My Ignorant Challenge

[OldWiseGuy]

They certainly don't want me or any of my friends in the club...

Of course we want you, but you'll have to repent.

 

[AV1611VET]

Irrational beliefs keep people form learning.

That's true.

If NASA would have followed the "irrational beliefs" of one man, NASA wouldn't have learned they had a defective O-ring.

 

[AV1611VET]

It's so much more joy knowing I can accept things for what they are, now.

Until they change tomorrow.

 

[HitchSlap]

Until they change tomorrow.

I hope so!

 

[HitchSlap]

Satan (formerly Lucifer) is the "god of this world", that wascally snake. He (it) has many faces, and the snake is one of his (it's) most common.

In the mythical story, the snake told the truth.

 

[Subduction Zone]

That's true.

If NASA would have followed the "irrational beliefs" of one man, NASA wouldn't have learned they had a defective O-ring.

Wow! How do you always get things so backwards?

 

[HitchSlap]

Wow! How do you always get things so backwards?

Maybe he got his degree from Patriot University?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

In the mythical story, the snake told the truth.

Satan "hides a pint of poison in a lake of truth". Sly, that old snake.

 

[Kylie]

Satan (formerly Lucifer) is the "god of this world", that wascally snake. He (it) has many faces, and the snake is one of his (it's) most common.

And yet you are incapable of understanding that snakes in other religions can be entirely different.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

And yet you are incapable of understanding that snakes in other religions can be entirely different.

Not enough to matter.

 

[Kylie]

Not enough to matter.

Nah, it's totally different.

 

[klutedavid]

And yet you are incapable of understanding that snakes in other religions can be entirely different.

Interesting statement below.

"Where there is evidence, no one speaks of faith. We do not speak of faith that two and two are four or that the earth is round. We only speak of faith when we wish to substitute emotion for evidence." — Bertrand Russel

The evidence rests on faith.

One must first believe that the universe can be understood through observation for example, in order to pursue scientific evidence.

If you do not believe that the universe can be understood through observation, then the observational evidence is useless.

Deep below the discipline are the axioms, the assumptions, the beliefs.

Bertrand is not correct in his assertion.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Interesting statement below.

"Where there is evidence, no one speaks of faith. We do not speak of faith that two and two are four or that the earth is round. We only speak of faith when we wish to substitute emotion for evidence." — Bertrand Russel

The evidence rests on faith.

One must first believe that the universe can be understood through observation for example, in order to pursue scientific evidence.

If you do not believe that the universe can be understood through observation, then the observational evidence is useless.

Deep below the discipline are the axioms, the assumptions, the beliefs.

Bertrand is not correct in his assertion.

This is not correct. You are making a very poor claim here. Evidence cannot rest on faith. That the universe can be understood is a concept that has been tested and verified countless times. No faith is involved. Those that rely on faith simply refuse to learn how to test one's beliefs. It is as if they knew that their beliefs could not stand up to reasonable tests.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Interesting statement below.

"Where there is evidence, no one speaks of faith. We do not speak of faith that two and two are four or that the earth is round. We only speak of faith when we wish to substitute emotion for evidence." — Bertrand Russel

The evidence rests on faith.

One must first believe that the universe can be understood through observation for example, in order to pursue scientific evidence.

If you do not believe that the universe can be understood through observation, then the observational evidence is useless.

Deep below the discipline are the axioms, the assumptions, the beliefs.

Bertrand is not correct in his assertion.

I just heard that science may have a billion fewer years to play with regarding the age of the universe. I wonder if it will have an effect on the ToE as well.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

And yet you are incapable of understanding that snakes in other religions can be entirely different.

I understand that they believe them to be different. They certainly don't connect their snake worship to the Lucifer/Satan of the Christian bible. It is the observation and opinion of Christians mainly.

 

[VirOptimus]

I just heard that science may have a billion fewer years to play with regarding the age of the universe. I wonder if it will have an effect on the ToE as well.

Quote?

And, no it wouldnt.

 

[Kylie]

Interesting statement below.

"Where there is evidence, no one speaks of faith. We do not speak of faith that two and two are four or that the earth is round. We only speak of faith when we wish to substitute emotion for evidence." — Bertrand Russel

The evidence rests on faith.

One must first believe that the universe can be understood through observation for example, in order to pursue scientific evidence.

If you do not believe that the universe can be understood through observation, then the observational evidence is useless.

Deep below the discipline are the axioms, the assumptions, the beliefs.

Bertrand is not correct in his assertion.

I'm afraid you've got it wrong.

There's a big difference between religious style faith and believing something is true based on evidence.

Although I find it very interesting that your argument in support of religious faith still boils down to claiming that belief based on evidence is no better than religious faith. Funny how you use a comparison to religious faith to belittle the alternative to religious faith, then act as though religious faith is suddenly a better option.

 

[Kylie]

I just heard that science may have a billion fewer years to play with regarding the age of the universe. I wonder if it will have an effect on the ToE as well.

Given that the earth has only existed for a small fraction of the age of the universe, I'd say no.

 

[Kylie]

I understand that they believe them to be different. They certainly don't connect their snake worship to the Lucifer/Satan of the Christian bible. It is the observation and opinion of Christians mainly.

So what? Is your argument to be based on nothing more than, "Well, they have a snake, and we have a snake, so their snake must be the same basic thing as our snake"?

Really, that's a terrible argument and you aren't convincing anyone.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Quote?

I'm surprised that you haven't heard this.

NASA - UNIVERSE MAY BE YOUNGER THAN PREVIOUSLY THOUGHT