Spring RTS Engine

Now, regardless of your stance on the science vs god carry on, you must agree that this is the stupidest thing you've ever heard...

but im probly wasting time trying to get you to prove science,

The guy said this after going on about creationism and getting a sensible reply. I mean, c'mon, all science is is trying to prove stuff.

Well... maby he's trying to imply that whoever he is arguing against is just making shit up. Most people can quote alot of "facts" without having any source to referance or anything, which unfortunately is what most God vs Science arguments come down to. The fact of the matter is, there is no desicive proof either way, and the best proofs there are for both sides aren't really understood by anyone.

To date the best argument against God is subjective philosophy.

The fact of the matter is, our understanding of the universe is very limited, and a belive in God isn't really innately any less logical then not beliving in God at this point in time. It really kindof comes down to unconcious preferance (I might want to belive that the world is perfect, but I really can't, my unconcious won't allow it) unless "God has shown himself to you" (this is what they call it) which is really unsubstantial to anyone else, because how can you individually proove that God has shown himself to you.

[edit] when I say things implying that "science can't be proved" I mean "science can't prove God doesn't exist". It's more a communication error then anything else.

well i dont know the context, but it is stupid in that way, as you can´t prove empirism itself (i think he refers only to natural sciences)

but most of the time those (natural) science vs. religion guys never heard anything about scientific method, logic and things like that.....

I had an argument with a Christian last night, the funniest thing in Christianity is that they say we all have free will but somehow our faith is pre-decided? so no matter what we do, we are being guided by god anyway so we don't completely have free will right?

the Ultimate way to express our free-will is to take our own life, if you do that, you go to hell, it can not be forgiven, so loved ones that killed them selves are burning in hell and being poked by nice little tridents?

On the flip side, I do believe both Creatonist and Darwinist are both wrong but also right in some extend, I do believe their is a type of higher power, not god persay, but in my opinion it's a large group of souls that we are part of, we ALL collectively are god, however there were plenty of entities in the past that claimed they were the supreme god, IMO they were the Elohim, which I think was a race of aliens or something.

Please, dont stereotype all Christians off that one meeting. I myself am Christian, and dont belive that. Either havnt been listning to what the minister has been saying hard enough, or that person had NFI what they were on about...

Anyways, I dunno what to belive. The scientific way (Big-Bang, evolution ect) or that one of the many Gods (most of which claim to be the 'One true God'. Go Figure) created the whole mess. But ID is just stupid. There is no getting round that.

Oh wait, I know! Flying Spaghetti Monster FTW!

Barring issues like "one true god" and such, there is a logical trap that you can use to validate a belief in God. It's calling safe gambling.

A safe bet is one that pays enough back to risk the gamble, let's say you can buy a lottary ticket for $1 and have a 1 in 10 chance to win $100,000,000, that's a good bet, now the shorter the odds, the lower price, the bigger the prize, the better the bet.

The Prize in question is basically infinite, winning eternal life in glory with the omnipotent creator is a very good, but you also avoid the infinite negative of eternal torture in hell in the process.

Now the cost is relatively small, just giving yourself a chance to believe and ask the lord into your heart, you don't have to "live right" or "go to church every sunday" or anything, because if we are right then once you believe God will prove himself to you and you won't need to gamble anymore. You risk being wrong for a period of time.

Now the odds are, in theory 50/50 (as much chance that there is a God as there not being a God), but no matter what you assign the odds as, the finite nature of the cost and the infinite nature of the prize (even assuming that there is no hell to worry about), this is a very good bet if you give it an honest chance.

But really, it's just simple, self proving math/statistics and a fun argument, nothing seriouse. You can't prove someone exists when it is all-powerful and doesn't want to get his existence proved.

mmm... I don't belive in heaven... well that is to say, I don't see any of the promisses made regarding it as valid concreate or even likely. I guess heaven is possible the way it's described, but it sounds pretty stupid to me anyways.

Like I say, people belive what they unconciously want to belive. Why I see heaven as so much less of a concept as many of the other biblical concepts is beyond me, but I really just find the concept degrading and uninteresting. I know I belive a god/creator figure exists, I know my reasonsings, and I know why I belive the God of the christian bible is the God of the universe, but at the same time I can't help but feel the bible is such a woefully uncompleate story... Either that or it's just plain wrong way to often. The character of God is so different the way each author paints him on the page from every other author... at some point I have to draw the conclusion that God is alot bigger then anyone who wrote of him cared to communicate. Either that or some/most of them were just posers, a concept that Jesus really didn't seem to like.

mwha, darwinism is the last empirical major theory of the 18th century thats left standing and ahsnt bene replaced by more logical and prooven theories, such as what happened to freudian psychology for example.

Creationism is an attempt to bring religion into schools, they dotn care about anythign but there faith in some palces and so they'll teahc religion over prooven facts or attempt to, or they think it should happen because they've bene pursuaded but eitherway its a matter of faith nto knowledge and thats nto what schools are for. Teach their own children fi they want ti so bad, dont force it on others peoples children.

Intelligent design is a rebranding of creationism that was used so they could be seen seriously as a scientific prooven theory to pursuade the public mroe but it's just creationism udner a brand new outfit.

They're all rubbish. It's bene shown that organisms at some fundamental have a choice voer how they evolve which ahs been shown in studies and ignored by the public for lack of publicity.

For example, a plant was given a genetic defect giving ti some terrible disease on purpose by scientists, then it was bred through generations. By generation 40, 90%+ of the child plants had repaired the defect. The defect did not impact the fitness of the plants capablility to reproduce or it's yield of seeds as they where bred in a controlled environment by scientists.

Eitherway, when I see christians, I see varying types. The old lady who ahs her faith in god sort of stereotype, the people who take the bible literally and arguing them and tryign to say others are wrogn for believing otherwise, blissfulyl unaware they're contradicting the bibles teachings of respect and kindness for others be they christians or not.

Then there are those who are the closest to true christians who believe it all within reason and see the lessons it tries to teach you rather than the story that the other guy says actually happened and ignores the elsson adn sees it as historical fact.

I have a small piece of text on my computer I cant find but I remember ti well. It was from a christian who knew a lto about the bible and knew thigns about ancient literature too. He says the bible is the most dangerous book in the world, people take it too literalyl and believe they know what to make of it, they dotn ahve degrees in ancient literature, they dont udnerstand the bible is ancient literature and they havent a clue how the bible was meant to be itnerpreted.

The bible is a book of lessons and philosphies to be learnt, which if everybody followed, we'd end up with heaven on earth. The same with other religions, it's what the old testament tells the jews todo, it's what the koran says, it's all just in different words and languages using different ways to portray it. But people identify too much with the stories and do thigns like worship and visit 'holy places', carry around holy symbols because the book told them to, or it's a sign of god and they need it, or follow rituals tot he letter for fear of redemption.


Whether religion is right or wrong, the vast majority of you who think you believe in it, arent practising it at all and contradict it to immense lengths sometimes. Examples of this being protestants spitting at catholic schoolkids as they walk down the street gathering at the roadsides in crowds just to sneer, or islamic fanatics who terrorize when they're not islamic at all, they contradict the koran with every word they utter manipulated by others for grudges and lies.

I was raised a catholic, my mum and sisters are latter day saints, and my stepdads an athiest, my grandma's a devout catholic who goes to lourdes every year. I know what the bible says, I went to a catholic primary school, I'm not a practising christian though. I think as long as I'm happy and that at the same time I'm making other people happy, then that sums up all of it. I may ahve a wierd abstract philosophy, and some odd views of what christianity tries to say, and some unconventional beliefs on spiritual things, but at least I've seen a widespread of things, and I'm not a closed minded individual who's only entered the realm of the bible and didnt attempt to interpret it as anything but literal fact, then trying to impose their views on others with no respect for their beliefs.

Sorry for the big rant. But I needed to say it. You can read what I say and discard it for all I care, but it's better said than brimming away at the back of my mind.

My idea is that a lot of things that people think are "worng" and "immoral"
dont really have many grounds...

Like divorce. Its a nasty business, expecialy with children, but dose it HAVE to be as onerous and difficult? No. If the a couple mutualy want to break up, then why should anyone stop them? Becuase its 'sinfull' or 'wicked'? Seince when was makeing a mistake wicked?

Why should people be ashamed of drug use, mastribation, homosexuality or any other thing that relligion, or more accuratly, the masses who FOLLOW relligion have branded 'evil'. Dose it HURT us? No! Dose it HURT the person doing what ever it is? Only in the case of drug use, where in it is an overdose. But even so smokeing and drinking have cuased more deaths then every single illigal drug combined. So why arent they considered immoral, or evil?

Why?

Its a deadly question, why. There is very rarely a good answer, at least in terms of morrality.

One of the worst shocks im my life was when i was just flipping through my sisters bible, just out of sheer curiosity... and wait, ill write down what i found.

If your brother, the son of your father or of your mother, or your son or daughter, or the spouse whom you embrace, or your most intimate friend, tries to secretly seduce you, saying, ├óÔé¼┼ôLet us go and serve other gods,├óÔé¼┬Ø unknown to you or your ancestors before you, gods of the peoples surrounding you, whether near you or far away, anywhere throughout the world, you must not consent, you must not listen to him; you must show him no pity, you must not spare him or conceal his guilt. No, you must kill him, your hand must strike the first blow in putting him to death and the hands of the rest of the people following. You must stone him to death, since he has tried to divert you from Yahweh your God. . . .(Deuteronomy 13:7├óÔé¼ÔÇ£11)

I was shocked, and hurt. THIS was the GOOD book? I slowly closed the book and put it down, and from that point onwards i realised just how screwed up some people are. Im glad i havent met an Evanglisist. I would have to aviod the rocks...

I prefer to believe in people.

FLOZi wrote:I prefer to believe in people.

me too... my life is partly in other peoples hands too or animals or the weathers damn its great possibility i die soon... oh well gotta make this life... my only life worth living

2 things disproove omnipotent & freewill god systems: 1stly can the god create a rock so heavy he can't lift it and 2ndly "freewill" system dictates that by gods will you should be allowed to decide if he exists or not.

2 things to disproove science: Proove what you are prooving is actually being prooved. The duckbilled platapus (i mean c'mon what evolutionary chain comes up with THAT)

raikitsune wrote:2 things disproove omnipotent & freewill god systems: 1stly can the god create a rock so heavy he can't lift it and 2ndly "freewill" system dictates that by gods will you should be allowed to decide if he exists or not.

I like these, but can you prove that they are proof?

raikitsune wrote:2 things to disproove science: Proove what you are prooving is actually being prooved. The duckbilled platapus (i mean c'mon what evolutionary chain comes up with THAT)

1. Can be applied to any argument of proof.
2. Science has predicted the existance of many strange things before they were discovered.

When you get on an aeroplane do you pray to your god that it wont crash, or are you thankful that science and technology has given you this means of travel?

raikitsune wrote:2 things disproove omnipotent & freewill god systems: 1stly can the god create a rock so heavy he can't lift it and 2ndly "freewill" system dictates that by gods will you should be allowed to decide if he exists or not.

a: perfect beings are incapable of imperfection. Breaking the laws of reality that he set in place would be in imperfection.

b: omnipotent free will would allow you to choose weather God exists or not, but our semblalence of free will is acctually pretty frigging pathetic. You don't need to be a christian to realize that the VAST majority of actions you take follow tightly along preset, boarder line compleatly predicatble, cause and effect relations. What free will decisions we can make are usually fairly insignifigant in the long run, because most of us don't like gambling against our natural instincts.

2 things to disproove science: Proove what you are prooving is actually being prooved. The duckbilled platapus (i mean c'mon what evolutionary chain comes up with THAT)

Yes and no... Science does a very poor job of raising conclusions. The fact is any experiment done in real world scenarios has billions of uncontrollable variables, and hundreds of possible meanings. For instance, Alantai's plant genetic repair experiment. It really doesn't prove that organisms chose thier genetic paths, or even that organisms have any ability to manipulate them at all. All it really proves is that certian plant in that cerian environment repairs genetic anomolies after 40 some odd generations. Not that that proof isn't signifigant, based on what we belived about evolution and natural selection, that simply shouldn't have happend. It shows that our understanding of genetic inheritance probably isn't as rounded as we belived it was, which is a HUGE discovery, because that means we have alot more work to do to figure out WHY that particular micro evolution occured the way it did. The experiment itself does nothing for the why, it just outlines the fact that the why is there. Basicly it disproves natural selection, so we need to figure what IS the real model.

Unfortuneatly alot of scientists forget that experiments that don't come out the way they were intended don't prove anything, they just disprove something we thought we already knew. Science almost never proves something difinitively. It's far more interested in breaking our understanding of everything until we realize that we really don't understand that much.

I believe that all forms of religion were created out of goodwill or selfishness:

Goodwill - Somebody wrote the holy books to try and convince people to help each and lead better lives e.g. the Bible (I believe)

Selfishness - Somebody wrote a holy book to bend people to their will e.g. terrorism, cults etc.

Please don't start me on Christianity, how could the two holy books be so conflicting?

I generally don't have a problem with religion, apart from when people use religion as an excuse e.g. terrorists (again)

This probably makes little to no sense, I apologise.... I should've gone to sleep earlier... as in yesterday

Aun wrote:I believe that all forms of religion were created out of goodwill or selfishness:

Goodwill - Somebody wrote the holy books to try and convince people to help each and lead better lives e.g. the Bible (I believe)

Selfishness - Somebody wrote a holy book to bend people to their will e.g. terrorism, cults etc.

Please don't start me on Christianity, how could the two holy books be so conflicting?

I generally don't have a problem with religion, apart from when people use religion as an excuse e.g. terrorists (again)

This probably makes little to no sense, I apologise.... I should've gone to sleep earlier... as in yesterday

They really don't conflict that much when you take them as a whole. It's just when you try to read equal tone and athority into every word that they are impossible to read.

SwiftSpear wrote: They really don't conflict that much when you take them as a whole. It's just when you try to read equal tone and athority into every word that they are impossible to read.

And how many people do that? Why shouldn't they do it?

Damnit, I didn't want your freaken opinions, I was just pointing out that that guy was a retard.

[K.B.] Napalm Cobra wrote:Damnit, I didn't want your freaken opinions, I was just pointing out that that guy was a retard.

Well, you're wrong. Science almost never proves anything, The buisness of science is disproving things.

The end result of scientific pursuit is to arrive at a conclusion by making every other alternitive impossible. Not to prove that you what you belive is correct. Science is compleatly unforgiving to those who make conclusions in its name.

Not only does science never prove anything, but the VAST majority of those who quote scientific claims as evidence for thier belives can't attach those claims to references. So not only does science not prove anything, people who quote it can't prove they are even quoting science.

In both cases the statement "I'm wasting time trying to get you to prove science" is true.

I don't know why people so quickly attack intelligent design... Or the idea that any degree of thought was put into anything that WE as a race didn't make. Let me put it to you this way... Imagine yourself as someone who has no idea what electicity or electronics or computers are.. Then imagine how you might behave if you found a village of perfectly human looking androids. They all talk to you, and treat you as if they were all normal humans. And lets say your an evolutionist... Sure, why not... I mean you don't believe in intelligently designed things that weren't made by your people's level of expertise so you'd have to be right? Besides that, you can't make anything that walks or talks so it's obviously impossible for anyone else to do so. Otherwise it'd have been done already. Or so goes your thinking.

Anyway, when you find out that these people are internaly made of metal.. Just imagine the ideas you'd have on where they came from! Why, This one here's made of 90% of an iron compound.. He must have evolved from magnets. Yes, magnets do tend to stick together, so maybe somehow over millions of years enough magnets got stuck together to make most of this guy's skeleton. You of course ignore the fact that he's not magnetized as it's inconvient and doesn't sit right with your theory of his formation. You find that many of them are filled with silicon and coper bits, probably evolved from some sand that somehow got refined copper in it. Who knows, it doesn't make any sense, so, not to look stupid in front of your fellow tribes men, you just try to ignore that little fact. Or make up something with big words that most of your friends can't understand so you look smart. (Yes scientists really do this, they do it to save their careers when they're wrong [or dead wrong and would litterally rather die of old age defending themselves than admit they wasted 40 years working on a stupid idea]. Afterall no one would ever do anything just for money, fame, recognition or personal satasfaction of a life not wasted , now would they?)

I don't suppose most people know this, but Darwin denounced his own theory on this death bed.. You can take that for whatever it's worth, and his book "The origin of speices" never answered the question it's cover posed.

Course you'll say that science has proved it now. Yeah, we practiced making real DNA and found we could only make viruses because the "Primortial soup" idea only produces DNA that's twisted to the left instead of all living DNA which is twisted to the right. I've got no idea why, but some how that subtle change produces DNA that's deadly to all forms of life.

Here's something else to consider, someone was talking about safe bets. Here's pascel's wager:
There are 4 variables, and two pairs that interact: (Tables are so hard to type out in message boards.)

--------------------------There is a God-------------There Isn't a God
I believe in him______|__Do Good get repaid_|___Do Good get nothing
I don't believe in him_|__Do Bad get Repaid__|___Do Bad, get nothing.

Basically if I remember it right, if you believe in God and obey what he's told you, he'll reward you if he exists. If you don't then he'll punish you like he promised to, if he exists. If however he doesn't exist, and you do good, you won't exist long enough after your dead to realize you were wrong, so you pretty much lose nothing that you'd have any chance to miss. If you do bad and there is no God, then you again, lose nothing that you'd have any chance to miss.

So Basically, the safe bet is to just believe in God and do what he says, that way, if when you die you find out that there is a God, you don't get punished.. And if he's not, your mind will probably just poof out of existance and you'll never get the chance to regret having lived a life that wasn't all about having fun or whatever.

As for Deuternomy 13:6-11, it's important to understand that their society isn't the same as our society(s). They were given that law because their people were isolated and surrounded by pagans, who believed in human sacrifice (which included men, women and children.) Abraham, the original founder of their religion was nearly sacrificed on the altar, and was saved by God and gave him his loyalty. To the Israelites religion was a life or death matter (because any religion in those days would ask them to betray their country and give their children to be slain before the gods of their neighbors.) Religion wasn't just something that was convient for them like it is for us... Their government was both the church and the state, the people were tribal families. So basically to go and join another faith was to say, "I renounce my family, my country, and my God." And then go and join those peoples who weren't in many cases friendly to the israelites. It's like if Mexican's crossed the borders to America just so they could join the American Army and prepare to fight Mexico. If I were in charge of Mexico, I sure wouldn't want people running off to join my enemies. Would you? Anyway, different time, different people. If your a Christian, then you should know that the Law of Moses (eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth, kill the guy who's telling you to leave your country and worship his gods.) Is done away with, at least that's what Jesus teaches in the New Testiment.

I've got just one more thing to say.... If God says something's bad, it's for a reason. Just because not everything's easy to see the cause and effects of. (Such as touching a stove and feeling the burn.) Doesn't mean that there aren't long term effects that you didn't consider. Or perhaps pay attention to... But when those consequences come, you'll understand why it was a "no-no."