40 Sikh lads defend themselves against Muslim sex predators?

[Carl the Llama]

Who wants their mind blown?

[The Doctor]

You need to be more humble in your assertions is all I'm saying bloke. Unless you can prove the theories you hold dearly to, you shouldn't be so stubborn in promoting them. Who knows when or how the next paradigm shift will occur?

Not at all - as I've said, they have reached the highest validity achievable in science, to go "remember they're theories" is foolish - you suggest theories are just something dreamed up in the pub.

Religious people were persecuted in the atheist old Soviet Bloc, Buddhists are persecuted in atheist China.

Atheism =/= science. Still no-one has been persecuted for not believing in science.

[Carl the Llama]

It's pathetically easy to disprove if you actually think about it. There are parts of the Koran and the Bible that are easy to disprove completley. But people believe because it makes them happy.

I believe the arguement that a man with faith is happier than man without holds no more weight than a man who is drunk is happier than one that is sober. But there we are.

Fine, individual excerpts can be shown to be silly.

What about the idea of an omnipresent deity, how do you go about disproving that?

[Zingari]

Sceince can't but religion is not a plausible alternative, it is flawed in nearly every way. Science cannot be proven however it can also not be disproven. It is quite easy to disprove religion as the effects is has against the human race goes against everything it stands for in the first place.

Science is definitely better at explaining most about the world we live in .I've never said anything contrary to this

Religion was good in it's day and provided a stable framework for society but has outlived most of its usefulness .

The point I'm trying to make is that "some things" were and will ever remain incomprehensible to our minds however they are dressed up with working models and hypothetical particles filling in the massive gaps.

How the universe began , how life originated etc etc are just too unfathomable questions when we can't even make the world free of disease or mend broken biscuits .

[Manwell Pablo]

The mis-practices of religions is not proof there is no god or higher being, only that there are hypocrites that claim to believe in god and use it as an excuse.

The idea there is a higher being comes from standard religions

We must question the story logic of having an all-knowing allpowerful God, who creates faulty Humans, and then blames them for his own mistakes

[Carl the Llama]

Not at all - as I've said, they have reached the highest validity achievable in science, to go "remember they're theories" is foolish - you suggest theories are just something dreamed up in the pub.

Atheism =/= science. Still no-one has been persecuted for not believing in science.

Every good scientist knows not to accept the current paradigm as unequivocal truth, no matter how convinced they are by it. I'm sure your Lecturers will teach you this eventually.

[Captain...]

The idea there is a higher being comes from standard religions

We must question the story logic of having an all-knowing allpowerful God, who creates faulty Humans, and then blames them for his own mistakes

But religion is not science, so logic doesn't need to apply.

[The Doctor]

Every good scientist knows not to accept the current paradigm as unequivocal truth, no matter how convinced they are by it. I'm sure your Lecturers will teach you this eventually.

And I never said I did?

I said it's incredibly foolish to attempt the "remember they're theories" bit, because that is the reserve of the scientifically illiterate.

[Carl the Llama]

And I never said I did?

I said it's incredibly foolish to attempt the "remember they're theories" bit, because that is the reserve of the scientifically illiterate.

Not accepting them as unequivocal truths is accepting them as theories. Ergo

it's important to remember that it's the big bang theory, and the theory of evolution.

I am satisfied with what we have achieved here today. Meeting adjourned.

[The Doctor]

aah, I'm all too used to people using that to say "It's only a theory" and attempt to claim their crazy nonsense has equal grounding (yes you creationists, you batshit crazy ****tards)

[Zingari]

aah, I'm all too used to people using that to say "It's only a theory" and attempt to claim their crazy nonsense has equal grounding (yes you creationists, you batshit crazy ****tards)

Why is it so important one way or another ?

If life evolved or was created , what can you do about it either way ?

[The Doctor]

Why is it so important one way or another ?

If life evolved or was created , what can you do about it either way ?

That's not so much the issue, the issue is when people try to push their ancient mythology into serious intellectual discussion, when it has no real evidence for it. When people try to make light of the scientific method like that, they attack the very foundations of science and in doing so threaten progress.

[Webbo]

That's not so much the issue, the issue is when people try to push their ancient mythology into serious intellectual discussion, when it has no real evidence for it. When people try to make light of the scientific method like that, they attack the very foundations of science and in doing so threaten progress.

Who's trying to push their religion? The only people trying to force their opinion on any one are the atheists.

[The Doctor]

Who's trying to push their religion? The only people trying to force their opinion on any one are the atheists.

I didn't say religion did I? I said crazy mythology, when they then try to make light of the scientific method to shoe-horn it into serious discussion, that's where the problem in the current discussion lies.

Oh, and for the record, I'd say I've met more proselytising religious people than I have atheists. You can't go past the clock tower without some sort of preacher or religious propaganda stand set up.

[Zingari]

That's not so much the issue, the issue is when people try to push their ancient mythology into serious intellectual discussion, when it has no real evidence for it. When people try to make light of the scientific method like that, they attack the very foundations of science and in doing so threaten progress.

They aren't attacking the very foundations of science though . This is the typical refuge that scientists keep running into whenever challenged .

What is being questioned is the wholesale belief in science having all the answers to all the questions without resorting to the hypothetical in the same way that religious zealots used esoteric language to suppress dissent

[Manwell Pablo]

But religion is not science, so logic doesn't need to apply.

It clearly does in this case.

[The Doctor]

They aren't attacking the very foundations of science though . This is the typical refuge that scientists keep running into whenever challenged .

What is being questioned is the wholesale belief in science having all the answers to all the questions without resorting to the hypothetical in the same way that religious zealots used esoteric language to suppress dissent

When they start throwing out the old "it's only a theory", as was the point, they do - because they suggest that hypothesises repeatedly confirmed through experimentation, with plenty of evidence behind them, aren't particularly strong. They make it sound like something dreamt up in the pub. When they make statements like that, in essence they suggest evidence isn't particularly important.

[Webbo]

I didn't say religion did I? I said crazy mythology, when they then try to make light of the scientific method to shoe-horn it into serious discussion, that's where the problem in the current discussion lies.

Oh, and for the record, I'd say I've met more proselytising religious people than I have atheists. You can't go past the clock tower without some sort of preacher or religious propaganda stand set up.

So you haven't actually met them you've walked past them? I find it very easy to ignore those people, why can't you?

[Manwell Pablo]

Who's trying to push their religion? The only people trying to force their opinion on any one are the atheists.

Well the religious types have got away with Murder and torture of millions for several thousands of years so I think they owe us a little bitching time.

[Webbo]

Well the religious types have got away with Murder and torture of millions for several thousands of years so I think they owe us a little bitching time.

People have been murdered and tortured for all sorts of other reasons for thousands of years as well, so why is religion getting all of the blame? You're very naive if you think history would have been much different/better without religion.

[Manwell Pablo]

People have been murdered and tortured for all sorts of other reasons for thousands of years as well, so why is religion getting all of the blame? You're very naive if you think history would have been much different/better without religion.

No it's not at all, if you look through history there are several wars, executions, etc etc which would have never have happened if it weren't for religion, To say otherwise is just blatently denying fact.

[Zingari]

When they start throwing out the old "it's only a theory", as was the point, they do - because they suggest that hypothesises repeatedly confirmed through experimentation, with plenty of evidence behind them, aren't particularly strong. They make it sound like something dreamt up in the pub. When they make statements like that, in essence they suggest evidence isn't particularly important.

This still isn't attacking the "very foundations of science" though is it ?

I mean no one is suggesting that anything and everything science has proven is all a lie , have they ?

There is just the problem that science , (or some quasi religious scientists) believe that anything and everything can be proved or disproved scientifically and this is patently and obviously just not so.

Science has provided many wonderful things to our lives and no doubt will continue to do so

But the total belief in the infallibity of science is bordering on the religious zealotry that it claims to despise

btw , what was your previous username ? i'm sorry but i'm sure i should know who you are

[Corky]

btw , what was your previous username ? i'm sorry but i'm sure i should know who you are

LargeAl.

[The Doctor]

This still isn't attacking the "very foundations of science" though is it ?

I mean no one is suggesting that anything and everything science has proven is all a lie , have they ?

There is just the problem that science , (or some quasi religious scientists) believe that anything and everything can be proved or disproved scientifically and this is patently and obviously just not so.

Science has provided many wonderful things to our lives and no doubt will continue to do so

But the total belief in the infallibity of science is bordering on the religious zealotry that it claims to despise

btw , what was your previous username ? i'm sorry but i'm sure i should know who you are

But that's not what I'm arguing against, what I'm arguing against is the flippant use of the word theory, as if it's a guess. That does damage the foundations of science, because it suggests all our investigations and experiments and evidence gathering, all the painstaking work is of no higher validity than the drunk ramblings of a mad man.

Scrooge McDuck until a couple of weeks ago, but prior to that LargeAl.

[Zingari]

But that's not what I'm arguing against, what I'm arguing against is the flippant use of the word theory, as if it's a guess. That does damage the foundations of science, because it suggests all our investigations and experiments and evidence gathering, all the painstaking work is of no higher validity than the drunk ramblings of a mad man.

Scrooge McDuck until a couple of weeks ago, but prior to that LargeAl.

Damn of course ! I should have known