Posts by Abaddon

104

Further incite on Dawkin's The God Delusion

by Abandoned in

jw
friends

i started a thread after i finished the first chapter of this book entitled something like, i'm an atheist.

i finished chapter three and i have to backtrack a bit, but i also feel the need to explain why since i was so vocal.. first, let me say that i think everyon should read the first two chapters of the god delusion by richard dawkins.

he brings up some very important points about religion and about science's place in our world.

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.

25

Who believes in reincarnation and enlightenment??

by Aphrodite in

what are your beliefs based on and how has this been affected by your time as a witness?

Abaddon

moshe

My only conclusion was that I had been a WW2 German Luftwaffe fighter pilot in a previous life and was shot down in the war.

AH, well that proves it then... to you. Which is fine, even if I can think of a dozen reasons why you felt the way you did...

I love it as a concept, but despite my predisposition find no evidence that would make me accept it was a fact.

To me enlightenment is realising that we are just clever €ucking monkey's; space flight and genocide, Bach and Kingdum Melodies. And this is it. no refunds or re-admission. If our lives are meaningless, it is our own fault as we are the only ones that can supply our lives meaning.

104

Further incite on Dawkin's The God Delusion

by Abandoned in

jw
friends

i started a thread after i finished the first chapter of this book entitled something like, i'm an atheist.

i finished chapter three and i have to backtrack a bit, but i also feel the need to explain why since i was so vocal.. first, let me say that i think everyon should read the first two chapters of the god delusion by richard dawkins.

he brings up some very important points about religion and about science's place in our world.

Abaddon

skyking

Child

By the way the only thing that I have been challenged on was my statement the Dawkins in closed minded.

No you have also been accused of being closed minded and of not knowing what theory actually was due to using it in a way which showed you've no idea what it means in a scientific context, as well as characterising various of us and the scientific community as a whole as closed minded. Nice of you to keep up.

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.

Yes you are right there is not one chance in hell you could convenience me that Dawkins is not closed minded.

Oh, you're so closed minded skyking!

lovelylil

Come on guys, give skyking a break! Everyone is entitled to thier personal opinions. I don't like Dawkins very much either. Lets face it, he is not everyone's cup of tea. Peace, Lilly

Where has anyone been denied their personal opinions? People's personal opinions have been criticised, but this is a DISCUSSION board! Skyking variously criticises or ignores the scientific method and the results thereof. This doesn't bother me in the slightest, nor any scientist, as the scientific method encourages criticism.

Yet skyking resents having the lack of evidence existing to support his opinions pointed out or having the credulity required to hold such opinions highlighted.

After all life is a constant journey of learning new things.

If only this were true for everyone. For some, it isn't. I don't expect skyking to change his tune.

I do know from experience that such discussions with stalwart supporters of unscientific mumbo-jumbo, (whether it be new-age paranormal rubbish or traditional religious beliefs) is actually of great benefit to many whose opinions shift as they can see the unsupported fanciful nature of such belief systems exposed time and time again in discussion.

You have to realise YOUR reaction to someone who worshipped a small rock they called Henry, whom they credited with Creation, 9/11 and tooth-decay, who held that catsup and plastic were the sole causes of cancer, would be roughly the same as mine to many claims by religious people or paranormalists.

I think people instinctively defend the beliefs of people whose beliefs conform to the same level of viability as those; people who believe in fairies don't throw stone at those who believe in Unicorns or UFO's. This is because people are aware if they critique the belief of someone whose beliefs are as supported or unsupported as theirs they are opening theirs to such criticism.

Obviously this means that scientists defend other scientists; but the scientific method corrects error so the viability of such things is high.

Religious and paranormal belief do not correct their errors; they ignore them or paper-over them.

104

Further incite on Dawkin's The God Delusion

by Abandoned in

jw
friends

i started a thread after i finished the first chapter of this book entitled something like, i'm an atheist.

i finished chapter three and i have to backtrack a bit, but i also feel the need to explain why since i was so vocal.. first, let me say that i think everyon should read the first two chapters of the god delusion by richard dawkins.

he brings up some very important points about religion and about science's place in our world.

Abaddon

The problem is tetra (as you know) when fundies try to subvert curricula to try and make sure kids are not taught the theory of evolution in a competent or objective manner.

I love this 'closed minded' knee-jerk you have skyking, it is really funny. You get challenged about your beliefs and the poor standards of evidence you are happy to accept, and you start calling other people closed minded. Most droll.

Do you rebutt the crticisms of your arguments or claims in any meaningful way? Nope, it's 'bwah! you're closed minded'.

93

It must be "Global Warming"

by Warlock in

snow in malibu yesterday.

.

this morning i had to scrape the ice off my windshield and back window.. on the way to work i saw many a frozen front lawn and most cars were covered with ice like mine.. all on the outskirts of los angeles.. it must be "global warming".. warlock.

Abaddon

FreeWilly

Q Earth has been much hotter before (holocene, Medievil periods) What do you think was the cause of this?

Previous highs and lows in average global temperatures have happened for a variety of natural reasons; solar variation, several orbital/rotational cycles, etc.

Never before have billions of tons of stored CO2 been released into the atmosphere in such a short space of time. At the same time we see an unprecidentedly rapid change in temperatures. All the various natural factors do not explain this. We should be somewhere else on the graph according to previously observed natural variations, given the solar and orbital etc. inputs.

Now, it might just be a big-ass coincidense, and there is some natural cycle we don't know about. Or it might be using fossil fuels like they're running out... oh, yeah...

Q How would you explain the "lag effect" of CO2 exiting previous Ice ages - namely, temperature rise preceding CO2 concentration increases in nearly all glacial terminations?

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=13

Q If humans were never on the Earth, what would you expect Earths climate, specifically in regards to temperature, to be doing? Does it makes sense that the ~18,000 year warming trend that is exiting us from the last ice age would continue, stall or reverse?

That is almost begging the question with a reply that isn't relevent... the general trend does not explain the current rapid rise, nor is the level of CO2 consistent with what it would 'normally' be at this point in a general trend. What the climate WOULD be isn't the question, why it is as it is, is. I love that last bit, "it is as it is, is". LOL

Q What role does CO2 play as a Greenhous Gas? Specifically, of all the known greenhouse gasses in our atmosphere, what portion or percentage does CO2 occupy? How does Co2 compare to say... water vapor?

Again, begging a question that the reply of which does mean anything in this context. So what if water vapour is the main greenhouse 'gas'. We are not talking about an increase in water vapour, we are talking about an increase of CO2 coinciding with a period where some other factor (like an increase in water vapour) can not explain the temperature rise. Funny point though; an increase in temperature also leads to an increase in water vapour...

Would you believe someone who told you the smell in the room had nothing to do with them farting? And saying the room would get smelly anyway at this time of day? When the room had never smelled that bad at that time of day before the farting?

93

It must be "Global Warming"

by Warlock in

snow in malibu yesterday.

.

this morning i had to scrape the ice off my windshield and back window.. on the way to work i saw many a frozen front lawn and most cars were covered with ice like mine.. all on the outskirts of los angeles.. it must be "global warming".. warlock.

Abaddon

Ha, even though I live in the Netherlands, my house is 20m above sea-level.

27

Baptisim BlackMail

by OUTLAW in

jw
friends

you had to get baptised,because of parental pressure..you had to get baptised,to date a potential mate..you had to get baptised,to get married at the kingdom hall..you had to get baptised,to keep your marriage together..you had to get baptised or god would kill you at armageddon.....the list go`s on......wbt$ rules are such that,your life can be disrupted or destroyed unless your a baptised jehovah`s witness.....were you forced into being baptised?...outlaw

Abaddon

Oh, ugh!

I remember my mum sheding a silent tear when asked if I was dunked yet by some friends at a CA... I think I was 16 or, so. I felt no internal complusion, but because of this cloting expectation went through the motions, including 'dedicating myself to Jehober in prayer', at 17 or 18 I think.

I need a joint...

OH!!

Does anyone else remember this Dubbie 'folk-belief' that if you couldn't remember the date of you baptism it was because you didn't mean it or weren't acceptable? That gave me the terrors...

104

Further incite on Dawkin's The God Delusion

by Abandoned in

jw
friends

i started a thread after i finished the first chapter of this book entitled something like, i'm an atheist.

i finished chapter three and i have to backtrack a bit, but i also feel the need to explain why since i was so vocal.. first, let me say that i think everyon should read the first two chapters of the god delusion by richard dawkins.

he brings up some very important points about religion and about science's place in our world.

Abaddon

skyking

He has no PROOF either.

Of what? Be specific.

I was reading just today that 70% of the universe is made up of some unknown matter that we can not seeor understand. So when you say there is no proof, you have no proof they are deceiving themselveseither. But yet we know 70% of the universe is unknown but it is ther. Be opened minded because we do not have all the answers yet. We may never have all of them.

You miss the point entirely. The theories that support dark matter and energy seem to wok well. Theories built on the same principles have, in the past, later been proved. But those theories about dark matter and energy might be wrong. In which case, it will be because a better theory, or proof thereof, supplants them.

What you have avoided ANY consideration is that your belief system, your paradigm, would not be changed by evidence, as it exists without evidence. Science changes with the evidence. Get over it.

Don't be so closed minded nothing gets in there

Give me proof, I'll change my mind. It is that simple. Your story is not proof. You could be mad. Or lying. Or mistaken. Not one person, ever, has ever proven a claim like yours in a court of law or a laboratory. I hope you will not mind me NOT taking your claim as proof, in view of the unlikelihood that you just happen to married to the chick in Medium.

I have some miracle wheat I could send you. Grew 12 foot high in my garden. Proof? No. What, not interested?!

If 1 in 500 billion people 'per night' dream about their husbands nephew being killed by someone putting a gun in their mouth, and 2,300 (I'm making this figure up it is an example) people who have live, married uncles are killed by having guns in their mouth a year, then given the population of the USA and the chance of that dream you can see LOADS of people dream something really strange happens to them or someone they know, or whatever, and it does. They ignore the millions of weird dreams that don't come true.

Remember the JW story about the person committing suicide being called on by JW's? Proof of Angelic Intervention to the person who WANTS to believe; other people wonder on all the poor people who committed suicide with no JW's, and effect on the vagaries of chance.

93

It must be "Global Warming"

by Warlock in

snow in malibu yesterday.

.

this morning i had to scrape the ice off my windshield and back window.. on the way to work i saw many a frozen front lawn and most cars were covered with ice like mine.. all on the outskirts of los angeles.. it must be "global warming".. warlock.

Abaddon

Let's be clear that 'Climate Change' is the best way to describe it. Yeah, at this time the general trend is warming, but that doesn;t mean colder weather in places. Currents change too.

To be blunt, I think anyone who has spent more than a week researching the subject superficially, and still thinks there is not a fossil-fueled link warming trend, is not looking in the right places.

THINK ABOUT IT.

Who paid for all those scientists who said smoking wasn't inked to cancer?

Find a vocal, scientifically qualified (in that field) climate change cynic, and then follow the money. Do it for each of the few that there are. Then tell me what you think; me telling it is just yadayada, you got to do it yourself.

It is not however, the end of the world. The Dutch will build higher dykes. Bangladesh will cease to exist. Some Pacific Island will disappear. 100's of millions at least will be displaced as their homes on or near coats are flooded. The Canadian Forests will be felled as the Mid-West ceases to be a viable place to grow wheat and entire communities lives will change or end.

For some of us the seaside will be closer and the summers hotter. For many, a far less easy ride.

Swiss banks no longer finance ski developments below 1,500m. Champagne growers in France are buyng land with identical soil in England, anticipting moving grape production there as Champagne's climate becomes less favourable for vines.

It is real, it's just some people who are making lot of oney and their political friends are quite happy with the status-quo.

I mean, they'll be be affected by it, will they?

26

Nosferatu's School of Dating - Lesson 2.2 - Building Rapport

by Nosferatu in

since many have commented that lesson 2.1 has "no feeling", portrays the individual as an abuser, and all the other negative comments, i decided to cover rapport next.. the unfortunate thing is i can only give you tips on how to build good rapport.

i will not be giving you magic lines that will make her fall in love with you.

it's your own personality, your enthusiasm, your wit, your sense of humor, your creativeness, and your imagination that has to do the actual work.. many people will tell you "forget about all these tips, tricks and techniques.

Abaddon

It's the Girl Whispherer!!

Seriously, anyone see that? Guy takes a feral horse in a small (20 yards square, maybe bit bigger) pen. Walks up to horse, horse moves away. Repeats. Eventually horse gets tired of running away, starts lowering its head (in horse, 'hey, I don't like this tension, let's stop this'). He moves away. Horse follows.

The same basic technique, using how horses interact against them so they help you build a rapport and can back, saddle and ride them without fuss or drama.

This is basically simple human psychology, noting the things which naturally lead to a pleasent atmosphere and intentionally duplicating them, using simple methods of getting someone's attention, simple desensitising techniques for physical contacts, and also being a simple step-by-step method of acheiving a goal; you always know what to do next.

Psychology and body language aside, this number thing... I've seen it in the 'States. What is that? They don't do it in Holland or the UK, not in the systematic way I have seen American guys work a room. Cruise up be charming and lay your number down is just wankyv - in the UK and you'd be laughed at - if you're lucky behind your back.