understand a concept as simple as the nature of the scientific theory? You've given no indication that you're capable of understanding such a concept.

So your argument was flawed practically before it was even conceived. That's an interesting concept....

 

[BlackLantern]

Evolution was taught to me as theory....and our teacher was very clear in explaining that this is all theory....Radiometric dating is as reliable as theories get though....to ignore it outright, whatever your reasons are, seems a bit silly...

 

[Carcharodon]

Evolution was taught to me as theory....and our teacher was very clear in explaining that this is all theory....Radiometric dating is as reliable as theories get though....to ignore it outright, whatever your reasons are, seems a bit silly...

Radiometric dating has been performed countless times with reliable and, most importantly, consistent results. The radioactive decay of materials is well understood and highly predictable.

Oh, MovieFan...do you have any idea how an atomic clock works? That's right: a predictable rate of decay.

Don't you find it strange that these clocks are the most accurate ever conceived?

Hmmm...

 

[Moviefan2k4]

The accuracy of radiometric dating is highly unstable, as its supposedly limited to a timespan of 10 million years at most (according to many evolutionists, mind you). If that had any truth to it (which I don't believe it does), they'd still have one heck of a time trying to prove that the Earth is 4.6 billion years old, using the same (or similar) methods.

 

[BlackLantern]

so what if the Earth is 4.6 Billion years old....? I don't think it challenges anyones direct beliefs....

 

[Moviefan2k4]

so what if the Earth is 4.6 Billion years old....? I don't think it challenges anyones direct beliefs....

It definitely challenges Christianity for starters. The Biblical dates from Adam to Joseph (Jesus' adoptive father) add up to just over 4,000 years, and the Book of Genesis clearly states that Adam was created on the sixth day of Creation, which started "in the beginning". Assuming that our current clandar is even 1,000 years off at most, that's still just over 7,000 years...which is way off from the 4.6 billion which many evolutionists say is fact.

 

[November Rain]

This is the original thread opener

Spoiler

The human condition is being alive. There are biological standards and rules that we most follow and chemical necessities that command our daily functions, and the choices we make are lucid.

Society and intelligence are shown in ants, bees, and various other animals in our planet. Emotions are displayed in mammals very evidently, as are other obvious traits of being in our mammalia class.

But what makes us unique? What makes us have such command over the world around us.

I believe intelligence is the factor that separates man from monster, beast or burden. We can rationalize and work with the world around us, we can understand and develop solutions. We are, for all intents and purposes, awake.

Being awake can have it's problems, though. Having the ability to rationalize means that we can over analyze things that, while complex, are no so very confusing if you look close enough.

Some people believe there is a heaven or hell, some people believe that we become part of a universal soul, others believe various things. Then there are those that believe that there is nothing, only chaos. Life is random and the operations of the human condition are as adaptive to chaos as anything else in existence. We think, so we are.

With that philosophy, being dead would be the same as being alive. Rules and laws would really have no deeper meaning other than sustaining order in a naturally chaotic existence.

Laws, Order and registration would actually therefore be an anomaly in which we are trying to create something out of the opposite of what is.



But if you stop and think about it, isn't it odd that cold and dark seem to be standard to the universe? Isn't it odd that energy seems like something "extra" something...special?

We have categorized and documented many creatures on this planet. We have watched stars birth and die, and calculated even the possibilities of our own downfall. Yet here we are. Newborns in the sense of time, yet ancient within our own realm, what do we exist for? What is the purpose of the human condition?

Purpose is easy and difficult. Our purpose is quite simple if you look at the bigger picture.

Our purpose is to collectively make the lives of those who follow us better than the lives we achieved.

Now the real problem is how people define better

Nowadays, it's all the materialistic route:

More money
more land
more time
more space
more gadgets
more 'freedom'

the capitalists dream to climb to the top of the individual tower of self worth value via external factors.


However there is more than this. There's something else, something that leads people to kill each other, for marriages to split up, spend billions on psychiatry and medication for, go through surgery, work to the bone and pretty much do everything else for.

Its the ability to empower yourself and subsequently others. To remove the value from materialistic things and seek the ultimate reward of helping out your fellow man in achieving our purpose.

Now this may not fully describe our purpose for being but as long as we are confused by advertising and capilalistic dreams and iphones and designer handbags and comics, we won't have the time or knowledge to reach that enlightenment.

This purpose I've described at least puts us on the path for future generations to find our collective goal.

edit:

it's funny, even as I post it, debates of materialistic posession of the 'truth' is keeping people from their purposes are happening around me'.

 

[Eggyman]

It definitely challenges Christianity for starters. The Biblical dates from Adam to Joseph (Jesus' adoptive father) add up to just over 4,000 years, and the Book of Genesis clearly states that Adam was created on the sixth day of Creation, which started "in the beginning". Assuming that our current clandar is even 1,000 years off at most, that's still just over 7,000 years...which is way off from the 4.6 billion which many evolutionists say is fact.

I think it's a lil redundant trying to calculate anything from this, with all the various factors being lined up together, and all of them having a varying estimate that could be off by a wide margin.

You may as well be saying 'blah + blah = blahblah.'

 

[BlackLantern]

my guess is that mountains of data look a little better, in an argument, than one leather bound book....I'm not sure myself...maybe the Earth was here for a while and something sparked human life....maybe the Bibles right or not....I get that both sides want to be "right"....