dimreepr

Depends on who’s watching.

Maybe you should go back to post #3 and read the mod note “Do you believe in god” is not the topic. Besides, science is just another religion ‘in waiting’. What if the sum of our knowledge/science were to suddenly stop being developed and those that truly understood, disappeared? How long do you think it would take (given the understanding continual development brings) for the knowledge, few of us truly understand, to pass into a belief? Especially when the distorting factors of time and language starts to erode what little meaning is left.

I think, fundamentally, the bible was intended to teach people how to live their lives; things like time, constantly evolving language and difficulties with translation leaves things open to almost any interpretation. If you can be content with your lot and live for now there’s no need to worry about death. If you understand this then heaven is here and now; hell is to live life without that understanding.

I have seen the film but you have to realise he is an extreme, of that type (why else make a film about him), and so untypical. As John suggests evidence is required and what’s to stop the homeless just selling the phone and hang the potential future earnings?

Hari Seldon tried it through psychohistory, in Isaac Assimov’s “Foundation series” the problem (that Assimov solved with telepathic overseers) is the same that the met office face in trying to predict the weather and very well explained in your climate thread.

In order to, actually, contribute to a thread with 25+ replies you need to read, at least, some of the replies. This just indicates you’ve failed to even read the first reply.

I’ll ignore the obvious implication, other than to point it out; since I’m sure it was a mistake. Until the adult information starts to contradict, then they tend to learn discriminately towards the information the most trusted adult gave and in some cases the child will develop independent discrimination based on their own ideas. Difficult to overcome doesn’t equal, it can’t be overcome and what makes you think all adults possess better critical thinking skills?

Of course children don’t lack the cognitive skills to separate, at least some of the wheat from the chaff; how else do they learn? That’s just nonsense.

Can you please clarify; without it this is just an oxymoron. Please explain how someone could be “partly enlightened”? Indeed: “A little learning is a dangerous thing; drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring: there shallow draughts intoxicate the brain, and drinking largely sobers us again. - Alexander Pope”. Nope: Ignorance of a train bearing down on you could only be blissful for a few seconds; knowledge of said train means a chance to continue that feeling. There’s never a problem with ignorance, it’s just an absence of knowledge, unless its wilful ignorance. Edit/ http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/63253-45-year-depression/?pid=652766#entry652766

Post with humility not hostility, post with a smile not a frown, accept that you may be wrong and most importantly learn when you’re shown to be wrong.

Post with humility not hostility, post with a smile not a frown, accept that you may be wrong and most importantly learn when you’re shown to be wrong. Edit/ sorry wrong thread...

Can you post a link to the comment in question please.

My apologies, I was not aware; it’s so much more rewarding to be shown to be wrong.

It also may only take tens of years to establish a rudimentary pattern, given the right conditions. Just to ram home your point. Edit/ Sorry, forgot the smilie

But not in a controlled way. Edit/ Without a control group there is no way to determine what is noise and what is valuable data.

I didn’t suggest you do the study but as ant seemed interested I thought he may try; I agree there will be noise in the data but if you take a fixed point like the lunar cycle then that noise will reduce the more years you run the experiment.

That picture was off google for convenience. Here’s Daisy in her winter quarters and yes she has been restored. I can't get it to upload I'll try again later

I’d much rather be your friend than your enemy and as a friend I feel obliged to point out your mistakes rather than indulge your fallacies; it seems much kinder.

Without the context of ‘a full, contented, life’, fear of it seems meaningless; much like fearing a meal that includes shark.

I gave it a +1 because it was a perfectly reasonable question that didn’t deserve a neg rep. You really have to take these things less personally if you want a more positive outcome.

Enlightenment is just another way to describe understanding, of being human, which in turn describes wisdom. Learning is a means to this end but in no way inevitably leads to the magical terminus of the enlightened. Therefore enlightenment has no relation to mysticism, eastern or otherwise and what, exactly, has a black box to do with wisdom/enlightenment/understanding?

That’s a little like saying “hey this mysterious substance somehow cures this disease, but yada yada yada” What's the point in finding out why?

Not as far as I can tell but there’s a lot of anecdotal evidence; maybe this would be an opportunity to advance our knowledge. BTW is that a fordson tractor? We use an old grey massey

The idea most worth having is the one you learn from. +1

Yes your reasoning is flawed, causality seems works at the macro-level but not at the quantum level; which may be counter-intuitive.but essentially makes it an accident the origin of which is meaningless.