Saving Planet Earth
- Thread starter Deist27
- Start date
Or maybe... just maybe... it's because God is a religious and not scientific construct. You can't write a scientific paper on a being that you can never prove.
And just for the record, not all scientists are athesist. That's just common rhetorhic.
And just for the record, not all scientists are athesist. That's just common rhetorhic.
God is far more than a religious. In fact Deism contends that God has nothing to do with religion.
Most of the best scientist in all of history have known about God, Einstein, Newton, aristotle, thelist goes on and on. today the sciientific community is dominated by people different from them, atheist actually pagans
Most of the best scientist in all of history have known about God, Einstein, Newton, aristotle, thelist goes on and on. today the sciientific community is dominated by people different from them, atheist actually pagans
Originally posted by Deist27
God is far more than a religious.
Then a religious what?
In fact Deism contends that God has nothing to do with religion.
Then what does God have to believe in. It's belief in something without proof. How would you classify it?
Most of the best scientist in all of history have known about God, Einstein, Newton, aristotle, thelist goes on and on.
And Einstein/Newton would both say that they would not use 'God' to support their argument... and I doubt they'd like you using them.
today the sciientific community is dominated by people different from them, atheist actually pagans
Atheist or pagans... take your pick. Do you actually know any scientists?
God is far more than a religious.
Then a religious what?
In fact Deism contends that God has nothing to do with religion.
Then what does God have to believe in. It's belief in something without proof. How would you classify it?
Most of the best scientist in all of history have known about God, Einstein, Newton, aristotle, thelist goes on and on.
And Einstein/Newton would both say that they would not use 'God' to support their argument... and I doubt they'd like you using them.
today the sciientific community is dominated by people different from them, atheist actually pagans
Atheist or pagans... take your pick. Do you actually know any scientists?
In fact Deism contends that God has nothing to do with religion
AGain but you still don't get it. Ont. proves the existance of God with proof.
Most of the best scientist in all of history have known about God, Einstein, Newton, aristotle, the list goes on and on
And Einstein/Newton would both Thier philosphy was God centered and they agreed with Anselm unlike you. I am certain they like me using their names to battle what they battled, Godlessness
today the sciientific community is dominated by people different from them, atheist actually pagans They hate God and discriminate against scientist who are Godly like Newton and Einstein. that is why their papers do not appear in the narrow minded journals you read. True science proves God's existance. Therefor these papers can't be published.
AGain but you still don't get it. Ont. proves the existance of God with proof.
Most of the best scientist in all of history have known about God, Einstein, Newton, aristotle, the list goes on and on
And Einstein/Newton would both Thier philosphy was God centered and they agreed with Anselm unlike you. I am certain they like me using their names to battle what they battled, Godlessness
today the sciientific community is dominated by people different from them, atheist actually pagans They hate God and discriminate against scientist who are Godly like Newton and Einstein. that is why their papers do not appear in the narrow minded journals you read. True science proves God's existance. Therefor these papers can't be published.
Last edited:
Originally posted by Deist27
Ont. proves the existance of God with proof.
and
True science proves God's existance. Therefor these papers can't be published.
Evidently you've seen these papers. If you be so kind to provide links I'm sure people will inform you as to why it is not science.
today the sciientific community is dominated by people different from them, atheist actually pagans They hate God and discriminate against scientist who are Godly like Newton and Einstein. that is why their papers do not appear in the narrow minded journals you read.
Pagans hate god now? That's unique, and also just more rhetoric.
So which office are you running for?
Ont. proves the existance of God with proof.
and
True science proves God's existance. Therefor these papers can't be published.
Evidently you've seen these papers. If you be so kind to provide links I'm sure people will inform you as to why it is not science.
today the sciientific community is dominated by people different from them, atheist actually pagans They hate God and discriminate against scientist who are Godly like Newton and Einstein. that is why their papers do not appear in the narrow minded journals you read.
Pagans hate god now? That's unique, and also just more rhetoric.
So which office are you running for?
GOD and EINSTEIN?
Here's what Einstein had to say about god and it's followers... (this ones for you Persol)
"I cannot imagine a God who rewards and punishes the objects of his creation, whose purposes are modeled after our own -- a God, in short, who is but a reflection of human frailty. Neither can I believe that the individual survives the death of his body, although feeble souls harbor such thoughts through fear or ridiculous egotisms."
[Albert Einstein, obituary in New York Times, 19 April 1955]
Here's what Einstein had to say about god and it's followers... (this ones for you Persol)
"I cannot imagine a God who rewards and punishes the objects of his creation, whose purposes are modeled after our own -- a God, in short, who is but a reflection of human frailty. Neither can I believe that the individual survives the death of his body, although feeble souls harbor such thoughts through fear or ridiculous egotisms."
[Albert Einstein, obituary in New York Times, 19 April 1955]
Thank you fireguy. I remembered reading about his beliefs, but would have never pulled that quote!
It always is nice to have some help
EDIT: Mind you I'm not saying that Einstien is right... or that theists are right, or non-theists. I think it doubtful that any of us are completely right, hence the need for debate.
It always is nice to have some help
EDIT: Mind you I'm not saying that Einstien is right... or that theists are right, or non-theists. I think it doubtful that any of us are completely right, hence the need for debate.
god means nothing to me...hence i can't hate god.
Originally posted by Deist27
If I did provide you with this information, you would have it blacklisted and ban access to the sites.
Across what sites? I forgot that we are all in a conspiracy here. People wouldn't mind your rhetoric if it seemed that you were at least knowledgable and not just a sheep.
If you look at some of the crackpot theories on this site you will see that none of them are deleted. They are just debated for their flaws. If you documents can not stand up to this criticism then stop calling them 'proof'.
Yes you do hate God.
Well... no... but feel free to try again.
That is the real reason for evolutioary theories
Or possibly because it is supported by observation? You are using the same argument people used to defend the earth being the center of the solar system. There are evolutionist who are Christian. The 2 are not mutually exclusive.
If I did provide you with this information, you would have it blacklisted and ban access to the sites.
Across what sites? I forgot that we are all in a conspiracy here. People wouldn't mind your rhetoric if it seemed that you were at least knowledgable and not just a sheep.
If you look at some of the crackpot theories on this site you will see that none of them are deleted. They are just debated for their flaws. If you documents can not stand up to this criticism then stop calling them 'proof'.
Yes you do hate God.
Well... no... but feel free to try again.
That is the real reason for evolutioary theories
Or possibly because it is supported by observation? You are using the same argument people used to defend the earth being the center of the solar system. There are evolutionist who are Christian. The 2 are not mutually exclusive.
God?
No prob's Persol!
Actually, Einstein also made comments that would lead people to think he was a believer. I think, better yet it is my opinion, that he made conflicting statements to serve only as a mediator; give arguments for both theories that is. That way his discoveries could never be discredited, based on his religious beliefs, by people who have convictions..!!
Do you agree Deist?
(maybe this time you can leave the insults to yourself, because it serves no purpose for me to engage in un-academic, or at the very least un-educated, debate.)
No prob's Persol!
Actually, Einstein also made comments that would lead people to think he was a believer. I think, better yet it is my opinion, that he made conflicting statements to serve only as a mediator; give arguments for both theories that is. That way his discoveries could never be discredited, based on his religious beliefs, by people who have convictions..!!
Do you agree Deist?
(maybe this time you can leave the insults to yourself, because it serves no purpose for me to engage in un-academic, or at the very least un-educated, debate.)
Dominant Force in the Universe
Best evidence strongly suggests the number 1 universal power observed is entropy. that many years ago the earth was struck by some natural disaster and has been dying ever since. This may have been a huge meteor striking the earth, a shift in the suns magnetic fields affecting the Earth, or many other theories could be correct. If all human life had disappeared at the time of the disaster, or never later appeared, did you know this would still be a dying planet? The world is dying even without us! As earth born people and a natural part the world, view ourselves as the only possible saviors and not the destroyers of our own planet. Thus blaming humans for world problems misses the evidence and leads to persecution
Best evidence strongly suggests the number 1 universal power observed is entropy. that many years ago the earth was struck by some natural disaster and has been dying ever since. This may have been a huge meteor striking the earth, a shift in the suns magnetic fields affecting the Earth, or many other theories could be correct. If all human life had disappeared at the time of the disaster, or never later appeared, did you know this would still be a dying planet? The world is dying even without us! As earth born people and a natural part the world, view ourselves as the only possible saviors and not the destroyers of our own planet. Thus blaming humans for world problems misses the evidence and leads to persecution
One Problem.....
Okay, lets assume for a moment you are right. I mean, the earth is going to die with or without us. I believe we are speeding that process up.. Human activity can be blamed for many things, including species exterpation, environmental destruction, pollution, etc etc. All of these contribute to a dying earth, right??
So the question is, are we not -- to some degree -- responsible for the earths death?
Consider this Deist, if a person is terminally ill -- meaning he/she is dying -- and you kill that person the courts will charge you with first degree murder; regardless if that person was terminally ill or not..
BUT, you first must accept the notion that the earth is a living organism. If you can agree with that then it has a right to exist just as much as we do... WE ARE NO MORE IMPORTANT THAN ANY OTHER LIVING ORGANISM; because we cannot live without other organisms.. So, we have a responsibility to do what we can to protect the earth, that means pro-active action as well as re-active action. To put it plainly, we must stop destroying the earth and do what we can to protect it in the future..
I don't see how god figures into that..... Even if she does exist..
Okay, lets assume for a moment you are right. I mean, the earth is going to die with or without us. I believe we are speeding that process up.. Human activity can be blamed for many things, including species exterpation, environmental destruction, pollution, etc etc. All of these contribute to a dying earth, right??
So the question is, are we not -- to some degree -- responsible for the earths death?
Consider this Deist, if a person is terminally ill -- meaning he/she is dying -- and you kill that person the courts will charge you with first degree murder; regardless if that person was terminally ill or not..
BUT, you first must accept the notion that the earth is a living organism. If you can agree with that then it has a right to exist just as much as we do... WE ARE NO MORE IMPORTANT THAN ANY OTHER LIVING ORGANISM; because we cannot live without other organisms.. So, we have a responsibility to do what we can to protect the earth, that means pro-active action as well as re-active action. To put it plainly, we must stop destroying the earth and do what we can to protect it in the future..
I don't see how god figures into that..... Even if she does exist..
Re: One Problem..... Good Questions
You made some good points. I personally believe the Earth will not die but we humans can and should "Save Planet Earth". We can say we are at least partially responsible for the dying, but then so would animals and even plants as they kill each other for survival in a brutal and sick world. Because starving animals and humans have been forced to devour the remaining trees and shrubs and even each other, it can be said that all life on Earth is dying and in danger of extinction.
And with the carnage so vast after the natural disaster, seawaters quickly became salty. Dead animals and plants washed down by erosion turned fresh water seas into the saltwater oceans of today. Most of the earth is now, already, baron and desolated waste areas of ice, saltwater and sand. Nor has any new species ever been shown coming into existence since the disaster struck. Nor can any species evolve upwards under such difficult and hostile conditions because the greater complexity available before the disaster is necessary for developing the most complex life. Truly the Earth became a sick and dying world.
You made some good points. I personally believe the Earth will not die but we humans can and should "Save Planet Earth". We can say we are at least partially responsible for the dying, but then so would animals and even plants as they kill each other for survival in a brutal and sick world. Because starving animals and humans have been forced to devour the remaining trees and shrubs and even each other, it can be said that all life on Earth is dying and in danger of extinction.
And with the carnage so vast after the natural disaster, seawaters quickly became salty. Dead animals and plants washed down by erosion turned fresh water seas into the saltwater oceans of today. Most of the earth is now, already, baron and desolated waste areas of ice, saltwater and sand. Nor has any new species ever been shown coming into existence since the disaster struck. Nor can any species evolve upwards under such difficult and hostile conditions because the greater complexity available before the disaster is necessary for developing the most complex life. Truly the Earth became a sick and dying world.
Yes, BUT.....
Yes other organisms kill for survival just as humans do BUT, humans are the ONLY species on earth that desroy and kill for reasons other than survival... We, I am sorry to say, have lost our understanding of respect. That is respect for our natural world.
Consider this; most parents when they find out that their newborn children will develop asthma -- because of, amongst other human caused activities, emissions from gasoline engines -- will pray to god for her to take their life in exchange for a healthy life for their children. Although, that same parent will not think twice about jumping into thier gas guzzling SUV to drive down to the corner store, leave the vehicle running, return home and say it is thier RIGHT to drive anything they want. Can you see the hypocracy? People do not realize that our survival is solely dependant on a healthy world. Please note Deist that I am presenting this argument to show that HUMANS ONLY destroy the earth flagrantly and without cause.
As far as your second assertion, again, I'll side with you and say that the earth has ceased to expand and is thus dying. But that argument -- to me -- serves no relativity. I mean, the only thing that is for sure in life is death. We all know that but we refuse to let that discourage us in making the best life for ourselves possible, and in achieving that best life possible we should do it with respect and understanding to our natural world.. I'm sorry to say that, at this moment in time, we do not practice life within that framework.
Finally; The survival of the fittest argument -- when it comes to humans -- is wreckless and a threat to all mankind.
Yes other organisms kill for survival just as humans do BUT, humans are the ONLY species on earth that desroy and kill for reasons other than survival... We, I am sorry to say, have lost our understanding of respect. That is respect for our natural world.
Consider this; most parents when they find out that their newborn children will develop asthma -- because of, amongst other human caused activities, emissions from gasoline engines -- will pray to god for her to take their life in exchange for a healthy life for their children. Although, that same parent will not think twice about jumping into thier gas guzzling SUV to drive down to the corner store, leave the vehicle running, return home and say it is thier RIGHT to drive anything they want. Can you see the hypocracy? People do not realize that our survival is solely dependant on a healthy world. Please note Deist that I am presenting this argument to show that HUMANS ONLY destroy the earth flagrantly and without cause.
As far as your second assertion, again, I'll side with you and say that the earth has ceased to expand and is thus dying. But that argument -- to me -- serves no relativity. I mean, the only thing that is for sure in life is death. We all know that but we refuse to let that discourage us in making the best life for ourselves possible, and in achieving that best life possible we should do it with respect and understanding to our natural world.. I'm sorry to say that, at this moment in time, we do not practice life within that framework.
Finally; The survival of the fittest argument -- when it comes to humans -- is wreckless and a threat to all mankind.
Very few humans kill like you said
Going from the specific then generalzing about an entire species like that is unfair and misleading. Obviously we have a place on Earth as do animals and plants. The planet will not survive without us.
A sick planet creates sick and violent residents. Many criminals have in their past a cruel and violent childhood. Similarly the violence of nature does not improved behavior. When people became treated like animals by the new and hostile conditions, they began act like animals with a brain. Most people respond to the way they are treated in like manner. Thus torture and inquisitions became part of human history. By no coincidence, slow and agonizing death is a daily occurrence in the forests and jungles of today. The original disaster is thus proven to have ruined good behavior in both animals and humans. It takes a person with tremendous character to behave honorably today. The scientific evidence, rather than supporting evolution, strongly supports the very opposite. We have been taken on a painful journey of destruction by natural forces, leading to a degeneration of behavior on Earth
Going from the specific then generalzing about an entire species like that is unfair and misleading. Obviously we have a place on Earth as do animals and plants. The planet will not survive without us.
A sick planet creates sick and violent residents. Many criminals have in their past a cruel and violent childhood. Similarly the violence of nature does not improved behavior. When people became treated like animals by the new and hostile conditions, they began act like animals with a brain. Most people respond to the way they are treated in like manner. Thus torture and inquisitions became part of human history. By no coincidence, slow and agonizing death is a daily occurrence in the forests and jungles of today. The original disaster is thus proven to have ruined good behavior in both animals and humans. It takes a person with tremendous character to behave honorably today. The scientific evidence, rather than supporting evolution, strongly supports the very opposite. We have been taken on a painful journey of destruction by natural forces, leading to a degeneration of behavior on Earth
?
This is all I choose to say on the topic Deist, unless you concede the following..
We do not take responsibility for our actions!! It's much much too easy to look for and find -- through scientific discovery or religion -- other reasons for ANY event, and much much harder to accept responsibility for them ourselves..
I ask you, quit looking to the heavens, the stars, or the scientific community for answers or reasons. We must look in the mirror, thats where LIFE exists; THE TANGIBLE!
Deist, I really hope you get the gist of this one. Please do not interpret it as condescension.
This is all I choose to say on the topic Deist, unless you concede the following..
We do not take responsibility for our actions!! It's much much too easy to look for and find -- through scientific discovery or religion -- other reasons for ANY event, and much much harder to accept responsibility for them ourselves..
I ask you, quit looking to the heavens, the stars, or the scientific community for answers or reasons. We must look in the mirror, thats where LIFE exists; THE TANGIBLE!
Deist, I really hope you get the gist of this one. Please do not interpret it as condescension.
Re: ?
Your right fireguy. We all should take responsibility for our own actions. Yet we are given the responsibilty for other peoples actions. We both know injustices occur.
Since the natural disaster, we live in a distorted sense of reality. To illustrate, think of life on Earth in four layers; at the bottom we have plants followed by animals then humans. We can physically see three levels yet a spiritual dimension exists also. The fourth level of life will be dealt with in the next chapter of my book not posted here. Animals and humans rightly feed on the lowest level, that of plants. Yet the disaster blended the layers. Thus the three layers are compacted in two. That is why humans now have the right to eat animals with plants and why animals are now eating each other. This unnatural two-layer condition not only violates human rights but also helps explain why some became predators. Yet what about the fourth level and who really is responsible for the disaster?]
http://home.att.net/~moss.rick/
Your right fireguy. We all should take responsibility for our own actions. Yet we are given the responsibilty for other peoples actions. We both know injustices occur.
Since the natural disaster, we live in a distorted sense of reality. To illustrate, think of life on Earth in four layers; at the bottom we have plants followed by animals then humans. We can physically see three levels yet a spiritual dimension exists also. The fourth level of life will be dealt with in the next chapter of my book not posted here. Animals and humans rightly feed on the lowest level, that of plants. Yet the disaster blended the layers. Thus the three layers are compacted in two. That is why humans now have the right to eat animals with plants and why animals are now eating each other. This unnatural two-layer condition not only violates human rights but also helps explain why some became predators. Yet what about the fourth level and who really is responsible for the disaster?]
http://home.att.net/~moss.rick/