So says Jan, a proven liar and purveyor of untruths.
Absolutely Nothing: Atheists on What They Know About What They Pretend to Discuss
- Thread starter Tiassa
- Start date
- Status
So says Jan, a proven liar and purveyor of untruths.I like Stephen Gould's take on this. Religion and science are two completely separate magisteria - they really _can't_ conflict. It's like two people arguing about a point on a graph at position (5,12):
"That point is at a position of X=5, I tell you!"
"No it's not you religious nut. It's at a position of Y=12!"
"Science won't help you this time. It is CLEARLY at a position of X=5. You are WRONG."
They're both right.
Have you been following this debacle wegs?
I have said a few times now that I am far from being a creationist/ID basher, but by the same token I abhore creationists/IDers coming to a science forum, all pretentious and full of delusions of grandeur, claiming to invalidate accepted science, in this case Darwinism and the theory of evolution. As I and others have shown, Jan does this by lying and redefining words, such as claiming that Atheism implies god exists.
Jan also a few days ago gave a link with regards to a Paleontologist who found some soft T-Rex tissue, and then berated said Paleontologist for not seeing this discovery the way that so called creationists and IDers immediatly saw it. Anyway in case you did miss it.....
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/dinosaur-shocker-115306469/
extract:
"Meanwhile, Schweitzer’s research has been hijacked by “young earth” creationists, who insist that dinosaur soft tissue couldn’t possibly survive millions of years. They claim her discoveries support their belief, based on their interpretation of Genesis, that the earth is only a few thousand years old. Of course, it’s not unusual for a paleontologist to differ with creationists. But when creationists misrepresent Schweitzer’s data, she takes it personally: she describes herself as “a complete and total Christian.” On a shelf in her office is a plaque bearing an Old Testament verse: “For I know the plans I have for you,” declares the Lord, “plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future.”
As I said when I read the article, "I dips me lid to her" for prevailing with the science and scientific method.
I hope that clears up my own position on this issue.
With regard to the finding by Mary Schweitzer.....
at https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/dinosaur-shocker-115306469/
I also found this......
https://www.livescience.com/41537-t-rex-soft-tissue.html
Controversial T. Rex Soft Tissue Find Finally Explained
extract:
"Then, in 2007, Schweitzer and her colleagues analyzed the chemistry of the T. rex proteins. They found the proteins really did come from dinosaur soft tissue. The tissue was collagen, they reported in the journal Science, and it shared similarities with bird collagen — which makes sense, as modern birds evolved from theropod dinosaurs such as T. rex."
and.....
"The obvious question, though, was how soft, pliable tissue could survive for millions of years. In a new study published today (Nov. 26) in the journal Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, Schweitzer thinks she has the answer: Iron.
Iron lady
Iron is an element present in abundance in the body, particularly in the blood, where it is part of the protein that carries oxygen from the lungs to the tissues. Iron is also highly reactive with other molecules, so the body keeps it locked up tight, bound to molecules that prevent it from wreaking havoc on the tissues.
After death, though, iron is let free from its cage. It forms minuscule iron nanoparticles and also generates free radicals, which are highly reactive molecules thought to be involved in aging.
"The free radicals cause proteins and cell membranes to tie in knots," Schweitzer said. "They basically act like formaldehyde."
Formaldehyde, of course, preserves tissue. It works by linking up, or cross-linking, the amino acids that make up proteins, which makes those proteins more resistant to decay."
at https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/dinosaur-shocker-115306469/
I also found this......
https://www.livescience.com/41537-t-rex-soft-tissue.html
Controversial T. Rex Soft Tissue Find Finally Explained
extract:
"Then, in 2007, Schweitzer and her colleagues analyzed the chemistry of the T. rex proteins. They found the proteins really did come from dinosaur soft tissue. The tissue was collagen, they reported in the journal Science, and it shared similarities with bird collagen — which makes sense, as modern birds evolved from theropod dinosaurs such as T. rex."
and.....
"The obvious question, though, was how soft, pliable tissue could survive for millions of years. In a new study published today (Nov. 26) in the journal Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, Schweitzer thinks she has the answer: Iron.
Iron lady
Iron is an element present in abundance in the body, particularly in the blood, where it is part of the protein that carries oxygen from the lungs to the tissues. Iron is also highly reactive with other molecules, so the body keeps it locked up tight, bound to molecules that prevent it from wreaking havoc on the tissues.
After death, though, iron is let free from its cage. It forms minuscule iron nanoparticles and also generates free radicals, which are highly reactive molecules thought to be involved in aging.
"The free radicals cause proteins and cell membranes to tie in knots," Schweitzer said. "They basically act like formaldehyde."
Formaldehyde, of course, preserves tissue. It works by linking up, or cross-linking, the amino acids that make up proteins, which makes those proteins more resistant to decay."
You my dear are not a good person.
Firstly I posted a link as a request from James, or Alex. That was because I used it as one of a few reasons to show that facts aren’t always true, even though they may seem so at the time. Another example was the spontaneous generation theory. It was picked by one of you, I can’t remember who. It was never something to put forward initially as blow for darwinism, although it is, as it stands.
I never berated Schweitzer for her views.
But later on I did say she has to be careful how she disseminates the news of her find, if she cares about her career, which obviously she does. We all know if she said anything about it contradicting darwinism, she would come under serious fire.
That’s all I said.
Yes we know. You cast your usual aspersions when someone or somebody fails to adhere to your own mythical nonsense, and then promptly deny it, as you have done previously and which others besides me have noted.
Oh, and I'm a real nice person Jan, I just detest hypocrites, and liars.
Xelasnave.1947
Valued Senior Member
Good morning Jan.
I thank you for being here, for whatever reason I enjoy talking nonsense and sifting through my thoughts.
I wrote this part last because I look at what I wrote and wonder why.
I realise I enjoy thinking aloud.
I read what you have written but can not help but think that you would like to see me convert.
Humans want other humans to be like they are particularly the weak ones.not suggesting you are weak but casually generalising..drug adictics want you to try it, someone likes a new food and can't resist the urge to insist that you have a taste, and of course religious folk are the same.
They think they have found something tasty so you must try it..Why humans do this I am not sure...but they do it.
They think they are showing something to another that they will enjoy or benefit from...I even do it but I know my approach is different in so far as I respect another's roll in life and will help rather than try to make them like me...but really I will be no different to other humans and must accept whatever flaws I perceive in them I will carry also even if that ego thing is whispering "but you are better than that".... I am not better I am probably as weak..I don't feel it but have some wisdom that allows me to imagine any flaw I see in another could also reside with me.
Well you will be happy to know I have given the matter much thought over the years. I have asked the questions. I have examined the package.
I have wondered about the voice inside and about strange things that I can do.
I have read all the history that has been available to me, I have traced the evolution of religion from the earliest times, I grew up in the Christian world went to Sunday school and church, and say that I gave religion enough time, perhaps more time than necessary. Our family turned their back on our heritage and just wanted to not be noticed in the community so we tried to follow their customs.
So my views are not a casual summation.
My conclusions are easy to see.
I am confident I am honest with others and honest with myself although that can never always be true.
I reject religion because it has no basis to assert that it is true and yet it's followers convince themselves that they have found the truth.
No one knows there is a god and there is no reason to think that there should be a god.
Humans are still simple creatures and not long out of the caves and one must factor in the reality that for many many thousands of years we lived in ignorance of how everything works. We learnt to respect and fear various things and somehow that fear and respect became superstition which has been woven into our being over perhaps millions of years... even pre dating our modern human form.
And so this feeling folk describe as the holy spirit I doubt has any spiritual significance but no more than some early remnant of a survival mechanism that manifests today in a confusing way.
In any event what is clear is there is nothing more to religion than a development of respect and fear into a structured system refined simply from various folk speculating without any basis which is in any small way reliable.
And this is evidenced by the number of gods humans have invented.
I have been studying gods for years and even the other day thanks to
Laurie G in the recent thread I started pointed out an avenue that was new to me...and yet folk somehow think their god is the one, and all those others are just inventions of crazy folk..the only difference between me and your theist is I dont believe in all crazy gods and thet dont either except they believe in one more than me t...and they don't get it..they grasp a feeling that is confusing and let that feeling cause them to avoid reason...maybe it was a herd thing..survival came from following the leader without question...I can think of explanations that do not require talking to a make believe entity.
Really I bet I have thought longer and harder than you Jan.
Anyways there is no basis for these inventions but from these speculations a god is invented his rules are known and then everything is explained by fitting the world into that particular god box...but what all forget truth has been lost along the way and now any search for it is defined by this newly created reality.
And we get this...my faith stuff...as if faith is a virtue...it is the ultimate cop out where you abdicate all responsibility to keep searching for the truth...faith is an unfounded belief in something that has no evidence..heck if you had any damn real evidence or supporting credible logic you would not need faith..saying you have faith is like saying I might be lieing to myself but I don't care it feels good..it is no better than sticking a needle in your arm and being satisfied with part of you being stolen and never found.
The universe is most likely eternal, why would it not be so...just because human experience is limited to simple things like a seed growing into a tree they think all things must be so..they see that so simply..the tree started as a seed and it grew...they fail to see the seed came from something earlier and finally is a mere rearrangement of atoms that were present well before that point the human conceived as a seed.
Lose faith and get back to seeking answers I say.
This is true Jan. However observing your behaviour suggests you are really no better.
You lie to push your points..you can not deny that.
You are manipulative to push your points.
You are evasive to push your points.
You reject all that does not fit well in your box.
On my observation you do anything fair or foul to push your point.
Your example is pretty common.
I was in two, people type, businesses...I saw from the inside how people think..law and real estate means you are with them when they really show their true colours.
People of professed faith I found mostly like you Jan. Talking about Jesus but ignoring the simple rules he (The Romans) laid down.
There is virtue in following the rules to support a positive outlook and rejecting negative emotion as laid out in Mathew but anyone could arrive at those principles with simple reasoning and no doubt the Romans behind the invention simply put forward guidelines that had worked for them.
But for you Jan I think your behaviour is no worse than others.
But..you will say..Alex you employed those devious manipulative tactics..and yes I did..not because I like doing things that way but it's like this Jan ..if in a sword fight I will use a sword.. if you think you are clever and devious than try it against someone who is new at that approach and see how you go...but the difference is I am playing whereas those tools are your first resort.
You set a fine example of what I am against.
I knew there was little chance of you being honest in your approach and I have used that against you.
When you were silly I would wait and give you a dose of sillyness sometimes days later.
There was never any point in our games for me but you had and still have your agenda.
You don't care if I convert is a lie, I Know it but perhaps you don't.
Well neither of us really know if you think about it.
I recognise I could been seen as a smart arse...That is not me on the inside..I would like others to realise I am a humble person..I can't help winning it became a habit and although people love winners, they say, but deep down they don't.. I certainly want to be recognised for who I am not who people think I am...
My fighting started because I was humble. Other kids would see me as a push over. I was told never to start a fight but never lose one and so even before I started training I had to take crap for maybe weeks and not rise in anger, and if they went to hit me I had to duck and only if they took a second swing could I fight. My humility was seen as weakness. And I had to back off as soon as they were beaten.
Walk softly but carry a big stick I was told, turn the other cheek I was told, respect everyone until they lose that respect but never judge them, if someone is annoying avoid them if wrong is being done intervene, never lie, be kind to all humans and all creatures, teach by example...
Analyse all that.
Alex
I thank you for being here, for whatever reason I enjoy talking nonsense and sifting through my thoughts.
I wrote this part last because I look at what I wrote and wonder why.
I realise I enjoy thinking aloud.
I read what you have written but can not help but think that you would like to see me convert.
Humans want other humans to be like they are particularly the weak ones.not suggesting you are weak but casually generalising..drug adictics want you to try it, someone likes a new food and can't resist the urge to insist that you have a taste, and of course religious folk are the same.
They think they have found something tasty so you must try it..Why humans do this I am not sure...but they do it.
They think they are showing something to another that they will enjoy or benefit from...I even do it but I know my approach is different in so far as I respect another's roll in life and will help rather than try to make them like me...but really I will be no different to other humans and must accept whatever flaws I perceive in them I will carry also even if that ego thing is whispering "but you are better than that".... I am not better I am probably as weak..I don't feel it but have some wisdom that allows me to imagine any flaw I see in another could also reside with me.
Well you will be happy to know I have given the matter much thought over the years. I have asked the questions. I have examined the package.
I have wondered about the voice inside and about strange things that I can do.
I have read all the history that has been available to me, I have traced the evolution of religion from the earliest times, I grew up in the Christian world went to Sunday school and church, and say that I gave religion enough time, perhaps more time than necessary. Our family turned their back on our heritage and just wanted to not be noticed in the community so we tried to follow their customs.
So my views are not a casual summation.
My conclusions are easy to see.
I am confident I am honest with others and honest with myself although that can never always be true.
I reject religion because it has no basis to assert that it is true and yet it's followers convince themselves that they have found the truth.
No one knows there is a god and there is no reason to think that there should be a god.
Humans are still simple creatures and not long out of the caves and one must factor in the reality that for many many thousands of years we lived in ignorance of how everything works. We learnt to respect and fear various things and somehow that fear and respect became superstition which has been woven into our being over perhaps millions of years... even pre dating our modern human form.
And so this feeling folk describe as the holy spirit I doubt has any spiritual significance but no more than some early remnant of a survival mechanism that manifests today in a confusing way.
In any event what is clear is there is nothing more to religion than a development of respect and fear into a structured system refined simply from various folk speculating without any basis which is in any small way reliable.
And this is evidenced by the number of gods humans have invented.
I have been studying gods for years and even the other day thanks to
Laurie G in the recent thread I started pointed out an avenue that was new to me...and yet folk somehow think their god is the one, and all those others are just inventions of crazy folk..the only difference between me and your theist is I dont believe in all crazy gods and thet dont either except they believe in one more than me t...and they don't get it..they grasp a feeling that is confusing and let that feeling cause them to avoid reason...maybe it was a herd thing..survival came from following the leader without question...I can think of explanations that do not require talking to a make believe entity.
Really I bet I have thought longer and harder than you Jan.
Anyways there is no basis for these inventions but from these speculations a god is invented his rules are known and then everything is explained by fitting the world into that particular god box...but what all forget truth has been lost along the way and now any search for it is defined by this newly created reality.
And we get this...my faith stuff...as if faith is a virtue...it is the ultimate cop out where you abdicate all responsibility to keep searching for the truth...faith is an unfounded belief in something that has no evidence..heck if you had any damn real evidence or supporting credible logic you would not need faith..saying you have faith is like saying I might be lieing to myself but I don't care it feels good..it is no better than sticking a needle in your arm and being satisfied with part of you being stolen and never found.
The universe is most likely eternal, why would it not be so...just because human experience is limited to simple things like a seed growing into a tree they think all things must be so..they see that so simply..the tree started as a seed and it grew...they fail to see the seed came from something earlier and finally is a mere rearrangement of atoms that were present well before that point the human conceived as a seed.
Lose faith and get back to seeking answers I say.
This is true Jan. However observing your behaviour suggests you are really no better.
You lie to push your points..you can not deny that.
You are manipulative to push your points.
You are evasive to push your points.
You reject all that does not fit well in your box.
On my observation you do anything fair or foul to push your point.
Your example is pretty common.
I was in two, people type, businesses...I saw from the inside how people think..law and real estate means you are with them when they really show their true colours.
People of professed faith I found mostly like you Jan. Talking about Jesus but ignoring the simple rules he (The Romans) laid down.
There is virtue in following the rules to support a positive outlook and rejecting negative emotion as laid out in Mathew but anyone could arrive at those principles with simple reasoning and no doubt the Romans behind the invention simply put forward guidelines that had worked for them.
But for you Jan I think your behaviour is no worse than others.
But..you will say..Alex you employed those devious manipulative tactics..and yes I did..not because I like doing things that way but it's like this Jan ..if in a sword fight I will use a sword.. if you think you are clever and devious than try it against someone who is new at that approach and see how you go...but the difference is I am playing whereas those tools are your first resort.
You set a fine example of what I am against.
I knew there was little chance of you being honest in your approach and I have used that against you.
When you were silly I would wait and give you a dose of sillyness sometimes days later.
There was never any point in our games for me but you had and still have your agenda.
You don't care if I convert is a lie, I Know it but perhaps you don't.
Well neither of us really know if you think about it.
I recognise I could been seen as a smart arse...That is not me on the inside..I would like others to realise I am a humble person..I can't help winning it became a habit and although people love winners, they say, but deep down they don't.. I certainly want to be recognised for who I am not who people think I am...
My fighting started because I was humble. Other kids would see me as a push over. I was told never to start a fight but never lose one and so even before I started training I had to take crap for maybe weeks and not rise in anger, and if they went to hit me I had to duck and only if they took a second swing could I fight. My humility was seen as weakness. And I had to back off as soon as they were beaten.
Walk softly but carry a big stick I was told, turn the other cheek I was told, respect everyone until they lose that respect but never judge them, if someone is annoying avoid them if wrong is being done intervene, never lie, be kind to all humans and all creatures, teach by example...
Analyse all that.
Alex
Last edited:
Xelasnave.1947
Valued Senior Member
You greatly impress me as a decent human.
All I would ask you to consider is what faith actually means.
I do not see it as a virtue is so far as claiming faith is no more than saying I will believe something without reason.
The negative is stopping with a claim that faith is an answer really prevents continuing the never ending search for truth in a white wash of mere acceptance because it somehow feels good.
Faith is not a virtue it is an excuse to stop searching for truth...in my view.
We don't know what we don't know but guessing is not the answer.
Thank you for your contribution I certainly appreciate you posting your thoughts.
Alex
Xelasnave.1947
Valued Senior Member
I post this so W4U gets feed back and hopefully tells you more or less what he would say if he knew what you said..you are on his ignore list so in keeping with my ethics I jump in where I see a wrong...what you said was wrong..so here you go again Jan ..that is a dishonest representation.
Science is not a religion, it is that simple and yet your agenda sees you twisting things in a dishonest fashion. Deny that.
There is no God in science and to fit the definition of religion there must be a god.
However it is interesting that your use of religion in this context hints at religion being a closed group with a selected dogma they push.
If that is your view of religion I think your view is somewhat valid.
Science is not however a religion as it has no God.Science is not however a religion as it has no God.
Science is not however a religion as it has no God.Science is not however a religion as it has no God.
Science is not however a religion as it has no God.Science is not however a religion as it has no God.
Science is not however a religion as it has no God.Science is not however a religion as it has no God.
Hail Dawin
Anyways why this need to try and degrade science?
Well we all know why don't we.
Science continually pushes god out of the picture, there are few questions that once were answered..oh god did it..that science can now not completly explain without a god.
Whats left is not much..the diversity of species answered by science, where did whales come from..answered by science...do you realise whales were once classified as fish in England because the bible indicated they were fish?
The actual creation of life remains...so on your side..God zapped life into being by mere whim although for a human went that extra mile creating a clay model and giving that clay model life..you drew my attention to the complexity of a single cell..think about that and just how complex gods clay model would need to be...and next human..took a rib from the first etc...do you know that to this day so many folk believe that women have one less rib than men...maybe you believe that? Do you? That is but one mistake.
Not a good book for science really...and for science it can offer a reasonable way life could appear from the various chemical reactions...really which do you think is getting close to the truth.
ID is a mere wish unsupported by science and backed by folk who have a declared agenda to attack science and it unlike science is indeed a religion with all those negatives you infer about religion.
Pretty obvious we are dealing with religious fanatics...don't you think...or will you lie suggesting we don't know who the designer may be....sure we don't.
And now back to you...look at how you go about pushing your agenda... dishonest..are you proud of having to resort so low?
Time for you to at least review how you go about things...fooling people is wrong and yet that is a big part of your game..how can that be decent?
Alex
Last edited:
Xelasnave.1947
Valued Senior Member
No neither are right.
The point can only be defined using both...the point is at x=5 y=12
Alex
religion definition
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/religion :
religion
[ ri-lij-uh n ]
noun
1- a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.
2 - a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects:the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.
3 - the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices:a world council of religions.
4 - the life or state of a monk, nun, etc.:to enter religion.
5 - the practice of religious beliefs; ritual observance of faith.
6- something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience:to make a religion of fighting prejudice.
7 - religions, Archaic. religious rites: painted priests performing religions deep into the night.
8 - Archaic. strict faithfulness; devotion:a religion to one's vow.
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/religion
https://sacred-texts.com/aor/einstein/einsci.htm :
The following article by Albert Einstein appeared in the New York Times Magazine on November 9, 1930 pp 1-4. It has been reprinted in Ideas and Opinions, Crown Publishers, Inc. 1954, pp 36 - 40. It also appears in Einstein's book The World as I See It, Philosophical Library, New York, 1949, pp. 24 - 28.
Religion and Science
..." It is therefore easy to see why the churches have always fought science and persecuted its devotees.On the other hand, I maintain that the cosmic religious feeling is the strongest and noblest motive for scientific research. Only those who realize the immense efforts and, above all, the devotion without which pioneer work in theoretical science cannot be achieved are able to grasp the strength of the emotion out of which alone such work, remote as it is from the immediate realities of life, can issue. What a deep conviction of the rationality of the universe and what a yearning to understand, were it but a feeble reflection of the mind revealed in this world, Kepler and Newton must have had to enable them to spend years of solitary labor in disentangling the principles of celestial mechanics! Those whose acquaintance with scientific research is derived chiefly from its practical results easily develop a completely false notion of the mentality of the men who, surrounded by a skeptical world, have shown the way to kindred spirits scattered wide through the world and through the centuries. Only one who has devoted his life to similar ends can have a vivid realization of what has inspired these men and given them the strength to remain true to their purpose in spite of countless failures. It is cosmic religious feeling that gives a man such strength. A contemporary has said, not unjustly, that in this materialistic age of ours the serious scientific workers are the only profoundly religious people. "
https://sacred-texts.com/aor/einstein/einsci.htm
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/religion :
religion
[ ri-lij-uh n ]
noun
1- a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.
2 - a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects:the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.
3 - the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices:a world council of religions.
4 - the life or state of a monk, nun, etc.:to enter religion.
5 - the practice of religious beliefs; ritual observance of faith.
6- something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience:to make a religion of fighting prejudice.
7 - religions, Archaic. religious rites: painted priests performing religions deep into the night.
8 - Archaic. strict faithfulness; devotion:a religion to one's vow.
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/religion
https://sacred-texts.com/aor/einstein/einsci.htm :
The following article by Albert Einstein appeared in the New York Times Magazine on November 9, 1930 pp 1-4. It has been reprinted in Ideas and Opinions, Crown Publishers, Inc. 1954, pp 36 - 40. It also appears in Einstein's book The World as I See It, Philosophical Library, New York, 1949, pp. 24 - 28.
Religion and Science
..." It is therefore easy to see why the churches have always fought science and persecuted its devotees.On the other hand, I maintain that the cosmic religious feeling is the strongest and noblest motive for scientific research. Only those who realize the immense efforts and, above all, the devotion without which pioneer work in theoretical science cannot be achieved are able to grasp the strength of the emotion out of which alone such work, remote as it is from the immediate realities of life, can issue. What a deep conviction of the rationality of the universe and what a yearning to understand, were it but a feeble reflection of the mind revealed in this world, Kepler and Newton must have had to enable them to spend years of solitary labor in disentangling the principles of celestial mechanics! Those whose acquaintance with scientific research is derived chiefly from its practical results easily develop a completely false notion of the mentality of the men who, surrounded by a skeptical world, have shown the way to kindred spirits scattered wide through the world and through the centuries. Only one who has devoted his life to similar ends can have a vivid realization of what has inspired these men and given them the strength to remain true to their purpose in spite of countless failures. It is cosmic religious feeling that gives a man such strength. A contemporary has said, not unjustly, that in this materialistic age of ours the serious scientific workers are the only profoundly religious people. "
https://sacred-texts.com/aor/einstein/einsci.htm
Cannot explain why the 'emoji' showed up in #7 !?!?!?
Possibly a senior moment while interacting with the keyboard !!!
It should read : 7 - religions, Archaic. religious rites : painted priests performing religions deep into the night.
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/religion
***might it be possible for one of the Moderators to excise said 'emoji'?***
At any rate, it would seem that a religion might not necessitate a "God"(according to dictionary.com at least!) and that Albert Einstein himself did not find unjust a contemporary's view that "in this materialistic age of ours the serious scientific workers are the only profoundly religious people. "
https://sacred-texts.com/aor/einstein/einsci.htm
Possibly a senior moment while interacting with the keyboard !!!
It should read : 7 - religions, Archaic. religious rites : painted priests performing religions deep into the night.
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/religion
***might it be possible for one of the Moderators to excise said 'emoji'?***
At any rate, it would seem that a religion might not necessitate a "God"(according to dictionary.com at least!) and that Albert Einstein himself did not find unjust a contemporary's view that "in this materialistic age of ours the serious scientific workers are the only profoundly religious people. "
https://sacred-texts.com/aor/einstein/einsci.htm
Last edited:
I appreciate your views, but I don't view my belief in God as ''guessing.'' I think that there are some misconceptions about faith, that suggest believers aren't interested in facts, and that faith runs contrary to facts - or that people of faith aren't interested in ''reality.'' Now, there are believers who deny scientific evidence, facts, and reality to varying degrees, and I'm sympathetic to them, because they fear betraying their faith. It's a shame when people of faith (any belief system) fear that progress and modern advancements, are somehow threats to their core values. For me, I feel that science supports my beliefs, it doesn't detract from them, nor does my faith detract from my respect for science.
Faith is also an experience, not just a set of stagnant beliefs, that go nowhere. I feel a sense of peace and joy from my faith, as we are more than machines taking in facts and data. We are sentient beings, and to that end, faith is a path that I've worked out for myself.
Thank you for your kind words, btw. You too are quite...decent.
The point is at X=5. The point is also at Y=12. (And if you added a third dimension you could say the point was at Z=-13 - and be just as right.)
I'm reasonably sure Einstein's religious views are generally known. Certainly he did not accept any personal god or any magical deity or sky daddy existing apart from the universe.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_and_philosophical_views_of_Albert_Einstein
" Einstein's religious views have been widely studied and often misunderstood.[1]Einstein stated that he believed in the pantheistic God of Baruch Spinoza.[2] He did not believe in a personal God who concerns himself with fates and actions of human beings, a view which he described as naïve.[3] He clarified however that, "I am not an atheist",[4] preferring to call himself an agnostic,[5] or a "religious nonbeliever."[3] Einstein also stated he did not believe in life after death, adding "one life is enough for me."[6] He was closely involved in his lifetime with several humanist groups."
ps: That's not a dig, its a show of appreciation for a reasonable just and considerate view. congrats. Let's hope it has some effect on Jan.
ps: That's not a dig, its a show of appreciation for a reasonable just and considerate view. congrats. Let's hope it has some effect on Jan.
Poor Jan. For as long as I've been a member on here, he has been the target of nearly everyone's fury. lol
(I'd hope for the sake of this pandemic, we could all show a bit more understanding and compassion. Then, once it's all over...go back to your mud flinging.
)
Xelasnave.1947
Valued Senior Member
I imagine you could only view it that way whereas I can only view it as guessing given I find no evidence for a god.
I hope you can appreciate why I hold what you think is a misconception. I find no facts in support of any gods and can only determine that reality does not include any gods.
And I feel a sense of peace and joy with none.
Thanks again for sharing your views.
Alex
Xelasnave.1947
Valued Senior Member
I see now. I assumed we needed both x and y to determine a point...wait. x=5 tells us where to read the x axis surely it is then the y axis that will intersect to determine the position of the point.
Do you see my point
Alex
You do need X and Y to determine a unique point. However, "the point is at X=5" is perfectly valid; it's like telling someone you live at latitude 30 degrees.
- Status