Satanic Rants Against Science

[Moontanman]

That supports my observation, because the heart is in the center of our body, and the brain is in the center of our head.

 

Not it's not, your heart is not even close to the center of our bodies, and our brain is irregularly shaped and is way off center

 

Also, people born with one foot, still have the exact same structure; it's not like they were meant to have 1 foot; that's why they are considered 'deformed'. Can a person born with 1 lung have a lung transplant?

 

There are people born with one lung and why couldn't they have a lung transplant?

[Klaplunk]

Yes you did, and my opinion is just as valid as yours.

 

I agree, your opinion is just ass valid as mine; also, I'm sure your local clinic can help you with your personality disorder.

[ydoaPs]

I agree, your opinion is just ass[sic] valid as mine

No you don't, and my opinion is just as valid as yours.

[Klaplunk]

 

Not it's not, your heart is not even close to the center of our bodies, and our brain is irregularly shaped and is way off center

 

 

 

There are people born with one lung and why couldn't they have a lung transplant?

 

 

 

Are you unaware of two halves? Can you not see the meeting point, would you like me to draw a line down the diagram for you?

[ydoaPs]

 

 

 

Are you unaware of two halves? Can you not see the meeting point' date=' would you like me to draw a line down the diagram for you?[/quote']

 

That diagram is 100% against your claim.

[padren]

Are you unaware of two halves? Can you not see the meeting point, would you like me to draw a line down the diagram for you?

 

If you would for my benefit, I'd appreciate it. The liver looks asymmetrical, as done the fact that the heart is on the left side of the chest.

[Klaplunk]

No you don't, and my opinion is just as valid as yours.

 

b. I guess this is some witty joke.

a. I guess this isn't some witty joke.

 

You decide

Or I decide

 

In our heads

Or in the thread

[Moontanman]

 

 

 

Are you unaware of two halves? Can you not see the meeting point' date=' would you like me to draw a line down the diagram for you?[/quote']

 

Klaplunk, look at your own diagram, which half is your heart in? Not the center for sure! yes parts of our bodies is symmetrical but the symmetry is not perfect...

[Phi for All]

That supports my observation, because the heart is in the center of our body, and the brain is in the center of our head.

The heart is NOT in the center of the body. It is most commonly found just to the left of center. You can test this by feeling where your heartbeat is strongest, if you don't trust the millions of autopsies that prove this.

 

You must have NPD if you cannot see this obvious factor of life. Go look in the mirror, you psycho.

Personal attacks are against the rules here. Why do you feel the need to lower yourself to this level?

[ydoaPs]

b. I guess this is some witty joke.

a. I guess this isn't some witty joke.

 

You decide

Or I decide

 

In our heads

Or in the thread

 

You're absolutely wrong, and my opinion is just as valid as yours.

[Klaplunk]

 

there's the line

[ydoaPs]

 

there's the line

 

Hmm....one side has a heart and the other doesn't. One side has a stomach and the other doesn't. One side has a spleen and the other doesn't. One side has an appendix and the other doesn't. Your line must be wrong.

[Moontanman]

 

there's the line

 

Whoooppp there it is.... The line proves the lack of symmetry....

[Klaplunk]

Let's annotate the outside of the body first.

So forgetting the insides for a second, please annotate that diagram again. Also, if you would, try use your 'brain', I know it's hard, but just do it. Try be less critical, and lets get this over quickly.

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

The inside became the outside - Whatever began first, had an inside before it had an outside. So our inside, grew to our outside - Therefore, in our insides image. I'm sure we could find some sort of pattern within the organs, but first - the outside.

[Moontanman]

Let's annotate the outside of the body first.

So forgetting the insides for a second, please annotate that diagram again. Also, if you would, try use your 'brain', I know it's hard, but just do it. Try be less critical, and lets get this over quickly.

 

You are the one who wanted to use the inside but the outside is not perfectly symmetrical either so this proves nothing.

[Sisyphus]

I have 100% proof that every human is meant to be born with 2 opposites halves.

 

Meaningless assertion.

 

I also have 100% proof that every human has a tailbone/naval, unless deformed, which is through reproduction and DNA editing along the way.

 

No, you don't. How do you know that? Have you personally examined every human? Have you done DNA testing on every human? If you have, how do you know you remember correctly? How do you know there are other humans?

 

That's 100% proof.

 

By that standard of "100% proof," the Earth is 100% proven not to be hollow.

 

Again, no, you haven't tested the core.

 

Not I. We, as in the human race. We look at it with seismic waves.

 

Since when were we touching the core;

 

Like, with my hand? Why is that the standard of proof?

 

You've tested it's actions, what the core is producing, nothing else.

 

If I was touching it with my hand, I would also just be testing its effects: the effect it has on my hand, as far as my senses can tell.

 

"1) You are not a philosopher."

I will be.

 

A philosopher is one who seeks truth. I see no evidence of that.

[Klaplunk]

The outside is perfectly symmetrical. You're nit picking now, and you're being rather dumb

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

Also, you haven't seen, heard, witnessed, touched or smelt the core. Let alone examined it. You've sent sizemic waves? Great, we can all rest peacefully then; 100% proof.

 

At least we look for the truth, where you just guess.

[insane_alien]

The outside is perfectly symmetrical. You're nit picking now, and you're being rather dumb

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

Also, you haven't seen, heard, witnessed, touched or smelt the core. Let alone examined it. You've sent sizemic waves? Great, we can all rest peacefully then; 100% proof.

 

At least we look for the truth, where you just guess.

 

 

if using seismic waves is just a guess then using ultrasound scans on women isn't 100% proof that they have a baby inside them. same principle, only uses a different source of waves.

 

for someone who claims to be looking for the truth you seem to be ignoring a lot without even evaluating its ability to be truthful. you need to open your mind.

[ydoaPs]

The outside is perfectly symmetrical.

No, it's not. There are moles, birth marks, scoliosis, etc.

 

 

You're nit picking now, and you're being rather dumb

No they're not, and my opinion is just as valid as yours.

 

Also, you haven't seen, heard, witnessed, touched or smelt the core. Let alone examined it. You've sent sizemic waves? Great, we can all rest peacefully then; 100% proof.

Have you seen, heard, witnessed, touched, or smelt every person ever born?

 

At least we look for the truth, where you just guess.

 

Irony meter off the friggin charts.

[DJBruce]

The outside is perfectly symmetrical. You're nit picking now, and you're being rather dumb

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

Also, you haven't seen, heard, witnessed, touched or smelt the core. Let alone examined it. You've sent sizemic waves? Great, we can all rest peacefully then; 100% proof.

 

At least we look for the truth, where you just guess.

 

No the outside of a body is not perfectly symmetric. Most, I would dare say all but would probably be called to show proof, bodies have slight abnormalities that make perfect symmetry impossible. For example, a leg that is slightly longer than the other, a dominate hand which has more muscle mass than the non-dominate hand ect. would all mean that a body would not be perfectly symmetrical. Also as a philosophy student you should realize that a universal statement like is exceptionally hard to prove as it takes one negative existentialism statement to disprove it.

 

Klaplunk science by definition deals with truth:

 

Science: A branch of knowledge or study dealing with a body of facts or truths systematically arranged and showing the operation of general laws

[padren]

The outside is perfectly symmetrical. You're nit picking now, and you're being rather dumb

You're cherry picking. You're choosing to only look at the outside, and on a very specific scale. You're fingerprints are not symmetrical. You're features aren't either, in fact their asymmetry, and how close they come to approaching symmetry, is a major factor in what humans identify as beauty.

 

More important than "degrees of symmetry" would be, what does this symmetry mean to you? Why is it important? What does it tell us about the world?

Also, you haven't seen, heard, witnessed, touched or smelt the core. Let alone examined it. You've sent sizemic waves? Great, we can all rest peacefully then; 100% proof.

 

At least we look for the truth, where you just guess.

 

How have you been looking for truth? All I see is you throwing out some unsubstantiated ideas, and then accusing people who do continue to research the very topic, who do uncover more and more information of not looking for truth.

 

As I said before, the seismic waves provided data that correlated with other models, and independently verified other methods of assessing the core.

 

And while we are on that topic - you can glibly mock these efforts as laughably incomplete, but can you provide even a single criticism as to the process? Can you demonstrate any flaw in the mechanics?

 

It's easy to sit on the sidelines and say "that's dumb" but it's a lot harder to explain why it's dumb.

[Sisyphus]

You're nit picking now

 

Nit picking? You said it was a 100% proven fact.

 

Also, you haven't seen, heard, witnessed, touched or smelt the core.

Let alone examined it. You've sent sizemic waves? Great, we can all rest peacefully then; 100% proof.

 

So you admit it then?

 

At least we look for the truth, where you just guess.

 

1) Stop saying "we." You are not a philosopher. You are not philosophizing. You are not studying philosophy. You do not speak for philosophers. What is that you think "philosophy" means?

3) If "you" means scientists, then "just guess" is not even remotely what they do. What is it that you think "science" means?

[ParanoiA]

Hmm, well I hate to feed the trolls but doesn't inductive reasoning suggest that we have no proof of the core? Shouldn't we instead refer to our belief in the core as strong induction, since we detect the core through instruments and not directly observed?

 

I thought science only disproved things...

 

Has science proven anything? I say this with admiration because Swansont went to a bit of trouble to make this point, years ago, and I forget which thread.

 

I have since had arguments with creationists over what qualifies as science, and what science actually posits, in the context of inductive reasoning utilized in the scientific method. Hate to go back and tell them I had it all wrong now.

[Phi for All]

I'm just arguing with science basically. I don't know what I'm talking about half of the time. I guess some of us just try to make life seem a bit more than a chemical bottle, or a dead end.

Science may take the passion out of things in order to explain them rationally, but we can put the passion back in when we have an explanation that works. Our universe is truly a miracle, in and of itself.

 

Does science believe there is no life after death?

Life after death, in the sense you mean here, is unobservable so science can't really measure it. We can measure that the body dies, but "spirits" and "souls" are inherently outside of any physical reality we can test. Does that make sense?

 

Why do we strive to find new technology or travel space? Shouldn't we care more for the people on Earth, and Earth itself. We treat life as a budding flower, or a complete flower, that is growing every second; rather than a flower that is dying.

Science treats life as an ecosystem that is evolving. Life, even human life, is not a dying flower. We may be dropping a few petals, but new ones grow to take their place.

 

Shouldn't it be the opposite? Where we would just take care of our planet, and live how nature intended? Who knows what nature intended?

Question #3 answers the other two.

 

Do you think it meant for us to steal Oil and other precious resources from other countries? And use gold and currency/power - instead of the hearts and minds of human beings being the main factor of power and respect?

See question #3.

 

It seems that we are doing the opposite of what nature intended, so wouldn't we be getting the opposite answers of what we're looking for?

I thought we were part of nature.

 

We have 2 opposite halves... A front/back, and top/bottom.

 

2 hands, 2 arms, 2 legs, 2 feet, 2 hands, 2 eyes, 2 nostrils, 2 ears, 2 nipples, a mouth that connects at 2 halves, a penis that connects at 2 halves.

 

Is it just a coincedence that my mouth is at the bottom of my face, it connects at two halves (not a duality like my eyes, nostrils, etc) and I use it to eat, survive. I can live without sight, hearing, smell - but I can't live without eating.

 

Then the penis, at the bottom of my body, and it connects at 2 halves (not duality like my arms, nipples/chest, legs) and is required for my genes to survive, I can't breed without my penis.

We got off on a corrections tangent with this earlier. What was your point about the two halves that are connected by one thing? Why is it important that my two eyes and ears and nostrils are connected by my mouth? Why is it important that my two body halves are connected by a single penis for reproduction?

[Klaplunk]

No, it's not. There are moles, birth marks, scoliosis, etc.

 

 

 

No they're not, and my opinion is just as valid as yours.

 

Have you seen, heard, witnessed, touched, or smelt every person ever born?

 

 

 

Irony meter off the friggin charts.

 

Since when was a mole part of the structure of the human body. Not everyone has moles though... Or was meant to have moles.

 

You're just jealous because I have more than the average 'Cyclops' brain. It must REALLY annoy you =P

 

Look, I'm out of this. It's like tennis, exept you're all in wheelchairs with non-symmetrical bodies and huge e-heads; and I'm standing at the other side using my skills, but it gets rather boring after a while. So, good night, god bless, and I'll see you in heaven.