Phi for All

Just like credit cards and marriages.

How can there be a "truth" when it involves billions of opinions? The kind of truth you're looking for is an illusion. That kind of truth is all subjective, so how can it be "true" for everyone?

I don't think you understand what this word means, because of the way you assert yours. It's not an opinion to say, "God is for real". That's an assertion of fact. Opinion would be, "I think God is for real".

alpha015 has been suspended for a month for repeatedly spamming their YouTube channel. We're a DISCUSSION site, in case I didn't say it before.

Many humans also have a high degree of intelligence, and overcome regrettable stances with critical thought and reasoned action.

Avarice? It's on the money, which is a big clue.

I reject that argument for the same reasons I reject the idea that religion is the only way to be a moral person. Imagine a world where people only treat you well because they're afraid of divine retribution. I'd much rather people understand the reasons for cooperation than feel like they'll roast in hell if they don't.

I don't understand this reasoning AT ALL. There are over 9000 sects of Christianity alone, and most would consider themselves wholehearted believers, and yet they disagree. They have their own plague of problems, so your statement makes little sense. Belief in an almighty god sounds like a poor solution to problems in the natural world.

! Moderator Note Thanks for understanding and moving on from this site. A piece of advice I'm pretty sure you'll ignore? If you truly want to help, you should stop acting like you work for a troll farm. Your posts are laden with conspiracy and misinformation, and your further claims of medical professionalism are untrustworthy. Best of luck elsewhere!

! Moderator Note And it's clear you aren't listening to any of the refutations of your idea. What you're doing is preaching, not discussing science. You have an idea that makes sense to you, but you've been shown over FOUR PAGES that there are inconsistencies with it, problems it causes that interfere with the definitions everyone else uses, but you didn't find intuitive. You aren't going to learn much in discussion if all you do is repeat yourself and soapbox ideas that others are trying to show you don't work. This is a science discussion forum. You need to learn to take criticism on board, and recognize when a more reasoned approach is necessary. Please don't spam any mainstream discussions with your pet idea about light. And since you're unable to support this topic, please don't start any more threads on it. Thread closed.

This is evidence of the grim effectiveness of Trump's flood-the-zone-with-shit strategy. Expectations are so low wrt his moral character that pointing out just one of his obvious conflicts of interest is met with calls of Bias! from his supporters. Apparently his behavior is perfectly fine, and if we'd just get over our dislike of the man himself, we'd all see that. It supposedly has nothing to do with how we feel about lies and corruption. Huh.

You're so negative! Why can't you say, "It's amazing how consistent you've been in defending your perspective"? Why can't you say it like that? I've been right a lot. You ought to be ashamed of yourself.

! Moderator Note Several posts with a focus on a conspiracy video have been hidden. We don't support the "watch the misinformation too" approach to science.

I thought you wanted your god to fix diseases and calamities and catastrophes. You have confused me.

In this case, I believe it IS both. This is sounding more and more like Trump talking up something one of his sycophants mentioned. He often gushes about a topic he's heard from someone who speaks well of him, as part of his blatant flattery pro quo policy. https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/23/opinions/in-trump-world-flattery-will-get-you-everywhere-and-nowhere-parker/index.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/11/21/frenzy-flattery-around-trump-is-reaching-new-extremes/ https://apnews.com/f9fb8c41b7f8acc215e3ec78ca32210a

Maybe the real problem is that you're looking to "solve" these things when your god really wants you to figure out the best ways to "adapt" to them, figure out how to deal with them. If we all thought like you, nobody would be working on curing today's diseases. They'd be waiting for their gods to do it.

In which, hopefully, you dream of more than Heaven and Earth, but not more than is reasonable.

What I keep seeing is very smart people who may have shrugged off science's importance in their early life, possibly after stumbling over some part of it in school. They make a decision NOT to become an egghead and choose other subjects. Fast forward a few years, and they read a pop-sci article and find it's pretty interesting. They actually understand more than they thought they would. But the information isn't cohesive the way it would be if they'd studied science formally. They're forced to piece together the bits they know to make sense of it. Many keep adding to their base of knowledge, and fill in the gaps that way, but it takes time. Some choose to let their imaginations take over, and they start filling those ignorance gaps with stuff they've made up, based on the little they've studied. And many of those come to this same conclusion, that maybe the stuff most people study is wrong, because the ideas they've made up seem to make more intuitive sense. There are similar phenomena, like "I don't know much about art, but I know what I like", and "I don't have the education to be a scientist, but anyone can philosophize."

Forgive me if I'm wrong about this, but in my experience, people who've studied physics and maths formally and intensively don't ask this question. They all seem to understand at a fundamental level how science describes the natural world. The folks who ask this question are the ones who haven't studied as rigorously, and I'm skeptical of their motives. If everything we know is wrong (black is white, up is down, and short is long^), then they were right to have avoided studying it in school. It seems like calling mainstream knowledge into question becomes a justification for skipping school. I could be wrong, but this is my impression after a number of years of discussion. * Thanks, Weird Al!

! Moderator Note You need to stop telling people to read your proposition. They have, and now they have questions that need answering, and only you can do that. The membership are giving you VERY specific objections, telling you exactly where your arguments fail, and you're just telling them they don't understand how you're redefining the terms. If this is the extent of your "discussion", we're going to have to rule this preaching, or soapboxing. You need to address the questions the members have, or I'll need to shut this down.

Oooh, I have one! Focus on the natural, not the supernatural!

Master Lawbringer has been banned for spamming and soapboxing the same intellectually lazy crap after being warned repeatedly to stop. Please learn some science.

! Moderator Note You were warned repeatedly about spamming this idiocy. Goodbye.

! Moderator Note Posts regarding a Trump connection to Hydroxychloroquine have been split to here.

! Moderator Note Spot on, both of you. Plenty of meaningful things to discuss scientifically, so let's move on.