The Political Party

[photon9]

You haven't the slightest clue what you're talking about do you?

Hey if all else fails just keep babbling and making shit up as you go, even if makes not the slightest bit of sense.

I do give you credit for not claiming this desecration of logic was inspired by the Holy Spirit like many non-god-haters I know would though.

[Used2BMarkoh]

---

chuckgp wrote:

---

Used2BMarkoh wrote:

---

fatback wrote:

But  can demonstrate that we (animals plants etc) are the planned out come of a designer rather than just the  current state of things.  You need to produce both the designer and the plan.  

Phil

---

Yes, well, you've finally gotten to the reasoned objection.  Design is absolutely evidence of a designer, the question is, is life a design.

And I freely admit my preference for design is largely instinctive.  But I think the instinct itself is pretty significant.  It would be pretty strange if humans could design and the cosmos knew nothing of design.  I see that if there is a designer, and if humans can know that designer, that could only happen if the designer built a user-interface into his design, and I think I see that very interface.

And, the other bit of evidence for me is, being trained and working in the physical sciences, I see that undirected processes do NOT produce anything like life.  We all see this in regular life, for instance when we stir our cream into our coffee.  This sort of statistical behavior is formalized in a mathematical concept I will not name on this forum (ok, entropy), but it's there to see for anybody willing to see it.

---

P.W. Atkins  The Second Law (Atkins, 1994)

---

Yer a frickin moron, chuck.  This is precisely why I didn't want to name the deplorable word.  You are a robot, chuck, like some google engine matching keywords in an email.

[chuckgp]

---

Used2BMarkoh wrote:

---

chuckgp wrote:

---

Used2BMarkoh wrote:

---

fatback wrote:

But  can demonstrate that we (animals plants etc) are the planned out come of a designer rather than just the  current state of things.  You need to produce both the designer and the plan.  

Phil

---

Yes, well, you've finally gotten to the reasoned objection.  Design is absolutely evidence of a designer, the question is, is life a design.

And I freely admit my preference for design is largely instinctive.  But I think the instinct itself is pretty significant.  It would be pretty strange if humans could design and the cosmos knew nothing of design.  I see that if there is a designer, and if humans can know that designer, that could only happen if the designer built a user-interface into his design, and I think I see that very interface.

And, the other bit of evidence for me is, being trained and working in the physical sciences, I see that undirected processes do NOT produce anything like life.  We all see this in regular life, for instance when we stir our cream into our coffee.  This sort of statistical behavior is formalized in a mathematical concept I will not name on this forum (ok, entropy), but it's there to see for anybody willing to see it.

---

P.W. Atkins  The Second Law (Atkins, 1994)

---

Yer a frickin moron, chuck.  This is precisely why I didn't want to name the deplorable word.  You are a robot, chuck, like some google engine matching keywords in an email.

---

heh-heh-heh

is your name Zachary Smith?

You can call me A. Bettik

[Used2BMarkoh]

---

onelife wrote:

---

Zig al-din wrote:

It's our basic place,, but it's like being the lowest rung on the ladder. 

It's unfortunate that our trip up the ladder has so far been quite wobbly and misguided due, in large part, with the obsession of generating wealth at any cost.

Truth seems to have become a major casualty in a world where manipulation yields higher profits.

---

We're on a ladder?  Who set that up?  "Misguided?"  Who is guiding us?

And what's this "truth" thing you speak of?  How is it a casualty?  You sure do talk as if humans are a player on some sort of stage, after all.

[Komandi]

Used2BMarkoh wrote: It's not fact, and it's not even an accurate description of the theory. Please don't waste our time making mere assertions as if they were fact.

---

I wasn't describing any theory.  Biological evolution is a fact.  It occurs.  It is observable.  There is no dispute.  There does exist a theory by the same name that attempts to explain this fact; however, that is not what I was describing.  

Species change over time via evolution.  This results in apparent design.  This is fact.  Deal with it.  

The watchmaker analogy is entirely bogus.  

[Used2BMarkoh]

---

fatback wrote:

---

........however I would not be able to consider 'our' designer any more of a diety than the human scientists that (for the sake of arguement) has achieved the same.

---

That's probably your problem right there.  Simply being able to truly acknowledge someone or something greater than oneself seems to be a problem for man.

I don't quite understand it myself, but there is a terror to genuinely yielding the high ground, to admitting yourself truly inferior to someone else.  We will yield to sticks and stones before we will yield to the name.

[chuckgp]

ok where's the goddamn non-physical ghost stories already?

carol ann?

[Used2BMarkoh]

---

photon9 wrote:
You haven't the slightest clue what you're talking about do you?

---

I'm afraid I know exactly what I'm talking about, photon.  Hey, if I was personally insulting in that first post, it's not really what I intended, I just get frustrated with these gold plated turds that get repeated mindlessly.

[chuckgp]

---

Used2BMarkoh wrote:

---

fatback wrote:

---

........however I would not be able to consider 'our' designer any more of a diety than the human scientists that (for the sake of arguement) has achieved the same.

---

That's probably your problem right there.  Simply being able to truly acknowledge someone or something greater than oneself seems to be a problem for man.

I don't quite understand it myself, but there is a terror to genuinely yielding the high ground, to admitting yourself truly inferior to someone else.  We will yield to sticks and stones before we will yield to the name.

---

which name, dumdum?

is it your non-physical ghost story?  finally?

[chuckgp]

---

Used2BMarkoh wrote:

---

photon9 wrote:
You haven't the slightest clue what you're talking about do you?

---

I'm afraid I know exactly what I'm talking about, photon.  Hey, if I was personally insulting in that first post, it's not really what I intended, I just get frustrated with these gold plated turds that get repeated mindlessly.

---

i'd be pissed if I had to shine all that shit too.

stay busy

[chuckgp]

---

photon9 wrote:
You haven't the slightest clue what you're talking about do you?

Hey if all else fails just keep babbling and making shit up as you go, even if makes not the slightest bit of sense.

I do give you credit for not claiming this desecration of logic was inspired by the Holy Spirit like many non-god-haters I know would though.

---

don't get too happy, he's said we need to yield to 'the name'

[newbie chick]

Can a believer please tell me why god didn't write the Bible himself if he has the power to inspire illiterate men to ghost write it for him?  We are told that God is both omniscient and omnipotent but his actions say otherwise.

Why haven't we heard from this same god for over 2000 years when there are so many questions that have not been answered?  

Did he fact check it to be certain that his inspirations were recorded correctly?

Why does the Bible only contains 4 Gospels when we know that there were many more available?  

[fatback]

I am probably inferior to billions of people - doesn't mean I need to invent some imaginary diety to feel inferior to as well.   Not really sure what the upside of worship is.  

Phil

[fatback]

---

Used2BMarkoh wrote:

---

fatback wrote:

---

........however I would not be able to consider 'our' designer any more of a diety than the human scientists that (for the sake of arguement) has achieved the same.

---

That's probably your problem right there.  Simply being able to truly acknowledge someone or something greater than oneself seems to be a problem for man.

I don't quite understand it myself, but there is a terror to genuinely yielding the high ground, to admitting yourself truly inferior to someone else.  We will yield to sticks and stones before we will yield to the name.

---

Yes my body would yield to stick and stones - I would say that black is white and white is black.  But I would still know that it isn't.  There has to be a damn good reason to really yield the your real self.

Phil

[Rudolf von Hag…]

---

newbie chick wrote:

Why haven't we heard from this same god for over 2000 years when there are so many questions that have not been answered?  

---

HE just spoke to me 2 minutes ago, and HE answered all questions about you.

[Rudolf von Hag…]

He also gave me a new soup recipe

[newbie chick]

---

Rudolf von Hagenwil wrote:
He also gave me a new soup recipe

---

What is the recipe?

I love soup in the winter.

[Zig al-din]

---

onelife wrote:

---

Zig al-din wrote:

It's our basic place,, but it's like being the lowest rung on the ladder. 

It's unfortunate that our trip up the ladder has so far been quite wobbly and misguided due, in large part, with the obsession of generating wealth at any cost.

Truth seems to have become a major casualty in a world where manipulation yields higher profits.

---

On the one hand, you have a shallow consumerist society and a materialistic,  acquisitive, opportunistic set of values which nowadays shade into social Darwinism. On the other, you have a rigid, scientific, ultra-rationalism that doesn't leave any room for the role of the unconscious or of 'irrational' forms of knowledge (if I can use the expression).  

Also, there are fundamentalist, literalist religious types who insist that the only option is to subscribe to whatever dogma they've bought into. A more balanced, integrated paradigm would not result in these kinds of extremist views.  

[onelife]

---

Used2BMarkoh wrote:

---

onelife wrote:

---

Zig al-din wrote:

It's our basic place,, but it's like being the lowest rung on the ladder. 

It's unfortunate that our trip up the ladder has so far been quite wobbly and misguided due, in large part, with the obsession of generating wealth at any cost.

Truth seems to have become a major casualty in a world where manipulation yields higher profits.

---

We're on a ladder?  Who set that up?  "Misguided?"  Who is guiding us?

And what's this "truth" thing you speak of?  How is it a casualty?  You sure do talk as if humans are a player on some sort of stage, after all.

---

When we used the term "ladder" in the above dialogue we were speaking metaphorically - a concept that seems to have eluded you.

I used that and the word "truth"in a general sense as part of a description how the world of consumerism manipulates  people's natural drives and creates false values in order to sell product. Have you heard the term "sex sells"? Just how important is it really to have your teeth a few shades whiter or cover up your naturally greying hair?

[BigMac5]