Discussion:
An amusing thought re atheistic views.
(too old to reply)
b***@gmail.com
2010-01-29 17:03:18 UTC
Permalink
I just watched the presentation of the new iPad. Im not buff by any
stretch of the imagination, but having bought one of the first 512k
Macs, I was 'blown away' with the incredible advancement of
technology.

I had an amusing thought during the presentation, that somebody in the
audience leaped to their feet, to ask the presenter "did this gizmo
create itself" ? There no doubt, would have been laughter, as in the
audience were many of the geniuses who developed it.

The follow up question would have been "then do some of you still
think those that created it just 'happened'?

Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some validity to
suit the times they appeared,often for the need for control , and are
totally redundant, and Im not suggesting that any of them come even
close to the truth, but to actually believe that we came about as just
an accumulation of happenstances has got to be the most ludicrous
idea imaginable, and those that do believe that, are hardly different
from the virgin birth Adam and Eve believers.

BOfL
duane
2010-01-29 17:06:55 UTC
Permalink
I just watched the presentation of the new iPad. Im not  buff by any
stretch of the imagination, but having bought one of the first 512k
Macs, I was 'blown away' with the incredible advancement of
technology.
I had an amusing thought during the presentation, that somebody in the
audience leaped to their feet, to ask the presenter "did this gizmo
create itself" ? There no doubt, would have been laughter, as in the
audience were many of the geniuses who developed it.
The follow up question would have been "then do some of you still
think those that created it just 'happened'?
Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some validity to
suit the times they appeared,often for the need for control , and are
totally redundant, and Im not suggesting that any of them come even
close to the truth, but to actually believe that we came about as just
an accumulation of happenstances has got to be  the most ludicrous
idea imaginable, and those that do believe that, are hardly different
from the virgin birth Adam and Eve believers.
BOfL
And?
b***@gmail.com
2010-01-30 02:38:45 UTC
Permalink
I just watched the presentation of the new iPad. Im not  buff by any
stretch of the imagination, but having bought one of the first 512k
Macs, I was 'blown away' with the incredible advancement of
technology.
I had an amusing thought during the presentation, that somebody in the
audience leaped to their feet, to ask the presenter "did this gizmo
create itself" ? There no doubt, would have been laughter, as in the
audience were many of the geniuses who developed it.
The follow up question would have been "then do some of you still
think those that created it just 'happened'?
Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some validity to
suit the times they appeared,often for the need for control , and are
totally redundant, and Im not suggesting that any of them come even
close to the truth, but to actually believe that we came about as just
an accumulation of happenstances has got to be  the most ludicrous
idea imaginable, and those that do believe that, are hardly different
from the virgin birth Adam and Eve believers.
BOfL
And?-
Why your response?

BOfL
Yap
2010-01-30 04:54:46 UTC
Permalink
I just watched the presentation of the new iPad. Im not  buff by any
stretch of the imagination, but having bought one of the first 512k
Macs, I was 'blown away' with the incredible advancement of
technology.
I had an amusing thought during the presentation, that somebody in the
audience leaped to their feet, to ask the presenter "did this gizmo
create itself" ? There no doubt, would have been laughter, as in the
audience were many of the geniuses who developed it.
The follow up question would have been "then do some of you still
think those that created it just 'happened'?
Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some validity to
suit the times they appeared,often for the need for control , and are
totally redundant, and Im not suggesting that any of them come even
close to the truth, but to actually believe that we came about as just
an accumulation of happenstances has got to be  the most ludicrous
idea imaginable, and those that do believe that, are hardly different
from the virgin birth Adam and Eve believers.
BOfL
And?
It means things and products are of human creation or from nature.
There is no such a thing as a supernatural being capable to create
things, such as turning dust into human.
The theistic thinking are essentially a non-starter, for, there is
never a god.
b***@gmail.com
2010-01-30 13:08:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Yap
I just watched the presentation of the new iPad. Im not  buff by any
stretch of the imagination, but having bought one of the first 512k
Macs, I was 'blown away' with the incredible advancement of
technology.
I had an amusing thought during the presentation, that somebody in the
audience leaped to their feet, to ask the presenter "did this gizmo
create itself" ? There no doubt, would have been laughter, as in the
audience were many of the geniuses who developed it.
The follow up question would have been "then do some of you still
think those that created it just 'happened'?
Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some validity to
suit the times they appeared,often for the need for control , and are
totally redundant, and Im not suggesting that any of them come even
close to the truth, but to actually believe that we came about as just
an accumulation of happenstances has got to be  the most ludicrous
idea imaginable, and those that do believe that, are hardly different
from the virgin birth Adam and Eve believers.
BOfL
And?
It means things and products are of human creation or from nature.
There is no such a thing as a supernatural being capable to create
things, such as turning dust into human.
The theistic thinking are essentially a non-starter, for, there is
never a god.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Care to draw a line where nature starts and finishes?

BOfL

BOfL
Darwin123
2010-01-31 00:35:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@gmail.com
Care to draw a line where nature starts and finishes?
Human beings are part of nature. If something is designed by
human beings, it automatically was created as part of nature. So there
is never a sharp line between "designed" and "formed."
Even when a human beings has directly assembled an artifact,
the human itself is the result of an undirected process.
As an example, in the current time human beings are always put
together by undirected processes. The process by which an embryo grows
is undirected. Unlike the watch, there is never a time that one could
say, "Ahaa, that section of the embryo was directly put together by a
deity." So the "human artifact" was created by an intentional
purpose, which was originally formed through an undirected process.
Whether the first step is intentional or undirected is not a
priori obvious.
Immortalista
2010-02-02 03:59:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@gmail.com
Care to draw a line where nature starts and finishes?
       Human beings are part of nature. If something is designed by
human beings, it automatically was created as part of nature. So there
is never a sharp line between "designed" and "formed."
        Even when a human beings has directly assembled an artifact,
the human itself is the result of an undirected process.
     As an example, in the current time human beings are always put
together by undirected processes. The process by which an embryo grows
is undirected. Unlike the watch, there is never a time that one could
say, "Ahaa, that section of the embryo was directly put together by a
deity." So the "human artifact"   was created by an intentional
purpose, which was originally formed through an undirected process.
    Whether the first step is intentional or undirected is not a
priori obvious.
1. Panspermia: is the hypothesis that "seeds" of life exist already in
the Universe, that life on Earth may have originated through these
"seeds", and that they may deliver or have delivered life to other
habitable bodies.

2. Exogenesis: is a more limited hypothesis that proposes life on
Earth was transferred from elsewhere in the Universe but makes no
prediction about how widespread it is. Because the term "panspermia"
is more well-known, it tends to be used in reference to what would
properly be called exogenesis.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panspermia

3. Directed panspermia: During the 1960s, Crick became concerned with
the origins of the genetic code. In 1966, Crick took the place of
Leslie Orgel at a meeting where Orgel was to talk about the origin of
life. Crick speculated about possible stages by which an initially
simple code with a few amino acid types might have evolved into the
more complex code used by existing organisms. At that time, everyone
thought of proteins as the only kind of enzymes and ribozymes had not
yet been found. Many molecular biologists were puzzled by the problem
of the origin of a protein replicating system that is as complex as
that which exists in organisms currently inhabiting Earth. In the
early 1970s, Crick and Orgel further speculated about the possibility
that the production of living systems from molecules may have been a
very rare event in the universe, but once it had developed it could be
spread by intelligent life forms using space travel technology, a
process they called “Directed Panspermia”.[45] In a retrospective
article,[46] Crick and Orgel noted that they had been overly
pessimistic about the chances of abiogenesis on Earth when they had
assumed that some kind of self-replicating protein system was the
molecular origin of life. Now it is easier to imagine an RNA world and
the origin of life in the form of some self-replicating polymer
besides protein.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Crick#Directed_panspermia

Abiogenesis (Greek a-bio-genesis, "non biological origins") is the
formation of life from non-living matter. Today the term is primarily
used to refer to hypotheses about the chemical origin of life, such as
from a 'primeval soup' or in the vicinity of hydrothermal vents, and
most probably through a number of intermediate steps, such as non-
living but self-replicating molecules (biopoiesis). The current models
of abiogenesis are still being scientifically tested.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis

In the natural sciences, abiogenesis, the question of the origin of
life, is the study of how life on Earth might have emerged from non-
life sometime between 4.4 billion years ago, when liquid water first
flowed on the Earth, and 2.7 billion years ago when the earliest
incontrovertible evidence of life is found in the form of stable
isotopes...

There is no truly "standard model" of the origin of life. But most
currently accepted models build in one way or another upon a number of
discoveries about the origin of molecular and cellular components for
life, which are listed in a rough order of postulated emergence:

Plausible pre-biotic conditions result in the creation of certain
basic small molecules (monomers) of life, such as amino acids. This
was demonstrated in the Miller-Urey experiment by Stanley L. Miller
and Harold C. Urey in 1953.

Phospholipids (of an appropriate length) can spontaneously form lipid
bilayers, a basic component of the cell membrane.

The polymerization of nucleotides into random RNA molecules might have
resulted in self-replicating ribozymes (RNA world hypothesis).

Selection pressures for catalytic efficiency and diversity result in
ribozymes which catalyse peptidyl transfer (hence formation of small
proteins), since oligopeptides complex with RNA to form better
catalysts. Thus the first ribosome is born, and protein synthesis
becomes more prevalent.

Proteins outcompete ribozymes in catalytic ability, and therefore
become the dominant biopolymer. Nucleic acids are restricted to
predominantly genomic use.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_of_life

RNA world hypothesis states that RNA was, before the emergence of the
first cell, the dominant, and probably the only, form of life. The
phrase "The RNA World" was first used by Walter Gilbert in 1986.

This hypothesis is supported by RNA's ability to participate in the
storage, transmission, and duplication of genetic information,
similarly to DNA, coupled with its ability to act as a ribozyme
(similar to an enzyme), catalyzing certain reactions. From the point
of view of reproduction, molecules exist for two basic purposes: self-
replication and catalysis assisting self-replication. DNA is capable
of self-replication, but only assisted by proteins. Proteins are
excellent catalysts, but fail to catalyze processes complex enough to
recreate themselves, individually. RNA is capable of both catalysis
and self-replication. [My favorote theory]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RNA_world_hypothesis
Jimbo
2010-01-29 17:10:32 UTC
Permalink
I just watched the presentation of the new iPad. Im not  buff by any
stretch of the imagination, but having bought one of the first 512k
Macs, I was 'blown away' with the incredible advancement of
technology.
I had an amusing thought during the presentation, that somebody in the
audience leaped to their feet, to ask the presenter "did this gizmo
create itself" ? There no doubt, would have been laughter, as in the
audience were many of the geniuses who developed it.
The follow up question would have been "then do some of you still
think those that created it just 'happened'?
Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some validity to
suit the times they appeared,often for the need for control , and are
totally redundant, and Im not suggesting that any of them come even
close to the truth, but to actually believe that we came about as just
an accumulation of happenstances has got to be  the most ludicrous
idea imaginable, and those that do believe that, are hardly different
from the virgin birth Adam and Eve believers.
BOfL
This is what happens when you put computers into the hands of
idiots....
b***@gmail.com
2010-01-30 02:39:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jimbo
I just watched the presentation of the new iPad. Im not  buff by any
stretch of the imagination, but having bought one of the first 512k
Macs, I was 'blown away' with the incredible advancement of
technology.
I had an amusing thought during the presentation, that somebody in the
audience leaped to their feet, to ask the presenter "did this gizmo
create itself" ? There no doubt, would have been laughter, as in the
audience were many of the geniuses who developed it.
The follow up question would have been "then do some of you still
think those that created it just 'happened'?
Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some validity to
suit the times they appeared,often for the need for control , and are
totally redundant, and Im not suggesting that any of them come even
close to the truth, but to actually believe that we came about as just
an accumulation of happenstances has got to be  the most ludicrous
idea imaginable, and those that do believe that, are hardly different
from the virgin birth Adam and Eve believers.
BOfL
This is what happens when you put computers into the hands of
idiots....- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Why would you describe the Apple men as idiots?

BOfL
Smiler
2010-01-30 04:16:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@gmail.com
Post by Jimbo
I just watched the presentation of the new iPad. Im not buff by any
stretch of the imagination, but having bought one of the first 512k
Macs, I was 'blown away' with the incredible advancement of
technology.
I had an amusing thought during the presentation, that somebody in
the audience leaped to their feet, to ask the presenter "did this
gizmo create itself" ? There no doubt, would have been laughter, as
in the audience were many of the geniuses who developed it.
The follow up question would have been "then do some of you still
think those that created it just 'happened'?
Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some validity to
suit the times they appeared,often for the need for control , and
are totally redundant, and Im not suggesting that any of them come
even close to the truth, but to actually believe that we came about
as just an accumulation of happenstances has got to be the most
ludicrous idea imaginable, and those that do believe that, are
hardly different from the virgin birth Adam and Eve believers.
BOfL
This is what happens when you put computers into the hands of
idiots....- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Why would you describe the Apple men as idiots?
Q.E.D.
He wasn't, idiot. He was describing you.
--
Smiler
The godless one
a.a.# 2279
All gods are bespoke. They're all made to
perfectly fit the prejudices of their believer
b***@gmail.com
2010-01-30 12:40:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Smiler
Post by b***@gmail.com
Post by Jimbo
I just watched the presentation of the new iPad. Im not buff by any
stretch of the imagination, but having bought one of the first 512k
Macs, I was 'blown away' with the incredible advancement of
technology.
I had an amusing thought during the presentation, that somebody in
the audience leaped to their feet, to ask the presenter "did this
gizmo create itself" ? There no doubt, would have been laughter, as
in the audience were many of the geniuses who developed it.
The follow up question would have been "then do some of you still
think those that created it just 'happened'?
Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some validity to
suit the times they appeared,often for the need for control , and
are totally redundant, and Im not suggesting that any of them come
even close to the truth, but to actually believe that we came about
as just an accumulation of happenstances has got to be the most
ludicrous idea imaginable, and those that do believe that, are
hardly different from the virgin birth Adam and Eve believers.
BOfL
This is what happens when you put computers into the hands of
idiots....- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Why would you describe the Apple men as idiots?
Q.E.D.
He wasn't, idiot. He was describing you.
I was wondering who would go to the trouble of pointing out the
'apparently obvious'

No he wasnt. He just believed he was.

BOfL
Post by Smiler
--
Smiler
The godless one
a.a.# 2279
All gods are bespoke. They're all made to
perfectly fit the prejudices of their believer- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Jimbo
2010-01-29 17:12:52 UTC
Permalink
I just watched the presentation of the new iPad. Im not  buff by any
stretch of the imagination, but having bought one of the first 512k
Macs, I was 'blown away' with the incredible advancement of
technology.
I had an amusing thought during the presentation, that somebody in the
audience leaped to their feet, to ask the presenter "did this gizmo
create itself" ? There no doubt, would have been laughter, as in the
audience were many of the geniuses who developed it.
The follow up question would have been "then do some of you still
think those that created it just 'happened'?
Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some validity to
suit the times they appeared,often for the need for control , and are
totally redundant, and Im not suggesting that any of them come even
close to the truth, but to actually believe that we came about as just
an accumulation of happenstances has got to be  the most ludicrous
idea imaginable, and those that do believe that, are hardly different
from the virgin birth Adam and Eve believers.
BOfL
You don't pull computers from the cd drive of the mother computer
naked, crying, and slime covered either. Does that mean that
pregnancy and birth do not exist?
Mike Painter
2010-01-29 17:35:31 UTC
Permalink
Jimbo wrote:
<snip>
Post by Jimbo
You don't pull computers from the cd drive of the mother computer
naked, crying, and slime covered either. Does that mean that
pregnancy and birth do not exist?
Another difference is that the software goes into the hardware.
b***@gmail.com
2010-01-30 02:44:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mike Painter
<snip>
Post by Jimbo
You don't pull computers from the cd drive of the mother computer
naked, crying, and slime covered either.  Does that mean that
pregnancy and birth do not exist?
Another difference is that the software goes into the hardware.
Does it put itself in there, just like the dna?

BOfL
Jimbo
2010-02-01 14:25:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mike Painter
<snip>
Post by Jimbo
You don't pull computers from the cd drive of the mother computer
naked, crying, and slime covered either.  Does that mean that
pregnancy and birth do not exist?
Another difference is that the software goes into the hardware.
lol! True.
b***@gmail.com
2010-01-30 02:40:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jimbo
I just watched the presentation of the new iPad. Im not  buff by any
stretch of the imagination, but having bought one of the first 512k
Macs, I was 'blown away' with the incredible advancement of
technology.
I had an amusing thought during the presentation, that somebody in the
audience leaped to their feet, to ask the presenter "did this gizmo
create itself" ? There no doubt, would have been laughter, as in the
audience were many of the geniuses who developed it.
The follow up question would have been "then do some of you still
think those that created it just 'happened'?
Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some validity to
suit the times they appeared,often for the need for control , and are
totally redundant, and Im not suggesting that any of them come even
close to the truth, but to actually believe that we came about as just
an accumulation of happenstances has got to be  the most ludicrous
idea imaginable, and those that do believe that, are hardly different
from the virgin birth Adam and Eve believers.
BOfL
You don't pull computers from the cd drive of the mother computer
naked, crying, and slime covered either.  Does that mean that
pregnancy and birth do not exist?- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Why do you ask?

BOfL
FreeThink
2010-01-29 17:14:25 UTC
Permalink
I just watched the presentation of the new iPad. Im not  buff by any
stretch of the imagination, but having bought one of the first 512k
Macs, I was 'blown away' with the incredible advancement of
technology.
I had an amusing thought during the presentation, that somebody in the
audience leaped to their feet, to ask the presenter "did this gizmo
create itself" ? There no doubt, would have been laughter, as in the
audience were many of the geniuses who developed it.
The follow up question would have been "then do some of you still
think those that created it just 'happened'?
Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some validity to
suit the times they appeared,often for the need for control , and are
totally redundant, and Im not suggesting that any of them come even
close to the truth, but to actually believe that we came about as just
an accumulation of happenstances has got to be  the most ludicrous
idea imaginable, and those that do believe that, are hardly different
from the virgin birth Adam and Eve believers.
BOfL
We need to understand more about the concept if time to have an
opinion on this. It is possible that there was never any "start" to
time itself and given the infinite availability of time the
probability that we just "happened" increases greatly
b***@gmail.com
2010-01-30 12:26:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by FreeThink
I just watched the presentation of the new iPad. Im not  buff by any
stretch of the imagination, but having bought one of the first 512k
Macs, I was 'blown away' with the incredible advancement of
technology.
I had an amusing thought during the presentation, that somebody in the
audience leaped to their feet, to ask the presenter "did this gizmo
create itself" ? There no doubt, would have been laughter, as in the
audience were many of the geniuses who developed it.
The follow up question would have been "then do some of you still
think those that created it just 'happened'?
Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some validity to
suit the times they appeared,often for the need for control , and are
totally redundant, and Im not suggesting that any of them come even
close to the truth, but to actually believe that we came about as just
an accumulation of happenstances has got to be  the most ludicrous
idea imaginable, and those that do believe that, are hardly different
from the virgin birth Adam and Eve believers.
BOfL
We need to understand more about the concept if time to have an
opinion on this. It is possible that there was never any "start" to
time itself and given the infinite availability of time the
probability that we just "happened" increases greatly- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
So you subscribe to the phenomena of chimps writing Beethoven given
enought time and paper?

You are onto something re time, which is a human created reference
point to identify sequence of events.

Did a mile or a klm always exist?

BOfL
Smiler
2010-01-31 00:16:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@gmail.com
Post by FreeThink
I just watched the presentation of the new iPad. Im not buff by any
stretch of the imagination, but having bought one of the first 512k
Macs, I was 'blown away' with the incredible advancement of
technology.
I had an amusing thought during the presentation, that somebody in
the audience leaped to their feet, to ask the presenter "did this
gizmo create itself" ? There no doubt, would have been laughter, as
in the audience were many of the geniuses who developed it.
The follow up question would have been "then do some of you still
think those that created it just 'happened'?
Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some validity to
suit the times they appeared,often for the need for control , and
are totally redundant, and Im not suggesting that any of them come
even close to the truth, but to actually believe that we came about
as just an accumulation of happenstances has got to be the most
ludicrous idea imaginable, and those that do believe that, are
hardly different from the virgin birth Adam and Eve believers.
BOfL
We need to understand more about the concept if time to have an
opinion on this. It is possible that there was never any "start" to
time itself and given the infinite availability of time the
probability that we just "happened" increases greatly- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
So you subscribe to the phenomena of chimps writing Beethoven given
enought time and paper?
You are onto something re time, which is a human created reference
point to identify sequence of events.
Did a mile or a klm always exist?
Not always. The mile has existed for about 14.5 billion years but KLM has
only existed since the invention of the passenger aeroplane.
--
Smiler
The godless one
a.a.# 2279
All gods are bespoke. They're all made to
perfectly fit the prejudices of their believer
Brian E. Clark
2010-01-29 17:36:29 UTC
Permalink
In article <1a036eba-b74f-4c89-afe7-
***@f17g2000prh.googlegroups.com>, bigfletch8
@gmail.com says...
...but to actually believe that we came about as just
an accumulation of happenstances has got to be the most ludicrous
idea imaginable, and those that do believe that, are hardly different
from the virgin birth Adam and Eve believers.
No matter how many ways you repackage it, and no matter how
many times you repeat it, all you offer is an Argument from
Incredulity. A fallacy. As of January 29, 2010, you have
yet to write a single non-fallacious word in defense of
your opinion.
--
-----------
Brian E. Clark
b***@gmail.com
2010-01-30 02:49:17 UTC
Permalink
On Jan 30, 1:36 am, Brian E. Clark
Post by Brian E. Clark
In article <1a036eba-b74f-4c89-afe7-
@gmail.com says...
...but to actually believe that we came about as just
an accumulation of happenstances has got to be  the most ludicrous
idea imaginable, and those that do believe that, are hardly different
from the virgin birth Adam and Eve believers.
No matter how many ways you repackage it, and no matter how
many times you repeat it, all you offer is an Argument from
Incredulity. A fallacy. As of January 29, 2010, you have
yet to write a single non-fallacious word in defense of
your opinion.
--
-----------
Brian E. Clark
I have no opinions,am not offering anything and have nothing to
defend. I leave tht to the religionists, politicins and most
philosophers.

What is your motive?

BOfL



BOfL
Jack
2010-01-29 17:47:15 UTC
Permalink
I just watched the presentation of the new iPad. Im not  buff by any
stretch of the imagination, but having bought one of the first 512k
Macs, I was 'blown away' with the incredible advancement of
technology.
I had an amusing thought during the presentation, that somebody in the
audience leaped to their feet, to ask the presenter "did this gizmo
create itself" ? There no doubt, would have been laughter, as in the
audience were many of the geniuses who developed it.
There would have been laughter if someone said, "will this gizmo
reproduce itself."
Davej
2010-01-29 17:52:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@gmail.com
[...]
Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some validity to
suit the times they appeared, often for the need for control, and are
totally redundant, and Im not suggesting that any of them come even
close to the truth, but to actually believe that we came about as just
an accumulation of happenstances has got to be  the most ludicrous
idea imaginable, and those that do believe that, are hardly different
from the virgin birth Adam and Eve believers.
Yeah, we're just so damn wonderful and amazing that our muddled brains
can barely stand it.


FreeThink
2010-01-29 17:55:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Davej
Post by b***@gmail.com
[...]
Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some validity to
suit the times they appeared, often for the need for control, and are
totally redundant, and Im not suggesting that any of them come even
close to the truth, but to actually believe that we came about as just
an accumulation of happenstances has got to be  the most ludicrous
idea imaginable, and those that do believe that, are hardly different
from the virgin birth Adam and Eve believers.
Yeah, we're just so damn wonderful and amazing that our muddled brains
can barely stand it.
http://youtu.be/He7Ge7Sogrk
Yet egotistical enough to think we can recognize the work of an
omnipotent creator thingie.
b***@gmail.com
2010-01-30 03:02:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by FreeThink
Post by Davej
Post by b***@gmail.com
[...]
Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some validity to
suit the times they appeared, often for the need for control, and are
totally redundant, and Im not suggesting that any of them come even
close to the truth, but to actually believe that we came about as just
an accumulation of happenstances has got to be  the most ludicrous
idea imaginable, and those that do believe that, are hardly different
from the virgin birth Adam and Eve believers.
Yeah, we're just so damn wonderful and amazing that our muddled brains
can barely stand it.
http://youtu.be/He7Ge7Sogrk
Yet egotistical enough to think we can recognize the work of an
omnipotent creator thingie.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Thats the big problem , which I alluded to re religious explanation.

The more, as a species, we are able to see the microscopic nature of
out existence, the more ludicrous the religious stories become.

If an isolated tribe in the Amazon saw the 'iPad' lying in the jungle,
he would automatically associate it with whatever frame of reference
he was capable of.

"It came from the great tree maker" for example.

The corollary being, if he was able to reduce it to its smallest
components, he would then say 'it all just happened'.

"More evidence leads to greater mystery", but doesnt invalidate the
mysterious.

BOfL
FreeThink
2010-01-30 17:04:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@gmail.com
Post by FreeThink
Post by Davej
Post by b***@gmail.com
[...]
Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some validity to
suit the times they appeared, often for the need for control, and are
totally redundant, and Im not suggesting that any of them come even
close to the truth, but to actually believe that we came about as just
an accumulation of happenstances has got to be  the most ludicrous
idea imaginable, and those that do believe that, are hardly different
from the virgin birth Adam and Eve believers.
Yeah, we're just so damn wonderful and amazing that our muddled brains
can barely stand it.
http://youtu.be/He7Ge7Sogrk
Yet egotistical enough to think we can recognize the work of an
omnipotent creator thingie.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Thats the big problem , which I alluded to re religious explanation.
The more, as a species, we are able to see the microscopic nature of
out existence, the more ludicrous the religious stories become.
If an isolated tribe in the Amazon saw the 'iPad' lying in the jungle,
he would automatically associate it with whatever frame of reference
he was capable of.
"It came from the great tree maker" for example.
The corollary being, if he was able to reduce it to its smallest
components, he would then say 'it all just happened'.
"More evidence leads to greater mystery", but doesnt invalidate the
mysterious.
BOfL
As an agnostic atheist I don't make a claim either way. However, the
need to know if we were "created" or not is brought about by our need
validate ourselves in the universe and in the end is probably more of
a semantics exercise rather than important.
Drafterman
2010-01-29 18:40:04 UTC
Permalink
I just watched the presentation of the new iPad. Im not  buff by any
stretch of the imagination, but having bought one of the first 512k
Macs, I was 'blown away' with the incredible advancement of
technology.
I had an amusing thought during the presentation, that somebody in the
audience leaped to their feet, to ask the presenter "did this gizmo
create itself" ? There no doubt, would have been laughter, as in the
audience were many of the geniuses who developed it.
The follow up question would have been "then do some of you still
think those that created it just 'happened'?
Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some validity to
suit the times they appeared,often for the need for control , and are
totally redundant, and Im not suggesting that any of them come even
close to the truth, but to actually believe that we came about as just
an accumulation of happenstances has got to be  the most ludicrous
idea imaginable, and those that do believe that, are hardly different
from the virgin birth Adam and Eve believers.
BOfL
I'm sorry that your ignorance of science is such that you are forced
to represent it so inaccurately and are unable to distinguish between
scientifically valid theories and religious myth.

I don't say this in a deragatory manner; science isn't for everyone.
But it would seem odd that a person so distinterested in what science
is and says about the world would even bother to comment it.

If you wish to comment on science, don't you think it would be more
appropriate to actually learn about it first, ask questions about
things you do not understand, and then - maybe - attempt to critique
it?
b***@gmail.com
2010-01-30 03:08:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Drafterman
I just watched the presentation of the new iPad. Im not  buff by any
stretch of the imagination, but having bought one of the first 512k
Macs, I was 'blown away' with the incredible advancement of
technology.
I had an amusing thought during the presentation, that somebody in the
audience leaped to their feet, to ask the presenter "did this gizmo
create itself" ? There no doubt, would have been laughter, as in the
audience were many of the geniuses who developed it.
The follow up question would have been "then do some of you still
think those that created it just 'happened'?
Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some validity to
suit the times they appeared,often for the need for control , and are
totally redundant, and Im not suggesting that any of them come even
close to the truth, but to actually believe that we came about as just
an accumulation of happenstances has got to be  the most ludicrous
idea imaginable, and those that do believe that, are hardly different
from the virgin birth Adam and Eve believers.
BOfL
I'm sorry that your ignorance of science is such that you are forced
to represent it so inaccurately and are unable to distinguish between
scientifically valid theories and religious myth.
I don't say this in a deragatory manner; science isn't for everyone.
But it would seem odd that a person so distinterested in what science
is and says about the world would even bother to comment it.
If you wish to comment on science, don't you think it would be more
appropriate to actually learn about it first, ask questions about
things you do not understand, and then - maybe - attempt to critique
it?- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I dont know where you came to those conclusions. I guess you would
have to develop a better understanding of spiritual consciousness to
understand.

Did you automatically cross ref to religion? Most would because of the
same lack of understanding.

In case you missed it, so many of the early scientists where mystics
first. Where do you think their inspirations came from.? Im referring
to people like daVinci.

BOfL
Drafterman
2010-02-01 15:39:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@gmail.com
Post by Drafterman
I just watched the presentation of the new iPad. Im not  buff by any
stretch of the imagination, but having bought one of the first 512k
Macs, I was 'blown away' with the incredible advancement of
technology.
I had an amusing thought during the presentation, that somebody in the
audience leaped to their feet, to ask the presenter "did this gizmo
create itself" ? There no doubt, would have been laughter, as in the
audience were many of the geniuses who developed it.
The follow up question would have been "then do some of you still
think those that created it just 'happened'?
Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some validity to
suit the times they appeared,often for the need for control , and are
totally redundant, and Im not suggesting that any of them come even
close to the truth, but to actually believe that we came about as just
an accumulation of happenstances has got to be  the most ludicrous
idea imaginable, and those that do believe that, are hardly different
from the virgin birth Adam and Eve believers.
BOfL
I'm sorry that your ignorance of science is such that you are forced
to represent it so inaccurately and are unable to distinguish between
scientifically valid theories and religious myth.
I don't say this in a deragatory manner; science isn't for everyone.
But it would seem odd that a person so distinterested in what science
is and says about the world would even bother to comment it.
If you wish to comment on science, don't you think it would be more
appropriate to actually learn about it first, ask questions about
things you do not understand, and then - maybe - attempt to critique
it?- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I dont know where you came to those conclusions.
They are based on your comment above and the fact that a person
knowledgable of the basics of the relevant scientific fields would not
have made such a comment.
Post by b***@gmail.com
I guess you would
have to develop a better understanding of spiritual consciousness to
understand.
And how would I do that?
Post by b***@gmail.com
Did you automatically cross ref to religion? Most would because of the
same lack of understanding.
My only reference to religion was in direct response to *your*
reference to religion.
Post by b***@gmail.com
In case you missed it, so many of the early scientists where mystics
first. Where do you think their inspirations came from.? Im referring
to people like daVinci.
I don't know, nor do I think it is relevant. Kepler was inspired by
the Platonic solids, thinking that the orbits of the (then known)
planets would conform to them. It is a testament to his scientific
objectivity that he abandoned his inspiration when the facts of the
matter contradicted them.
Post by b***@gmail.com
BOfL- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Robert Cohen
2010-01-29 18:50:35 UTC
Permalink
I just watched the presentation of the new iPad. Im not  buff by any
stretch of the imagination, but having bought one of the first 512k
Macs, I was 'blown away' with the incredible advancement of
technology.
I had an amusing thought during the presentation, that somebody in the
audience leaped to their feet, to ask the presenter "did this gizmo
create itself" ? There no doubt, would have been laughter, as in the
audience were many of the geniuses who developed it.
The follow up question would have been "then do some of you still
think those that created it just 'happened'?
Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some validity to
suit the times they appeared,often for the need for control , and are
totally redundant, and Im not suggesting that any of them come even
close to the truth, but to actually believe that we came about as just
an accumulation of happenstances has got to be  the most ludicrous
idea imaginable, and those that do believe that, are hardly different
from the virgin birth Adam and Eve believers.
BOfL
RobtCoheniac hereaby predicts with apologies to Carnac (Johnny
Carson)

Apple shalll change the name of the "Ipad" to "Itab"

Why? two or three, count 'em, reasons

That unfortunate Kotex-Tampon etc pad association is sickly-crudely
hilarious

Fujitsu (sp?) is reportedly pursuing claim of trademark infringement,
really

If "I-Tab" isn't tied up legalistically, then it's a slam dunk
prediction, but if it is spoken for, then sumthin else
b***@gmail.com
2010-01-30 03:10:13 UTC
Permalink
I just watched the presentation of the new iPad. Im not  buff by any
stretch of the imagination, but having bought one of the first 512k
Macs, I was 'blown away' with the incredible advancement of
technology.
I had an amusing thought during the presentation, that somebody in the
audience leaped to their feet, to ask the presenter "did this gizmo
create itself" ? There no doubt, would have been laughter, as in the
audience were many of the geniuses who developed it.
The follow up question would have been "then do some of you still
think those that created it just 'happened'?
Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some validity to
suit the times they appeared,often for the need for control , and are
totally redundant, and Im not suggesting that any of them come even
close to the truth, but to actually believe that we came about as just
an accumulation of happenstances has got to be  the most ludicrous
idea imaginable, and those that do believe that, are hardly different
from the virgin birth Adam and Eve believers.
BOfL
RobtCoheniac hereaby predicts with apologies to  Carnac (Johnny
Carson)
Apple shalll change the name of  the "Ipad" to "Itab"
Why? two or three, count 'em, reasons
That unfortunate  Kotex-Tampon etc pad association is sickly-crudely
hilarious
Fujitsu (sp?) is reportedly pursuing claim of trademark infringement,
really
If "I-Tab" isn't tied up legalistically, then it's a slam dunk
prediction, but if it is spoken for, then sumthin else- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Coca Cola would have something to say about that!

So you wish to turn this into a trademark discussion?

BOfL
i***@gmail.com
2010-01-29 19:10:55 UTC
Permalink
I just watched the presentation of the new iPad. Im not  buff by any
stretch of the imagination, but having bought one of the first 512k
Macs, I was 'blown away' with the incredible advancement of
technology.
I had an amusing thought during the presentation, that somebody in the
audience leaped to their feet, to ask the presenter "did this gizmo
create itself" ? There no doubt, would have been laughter, as in the
audience were many of the geniuses who developed it.
The follow up question would have been "then do some of you still
think those that created it just 'happened'?
Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some validity to
suit the times they appeared,often for the need for control , and are
totally redundant, and Im not suggesting that any of them come even
close to the truth, but to actually believe that we came about as just
an accumulation of happenstances has got to be  the most ludicrous
idea imaginable, and those that do believe that, are hardly different
from the virgin birth Adam and Eve believers.
BOfL
The Universe is FAR FAR more complex than the I-Pad with well over
150 very narrowly precise Physics Constants all working together and
some have a critical tolerance to the 120th decimal place precision
otherwise we arent here... but the I-Pad was created by intelligence
and the Universe 'just happened' and was uncaused . Why ? Because it
MUST BE THAT WAY , so willful unbelievers can live anyway they deem
fit and so they are not owned by anyone higher than Self. Its in
keeping with Maslows Higher Hierarchial Chart with doing whatever you
feel like doing at the top of the pyramid chart . A personal Creator
must be refused under all circumstances so its not a fly in the
ointment to ones lifestyle choices. Ergo, the charade must go
on.... (Been there done that for a good 10 years as 'an atheist') .
Free Lunch
2010-01-29 19:13:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by i***@gmail.com
I just watched the presentation of the new iPad. Im not  buff by any
stretch of the imagination, but having bought one of the first 512k
Macs, I was 'blown away' with the incredible advancement of
technology.
I had an amusing thought during the presentation, that somebody in the
audience leaped to their feet, to ask the presenter "did this gizmo
create itself" ? There no doubt, would have been laughter, as in the
audience were many of the geniuses who developed it.
The follow up question would have been "then do some of you still
think those that created it just 'happened'?
Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some validity to
suit the times they appeared,often for the need for control , and are
totally redundant, and Im not suggesting that any of them come even
close to the truth, but to actually believe that we came about as just
an accumulation of happenstances has got to be  the most ludicrous
idea imaginable, and those that do believe that, are hardly different
from the virgin birth Adam and Eve believers.
BOfL
The Universe is FAR FAR more complex than the I-Pad with well over
150 very narrowly precise Physics Constants all working together and
some have a critical tolerance to the 120th decimal place precision
otherwise we arent here... but the I-Pad was created by intelligence
and the Universe 'just happened' and was uncaused . Why ? Because it
MUST BE THAT WAY , so willful unbelievers can live anyway they deem
fit and so they are not owned by anyone higher than Self. Its in
keeping with Maslows Higher Hierarchial Chart with doing whatever you
feel like doing at the top of the pyramid chart . A personal Creator
must be refused under all circumstances so its not a fly in the
ointment to ones lifestyle choices. Ergo, the charade must go
on.... (Been there done that for a good 10 years as 'an atheist') .
Thanks again for showing us that you are a parody of believers and that
you love to mock God.
thomas p.
2010-01-29 20:12:31 UTC
Permalink
I just watched the presentation of the new iPad. Im not buff by any
stretch of the imagination, but having bought one of the first 512k
Macs, I was 'blown away' with the incredible advancement of
technology.
I had an amusing thought during the presentation, that somebody in the
audience leaped to their feet, to ask the presenter "did this gizmo
create itself" ? There no doubt, would have been laughter, as in the
audience were many of the geniuses who developed it.
The follow up question would have been "then do some of you still
think those that created it just 'happened'?
Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some validity to
suit the times they appeared,often for the need for control , and are
totally redundant, and Im not suggesting that any of them come even
close to the truth, but to actually believe that we came about as just
an accumulation of happenstances has got to be the most ludicrous
idea imaginable, and those that do believe that, are hardly different
from the virgin birth Adam and Eve believers.
BOfL
The Universe is FAR FAR more complex than the I-Pad with well over
150 very narrowly precise Physics Constants all working together and
some have a critical tolerance to the 120th decimal place precision
otherwise we arent here... but the I-Pad was created by intelligence
and the Universe 'just happened' and was uncaused . Why ? Because it
MUST BE THAT WAY , so willful unbelievers can live anyway they deem
fit and so they are not owned by anyone higher than Self. Its in
keeping with Maslows Higher Hierarchial Chart with doing whatever you
feel like doing at the top of the pyramid chart . A personal Creator
must be refused under all circumstances so its not a fly in the
ointment to ones lifestyle choices. Ergo, the charade must go
on.... (Been there done that for a good 10 years as 'an atheist') .
thomas p.
2010-01-29 20:15:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by i***@gmail.com
Post by b***@gmail.com
I just watched the presentation of the new iPad. Im not
buff by any stretch of the imagination, but having
bought one of the first 512k Macs, I was 'blown away'
with the incredible advancement of technology.
I had an amusing thought during the presentation, that
somebody in the audience leaped to their feet, to ask
the presenter "did this gizmo create itself" ? There no
doubt, would have been laughter, as in the audience were
many of the geniuses who developed it.
The follow up question would have been "then do some of
you still think those that created it just 'happened'?
Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some
validity to suit the times they appeared,often for the
need for control , and are totally redundant, and Im not
suggesting that any of them come even close to the
truth, but to actually believe that we came about as
just an accumulation of happenstances has got to be the
most ludicrous idea imaginable, and those that do
believe that, are hardly different from the virgin birth
Adam and Eve believers.
BOfL
The Universe is FAR FAR more complex than the I-Pad with
well over 150 very narrowly precise Physics Constants all
working together and some have a critical tolerance to
the 120th decimal place precision otherwise we arent
here... but the I-Pad was created by intelligence and the
Universe 'just happened' and was uncaused .
And god just happened and was uncaused.

Why ?
Post by i***@gmail.com
Because it MUST BE THAT WAY , so willful unbelievers can
live anyway they deem fit and so they are not owned by
anyone higher than Self.
Are you truly so dense that you think anybody can just live any way
they see fit whether there is a god or not? In any event you are not
a mind reader and your above attempt demonstrates that you are not.


Its in keeping with Maslows
Post by i***@gmail.com
Higher Hierarchial Chart with doing whatever you feel
like doing at the top of the pyramid chart . A personal
Creator must be refused under all circumstances so its
not a fly in the ointment to ones lifestyle choices.
Ergo, the charade must go on.... (Been there done that
for a good 10 years as 'an atheist') .
Liar.
Virgil
2010-01-29 20:50:19 UTC
Permalink
In article
Post by i***@gmail.com
The Universe is FAR FAR more complex than the I-Pad with well over
150 very narrowly precise Physics Constants all working together and
some have a critical tolerance to the 120th decimal place precision
otherwise we arent here...
But for different physical constants, possibly someone/something else
would be here claiming the same sort of thing.
raven1
2010-01-29 20:54:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by i***@gmail.com
I just watched the presentation of the new iPad. Im not  buff by any
stretch of the imagination, but having bought one of the first 512k
Macs, I was 'blown away' with the incredible advancement of
technology.
I had an amusing thought during the presentation, that somebody in the
audience leaped to their feet, to ask the presenter "did this gizmo
create itself" ? There no doubt, would have been laughter, as in the
audience were many of the geniuses who developed it.
The follow up question would have been "then do some of you still
think those that created it just 'happened'?
Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some validity to
suit the times they appeared,often for the need for control , and are
totally redundant, and Im not suggesting that any of them come even
close to the truth, but to actually believe that we came about as just
an accumulation of happenstances has got to be  the most ludicrous
idea imaginable, and those that do believe that, are hardly different
from the virgin birth Adam and Eve believers.
BOfL
The Universe is FAR FAR more complex than the I-Pad with well over
150 very narrowly precise Physics Constants all working together and
some have a critical tolerance to the 120th decimal place precision
Bullshit. You keep making this idiotic claim, but have never offered
anything to support it, despite repeated requests.

Put up or shut up, you dishonest twat.
b***@gmail.com
2010-01-30 03:36:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by raven1
I just watched the presentation of the new iPad. Im not  buff by any
stretch of the imagination, but having bought one of the first 512k
Macs, I was 'blown away' with the incredible advancement of
technology.
I had an amusing thought during the presentation, that somebody in the
audience leaped to their feet, to ask the presenter "did this gizmo
create itself" ? There no doubt, would have been laughter, as in the
audience were many of the geniuses who developed it.
The follow up question would have been "then do some of you still
think those that created it just 'happened'?
Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some validity to
suit the times they appeared,often for the need for control , and are
totally redundant, and Im not suggesting that any of them come even
close to the truth, but to actually believe that we came about as just
an accumulation of happenstances has got to be  the most ludicrous
idea imaginable, and those that do believe that, are hardly different
from the virgin birth Adam and Eve believers.
BOfL
The Universe is FAR FAR more complex than the I-Pad  with well over
150 very narrowly precise Physics Constants all working together and
some have a critical tolerance to the 120th decimal place precision
Bullshit. You keep making this idiotic claim, but have never offered
anything to support it, despite repeated requests.
Put up or shut up, you dishonest twat.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
And what evidence would convince you?

BOfL
Smiler
2010-01-30 04:24:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@gmail.com
Post by raven1
I just watched the presentation of the new iPad. Im not buff by any
stretch of the imagination, but having bought one of the first 512k
Macs, I was 'blown away' with the incredible advancement of
technology.
I had an amusing thought during the presentation, that somebody in
the audience leaped to their feet, to ask the presenter "did this
gizmo create itself" ? There no doubt, would have been laughter,
as in the audience were many of the geniuses who developed it.
The follow up question would have been "then do some of you still
think those that created it just 'happened'?
Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some validity to
suit the times they appeared,often for the need for control , and
are totally redundant, and Im not suggesting that any of them come
even close to the truth, but to actually believe that we came
about as just an accumulation of happenstances has got to be the
most ludicrous idea imaginable, and those that do believe that,
are hardly different from the virgin birth Adam and Eve believers.
BOfL
The Universe is FAR FAR more complex than the I-Pad with well over
150 very narrowly precise Physics Constants all working together and
some have a critical tolerance to the 120th decimal place precision
Bullshit. You keep making this idiotic claim, but have never offered
anything to support it, despite repeated requests.
Put up or shut up, you dishonest twat.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
And what evidence would convince you?
For a start, a list of those supposed '150 very narrowly precise Physics
Constants."
He used to claim 250. I wonder what happened to the other 100?
He never has told us what they supposedly are, despite being asked many
times.
--
Smiler
The godless one
a.a.# 2279
All gods are bespoke. They're all made to
perfectly fit the prejudices of their believer
b***@gmail.com
2010-01-30 12:45:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Smiler
Post by b***@gmail.com
Post by raven1
I just watched the presentation of the new iPad. Im not buff by any
stretch of the imagination, but having bought one of the first 512k
Macs, I was 'blown away' with the incredible advancement of
technology.
I had an amusing thought during the presentation, that somebody in
the audience leaped to their feet, to ask the presenter "did this
gizmo create itself" ? There no doubt, would have been laughter,
as in the audience were many of the geniuses who developed it.
The follow up question would have been "then do some of you still
think those that created it just 'happened'?
Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some validity to
suit the times they appeared,often for the need for control , and
are totally redundant, and Im not suggesting that any of them come
even close to the truth, but to actually believe that we came
about as just an accumulation of happenstances has got to be the
most ludicrous idea imaginable, and those that do believe that,
are hardly different from the virgin birth Adam and Eve believers.
BOfL
The Universe is FAR FAR more complex than the I-Pad with well over
150 very narrowly precise Physics Constants all working together and
some have a critical tolerance to the 120th decimal place precision
Bullshit. You keep making this idiotic claim, but have never offered
anything to support it, despite repeated requests.
Put up or shut up, you dishonest twat.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
And what evidence would convince you?
For a start, a list of those supposed '150 very narrowly precise Physics
Constants."
He used to claim 250. I wonder what happened to the other 100?
He never has told us what they supposedly are, despite being asked many
times.
--
Smiler
The godless one
a.a.# 2279
All gods are bespoke. They're all made to
perfectly fit the prejudices of their believer- Hide quoted text -
Would that cure you of the need to call people who have different
pov's than you 'dishonest twats'? What comes from within you is part
of your current position.

In other words, statements like yours speak volumes (to you if you
listen) of where you are in the scheme of things.

Selff dialouge is the only pure communication, not abberated by others
perceptions.

BOfL
raven1
2010-01-30 18:49:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@gmail.com
Post by Smiler
Post by b***@gmail.com
Post by raven1
I just watched the presentation of the new iPad. Im not buff by any
stretch of the imagination, but having bought one of the first 512k
Macs, I was 'blown away' with the incredible advancement of
technology.
I had an amusing thought during the presentation, that somebody in
the audience leaped to their feet, to ask the presenter "did this
gizmo create itself" ? There no doubt, would have been laughter,
as in the audience were many of the geniuses who developed it.
The follow up question would have been "then do some of you still
think those that created it just 'happened'?
Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some validity to
suit the times they appeared,often for the need for control , and
are totally redundant, and Im not suggesting that any of them come
even close to the truth, but to actually believe that we came
about as just an accumulation of happenstances has got to be the
most ludicrous idea imaginable, and those that do believe that,
are hardly different from the virgin birth Adam and Eve believers.
BOfL
The Universe is FAR FAR more complex than the I-Pad with well over
150 very narrowly precise Physics Constants all working together and
some have a critical tolerance to the 120th decimal place precision
Bullshit. You keep making this idiotic claim, but have never offered
anything to support it, despite repeated requests.
Put up or shut up, you dishonest twat.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
And what evidence would convince you?
For a start, a list of those supposed '150 very narrowly precise Physics
Constants."
He used to claim 250. I wonder what happened to the other 100?
He never has told us what they supposedly are, despite being asked many
times.
--
Smiler
The godless one
a.a.# 2279
All gods are bespoke. They're all made to
perfectly fit the prejudices of their believer- Hide quoted text -
Would that cure you of the need to call people who have different
pov's than you 'dishonest twats'?
This is not about the fact that out pov's differ. This is about the
fact that IlBeBauck is, in fact, a dishonest twat, who insists on
parroting claims cribbed from Creationist websites, that he not only
cannot support, but does not even understand.
Ken
2010-02-02 03:28:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by raven1
This is not about the fact that out pov's differ. This is about the
fact thatIlBeBauckis, in fact, a dishonest twat, who insists on
parroting claims cribbed from Creationist websites, that he not only
cannot support, but does not even understand.
Or the fact that Dave (aka Ilbebauck, Itisdave, DILV, and dozen's of
other nics) is a Fundy Asstroll
Smiler
2010-01-31 00:21:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@gmail.com
Post by Smiler
Post by b***@gmail.com
Post by raven1
I just watched the presentation of the new iPad. Im not buff by
any stretch of the imagination, but having bought one of the
first 512k Macs, I was 'blown away' with the incredible
advancement of technology.
I had an amusing thought during the presentation, that somebody
in the audience leaped to their feet, to ask the presenter "did
this gizmo create itself" ? There no doubt, would have been
laughter, as in the audience were many of the geniuses who
developed it.
The follow up question would have been "then do some of you still
think those that created it just 'happened'?
Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some validity
to suit the times they appeared,often for the need for control ,
and are totally redundant, and Im not suggesting that any of
them come even close to the truth, but to actually believe that
we came about as just an accumulation of happenstances has got
to be the most ludicrous idea imaginable, and those that do
believe that, are hardly different from the virgin birth Adam
and Eve believers.
BOfL
The Universe is FAR FAR more complex than the I-Pad with well over
150 very narrowly precise Physics Constants all working together
and some have a critical tolerance to the 120th decimal place
precision
Bullshit. You keep making this idiotic claim, but have never
offered anything to support it, despite repeated requests.
Put up or shut up, you dishonest twat.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
And what evidence would convince you?
For a start, a list of those supposed '150 very narrowly precise
Physics Constants."
He used to claim 250. I wonder what happened to the other 100?
He never has told us what they supposedly are, despite being asked
many times.
--
Smiler
The godless one
a.a.# 2279
All gods are bespoke. They're all made to
perfectly fit the prejudices of their believer- Hide quoted text -
Would that cure you of the need to call people who have different
pov's than you 'dishonest twats'?
Where did I call him that?
Check the attributions, moron.
--
Smiler
The godless one
a.a.# 2279
All gods are bespoke. They're all made to
perfectly fit the prejudices of their believer
raven1
2010-01-30 18:47:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@gmail.com
Post by raven1
I just watched the presentation of the new iPad. Im not  buff by any
stretch of the imagination, but having bought one of the first 512k
Macs, I was 'blown away' with the incredible advancement of
technology.
I had an amusing thought during the presentation, that somebody in the
audience leaped to their feet, to ask the presenter "did this gizmo
create itself" ? There no doubt, would have been laughter, as in the
audience were many of the geniuses who developed it.
The follow up question would have been "then do some of you still
think those that created it just 'happened'?
Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some validity to
suit the times they appeared,often for the need for control , and are
totally redundant, and Im not suggesting that any of them come even
close to the truth, but to actually believe that we came about as just
an accumulation of happenstances has got to be  the most ludicrous
idea imaginable, and those that do believe that, are hardly different
from the virgin birth Adam and Eve believers.
BOfL
The Universe is FAR FAR more complex than the I-Pad  with well over
150 very narrowly precise Physics Constants all working together and
some have a critical tolerance to the 120th decimal place precision
Bullshit. You keep making this idiotic claim, but have never offered
anything to support it, despite repeated requests.
Put up or shut up, you dishonest twat.
And what evidence would convince you?
A list of the specific "150 very narrowly precise Physics Constants
all working together and some have a critical tolerance to the 120th
decimal place precision" that he's claiming. Very simple, actually.
Virgil
2010-01-30 20:37:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by raven1
Post by b***@gmail.com
Post by raven1
I just watched the presentation of the new iPad. Im not  buff by any
stretch of the imagination, but having bought one of the first 512k
Macs, I was 'blown away' with the incredible advancement of
technology.
I had an amusing thought during the presentation, that somebody in the
audience leaped to their feet, to ask the presenter "did this gizmo
create itself" ? There no doubt, would have been laughter, as in the
audience were many of the geniuses who developed it.
The follow up question would have been "then do some of you still
think those that created it just 'happened'?
Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some validity to
suit the times they appeared,often for the need for control , and are
totally redundant, and Im not suggesting that any of them come even
close to the truth, but to actually believe that we came about as just
an accumulation of happenstances has got to be  the most ludicrous
idea imaginable, and those that do believe that, are hardly different
from the virgin birth Adam and Eve believers.
BOfL
The Universe is FAR FAR more complex than the I-Pad  with well over
150 very narrowly precise Physics Constants all working together and
some have a critical tolerance to the 120th decimal place precision
Bullshit. You keep making this idiotic claim, but have never offered
anything to support it, despite repeated requests.
Put up or shut up, you dishonest twat.
And what evidence would convince you?
A list of the specific "150 very narrowly precise Physics Constants
all working together and some have a critical tolerance to the 120th
decimal place precision" that he's claiming. Very simple, actually.
I do not even believe that any actually PHYSICAL constants (pi and e are
constants but not physical ones) are actually KNOWN to 120 significant
digit decimal precision, certainly no 150 independent ones are known so
accurately .
b***@gmail.com
2010-01-30 03:20:55 UTC
Permalink
I just watched the presentation of the new iPad. Im not  buff by any
stretch of the imagination, but having bought one of the first 512k
Macs, I was 'blown away' with the incredible advancement of
technology.
I had an amusing thought during the presentation, that somebody in the
audience leaped to their feet, to ask the presenter "did this gizmo
create itself" ? There no doubt, would have been laughter, as in the
audience were many of the geniuses who developed it.
The follow up question would have been "then do some of you still
think those that created it just 'happened'?
Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some validity to
suit the times they appeared,often for the need for control , and are
totally redundant, and Im not suggesting that any of them come even
close to the truth, but to actually believe that we came about as just
an accumulation of happenstances has got to be  the most ludicrous
idea imaginable, and those that do believe that, are hardly different
from the virgin birth Adam and Eve believers.
BOfL
The Universe is FAR FAR more complex than the I-Pad  with well over
150 very narrowly precise Physics Constants all working together and
some have a critical tolerance to the 120th decimal place precision
otherwise we arent here... but the I-Pad was created by intelligence
and the Universe 'just happened' and was uncaused .  Why ?  Because it
MUST BE THAT WAY , so willful unbelievers can live anyway they deem
fit and so they are not owned by anyone higher than Self.   Its in
keeping with Maslows Higher Hierarchial Chart with doing whatever you
feel like doing at the top of the pyramid chart .  A personal Creator
must be refused under all circumstances so its not a fly in the
ointment to ones lifestyle choices.  Ergo,  the charade must go
on....  (Been there done that for a good 10  years as 'an atheist') .- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
'Unbelievers' is an oxymoron. Belifes are beliefs.There is no
difference between 'believing it does and believing it doesnt',
whatever 'it' you are referring to.

Sometimes old religious quotes are validated by scientific discovery,
the best example being 'every action has an equal opposite rection'
and 'as ye sow, also shal ye reap'. All part of the 'intelligent
universe', so with choice comes consequence.One at a 'mechanical'
level, one, a conscious level. How else could one gain wisdom?
Lifestyle choices are usually in inverse proportion to religious
domination.Priests have always been threatened by the Galilao's of
this world.

If you create something, is that no personal?

BOfL
Smiler
2010-01-30 04:42:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@gmail.com
I just watched the presentation of the new iPad. Im not buff by any
stretch of the imagination, but having bought one of the first 512k
Macs, I was 'blown away' with the incredible advancement of
technology.
I had an amusing thought during the presentation, that somebody in
the audience leaped to their feet, to ask the presenter "did this
gizmo create itself" ? There no doubt, would have been laughter, as
in the audience were many of the geniuses who developed it.
The follow up question would have been "then do some of you still
think those that created it just 'happened'?
Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some validity to
suit the times they appeared,often for the need for control , and
are totally redundant, and Im not suggesting that any of them come
even close to the truth, but to actually believe that we came about
as just an accumulation of happenstances has got to be the most
ludicrous idea imaginable, and those that do believe that, are
hardly different from the virgin birth Adam and Eve believers.
BOfL
The Universe is FAR FAR more complex than the I-Pad with well over
150 very narrowly precise Physics Constants all working together and
some have a critical tolerance to the 120th decimal place precision
otherwise we arent here... but the I-Pad was created by intelligence
and the Universe 'just happened' and was uncaused . Why ? Because it
MUST BE THAT WAY , so willful unbelievers can live anyway they deem
fit and so they are not owned by anyone higher than Self. Its in
keeping with Maslows Higher Hierarchial Chart with doing whatever you
feel like doing at the top of the pyramid chart . A personal Creator
must be refused under all circumstances so its not a fly in the
ointment to ones lifestyle choices. Ergo, the charade must go
on.... (Been there done that for a good 10 years as 'an atheist') .-
Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
'Unbelievers' is an oxymoron. Belifes are beliefs.There is no
difference between 'believing it does and believing it doesnt',
whatever 'it' you are referring to.
Sometimes old religious quotes are validated by scientific discovery,
the best example being 'every action has an equal opposite rection'
What's a rection? The precursor of the E-rection, as the book is the
precursor of the E-book and the mail is the precursor of the E-mail?
Those IT guys are sure clever......
Hey! You guys at Apple. How about an iProd?
Post by b***@gmail.com
and 'as ye sow, also shal ye reap'.
Nope. Otherwise 'As ye reap, also shall you sow' would also be true.
Post by b***@gmail.com
All part of the 'intelligent
universe',
What 'intelligent universe'? Where is this intelligence you imagine?
Is that like the 'intelligent earth' that kills people with earthquakes,
tsunamis and volcanoes?
Post by b***@gmail.com
so with choice comes consequence.One at a 'mechanical'
level, one, a conscious level. How else could one gain wisdom?
Try learning to think for yourself instead of taking things as 'gospel' from
'holy' books.
Post by b***@gmail.com
Lifestyle choices are usually in inverse proportion to religious
domination.Priests have always been threatened by the Galilao's of
this world.
If you create something, is that no personal?
Would Sir like some dressing on that word salad?
--
Smiler
The godless one
a.a.# 2279
All gods are bespoke. They're all made to
perfectly fit the prejudices of their believer
b***@gmail.com
2010-01-30 13:01:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Smiler
I just watched the presentation of the new iPad. Im not buff by any
stretch of the imagination, but having bought one of the first 512k
Macs, I was 'blown away' with the incredible advancement of
technology.
I had an amusing thought during the presentation, that somebody in
the audience leaped to their feet, to ask the presenter "did this
gizmo create itself" ? There no doubt, would have been laughter, as
in the audience were many of the geniuses who developed it.
The follow up question would have been "then do some of you still
think those that created it just 'happened'?
Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some validity to
suit the times they appeared,often for the need for control , and
are totally redundant, and Im not suggesting that any of them come
even close to the truth, but to actually believe that we came about
as just an accumulation of happenstances has got to be the most
ludicrous idea imaginable, and those that do believe that, are
hardly different from the virgin birth Adam and Eve believers.
BOfL
The Universe is FAR FAR more complex than the I-Pad with well over
150 very narrowly precise Physics Constants all working together and
some have a critical tolerance to the 120th decimal place precision
otherwise we arent here... but the I-Pad was created by intelligence
and the Universe 'just happened' and was uncaused . Why ? Because it
MUST BE THAT WAY , so willful unbelievers can live anyway they deem
fit and so they are not owned by anyone higher than Self. Its in
keeping with Maslows Higher Hierarchial Chart with doing whatever you
feel like doing at the top of the pyramid chart . A personal Creator
must be refused under all circumstances so its not a fly in the
ointment to ones lifestyle choices. Ergo, the charade must go
on.... (Been there done that for a good 10 years as 'an atheist') .-
Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
 'Unbelievers' is an oxymoron. Belifes are beliefs.There is no
difference between 'believing it does and believing it doesnt',
whatever 'it' you are referring to.
Sometimes old religious quotes are validated by scientific discovery,
the best example being 'every action has an equal opposite rection'
What's a rection?
These ng's are full of them. often straw man, insulting and self
derogatory in nature.
Post by Smiler
The precursor of the E-rection, as the book is the
precursor of the E-book and the mail is the precursor of the E-mail?
Those IT guys are sure clever......
Hey! You guys at Apple. How about an iProd?
and 'as ye sow, also shal ye reap'.
Nope. Otherwise 'As ye reap, also shall you sow' would also be true.
It is. Never seen someone 'going around in circles"?
Post by Smiler
All part of the 'intelligent
universe',
What 'intelligent universe'? Where is this intelligence you imagine?
Is that like the 'intelligent earth' that kills people with earthquakes,
tsunamis and volcanoes?
So you think it should be a place without death? Not very intelligent.
Post by Smiler
so with choice comes consequence.One at a 'mechanical'
level, one, a conscious level. How else could one gain wisdom?
Try learning to think for yourself instead of taking things as 'gospel' from
'holy' books.
I write, I dont read. You are getting you image of me mixed up with
your image of yourself. Note. I wrote that, didnt read it.
Post by Smiler
Lifestyle choices are usually in inverse proportion to religious
domination.Priests have always been threatened by the Galilao's of
this world.
If you create something, is that no personal?
Would Sir like some dressing on that word salad?
Is that the limit of your capacity? Then I will withdraw.

Nothing personal.

BOfL
Smiler
2010-01-31 00:28:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@gmail.com
Post by Smiler
Post by b***@gmail.com
I just watched the presentation of the new iPad. Im not buff by
any stretch of the imagination, but having bought one of the
first 512k Macs, I was 'blown away' with the incredible
advancement of technology.
I had an amusing thought during the presentation, that somebody in
the audience leaped to their feet, to ask the presenter "did this
gizmo create itself" ? There no doubt, would have been laughter,
as in the audience were many of the geniuses who developed it.
The follow up question would have been "then do some of you still
think those that created it just 'happened'?
Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some validity
to suit the times they appeared,often for the need for control ,
and are totally redundant, and Im not suggesting that any of them
come even close to the truth, but to actually believe that we
came about as just an accumulation of happenstances has got to be
the most ludicrous idea imaginable, and those that do believe
that, are hardly different from the virgin birth Adam and Eve
believers.
BOfL
The Universe is FAR FAR more complex than the I-Pad with well over
150 very narrowly precise Physics Constants all working together
and some have a critical tolerance to the 120th decimal place
precision otherwise we arent here... but the I-Pad was created by
intelligence and the Universe 'just happened' and was uncaused .
Why ? Because it MUST BE THAT WAY , so willful unbelievers can
live anyway they deem fit and so they are not owned by anyone
higher than Self. Its in keeping with Maslows Higher Hierarchial
Chart with doing whatever you feel like doing at the top of the
pyramid chart . A personal Creator must be refused under all
circumstances so its not a fly in the ointment to ones lifestyle
choices. Ergo, the charade must go
on.... (Been there done that for a good 10 years as 'an atheist')
.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
'Unbelievers' is an oxymoron. Belifes are beliefs.There is no
difference between 'believing it does and believing it doesnt',
whatever 'it' you are referring to.
Sometimes old religious quotes are validated by scientific
discovery, the best example being 'every action has an equal
opposite rection'
What's a rection?
These ng's are full of them. often straw man, insulting and self
derogatory in nature.
Post by Smiler
The precursor of the E-rection, as the book is the
precursor of the E-book and the mail is the precursor of the E-mail?
Those IT guys are sure clever......
Hey! You guys at Apple. How about an iProd?
Post by b***@gmail.com
and 'as ye sow, also shal ye reap'.
Nope. Otherwise 'As ye reap, also shall you sow' would also be true.
It is. Never seen someone 'going around in circles"?
As you appear to be doing.
Post by b***@gmail.com
Post by Smiler
Post by b***@gmail.com
All part of the 'intelligent
universe',
What 'intelligent universe'? Where is this intelligence you imagine?
Is that like the 'intelligent earth' that kills people with
earthquakes, tsunamis and volcanoes?
So you think it should be a place without death? Not very intelligent.
Please show where I said that.
Are you a mindreader that knows what I'm thinking?
Where did you get your mindreading qualifications from?
Post by b***@gmail.com
Post by Smiler
Post by b***@gmail.com
so with choice comes consequence.One at a 'mechanical'
level, one, a conscious level. How else could one gain wisdom?
Try learning to think for yourself instead of taking things as
'gospel' from 'holy' books.
I write, I dont read.
That's abundantly obvious from your posts.
Post by b***@gmail.com
You are getting you image of me mixed up with
your image of yourself. Note. I wrote that, didnt read it.
You should try reading sometime. You might learn something.
Post by b***@gmail.com
Post by Smiler
Post by b***@gmail.com
Lifestyle choices are usually in inverse proportion to religious
domination.Priests have always been threatened by the Galilao's of
this world.
If you create something, is that no personal?
Would Sir like some dressing on that word salad?
Is that the limit of your capacity? Then I will withdraw.
Nothing personal.
BOfL
--
Smiler
The godless one
a.a.# 2279
All gods are bespoke. They're all made to
perfectly fit the prejudices of their believer
Yap
2010-01-30 04:58:15 UTC
Permalink
I just watched the presentation of the new iPad. Im not  buff by any
stretch of the imagination, but having bought one of the first 512k
Macs, I was 'blown away' with the incredible advancement of
technology.
I had an amusing thought during the presentation, that somebody in the
audience leaped to their feet, to ask the presenter "did this gizmo
create itself" ? There no doubt, would have been laughter, as in the
audience were many of the geniuses who developed it.
The follow up question would have been "then do some of you still
think those that created it just 'happened'?
Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some validity to
suit the times they appeared,often for the need for control , and are
totally redundant, and Im not suggesting that any of them come even
close to the truth, but to actually believe that we came about as just
an accumulation of happenstances has got to be  the most ludicrous
idea imaginable, and those that do believe that, are hardly different
from the virgin birth Adam and Eve believers.
BOfL
The Universe is FAR FAR more complex than the I-Pad  with well over
150 very narrowly precise Physics Constants all working together and
some have a critical tolerance to the 120th decimal place precision
otherwise we arent here... but the I-Pad was created by intelligence
and the Universe 'just happened' and was uncaused .  Why ?  Because it
MUST BE THAT WAY , so willful unbelievers can live anyway they deem
fit and so they are not owned by anyone higher than Self.   Its in
keeping with Maslows Higher Hierarchial Chart with doing whatever you
feel like doing at the top of the pyramid chart .  A personal Creator
must be refused under all circumstances so its not a fly in the
ointment to ones lifestyle choices.  Ergo,  the charade must go
on....  (Been there done that for a good 10  years as 'an atheist') .
Oh, you mean such as complexity requires a god?
Equipped with the capabilities to create this universe, your god
showed no capability to deal with the quake in Haiti, what happened?
Ken
2010-01-30 05:11:07 UTC
Permalink
Dickhead Dave saz: Did you know that radiocarbon dating may
offer supporting evidence for Noah's Flood?
Dimwit dave Saz: "However, THIS one is Creationists can certainly
prove an intelligent Designer/Creator for the Cosmos"
Dumbfuck Dave saz: "If you cant see the vast evidences for special
Creation..." there is good evidence that the leviathan described in
the book of
Job was a large dinosaur.


What "supporting evidence", what "proof", what "vast evidences"?
Come on
Show us, Ya Fundy Fuckwadd
SkyEyes
2010-01-29 20:17:42 UTC
Permalink
On Jan 29, 10:03 am, "***@gmail.com" <***@gmail.com>
wrote:

<Snippage>
Post by b***@gmail.com
Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some validity to
suit the times they appeared,often for the need for control , and are
totally redundant, and Im not suggesting that any of them come even
close to the truth, but to actually believe that we came about as just
an accumulation of happenstances has got to be  the most ludicrous
idea imaginable,
Only for those arrogant enough to think that life and humans in
general, and themselves in particular, are somehow "important" to the
universe.

I am perfectly comfortable with the knowledge that life/humans/me is
the product of undesigned natural processes; I have no trouble
envisioning such a process. If you get heartburn, then that's a
personal problem.

Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34
BAAWA Knight
EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
skyeyes nine at cox dot net
b***@gmail.com
2010-01-30 03:32:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by SkyEyes
<Snippage>
Post by b***@gmail.com
Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some validity to
suit the times they appeared,often for the need for control , and are
totally redundant, and Im not suggesting that any of them come even
close to the truth, but to actually believe that we came about as just
an accumulation of happenstances has got to be  the most ludicrous
idea imaginable,
Only for those arrogant enough to think that life and humans in
general, and themselves in particular, are somehow "important" to the
universe.
If you take the material interpretation of the universe, you are
perfectly correct. A rock has no concern with you, or if it gets
smashed up.

Life is a whole different matter (no matter).
Post by SkyEyes
I am perfectly comfortable with the knowledge that life/humans/me is
the product of undesigned natural processes; I have no trouble
envisioning such a process.  If you get heartburn, then that's a
personal problem.
Why? The universe doesnt care, and you are just so much vibrating
energy, in the form of particles.

Psychologists may say 'the heartburn is all in your mind', and they
would be right. It started with your mentel choice (albeit unconscious
of the outcome) to eat badly and as a consequence become unwell. It is
amazing how such experiences can stir up the 'inner creator' in people
and bring forth 'life force'.You can also switch off from the
symptoms...and the situation will become progressively more
challenging. Thats the working of intelligence, either applied or
unapplied.

BOfL
SkyEyes
2010-02-03 00:50:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@gmail.com
Post by SkyEyes
<Snippage>
Post by b***@gmail.com
Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some validity to
suit the times they appeared,often for the need for control , and are
totally redundant, and Im not suggesting that any of them come even
close to the truth, but to actually believe that we came about as just
an accumulation of happenstances has got to be  the most ludicrous
idea imaginable,
Only for those arrogant enough to think that life and humans in
general, and themselves in particular, are somehow "important" to the
universe.
If you take the material interpretation of the universe, you are
perfectly correct. A rock has no concern with you, or if it gets
smashed up.
Life is a whole different matter (no matter).
Post by SkyEyes
I am perfectly comfortable with the knowledge that life/humans/me is
the product of undesigned natural processes; I have no trouble
envisioning such a process.  If you get heartburn, then that's a
personal problem.
Why? The universe doesnt care, and you are just so much vibrating
energy, in the form of particles.
Psychologists may say 'the heartburn is all in your mind', and they
would be right. It started with your mentel choice (albeit unconscious
of the outcome) to eat badly and as a consequence become unwell. It is
amazing how such experiences can stir up the 'inner creator' in people
and bring forth 'life force'.You can also switch off from the
symptoms...and the situation will become progressively more
challenging. Thats the working of intelligence, either applied or
unapplied.
Er, I don't know how to tell you this, but I was using "heartburn" as
a *metaphor*. That is to say, if *you* are upset ["get heartburn"] by
the knowledge that you are the product of natural processes and not
the "point" of creation, then you've got a personal problem.

Good grief.

Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34
BAAWA Knight
EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
skyeyes nine at cox dot net
huge
2010-02-03 00:57:17 UTC
Permalink
SkyEyes :

<snippé> (French snip)
Post by b***@gmail.com
Psychologists may say 'the heartburn is all in your mind', and they
would be right. It started with your mentel choice (albeit unconscious
of the outcome) to eat badly and as a consequence become unwell. It is
amazing how such experiences can stir up the 'inner creator' in people
and bring forth 'life force'.You can also switch off from the
symptoms...and the situation will become progressively more
challenging. Thats the working of intelligence, either applied or
unapplied.
Er, I don't know how to tell you this, but I was using "heartburn" as a
*metaphor*. That is to say, if *you* are upset ["get heartburn"] by the
knowledge that you are the product of natural processes and not the
"point" of creation, then you've got a personal problem.
Good grief.
Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34
BAAWA Knight
EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding skyeyes nine at
cox dot net
It's a big night for literalism. I have Andrew on another
sub-thread claiming not to know what Xianity is.
--
huge: Not on my time you don't.
Virgil
2010-02-03 06:02:21 UTC
Permalink
<snippé> (French snip)
Post by b***@gmail.com
Psychologists may say 'the heartburn is all in your mind', and they
would be right. It started with your mentel choice (albeit unconscious
of the outcome) to eat badly and as a consequence become unwell. It is
amazing how such experiences can stir up the 'inner creator' in people
and bring forth 'life force'.You can also switch off from the
symptoms...and the situation will become progressively more
challenging. Thats the working of intelligence, either applied or
unapplied.
Er, I don't know how to tell you this, but I was using "heartburn" as a
*metaphor*. That is to say, if *you* are upset ["get heartburn"] by the
knowledge that you are the product of natural processes and not the
"point" of creation, then you've got a personal problem.
Good grief.
Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34
BAAWA Knight
EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding skyeyes nine at
cox dot net
It's a big night for literalism. I have Andrew on another
sub-thread claiming not to know what Xianity is.
There are so many pecculiar varieties of Xtianity that nobody knows them
all.

haiku jones
2010-01-29 20:47:38 UTC
Permalink
I just watched the presentation of the new iPad. Im not  buff by any
stretch of the imagination, but having bought one of the first 512k
Macs, I was 'blown away' with the incredible advancement of
technology.
I had an amusing thought during the presentation, that somebody in the
audience leaped to their feet, to ask the presenter "did this gizmo
create itself" ? There no doubt, would have been laughter, as in the
audience were many of the geniuses who developed it.
The follow up question would have been "then do some of you still
think those that created it just 'happened'?
Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some validity to
suit the times they appeared,often for the need for control , and are
totally redundant, and Im not suggesting that any of them come even
close to the truth, but to actually believe that we came about as just
an accumulation of happenstances has got to be  the most ludicrous
idea imaginable,
Well, how about an accumulation of a billion billion happenstances,
where the useful ones are kept and the others thrown out?
Are you more comfortable with that?


Haiku Jones
and those that do believe that, are hardly different
from the virgin birth Adam and Eve believers.
BOfL
b***@gmail.com
2010-01-30 03:35:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by haiku jones
I just watched the presentation of the new iPad. Im not  buff by any
stretch of the imagination, but having bought one of the first 512k
Macs, I was 'blown away' with the incredible advancement of
technology.
I had an amusing thought during the presentation, that somebody in the
audience leaped to their feet, to ask the presenter "did this gizmo
create itself" ? There no doubt, would have been laughter, as in the
audience were many of the geniuses who developed it.
The follow up question would have been "then do some of you still
think those that created it just 'happened'?
Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some validity to
suit the times they appeared,often for the need for control , and are
totally redundant, and Im not suggesting that any of them come even
close to the truth, but to actually believe that we came about as just
an accumulation of happenstances has got to be  the most ludicrous
idea imaginable,
Well, how about an accumulation of a billion billion happenstances,
where the useful ones are kept and the others thrown out?
You are inferring 'they either throw themselves out or keep themselves
in'.

No concerrn for the laws of presevation of matter?
Post by haiku jones
Are you more comfortable with that?
Haiku Jones
Am am extremely comfortable. And you ?

BOfL
haiku jones
2010-02-02 22:19:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@gmail.com
Post by haiku jones
I just watched the presentation of the new iPad. Im not  buff by any
stretch of the imagination, but having bought one of the first 512k
Macs, I was 'blown away' with the incredible advancement of
technology.
I had an amusing thought during the presentation, that somebody in the
audience leaped to their feet, to ask the presenter "did this gizmo
create itself" ? There no doubt, would have been laughter, as in the
audience were many of the geniuses who developed it.
The follow up question would have been "then do some of you still
think those that created it just 'happened'?
Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some validity to
suit the times they appeared,often for the need for control , and are
totally redundant, and Im not suggesting that any of them come even
close to the truth, but to actually believe that we came about as just
an accumulation of happenstances has got to be  the most ludicrous
idea imaginable,
Well, how about an accumulation of a billion billion happenstances,
where the useful ones are kept and the others thrown out?
You are inferring 'they either throw themselves out or keep themselves
in'.
Actually, I am implying that the negative mutations
"throw themselves out" by dying off and leaving
no offspring.
Post by b***@gmail.com
No concerrn for the laws of presevation of matter?
Dying is not a violation of the (incomplete) law
of conservation of matter.


Haiku Jones
Post by b***@gmail.com
Post by haiku jones
Are you more comfortable with that?
Haiku Jones
Am am extremely comfortable. And you ?
BOfL
THE BORG
2010-01-29 21:44:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@gmail.com
I just watched the presentation of the new iPad. Im not
buff by any
stretch of the imagination, but having bought one of the
first 512k
Macs, I was 'blown away' with the incredible advancement
of
technology.
I had an amusing thought during the presentation, that
somebody in the
audience leaped to their feet, to ask the presenter "did
this gizmo
create itself" ? There no doubt, would have been laughter,
as in the
audience were many of the geniuses who developed it.
The follow up question would have been "then do some of
you still
think those that created it just 'happened'?
Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some
validity to
suit the times they appeared,often for the need for
control , and are
totally redundant, and Im not suggesting that any of them
come even
close to the truth, but to actually believe that we came
about as just
an accumulation of happenstances has got to be the most
ludicrous
idea imaginable, and those that do believe that, are
hardly different
from the virgin birth Adam and Eve believers.
BOfL
The concept that life has always existed in some form, that
there was never a beginning is hard to understand but the
idea of "beginning" stories are for those who cannot
conceive this as a possibility.
Life can exist in spiritual/pure intelligence form, without
the necessity for matter.
Think of dreams, there is no matter there, and yet worlds
and scenarios can occur.
If life has a "startpoint" thus it would be artificial life,
or "created" life. But real life can have no startpoint nor
endpoint.
The question is - are humanoids "real" life, or are they
created/artificial life.
If humans have a startpoint or endpoint, then they are
created or artificial life.
If they have no startpoint or endpoint, then they are "real"
life.
THE BORG
THE BORG
2010-01-29 21:54:58 UTC
Permalink
A further question is
"Are there more than one kind/type of humanoid?"

Those who consider death a finality with nothing beyond
would be artificial or created life, thus they would not be
"real" life, as it is not possible for "real" life to
conceive this notion; but those who KNOW they continue in
some way and who KNOW they existed prior to life on Earth,
these would be "real" life.
Question is, what kind of set up or game is this?
How many types or kinds of humanoids are there?
Are some ancestors of various Gods and Goddesses?
Does reincarnation dictate that there are different sources
where humanoids come from?

As various groups or types of humans are so different from
each other, then there must be different types of humanoids,
and also there must be different sources as to where
humanoids come from.

THE BORG
THE BORG
2010-01-29 22:01:55 UTC
Permalink
As regards "real" life who know they continue beyond the
grave, we do not mean this in a religious sense.
It is something you know without the requirement for any
religious teachings. You would know this, even as a small
child.

Those who believe they continue after the grave ONLY due to
religion, do not really count in this exercise, as even
artificial or created life could believe this.

For "real" life also is the awareness that you were
somewhere before the years on Earth.

"Real" life cannot conceive the notion of termination and
none existence, any who can conceive these notions are
therefore artificial or created life, and are not "real"
life.
So there are at least TWO kinds of humanoids.

But what does this prove?
Who organized this set up or game?
And what is the plot?
And when is the denouement?

THE BORG
WangoTango
2010-01-29 22:17:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by THE BORG
As regards "real" life who know they continue beyond the
grave, we do not mean this in a religious sense.
It is something you know without the requirement for any
religious teachings. You would know this, even as a small
child.
Well, there is that......crazy I mean......

Sometimes I just stand there wondering why the Frisbee is getting
bigger, and then it hits me.....
THE BORG
2010-01-29 22:18:13 UTC
Permalink
The setup of the various types of humanoids looks quite
diverse and interesting.

When reading some of the stories and history of Earth, then
maybe some of the taller, stronger, better looking males may
be descendants or even incarnations of various Gods.
Some of the thinner, more delicate, effeminate kind of males
may be descendants of Elves.
The computer nerds, or atheists who believe in termination
and cessation upon death, and obviously possess no basic
intelligence in their views, would be the artificial life or
created life.
But what about gay men? What would cause men to be gay?
Aliens? Angels?
Angels are viewed as all male and would never fornicate with
woman, this ties in with gay men and their feelings on
women. Are gay men Angels?
Why do some men sing and write beautiful music and songs,
whereas others produce complete crap?
Why are some men intelligent, eloquent and polite, whereas
others are thick, rude and stupid?
All humanoids cannot possible be the same type or species,
the differences are too great.

So what is the game?
What will be the outcome?
There is obviously some intelligent plan.
An intelligent design.

THE BORG
b***@gmail.com
2010-01-30 03:52:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by THE BORG
A further question is
"Are there more than one kind/type of humanoid?"
Those who consider death a finality with nothing beyond
would be artificial or created life, thus they would not be
"real" life,
Considering does not make it so.

There is nothin 'outside' real life.

Pythagoras said it plainly. Know the universe, and know thyself'


as it is not possible for "real" life to
Post by THE BORG
conceive this notion;  but those who KNOW they continue in
some way and who KNOW they existed prior to life on Earth,
these would be "real" life.
What you are describing here is the process of awakening of
consciousness (note the spelling)!
Post by THE BORG
Question is, what kind of set up or game is this?
What are the alternatives?
Post by THE BORG
How many types or kinds of humanoids are there?
How many billions of neurons in your brain? Does the answer help?
Post by THE BORG
Are some ancestors of various Gods and Goddesses?
Does reincarnation dictate that there are different sources
where humanoids come from?
Reincarnation is simply a biological process fascilitating the
spiritual growth in line with the individuals state of consciousness.

If he needs to learn about tollerence, he will have had to live
through both extremes, which is creted for 'himself' through the laws
of karma.

Those more aware of this, can realize such experiences this life, very
readily. instant karm being the modus operndi. similar minor
adjustment rockets to keep the space vehicle on course.
Post by THE BORG
As various groups or types of humans are so different from
each other, then there must be different types of humanoids,
and also there must be different sources as to where
humanoids come from.
The multi universes are materialised consciousness. Each 'individual'
unique, continually growing away from the 'collective consciousness'.

Bad news for the borg, but you will get over it.

BOfL



BOfL
Post by THE BORG
THE BORG
WangoTango
2010-01-29 22:15:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by THE BORG
Life can exist in spiritual/pure intelligence form, without
the necessity for matter.
Ah, my bullshit meter is pegged now!

I like it when people throw out a wild conjecture and blithely move on
as if their stating it makes it so.

How would one go about proving that such life is possible?
How would we look for and identify it?
b***@gmail.com
2010-01-30 12:24:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by WangoTango
Post by THE BORG
the necessity for matter.
Ah, my bullshit meter is pegged now!
I like it when people throw out a wild conjecture and blithely move on
as if their stating it makes it so.
How would one go about proving that such life is possible?
How would we look for and identify it?
What do you think you are doing now?

Ever tried to 'prove' a rose?

BOfL
Smiler
2010-01-31 00:34:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@gmail.com
says...> Life can exist in spiritual/pure intelligence form, without
Post by THE BORG
the necessity for matter.
Ah, my bullshit meter is pegged now!
I like it when people throw out a wild conjecture and blithely move on
as if their stating it makes it so.
How would one go about proving that such life is possible?
How would we look for and identify it?
What do you think you are doing now?
Ever tried to 'prove' a rose?
A rose is both existent and evident. I often see them in my travels. Try
looking in gardening books. They often have photographs of them.
There are no photographs of spiritual life forms, anywhere, except in your
deluded mind.
--
Smiler
The godless one
a.a.# 2279
All gods are bespoke. They're all made to
perfectly fit the prejudices of their believer
b***@gmail.com
2010-01-30 03:40:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by THE BORG
Post by b***@gmail.com
I just watched the presentation of the new iPad. Im not
buff by any
stretch of the imagination, but having bought one of the
first 512k
Macs, I was 'blown away' with the incredible advancement
of
technology.
I had an amusing thought during the presentation, that
somebody in the
audience leaped to their feet, to ask the presenter "did
this gizmo
create itself" ? There no doubt, would have been laughter,
as in the
audience were many of the geniuses who developed it.
The follow up question would have been "then do some of
you still
think those that created it just 'happened'?
Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some
validity to
suit the times they appeared,often for the need for
control , and are
totally redundant, and Im not suggesting that any of them
come even
close to the truth, but to actually believe that we came
about as just
an accumulation of happenstances has got to be  the most
ludicrous
idea imaginable, and those that do believe that, are
hardly different
from the virgin birth Adam and Eve believers.
BOfL
The concept that life has always existed in some form, that
there was never a beginning is hard to understand but the
idea of "beginning" stories are for those who cannot
conceive this as a possibility.
Life can exist in spiritual/pure intelligence form, without
the necessity for matter.
Think of dreams, there is no matter there, and yet worlds
and scenarios can occur.
If life has a "startpoint" thus it would be artificial life,
or "created" life.  But real life can have no startpoint nor
endpoint.
The question is - are humanoids "real" life, or are they
created/artificial life.
If humans have a startpoint or endpoint, then they are
created or artificial life.
If they have no startpoint or endpoint, then they are "real"
life.
THE BORG- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
There is no 'crated or artificial' life, just 'life creating', from
quarks to cosmos.

BOfL
L.Roberts
2010-01-29 22:09:44 UTC
Permalink
I just watched the presentation of the new iPad. Im not  buff by any
stretch of the imagination, but having bought one of the first 512k
Macs, I was 'blown away' with the incredible advancement of
technology.
I had an amusing thought during the presentation, that somebody in the
audience leaped to their feet, to ask the presenter "did this gizmo
create itself" ? There no doubt, would have been laughter, as in the
audience were many of the geniuses who developed it.
The follow up question would have been "then do some of you still
think those that created it just 'happened'?
Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some validity to
suit the times they appeared,often for the need for control , and are
totally redundant, and Im not suggesting that any of them come even
close to the truth, but to actually believe that we came about as just
an accumulation of happenstances has got to be  the most ludicrous
idea imaginable, and those that do believe that, are hardly different
from the virgin birth Adam and Eve believers.
BOfL
What is, a little amusing, is that you posted this.
b***@gmail.com
2010-01-30 03:54:24 UTC
Permalink
I just watched the presentation of the new iPad. Im not  buff by any
stretch of the imagination, but having bought one of the first 512k
Macs, I was 'blown away' with the incredible advancement of
technology.
I had an amusing thought during the presentation, that somebody in the
audience leaped to their feet, to ask the presenter "did this gizmo
create itself" ? There no doubt, would have been laughter, as in the
audience were many of the geniuses who developed it.
The follow up question would have been "then do some of you still
think those that created it just 'happened'?
Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some validity to
suit the times they appeared,often for the need for control , and are
totally redundant, and Im not suggesting that any of them come even
close to the truth, but to actually believe that we came about as just
an accumulation of happenstances has got to be  the most ludicrous
idea imaginable, and those that do believe that, are hardly different
from the virgin birth Adam and Eve believers.
BOfL
What is, a little amusing, is that you posted this.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
And look at all the pointless responses.

And your motivation to post your response?

BOfL
AndrewJH
2010-01-30 03:56:52 UTC
Permalink
I just watched the presentation of the new iPad. Im not  buff by any
stretch of the imagination, but having bought one of the first 512k
Macs, I was 'blown away' with the incredible advancement of
technology.
I had an amusing thought during the presentation, that somebody in the
audience leaped to their feet, to ask the presenter "did this gizmo
create itself" ? There no doubt, would have been laughter, as in the
audience were many of the geniuses who developed it.
The follow up question would have been "then do some of you still
think those that created it just 'happened'?
Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some validity to
suit the times they appeared,often for the need for control , and are
totally redundant, and Im not suggesting that any of them come even
close to the truth, but to actually believe that we came about as just
an accumulation of happenstances has got to be  the most ludicrous
idea imaginable, and those that do believe that, are hardly different
from the virgin birth Adam and Eve believers.
BOfL
Proof?
b***@gmail.com
2010-01-30 12:37:54 UTC
Permalink
I just watched the presentation of the new iPad. Im not  buff by any
stretch of the imagination, but having bought one of the first 512k
Macs, I was 'blown away' with the incredible advancement of
technology.
I had an amusing thought during the presentation, that somebody in the
audience leaped to their feet, to ask the presenter "did this gizmo
create itself" ? There no doubt, would have been laughter, as in the
audience were many of the geniuses who developed it.
The follow up question would have been "then do some of you still
think those that created it just 'happened'?
Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some validity to
suit the times they appeared,often for the need for control , and are
totally redundant, and Im not suggesting that any of them come even
close to the truth, but to actually believe that we came about as just
an accumulation of happenstances has got to be  the most ludicrous
idea imaginable, and those that do believe that, are hardly different
from the virgin birth Adam and Eve believers.
BOfL
Proof?- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Your standing in it!

BOfL
Smiler
2010-01-31 00:36:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@gmail.com
Post by AndrewJH
I just watched the presentation of the new iPad. Im not buff by any
stretch of the imagination, but having bought one of the first 512k
Macs, I was 'blown away' with the incredible advancement of
technology.
I had an amusing thought during the presentation, that somebody in
the audience leaped to their feet, to ask the presenter "did this
gizmo create itself" ? There no doubt, would have been laughter, as
in the audience were many of the geniuses who developed it.
The follow up question would have been "then do some of you still
think those that created it just 'happened'?
Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some validity to
suit the times they appeared,often for the need for control , and
are totally redundant, and Im not suggesting that any of them come
even close to the truth, but to actually believe that we came about
as just an accumulation of happenstances has got to be the most
ludicrous idea imaginable, and those that do believe that, are
hardly different from the virgin birth Adam and Eve believers.
BOfL
Proof?
Your standing in it!
No. That is just your stupid belief.
Beliefs aren't evidence.
--
Smiler
The godless one
a.a.# 2279
All gods are bespoke. They're all made to
perfectly fit the prejudices of their believer
Father Haskell
2010-01-30 04:25:45 UTC
Permalink
I just watched the presentation of the new iPad. Im not  buff by any
stretch of the imagination, but having bought one of the first 512k
Macs, I was 'blown away' with the incredible advancement of
technology.
I had an amusing thought during the presentation, that somebody in the
audience leaped to their feet, to ask the presenter "did this gizmo
create itself" ?
In a sense, yes. Much of the design work was performed by
other computers. The circuit density -- millions of switches
per square cm -- is too great for humans alone to achieve in
so short a time.
b***@gmail.com
2010-01-30 12:47:48 UTC
Permalink
I just watched the presentation of the new iPad. Im not  buff by any
stretch of the imagination, but having bought one of the first 512k
Macs, I was 'blown away' with the incredible advancement of
technology.
I had an amusing thought during the presentation, that somebody in the
audience leaped to their feet, to ask the presenter "did this gizmo
create itself" ?
In a sense, yes.  Much of the design work was performed by
other computers.  The circuit density -- millions of switches
per square cm -- is too great for humans alone to achieve in
so short a time.
So the creators just sat back and watched? Of course not, they simply
harnessed and applied their state of undertanding. "Thats Life".

BOfL
Lars Eighner
2010-01-30 18:12:41 UTC
Permalink
In our last episode,
Post by b***@gmail.com
I just watched the presentation of the new iPad. Im not buff by any
stretch of the imagination, but having bought one of the first 512k
Macs,
How could you be that old and still be so stupid?
--
Lars Eighner *Atheist #1965* ***@larseighner.com <http://larseighner.com/>
1433.0 hours since Warbama declared Viet Nam II.
Warbama: An LBJ for the Twenty-First century. No hope. No change.
dorayme
2010-01-30 20:53:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lars Eighner
In our last episode,
Post by b***@gmail.com
I just watched the presentation of the new iPad. Im not buff by any
stretch of the imagination, but having bought one of the first 512k
Macs,
How could you be that old and still be so stupid?
By staying safely indoors and keeping up the pot smoking of his
and all his basketweaving club's mates.
--
dorayme
thomas p.
2010-01-30 20:55:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lars Eighner
In our last episode,
Post by b***@gmail.com
I just watched the presentation of the new iPad. Im not buff by any
stretch of the imagination, but having bought one of the first 512k
Macs,
How could you be that old and still be so stupid?
No doubt it takes practice and devotion.
Post by Lars Eighner
--
<http://larseighner.com/>
1433.0 hours since Warbama declared Viet Nam II.
Warbama: An LBJ for the Twenty-First century. No hope. No change.
Immortalista
2010-02-02 04:02:58 UTC
Permalink
I just watched the presentation of the new iPad. Im not  buff by any
stretch of the imagination, but having bought one of the first 512k
Macs, I was 'blown away' with the incredible advancement of
technology.
I had an amusing thought during the presentation, that somebody in the
audience leaped to their feet, to ask the presenter "did this gizmo
create itself" ? There no doubt, would have been laughter, as in the
audience were many of the geniuses who developed it.
The follow up question would have been "then do some of you still
think those that created it just 'happened'?
Ive no doubt that all of the religious stories had some validity to
suit the times they appeared,often for the need for control , and are
totally redundant, and Im not suggesting that any of them come even
close to the truth, but to actually believe that we came about as just
an accumulation of happenstances has got to be  the most ludicrous
idea imaginable, and those that do believe that, are hardly different
from the virgin birth Adam and Eve believers.
BOfL
The Drunkard’s Walk

A drunk staggers out of a bar. Here’s the bar, and he’s leaning right
against the wall of the bar. Now, he’s staggering completely at
random, back and forth. There’s a gutter 30 feet away. He staggers
five feet every time he staggers, completely at random, goes towards
the bar as often as he goes away, except if he hits the bar wall, he
can’t go through it, so he just stands there until he staggers away.
Now, where does he end up every time? Of course, he ends up in the
gutter. He falls down in the gutter, the thing’s over. He’s going to
lend up in the gutter every time.

It’s like flipping six heads in a row because he staggers five feet,
but his movement is entirely random. The only reason he ends up in the
gutter is that he’s beginning next to this wall that he can’t go
through. The history of life did the same thing. The history of life
began with a bacteria next to the left wall of maximal simplicity.

So in its random motion back and forth occasionally a species staggers
over towards greater complexity, but it arises within an effectively
random system. The complexity is toward the gutter in that analogy.
And the bar wall is home.

You can’t get simpler than a bacterium, so as life expands, there is a
real trend. The real trend is the success in expansion of life. If you
begin at maximal simplicity, there’s no room to get any simpler, so
what happens is this position of maximal simplicity. The bacterial
mode just gets higher and higher.

How to get directional & predictable
motion within a totally random system.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/gergen/november96/gould.htm

Alan Ford
2010-02-02 05:53:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Immortalista
The Drunkard’s Walk
A drunk staggers out of a bar. Here’s the bar, and he’s leaning right
against the wall of the bar. Now, he’s staggering completely at
random, back and forth. There’s a gutter 30 feet away. He staggers
five feet every time he staggers, completely at random, goes towards
the bar as often as he goes away, except if he hits the bar wall, he
can’t go through it, so he just stands there until he staggers away.
Now, where does he end up every time? Of course, he ends up in the
gutter. He falls down in the gutter, the thing’s over. He’s going to
lend up in the gutter every time.
This is the shittiest joke I've ever heard.
--
If you don't beat your meat
You can't have any pudding
How can you have any pudding
If you don't beat your meat?
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...