If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#341
|
|||
|
|||
"socialist" when describing Hillary Clinton
"Thomas Borchert" wrote
Creationist - We have no idea what was in the beginning, so we make up this cozy feeling fairy tale with a bearded guy in it, then we go and kill or oppress people by the gazillions supposedly in the name of that guy, but really for our personal gain, be it economic, political or otherwise. This is an inflammatory statement that does not reflect the views of Creationists, however, debates on the subject normally lower to this level of name calling very quickly. I don't take offence. In the 'Christian' newsgroup I hang out in this topic is hotly 'debated' twice a year or so. No resolution, just a whole lot of yadda yadda. Scientist - We have no idea what was in the beginning, we'll keep trying to make sense of it, but still have no idea, and that's a good thing, too, because "We don't know" is an answer we can not only live with, but one we wholeheartedly embrace. If only all non-Creationists stated it this way. Most try to prove that they have "The Answer" (tm). Now, what sort of plane do you fly? I'm still stuck in a Warrior but the school has installed an autopilot so I get to do a little sight-seeing! David -- I was reading the dictionary the other day. I thought it was a poem about everything. |
#342
|
|||
|
|||
"socialist" when describing Hillary Clinton
"dVaridel" wrote in
u: "Thomas Borchert" wrote Creationist - We have no idea what was in the beginning, so we make up this cozy feeling fairy tale with a bearded guy in it, then we go and kill or oppress people by the gazillions supposedly in the name of that guy, but really for our personal gain, be it economic, political or otherwise. This is an inflammatory statement that does not reflect the views of Creationists, however, debates on the subject normally lower to this level of name calling very quickly. I don't take offence. In the 'Christian' newsgroup I hang out in this topic is hotly 'debated' twice a year or so. No resolution, just a whole lot of yadda yadda. Scientist - We have no idea what was in the beginning, we'll keep trying to make sense of it, but still have no idea, and that's a good thing, too, because "We don't know" is an answer we can not only live with, but one we wholeheartedly embrace. If only all non-Creationists stated it this way. Most try to prove that they have "The Answer" (tm). (tm) by christians, eh? Bertie |
#343
|
|||
|
|||
"socialist" when describing Hillary Clinton
Jim Logajan wrote:
Bob Noel wrote: No scientist today postulates a beginning? IMHO no one with a grasp of logic and a clear understanding of the concept of causality would postulate a "beginning" to time. It would either be pointlessly self-referential or require the postulation of some sort of meta-time in which causality (something to support "before" and "after" concepts) was still applicable. But that would then beg the question of postulating a beginning to the "meta-time". By the way, I would recommend the following book for anyone interested in the physics and philosophy of time: "Time's Arrow and Archimedes' Point: New Directions for the Physics of Time" by Huw Price. http://www.amazon.com/Times-Arrow-Ar...d_bxgy_b_img_a Tough reading because it requires some deep thinking, but no math. Those with a very strong background in math and physics at the senior to graduate college level might find this book worth some study: "The Physical Basis of the Direction of Time" by H. D. Zeh http://www.amazon.com/Times-Arrow-Ar...d_bxgy_b_img_a I still like "A Brief History of Time", but Hawking. I don't agree with much of it, but it is interesting reading nonetheless. Matt |
#344
|
|||
|
|||
"socialist" when describing Hillary Clinton
Thomas Borchert wrote:
DVaridel, Creationist - In the beginning there was God, and He created everything Others - In the beginning there was nothing, then it exploded Hmmmmm Here's the answer I should have given in the first place: Creationist - We have no idea what was in the beginning, so we make up this cozy feeling fairy tale with a bearded guy in it, then we go and kill or oppress people by the gazillions supposedly in the name of that guy, but really for our personal gain, be it economic, political or otherwise. Scientist - We have no idea what was in the beginning, we'll keep trying to make sense of it, but still have no idea, and that's a good thing, too, because "We don't know" is an answer we can not only live with, but one we wholeheartedly embrace. No one needs to get hurt in this process. Hmmmm Yes, Hmmm. Who created most of the nastiest weapons known to man... Hint, it wasn't creationists. Matt |
#345
|
|||
|
|||
"socialist" when describing Hillary Clinton
Matt Whiting wrote in
: Jim Logajan wrote: Bob Noel wrote: No scientist today postulates a beginning? IMHO no one with a grasp of logic and a clear understanding of the concept of causality would postulate a "beginning" to time. It would either be pointlessly self-referential or require the postulation of some sort of meta-time in which causality (something to support "before" and "after" concepts) was still applicable. But that would then beg the question of postulating a beginning to the "meta-time". By the way, I would recommend the following book for anyone interested in the physics and philosophy of time: "Time's Arrow and Archimedes' Point: New Directions for the Physics of Time" by Huw Price. http://www.amazon.com/Times-Arrow-Archimedes-Point- Directions/dp/01951 17980/ref=pd_bxgy_b_img_a Tough reading because it requires some deep thinking, but no math. Those with a very strong background in math and physics at the senior to graduate college level might find this book worth some study: "The Physical Basis of the Direction of Time" by H. D. Zeh http://www.amazon.com/Times-Arrow-Archimedes-Point- Directions/dp/01951 17980/ref=pd_bxgy_b_img_a I still like "A Brief History of Time", but Hawking. I don't agree with much of it, but it is interesting reading nonetheless. Oh you should write to him and point out his errors then. Be sure to include your views on guns. Perhaps that will help him see the error of his ways. Bertie |
#346
|
|||
|
|||
"socialist" when describing Hillary Clinton
Matt Whiting wrote in
: Thomas Borchert wrote: DVaridel, Creationist - In the beginning there was God, and He created everything Others - In the beginning there was nothing, then it exploded Hmmmmm Here's the answer I should have given in the first place: Creationist - We have no idea what was in the beginning, so we make up this cozy feeling fairy tale with a bearded guy in it, then we go and kill or oppress people by the gazillions supposedly in the name of that guy, but really for our personal gain, be it economic, political or otherwise. Scientist - We have no idea what was in the beginning, we'll keep trying to make sense of it, but still have no idea, and that's a good thing, too, because "We don't know" is an answer we can not only live with, but one we wholeheartedly embrace. No one needs to get hurt in this process. Hmmmm Yes, Hmmm. Who created most of the nastiest weapons known to man... Hint, it wasn't creationists. Only because they're too dumb to make spitballs. But not to use them. Bertie |
#347
|
|||
|
|||
"socialist" when describing Hillary Clinton
On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 02:17:20 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip
wrote: Matt Whiting wrote in : Jim Logajan wrote: Bob Noel wrote: No scientist today postulates a beginning? IMHO no one with a grasp of logic and a clear understanding of the concept of causality would postulate a "beginning" to time. It would either be pointlessly self-referential or require the postulation of some sort of meta-time in which causality (something to support "before" and "after" concepts) was still applicable. But that would then beg the question of postulating a beginning to the "meta-time". By the way, I would recommend the following book for anyone interested in the physics and philosophy of time: "Time's Arrow and Archimedes' Point: New Directions for the Physics of Time" by Huw Price. http://www.amazon.com/Times-Arrow-Archimedes-Point- Directions/dp/01951 17980/ref=pd_bxgy_b_img_a Tough reading because it requires some deep thinking, but no math. Those with a very strong background in math and physics at the senior to graduate college level might find this book worth some study: "The Physical Basis of the Direction of Time" by H. D. Zeh http://www.amazon.com/Times-Arrow-Archimedes-Point- Directions/dp/01951 17980/ref=pd_bxgy_b_img_a I still like "A Brief History of Time", but Hawking. I don't agree with much of it, but it is interesting reading nonetheless. Oh you should write to him and point out his errors then. You guys are all wrong. Douglass Addams hit it right with "The Restaurant at the End of the Universe". Be sure to include your views on guns. Perhaps that will help him see the error of his ways. Every one that thinks like I do should be able to own as many as they want. Take 'em away from every one else. Same for universal govt and religion. :-)) Roger Bertie |
#348
|
|||
|
|||
"socialist" when describing Hillary Clinton
On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 02:15:17 GMT, Matt Whiting
wrote: Thomas Borchert wrote: DVaridel, Creationist - In the beginning there was God, and He created everything Others - In the beginning there was nothing, then it exploded Hmmmmm Here's the answer I should have given in the first place: Creationist - We have no idea what was in the beginning, so we make up this cozy feeling fairy tale with a bearded guy in it, then we go and kill or oppress people by the gazillions supposedly in the name of that guy, but really for our personal gain, be it economic, political or otherwise. Scientist - We have no idea what was in the beginning, we'll keep trying to make sense of it, but still have no idea, and that's a good thing, too, because "We don't know" is an answer we can not only live with, but one we wholeheartedly embrace. No one needs to get hurt in this process. Hmmmm Yes, Hmmm. Who created most of the nastiest weapons known to man... Hint, it wasn't creationists. Nastiest weapon known to man? Hate. Twasn't created by the scientists. Roger Matt |
#349
|
|||
|
|||
"socialist" when describing Hillary Clinton
DVaridel,
The Big Bang idea 'has no basis in science'. If you think your description had anything to do with the Big Bang theory, you'd be wrong. -- Thomas Borchert (EDDH) |
#350
|
|||
|
|||
"socialist" when describing Hillary Clinton
DVaridel,
Now, what sort of plane do you fly? Socata TB-10 Tobago. Wider cabin than a Bo, but sadly, neither the engine power nor the speed. -- Thomas Borchert (EDDH) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Old polish aircraft TS-8 "Bies" ("Bogy") - for sale | >pk | Aviation Marketplace | 0 | October 16th 06 07:48 AM |
"Airplane Drivers" and "Self Centered Idiots" | Skylune | Piloting | 28 | October 16th 06 05:40 AM |
Dispelling the Myth: Hillary Clinton and the Purple Heart | Otis Willie | Naval Aviation | 0 | February 21st 06 05:41 AM |
Desktop Wallpaper - "The "Hanoi Taxi"". | T. & D. Gregor, Sr. | Simulators | 0 | December 31st 05 06:59 PM |