....
Ridiculous beliefs deserve to be ridiculed.
Don't forget too much people suffered and died for not following those ridiculous beliefs, atheists have been persecuted for way too long, killed, burned, tortured, dismembered, banished, shunned, associated with immorality, robbed of their possessions, chased away from their property, but now there's free speech and those people better have thick skin if they still maintain those same ridiculous beliefs.
The problem with that point of view is that for most of history, atheism was ridiculous. The invention of the microscope changed that. Before then, spontaneous generation of life was obvious and this 'proved' the existence of supernatural phenomena as part of and parcel of life. Hence, the spiritual world existed. It was only a question of one or many gods, but that question could not have rationally had an option of 0 gods. So for me to accept your initial premise means that I must accept as rational the past ridicule and suffering of atheists. Which I do not. You seem to be advocating a 'what goes around comes around' or an 'eye for an eye'. But (some of the Christians on the forum might comment on this) that seems to be contrary to the fundamental teachings of the New Testament. I see where you're coming from, but I'm not advocating an "eye for eye". When the first guy invented the first god, I'm sure there was another guy next to him that said I don't believe what you're saying, there have been atheists as long as there have been theists. Epicurus (341–270 B.C.E.) Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God? And yes, now we have science, but there are people that still maintain beliefs that go against reality, beliefs from the bronze age, and that is ridiculous and dangerous! |
|
|
|
The theorem says that God, or a supreme being, is that for which no greater can be conceived. God exists in the understanding. If God exists in the understanding, we could imagine Him to be greater by existing in reality. Therefore, God must exist. This is contradictory and stupid logic, what they're essentially saying is that if you believe it is real then it must exist and that's the kind of arguments that religious people have been using for years, whether or not they are correct is down to the evidence provided as we've known yet again for years, I also noticed that these articles don't bother going into any of the actual maths or scientific evidence for this theory which basically means they're putting up a ridiculous headline so they'll get people reading. As far as I'm concerned, gods have to prove their existence to me if they want me to believe in them, not the other way round, this looks a lot like fake or very dodgy science to me to make it seem that religious people are correct. In Imaginationland everything is possible.  From the articles: But unsurprisingly, there is a rather significant caveat to that claim. In fact, what the researchers in question say they have actually proven is a theorem put forward by renowned Austrian mathematician Kurt Gödel -- and the real news isn't about a Supreme Being, but rather what can now be achieved in scientific fields using superior technology. and The theorem says that God, or a supreme being, is that for which no greater can be conceived. God exists in the understanding. If God exists in the understanding, we could imagine Him to be greater by existing in reality. Therefore, God must exist. |
|
|
|
|
Well, atheism, agnosticism, Juedu-Christianity and Polytheist are not religions, but we understand what you're trying say...
|
|
|
|
Please read what I said at first, and then you will realize that some of you are posting off-topic here. This is not a thread for debating with fools about whether God is, or whether Jesus is, or not. And I quote from the Holy Bible: 'The Fool Has Said In His Heart, There Is No God' What did I say in my first post? Reply here in this thread if you believe in Jesus ChristNot only are some people blind and deaf, but they also cannot read, nor understand.  Ah, quoting the Bible, here's my favorite: Ezekiel 23:19-21 Yet she became more and more promiscuous as she recalled the days of her youth, when she was a prostitute in Egypt. There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses. So you longed for the lewdness of your youth, when in Egypt your bosom was caressed and your young breasts fondled. |
|
|
|
|
Yeah, to the opposite of the moon!!!1
|
|
|
|
After musing about the latest Snowden release...and getting some lol's out of it...
It would be interesting to know how the NSA would interpret the jurisdictional considerations of GFEs floating either in the San Francisco Bay or 12 miles off-shore. I'm sure it would be a state secret so asking them directly would not be very productive, but interesting ans seemingly reliable information about this stuff seems to be getting out anyway.
NSA doesn't care about laws or jurisdictions. |
|
|
|
JohnyBigs investigating labcon, thats alsmost as funny as when Goat was going to hunt down Pirate.
FTFY  |
|
|
|
|
It happens from time to time, after a few hours it works fine again.
|
|
|
|
Everything works fine now. |
|
|
|
|
Dividends are out, 0.00000225 per share.
Total 18.21224025 BTC, shouldn't it be more?
|
|
|
|
Can someone do something bad with the data?
Of course not, please pm me your Drivers License, Passport, and a Utility Bill. Theres nothing malicious I can do with that data. I don't have a passport, but tell me, what can be done with a name and an address? "they'll" come over and eat your brains... Oh, ok then. |
|
|
|
Can someone do something bad with the data?
Of course not, please pm me your Drivers License, Passport, and a Utility Bill. Theres nothing malicious I can do with that data. I don't have a passport, but tell me, what can be done with a name and an address? |
|
|
|
Google made serious efforts for transparency.
...of our data and conversations to the Obama administration, yes... ...which top execs at Google helped get relected..... Haha, well done sir! But I was talking about this: http://www.google.com/transparencyreport/Google fought in court because they could not disclose some requests. |
|
|
|
There was also 13 from yesterday that never went out.  There's also a few dozens TH/s missing... |
|
|
|
I shut down Bitcoin QT, restarted the computer, started up Bitcoin QT and now it's counting down the weeks (slowly) as it was doing before.
You can download a big chunk of the blockchain with bittorrent, by using that it will take less time to synchronize, something like one day, it will depend on several factors but much less than letting Bitcoin-QT from scratch. Check here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=145386.0 |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
