freeztar Posted June 1, 2008 Report Share Posted June 1, 2008 Why you being so rude? The "thought police" thread was started specifically for you. You are bullying people and trying to be the sole determiner of what people will or will not talk about. If you don't like the chosen subject and limits that were very nice requested, stay out of the thread, and stop bullying everyone to do things your way. You act like the "thought police", and it is very unpleasant. To clarify, it is your rude behavior I am objecting to, not what you think. Well, care to throw any more daggers why you're at it. Let me ask you Nutron, who is being rude here? If you have a specific problem with me, then please contact, via PM, myself or any other staff members. I will also be happy to discuss this issue in the thread which you created called "thought police". Otherwise, please stop spilling different subjects into other threads. Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
modest Posted June 1, 2008 Report Share Posted June 1, 2008 I am only interested in the nature of the universe. The electron and the proton are the only two MAJOR players in the universe.They form the HA that is the single element that fuses into the stars to form helium and any other heavier elements. When asked to elaborate, Mike C responds: Discussing physics here is off topic.My view of Nature as GOD is based on the biological life rather than the physical. So I would like to discuss this part of our lives. So you see, Mike is "only interested in the nature of the universe" which he won't discuss because "GOD is based on the biological life rather than the physical" Honestly nutronjon - Should we all pat Mike on the back for making two statements that are not only wrong but are absolutely inconsistent with each other? You honestly think it is out of bounds to even ask Mike to elaborate? -modest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nutronjon Posted June 1, 2008 Report Share Posted June 1, 2008 Mike C. this is your thread and entering it should be kind of like entering your home. You are the host, and we are the quest, and if treat each other respectfully, things will go much better. Your desire for how you want your thread to be should be respected. That said, I am having difficulty understanding where you want to go with this thread. When the ancients spoke of Nature as god there was a concept of earth as mother, and then this one god was broken into many gods, as men developed the concept of bureaucracies, and bureaucrats in charge of different departments. At this point of human consciousness, it seemed obvious, one god couldn't do it all. So the gods of nature, were the forces of nature. However, this seems different from your idea of Nature as God. I am having trouble understanding a concept of Nature as God that is simply biological. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nutronjon Posted June 1, 2008 Report Share Posted June 1, 2008 Well, care to throw any more daggers why you're at it. Let me ask you Nutron, who is being rude here? If you have a specific problem with me, then please contact, via PM, myself or any other staff members. I will also be happy to discuss this issue in the thread which you created called "thought police". Otherwise, please stop spilling different subjects into other threads. Thanks. I wanted Mike C. to know I thought the way you addressed him was disrespectful, however, I goofed when I said, I started the thread "thought police" specifically for you. Infinite was also on my mind. When the two of you start attacking someone, it is a very unpleasant experience. I know, because I have been the one attacked by the two of you. I would have greatly appreciated someone stepping in and saying something about the disrespectful way the you two addressed me, so I am doing that for Mike. No, Modest, we shouldn't pat Mike on the back for making wrong statements, but we can address these errors respectfully. Only in the threads where God is mentioned, have I notice so much disrespect. I have repeatedly expressed my appreciation of people addressing me respectfully, when I obviously am pretty ignorant about the science subjects. Only we start speaking of God, have I noticed so much disrespect. I can not believe people do not know the difference between being rude and being respectful. Maybe they really don't? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
modest Posted June 1, 2008 Report Share Posted June 1, 2008 No, Modest, we shouldn't pat Mike on the back for making wrong statements, but we can address these errors respectfully. Only in the threads where God is mentioned, have I notice so much disrespect. I have repeatedly expressed my appreciation of people addressing me respectfully, when I obviously am pretty ignorant about the science subjects. Only we start speaking of God, have I noticed so much disrespect. I can not believe people do not know the difference between being rude and being respectful. Maybe they really don't? Yeah, I used to be a bible-thumper. I know all about it. I also used to think my ideas were privileged and above reproach. Now it doesn't bother me when people tell me my ideas are wrong because I know they sometimes very much are wrong. I used to think a disagreement was an attack on my beliefs and a personal insult to the way I lived my life. I now understand that a debate can benefit both parties with no ill-intent. Understand the door swings both ways. I have seen you insist that the only proper debate is to accept your premise that God does indeed exist. I've seen others insist that anyone who doesn't accept Jesus is an idiot. You may think INow and others are disrespectful to such ideas, but I assure you the disrespect is very much evident all too often on the part of the theistic side. Disrespectful in a way that rejects any idea that doesn't support their own argument. A lot of people have disagreed with your ideas nutronjon. You feel attacked I'm sure. But, I honestly don't think anyone's intent is to attack you. People want to put holes in your ideas and show where you are wrong because they honestly disagree with you. And, that is good debate. -modest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InfiniteNow Posted June 1, 2008 Report Share Posted June 1, 2008 I wanted Mike C. to know I thought the way you addressed him was disrespectful, however, I goofed when I said, I started the thread "thought police" specifically for you. Infinite was also on my mind. When the two of you start attacking someone, it is a very unpleasant experience. I know, because I have been the one attacked by the two of you. Make a claim which is supportable and it won't be attacked. If I said, "the winds and the breeze are caused by unicorns flapping their wings," I don't think anybody would take it seriously, and the challenges to my claim would be biting. I disagree with anyone who thinks and suggests that this concept of god (whether defined as abrahamic or nature or something else) is supposed to be beyond challenge, and that it should be respected just for respect's sake. Rubbish. If it's supportable, then support it. Otherwise, I'll challenge it like I would any other ridiculous idea. Now, man up, grow a spine, support your claims, don't make them if you cannot, and quit whining. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Southtown Posted June 2, 2008 Report Share Posted June 2, 2008 I second that. I can't rep you, apparently because you're beyond repute. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C1ay Posted June 2, 2008 Report Share Posted June 2, 2008 Only in the threads where God is mentioned, have I notice so much disrespect. I have repeatedly expressed my appreciation of people addressing me respectfully, when I obviously am pretty ignorant about the science subjects. Only we start speaking of God, have I noticed so much disrespect. I can not believe people do not know the difference between being rude and being respectful. Maybe they really don't? You know what's disrespectful. The steady stream of bible thumpers that hunt down our science forum to preach and proselytize their faithful beliefs and then complain when we attempt to restrain them to science. If you Google "religious discussion" you get millions of hits with plenty of other places to go and yet they want to come here and ***** and whine and moan that we don't change our rules for them. Guess what? The sign at the front door says, "Science Forums". If you want to bring up God you're going to get an earful and you're probably not going to like what we have to say. If that bothers you then I recommend you go elsewhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike C Posted June 2, 2008 Author Report Share Posted June 2, 2008 Are you saying that life doesn't follow the laws of the universe? Or laws of religion? Yes!Even the BBT does not follow the Laws of Physics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted June 2, 2008 Report Share Posted June 2, 2008 Yes!Even the BBT does not follow the Laws of Physics. That is because the BBT is a incomplete construct used to describe something we have very little if any first hand information about. Once we understand it better (if we ever do) we will almost certainly find it obeys laws as well. Life does indeed follow all the laws of the universe that were established at the BB, if the laws were even different in a small way life as we know it wouldn't exist. There might be life of some other kind but not as we know it. Everything that has transpired since the BB follows natural laws, you will not find anything that violates natural laws, life, the abiogenesis of life, evolution of life, all these things follow the laws of the universe. If you disagree then name an instance of life not following the laws of the universe:hyper: Or anything else for that matter:naughty: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike C Posted June 2, 2008 Author Report Share Posted June 2, 2008 When asked to elaborate, Mike C responds: So you see, Mike is "only interested in the nature of the universe" which he won't discuss because "GOD is based on the biological life rather than the physical" Honestly nutronjon - Should we all pat Mike on the back for making two statements that are not only wrong but are absolutely inconsistent with each other? You honestly think it is out of bounds to even ask Mike to elaborate? -modest Modest The bible is the creator of both the physical and the biological universes. IMO, the OT promotes nothing but evil.Its insult to women by promoting them to be siiners is evil.Its racism by separating day and night is what promotes racism. Further evidence of this is the portrayal of eating the fruit from a tree is an insult to the APES, our biological anscestors.That is evil.There are many more things that the OT teaches as evil. Science proves the OT to be false in many ways. What should be separated is the biological from the physical.Life reproduces. Matter (physical) does not . So the OT here ia also wrong. Mike C Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted June 2, 2008 Report Share Posted June 2, 2008 What should be separated is the biological from the physical.Life reproduces. Matter (physical) does not . So the OT here ia also wrong. Mike C Life is reproducing Matter how can you say that life and matter are seperate? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike C Posted June 2, 2008 Author Report Share Posted June 2, 2008 Mike C. this is your thread and entering it should be kind of like entering your home. You are the host, and we are the quest, and if treat each other respectfully, things will go much better. Your desire for how you want your thread to be should be respected. That said, I am having difficulty understanding where you want to go with this thread. When the ancients spoke of Nature as god there was a concept of earth as mother, and then this one god was broken into many gods, as men developed the concept of bureaucracies, and bureaucrats in charge of different departments. At this point of human consciousness, it seemed obvious, one god couldn't do it all. So the gods of nature, were the forces of nature. However, this seems different from your idea of Nature as God. I am having trouble understanding a concept of Nature as God that is simply biological. John I would like to confine this thread to the biological realm because that is where we are involved in determining our lifestyles.We can control our lifestyle choices but cannot control the universe. We have a separate thread for discussing this topic that is physical. Thank for your support. Mike C Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InfiniteNow Posted June 2, 2008 Report Share Posted June 2, 2008 Life is reproducing Matter how can you say that life and matter are seperate? I think it has something to do with delusion and/or cognitive dissonance, but I've been wrong once before in my life. ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thunderbird Posted June 3, 2008 Report Share Posted June 3, 2008 I think it has something to do with delusion and/or cognitive dissonance, but I've been wrong once before in my life. :rolleyes:Oh now, now, don't be such a dick. oh yea go **** yourself. :( Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nutronjon Posted June 3, 2008 Report Share Posted June 3, 2008 John I would like to confine this thread to the biological realm because that is where we are involved in determining our lifestyles.We can control our lifestyle choices but cannot control the universe. We have a separate thread for discussing this topic that is physical. Thank for your support. Mike C You are welcome. It may be helpful if we establish, considering Nature as God from a biological point of view, is just a point of view. Sometimes people seem too hung up on technological correctness, and have forgotten what abstract thinking is all about, and dismiss things like Einstien believing imagine is very important. We need to not take ourselves so seriously we can not allow different points of view. We can not know where thinking from a different of point of view will lead us, until we follow the path, and see what happens. That said, I am having a terrible time imagining a biological god. Unless, hum the earth is a living organism, with god qualities? But then what would be the qualities of such a god? My sense is, this god would not be immortal and therefore, would have survival concerns and functions, because biological things die. Hum, this is getting closer to Earth Mother concept, from which all life springs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InfiniteNow Posted June 3, 2008 Report Share Posted June 3, 2008 Oh now, now, don't be such a dick. :hihi: Awww... Did I strike a nerve? :shade: oh yea go f**K yourself. :)Done. Now what? :esmoking: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.