Moontanman

Yesterday, the media said I think that is the key to this, do you have a link to the original science paper?

I think I might have to agree, power does not corrupt and I think power does attract the corrupt. I honestly do not think that power or money would corrupt me.... at least not any more than i already am and there lies the rub. How corrupt are you or me? What behaviors would you draw that line at if you knew you couldn't be held accountable, do you know, can any of us really know what parts of our behaviors are restricted by our own inner moral compass and what behaviors are restrained due to lack of money/power to act out those behaviors. If I woke up in the morning with the power of god I can think of a short list of people who might just vanish... maybe... I do have an inner moral compass and if i stopped to think of the consequences of my actions and their effect on others I would probably not go to that list. But to be honest do to a lack of any real temptation I can't say if power would corrupt me any further than i am already corrupted.

There are none that were not translated to be such after the fact. In short there are no prophecies in any religious text that has predicted anything to happen that did indeed happen before it happened.. none...

I think it's quite apparent from this thread that religion=mysticism=supernatural=superstition, you can add as many zeros as you want but you will still get zero. Anything that occurs only in your mind and is not demonstrable to anyone else in any way is not knowledge. My little dinosaur story shows this quite well, no matter how real we think something is, no matter how smart we are or think we are knowledge requires evidence, I would think that absolute knowledge requires absolute evidence, appeals to someone who is famous for coughing up horse feathers does not make your argument any more believable. Mysticism can be dressed up in any way you want but it is still the dinosaur only you can see feel and touch, no one else can experience your dinosaur. All through this thread I see positive assertions of rmss but nothing to back up those assertions other than more horse feathers coughed up by rmss. At some point evidence is going to be needed to back up these positive assertions. I think it's also pertinent to point out the lack of knowledge produced by rmss, never has rmss produced tangible results, no cures, no technology, nothing but unsupportable claims about that which we do not know. If I get sick I'm going to a doctor, not a mystic, if I want to build a house I'll go to an architect not a mystic, if I want to build a space ship I'll go to scientists and engineers not a mystic in fact I do not know of any circumstance that would lead me to go to a mystic... well maybe for entertainment, Penn and Teller are fun to watch.... More to the point of this OT, I believe empirical evidence, i can only know what you tell me about what you believe and I have no idea what they believe....

Life is the poetry of the universe Love is the poetry of life.

Little yellow triangle at the left hand bottom of the screen.... I don't "know" there are no absolute truths, i am simply going to the default stance in the total lack of evidence. It's the lack of a belief in god or gods, nothing more or less. i am always willing to change my stance in the face of empirical evidence, you have not provided anything even close to evidence That is what you appear to be asserting. I go with the evidence, if some one were to tell me that I would require positive evidence of his assertion. Both god and mysticism lack evidence of their reality You can state you are anything you want. So we won't let you change the rules to your benefit so you'll take you ball and go home.

I think we should stop financial speculating, the buying up of something to try and drive up the price or in the hope the price will go up is wrong. Buying influence in our government is wrong, or possibly it should be wrong to be able to do so, both. Make religion report it's income and tax it. For once and all separate religion from government. Pursue space exploration the same way we pursue weapons superiority. Pursue alternative energy, oil should be an industrial feedstock not the source of the worlds energy. All industry, banks, farms, power companies, manufacturing, anything financial not covered by banks, should be regulated...

While I think eugenics is probably a bad idea if for no other reason than humans aren't wise enough to make such decisions for the most part at least. About 50,000 years ago we were genetically purged some say we could have been reduced to a population of less than a few thousand people, those few survived some natural disaster, a super volcano i think, there also seems to be a rise in art at about the same time and weapons started being more and more complex but the 'explosion was around 50,000 years ago when a super volcano blew up and wiped out much of the humans of the time. Creativity could have been the trait that helped those few survive but it also resulted in a genetic bottleneck we still see today, humans are not as diverse genetically as chimps for instance. Not hard to see those few of our African forefathers, the ones who had better skills of some sort and creativity does seem to jump around that time as well. There is also some evidence of flowering of human creativity in some earlier humans but they didn't widely catch on until that super volcano. Oh oh oh maybe the nuclear war will create a race of supermen with mental powers, no really, this disaster did seem to shape human evolution or at least culture to a significant extent.

Are you serious? If not you got me.... While I acknowledge that religion does good the percentage of money that religion gives to the poor in some way or another is small compared to the amount of money that goes into mega churches, lavish life styles of the clergy not to mention the money that goes into promoting the church it's self, have to keep filling those pews and talking non believers into thinking they are going to burn in hell... now I'm baiting you a little on this, religion helps people deal with life, there is no doubt that a great many people require belief in their lives but to me religions second biggest sin is how it sections off people, divides the population between us and them, them being anyone who believes a little different than you do, the disconnect gets bigger as the beliefs diverge in the past often degenerating into violence well before the divergence went to belief in another god. Now on the other hand there is what are called fundamentalist religions, often synonymous with Evangelicals but many others are involved. They are also parts of various religions known as Creationists, Creationists are always fundamentalists but fundamentalists are sometimes not Creationists. It should be noted that there are more non Christian Creationists than Christian Creationists. Fundamentalism, especially the Creationist kind, is religions biggest sin, they don't just insist there view on religion is Absolute Truth they want it taught in schools as well so everyone's children are indoctrinated into their religion. Of course in their eyes I am a satanic evolutionist to begin with and everything I say is lies lies lies..... If all religions promoted the ideals this short article asked for religion would be a much greater thing than it is now....

If you feel that I have violated the rules in this discussion I suggest you click the little yellow flag at the bottom left of the screen. In the question is there an absolute truth, I have to say in the absence of any evidence of such truth the default position is there are no absolute truths. Not there is an absolute truth but we do not know it. For instance, I am an atheist, this does not mean i positively assert there is no god, it's just in the complete absence of evidence the default position is there are no gods. Not there is a god but he is undetectable in any way. No doubt, i understand your reluctance to do so, it would make any positive assertion of god untenable We might be able to discuss some of this because while I don't believe in god religion is quite real... I really expected better than this, while true that various mystics have claimed various things and i have no doubt some portion of them asserted something to this effect but why would it be considered an absolute truth? That's nonsensical... Please provide some evidence the universe is an unity. So being unable to prove a negative means the positive must be true? No, the default position is there are no absolute truths. Yes, as I pointed out earlier it would indeed make the concept of god difficult to defend but not religion. Quite the opposite, i think you were trying to set us up to admit to absolute truths so you could use that to assert the existence of god...

Of course not, how could anyone like me have anything relevant to say to someone as uber intelligent as you.... I am a rationalist, I the only thing I believe in is using empirical evidence, reliable data, logic, and rational thought to guide my own actions and thoughts. I am highly skeptical, of your idea of absolute truth in particular, how about naming an absolute truth so I can, in my own small way, understand what you mean by absolute truth. As for being a philosopher, I am sure you are correct, you seem to be quite sure of your own ability to define reality with the absolute knowledge you are in possession of so it must be true... makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside to know you know what I am, how I think, and why I think what I think. So comforting to know you have hope....

Please respect my religion, an unusual take on religion... http://freethoughtnation.com/contributing-writers/63-acharya-s/614-please-re

No, they are contradictory world views, creationism has only old books written by bronze age savages as evidence, evolution has 150 years of scientific methodology behind it not to mention an overwhelming amount of data, creationism has an old book that fails every test put to it and no empirical evidence what so ever...

I'll adress your assertion, it's a strawman, we do not automatically dismiss the claims for knowledge of anyone, all that is required is that they demonstrate the knowledge. If you were to come to me and say "I met a guy who says he can show gods power is real and there for god is real" I'd say can you show me? and if you said yes and proceeded to repeat gods name three times spin around twice and pray for 30 seconds and make a coffee cup hover 4 feet off the ground for 30 seconds not only would I have to admit some sort of real knowledge had passed between you and the guy who showed you that display of gods power and how to get god to allow it I guarantee you'd have researchers crawling in and our of your rectum studying this phenomena and even if we had to admit that it was not due to any effect we could measure in any way it works and it works every time so it would be knowledge and as long as we couldn't figure out the how and why behind you it could label it supernatural knowledge, if it only worked if you prayed to a paticular god you could label it religious knowledge but you tell me that some guy told you that god had told him what the universe was like before it existed but he can't demonstrate it, get god to show everyone else or substantiat his claims in any way then it becomes just something some guy claims to be true, it is not knowledge. Really really really believing something is not knowledge.... So far no one has come forward with any knowledge that can be said to come from God or the supernatural, simple as that.... as far as absolute truth, there are no absolute truths. Would you say that falling out of an airplane with no parachute or other rescue device at 25,000 feet means you will die is an absolute truth? If you say yes, you'd be wrong....

your main assertion seems odd to me, woman have low sex drives? says who? I've always been amazed at how high womens sex drive is and how much more they enjoy sex than men....

Evolution is the most well supported theory in all of science, nothing in biology make any sense without evolution, and genisis makes no sense in any context. Deal with it... You don't even know what ToE is and it has nothing to do with evolution, even if we do eventually show that there is a god and it created the universe evolution would still be true, evolution is a fact, deal with it... Genetics support evolution completely, evolution was thought of before anyone knew why animals passed on common traits and the discovery of DNA supports evolution 100% Again, neither the BBT or ToE have anything to do with biological evolution. No actually life did not begin as two sexes, the first life forms had no sexes at all and some have several sexes, you are ignorant of basic biology. Only things that reproduce and pass down their traits with less than perfection can evolve, marbles cannot evolve and the answer to your question is no. You are ignorant of even the basics of your own bible stories, you are ignorant of the basics of science and your are totally ignorant of what evolution is and how evolution works. Your pursuit is conformation of something you want to believe, truth has nothing to do with it. Again you are ignorant of even the basics of biology and your bible.... You are being insulting, are you so desperate to believe lies that you would ignore facts? That was a total fabrication on your part, Darwin never said he knew how the universe started, no one knows how the universe started or even if it did start. Heal thy self, your lack of knowledge on this issue is astounding, it's like you get all your information from religious apologetic's like answers in genesis the most disingenuous bunch of apologists I have seen, liars all of them and if you believe the bible you know who the author of all lies is don't you?

No, nothing you are asserting is factual, can you not understand that? There are many writings that predate the Bible, some by a considerable margin. Yours is not the only mono theism and there is no reason to assert that monotheism is correct. You keep making totally false assertions and refuse to support them with anything but repeats of the same false assertions. you are simply using word games to try and impress your audience with your own belief but you fail to understand that belief does not equal knowledge, repeated assertions of the same thing lends absolutely no weight to your argument. Your argument fails on every level and your own incredulity to anything that disagrees with your world view is meaningless.... This might work with people who already want to believe your assertions and lack the education or even the desire to understand how badly you are breaking the ninth commandment in your efforts to show yourself as correct. So far your entire argument is based on the fallacy that the christian bible is somehow not only superior to all other religious writing but also factually accurate when in fact it is neither, when it comes to the description of the real world your book is wrong about nearly everything from cover to cover, believe what you want if you want but do not assert your beliefs as truth unless you can actually back them up with something other than horse feathers. I'm going to suggest a series of videos for you to watch, they might give you an understanding of why you are mistaken, I put this here for you because I hold no ill will toward you and I feel strongly you have never actually been told the truth, bad or good about your holy book. After watching the videos i would very strongly suggest you actually read the bible from cover to cover just like you would any other book. Reading the bible in small sound bites cherry picked by someone else to make a point can make the bible look pretty good but if you actually read it in context you will see it is not a factually accurate description of reality and contains horrific details of actions by a god that if true would qualify him as psychopath. Read your bible, really read it.... http://www.youtube.com/user/brettppalmer#p/c/32CC279BF7082A24/0/oSDXgT2QAf0

Yeah but you have to admit that nothing kills brain cells quite like guns, autos, and alcohol....

I admit a bias here, i think that animals exhibit all the same things we do and while some animals exhibit more complex behaviors than others but I think a great many have a sense of self, I have a dog that pouts if you make fun of him, his brothers will wear fake antlers and love the attention and praise they get but they are so funny looking with the antlers (basset hounds) you can't help but laigh, no problem for them but he sees you laughing at them and he will not do it and will growl and bark at you if you try to get him to wear them. Then if you laugh at him for not wearing them he sulks off for an hour in his bed. I think animals are as conscious as they can be as an emergent property of the complexity of their brain. Bird brains are arranged differently than mammal brains and the same size rules seem not to apply to birds I wonder if some of this applies to some reptiles as well, some monitor lizards exhibit some surprising behaviors in the wild and in captivity, some birds can use human speech to actually hold a conversation of sorts with a human. The bird can count, knows words of things like his foods and people and can talk about the things he knows. I think that sometimes having a life long relationship with an animal can mold some of it's behaviors over generations of close contact to resemble the dominate of the species but both affect each others behaviors to come extent.... I had a dog go get help when I got stuck in a sink hole when I was a kid, to that point everyone thought that dog was dumb as a stump.... Sudden inspiration of the dog or was it too stubborn all along to be or do what I wanted him to do but come to my aid when he saw i was really in danger? i don't know. Oh! And the Merkats!

it depends on what you are asking, in dilute amounts alcohol induces drunkenness which could lead to death like in a car crash, but alcohol will indeed kill brain cells more directly by death by alcohol poisoning. It is also addictive in some people.

Sharks and dolphins is not an exact comparison, there are many sharks, most in fact eat small fish and if they bite a human it's an accident, few sharks attack large prey but some fish eaters will eat carrion like a dead whale or dolphin if given the chance. There are also many species of Cetaceans called dolphins, in fact orcas are part of the family of wales known as dolphins, they range in size from 4' to 30' of orcas. The smaller toothed whales most people know as dolphins rarely interact with sharks nor do most sharks molest dolphins. I live on the coast and I have seen dolphins and sharks feed together on schools of fish many times but I have never seen a shark harm a dolphin but I have rarely seen dolphins play around with sharks. but to say one drives the other away would not apply in most circumstances.

Orcas have been seen and even filmed killing and eating great white sharks, in one film i saw the Orca played with the shark while it's own calf watched evidently teaching it how to handle sharks. Also there is the idea that an Orca would be aware of the shark due to it's sonar, a very precise sense while the shark relies on smell a somewhat less precise sense. If the Orca is aware of the shark the shark is harmless at best, doomed at worst if the Orca deems it so.... A shark might get an ambush in on a Orca but I bet it's a rare event. A whale washed up locally the other day, mortally wounded by a huge shark bite, a few days earlier an 18 foot great white was seen just offshore, connection?

The Hebrew Bible clearly states the earth is a flat disc under a crystal dome surrounded by water both above and below, virtually anyone out on a clear night would assume the stars were uncountable. The primordial actions themselves do not support reality even in a off hand way and the bible clearly states that the stars are fixed to the crustal dome that covers the earth as are the sun and moon. The bible also clearly states that stars can come to the ground and do battle with a human the bible clearly states that pillage, genocide, murder, rape slavery, and child molestation ok as well. The bible contains absolutely no knowledge any normal person of the times didn't believe and none of it was scientific. I can think of two or three off the top of my head, Hindus Zoastrians and Sieks (sp) have completely different creation stories dedicated to a completely different Pantheon of gods, there are many more... No, complexity can arise from chaos, it has been demonstrated many times this is true. Your statement shows you know nothing of what science is or says. I do believe he said their arguments were stupid not the individuals, a great many intelligent people have beliefs that are not.... Why does adding yet another layer of complexity to something that the only honest answer to is "we don't know?" make it a better explanation? Why would I want to prove your strawman? Because creation does not support the available evidence. I think I'll ask you as well, "How do you know the creation story you are touting is the correct one assuming creationism is true?" I rather like the Norse Gods creation story.

Or maybe I should have said, Valentine Michael Smith knew...

Seriously iNow, everyone just knows.... Heinlein knew