The Devil’s Delusion

[PoliticalChic]

That is just an opinion, other theories exist where the Laws of Thermodynamics do not break down because there is no singularity. These theories are based on advanced mathematics, not faith.

I get such a kick out of you, BeetsAndSpinach!

You don't realize how you have advanced my position with this statement: "That is just an opinion, other theories..."

More opinions???
No proof, just theories??

Just like religion, huh?


Next witness.

And which religion is based on advanced mathematics?

You've already rejected a proven Law of physics on the opinion of an astronomer, so God herself could tell you that you are wrong and you would reject it.

Like I said earlier in this thread, I truly wish you whackos can get science legally established as a religion so that I, as a physicist, can get the same special tax privileges the lesser religions get.

Now, now, Beets....try to be more accurate. It was a physicist who explained that the laws of physics fall apart at the singularity.
I hope this doesn't mean that your are giving up!!


If the Big Bang has proven too great a burden for you...how about this:

1. In Genesis 1:3, the Old Testament records that God said: Let there be light.” This presents a problem for the theologist, since the sun, moon, and stars were not made until the fourth day (1:14-16)… what was the nature of the ‘light’ mentioned in verse 3?

2. What a coincidence, we have the fullest of understanding of the nature of light from the science community….In his Opticks (1704), Newton argued that light was made up of tiny particles. Slightly earlier, the Dutch physicist Christiaan Huygens wrote a Treatise on light, in which he proposed that light was a wave. It was only in 1789 that Thomas Young proposed a simple experiment that appeared to resolve the controversy by showing that light indeed behaves as a wave. http://www.dartmouth.edu/~phys1/labs/lab2.pdf

3. In 1905, Albert Einstein provided an explanation of the photoelectric effect, a hitherto troubling experiment that the wave theory of light seemed incapable of explaining. He did so by postulating the existence of photons, quanta of light energy with particulate qualities. Wave

4. Luckily…Bohr, Heisenberg, Schrodinger and Born finessed the problem by declaring ‘Young vs. Einstein’ a draw. Light is both like a wave and like a particle, this on the level of individual photons themselves! The wave, it seems can pass through two slits, as waves do…but to attest to a single particle may divide in the same way, requires…let’s call it an element of belief! Either that or legerdemain!

5. The mystery will not appear entirely unfamiliar to Christians persuaded of the threefold aspect of the deity: if light is a particle and a wave, religious observers might observe, God is a Father, a Son, and a Holy Ghost. Need I say that this is an analogy that has not captured the allegiance of scientific atheists.

a.As physicist John Bell observed: “o long as the wave packet reduction is an essential component, and so long as we do not know exactly when and how it takes over from the Schrödinger equation, we do not have an exact and unambiguous formulation of our most fundamental physical theory.” http://faculty.washington.edu/afine/MSdraft.pdf


So, to review....there are mysteries in science analogous to those in religion, that are solved simply by...

...faith.


Wanna take a crack at that one, Beets?
(Mini is busy excusing his inadequasies.....but he'll be back).

 

[PoliticalChic]

1.) I've done some quote mining. What I've found is fascinating, indeed! Quite literally, everything P.C. insults others with is a projection of her own insecurities!

A. she calls on me to be more "civil" - where my quote mining efforts below (mind you - only mined from this thread, and stopping a few pages short of the end of it) show that she's basically Triumph, the comic insult Dog! Triumph, the Insult Comic Dog - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia A call for more civility onto another? Indeed!

B. the clear majority of her insults share the same basic theme: repeating the meme that her intellect is superior. How, then, could she be the author of the following if it were not a clear projection: "It seems that you are deathly afraid that folks may think you are less than an intellectual...so you feel the need to conspicuously inscribe and display it on your chest over and over...in the hope, I suppose, that it sticks to you.
Pathetic."

^ that person (?!?!?!?!!?)

v said THESE (?!?!?!?!?!)

"if you only had the capacity to understand plain language!
Wow! You'd be a real threat then!"

"are you dishonest, or simply a dolt?
I think you are honest...which leaves but one choice."

"Blinded by bigotry.
Poor Beets! You have more issues than the Reader’s Digest"

"Are you aware that the only reason that you’re still alive is that I’m too tired to dig a hole in the woods to bury you?


Oh, yeah....and you have Van Gogh's ear for music!!!!
Yechhhhhhh!!!! "

"Your time would be far better spent learning something constructive, such as how
to fold a fitted sheet."

"There you go, Chubby!
In one short post you summed up the single most important reason for your lack of success in life!"

"What, pray tell, Rocks...(pun intended) is the cause of your incapacity?"

"Is English a second language for you?
I know you don't have a first one.
I keed, I keed!

Now, you stay away from the bottle tonight...your link to reality is tentative as is! "

"While, clearly, you don't realize the comic relief you provide, it is equally clear that you don't realize the dunce you appear."

"Now, certainly you will be unable to do so...as you are unable to do so very many things.
quod erat demonstrandum...you are a dunce."

"You should try to stick to subjects where you might actually have some cache, such as favorite Crayola, or how far to sit from the tv….this is out of your league.

Now, I've given you far more attention than you deserve....be gone."
"You're really not a very good judge of reality, are you.

Bet the younger version turns out better. "

"Shredded, huh?
Tough day for you, Lok?
You have that deep-seated fear of being labelled a 'retard'...
...luckily for you, I don't use that term.

Hey...take heart...it makes friend G.T. look just as dumb. "

"Understand now, my slow-witted friend?"

"Well, certainly beyond your ability for logical thinking.
And to prove how abysmally dumb your post is...
....G.T. liked it!"

"Dumb, isn't it.
But not too dumb for flotsam and jetsam (you and G.T.) to climb right on board.
Yous is down wit dat, huh?"

"The only thing that "exists today in the exact same total quantity as has always existed in the past and will always exist in the future" is your bewilderment. "

"I've usually found that losers spring to personal vituperations as they are 'light' in the argument portion of the thread...that would be you, Lowest."

"If I may indulge in a bit of psychobabble, the mean-spirited, and hostile manner of your posts is due to the unhappyness of your life, and your attempts ot bring same to others.
My suspicion is that whatever has befallen you, is of your own causing.

No doubt losing the argument is one more of the scourges you have faced. Couldn't happen to a more deserving individual. "

"Flaccid, Lowest.

You lose by definition...you're a loser. "

"This post blurs the line between insanity and stupidity…

Impervious to rational discussion…"
"Upset, Lowest?

If you need a shoulder to cry on, pull off to the side of the road "

"I don't belive that there is a cure for your Voluntary Tourette’s…"

"But don't give up, Lowest... Moses was once a basket case.
At some point, you'll have to buy a ticket on the clue train"

"Welcome to camp USMB, today’s lesson: conflict resolution.

See the efficacy of the spanking I administered...now you're almost civil!

Good boy, Lowest!
Dog biscuit? "



2. In conclusion, my quote mining has CLEARLY shown (to anyone with a "LICK" of sense) that P.C. indeed projects many of her life's insecurities onto others, in discussion. Sadly, said discussion takes place on an inconsequencial message board and she will not be prompted to self-reflect as a result of any of this "friendly" effort to get her to see herself.



/end file.

Very good! Many of 'em are very clever! I enjoyed reading them!

Especially this one: ""I've usually found that losers spring to personal vituperations as they are 'light' in the argument portion of the thread..."
Did the shoe fit?
Did you notice that all could be used in front of children...unlike your posts?
See...that is the crux of the matter.


Feel better now, Mini?

Good...(pat on head) ...now back in the corner until you're called for.

 

[PoliticalChic]

1.) I've done some quote mining. What I've found is fascinating, indeed! Quite literally, everything P.C. insults others with is a projection of her own insecurities!

A. she calls on me to be more "civil" - where my quote mining efforts below (mind you - only mined from this thread, and stopping a few pages short of the end of it) show that she's basically Triumph, the comic insult Dog! Triumph, the Insult Comic Dog - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia A call for more civility onto another? Indeed!

B. the clear majority of her insults share the same basic theme: repeating the meme that her intellect is superior. How, then, could she be the author of the following if it were not a clear projection: "It seems that you are deathly afraid that folks may think you are less than an intellectual...so you feel the need to conspicuously inscribe and display it on your chest over and over...in the hope, I suppose, that it sticks to you.
Pathetic."

^ that person (?!?!?!?!!?)

v said THESE (?!?!?!?!?!)

"if you only had the capacity to understand plain language!
Wow! You'd be a real threat then!"

"are you dishonest, or simply a dolt?
I think you are honest...which leaves but one choice."

"Blinded by bigotry.
Poor Beets! You have more issues than the Reader’s Digest"

"Are you aware that the only reason that you’re still alive is that I’m too tired to dig a hole in the woods to bury you?


Oh, yeah....and you have Van Gogh's ear for music!!!!
Yechhhhhhh!!!! "

"Your time would be far better spent learning something constructive, such as how
to fold a fitted sheet."

"There you go, Chubby!
In one short post you summed up the single most important reason for your lack of success in life!"

"What, pray tell, Rocks...(pun intended) is the cause of your incapacity?"

"Is English a second language for you?
I know you don't have a first one.
I keed, I keed!

Now, you stay away from the bottle tonight...your link to reality is tentative as is! "

"While, clearly, you don't realize the comic relief you provide, it is equally clear that you don't realize the dunce you appear."

"Now, certainly you will be unable to do so...as you are unable to do so very many things.
quod erat demonstrandum...you are a dunce."

"You should try to stick to subjects where you might actually have some cache, such as favorite Crayola, or how far to sit from the tv….this is out of your league.

Now, I've given you far more attention than you deserve....be gone."
"You're really not a very good judge of reality, are you.

Bet the younger version turns out better. "

"Shredded, huh?
Tough day for you, Lok?
You have that deep-seated fear of being labelled a 'retard'...
...luckily for you, I don't use that term.

Hey...take heart...it makes friend G.T. look just as dumb. "

"Understand now, my slow-witted friend?"

"Well, certainly beyond your ability for logical thinking.
And to prove how abysmally dumb your post is...
....G.T. liked it!"

"Dumb, isn't it.
But not too dumb for flotsam and jetsam (you and G.T.) to climb right on board.
Yous is down wit dat, huh?"

"The only thing that "exists today in the exact same total quantity as has always existed in the past and will always exist in the future" is your bewilderment. "

"I've usually found that losers spring to personal vituperations as they are 'light' in the argument portion of the thread...that would be you, Lowest."

"If I may indulge in a bit of psychobabble, the mean-spirited, and hostile manner of your posts is due to the unhappyness of your life, and your attempts ot bring same to others.
My suspicion is that whatever has befallen you, is of your own causing.

No doubt losing the argument is one more of the scourges you have faced. Couldn't happen to a more deserving individual. "

"Flaccid, Lowest.

You lose by definition...you're a loser. "

"This post blurs the line between insanity and stupidity…

Impervious to rational discussion…"
"Upset, Lowest?

If you need a shoulder to cry on, pull off to the side of the road "

"I don't belive that there is a cure for your Voluntary Tourette’s…"

"But don't give up, Lowest... Moses was once a basket case.
At some point, you'll have to buy a ticket on the clue train"

"Welcome to camp USMB, today’s lesson: conflict resolution.

See the efficacy of the spanking I administered...now you're almost civil!

Good boy, Lowest!
Dog biscuit? "



2. In conclusion, my quote mining has CLEARLY shown (to anyone with a "LICK" of sense) that P.C. indeed projects many of her life's insecurities onto others, in discussion. Sadly, said discussion takes place on an inconsequencial message board and she will not be prompted to self-reflect as a result of any of this "friendly" effort to get her to see herself.



/end file.

Very good! Many of 'em are very clever! I enjoyed reading them!

Especially this one: ""I've usually found that losers spring to personal vituperations as they are 'light' in the argument portion of the thread..."
Did the shoe fit?

Feel better now, Mini?

Good...(pat on head) ...now back in the corner until you're called for.

It sure fits YOU!~

"Did you notice that all could be used in front of children...unlike your posts?
See...that is the crux of the matter."

See...that is my only objection to your work.
I suppose I could have shortened to this:
"Grow up."

 

[PoliticalChic]

It sure fits YOU!~

"Did you notice that all could be used in front of children...unlike your posts?
See...that is the crux of the matter."

See...that is my only objection to your work.
I suppose I could have shortened to this:
"Grow up."

Snide name calling is not for grown-ups, you're projecting again. Say it to yourself, g'head: "Grow up."

Sure it is, especially if it's clever or funny....why don't you work on that.

 

[koshergrl]

Yes, you mine your vast imaginary society of functional adults you claim to be a part of and get back to us on that.

PS..mothers don't count. We all understand that mothers are in a special category, which is why so many of the posters on this site still live with theirs. While pretending to be movers and shakers in "the real world".

 

[koshergrl]

Oh yawn. You have REALLY overestimated how much I, or anyone else on this site, cares about your offline life. My only point is that people who feel compelled to "prove" how important they are usually have tiny dicks, and are liars to boot.

 

[Woyzeck]

The following is from "The Devil’s Delusion: Atheism and Its Scientific Pretensions," by David Berlinski...

1. There are those who argue that science is in opposition to religion, and that science offers sophisticated men and women a coherent vision of the universe.

You also get just as many people claiming the same, but that religion (usually Christianity if we're in America) offers sophisticated men and women a coherent vision of the universe.

2. There have been four powerful and profound scientific theories since the great scientific revolution was set in motion in the seventeenth century:
a. Newtonian mechanics,
b. Maxwell’s theory of the electromagnetic field,
c. Special and general relativity
d. And quantum mechanics

Okay, sure why not.

3. English mathematical physicist Roger Penrose has described the theories as “sometimes phenomenally accurate,” but a “tantalizingly inconsistent scheme of things.” The result, we know better than we did what we do not know, and what we have not grasped: how the universe began, how the mind functions, why we are here, how life emerged, or, with assurance, that it did.

What theories is he talking about? The above ones? Different ones? It's not really clear what he's talking about. I guess I could assume he's talking about the above four, but there hasn't even been a complete sentence quoted from Penrose, so I retain my doubts.

And yes, we do now know how much we don't know. I imagine Socrates would be pleased.

4. No scientific theory touches on the mysteries that the religious tradition addresses. When and if one questions the meaning of life, the number of his days, he hardy turns to algebraic quantum field theory for the answer.

Science doesn't really claim to answer the meaning of life (42!). We don't know why things are, we only can describe how they are and what they do. We leave questions like why to philosophy.

a. Prominent figures have hypothesized that we are merely cosmic accidents. Bertrand Russell, Jacques Monod, Steven Weinberg, and Richard Dawkins have said it is so…and it is an article of their faith based on the confidence of men convinced that nature has equipped them in ways the rest of us cannot bear to contemplate.
There is not the slightest reason to think that this is so.

And if you look at the other planets in our own backyard, we were pretty lucky earth turned out the way it did. Presumably, the chaps you listed above also have similar opinions, after all they think we're "cosmic accidents." To be honest I'm not sure how you can substantially prove otherwise. We know what the right conditions are for an earth-like planet. In fact we've found other earth-like planets who have similar conditions.

5. While science has nothing of value to say on the great and aching questions of life, death, love and meaning, what the religious traditions of mankind have said forms a coherent body of thought. It is a system of belief both adequate and more fitting to the complexities of our existence: recompense for suffering, principles beyond selfishness. Reassurance.
While I do not know if any of this is true, I am certain that the scientific community does not know that it is false.

Uh okay. This bears worth repeating, that isn't the realm of science. That's the realm of philosophy. Science will tackle life and death in terms prolonging life and protracting death, but they don't have an interest in "finding the meaning of life" or some big grand question like that. That stuff is left to philosophers.

So, what's the point of this thread then? I'm a little unsure of what the overall point is, besides some accusations of what science can't and doesn't claim to answer and something about atheism.

 

[koshergrl]

Oh yawn. You have REALLY overestimated how much I, or anyone else on this site, cares about your offline life. My only point is that people who feel compelled to "prove" how important they are usually have tiny dicks, and are liars to boot.

Well, I offered to PROVE that what you said is horseshit, and you did not have the courage to put your money where your mouth was thus nobody should lend any credence to what ypou have said. It's that simple. You said I was making it up that I have family and friends offline, I told you to put up or shut up, you backed down. How grand.

I don't have to prove you're an insecure idiot. You wear it like a badge.

 

[koshergrl]

You wouldn't know a fact if it sat on your face and wiggled. You saying something is a "fact" does not, in fact, make it a fact.

 

[koshergrl]

No, it's a fact that you're an insecure idiot. And my foot is squarely on your ass. For now, that's a good place for it, I agree.

 

[koshergrl]

Good heavens, you sound increasingly insane.

Are you perchance a mullah?