Jim Bob
Lilly
The reason everyyone should be opened minded is because a fool believes in the "power of his image, and sound of his tongue,"
Further incite on Dawkin's The God Delusion
by Abandoned 104 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
tetrapod.sapien
Who knows 1,000 years from now what the theory will be then.
indeed. it could be even be more well supported. if we take the current rate of synthesised hypotheses under the umbrealla of the theory itself, there is no reason to assume that it will change in it's current direction. this is because the past is set in stones and genomes. it's CSI work. i future-based "surprise" that would throw the entire thoery into some sort of disrepute would have to be a big one. simply speaking. a technical point if nothing else.
skyking,
i don't think that string theory, 11 dimensional hyperspace theory, m-theory, whatever, is out to replace the theory of evolution at all. i am a fan of it as well, and i think it's cool that you are so onboard with your support of it. i agree, and i think there are some really interesting implications of such a theory, should it turn out tlo be the theory it says it will be when we can finally harness anough energy to actually physically test the math. my opinion is that they may actually really be onto something.
but i don't think it replaces the theory of evolution in any way. the over archingness of the theory explains much in addition to how life evolved on earth. and good. it's what such a theory should be doing.
tetra
-
tetrapod.sapien
skyking,
The reason everyyone should be opened minded is because a fool believes in the "power of his image, and sound of his tongue,"
well, to foolishness then! the tongue is a powerful tool for change and catalyst in the world. did you know that some psychologists consider language itself to be the definition of human consciousness? the tongue is the tool that expressing ones mind to the world. you can expect highly intelligent people to be out spoken at this time in human history. all discussions are talking place on this medium we have invented, the world wide web. and this is going to be the place where humanity finds a common voice. and so the discussions go on this medium. and a persons self image goes a long way, in how they stand up and take the world. no one likes a self-defeatist.
in my critiques of your attitude on this thread, i have only desired to help you broaden your views, not change them. if you believe you are beyond my assistance, then sorry to have wasted your time.
tetra
-
skyking
tetrapod.sapien I don't think it will either, evolution is sound. I can not imagine some Theory disproving evolution. My whole beef with Dawkins book he left no room for other explanations for the paranormal or "Religious experiences" other than it is foolish and the person believing is fooling himself. There might be real explanations for why a few people are able to see the future. As I have mentioned many times my wife has that apparent ability. I know several posters on this board who live in my area and they know her personally. They have experienced her ability and know I am telling the truth. I am not willing nor able able at this time to believe that the Demons or Gods angels have given her this ability. She is no prophet nor witch just a person that might be able to tap into to other dimensions. Also I would like to tell you, I like your posts and never have I thought you were being rude with your post to me. This have been an interesting discussion look forward to more in the future.
-
Abaddon
skyking
You PM'd me, as you have before in such discussions. Now as then I responded to your rude and inaccurate PM. I'm sure there's nothing 'wrong' with your IQ; typically you bring this up when I have never said such a thing. Nice of you to insult yourself for me. Smart people can be mistaken, credulous, and have poor standards of evidence. It is also really nice you feel there is a theory which supports the paranormal... pity there is no proof of the paranormal, eh?
Time again you miss it; when it was show that small infective agents exist, science accepted it. When Creation myths are shown to be bunk (not saying you support them, it is an example), people keep on believing them and/or viewing the source books claims of origin as credible as before. When every single paranormal claimant has failed to demonstrate their abilities in s scientifically acceptable manner, people still believe such claims are credible.
I'm sure it isn't deliberate, it's just you being you which is fine.
I suggest you do the reading though;
It's been made very clear to you that science changes if shown to be wrong; religion and paranormal remains the same.
Traditional ideas of Creation can be shown to be wrong, people retain other unsubstantiated beliefs associated with it. Paranormal events do not occur under scientific observation, but are treated as credible as those that can.
I said how religious and paranormal beliefs do not change when their beliefs are shown to be wrong. I gave examples of both. I never said you believe in creationism. I said, just like creationists, you persist in giving credibility to something that has never, ever, ever shown any scientific credibility.
You don't have to like this, but there you go.
Scientists who said heavier-than-air flight was impossible were ignoring birds, bats, insects and gliders. The theories of infectious transmission in vogue before Pasteur were demonstrably false.
There is nothing in nature that shows psychic abilities are even possible (no equivalent of birds etc.). There might be theories about the paranormal, but as the paranormal is yet to be proved even in the smallest part, they should actually be called hypotheses.
Now, I know you are a believer, and that's fine. I just can't fathom how you miss the gap between what you accept as credible, and what someone using anything remotely resembling the scientific method would accept as credible. Not only that, you take it personally; it really isn't about you. The scientific method is to minimise error, not to stop you believing in what you will according to what standards you like. You can still do that; just don't expect speculation on such a basis as being acceptable to others, and have the maturity to not use 'closed-minded' as some kind of petulant retort to someone who will not embrace your standards.