Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Riddle me this
pingu~
Guest


Message 4 of 21 (33989)
03-09-2003 5:15 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by funkmasterfreaky
03-09-2003 12:44 PM


Any sort of discussion
Yes indeed, funkmaster, any sort of discussion would be fine with me. In ye olde daze, the Bible was used as the main book of instruction to teach reading and writing, among other things. I would have thought that scholars of the Bible even today would have picked up basic spelling and grammar by osmosis.
So, what do you think?
Here's what I think. The Bible is supposed to be a guide to life, the universe and everything. Why, then, does it not tell me what to do in the event that I register a handle at and receive no confirmation email, thus forcing me to continue to post as a visitor while preventing me from using my "reserved" chosen name?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 03-09-2003 12:44 PM funkmasterfreaky has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by Gzus, posted 03-09-2003 5:21 PM You replied
 Message 7 by Admin, posted 03-10-2003 8:38 AM You have not replied

  
pingu~
Guest


Message 6 of 21 (33995)
03-09-2003 6:14 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by Gzus
03-09-2003 5:21 PM


My point
My point would appear to be that Creationists don't read their Bibles very thoroughly. But that's debatable - perhaps good grammar and spelling are not obtainable by osmosis (I saw a Creationist write "devine" on another thread - sheesh!) or perhaps Creationists are unaware of how their poor English language skills are undermining their case, or perhaps they are just not very well educated.
Whatever. It's open for discussion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Gzus, posted 03-09-2003 5:21 PM Gzus has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by Peter, posted 03-20-2003 9:10 AM You have not replied

  
pingu~
Guest


Message 9 of 21 (34493)
03-16-2003 3:15 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by Buzsaw
03-15-2003 3:22 PM


quote:
3. Wisdom is that unique and wonderful ability of what to do with knowledge, and the more educated the world becomes, it seems, the worse off the world becomes and the further from truth we stray.
What is your evidence that the world is worse off today, and that this is a result of an increase in education?
What is the truth, and how do you know? What is your evidence that others who claim a different truth are wrong?
Are education, knowledge and critical thinking not required in order to assess what is the truth?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Buzsaw, posted 03-15-2003 3:22 PM Buzsaw has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by Admin, posted 03-16-2003 10:24 AM You replied
 Message 11 by Buzsaw, posted 03-16-2003 10:52 AM You replied

  
pingu~
Guest


Message 12 of 21 (34524)
03-16-2003 5:52 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by Admin
03-16-2003 10:24 AM


Re: Username and Password
quote:
Haven't your registration problems been solved yet? Please see Message 7.
Saw it - and thank you - I can only think that Hotmail is kindly deleting these messages for me. Doesn't matter.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Admin, posted 03-16-2003 10:24 AM Admin has not replied

  
pingu~
Guest


Message 13 of 21 (34525)
03-16-2003 6:09 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by Buzsaw
03-16-2003 10:52 AM


quote:
1. Students of science and physics are taught to regard uproven theory to be more beneficial than common sense and logic.
Could you give me other examples of science that defy logic and common sense? I realise there may be teachers and scientists who are illogical and have little common sense, but I'm referring to science as a field of study, ie. a methodology.
quote:
Logic and common sense says you can't have a decrease in entropy to the super magnitude the earth experiences and the other planets with nothing atol going on.
Okay, this is one example but I dispute it. Firstly, I think you mean *increase* in entropy (disorder) - given that, why does this defy logic? Entropy increases in a closed system. The Earth is not closed - we have a gazillion megawatts of energy from the Sun streaming into the system every second of the day.
Also, common sense and simple observation shows me that order does increase in localised areas: snowflakes form, embryos grow.
quote:
2. The more learned we get, the more social problems such as divorce, drugs, raising and educating children, crime, personal freedom, etc.
Are you saying these phenomena are recent? Did we not have rampant crime 200 years ago? Child labour? Domestic violence? Bloody warmongering? Would my personal freedom as a young woman in the year 1000, 1500, or 1900 have been greater or lesser than it is today?
quote:
3. The medical field is a dandy example. After patients, like the woman in Jesus's day, have spent all their living with the doctors and are still sick, some of them wake up to the fact that wholistic healing which treats the body rather than the symptom is what makes them whole.
In the past, did we not have plagues that wiped out millions? Did we not die much younger, often in childhood or childbirth? Were we not infested with parasites and other chronic problems?
Are you saying we are worse off today, with our modern sanitation, our understanding of disease, our vaccinations, our knowledge of body systems and our surgical techniques? (I'm not saying it's all perfect, just querying your comment that we are worse off than before.)
Your general comments are not making much sense to me yet. Can you be more specific? Hopefully my questions will help guide your responses.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by Buzsaw, posted 03-16-2003 10:52 AM Buzsaw has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by Buzsaw, posted 03-16-2003 6:54 PM You replied

  
pingu~
Guest


Message 15 of 21 (34531)
03-16-2003 9:20 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by Buzsaw
03-16-2003 6:54 PM


quote:
Evolution defies the logic and common sense that billions of thiss n thats don't assemble themselves into very complex things as we observe on earth by chance, no matter how much time you give it.
Forgive me, but that's the kookiest definition of "evolution" I've ever heard.
quote:
I believe you need to reread my statement. I said entropy decreases on earth while the other planets are doing nothing. If anything the other planets and the sun are increasing in entropy. Logic and sense says if the earth decreases, the others should likewise. They're all open systems, are they not?
What I'm saying is that everyting on earth came to be by a decrease in entropy (imo creative intelligence at work)
Sorry, I did misunderstand because my interpretation was the only way I could make sense of what I thought you were trying to say. Thank you for the clarification. However, I still disagree - if what you have called a decrease in entropy refers to the life on Earth, you can't compare that to the sun and other planets which have no life. Obviously on planets with no life, there will be no increasing complexity in the biosphere. That's logic.
quote:
Have you checked out the rate of increase in crime over the last 50 years? I'm 67 and I know what's happening. On child labor, we've gone from that to the kids having all the idle time to run the streets and get into trouble. Child labor laws fixed that for the most part a long time ago. 50 and 60 years ago we as kids could get jobs to earn some money and learn skills and how to work with no fear of legal hassle. Nowadays everybody's afraid to hire a kid because of the minimum wage, legal law suits and government regs.
You have referred to one of the many examples I gave - I would welcome your comments on the others.
Regarding child labour: I'm not quite sure of the point you're making - you've gone from saying that too much education takes us further from the "truth", to saying that child labor laws are putting kids on the street where they make trouble. Is there a causal connection here? I don't see one.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by Buzsaw, posted 03-16-2003 6:54 PM Buzsaw has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by Buzsaw, posted 03-16-2003 11:53 PM You replied

  
pingu~
Guest


Message 18 of 21 (34549)
03-17-2003 3:51 AM
Reply to: Message 16 by Buzsaw
03-16-2003 11:53 PM


quote:
1. Far more domestic violence according to stats.
Which stats? How far back do the stats go? What about the times for which we have no stats? How can we know what the level of domestic violence was then?
quote:
2. More frequency of wars today.
Well, we have not defined "today" so I don't know what timeframe you mean, but I find it hard to believe that more people are suffering and dying because of war than ever before. Humans have always warred - and frequently by order of God.
quote:
3. On women, imo, the question should be "are women more content/better off then than now? I think so, because they were for the most part keepers at home an happy without the pressures raising the children to be good citizens and to love and respect their parents in later life.
You started well - contentment is a good indicator of the wellbeing of society. You seem to have an idealised view of what life for women was like, however, but I'm not going to give you a history lesson. I do ask you to show how logic and common sense are served by a society that denies women education and choice.
The "without the pressures" thing... Oops. Credibility slipping... slipping...
quote:
As far as authority in the home, men were kinder to women than now, over all, respected and loved them more because women were more willing to leave the leadership role to the man so as not to have 2 presidents of equal authority. That wouldn't work in business, government, club or church and it doesn't work in the home.
Men were NOT kinder to women. They loved and respected them LESS.
See, I can make assertions too! What proof do you have? And why do you think this alleged lack of kindness, love and respect is due to an over-educated society?
Eek!... credibility slipping further... the home is analagous to a government or church or club? That's news to me.
quote:
Also women were women, that is more feminine acting and loveable, imo.
Personal opinion, to which you're entitled, but not relevant to whether or not social problems have increased due to too much education.
quote:
My apologies, but not being retired and lots to do, my time responding is limited, but will do what I can. I hope you understand.
Till next time. I would like to hear your opinion on whether you think advances in science and medicine have brought us benefits, or are simply another cause of increased social problems than we previously had. I'd also like to know whether you think the scientific method, as a means of describing the universe, is bringing us closer to the truth of what the universe is.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Buzsaw, posted 03-16-2003 11:53 PM Buzsaw has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by PaulK, posted 03-17-2003 5:26 AM You replied

  
pingu~
Guest


Message 20 of 21 (34558)
03-17-2003 9:03 AM
Reply to: Message 19 by PaulK
03-17-2003 5:26 AM


quote:
Another important question is whether the stats on domestic violence represent occurrences or complaints. If the complaints have gone up it could well be a sign that domestic violence has become less acceptable - and could even be decreasing as a result.
Agreed - same goes for rape, which is certainly reported more often than it was 50, 100, 300 years ago. Due in no small part to the empowerment of women, I might add.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by PaulK, posted 03-17-2003 5:26 AM PaulK has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024