Comment by archaeopteryx on August 31, 2012 at 1:28am

Miguel, Humankind, in some form or another, has lived with pestilence, in some form or another, for over three million years - in the last few months, that has included you.

Comment by Heather Spoonheim on August 31, 2012 at 1:30am

@Zia

When you point out that we can't ask who created your god because that would lead to a paradox, you point out that your god hypothesis is inherently flawed.

Comment by archaeopteryx on August 31, 2012 at 1:31am

I'm sorry Zia, but your logic is SO flawed, and so a product of your Stockholm-Syndrome, religious-induced upbringing. Watch the video, then get back to us.

Comment by archaeopteryx on August 31, 2012 at 1:38am

Here's something you might want to consider, Zia --

"If a man, holding a belief which he was taught in childhood, or persuaded of afterward, keeps down and pushes away any doubts which arise about it in his mind, purposely avoids the reading of books and the company of men that call in question or discuss it...the life of that man is one long sin against mankind."
-- William Kingdon Clifford --

Comment by James Cox on August 31, 2012 at 2:08am

@Arch-

Should such a mind set be considered a 'sin', or just a sad ''lose'? People could have the 'right' to not be open minded, they could really be stuck with dogie and horsie fair at dinner parties, with only the last rerun of 'Dark Shadows' to reflux or the latest sex scandel. Sometimes, at family gatherings, I am stuck with talking with the family dog or staying near the food table because no one much cares about issues involved with electron transfer chains in microbial fuel cells, or some such. My family seems very obcessed with fishing, gambling, and religious affiliation assumptions. I love them, but sometimes I need to feed myself..;p)  

Comment by archaeopteryx on August 31, 2012 at 2:12am

Sometimes family dogs make the best dinner companions. My Cocker Spaniel agrees.

Comment by James Cox on August 31, 2012 at 2:25am

@ Michael-

As does the number of observers, sensor devices, people with cameras, people with some ideological axe to grind, 24/7 news programs needy for material, and people sticking their noses into mouse holes looking for trouble.

We have field mice here. Our dogs seem to be hunting them everytime we take a walk. Today our youngest puppy found one and just about downed it before I grabed the mouse by the tail and pulled it free of a certain death. Our puppies seem to come home unscaved. It is clear that not all mice will be saved! If I stop writing, some day, just maybe in am in the ICU under issolation. There are a few ugly diseases that could be in the natural rodent populations. I would not like to live a life affraid to leave the house, and waiting for the 'end-times', or wearing an aluminum foil helmet.  LOL 

Comment by James Cox on August 31, 2012 at 2:33am

@Michael-

I would like to take a vote:

a) Will Michael go away if we ignore him?

b) Will Michael discover 'wisdom' here?

c) Will Michael improve his religio-babble by practice?

Comment by archaeopteryx on August 31, 2012 at 2:36am

Personally, I'm looking forward to all those people - including Michael, we must presume - floating up into the air - now THAT'S an ethnic cleansing I could live with --

Comment by Zia Dost Muhammad on August 31, 2012 at 3:08am

@Heather

The point was not what a sniper actually does. This was just meant to be an analogy to put a point across. 

I had a simple question of where is the starting point. According to you, 'So you have an infinite number of things/causes, going back infinitely. You don't get something from nothing,...'. Whatever explanation you have, it will just be a theory. We all know nothing has been proved regarding this. And since these are theories, the possibility of a Creator cannot be ruled out. And to reject this possibility (without proof), then this itself is unscientific. Therefore it is more scientific to be an agnostic than an atheist (again, since they have rejected God based on an assumption which is not backed by proofs) 

Claiming to be a part of a 'big league' and trying to put someone down does not give one supremacy in an argument. Supremacy is based on the weight of the argument. 

Comment

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 7
• 8
• 9
• 10
• 11
• …
• 30
• Next ›
• Page