The New "Religion Vs Science" Thread

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List

This thread has been locked

Messages 6881 - 6900 of total 10585 in this topic

<< First | < Previous | Show All | Next > | Last >>

High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber

May 17, 2016 - 07:51pm PT

Okay, MF, you win.

PS Thank you, Ed.

Yeah, that clinched it.

One more, can't resist...
(please see what evoked it)

He also made a subtle little threat here... This is classic bullying.

and you told me somewhere above to get a spine? lol

paul roehl

Boulder climber

california

May 17, 2016 - 07:54pm PT

Are you saying that your "majority of stars" that one can see as discrete objects with a telescope - even hubble - are dead?

No, without looking, I don't believe I did. I said something like a substantial number. Look, this kind of argument is a waste. What I said is true: you can see light the source of which no longer exists.

Why not lighten up a bit.

High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber

May 17, 2016 - 08:00pm PT

No, without looking, I don't believe I did. -Paul

I mean now. Starting all over. Since you keep bringing up a telescope based on the link Cintine (I think it was) provided. (As opposed to using just our naked eyes.)

Are you saying that a "majority of stars" that one can see as discrete objects with a telescope - even hubble - are dead?

Are you NOW saying this?

We are starting over. If you're game? Do you understand my meaning?

Mark Force

Trad climber

Ashland, Oregon

May 17, 2016 - 08:03pm PT

What I said is true: you can see light the source of which no longer exists.

Indeed true.

Ed Hartouni

Trad climber

Livermore, CA

May 17, 2016 - 08:10pm PT

Let's hit a nail on the head: Do you think it was right for jgill to call me a "bigot" and cowardly after my relatively innocuous posts? Speak to this please.

do I think it was right?

does it matter what I think is right? it was an observation that you were making what would commonly be viewed as bigoted statements.

what it sounded like to me, was that you have basically called the entire muslim world "dangerous" based on a poll (where there are no polls to inform us as to the rest of humanities views on similar topics). Calling out 1.6 billion people, while stating that 2.2 billion people who are christian ok..."The Islamic world has a long way to come to get to Christendom's moderation.", this would seem to fit the definition of a bigoted statement (in spire of your claim to being an atheist, you seem to pick sides here).

As for being a coward, you have to expect that your continued anonymity doesn't help your case here. You can basically make any claim you wish, with no recrimination. You hide behind your avatar.

High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber

May 17, 2016 - 08:13pm PT

It was an observation that you were making what would commonly be viewed as bigoted statements

Please, be specific. You just made this claim. What was it? Please quote it.

does it matter what I think is right?

Well, you certainly felt the impulse to set me to rights.

."The Islamic world has a long way to come to get to Christendom's moderation."

These are just common facts in the field of study. Spend a few years immersed in the subjects and you'll come to the pov yourself. It is well known that Christendom's had its reformation(s) of sorts while much of Islam hasn't. I'm tired but you can research it any time. There is no bigotry involved. Esp where criticism of doctrine or dogma as opposed to people are involved. Now if this is your perception so be it. But "bigot" is a pretty strong word.

this would seem to fit the definition of a bigoted statement

Sorry, but this is just naive.

As for being a coward, you have to expect that your continued anonymity doesn't help your case here. You can basically make any claim you wish, with no recrimination.

This is just weak. If I've made a claim (eg, re science) that is bogus or inaccurate you can point it out. Regarding "coward" or "cowardly" - oh please. I won't even dignify it.

My business is private. It will stay that way. I'm here only because I am a climber (1) and (2) a "science associate" in R&D in a private nonprofit (at the intersection of science, religion and belief) keen on social entrepreneuring.

John M

climber

May 17, 2016 - 08:28pm PT

Bigot: a person who strongly and unfairly dislikes other people, ideas, etc. : a bigoted person; especially : a person who hates or refuses to accept the members of a particular group (such as a racial or religious group)

Full Definition of bigot
: a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance

hmm.. you constantly sneer at anyone with religious beliefs.. it feels pretty much like hatred to me.

High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber

May 17, 2016 - 08:29pm PT

bigot... Yep. -dmt

I'll call you an as#@&%e, then.
I've got no problem with that either dmt.

yep, feels pretty good, too.

Ed Hartouni

Trad climber

Livermore, CA

May 17, 2016 - 08:39pm PT

Why would I or DMT or anyone else care about what you think of them?

We don't know who your are, and you don't want us to know... so your views aren't very relevant in terms of personal judgements. You're an anonymous troll, you aren't a person, and you want it to stay that way. You should embrace it, you seem to want us to affirm your personhood without wanting to show us the person.

As for what you know, we have direct demonstration from you (mixed, you haven't been very remarkable in your posts, whether they are climbing related or other; have you posted anything notable to the climbing parts of the STForum?). We don't know what else you've done other than your rather expansive view of your own importance...

High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber

May 17, 2016 - 08:46pm PT

Why would I or DMT or anyone else care about what you think of them?

Was this ever the issue? Don't care. So be it.

We don't know who your are, and you don't want us to know... so you're views aren't very relevant in terms of personal judgements. You're an anonymous troll, you aren't a person, and you want it to stay that way. You should embrace it...

Fair enough. I do embrace it.

(EDIT: "troll" has a strongly negative conotation; what's fair is that I am an anonymous handle; generally I do not post to bullsh#t.)

But it is informative to know your opinion of me as a troll.

you seem to want us to affirm your personhood without wanting to show us the person.

Not at all.

As for what you know, we have direct demonstration from you (mixed, you haven't been very remarkable in your posts, whether they are climbing related or other; have you posted anything notable to the climbing parts of the STForum?).

Fair enough.

We do have your rather expansive view of your own importance...

These are obviously your perceptions.

So I think we're all clear now?
Thanks for the clarification and your pov.

.....

Fair enough. Call the (edit: handles)/trolls names. Nbd.
Pretend to knowledge you don't have. Nbd.
Bs all you want. Be loosey goosey with the facts.
It's only a page, a thread, on
a climbing forum. Nbd.

Thanks again for the pov/reveal.

jgill

Boulder climber

The high prairie of southern Colorado

May 17, 2016 - 08:54pm PT

I've been studying comparative religions for 20 years . . . (HFCS)

And it's all come down to this?

Culminating in infantile snipping on a forum thread on a website that is an infinitesimal spark in the vast universe of the internet? No books, articles, public addresses, or peer commentary . . . just a lonely anonymous science associate wandering the labyrinth of imaginary demons and lashing out at perceived threats?

I'm sorry now I stooped to insults. Better to let smoldering embers cool and vanish back into obscurity.

;>\

High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber

May 17, 2016 - 09:05pm PT

Finally, in conclusion this day,

the facts remain...

(1) I do not start the name-calling, I never have.
(2) Those who do have never been called out on it. Yet somehow they get the free pass.

I think I've been pretty tame as an anonymous handle.

So it goes.

.....

"I've been studying comparative religions for 20 years . . ." -jgill

It's not easy. You should try it some time - esp at it relates to science over any common ground they might have.

"Culminating in infantile snipping on a forum thread..." -jgill

O please, hardly a culmination.

John M

climber

May 17, 2016 - 09:09pm PT

(1) I do not start the name-calling, I never have.

well.. you sneer at people, you laugh at their beliefs. You come off as superior. Do you start by name calling. I don't know. But I do believe that you present yourself as superior.

High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber

May 17, 2016 - 09:11pm PT

well.. you sneer at people, you laugh at their beliefs... jm

Go away, spare me.

It's clear to me you've held this grudge going back years to when you were moosie. Feels pretty good, I guess.

In fact, it's rather pathetic, imo.

"Do you start by name calling. I don't know."

That's right. You don't know. But you don't
mind putting it out there.

.....

EDIT 4 below:

To be clear, of course the pathetic part is your waiting till there is something of a dog pile... after all this time... and then jumping on and not going away. Pathetic.

John M

climber

May 17, 2016 - 09:14pm PT

sure.. I have held this belief for that long. so what. its true..

spare you.. uh huh..

High Fructose Corn Spirit

Gym climber

May 17, 2016 - 09:16pm PT

This is even better on the second read...

"Culminating in infantile snipping on a forum thread on a website that is an infinitesimal spark in the vast universe of the internet? No books, articles, public addresses, or peer commentary . . . just a lonely anonymous science associate wandering the labyrinth of imaginary demons and lashing out at perceived threats?" -jgill

So i'll just throw it down again for a keepsake.

cintune

climber

Colorado School of Mimes

May 18, 2016 - 02:41pm PT

So this all went pretty decisively Lord of the Flies.

Maybe there's nothing more to say about these topics.

Thanks for reading and writing to Religion v. Science, everyone! It's been super interesting!

MikeL

Social climber

Seattle, WA

May 18, 2016 - 02:54pm PT

There are at least two forms of objectivity.

(1) That there are “things” that one can know that exist outside of mind; a third-person point of view.

(2) That of looking at so-called “facts,” cooly, without bias, without passion, unemotionally, without pandering to self interests or personal beliefs.

One might think that the first would go along with the second, but that would apparently be wrong.