Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 107 (8805 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 12-10-2017 9:00 PM
345 online now:
Dredge, dwise1, Faith, jar (4 members, 341 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: jaufre
Post Volume:
Total: 824,000 Year: 28,606/21,208 Month: 672/1,847 Week: 47/475 Day: 47/58 Hour: 0/2

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
1
23Next
Author Topic:   The Three Minute SOAPBOX:
Phat
Member
Posts: 10222
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.3


Message 1 of 41 (256423)
11-03-2005 4:56 AM


Give a Shout Out to a virtual audience
The purpose of this topic is simply to allow anyone to have the opportunity to say whatever they want to say to everyone who may be listening to them here at EvC forum. Any topic is fair game, and politeness and proper form is expected.

Jump up here on the podium and give your best advice, encouragement, philosophy, or pet topic that you feel must be said. Everyone can have about a screens worth of stuff to say...a good three minute speech. Direct your rant at everyone and not just a select audience of one, two, or a few. This soapbox can be heard for virtually thousands of miles away from your computer!

********************************************************************
Everyone will be famous for 15 minutes.
Andy Warhol

This message has been edited by Phat, 11-30-2005 04:18 AM

Edited by Phat, : modified rules


Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by Phat, posted 11-04-2005 3:19 AM Phat has acknowledged this reply
 Message 4 by mike the wiz, posted 11-04-2005 12:40 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply
 Message 5 by purpledawn, posted 11-04-2005 12:45 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply
 Message 23 by Ben!, posted 12-23-2005 11:34 AM Phat has acknowledged this reply
 Message 28 by Phat, posted 01-02-2008 5:59 PM Phat has responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 10222
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.3


Message 2 of 41 (256691)
11-04-2005 3:19 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Phat
11-03-2005 4:56 AM


Bumpity Bump? Anyone?
and one more good bumpitidy bump bump bump
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Phat, posted 11-03-2005 4:56 AM Phat has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by Omnivorous, posted 11-04-2005 11:08 AM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
Omnivorous
Member (Idle past 577 days)
Posts: 3808
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005


Message 3 of 41 (256773)
11-04-2005 11:08 AM
Reply to: Message 2 by Phat
11-04-2005 3:19 AM


Ahem. By their fruits shall ye know them...
Sure, Phat. I can almost always crank up a good rant...

A source of puzzlement to me: Evangelicals/Creationists mostly find their home in the Republican Party, along with big business.

Why are they so anxious to despoil the earth? If God created this beautiful place and made us stewards of it, why are the Republican-identified Evangelicals/Creationists so ardent about valuing profit over conservation? Why are they so sanguine about the loss of entire species?

One would think this world would sparkle to them with the sacredness of their Creator, and every creature in it would be precious. Instead, they seem to delight in rolling back environmental protection laws, in proposing higher tolerances for mercury in their air and children, in profit over preservation, in war over peace.

Did God lard the earth with life so we could gleefully slaughter it?

Calling themselves conservative, they thirst to suck every last drop of oil (and all other resources) out of the earth, leaving none for the generations to come and without regard for the impact on the planet, its people, and its wildlife. Why do they support filling the national parks and wildernesses with Machine Heads until the gate rangers have to wear gas masks against the clouds of exhaust?

Why are so many environmentalists and lovers of all creatures secularists? Where are the voices of the faithful? Why is there no chorus rising from the churches to stop the destruction of this gorgeous world?

Edited by AdminPhat, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by Phat, posted 11-04-2005 3:19 AM Phat has acknowledged this reply

    
mike the wiz
Member (Idle past 63 days)
Posts: 4600
From: u.k
Joined: 05-24-2003


Message 4 of 41 (256788)
11-04-2005 12:40 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Phat
11-03-2005 4:56 AM


Under-apreciated Skeptick
Rantastic. :) Great topic Phatz.

I hope I'm not limited to a rant-ratio per day.

I think the skeptick is a highly under-apreciated individual.

I watch a program[me] about ghost-hunting. Every week this pyschic dude comes on the show and pretends to be posessed by spirits. (I can say pretends as a skeptick de-bunked the bullshitter).

You might guess the show. I won't name names. Anyway, sometimes they hava a live show, and the audience nearly always boohs and whistles down the skeptick, and his evidentially and logically-based suggestions are met with much murmuring and discontent amongst the tumult. So now the skeptick set the psychic up, and planted anagrams into the field of history being investigated in haunted locations. --> Each week the psychic is supposed to get messages from his spirit-guide, and tell us the history of the places they visit, ghost-hunting. So our parapsychologist set up "fake history" and asked someone to discretely pass along this information to the psychic. The anagrams that were supposed to be historical names, were made of statements like "this guy's a bulshitter", "he's a fake", "you're being duped" etc.

So anyway, the psychic, during the show, came up with all the fake planted historical names he thought he was getting from a genuine source, which is highly amusing, and proves what a lying snake he is, as he's most definitely the richest psychic in the country by now, because of this show.

What does this prove? The crowd will heckle the honest skeptick who wants to get at the truth, even if the guys they're desperate to believe in are full of it, and haven't a logical, reasonable or honest bone in their body.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Phat, posted 11-03-2005 4:56 AM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 1067 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 5 of 41 (256791)
11-04-2005 12:45 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Phat
11-03-2005 4:56 AM


Common Courtesy In The Home
It is a shame that many married couples don’t show as much common courtesy to each ‎other around the home as they do to a stranger.‎ (Of course there are some people who are not courteous anywhere.)

So often I hear, “Well it's the man’s job” or “It's the woman’s job”. Sometimes it isn’t ‎even gender specific, but has been designated as the other’s job.‎

A few come to mind:

If you drink coffee in the morning and spill dry or wet coffee in the process of making it, ‎why not clean up after yourself? Note to coffee drinkers who fill their cup to the brim ‎and then spill one inch of it on the way to their sitting destination: DON’T FILL IT TO ‎THE BRIM!‎

If clothes have been left in the dryer and you need the dryer, why not fold the clothes? ‎Don’t just stuff them in the basket to wrinkle.‎

If the trash can is full, why not change the bag even though it isn’t your job?‎

Gentlemen, when you’re in the head, if you can’t hit the hole, why not clean up after ‎yourself?
Note: If you can’t hit the hole, SIT!‎

When you need assistance from your significant other, request and coordinate. Don’t ‎demand. ‎

Most of all say thank you when your significant other does something for you.‎

For the last 19 years, I have always told my husband thank you for doing things he didn’t ‎have to do, helping me and when he takes me out to dinner, movies, etc. He shows the ‎same courtesy and respect to me.‎

Common courtesy makes life a little more pleasant.

Thank you :)


Nobody can make you feel inferior without your permission. -Eleanor Roosevelt-
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Phat, posted 11-03-2005 4:56 AM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
robinrohan
Inactive Member


(2)
Message 6 of 41 (256792)
11-04-2005 12:47 PM


We need to read more
I've just got back from the library with an armful of new books, and I can't wait to dive in. So I'm happy, and I hope you're happy too!

Here's what I got:

"Quick and Easy Ways to Humiliate a Christian: A Concise Handbook," by Crashfrog.

"The Randman Index: A complete list and description of every fossil ever found on the face of the earth, combined in a composite study with a complete list and description of every organism that ever lived on the face of the earth, yielding the Randman Rate of Fossilization," by Randman.

"My Life as a Transitional: an Epic Poem in Rhymed Couplets," by Parasomnium.

"Diary of a Martyr," by Faith.

"The Politics of Cocks: A Sociological Look at the Male Organ," by Holmes (includes photos).

"Hugh Heffner: A Hero of Our Times," by Schrafinator.

"Evolution Makes me Cry," by Prophex.

"Just Try: The New Theology," by Jar. (just glanced at it so far: the first sentence reads, rather simply and profoundly, "It's just that simple."

"How I Made It at Cornell," by Brad McFall. Translated by Ben.

This message has been edited by robinrohan, 11-04-2005 11:49 AM


Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by Parasomnium, posted 11-07-2005 10:16 AM robinrohan has not yet responded

  
Parasomnium
Member (Idle past 306 days)
Posts: 2191
Joined: 07-15-2003


(1)
Message 7 of 41 (257462)
11-07-2005 10:16 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by robinrohan
11-04-2005 12:47 PM


My Life as a Transitional
My Life as a Transitional

A Not-Quite-So-Epic-As-Some-Would-Have-It Poem in Rhymed Couplets

by Parasomnium

(End notes by Robin Rohan)

't Was not the state of Belgium, but to its north a nation,
where my daddy's sperm met with my dearest mummy's ovum,
and it truly was a cause for the most happy celebration,
for it turned out that I was really something of a novum.

It took nine months fiddling, most painstaking,
by the mixture of my parents' DNA,
the genes in which took part in the decision making
of which limb went where, and how to keep deformity at bay.

Then came the day of my first stage appearance,
which I'm often told was very untraditional,
'cause though most babies' first cries lack coherence,
mine were: "Good afternoon, I'm a transitional."

I looked not too much unlike my lovely mother
though it seemed that that was nothing new,
we had seen the same thing in my elder brother
who, it appeared, looked somewhat like my mother too.

And both of us, we had my handsome father's looks as well,
which also was not much of a surprise,
because once we were a tiny embryonic cell,
it was determined we would have his ears and eyes.

On my first occasion in the world at large I spent
a long time walking down a graded slope,
shaking hands with many predecessors, until at the end
I found that I was talking to a microscope.

After tweaking some parameters to clear away the static,
(the thing was not the optic kind, and electrons were buzzin')
I saw something that, to me at least, appeared quite enzymatic
but which I knew to be my very oldest cousin.

Having seen I came from not much more than a colloidal solution,
I discarded so-called theories of intelligent design,
for I knew now that the process we call evolution
is a mindless trick of nature, and hardly anything devine.

With my new-gained knowledge, to a site called EvC I sped
where I was welcomed and all posters to a man wished
me good luck and happy learning, so I opened up a thread,
in which I started well, but was soon completely vanquished.

The discussion veered towards a species' definition,
and after many messages containing verbal mincing,
one of the debaters, who was a kind of politician,
still thought of seamlessness as very unconvincing.

Then, in the coffee house, he called on my poetic skill
to which I happily obliged, the result of which you're reading
I did my very best and I sincerely hope it fits the bill:
it'll have to, for all this rhyming is my normal life impeding.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by robinrohan, posted 11-04-2005 12:47 PM robinrohan has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by Nighttrain, posted 11-20-2005 6:37 PM Parasomnium has not yet responded

  
ohnhai
Member (Idle past 2772 days)
Posts: 649
From: Melbourne, Australia
Joined: 11-17-2004


Message 8 of 41 (261511)
11-20-2005 9:27 AM


my liitle rant
<>

I truly don’t get it. Though I am an Atheist, and a supporter of scientific ideals, holding the current idioms to be the best explanations we have to date, I still will state that despite what I believe in regard to the existence of god, that none of what I know excludes the hand of god from being fundamentally the route cause of everything. You can support all that science has to say AND still believe that god is the sole cause of it all, you don’t loose a thing.

In that light what I don’t get is the lack of willingness of those of religion to embrace that idea and recognise it for the wondrous thing that that is. Just because science and the bible don’t see eye to eye in orders and dates and specifics, doesn’t mean that the two are mutually exclusive. It just means that you just have to read the bible in a less than a 100% literal manner.

We don’t know how the universe got started, we don’t, so inserting a GDI (God Did It) at the very start is just as valid as the many other strange and weird notions out there. And by being the root cause the GDI becomes the GDI for the species, the Grand Canyon, all of it. Everything is in the opening GDI.

I believe that the initial GDI did not happen ‘cause I believe God or any gods do not exist. But, I am willing to admit, that does not bar it from being a valid explanation as good as any other till we can get some hard evidence.

So I just simply don’t get it why some religious types don’t see there is little point in denying Evolution and an old earth when there is so much evidence and placing a single GDI at the start makes the whole thing more miraculous in the first place.

<>


Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by GDR, posted 11-20-2005 10:54 AM ohnhai has not yet responded

    
GDR
Member
Posts: 4365
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.8


Message 9 of 41 (261529)
11-20-2005 10:54 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by ohnhai
11-20-2005 9:27 AM


Re: my liitle rant
As a Christian I agree with you except that I would add something to it. Evolution, as I understand it, is at it most basic just a series of irregularly occurring genetic mutations. Why did those genetic mutations occur?

Edited by AdminPhat, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by ohnhai, posted 11-20-2005 9:27 AM ohnhai has not yet responded

    
Nighttrain
Member (Idle past 1604 days)
Posts: 1512
From: brisbane,australia
Joined: 06-08-2004


Message 10 of 41 (261621)
11-20-2005 6:37 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by Parasomnium
11-07-2005 10:16 AM


Re: My Life as a Transitional
Nice job, Para, but I think Shakespeare (or is it Sir Henry Neville?) can rest easy.:D
This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by Parasomnium, posted 11-07-2005 10:16 AM Parasomnium has not yet responded

    
Phat
Member
Posts: 10222
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.3


Message 11 of 41 (264389)
11-30-2005 6:15 AM


The Three Minute SOAPBOX:
The purpose of this topic is simply to allow anyone to have the opportunity to say whatever they want to say to everyone who may be listening to them here at EvC forum. Any topic is fair game, and politeness and proper form is expected.

Jump up here on the podium and give your best advice, encouragement, philosophy, or pet topic that you feel must be said. Everyone can have about a screens worth of stuff to say...a good three minute speech. Direct your rant at everyone and not just a select audience of one, two, or a few. This soapbox can be heard for virtually thousands of miles away from your computer!

********************************************************************
Everyone will be famous for 15 minutes.
Andy Warhol

This message has been edited by Phat, 11-30-2005 09:08 AM

Edited by Phat, : No reason given.


  
Larni
Member
Posts: 3951
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 12 of 41 (264678)
12-01-2005 7:59 AM


Things to do.
I spend hours every day telling my clients what essentially boils down to this:

"Just 'cause you believe it, dos'ent mean it's true."

"When you are angry* you act angry, feel angry, you think angry, you have angry chemistry and you effect the world like an angry person. But afterwards when you calm down you know thats not the real you."

* insert any emotional state

"If you never do things, things won't get done."

"Other people can't read your mind, you have tell them."

"When you ask yourself: what if.......? (insert negative prediction), answer the question, don't sit there asking 'what if.....? over and over."

"Worrying is a habit, it's like smoking, you can quit"


    
iano
Member (Idle past 793 days)
Posts: 6164
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 13 of 41 (264682)
12-01-2005 8:14 AM


Gods love
There seems to be a natural human tendency to think that we have to do stuff to get stuff. I want money - so I work to get money, I want a girlfriend - so I shower and shave and put on my best clothes. I want to go 160mph - so I by a Yamaha 1000 that can achieve such speeds.

We are very, very wary of anything that comes along with the tag FREE written on it. We smile when we hear of people who actually "send their money NOW!

When it comes to Religion it's the same thing. Every world Religion has at it's root the idea that your position before the God/ Energy/Consciousness/whatever that is in question is determined by what YOU do. Nothing is free, therefore if one wants what the particular Religion offers, one must do something to get it: pray, go to church, meditate, do yoga, kill ego, flagellate themselves, become a suicide bomber, do unto others, obey ones teachers. "Do this and you'll get that" in other words.

Love is different than all these things. A person who truly loves someone doesn't love them in order to get anything. A parent can love it's child simply because it loves it. It expects nor demands anything in return. And even when the child behaves abominantly - the parent - even though angry, even though they may not particularily like the child at that moment - still loves it. It seems that love, true love that is, comes in an envelope marked FREE GIFT.

And it for that reason perhaps, love being something freely given, that love is prized over all other things. And if one has ever loved or been loved then they might agree that there is no better experience to be had than experiencing what it is to love/be loved.

If it is true that "God so loved the world he gave his only son for it" then it is reasonable to suppose that that special characteristic of love, freely given, is present. If God loves us then it cannot be dependant on us being good or acknowledging him or liking him or loving him back.

Love always wants love to be reciprocated, for there is nothing so painful as unrequited love. True love cannot, however, use threat or pressure or trickery to achieve this. It can only be satisfied if the beloved makes the free choice to love back. If our experience of love is similar in kind to God's love, if he desires to have that love reciprocated, then he must woo the object of his love. I say 'woo' and I think this is a limit that not even God can transgress. As in life, it is not fair to blurt out to the object of your love "I love you so madly I could die if you do not return my love" This puts unfair pressure on the object. Any possible choice is immediately distorted by the necessity to take the others feelings into account. How could one make a completely free choice under those circumstances. What person could freely say No! were it God to express his feelings so directly.

It should be obvious that we, under our own steam, cannot find God. God must be the one to reveal himself to us. And he can do so only by wooing us. My advice? Keep your hearts eyes out for God. He is wooing you. Maybe even at this very moment.

This message has been edited by iano, 01-Dec-2005 01:22 PM


  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19292
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 14 of 41 (264883)
12-01-2005 8:11 PM


Firefox 1.5 -- anyone tried it yet?
All I've heard is hype. Guess I'll have to upgrade to really find out anyway eh?

Edited by AdminPhat, : No reason given.


Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by jar, posted 12-01-2005 8:12 PM RAZD has not yet responded
 Message 16 by Yaro, posted 12-01-2005 8:15 PM RAZD has responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 29745
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 1.7


Message 15 of 41 (264884)
12-01-2005 8:12 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by RAZD
12-01-2005 8:11 PM


Re: Firefox 1.5 -- anyone tried it yet?
yes, so far as good as the Betas


Aslan is not a Tame Lion
This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by RAZD, posted 12-01-2005 8:11 PM RAZD has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by Phat, posted 12-02-2005 7:18 AM jar has not yet responded

  
1
23Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017