Total Posts:24|Showing Posts:1-24
Jump to topic:

Scientists

muzebreak
Posts: 2,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2013 12:08:52 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
While this thread is labeled 'Scientists', which might lead one to believe it should belong in the science forum. I have posted it here, because it is directed at those religious who advocate a descent from the scientific consensus.

Why, in your opinion, do the vast majority of scientists disagree with your view?
"Every kid starts out as a natural-born scientist, and then we beat it out of them. A few trickle through the system with their wonder and enthusiasm for science intact." - Carl Sagan

This is the response of the defenders of Sparta to the Commander of the Roman Army: "If you are a god, you will not hurt those who have never injured you. If you are a man, advance - you will find men equal to yourself. And women.
Jack_the_lad
Posts: 10
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2013 1:44:05 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I agree with your view, science is the only way of explaining anything, through evidence and repeatable observation. You cannot base anything on religion because it is a human construct. Unlike science religion is not fact. You cannot reject science for faith that is based on writings of wanderers thousands of years ago who had a lot less understanding about science than we do today. Similarly, you cannot reject science for myths, parables and fables when there is no scientific evidence for these. I hate it when religious people say 'well god takes a different understanding, one that can't be explained by scientific means.' Of course god can't be explained by scientific means, because he/she/it doesn't exist. I am as certain that god doesn't exist as I am that Santa doesn't exist, and fairies, and goblins, that are also human constructs.
muzebreak
Posts: 2,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2013 1:45:54 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/9/2013 1:44:05 PM, Jack_the_lad wrote:
I agree with your view, science is the only way of explaining anything, through evidence and repeatable observation.

I didn't say that.....
"Every kid starts out as a natural-born scientist, and then we beat it out of them. A few trickle through the system with their wonder and enthusiasm for science intact." - Carl Sagan

This is the response of the defenders of Sparta to the Commander of the Roman Army: "If you are a god, you will not hurt those who have never injured you. If you are a man, advance - you will find men equal to yourself. And women.
inferno
Posts: 10,689
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2013 1:48:47 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/9/2013 12:08:52 PM, muzebreak wrote:
While this thread is labeled 'Scientists', which might lead one to believe it should belong in the science forum. I have posted it here, because it is directed at those religious who advocate a descent from the scientific consensus.

Why, in your opinion, do the vast majority of scientists disagree with your view?

Many scientists are flawed, unreliable, fallible, and anti Christ just to name a few.
So it doesnt matter what they think. The majority of Americans still yet believe in God and Heaven. Not to mention Hell.
So their credibility is forever questioned as well as their common sense and sanity, too. =)
muzebreak
Posts: 2,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2013 1:52:44 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/9/2013 1:48:47 PM, inferno wrote:
At 4/9/2013 12:08:52 PM, muzebreak wrote:
While this thread is labeled 'Scientists', which might lead one to believe it should belong in the science forum. I have posted it here, because it is directed at those religious who advocate a descent from the scientific consensus.

Why, in your opinion, do the vast majority of scientists disagree with your view?

Many scientists are flawed,

In what way?

unreliable,

In what way?

fallible,

So is everyone. That's why we have the scientific method.

and anti Christ just to name a few.

Seriously.......

So it doesnt matter what they think. The majority of Americans still yet believe in God and Heaven. Not to mention Hell.

So do a lot of scientists.

So their credibility is forever questioned as well as their common sense and sanity, too. =)
"Every kid starts out as a natural-born scientist, and then we beat it out of them. A few trickle through the system with their wonder and enthusiasm for science intact." - Carl Sagan

This is the response of the defenders of Sparta to the Commander of the Roman Army: "If you are a god, you will not hurt those who have never injured you. If you are a man, advance - you will find men equal to yourself. And women.
Jack_the_lad
Posts: 10
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2013 3:16:12 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/9/2013 1:45:54 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 4/9/2013 1:44:05 PM, Jack_the_lad wrote:
I agree with your view, science is the only way of explaining anything, through evidence and repeatable observation.


I didn't say that.....

It seemed you were looking for religious explanations, implying you were from a scientific standpoint.

I think its funny how someone can say it doesn't matter what scientists think because they have been wrong before. Yes they have been wrong about some things but not all things.
cybertron1998
Posts: 5,818
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2013 3:23:22 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/9/2013 1:44:05 PM, Jack_the_lad wrote:
I agree with your view, science is the only way of explaining anything, through evidence and repeatable observation. You cannot base anything on religion because it is a human construct. Unlike science religion is not fact. You cannot reject science for faith that is based on writings of wanderers thousands of years ago who had a lot less understanding about science than we do today. Similarly, you cannot reject science for myths, parables and fables when there is no scientific evidence for these. I hate it when religious people say 'well god takes a different understanding, one that can't be explained by scientific means.' Of course god can't be explained by scientific means, because he/she/it doesn't exist. I am as certain that god doesn't exist as I am that Santa doesn't exist, and fairies, and goblins, that are also human constructs.

no technically science is a human construct science could very well be wrong and we just don't no it
Epsilon: There are so many stories where some brave hero decides to give their life to save the day, and because of their sacrifice, the good guys win, the survivors all cheer, and everybody lives happily ever after. But the hero... never gets to see that ending. They'll never know if their sacrifice actually made a difference. They'll never know if the day was really saved. In the end, they just have to have faith.
muzebreak
Posts: 2,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2013 3:25:46 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/9/2013 3:16:12 PM, Jack_the_lad wrote:
At 4/9/2013 1:45:54 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 4/9/2013 1:44:05 PM, Jack_the_lad wrote:
I agree with your view, science is the only way of explaining anything, through evidence and repeatable observation.


I didn't say that.....

It seemed you were looking for religious explanations, implying you were from a scientific standpoint.

No I wasn't. no it does not imply that, but yes I am. Being from a scientific standpoint does not mean one ascribes to science as the be all end all of truth. There is also mathematics and philosophy.


I think its funny how someone can say it doesn't matter what scientists think because they have been wrong before. Yes they have been wrong about some things but not all things.
"Every kid starts out as a natural-born scientist, and then we beat it out of them. A few trickle through the system with their wonder and enthusiasm for science intact." - Carl Sagan

This is the response of the defenders of Sparta to the Commander of the Roman Army: "If you are a god, you will not hurt those who have never injured you. If you are a man, advance - you will find men equal to yourself. And women.
muzebreak
Posts: 2,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2013 3:26:50 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/9/2013 3:23:22 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
At 4/9/2013 1:44:05 PM, Jack_the_lad wrote:
I agree with your view, science is the only way of explaining anything, through evidence and repeatable observation. You cannot base anything on religion because it is a human construct. Unlike science religion is not fact. You cannot reject science for faith that is based on writings of wanderers thousands of years ago who had a lot less understanding about science than we do today. Similarly, you cannot reject science for myths, parables and fables when there is no scientific evidence for these. I hate it when religious people say 'well god takes a different understanding, one that can't be explained by scientific means.' Of course god can't be explained by scientific means, because he/she/it doesn't exist. I am as certain that god doesn't exist as I am that Santa doesn't exist, and fairies, and goblins, that are also human constructs.

no technically science is a human construct science could very well be wrong and we just don't no it

So could our perception of reality. Solipsism much?
"Every kid starts out as a natural-born scientist, and then we beat it out of them. A few trickle through the system with their wonder and enthusiasm for science intact." - Carl Sagan

This is the response of the defenders of Sparta to the Commander of the Roman Army: "If you are a god, you will not hurt those who have never injured you. If you are a man, advance - you will find men equal to yourself. And women.
cybertron1998
Posts: 5,818
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2013 3:31:27 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/9/2013 1:48:47 PM, inferno wrote:
At 4/9/2013 12:08:52 PM, muzebreak wrote:
While this thread is labeled 'Scientists', which might lead one to believe it should belong in the science forum. I have posted it here, because it is directed at those religious who advocate a descent from the scientific consensus.

Why, in your opinion, do the vast majority of scientists disagree with your view?

Many scientists are flawed, unreliable, fallible, and anti Christ just to name a few.
So it doesnt matter what they think. The majority of Americans still yet believe in God and Heaven. Not to mention Hell.
So their credibility is forever questioned as well as their common sense and sanity, too. =)

1) many theists are flawed too
2) many theists are unreliable too
3) everyone is fallible
4) It does matter what they think b/c they might be right
5) the majority of Americans believe in many instances of science
6) theists' credibility, common sense, and sanity are questioned too

the problem is dude is you were in the faith mindset. Faith mindset is what I gave a name when people talk and write to one another about religion with there mind around the statement "if you have faith in god you're better than others." dude, theists and scientists a like have some fvcked up people included.
Epsilon: There are so many stories where some brave hero decides to give their life to save the day, and because of their sacrifice, the good guys win, the survivors all cheer, and everybody lives happily ever after. But the hero... never gets to see that ending. They'll never know if their sacrifice actually made a difference. They'll never know if the day was really saved. In the end, they just have to have faith.
cybertron1998
Posts: 5,818
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2013 3:32:30 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/9/2013 3:26:50 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:23:22 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
At 4/9/2013 1:44:05 PM, Jack_the_lad wrote:
I agree with your view, science is the only way of explaining anything, through evidence and repeatable observation. You cannot base anything on religion because it is a human construct. Unlike science religion is not fact. You cannot reject science for faith that is based on writings of wanderers thousands of years ago who had a lot less understanding about science than we do today. Similarly, you cannot reject science for myths, parables and fables when there is no scientific evidence for these. I hate it when religious people say 'well god takes a different understanding, one that can't be explained by scientific means.' Of course god can't be explained by scientific means, because he/she/it doesn't exist. I am as certain that god doesn't exist as I am that Santa doesn't exist, and fairies, and goblins, that are also human constructs.

no technically science is a human construct science could very well be wrong and we just don't no it

So could our perception of reality. Solipsism much?

matrix much
Epsilon: There are so many stories where some brave hero decides to give their life to save the day, and because of their sacrifice, the good guys win, the survivors all cheer, and everybody lives happily ever after. But the hero... never gets to see that ending. They'll never know if their sacrifice actually made a difference. They'll never know if the day was really saved. In the end, they just have to have faith.
muzebreak
Posts: 2,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2013 3:34:13 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/9/2013 3:32:30 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:26:50 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:23:22 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
At 4/9/2013 1:44:05 PM, Jack_the_lad wrote:
I agree with your view, science is the only way of explaining anything, through evidence and repeatable observation. You cannot base anything on religion because it is a human construct. Unlike science religion is not fact. You cannot reject science for faith that is based on writings of wanderers thousands of years ago who had a lot less understanding about science than we do today. Similarly, you cannot reject science for myths, parables and fables when there is no scientific evidence for these. I hate it when religious people say 'well god takes a different understanding, one that can't be explained by scientific means.' Of course god can't be explained by scientific means, because he/she/it doesn't exist. I am as certain that god doesn't exist as I am that Santa doesn't exist, and fairies, and goblins, that are also human constructs.

no technically science is a human construct science could very well be wrong and we just don't no it

So could our perception of reality. Solipsism much?

matrix much

Tautology much?
"Every kid starts out as a natural-born scientist, and then we beat it out of them. A few trickle through the system with their wonder and enthusiasm for science intact." - Carl Sagan

This is the response of the defenders of Sparta to the Commander of the Roman Army: "If you are a god, you will not hurt those who have never injured you. If you are a man, advance - you will find men equal to yourself. And women.
cybertron1998
Posts: 5,818
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2013 3:36:43 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/9/2013 3:34:13 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:32:30 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:26:50 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:23:22 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
At 4/9/2013 1:44:05 PM, Jack_the_lad wrote:
I agree with your view, science is the only way of explaining anything, through evidence and repeatable observation. You cannot base anything on religion because it is a human construct. Unlike science religion is not fact. You cannot reject science for faith that is based on writings of wanderers thousands of years ago who had a lot less understanding about science than we do today. Similarly, you cannot reject science for myths, parables and fables when there is no scientific evidence for these. I hate it when religious people say 'well god takes a different understanding, one that can't be explained by scientific means.' Of course god can't be explained by scientific means, because he/she/it doesn't exist. I am as certain that god doesn't exist as I am that Santa doesn't exist, and fairies, and goblins, that are also human constructs.

no technically science is a human construct science could very well be wrong and we just don't no it

So could our perception of reality. Solipsism much?

matrix much

Tautology much?

Repeating much?
Epsilon: There are so many stories where some brave hero decides to give their life to save the day, and because of their sacrifice, the good guys win, the survivors all cheer, and everybody lives happily ever after. But the hero... never gets to see that ending. They'll never know if their sacrifice actually made a difference. They'll never know if the day was really saved. In the end, they just have to have faith.
muzebreak
Posts: 2,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2013 3:39:45 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/9/2013 3:36:43 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:34:13 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:32:30 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:26:50 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:23:22 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
At 4/9/2013 1:44:05 PM, Jack_the_lad wrote:
I agree with your view, science is the only way of explaining anything, through evidence and repeatable observation. You cannot base anything on religion because it is a human construct. Unlike science religion is not fact. You cannot reject science for faith that is based on writings of wanderers thousands of years ago who had a lot less understanding about science than we do today. Similarly, you cannot reject science for myths, parables and fables when there is no scientific evidence for these. I hate it when religious people say 'well god takes a different understanding, one that can't be explained by scientific means.' Of course god can't be explained by scientific means, because he/she/it doesn't exist. I am as certain that god doesn't exist as I am that Santa doesn't exist, and fairies, and goblins, that are also human constructs.

no technically science is a human construct science could very well be wrong and we just don't no it

So could our perception of reality. Solipsism much?

matrix much

Tautology much?

Repeating much?

Project much?
"Every kid starts out as a natural-born scientist, and then we beat it out of them. A few trickle through the system with their wonder and enthusiasm for science intact." - Carl Sagan

This is the response of the defenders of Sparta to the Commander of the Roman Army: "If you are a god, you will not hurt those who have never injured you. If you are a man, advance - you will find men equal to yourself. And women.
cybertron1998
Posts: 5,818
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2013 3:43:41 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/9/2013 3:39:45 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:36:43 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:34:13 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:32:30 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:26:50 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:23:22 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
At 4/9/2013 1:44:05 PM, Jack_the_lad wrote:
I agree with your view, science is the only way of explaining anything, through evidence and repeatable observation. You cannot base anything on religion because it is a human construct. Unlike science religion is not fact. You cannot reject science for faith that is based on writings of wanderers thousands of years ago who had a lot less understanding about science than we do today. Similarly, you cannot reject science for myths, parables and fables when there is no scientific evidence for these. I hate it when religious people say 'well god takes a different understanding, one that can't be explained by scientific means.' Of course god can't be explained by scientific means, because he/she/it doesn't exist. I am as certain that god doesn't exist as I am that Santa doesn't exist, and fairies, and goblins, that are also human constructs.

no technically science is a human construct science could very well be wrong and we just don't no it

So could our perception of reality. Solipsism much?

matrix much

Tautology much?

Repeating much?

Project much?

Launch much?
Epsilon: There are so many stories where some brave hero decides to give their life to save the day, and because of their sacrifice, the good guys win, the survivors all cheer, and everybody lives happily ever after. But the hero... never gets to see that ending. They'll never know if their sacrifice actually made a difference. They'll never know if the day was really saved. In the end, they just have to have faith.
muzebreak
Posts: 2,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2013 3:47:22 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/9/2013 3:43:41 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:39:45 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:36:43 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:34:13 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:32:30 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:26:50 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:23:22 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
At 4/9/2013 1:44:05 PM, Jack_the_lad wrote:
I agree with your view, science is the only way of explaining anything, through evidence and repeatable observation. You cannot base anything on religion because it is a human construct. Unlike science religion is not fact. You cannot reject science for faith that is based on writings of wanderers thousands of years ago who had a lot less understanding about science than we do today. Similarly, you cannot reject science for myths, parables and fables when there is no scientific evidence for these. I hate it when religious people say 'well god takes a different understanding, one that can't be explained by scientific means.' Of course god can't be explained by scientific means, because he/she/it doesn't exist. I am as certain that god doesn't exist as I am that Santa doesn't exist, and fairies, and goblins, that are also human constructs.

no technically science is a human construct science could very well be wrong and we just don't no it

So could our perception of reality. Solipsism much?

matrix much

Tautology much?

Repeating much?

Project much?

Launch much?

Say random stuff that doesn't make sense much?
"Every kid starts out as a natural-born scientist, and then we beat it out of them. A few trickle through the system with their wonder and enthusiasm for science intact." - Carl Sagan

This is the response of the defenders of Sparta to the Commander of the Roman Army: "If you are a god, you will not hurt those who have never injured you. If you are a man, advance - you will find men equal to yourself. And women.
cybertron1998
Posts: 5,818
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2013 3:49:38 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/9/2013 3:47:22 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:43:41 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:39:45 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:36:43 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:34:13 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:32:30 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:26:50 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:23:22 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
At 4/9/2013 1:44:05 PM, Jack_the_lad wrote:
I agree with your view, science is the only way of explaining anything, through evidence and repeatable observation. You cannot base anything on religion because it is a human construct. Unlike science religion is not fact. You cannot reject science for faith that is based on writings of wanderers thousands of years ago who had a lot less understanding about science than we do today. Similarly, you cannot reject science for myths, parables and fables when there is no scientific evidence for these. I hate it when religious people say 'well god takes a different understanding, one that can't be explained by scientific means.' Of course god can't be explained by scientific means, because he/she/it doesn't exist. I am as certain that god doesn't exist as I am that Santa doesn't exist, and fairies, and goblins, that are also human constructs.

no technically science is a human construct science could very well be wrong and we just don't no it

So could our perception of reality. Solipsism much?

matrix much

Tautology much?

Repeating much?

Project much?

Launch much?

Say random stuff that doesn't make sense much?

You don't see the use of synonyms much?
Epsilon: There are so many stories where some brave hero decides to give their life to save the day, and because of their sacrifice, the good guys win, the survivors all cheer, and everybody lives happily ever after. But the hero... never gets to see that ending. They'll never know if their sacrifice actually made a difference. They'll never know if the day was really saved. In the end, they just have to have faith.
AlbinoBunny
Posts: 3,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2013 3:50:15 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/9/2013 1:48:47 PM, inferno wrote:
At 4/9/2013 12:08:52 PM, muzebreak wrote:
While this thread is labeled 'Scientists', which might lead one to believe it should belong in the science forum. I have posted it here, because it is directed at those religious who advocate a descent from the scientific consensus.

Why, in your opinion, do the vast majority of scientists disagree with your view?

Many scientists are flawed, unreliable, fallible, and anti Christ just to name a few.
So it doesnt matter what they think. The majority of Americans still yet believe in God and Heaven. Not to mention Hell.
So their credibility is forever questioned as well as their common sense and sanity, too. =)

That is why you think they disagree with your views? Not because you can not show though any means that they are correct views?
bladerunner060 | bsh1 , 2014! Presidency campaign!

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org... - Running for president.
http://www.debate.org... - Running as his vice president.

May the best man win!
muzebreak
Posts: 2,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2013 3:57:40 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/9/2013 3:49:38 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:47:22 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:43:41 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:39:45 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:36:43 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:34:13 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:32:30 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:26:50 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:23:22 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
At 4/9/2013 1:44:05 PM, Jack_the_lad wrote:
I agree with your view, science is the only way of explaining anything, through evidence and repeatable observation. You cannot base anything on religion because it is a human construct. Unlike science religion is not fact. You cannot reject science for faith that is based on writings of wanderers thousands of years ago who had a lot less understanding about science than we do today. Similarly, you cannot reject science for myths, parables and fables when there is no scientific evidence for these. I hate it when religious people say 'well god takes a different understanding, one that can't be explained by scientific means.' Of course god can't be explained by scientific means, because he/she/it doesn't exist. I am as certain that god doesn't exist as I am that Santa doesn't exist, and fairies, and goblins, that are also human constructs.

no technically science is a human construct science could very well be wrong and we just don't no it

So could our perception of reality. Solipsism much?

matrix much

Tautology much?

Repeating much?

Project much?

Launch much?

Say random stuff that doesn't make sense much?

You don't see the use of synonyms much?

See now you done Fvcked it up. You're supposed to end the sentence with much in a way that much is improper grammatically.
"Every kid starts out as a natural-born scientist, and then we beat it out of them. A few trickle through the system with their wonder and enthusiasm for science intact." - Carl Sagan

This is the response of the defenders of Sparta to the Commander of the Roman Army: "If you are a god, you will not hurt those who have never injured you. If you are a man, advance - you will find men equal to yourself. And women.
cybertron1998
Posts: 5,818
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2013 3:59:35 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/9/2013 3:57:40 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:49:38 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:47:22 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:43:41 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:39:45 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:36:43 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:34:13 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:32:30 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:26:50 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:23:22 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
At 4/9/2013 1:44:05 PM, Jack_the_lad wrote:
I agree with your view, science is the only way of explaining anything, through evidence and repeatable observation. You cannot base anything on religion because it is a human construct. Unlike science religion is not fact. You cannot reject science for faith that is based on writings of wanderers thousands of years ago who had a lot less understanding about science than we do today. Similarly, you cannot reject science for myths, parables and fables when there is no scientific evidence for these. I hate it when religious people say 'well god takes a different understanding, one that can't be explained by scientific means.' Of course god can't be explained by scientific means, because he/she/it doesn't exist. I am as certain that god doesn't exist as I am that Santa doesn't exist, and fairies, and goblins, that are also human constructs.

no technically science is a human construct science could very well be wrong and we just don't no it

So could our perception of reality. Solipsism much?

matrix much

Tautology much?

Repeating much?

Project much?

Launch much?

Say random stuff that doesn't make sense much?

You don't see the use of synonyms much?

See now you done Fvcked it up. You're supposed to end the sentence with much in a way that much is improper grammatically.

Dammit much?
Epsilon: There are so many stories where some brave hero decides to give their life to save the day, and because of their sacrifice, the good guys win, the survivors all cheer, and everybody lives happily ever after. But the hero... never gets to see that ending. They'll never know if their sacrifice actually made a difference. They'll never know if the day was really saved. In the end, they just have to have faith.
muzebreak
Posts: 2,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2013 4:01:13 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/9/2013 3:59:35 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
a way that much is improper grammatically.

Dammit much?

No, stop it. The joke is dead.
"Every kid starts out as a natural-born scientist, and then we beat it out of them. A few trickle through the system with their wonder and enthusiasm for science intact." - Carl Sagan

This is the response of the defenders of Sparta to the Commander of the Roman Army: "If you are a god, you will not hurt those who have never injured you. If you are a man, advance - you will find men equal to yourself. And women.
cybertron1998
Posts: 5,818
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2013 4:03:24 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/9/2013 4:01:13 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:59:35 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
a way that much is improper grammatically.

Dammit much?

No, stop it. The joke is dead.

Dammit I actually realized it when I looked at your statement
Epsilon: There are so many stories where some brave hero decides to give their life to save the day, and because of their sacrifice, the good guys win, the survivors all cheer, and everybody lives happily ever after. But the hero... never gets to see that ending. They'll never know if their sacrifice actually made a difference. They'll never know if the day was really saved. In the end, they just have to have faith.
AlbinoBunny
Posts: 3,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2013 4:03:25 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/9/2013 3:59:35 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:57:40 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:49:38 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:47:22 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:43:41 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:39:45 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:36:43 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:34:13 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:32:30 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:26:50 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:23:22 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
At 4/9/2013 1:44:05 PM, Jack_the_lad wrote:
I agree with your view, science is the only way of explaining anything, through evidence and repeatable observation. You cannot base anything on religion because it is a human construct. Unlike science religion is not fact. You cannot reject science for faith that is based on writings of wanderers thousands of years ago who had a lot less understanding about science than we do today. Similarly, you cannot reject science for myths, parables and fables when there is no scientific evidence for these. I hate it when religious people say 'well god takes a different understanding, one that can't be explained by scientific means.' Of course god can't be explained by scientific means, because he/she/it doesn't exist. I am as certain that god doesn't exist as I am that Santa doesn't exist, and fairies, and goblins, that are also human constructs.

no technically science is a human construct science could very well be wrong and we just don't no it

So could our perception of reality. Solipsism much?

matrix much

Tautology much?

Repeating much?

Project much?

Launch much?

Say random stuff that doesn't make sense much?

You don't see the use of synonyms much?

See now you done Fvcked it up. You're supposed to end the sentence with much in a way that much is improper grammatically.

Dammit much?

You fvcked up much to much, much? I've said much so much that much doesn't even sound like a real word much?
bladerunner060 | bsh1 , 2014! Presidency campaign!

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org... - Running for president.
http://www.debate.org... - Running as his vice president.

May the best man win!
cybertron1998
Posts: 5,818
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2013 4:04:33 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/9/2013 4:03:25 PM, AlbinoBunny wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:59:35 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:57:40 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:49:38 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:47:22 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:43:41 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:39:45 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:36:43 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:34:13 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:32:30 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:26:50 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 4/9/2013 3:23:22 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
At 4/9/2013 1:44:05 PM, Jack_the_lad wrote:
I agree with your view, science is the only way of explaining anything, through evidence and repeatable observation. You cannot base anything on religion because it is a human construct. Unlike science religion is not fact. You cannot reject science for faith that is based on writings of wanderers thousands of years ago who had a lot less understanding about science than we do today. Similarly, you cannot reject science for myths, parables and fables when there is no scientific evidence for these. I hate it when religious people say 'well god takes a different understanding, one that can't be explained by scientific means.' Of course god can't be explained by scientific means, because he/she/it doesn't exist. I am as certain that god doesn't exist as I am that Santa doesn't exist, and fairies, and goblins, that are also human constructs.

no technically science is a human construct science could very well be wrong and we just don't no it

So could our perception of reality. Solipsism much?

matrix much

Tautology much?

Repeating much?

Project much?

Launch much?

Say random stuff that doesn't make sense much?

You don't see the use of synonyms much?

See now you done Fvcked it up. You're supposed to end the sentence with much in a way that much is improper grammatically.

Dammit much?

You fvcked up much to much, much? I've said much so much that much doesn't even sound like a real word much?

lol^
Epsilon: There are so many stories where some brave hero decides to give their life to save the day, and because of their sacrifice, the good guys win, the survivors all cheer, and everybody lives happily ever after. But the hero... never gets to see that ending. They'll never know if their sacrifice actually made a difference. They'll never know if the day was really saved. In the end, they just have to have faith.