That's a pretty interesting discovery :o
It's beyond interesting, it changes everything. If DNA can form on Earth with another element in place of phosphorous, that means that the parameters for locating possible life-containing worlds just expanded dramatically. We don't need to seek out Earth-like worlds cos DNA could evolve on worlds and in environments previously thought antithetical to life. This is potentially a bigger development on the field of biology than the Theory of Evolution.
But I like my science with Zombies.
I think we are all alien to this planet in some form or another.
We may need to redefine "alien".
That's a pretty interesting discovery :o
It's beyond interesting, it changes everything. If DNA can form on Earth with another element in place of phosphorous, that means that the parameters for locating possible life-containing worlds just expanded dramatically. We don't need to seek out Earth-like worlds cos DNA could evolve on worlds and in environments previously thought antithetical to life. This is potentially a bigger development on the field of biology than the Theory of Evolution.
Yes, I have a tendency to make understatements about discoveries...
So life is not only extremely tough in it's first known form, it's actually possible to create it from different kinds of elements. It should open up a lot of new places to scan.
I'm really looking forward to where they're going with this.
Extremely interesting, but I wouldn't say all that surprising. I think our definition of life is very lacking and based totally on what I imagine is a small subset of what actually exists. So while an important discovery that is extremely valuable and interesting, I don't think its very surprising. But I'm not a biologist.
(And I don't want anyone to think I'm minimizing the discovery.)
A real, honest-to-Bog fact on fox news, and an amazing one to boot!
I am curious to know what you were doing on the Fox News website.
I'm Facebook friends with SF author Robert J. Sawyer who is quoted in the article. It was all over the net but I quoted that one as a shout-out to Rob, and also cos I think that Fox posting an actual fact was in and of itself a noteworthy achievement.
Now that they actually found some though, now that it is no longer all conjecture, hopefully they will be able to come up with some new ideas for how it actually works, and better ways to test for it.
The notion that life could be formed of other elements is not new. Like, at all. We look for the kind of life we know, because it is what we know how to look for, not because we think that is all that might be out there.
Now that they actually found some though, now that it is no longer all conjecture, hopefully they will be able to come up with some new ideas for how it actually works, and better ways to test for it.
I know it is not a new idea, that's why they were interviewing Robert J. Sawyer cos he, and other SF authors, have written about the possibility. What it is is a new reality. This creature's DNA is built differently than every other living organism on Earth. It means that we have proof, not just a hypothesis, that life can evolve in environments entirely unlike those previously assumed necessary. It means that in the search for extraterrestrial life we no longer are restricted to just Earth-like worlds.
It means that in the search for extraterrestrial life we no longer are restricted to just Earth-like worlds.
We never where [looked for life on the moon, on space rocks, plans to search watery moons of jupiter and commet trails, ect.] Still, if we can learn more about them, it can give us ideas on how to search thoes other places.
I mean, I know it would still be possible to reach them because of time dilation and space contraction, but everyone on Earth would probably be dead by then.
But why would it matter if we knew where other life was? They'd be light years away.
I mean, I know it would still be possible to reach them because of time dilation and space contraction, but everyone on Earth would probably be dead by then.
Well see, your still working under the assumption that life can only exist on earth like planets, and thoes are not nearbye in great abundance. But non-earth like life could be much closer, we have alot of celestial bodies in orbit with us at the moment.
Also, because it proves stuff about the universe. One can never know to much. And it might shut up certain rather vocal groups a bit more
And it might shut up certain rather vocal groups a bit more
In the very least, they'd have to update their book.
But why would it matter if we knew where other life was? They'd be light years away.
But why would it matter if we knew where other life was? They'd be light years away.
California is only a few hundred kilometers away... just FYI
But why would it matter if we knew where other life was? They'd be light years away.
Yeah, and even if they lived nearby, they wouldn't speak our language. Not that we'd have anything to talk about, their taste in movies and books would probably be too different from ours!
On a serious note: it always annoyed me when I heard or read about types of planets being discarded as possibly housing life because there was no air or no water or temperature was too high or too low to support Earth life. So I'm glad they found this; right here on Earth no less.
On a serious note: it always annoyed me when I heard or read about types of planets being discarded as possibly housing life because there was no air or no water or temperature was too high or too low to support Earth life. So I'm glad they found this; right here on Earth no less.
I agree in principle, but I can understand why they would want to limit searching for things familar. Its just easier to search for things which you can understand better. But I definately hate how life is so narrowly defined by what we see on Earth.
(But biology sucks anyway!)
and also cos I think that Fox posting an actual fact was in and of itself a noteworthy achievement.
FOXNews bashing part 2.
and also cos I think that Fox posting an actual fact was in and of itself a noteworthy achievement.
Achievements aren't worth that much anymore nowadays. Try playing a game without gaining 10 achievements in your first playthrough.
CONGRATULATIONS, YOU ARE NOW LEVEL 1!!!!
Uperduper achievement unlocked.
I mean, it really is a much more elegant answer.
But why would it matter if we knew where other life was? They'd be light years away.
Maybe I should explain myself?
Let's say, theoritically there is a planet 100 light years away that contains sentient, sapient life. What are we going to do about it? If anyone wanted to go there and back (because of the space/time relationship they could reasonably do this within their lifetime with a fast enough spacecraft), 200 years would have passed on Earth. 200 years is a lot of time, especially considering how fast technology is expanding in this day and age. I don't even think it would be possible to send messages to them since that would also take around 200 years.
But why would it matter if we knew where other life was? They'd be light years away.
Maybe I should explain myself?
Let's say, theoritically there is a planet 100 light years away that contains sentient, sapient life. What are we going to do about it? If anyone wanted to go there and back (because of the space/time relationship they could reasonably do this within their lifetime with a fast enough spacecraft), 200 years would have passed on Earth. 200 years is a lot of time, especially considering how fast technology is expanding in this day and age. I don't even think it would be possible to send messages to them since that would also take around 200 years.
...
And maybe now that we know a little more about this stuff, we might be looking within our own solar system in places we didn't. There is no restriction placed on the number of planets within a solar system that support life, or even that it must be on a planet instead of say, a moon or an asteroid.
It may well be close to home.
FOXNews bashing part 2.
And?
FOXNews bashing part 2.
And?
I like Fox :]
FOXNews bashing part 2.
And?
I like Fox :]
So do I.
And boraxe will continue to bash and bad mouth FOX simply because he knows it gets under my skin.
See, it's ok for Boreaxe to bash stuff he doesn't agree with, but it is not ok for others to bash stuff he agrees with.
So do I.
And boraxe will continue to bash and bad mouth FOX simply because he knows it gets under my skin.
See, it's ok for Boreaxe to bash stuff he doesn't agree with, but it is not ok for others to bash stuff he agrees with.
I thought you did it on purpose until I noticed you spelt it correctly the first time.
And boraxe will continue to bash and bad mouth FOX simply because he knows it gets under my skin.
I know it may be difficult for you to believe but you really don't enter into my decision making process at all. Sorry to burst your bubble, dude.
See, it's ok for Boreaxe to bash stuff he doesn't agree with, but it is not ok for others to bash stuff he agrees with.
Deliberately misspelling my username to make a thinly veiled insult is weak.
It seemed like he was saying the things about Fox on purpose. Now I know why. Sooo whats the opposite of Fox Boraxe? What type of news do you prefer? Is there something that you would willingly say is better than Fox News?
The opposite of "Fox" is "News".
It seemed like he was saying the things about Fox on purpose. Now I know why. Sooo whats the opposite of Fox Boraxe? What type of news do you prefer? Is there something that you would willingly say is better than Fox News?
The opposite of "Fox" is "News".
really I know you're not being serious because obviously Fox is news. Thats just silly.
It seemed like he was saying the things about Fox on purpose. Now I know why. Sooo whats the opposite of Fox Boraxe? What type of news do you prefer? Is there something that you would willingly say is better than Fox News?
The opposite of "Fox" is "News".
really I know you're not being serious because obviously Fox is news. Thats just silly.
I don't know a thing about Fox news, but what you say can't possibly be. If Fox was news, then 'Fox news' would be 'news news'. :P
It seemed like he was saying the things about Fox on purpose. Now I know why. Sooo whats the opposite of Fox Boraxe? What type of news do you prefer? Is there something that you would willingly say is better than Fox News?
The opposite of "Fox" is "News".
really I know you're not being serious because obviously Fox is news. Thats just silly.
I don't know a thing about Fox news, but what you say can't possibly be. If Fox was news, then 'Fox news' would be 'news news'. :P
It is.
And boraxe will continue to bash and bad mouth FOX simply because he knows it gets under my skin.
I know it may be difficult for you to believe but you really don't enter into my decision making process at all. Sorry to burst your bubble, dude.See, it's ok for Boreaxe to bash stuff he doesn't agree with, but it is not ok for others to bash stuff he agrees with.
Deliberately misspelling my username to make a thinly veiled insult is weak.
Believe it or not, I don't care which, it was a spelling error on my part... not meant as an insult.
*shrug*
It is.
Ah nuts! I should've looked it up first. It's a whole channel. I assumed 'Fox news' was one program on the 'Fox channel'. I'm going to crawl back under my rock now.
It seemed like he was saying the things about Fox on purpose. Now I know why. Sooo whats the opposite of Fox Boraxe? What type of news do you prefer? Is there something that you would willingly say is better than Fox News?
The opposite of "Fox" is "News".
See?
It is.
Ah nuts! I should've looked it up first. It's a whole channel. I assumed 'Fox news' was one program on the 'Fox channel'. I'm going to crawl back under my rock now.
nooo lurking in the OTT isn't ok :] have your opinion and learn stuff.
It seemed like he was saying the things about Fox on purpose. Now I know why. Sooo whats the opposite of Fox Boraxe? What type of news do you prefer? Is there something that you would willingly say is better than Fox News?
The opposite of "Fox" is "News".
See?
yeah, Boraxe thats not cool dude.
yeah, Boraxe thats not cool dude.
Fox News is not news, it is news-styled opinion programming as well as being the unofffial media wing of the GOP. If they would simply admit it I'd have far less of an issue with them.
yeah, Boraxe thats not cool dude.
Fox News is not news, it is news-styled opinion programming as well as being the unofffial media wing of the GOP. If they would simply admit it I'd have far less of an issue with them.
Yep! Just like CNN and the other news stations are simply left-wing opinion and propaganda machines.
Yep! Just like CNN and the other news stations are simply left-wing opinion and propaganda machines.
You know, certain people like to trot out that little trope as if it were gospel, yet somehow never seem to actually be able to back it up with facts or examples (thought given the quality of reportage on Fox News, for example, this is hardly surprising as they do not simply refuse to rely on facts or examples but seem intent on banishing them entirely).
Yep! Just like CNN and the other news stations are simply left-wing opinion and propaganda machines.
You know, certain people like to trot out that little trope as if it were gospel, yet somehow never seem to actually be able to back it up with facts or examples (thought given the quality of reportage on Fox News, for example, this is hardly surprising as they do not simply refuse to rely on facts or examples but seem intent on banishing them entirely).
Facts...
That's rich coming from you.
As if the liberal left-wing media knows anything about facts and reality...
Facts...
Yes, "facts". It means truth, reality, and things that are demonstrably, provably real. Being a Fox News viewer you may be unfamiliar with them but facts are generally held to be of particular merit by actual news outlets.
That's rich coming from you.
I'm rich? Woot!
As if the liberal left-wing media knows anything about facts and reality...
Is this the part where we start saying "Nuh uh!" and "Uh huh!" at each other? ;)
Is this the part where we start saying "Nuh uh!" and "Uh huh!" at each other? ;)
I thought we were past that, but I guess not...
Is this the part where we start saying "Nuh uh!" and "Uh huh!" at each other? ;)
I thought we were past that, but I guess not...
Please note the ;) at the end.
The real problem with Faux News and MSNBC, is that they are creating the Grey Truth phenomina slowly but steadily. Faux being the Right wing propaganda, and MSNBC being the Left machine people are going to start assuming, in right or wrong that the actual truth is somewhere in the middle.
Is this the part where we start saying "Nuh uh!" and "Uh huh!" at each other? ;)
I thought we were past that, but I guess not...
Please note the ;) at the end.
Heh...
How long did Fox News repeat the lie about how much Obama's India trip was costing?
About as long as CNN and MSNBC lied about how great Barry is and all the good works he is doing for this country.
How long did Fox News repeat the lie about how much Obama's India trip was costing?
About as long as CNN and MSNBC lied about how great Barry is and all the good works he is doing for this country.
I'd love to see the citation to prove that about CNN. Which is by far between the big three the least biased one way or another.
CNN's programming is mostly news broad casts. FN's is mostly commentary about the news. (At least that's how it was when I last watched CNN. Now in the name of chasing Ratings that might have changed.) Quite a big difference in institutions don't you think?
About as long as CNN and MSNBC lied about how great Barry is and all the good works he is doing for this country.
Although potentially biased, these aren't lies, they're opinions.
About as long as CNN and MSNBC lied about how great Barry is and all the good works he is doing for this country.
Although potentially biased, these aren't lies, they're opinions.
Sh*******t I'de prefer BBC to CNN.
PBS FTW?
Indeed.
I remember Anderson Cooper had a Daily Show-esque skit (but obviously less funny) where he was crossing out parts of the Bill of Rights (there's probably a video online somewhere). If you don't think that's biased, then I don't know what other example I could give.
I remember Anderson Cooper had a Daily Show-esque skit (but obviously less funny) where he was crossing out parts of the Bill of Rights (there's probably a video online somewhere). If you don't think that's biased, then I don't know what other example I could give.
I'll have to look that one up. In the mean time, here is a video of Anderson Cooper tearing a birther a new stinkhole; tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/...
I watched this documentary 'dinosaurs or dragons' a couple days ago, and I must say, I really don't understand the mind set. Their argument goes "The world is only 6000 years old, cause the bible says so, so where do all these bones come from that science says are millions of years old? They are not that old, they are only a few hundred years old, the bodies of dragons from ledgends from around the world." Now what I don't get is, they are trying to disprove something because it contradicts the bible, so why go so far afield when looking for an alternative interpretation when a much easier and more obvious one exists in the source of your unease; "The devil planted them their to lead people astray from the worship of god by descrediting his holy book."
I mean, it really is a much more elegant answer.
Yeah, I thought of that when I was still a little kid.I've also considered that maybe God's just entertaining us with such things.
Of course for the 7 days/600years vrs millions of years arguments there's always the possibility that things aren't the same as they used to be.
What if the planet has sped up/slowed down, shifted orbits slightly, etc etc etc? Maybe more than once even. Or maybe our world has been affected by forces that we presently lack the means to detect/measure/explain.....
That's impossible you say? Why? Up till now wasn't our science telling us what THE formula for life was?
That's impossible you say? Why? Up till now wasn't our science telling us what THE formula for life was?
Wasn't there a saying? "When a scientist says something is improbable, he's almost always right. When a scientist says something is impossible, he's almost never right"
;)
G'night!
Up till now wasn't our science telling us what THE formula for life was?
Nope. The biological definition of life has always been more open-ended then just what we've found on earth. At best we've said "this seems to be the formula for life as we know it", which is different in significant ways.
They've already tried that one. It didn't float so well before either. It's one of those statements a person can make that's a red-flag for the other person that the conversation isn't going anywhere fruitful, so you may as well have fun along the way.
But damnit, if you want someone to belive something because this book says so, and they wont belive it because of X, pointing out how this book could explain away X makes perfect sense, and does alot more to further your ultimate goal of getting people to belive the things that your book says. If, on the other hand, you get them to belive one thing out of your book as a result of outside data, well, all you do is teach them to belive in the parts of your book that can be verified with outside data. I'm almost certain that is not the goal.
The stickyist of which: "God is intentionally trying to make us doubt his word. God said he wants us to belive his word. God is telling us he wants one thing while actively working to acheive the opposite. God lies to us." When your entire faith system rests on 'god said so', introducing trains of thought that have the logical conclusion of demonstraiting how your god is a liar kind of invalidates your entire faith.
Genesis 22, TA, it's already in there.
Whats alreayd in there? That god put the bones there just to **** with us, that the devil did it for the same reason, or the whole 'god lies to us' thing (like that whole, I want you to kill your son Jazz)? I'm really not up on my scripture and don't have ready access to the bible.
Saying things that arn't true to get a reaction out of people....
Trollieness is next to godlieness?
It's like an abusive husband. "I'm only sending you to hell because I love you, and because you can't read my omnipotent mind about what I want you to do"
*dons fire-retardant suit*
Stop with all the Christianity and God bashing.
It doesn't make you look cool, or educated, or special.
Thanks!
Feel free to replace "god" with "allah" and "bible" with "koran" so you can continue bashing the Islam.
Feel free to simply stop bashing God and Christianity... instead of baiting me.
More Christian bashing goes on here than any other bashing... except maybe for Dubya.
Do you like to get threads closed/locked?
Is that what you "do"?
Feel free to replace "god" with "allah" and "bible" with "koran" so you can continue bashing the Islam.
whoa whoa WHOA!!! Yall need to chill with all that. when you start debunking others peoples religions that's where the line should be drawn. Nobody is here telling you that your eternal soul is damned forever, no one is telling you that you're wrong and you should change your opinions. But the last page was nothing but arguing against the non-existant christian radicals or something. EE and RH kept their cool about it but then you all want to call an omnipotent being a liar? Just stop please. Its literally pointless. You're not gonna convert anybody in a forum.
On a side note on religions: without religions, we'd not have near as many wars as we do these days! And without war, what would we complain about and die for!? We need religions! Living happily in peace sucks!
Discovering new ways DNA can be formed changes my life completely! Oh, wait...no it doesn't. I guess I'll still go to work today and come home tonight, and deal with my other issues in life like kids and stuff. Sure, new discoveries are cool, but they don't really mean much in the grand scheme of things to me. I am glad though for all that are impressed by this discovery, and those that chose to bash religions instead of ignore them, all because human ignorance has been further proven, and thus slightly diminished (and I mean very slightly...).
On a side note on religions: without religions, we'd not have near as many wars as we do these days! And without war, what would we complain about and die for!? We need religions! Living happily in peace sucks!
If religion never existed, what do you think the world would be like? hmmm?
Just the name in which atrocities are committed would be different. Though a few of them might not have happened.
If religion never existed, what do you think the world would be like? hmmm?
If it never existed, probably less developed. However, now that we are semi-modernized, many of the archaic religions that are trying to stay alive are obsolete. I'm not going to pick on any in particular, but basically all that believe mutilating oneself (removing body parts at any age because a deity said to do so) and the sort that say killing others is good are not needed. It was great when the world lacked global communication and folks could live thnking that there was only one way to do things, but now, we can all realize that there are too many religions to easily pin-point one as correct. I don't know what the correct religion is, if any at all are unerringly right. Religion and faith are good for weaker minds, and it pacifies them to a greater extent than alcohol, so I applaud those that need such social and emotional devices to get through the day. I don't though, which might be my own religion, making me a hypocrite. I just don't know. I'm only an ignorant human with one kind of DNA, so I don't honestly have the answers, and like everyone else on the planet (or off of it, for that matter) I cannot claim with any authority that I know better than anyone else.
Honestly probably about the same.
Just the name in which atrocities are committed would be different. Though a few of them might not have happened.
and thats an opinion. Just like everyones entitled to have. So stop.
If religion never existed, what do you think the world would be like? hmmm?
If it never existed, probably less developed. However, now that we are semi-modernized, many of the archaic religions that are trying to stay alive are obsolete. I'm not going to pick on any in particular, but basically all that believe mutilating oneself (removing body parts at any age because a deity said to do so) and the sort that say killing others is good are not needed. It was great when the world lacked global communication and folks could live thnking that there was only one way to do things, but now, we can all realize that there are too many religions to easily pin-point one as correct. I don't know what the correct religion is, if any at all are unerringly right. Religion and faith are good for weaker minds, and it pacifies them to a greater extent than alcohol, so I applaud those that need such social and emotional devices to get through the day. I don't though, which might be my own religion, making me a hypocrite. I just don't know. I'm only an ignorant human with one kind of DNA, so I don't honestly have the answers, and like everyone else on the planet (or off of it, for that matter) I cannot claim with any authority that I know better than anyone else.
Wow, I respect you for that answer
Just because you don't like the answer doesn't mean you get to tell me to shut up.
But then that's a common trait of the Religious I've found. If they don't like the answer they either ignore it, or actively seek out ways to destroy those with differing opinions.
You asked.
Just because you don't like the answer doesn't mean you get to tell me to shut up.
But then that's a common trait of the Religious I've found. If they don't like the answer they either ignore it, or actively seek out ways to destroy those with differing opinions.
Are you joking? I loved that you answered my question. I certainly didn't tell you to shut up, in fact if you would care to re-read what you so obviously simply glanced at, you would see that.
Your apparent hate for religion is obvious. I know that I could never change your mind even though I didn't seek to. What I'm getting at is, you're not gonna make a revolution on the internet. Nor will you change ANYONE'S mind about their religion on the internet. So going on and on about it on a message board is pointless.
Religion is alot like communism most of the time it's supposed to be a benign or helpful thing filled with great ideals. It can be used to build a strong sense of community.
But in actual execution far too often it is used as a tool of oppression, and a vehicle through which to control the weak minded, as well as provide an easy way to justify any and all acts of barbarism. They aren't like us, they don't Believe as we do. Therefore they must die. We are doing them a kindness by delivering them to Our God, who is better than Their God.
Actually if you hadn't noticed I've stayed out of this thread. And really, that you see it so commonly on the internet should point out to you that Religion is more than likely on the Decline. (There are various religious groups particularly here in the US that would agree with that sentiment as church after church fails)
... And without war, what would we complain about and die for!? ... Living happily in peace sucks!
"My argument is that War makes rattling good history, but Peace is poor reading."
Thomas Hardy
Here's why I don't like Religion. Couple that, with more than a few people that have told me my sister's autism is a Punishment from God.
Religion is alot like communism most of the time it's supposed to be a benign or helpful thing filled with great ideals. It can be used to build a strong sense of community.
But in actual execution far too often it is used as a tool of oppression, and a vehicle through which to control the weak minded, as well as provide an easy way to justify any and all acts of barbarism. They aren't like us, they don't Believe as we do. Therefore they must die. We are doing them a kindness by delivering them to Our God, who is better than Their God.
Actually if you hadn't noticed I've stayed out of this thread. And really, that you see it so commonly on the internet should point out to you that Religion is more than likely on the Decline. (There are various religious groups particularly here in the US that would agree with that sentiment as church after church fails)
People are ****s deal with it. Somebodies gonna hurt your feelings sometimes.
Opression huh? how far back are you looking? things change with time. We no longer fight crusades. A modern version of what you're saying is asking people "If they've heard the good news."
So when a couple of D&D players say that religion is bad then that means its on the decline?
Religion is only on the decline because religion is a business, and right now business is bad.
I love your signature
Feel free to replace "god" with "allah" and "bible" with "koran" so you can continue bashing the Islam.
Feel free to simply stop bashing God and Christianity... instead of baiting me.
More Christian bashing goes on here than any other bashing... except maybe for Dubya.
Sorry, the only correct answer was "Stop bashing religions". This is just you getting pished that I'm bashing your religion, instead of religion, which (obviously) does not help.
But the last page was nothing but arguing against the non-existant christian radicals or something
My, are you going to be surprised someday.
. EE and RH kept their cool about it but then you all want to call an omnipotent being a liar?
Why not? If he's omnipotent he obviously doesn't care as he could've stopped me easily.
If religion never existed, what do you think the world would be like? hmmm?
Agreed with previous posters, mostly the same with different names. Maybe we'd have been able to advance on the road of science slightly faster because of less hangings/bannings/burnings, but other then that, mostly the same.
(Also, before anyone tries, I don't hate religions. I think they are fascinating. I just hate oblivious religious people.)
People are ****s deal with it. Somebodies gonna hurt your feelings sometimes.
Opression huh? how far back are you looking? things change with time. We no longer fight crusades. A modern version of what you're saying is asking people "If they've heard the good news."
So when a couple of D&D players say that religion is bad then that means its on the decline?
Again, it's more the sentiment that my sibling, surely must have done something Against God before she was even born. Hell before she was really alive. A sibling who is pretty much the embodiment of an Innocent. One of the very few people I would call such. These people don't know said sibling, never met her. And here they are judging her.
How about now? You know that whole Jihad thing going on right now maybe? Or the Catholic Churches stances, on gays (actually scratch that, Pretty much Every Religious group's stance against gays), birth control, or how about Baptist's beliefs that anyone that isn't Baptist and isn't Saved is Going To Hell? Then of course you have that whole, D&D scare, Prohibition, Religious war against videogames, what appears to be most christians stance towards non believers.
No it's not just a couple D&D players. Alot of churches are going down the Drain right now. They made new churches when obviously there isn't enough demand out there. (or didn't agree with their Minister/Pastor/Priest/whatever) And then there's various christian 'prominent' figures saying that less and less people are showing up on Sundays.
People are ****s deal with it. Somebodies gonna hurt your feelings sometimes.
Opression huh? how far back are you looking? things change with time. We no longer fight crusades. A modern version of what you're saying is asking people "If they've heard the good news."
So when a couple of D&D players say that religion is bad then that means its on the decline?
Again, it's more the sentiment that my sibling, surely must have done something Against God before she was even born. Hell before she was really alive. A sibling who is pretty much the embodiment of an Innocent. One of the very few people I would call such. These people don't know said sibling, never met her. And here they are judging her. Do you know what I tell these people?
I tell them that they neither care for nor follow their Religion. And if they Do, I'd rather go to Hell than spend an eternity with them in an afterlife.
How about now? You know that whole Jihad thing going on right now maybe? Or the Catholic Churches stances, on gays (actually scratch that, Pretty much Every Religious group's stance against gays), birth control, or how about Baptist's beliefs that anyone that isn't Baptist and isn't Saved is Going To Hell? Then of course you have that whole, D&D scare, Prohibition, Religious war against videogames, what appears to be most christians stance towards non believers.
Then there's the countless jackholes that try to "save me" and Convert me. Out of a sense of misdirected self righteousness, telling me my beliefs are Wrong, they are Right, and I should Believe as they do.
No it's not just a couple D&D players. Alot of churches are going down the Drain right now. They made new churches when obviously there isn't enough demand out there. (or didn't agree with their Minister/Pastor/Priest/whatever) And then there's various christian 'prominent' figures saying that less and less people are showing up on Sundays.
Feel free to replace "god" with "allah" and "bible" with "koran" so you can continue bashing the Islam.
Feel free to simply stop bashing God and Christianity... instead of baiting me.
More Christian bashing goes on here than any other bashing... except maybe for Dubya.
1.Sorry, the only correct answer was "Stop bashing religions". This is just you getting pished that I'm bashing your religion, instead of religion, which (obviously) does not help.But the last page was nothing but arguing against the non-existant christian radicals or something
2.My, are you going to be surprised someday.. EE and RH kept their cool about it but then you all want to call an omnipotent being a liar?
3.Why not? If he's omnipotent he obviously doesn't care as he could've stopped me easily.If religion never existed, what do you think the world would be like? hmmm?
4.Agreed with previous posters, mostly the same with different names. Maybe we'd have been able to advance on the road of science slightly faster because of less hangings/bannings/burnings, but other then that, mostly the same.
(Also, before anyone tries, I don't hate religions. I think they are fascinating. I just hate oblivious religious people.)
1. the only correct answer.....get out of here with that plu. If I was attacking something you love wouldn't you be more than a little miffed?
2. I know they exist, I meant there were none to argue against and it was more along the lines of "intellectuals" trading their blasphemous notions, including one example of a certain someone callling my god a "giant rooster" I believe....
3. God loves you.
4. That was merely a question to give you a visual representation of your opinions being similar thus resulting in a situation where you no longer need to drivel on about how you think you're superior to a religious person cuz nobody is arguing against you.
People are ****s deal with it. Somebodies gonna hurt your feelings sometimes.
Opression huh? how far back are you looking? things change with time. We no longer fight crusades. A modern version of what you're saying is asking people "If they've heard the good news."
So when a couple of D&D players say that religion is bad then that means its on the decline?
Again, it's more the sentiment that my sibling, surely must have done something Against God before she was even born. Hell before she was really alive. A sibling who is pretty much the embodiment of an Innocent. One of the very few people I would call such. These people don't know said sibling, never met her. And here they are judging her. Do you know what I tell these people?
I tell them that they neither care for nor follow their Religion. And if they Do, I'd rather go to Hell than spend an eternity with them in an afterlife.
How about now? You know that whole Jihad thing going on right now maybe? Or the Catholic Churches stances, on gays (actually scratch that, Pretty much Every Religious group's stance against gays), birth control, or how about Baptist's beliefs that anyone that isn't Baptist and isn't Saved is Going To Hell? Then of course you have that whole, D&D scare, Prohibition, Religious war against videogames, what appears to be most christians stance towards non believers.
No it's not just a couple D&D players. Alot of churches are going down the Drain right now. They made new churches when obviously there isn't enough demand out there. (or didn't agree with their Minister/Pastor/Priest/whatever) And then there's various christian 'prominent' figures saying that less and less people are showing up on Sundays.
ok everything about religion is wrong. God is fake, and all churches are the work of people that are just looking to spark up rebellions. Is that what you want to hear? Cuz that ain't happenin.
1. the only correct answer.....get out of here with that plu. If I was attacking something you love wouldn't you be more than a little miffed?
Nope. If it was senseless bashing I'd ignore it, and if it was rational arguments it might interest me enough to re-evaluate my views. I'm not going to be bothered by what people post here.
3. God loves you.
I know. That must be why he's actively trying to make me go to hell, isn't it?
4.That was merely a question to give you a visual representation of your opinions being similar thus resulting in a situation where you no longer need to drivel on about how you think you're superior to a religious person cuz nobody is arguing against you.
You seem to be arguing against me...
Until that happens, when someone asks an open ended question like that, you're going to get an answer. If you don't like said answer maybe you should think for half a second before asking it if you really want it answered.
1. the only correct answer.....get out of here with that plu. If I was attacking something you love wouldn't you be more than a little miffed?
Nope. If it was senseless bashing I'd ignore it, and if it was rational arguments it might interest me enough to re-evaluate my views. I'm not going to be bothered by what people post here.3. God loves you.
I know. That must be why he's actively trying to make me go to hell, isn't it?4.That was merely a question to give you a visual representation of your opinions being similar thus resulting in a situation where you no longer need to drivel on about how you think you're superior to a religious person cuz nobody is arguing against you.
You seem to be arguing against me...
1. I'm so sure you would.
3. A mother eagle pushes it's babies out of the nest in order to make them fly. God does the same thing to us. Without trials and tribulations in life, How are you ever supposed to learn?
4. yeah, you and micha pulled me into it. **** **** ****
**** ****No, what I want to see is the supposedly Religious people that want my respect to stop shoving their Bull Crap down my throat and actually respect my own beliefs instead of demanding it from me while telling me I'm Morally Wrong, for not believing in the same things they do. I'd also like it if Religous Groups actually followed the things they are supposed to be teaching (acceptance, tolerance and respect for others that are not running around out there Ruining people's lives)
Until that happens, when someone asks an open ended question like that, you're going to get an answer. If you don't like said answer maybe you should think for half a second before asking it if you really want it answered.
No one that I know of here is trying to shovel their beliefs down your throat.
3. A mother eagle doesn't push them out of the nest until they are ready. It has nothing to do with 'testing' the young eagle. It also doesn't actively condem the eagle to die because it failed to live up to momma's expectations. You learn from your mistakes. Which 9/10 times is your own damn fault. The sooner people stop thinking "this was a test from god!" the better. God has nothing to do with learning and bettering yourself.
4. Now you're just projecting. You asked the open ended question. I decided to bite. It takes two to tango.
From your last post.
No? Then how about you start condeming people that do? Or will you decide not to do such because those people share your beliefs? Because after all it's okay as long as someone shares your views.
1. Again it depends on the argument in question.
3. A mother eagle doesn't push them out of the nest until they are ready. It has nothing to do with 'testing' the young eagle. It also doesn't actively condem the eagle to die because it failed to live up to momma's expectations. You learn from your mistakes. Which 9/10 times is your own damn fault. The sooner people stop thinking "this was a test from god!" the better. God has nothing to do with learning and bettering yourself.
4. Now you're just projecting. You asked the open ended question. I decided to bite. It takes two to tango.
From your last post.
No? Then how about you start condeming people that do? Or will you decide not to do such because those people share your beliefs? Because after all it's okay as long as someone shares your views.
are you claiming to know the workings of someone that you can't even comprehend?
If I entered a topic and someone was preaching at you do you really think I wouldn't say something in your favor? You're obviously not comfortable with religion and I would respect that. Do you think I would jump in and start attacking you too?
Shall you continue to spin the crank or move on towards something else?
Shall you continue to spin the crank or move on towards something else?
you're right. I'll stop.
Sure, new discoveries are cool, but they don't really mean much in the grand scheme of things to me.
Actually they mean a lot in the "grand scheme of things", what is insignificant in such a scheme is your petty little life (and mine, and everyone else's for that matter).
I'd also like it on record that I did not take part in the theist/atheist argument.
are you claiming to know the workings of someone that you can't even comprehend?
I can ask you the same question. Actually with the way Religion works, you are assuming that you can comprehend God. Otherwise you wouldn't believe what you do. You are assuming god is Insert Traits Here by default by even having a Religion.
You are also assuming that some how that God isn't still a hypocrite by actively sending you to hell, or with every Major Attrocity that goes on. If god is an all powerful omipotent being, it stands to reason that either 1 God is a hypocrite by actively trying to sabotage your soul, or 2 God frankly Doesn't Care, or isn't even more than vaguely aware of our own existence. There is no reason to test someone when frankly if God has unconditional love for everyone. You don't see me running around and putting my friends and family that I love into jeapordy to test them to see if they are worthy of my love now do you?
If I did, frankly that would make me a Dick. If god does it, All Powerful or no, he's a Dick.
are you claiming to know the workings of someone that you can't even comprehend?
You seem to. I'm just using the arguments of others to show how silly they are.
1. I'm so sure you would.
Feel free to try. I doubt you could even find anything I care so much about.
3. Was answered quite nicely by Micha, anyway.
Also, it takes a lot of cranking to find out how the machine ticks, so I'm going to keep spinning it until I figure it out.
honestly I can't keep arguing against two people who are each better than me at arguing. I'm only going to make myself look foolish. Sorry but I won't continue this.
"Going to"?
honestly I can't keep arguing against two people who are each better than me at arguing. I'm only going to make myself look foolish. Sorry but I won't continue this.
"Going to"?
Oh that's cute, I bet you think thats clever too? hahaha
Oh that's cute, I bet you think thats clever too? hahaha
Yup. Though I do tend to forget you can't recognize irony even when it's biting you on the ass so you may have missed the fact it was an obvious joke.
at least I can quote somebody -.-
This is why we machines can't have good equipment. You humans keep using it to bludgeon your defunct equines.
mhm.
Also, I think we hurt poor Jesse's feelings...
Don't worry Klirshon, we'll invent new tools for bludgeoning said defunct equines that way. That way you can profit aswell.
Also, I think we hurt poor Jesse's feelings...
A lil.
More Christian bashing goes on here than any other bashing... except maybe for Dubya.
It's been forever since he was mentioned actually.
Don't worry Klirshon, we'll invent new tools for bludgeoning said defunct equines that way. That way you can profit aswell.
Better yet, let's make robots do that for us!
Dood, how could this hurt your feelings? From what I recall of my religious indoctrination, you're supposed to be challenged about your faith. This stuff means you're doin' it right. You're supposed to be vindicated by the attacks of non-believers. It means you're gettin' the Golden Ticket to them Pearly Gates. St Peter's gonna have your name on the list. Fighting back? That's not how you're supposed to do it. I mean, you're supposed to spread the faith as much as possible (through 'mission work' - aka: raping populations of their native traditions and beliefs or by bangin' out an army of devout with your wife) but you're also supposed to turn the other cheek. No? Am I wrong? I swear I remember it being taught - at least to me and those in classes with me - that it's a good thing to be 'attacked' for your faith. So yeah, be happy, mon. It's all as has been planned for you. ;)
I was joking lmao but I'm jewish actually.
(kiddin', kiddin')
Better yet, let's make robots do that for us!
That wouldn't be very smart. We would create tools that "incapacitate" the user when used as a bludgeon.
Sure, new discoveries are cool, but they don't really mean much in the grand scheme of things to me.
Actually they mean a lot in the "grand scheme of things", what is insignificant in such a scheme is your petty little life (and mine, and everyone else's for that matter).
My life is the grand scheme of things to me. Afterall, I don't know if anything else other than myself is even real. Life on other planets? If that exists in the same reality as myself, then it still doesn't affect me. If such nigh-useless discoveries get other people going, good for them. But me - other worlds and their possible lifeforms are insignificant at best.
Sure, new discoveries are cool, but they don't really mean much in the grand scheme of things to me.
Actually they mean a lot in the "grand scheme of things", what is insignificant in such a scheme is your petty little life (and mine, and everyone else's for that matter).
My life is the grand scheme of things to me. Afterall, I don't know if anything else other than myself is even real. Life on other planets? If that exists in the same reality as myself, then it still doesn't affect me. If such nigh-useless discoveries get other people going, good for them. But me - other worlds and their possible lifeforms are insignificant at best.
Then uh, in the lexicon of the day, y r u ere? Look, see, your a troll. Trolling is part of your life and thus part of your 'grand scheme'. This discovery started a thread that became a discussion that gave you something to troll. It has already affected your life.
My life is the grand scheme of things to me. Afterall, I don't know if anything else other than myself is even real. Life on other planets? If that exists in the same reality as myself, then it still doesn't affect me. If such nigh-useless discoveries get other people going, good for them. But me - other worlds and their possible lifeforms are insignificant at best.
Then uh, in the lexicon of the day, y r u ere? Look, see, your a troll. Trolling is part of your life and thus part of your 'grand scheme'. This discovery started a thread that became a discussion that gave you something to troll. It has already affected your life.
Only if this thread is actually real. If the thread is real, you are correct. If the thread is not real, then he is delusional. One should wonder why he is responding to an imaginary thread...
My life is the grand scheme of things to me. Afterall, I don't know if anything else other than myself is even real. Life on other planets? If that exists in the same reality as myself, then it still doesn't affect me. If such nigh-useless discoveries get other people going, good for them. But me - other worlds and their possible lifeforms are insignificant at best.
Then uh, in the lexicon of the day, y r u ere? Look, see, your a troll. Trolling is part of your life and thus part of your 'grand scheme'. This discovery started a thread that became a discussion that gave you something to troll. It has already affected your life.
Only if this thread is actually real. If the thread is real, you are correct. If the thread is not real, then he is delusional. One should wonder why he is responding to an imaginary thread...
Well, no. For your line of argument to make sense, you have to work from the premiss that unreal things cannot have an an effect upon real things. To hold both that idea to be true alongside the idea that things outside yourself may well not be real, would then require that everything you interact with or has an affect upon your interactions with other things are defacto real (or else that you are also not real).
The very fact of his interaction with us shows that either this thread is real or that he can be affected by unreal things and either way your line of reasoning fails.
Well, no. For your line of argument to make sense, you have to work from the premiss that unreal things cannot have an an effect upon real things. To hold both that idea to be true alongside the idea that things outside yourself may well not be real, would then require that everything you interact with or has an affect upon your interactions with other things are defacto real (or else that you are also not real).
The very fact of his interaction with us shows that either this thread is real or that he can be affected by unreal things and either way your line of reasoning fails.
Unless his interaction is also a delusion. He could be imagining that he is responding to posts made in this imaginary thread. In which case, all this is occurring within his imagination. You and I aren't real, we are just figments of his imagination. Your response is actually his response. So he is responding to himself. If he is the only thing real, he can affect himself.
In any case, it was meant as a joke. You failed your perception check...
[And no, I did not. You may have failed yours, however.]
Really, my point was that I'm just not focused on things that don't mean much to me. I enjoy what I'm reading here, imagined/real or not, and thus I am participating to some extent (causing folks to think/react/say something stupid to 'make a point').
I don't hit every thread, this one just caught me eye a while back, evolved into something mildly thought-provoking, and so here I am provoking thoughts. You don't have to agree, but you can tell I'm right because you either have or are going to respond to this. That isn't my goal though, and even if this post kills the thread (not likely), all of the previous posts by everyone would make you think something, be it to agree, disagree, or completely follow a new line of thought straight to the fridge for a beer.
Its just a forum, everyone, not a test. Any answer is a good answer, as long as one can fool another into thinking there was thought involved. Keep it up; like I said, this is interesting to read.
Wow. I guess I ruffled some feathers there. Sorry about that.
Eh? I don't even have feathers! We are having fun kind of at your expense, but thats par for the course here. If your gonna get all melodramatic every time that happens, well, welcome to the tavern. We will make a gay old time of it. But really, put more thought into it than 'your gonna reply to me, so I win'. Thats not retarded enough nor clever enough to entertain anyone!
Wow. I guess I ruffled some feathers there. Sorry about that.
Thats not retarded enough nor clever enough to entertain anyone!
HAHAHA I should make that a sig
Wow. I guess I ruffled some feathers there. Sorry about that.
Eh? I don't even have feathers!
Am I the only one with feathers in here?
Wow. I guess I ruffled some feathers there. Sorry about that.
Eh? I don't even have feathers!
Am I the only one with feathers in here?
Its possible :]
I think there are probably some people here who regularly stick some up their arse so you´re probably not alone.
But if things he simply imagines are things that can affect him then either the things he imagines are real or unreal things can affect him. Therfore whatever the case [this thread and discovery are a) Real, b) not real but not simply imagined or c) completly made up by him] it makes no diffrence to the assertion that it can and has in fact affected him.
How are you defining" "Real", "unreal", and "affect him"?
[And no, I did not. You may have failed yours, however.]
I meant you failed to perceive the joke.
In any case, it was meant as a joke. You failed your perception check...
If he failed to get a joke, shouldn't it be an insight check? Its not like he didn't see the text or something.
If religion never existed, what do you think the world would be like? hmmm?
Well for one thing pretty much every argument about why the government should sanction and encourage discrimination and violence towards me would have the wind taken out of it's sails, as the religious ones are the only ones that really stick with people. I mean sure, you can make non-religious arguments for why it should be legal to beat me to a pulp in the streets, but those just don't resonate with people.
And don't even get me started about the whole "God loves you" bit... that's a 2000 world minimum level rant for me.
Well for one thing pretty much every argument about why the government should sanction and encourage discrimination and violence towards me would have the wind taken out of it's sails, as the religious ones are the only ones that really stick with people. I mean sure, you can make non-religious arguments for why it should be legal to beat me to a pulp in the streets, but those just don't resonate with people.
It's unnaturaaaaal!
Also despite the world being grossly overpopulated, economy wants our numbers to grow and you aren't doing your duty making babies. Although I suppose if you donated some stuff to a sperm bank it might be ok...
In any case, it was meant as a joke. You failed your perception check...
If he failed to get a joke, shouldn't it be an insight check? Its not like he didn't see the text or something.
You are probably right. I haven't played in quite some time. Although ZB makes a good point.
Well for one thing pretty much every argument about why the government should sanction and encourage discrimination and violence towards me would have the wind taken out of it's sails, as the religious ones are the only ones that really stick with people. I mean sure, you can make non-religious arguments for why it should be legal to beat me to a pulp in the streets, but those just don't resonate with people.
It's unnaturaaaaal!
Also despite the world being grossly overpopulated, economy wants our numbers to grow and you aren't doing your duty making babies. Although I suppose if you donated some stuff to a sperm bank it might be ok...
That was dickish to say guy that I quoted.
and EE I'm sorry but idk what to say :[
That was dickish to say guy that I quoted.
and EE I'm sorry but idk what to say :[
I'm confident EscherEnigma will read it as the joke that it is. Come on, the economy thing? The sperm bank? The smilie?
meh
*shrug*
The way I read it, he did get the joke and played along with it, but then you took what he said seriously thus not getting he was joking.
You must not have read my follow up post.
You must not have read my follow up post.
The follow up post to the posts I was talking about is where you say it was a joke and he seems to have missed that. But I think he did get it and his whole 'your argument blahblah..." was a joke too. Thus then his next response being that he did not fail his check but you may have because you took that post where he was 'debunking your argument' seriously.
Anyway, at this moment only he knows for sure, but that's what it all looked like to me.
It's a bunch of jokin' about people not gettin' jokes. SOP, IIRC. And funsies.
That doesn't matter! Until Toasted returns to clarify things we can argue about it and have a good old fashioned fight. I'm sure that secretly, you want to join in on the fun. Don't be afraid to complicate the 'I quote that he said that you said'-train further.
and EE I'm sorry but idk what to say :[
Don't need to say anything. You asked a question, I answered.
Until Toasted returns to clarify things ... .
