1. Joined
    27 Sep '06
    Moves
    9651
    09 Feb '08 18:11
    I thought it was the consensus that the earth was warming. Now I hear that things might just be cooling off.

    When will these scientists actually figure it out?
  2. Joined
    06 May '05
    Moves
    9174
    09 Feb '08 18:35
    Originally posted by josephw
    I thought it was the consensus that the earth was warming. Now I hear that things might just be cooling off.

    When will these scientists actually figure it out?
    Yeah, they should just ask god and hope he doesn't cause a tsunami.

    Maybe god will answer them if they are schizophrenic.
  3. Donationrwingett
    Ming the Merciless
    Royal Oak, MI
    Joined
    09 Sep '01
    Moves
    26187
    09 Feb '08 18:39
    Originally posted by josephw
    I thought it was the consensus that the earth was warming. Now I hear that things might just be cooling off.

    When will these scientists actually figure it out?
    You obviously fail to realize that science's adaptability and perfectibility is a strength and not a weakness.
  4. Joined
    27 Sep '06
    Moves
    9651
    09 Feb '08 18:44
    Originally posted by PsychoPawn
    Yeah, they should just ask god and hope he doesn't cause a tsunami.

    Maybe god will answer them if they are schizophrenic.
    Actually, this is a serious thread. I only titled it that way to generate a meaningful discussion.
    I may be wrong, but it seems to me that with all that scientists come up with all the time, that there wouldn't be so many contradictions. I hear this theory and that theory. And then come to find out they decide they were wrong and come up with a new prevailing theory. It drives me nuts.

    As far as I'm concerned science has run amuck.
  5. Joined
    27 Sep '06
    Moves
    9651
    09 Feb '08 18:47
    Originally posted by rwingett
    You obviously fail to realize that science's adaptability and perfectibility is a strength and not a weakness.
    I could say the same thing about the Christian walk.

    My question is, is the earth warming or cooling? I don't think science can ever really know.
  6. Standard memberDoctorScribbles
    BWA Soldier
    Tha Brotha Hood
    Joined
    13 Dec '04
    Moves
    49088
    09 Feb '08 18:471 edit
    Originally posted by josephw
    Actually, this is a serious thread. I only titled it that way to generate a meaningful discussion.
    I may be wrong, but it seems to me that with all that scientists come up with all the time, that there wouldn't be so many contradictions. I hear this theory and that theory. And then come to find out they decide they were wrong and come up with a new prevailing theory. It drives me nuts.

    As far as I'm concerned science has run amuck.
    Well, what would you prefer? That humanity's collective knowledge be set in stone, never to change again regardless of any new information that becomes available?
  7. Joined
    06 May '05
    Moves
    9174
    09 Feb '08 18:50
    Originally posted by josephw
    Actually, this is a serious thread. I only titled it that way to generate a meaningful discussion.
    I may be wrong, but it seems to me that with all that scientists come up with all the time, that there wouldn't be so many contradictions. I hear this theory and that theory. And then come to find out they decide they were wrong and come up with a new prevailing theory. It drives me nuts.

    As far as I'm concerned science has run amuck.
    Yeah, science adapts and changes according to the evidence at hand and that is bad? Please explain.
  8. Joined
    27 Sep '06
    Moves
    9651
    09 Feb '08 19:08
    Originally posted by PsychoPawn
    Yeah, science adapts and changes according to the evidence at hand and that is bad? Please explain.
    Don't you think that science should establish the facts based on objective truth and not devise all these clever theories based on their preconceived ideas about how they would like things to be?

    I remember a time when science was about the business of establishing fact. But it appears science has evolved.

    [b]"Yeah, science adapts and changes according to the evidence at hand".[b/]
    It's the same evidence, but a whole new theory every day. You know as well as I do the whole scientific community is driven by money. And now politics has joined in. Death by a thousand cuts!
  9. Joined
    27 Sep '06
    Moves
    9651
    09 Feb '08 19:13
    Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
    Well, what would you prefer? That humanity's collective knowledge be set in stone, never to change again regardless of any new information that becomes available?
    I prefer facts. Any new information will only support the truth.

    You see, therein lies the deception. It is supposed that new information means that what is true now may not be true later. Truth is truth. New information that contradicts truth is a lie.
  10. Standard memberDoctorScribbles
    BWA Soldier
    Tha Brotha Hood
    Joined
    13 Dec '04
    Moves
    49088
    09 Feb '08 19:18
    Originally posted by josephw
    I prefer facts. Any new information will only support the truth.

    You see, therein lies the deception. It is supposed that new information means that what is true now may not be true later. Truth is truth. New information that contradicts truth is a lie.
    You are just very confused.
  11. Donationrwingett
    Ming the Merciless
    Royal Oak, MI
    Joined
    09 Sep '01
    Moves
    26187
    09 Feb '08 19:28
    Originally posted by josephw
    I prefer facts. Any new information will only support the truth.

    You see, therein lies the deception. It is supposed that new information means that what is true now may not be true later. Truth is truth. New information that contradicts truth is a lie.
    Everyone prefers facts, if available. But it may be the case that absolute facts are beyond our grasp. We may simply not be able to ever grasp the Truth about anything. But we can always form closer and closer approximations of that truth. I know it's a shock to discover your parents are imperfect beings, but god is incapable of restoring that certainty to you, except in a superficial sense.
  12. Donationkirksey957
    Outkast
    With White Women
    Joined
    31 Jul '01
    Moves
    91452
    09 Feb '08 19:37
    Originally posted by josephw
    I prefer facts. Any new information will only support the truth.

    You see, therein lies the deception. It is supposed that new information means that what is true now may not be true later. Truth is truth. New information that contradicts truth is a lie.
    It was once thought that masturbation caused baldness and blindness and that chronic masturbators had lower intelligence. This was considered "truth." Is new information about this a "lie"?
  13. DonationPawnokeyhole
    Krackpot Kibitzer
    Right behind you...
    Joined
    27 Apr '02
    Moves
    16879
    09 Feb '08 19:58
    Originally posted by josephw
    Actually, this is a serious thread. I only titled it that way to generate a meaningful discussion.
    I may be wrong, but it seems to me that with all that scientists come up with all the time, that there wouldn't be so many contradictions. I hear this theory and that theory. And then come to find out they decide they were wrong and come up with a new prevailing theory. It drives me nuts.

    As far as I'm concerned science has run amuck.
    You crave a perfect authority to tell you what's what.

    Grow up, accept that reality is complicated, and that understand that empirical investigations of a complex subject matter by people with imperfect intelligence and limited tools are bound to involve theoretical disputes that are only gradually resolved.
  14. Joined
    15 Oct '06
    Moves
    10115
    09 Feb '08 20:50
    Originally posted by josephw
    Actually, this is a serious thread. I only titled it that way to generate a meaningful discussion.
    I may be wrong, but it seems to me that with all that scientists come up with all the time, that there wouldn't be so many contradictions. I hear this theory and that theory. And then come to find out they decide they were wrong and come up with a new prevailing theory. It drives me nuts.

    As far as I'm concerned science has run amuck.
    Do you acknowledge that "Christianity" as a whole is probably just as, if not more, contradictory as to the interpretation of the teachings of Jesus?
  15. Standard memberknightmeister
    knightmeister
    Uk
    Joined
    21 Jan '06
    Moves
    443
    09 Feb '08 21:50
    Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
    Do you acknowledge that "Christianity" as a whole is probably just as, if not more, contradictory as to the interpretation of the teachings of Jesus?
    No he probably won't. It's you that has the "interpretation" not Christianity. Jesus said his church would stand and nothing would prevail against it. Do you really think the God of Jesus would allow the truth to be lost and for St Paul to come in and deceive us all?

    You have an interpretation based on only half of the sayings of Jesus (the other half remain ignored and brushed over by you) . St Paul had the complete picture. If you would like to explore the complete picture and have your lies exposed feel free. We went there once and you ran off. Until then stop trying to find a "way in" to other Christians , I'm still around to warn them about you.
Back to Top