2151. Fleabytes
Comment #139296 by epeeist on March 5, 2008 at 2:10 pm
Comment #139292 by Bonzai
Phenomenon precedes theorization.
It is like saying cognitive science is physics, biology is physics, in fact everything is "identical" to physics because what is there beneath physics?
2152. Fleabytes
Comment #139264 by epeeist on March 5, 2008 at 12:31 pm
Comment #139262 by _J_
Hi _J_ nice to here from you again.
(On the question of how the FCOS forum works: we may accuse David Robertson of various things, but rampant censorship ought not to be one of them.
2153. Fleabytes
Comment #139261 by epeeist on March 5, 2008 at 12:14 pm
Comment #139256 by Steve Zara
(Well, what else did you expect from me, huh?)
Music!
2154. Fleabytes
Comment #139246 by epeeist on March 5, 2008 at 11:16 am
Comment #139243 by Richard Morgan
Like Bach's "Art of Fugue" it seems to go on for ever, but the same theme keeps recurring and it is never boring.Just so long as it doesn't end for the same reason as the "Art of Fugue" did...
2155. The Salamander's Tale
Comment #139239 by epeeist on March 5, 2008 at 11:05 am
Just for wooter's benefit.
If god created the universe in 4004BC, then lots of things we thought we knew are wrong. Evolution would be one example, Sumerian literature written on stone tablets would be another, the varves in lake Suigetsu would be another. In which case we obviously can't rely on our senses.
The question is, can god rely on his? How does he know he wasn't created in 4005BC?
2156. Fleabytes
Comment #139237 by epeeist on March 5, 2008 at 11:01 am
Comment #139234 by Steve Zara
But this is back to language again.
I have also realised the irony of talking about different brains processing information in different ways on a thread in which atheists are attempting (without much success it seems) to communicate with a theist, and in which there has been so much misunderstanding over words.
2157. Fleabytes
Comment #139232 by epeeist on March 5, 2008 at 10:47 am
Comment #139037 by Steve Zara
Is it reasonable to assume that different brains process information in the same way?
In general terms, I guess it is, because we would not be able to relate to each other at all if not, but in terms of specifics, perhaps not. There are major differences between cultures.
2158. The Salamander's Tale
Comment #139179 by epeeist on March 5, 2008 at 9:00 am
Wooter - since you seem to be having problems answering Jon_sociologist's questions how about reducing it to answering one simple question from the Reverend:
What date did god create everything?
And to add a little addendum of my own
What evidence do you have for this?
2159. Fleabytes
Comment #139104 by epeeist on March 5, 2008 at 6:21 am
Comment #139054 by clodhopper
Sounds like a Maslow "Peak Experience".
You see we make a division between the experiencer and the experienced which may be entirely false. Many many years ago I had an 'experience' where this division completely dissapeared and no, I was not on drugs. Actually I was picking runner beans in a market garden (holiday job). The experience was quite extraordinary and has not been repeated. There just was NO division between 'me', the beans, the bees on the flowers, the wind blowing through them, that person on the bike over there, the sunshine, the whole damn universe. My brain had also stopped jabbering and was completely silent, just looking on while this took place.
2160. What's the Point of the Archbishop of Canterbury?
Comment #139090 by epeeist on March 5, 2008 at 5:42 am
Comment #139079 by fides_et_ratio
I think you've misread my post.
I didn't say they hadn't, what I did intimate was that they should not be able to decide on policy, this should be down to elected representatives.
I disagree with you on your second point as I think the figures you've mentioned have a valuable part to play.
(automatic deference isn't a phrase I've used nor one I agree with)
2161. Bulldozers tear down giant religious teapot
Comment #139076 by epeeist on March 5, 2008 at 5:23 am
Comment #138840 by Affront
OK, for the benefit of our UK readers there was evidence for deviation and repetition in the article, but what about hesititation?
If only Islam could take on board the idea of 'having a sense of humour' but I guess that we'll have to wait a few more centuries for that.
2162. What's the Point of the Archbishop of Canterbury?
Comment #139067 by epeeist on March 5, 2008 at 5:15 am
Comment #139055 by fides_et_ratio
In an effective democracy power shouldn't be concentrated in the hands of a political elite to the extent that it excludes any other voice.
2163. The Salamander's Tale
Comment #139044 by epeeist on March 5, 2008 at 4:27 am
Comment #138205 by Geoff
Stat a new thread on here:
http://www.richarddawkins.net/forum/viewforum.php?f=46
You'll be made to feel very welcome.
2164. Fleabytes
Comment #139031 by epeeist on March 5, 2008 at 3:53 am
Comment #139007 by Steve Zara
For computers, it doesn't. The company Sun Microsystems has a slogan: "the network IS the computer".
What interests me is what it would feel like to have some kind of "network" between two brains.
(Being able to share what it is like to have a "revelatory experience" would be useful)
2165. The Salamander's Tale
Comment #138972 by epeeist on March 5, 2008 at 2:03 am
Comment #138954 by wipeout
I ain't no willing to intervine any stupid argument on this web page, but i am really tempted when i see twisted minds or mindsets obsessed with sex and related swearing- they think this is an ace card to use against anybody who are against them, like me or schemezers or kringski or wooter guy. If these are scientific answers, then, I know nothing about science.
2166. State Approves Evolution As 'Scientific Theory'
Comment #138554 by epeeist on March 4, 2008 at 2:04 pm
It might be dead, but it certainly doesn't want to lie down - http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/news_education_edblog/2008/03/will-we-be-hear.html
2167. Fleabytes
Comment #138252 by epeeist on March 4, 2008 at 5:26 am
Comment #138226 by Peacebeuponme
You obviously weren't brought up a Catholic - sins of commission and sins of omission.
- I don't think they are liars unless they state the opposite though - you can't lie by being silent.
2168. The Salamander's Tale
Comment #138206 by epeeist on March 4, 2008 at 4:09 am
Comment #138191 by wooter
You can talk to Darwin and Bertrand Russell who were looking for amino acids in the soup and when you find it, it is your turn again. By the way thank you for your very descriptive language of yourself and this web page features. Way to go. You are almost there to prove that E.T is not fact but only a vocabulary of foul language. By the way you live along with Mr Dawkins?
2169. Fleabytes
Comment #138127 by epeeist on March 4, 2008 at 1:09 am
Comment #138121 by LorienRyan
If you could extend it to include all the 'omni...'s' and make it succinct and catchy I'd be for it.
EDIT: or do a series, one for each 'omni'.
2170. Fleabytes
Comment #138124 by epeeist on March 4, 2008 at 1:05 am
Comment #138117 by MPhil
Say, what would you (directed at all) think of me combining, refining an expanding my posts on The impossibility of omnipotence
2171. US Treaty with Tripoli
Comment #138108 by epeeist on March 4, 2008 at 12:26 am
Comment #137804 by al-rawandi
2) Please do comment on the Constitution. I hope you, unlike retarded Jay, have actually read portions of the Bill of Rights. So do contribute...
2172. US Treaty with Tripoli
Comment #137795 by epeeist on March 3, 2008 at 1:40 pm
Comment #137739 by Diacanu
Fighting a tiger, that might mean something, y'know?
But even then, it's a critter with claws versus a guy with a gun.
2173. Fleabytes
Comment #137786 by epeeist on March 3, 2008 at 1:28 pm
2946. Comment #137777 by clodhopper
Oooo yes. Remind me which sci fi novel that was?
er...I'm thick....how do I put an avatar up?
2174. Fleabytes
Comment #137769 by epeeist on March 3, 2008 at 1:08 pm
Comment #137764 by clodhopper
Why use that when we already have a perfectly good word, i.e. "grok".
I would like it as a verb; so I can say I pod something. Perhaps meaning 'to understand'.
eg " I do not pod what theologians do for a living"
2175. Fleabytes
Comment #137558 by epeeist on March 3, 2008 at 6:37 am
Comment #137552 by Quetzalcoatl
That's dreadful. If posts on this site disappeared like that, even if it was only to the alternate thread, people would immediately complain.
Speaking of FCOS- after Robertson replied on his site last night another comment was made, which I now notice has magically disappeared, thanks to the wonders of moderation.
2176. Fleabytes
Comment #137190 by epeeist on March 2, 2008 at 1:46 pm
Comment #137182 by hello
Which scientific advance is that, then?
2177. Fleabytes
Comment #137101 by epeeist on March 2, 2008 at 10:52 am
Comment #137095 by Corylus
Nice spot, I think the Nov. 15th "Expelled" post rather gives it away.
Of course he really blew it when he linked to a Free Church Magazine. :-))
2178. Fleabytes
Comment #137092 by epeeist on March 2, 2008 at 10:39 am
Comment #137087 by Deepthought
Posting in a way to cause flamefests, possibly deliberately. However, having read some of his posts elsewhere this is debatable.
What were the real reasons for his banning? I'm fairly certain his are slightly skewed.
2179. US Treaty with Tripoli
Comment #136948 by epeeist on March 2, 2008 at 4:10 am
Comment #136944 by Steve Zara
I'm afraid I don't really have the strength of emotional responses you seem to think. I just believe that bullies like you do positive harm to this site. My impression is that this is supposed to be a place where people with different views can express them. Sure, we get insults, but those normally at least contain some content, or have an actual point.
2180. US Treaty with Tripoli
Comment #136907 by epeeist on March 2, 2008 at 2:37 am
Comment #136856 by brue68
I'd just like to say that I don't like having seat belt and helmet laws. I use a seat belt, because otherwise I feel like I'm falling out of the seat, but if someone feels like risking their life for perceived comfort or personal preference, I don't see why we should apply a penalty.
2181. Berlin gallery in Islam art row
Comment #136904 by epeeist on March 2, 2008 at 2:30 am
Comment #136564 by Mango
Never give in to the demands of terrorists or they will keep up their tactics. This is encouraging extremists to continue to threaten violence because it meets their goals!
2182. Fleabytes
Comment #136538 by epeeist on March 1, 2008 at 11:29 am
Comment #136535 by Paula Kirby
Now I've answered your question, perhaps you would return the favour and answer the two I posted for you yesterday:
2183. The Salamander's Tale
Comment #136363 by epeeist on March 1, 2008 at 1:55 am
Comment #136361 by Jon_Sociologist
It's also your turn.
2184. Fleabytes
Comment #136362 by epeeist on March 1, 2008 at 1:41 am
Comment #136357 by D'Arcy
Banter? It is all hello can do to get beyond a single sentence response. You can strike banter, constructive and intelligent off the list I'm afraid.
Have you got any thing constructive to say about your ideas, like maybe "there is a God" or "Jesus saves"?
Mindless banter bores me.
2185. Fleabytes
Comment #136206 by epeeist on February 29, 2008 at 2:17 pm
Comment #136184 by Quetzalcoatl
OK, I'm off too then.
2186. Fleabytes
Comment #136193 by epeeist on February 29, 2008 at 2:06 pm
Comment #136177 by scottishgeologist
There was a report on Pharyngula about a debate that PZ did with a particular creationist (I can't find the exact article). Essentially PZ set the topic of the debate as the evidence for creationism. Having done that he would not let his opponent criticise evolution, he kept pulling him back on the topic of the validity of creationism.
The points that I would really like to see the God botherers get to grips with are these:
Those areas, where the "supernatural" (which lets face it cannot be empirically proven) overlaps and influences the "natural"
2187. Fleabytes
Comment #136181 by epeeist on February 29, 2008 at 1:55 pm
Comment #136174 by righton
Accepted - it was such a ludicrous assertion that it needed a response. I should have left it to someone with a bit more clue.
I wouldnt suspect such a simple answer. Of course natural selection was working and a neurobiologist would be able to tell you a lot more about the current theories of how intelligence developed. It definitely would not be a simple "I dont know" response.
2189. Fleabytes
Comment #136167 by epeeist on February 29, 2008 at 1:48 pm
Comment #136157 by Dr Benway
I think you may have missed this. Rarely do I say this, but in this case it may just make the point better than you
As our time is not infinite, we ought to begin now. Let's hear your reason for not believing in:
Zeus
2190. Fleabytes
Comment #136160 by epeeist on February 29, 2008 at 1:44 pm
Comment #136150 by Quetzalcoatl
[Multiverse-sarcasm]Ha ha ha![/Multiverse-sarcasm]
2191. Fleabytes
Comment #136156 by epeeist on February 29, 2008 at 1:39 pm
Comment #136133 by al-rawandi
Just to be a spelling pedant for the moment asymmetry. Spelt it consistently wrongly in an essay once and was deducted marks each time I did it, got a negative mark.
As for the prefix "a" it means without. As in amelodic, asexual, asymetry.
2192. Fleabytes
Comment #136152 by epeeist on February 29, 2008 at 1:37 pm
Comment #136118 by whatthe..?!
"No actually, the theist asserts that a particular deity exists, we merely doubt that assertion. The burden of proof therefore lies on the theist."
Is this a materialist atheist, a New Age atheist, a Buddhist atheist?
The atheist claims that intelligence arose from mindless matter. Clearly this is inadequate.
2193. Fleabytes
Comment #136143 by epeeist on February 29, 2008 at 1:29 pm
Comment #136123 by Goldy
Hey Anna, a game we can agree on - wanna play "whack-a-mole"?
More like stomping on moles...
2194. Fleabytes
Comment #136136 by epeeist on February 29, 2008 at 1:25 pm
Comment #136099 by Bonzai
I notice there are a few new names on this thread, all Christians, all post only on this thread in a hit and run fashion.. I am thinking either this is the same person with different handles, or more likely, we are being raid by a group of young Christians, possibly Robertson's minions who have to fill some quotas.
2195. Fleabytes
Comment #136084 by epeeist on February 29, 2008 at 1:04 pm
Comment #136072 by whatthe..?!
No actually, the theist asserts that a particular deity exists, we merely doubt the truth of the assertion. The burden of proof therefore lies on the theist.
Surely this applies to the atheist as well? After all, it would be absurd to reject theism (in this case 'Christianity') because of a perceived lack of evidence for it if atheism also lacked evidence.
2196. Fleabytes
Comment #136074 by epeeist on February 29, 2008 at 1:01 pm
Comment #136058 by annabanana
[sarcasm]Quetzcoatl, how dare you steal something of mine![/sarcasm]You still have that StalinIcon?
2197. Fleabytes
Comment #135876 by epeeist on February 29, 2008 at 10:11 am
Comment #135866 by hello
How would you know? In fact Paula has revealed exactly how she came to be an atheist. Just backtrack through her posts to find out. You can also find similar stories from a number of people here.
..but I doubt very much that it was lack of evidence that led you to choose atheism.
2198. Fleabytes
Comment #135868 by epeeist on February 29, 2008 at 10:04 am
Comment #135857 by Paula
I won't be able to respond straightaway, since I have to go out now, but I'll be back in an hour or so and can't wait to read what you've given us.
2199. Fleabytes
Comment #135851 by epeeist on February 29, 2008 at 9:48 am
I am a little disappointed with this thread. It is past 2000 now and I was expecting to see Paula in a posh frock.
I realise that she might be "fashionably late" but in the mean time it is a little dispiriting to have to put up with all these people in their sub-fusc attire trying to get a glimpse of the proceedings
2200. Fleabytes
Comment #135817 by epeeist on February 29, 2008 at 9:30 am
Comment #135811 by hello
How predictable are you? What do you friends say about you?