GOD - Page 4

dafydd · 21st June 2012, 04:39 PM

Originally Posted by Navigator

2: The OP explains that 'God' is masculine and further explains that the concept regarding 'Gods and Goddesses' is most definitely human in origin.

You just saying something is not an explanation.

Quote:

So we need then to remove the masks and costumes that have adorned the god concepts of human beings before we can even begin sensible discussion regarding GOD.[/i]

How can we have a sensible discussion about an imaginary being? We may as well attempt to have a sensible discussion about the Tooth Fairy.

Krikkiter · 21st June 2012, 04:41 PM

Navigator, could you explain to me the nature and properties of this "SOURCE"?

Gawdzilla · 21st June 2012, 04:51 PM

Originally Posted by dafydd

GOD has been known to be a SADIST too.

And utterly incompetent. The bungles in the Gard of Eden, for starters. And then he had to kill almost every living thing on the planet to get rid of a rogue batch of humans. (Most of whom would have never heard of him.) A GOD who can't just wave his hand and correct a mistake? A GOD who makes mistakes! A bungling moron.

Jack by the hedge · 21st June 2012, 04:54 PM

Of course his idea of stripping back the human concept of God to reveal its true essence presupposes that the idea of God is constructed around something real in the first place.

Like many others here, I make no such assumption.

Krikkiter · 21st June 2012, 05:14 PM

Originally Posted by Jack by the hedge

Of course his idea of stripping back the human concept of God to reveal its true essence presupposes that the idea of God is constructed around something real in the first place.

Like many others here, I make no such assumption.

God is a human construct. Which is why Navigator's spiel is so meaningless to me. He seems to be asking us to discuss (not argue - that would be stupid!) the concept of God as if God wasn't a human construct at all. In which case, why frame the argument in convoluted ravings?

Why not just present evidence of this 'essence' or 'SOURCE' so we can discuss the properties of God? My guess is that, as I pointed out in my first post in this thread, Navigator doesn't have a proper argument. Just incoherent and thoughtless ramblings.

Navigator · 21st June 2012, 07:08 PM

Originally Posted by dafydd

You just saying something is not an explanation.

What I said - that you quoted was indeed an explanation.

Navigator · 21st June 2012, 07:12 PM

Originally Posted by Krikkiter

Navigator, could you explain to me the nature and properties of this "SOURCE"?

I said :
The metaphor explains how humans took a concept which is invisible and dressed it in their own understanding.
This is explainable and acceptable as part of the evolution of our specie. Remove the costumes and masks and what remains is Source.

What that Source is, is most likely incomprehensible.

The incomprehensible is not the same as ‘does not exist’

Pay attention people!

Krikkiter · 21st June 2012, 07:18 PM

Originally Posted by Navigator

I said :
The metaphor explains how humans took a concept which is invisible and dressed it in their own understanding.
This is explainable and acceptable as part of the evolution of our specie. Remove the costumes and masks and what remains is Source.

What that Source is, is most likely incomprehensible.

The incomprehensible is not the same as ‘does not exist’

Pay attention people!

Thank you for verifying that you have absolutely nothing to discuss despite your lengthy, rambling musings.

Oh and by the way, I'm sure that you understand that just as God is a human construct, so is your incomprehensible SOURCE.

Navigator · 21st June 2012, 07:21 PM

Originally Posted by dafydd

How can we have a sensible discussion about an imaginary being? We may as well attempt to have a sensible discussion about the Tooth Fairy.

Certainly on this board (but not this one alone) there are the usual stupid comments and conversations regarding those gods - especially the Judeo/Christian god concepts. Quiet right they are not sensible.
In order to have sensible discussion on must remove themselves from the stupidity of mere argument, pointless adolescent immaturity and also hate/blame etc.
Pointless even but I suppose it keeps the small-minded entertained and preoccupied.
Ironic.

How? Well if one were to have a sensible discussion about the tooth fairy - or santa clause for that matter, one would need to behave sensibly. It is possible. you have to make the effort of course.

Navigator · 21st June 2012, 07:23 PM

Originally Posted by Krikkiter

Oh and by the way, I'm sure that you understand that just as God is a human construct, so is your incomprehensible SOURCE.

Not at all although I accept that it may be the case for you. You ignore the Science (already mentioned).

Krikkiter · 21st June 2012, 07:32 PM

Originally Posted by Navigator

Not at all although I accept that it may be the case for you. You ignore the Science (already mentioned).

I must apologise profusely Navigator but I seem to have missed the science that's been discussed. I have read the whole thread and I can't find it. Could you quote the Science you've presented or link to it?

Many thanks,

Krikkiter.

Foster Zygote · 21st June 2012, 08:26 PM

Originally Posted by Navigator

Life on Earth is an anomaly...

And you know this how? You seem a bit like someone born 500 years ago to a small community of people on a tiny, isolated island in the middle of the Pacific ocean who declares that dry land is an anomaly in the world.

Quote:

...but even if it were the only planet in the universe, this would not necessarily signify that it thus needs a title of ‘extraordinary’. Indeed, that word belongs with ‘paranormal’ and ‘supernatural’.

Actually, yes, it would signify that life is extraordinary. If the Earth was the only planet with life out of all the planets orbiting the 10²² to 10²⁴ stars estimated to exist in the universe, then the ordinary planet would be lifeless. This would make the Earth not an ordinary planet regarding the presence of life.

Extraordinary: ORIGIN late Middle English: from Latin extraordinarius, from extra ordinem ‘outside the normal course of events.’

The only planet among tens or even hundreds of septillions of planets to have life would most certainly be "outside the normal course of events". "Extraordinary" denotes something rare. "Supernatural" denotes something that exists outside of nature. They are not the same thing. You simply have a poor understanding of the word "extraordinary".

Navigator · 21st June 2012, 09:41 PM

Originally Posted by Foster Zygote

And you know this how? You seem a bit like someone born 500 years ago to a small community of people on a tiny, isolated island in the middle of the Pacific ocean who declares that dry land is an anomaly in the world.

Actually, yes, it would signify that life is extraordinary. If the Earth was the only planet with life out of all the planets orbiting the 10²² to 10²⁴ stars estimated to exist in the universe, then the ordinary planet would be lifeless. This would make the Earth not an ordinary planet regarding the presence of life.

Extraordinary: ORIGIN late Middle English: from Latin extraordinarius, from extra ordinem ‘outside the normal course of events.’

The only planet among tens or even hundreds of septillions of planets to have life would most certainly be "outside the normal course of events". "Extraordinary" denotes something rare. "Supernatural" denotes something that exists outside of nature. They are not the same thing. You simply have a poor understanding of the word "extraordinary".

Okay I will go with that estimate, and acknowledge that in your opinion this would indeed be extraordinary.
Its fits well with the general message of the OP.

Now, what are you doing with the life you are living upon this extraordinary Planet?
Are you part of the problem or part of the solution?

Is it right for me to ask? Is it my business? I think so. Do you behave in the real world toward others as if you understand that they are part of this extraordinary reality?
Do you also behave this way in cyberland?

Think about this extraordinary thing – part of your reality…likely all of your reality!
What are YOU doing to input your nurturing aspects into the world -your humanity?
Are you among those who appear hopeless and angry and have no idea really what to do to contribute to change?
Are you one of those who picks out a particular type (for example…Christians) and focuses blame upon them for the woes of your world and so choose to verbally deride them?
I am not saying you are or do. I could go take a look, but suffice to say that many are doing just that.
It is a symptom of their frustration and feeling of powerlessness to behave as such, and offers some sort of relief from that frustration I would suppose, but what is it really achieving?

It appears to be like a drug for some. If the focus of ones anger and frustration happens to wander in and post, then wham bang and ye hah! Fix for the day!
(Nothing extraordinary in that.)
If they don’t, then someone will start some thread like this one here:
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=238308

which acts as a synthetic fix while ‘the real thing’ remains allusive.

It is interesting. I read a similar thread on another board which also mentioned the ‘fig tree’ subject in passing (the thread was called “Christianity and Violence”) and while there are many sceptics on that board, they are able to hold discussions.
It could be just as easy for any other skeptic based board to do the same…indeed I would say this board is likely known as THE skeptic board, but maybe not.
Yet it appears (appearances can be deceptive) that the sceptical membership is distracted by pettiness and the need to argue, as if – as I mentioned – it is a ‘fix’ and simply habitual and addictive.

Here is a snippet from that fig tree related comment:

I love that story...from daybreak to after dark...it is one of the funniest! All day long Jesus was having a 'bad hair day' - things were getting nearer to 'the time' and his patience wore a bit thin...he was also wanting to be noticed (hence both - and other - incidences) but after he had 'whipped things into shape, he left town and felt hungry and went to a fig tree...oops wrong season for fruiting! Your bad fig tree - you are soooo out of here! (Not exactly something a peace loving tree hugger would do) so here is god cursing yet another one of his creations for not pleasing him!
Seriously?
The real laugh comes later went - settling in for the night and talking around the fire, Jesus talks at length on the subject of 'Forgiveness'...it is not recorded which - if any - of the disciples asked him where his actions re the angry outburst an physical assault and re the fig tree fitted in with 'forgiveness' but maybe they forgave him.

http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com...0%20tree&st=45

A much more mature observation and use of humor than the one mentioned on this board – I agree.

Come on people! Get extraordinary!

(Krikkiter No doubt I will be mentioning that scientific law again. Maybe you will catch it then.)

Navigator · 21st June 2012, 09:43 PM

PS:
here check out this vid...I found it appropriate and humorous.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nw5W3CszeAI

Krikkiter · 21st June 2012, 10:14 PM

Originally Posted by Navigator

(Krikkiter No doubt I will be mentioning that scientific law again. Maybe you will catch it then.)

I'll take that as a no. The fact that you can't or won't show me where you presented your "Science" is telling. Science deals with evidence. Where is your evidence?

So far all I've seen is textual diarrhea.

Halfcentaur · 21st June 2012, 10:27 PM

Originally Posted by Navigator

Okay I will go with that estimate, and acknowledge that in your opinion this would indeed be extraordinary.
Its fits well with the general message of the OP.

Now, what are you doing with the life you are living upon this extraordinary Planet?
Are you part of the problem or part of the solution?

Is it right for me to ask? Is it my business? I think so. Do you behave in the real world toward others as if you understand that they are part of this extraordinary reality?
Do you also behave this way in cyberland?

Think about this extraordinary thing – part of your reality…likely all of your reality!
What are YOU doing to input your nurturing aspects into the world -your humanity?
Are you among those who appear hopeless and angry and have no idea really what to do to contribute to change?
Are you one of those who picks out a particular type (for example…Christians) and focuses blame upon them for the woes of your world and so choose to verbally deride them?
I am not saying you are or do. I could go take a look, but suffice to say that many are doing just that.
It is a symptom of their frustration and feeling of powerlessness to behave as such, and offers some sort of relief from that frustration I would suppose, but what is it really achieving?

It appears to be like a drug for some. If the focus of ones anger and frustration happens to wander in and post, then wham bang and ye hah! Fix for the day!
(Nothing extraordinary in that.)
If they don’t, then someone will start some thread like this one here:
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=238308

which acts as a synthetic fix while ‘the real thing’ remains allusive.

It is interesting. I read a similar thread on another board which also mentioned the ‘fig tree’ subject in passing (the thread was called “Christianity and Violence”) and while there are many sceptics on that board, they are able to hold discussions.
It could be just as easy for any other skeptic based board to do the same…indeed I would say this board is likely known as THE skeptic board, but maybe not.
Yet it appears (appearances can be deceptive) that the sceptical membership is distracted by pettiness and the need to argue, as if – as I mentioned – it is a ‘fix’ and simply habitual and addictive.

Here is a snippet from that fig tree related comment:

I love that story...from daybreak to after dark...it is one of the funniest! All day long Jesus was having a 'bad hair day' - things were getting nearer to 'the time' and his patience wore a bit thin...he was also wanting to be noticed (hence both - and other - incidences) but after he had 'whipped things into shape, he left town and felt hungry and went to a fig tree...oops wrong season for fruiting! Your bad fig tree - you are soooo out of here! (Not exactly something a peace loving tree hugger would do) so here is god cursing yet another one of his creations for not pleasing him!
Seriously?
The real laugh comes later went - settling in for the night and talking around the fire, Jesus talks at length on the subject of 'Forgiveness'...it is not recorded which - if any - of the disciples asked him where his actions re the angry outburst an physical assault and re the fig tree fitted in with 'forgiveness' but maybe they forgave him.

http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com...0%20tree&st=45

A much more mature observation and use of humor than the one mentioned on this board – I agree.

Come on people! Get extraordinary!

(Krikkiter No doubt I will be mentioning that scientific law again. Maybe you will catch it then.)

You ignore the fact this board is concerned with exposing the things our species as a norm distort about reality, and that on a near daily basis people come here making common distortions of reality and accuse the mean old skeptics of being close minded and dogmatic for not entertaining the same arguments from ignorance and confirmation bias as you have resorted to doing, rather than discuss the topic you choose to personalize the issues. This seems like nothing more than you asserting your sense of self worth through projection, and you're lecturing people on projection, which makes it a tangled mess of ego stroking and mental masturbation.

If you can resist the constant tit for tat, what makes you think for a second that a god is even to be considered as more than human construct? Why call it god?

kerikiwi · 21st June 2012, 10:58 PM

Originally Posted by Navigator

No doubt I will be mentioning that scientific law again. Maybe you will catch it then.)

Again? Why not just point us to where you mentioned it the first time?

Navigator · 21st June 2012, 11:37 PM

Originally Posted by Halfcentaur

You ignore the fact this board is concerned with exposing the things our species as a norm distort about reality...

What are you doing to contribute to the solution?
I don't ignore that this board is concerned with exposing what this board regards as 'the problem' anymore than I ignore hypocrisy.

Originally Posted by Halfcentaur

If you can resist the constant tit for tat, what makes you think for a second that a god is even to be considered as more than human construct? Why call it god?

Call what 'god'?

What do you think about this message?

Look again at that dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives. The aggregate of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions, ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every "superstar," every "supreme leader," every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there--on a mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam.

The Earth is a very small stage in a vast cosmic arena. Think of the rivers of blood spilled by all those generals and emperors so that, in glory and triumph, they could become the momentary masters of a fraction of a dot. Think of the endless cruelties visited by the inhabitants of one corner of this pixel on the scarcely distinguishable inhabitants of some other corner, how frequent their misunderstandings, how eager they are to kill one another, how fervent their hatreds.

Our posturings, our imagined self-importance, the delusion that we have some privileged position in the Universe, are challenged by this point of pale light. Our planet is a lonely speck in the great enveloping cosmic dark. In our obscurity, in all this vastness, there is no hint that help will come from elsewhere to save us from ourselves.

The Earth is the only world known so far to harbor life. There is nowhere else, at least in the near future, to which our species could migrate. Visit, yes. Settle, not yet. Like it or not, for the moment the Earth is where we make our stand.

It has been said that astronomy is a humbling and character-building experience. There is perhaps no better demonstration of the folly of human conceits than this distant image of our tiny world. To me, it underscores our responsibility to deal more kindly with one another, and to preserve and cherish the pale blue dot, the only home we've ever known.

-- Carl Sagan (1934-1996)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PN5J...layer_embedded

It is appropriate to the OP.

Navigator · 21st June 2012, 11:56 PM

Originally Posted by kerikiwi

Again? Why not just point us to where you mentioned it the first time?

http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php...&postcount=116

I think I may also have mentioned the law prior to this post, but there it is in this one.

gambling_cruiser · 21st June 2012, 11:57 PM

Is your message be nice to each other and try to develop a sustainable world?
Or what are you trying to achieve here?

Krikkiter · 22nd June 2012, 12:00 AM

Originally Posted by Navigator

What are you doing to contribute to the solution?
I don't ignore that this board is concerned with exposing what this board regards as 'the problem' anymore than I ignore hypocrisy. <snip rambling>

And here we are again. You don't like people disagreeing with you and you turn that into a problem with the way the forums operate. Your solution is not to voice your concerns with mods or admin but to use it as some kind of shield against rational discussion.

I think you should try getting to the point at some stage.

Krikkiter · 22nd June 2012, 12:17 AM

Originally Posted by Navigator

http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php...&postcount=116

I think I may also have mentioned the law prior to this post, but there it is in this one.

You mean this?

Originally Posted by Navigator

In the case of the OP, The SOURCE is not such an example of mistake. I do not myself attribute any particular persona/character to that Source. I simply acknowledge that – given the present Science – the universe had a beginning and the evidence suggested by science is commonly referred to as ‘the Big Bang’.

Given that we understand all subsequent events within the Universe can be traced to that one event and that those subsequent events are a chain of causes and effects following the law I have mentioned, the Big Bang is also an effect of a cause and the cause is the SOURCE.

You've certainly used the word law and you actually used the word science too. Have you given an explanation of this "law"? No. Have you presented any science? No. Then again, maybe you think using words in sentences counts as explanation?

Time to start making sense.

kerikiwi · 22nd June 2012, 01:07 AM

Originally Posted by Navigator

http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php...&postcount=116

I think I may also have mentioned the law prior to this post, but there it is in this one.

It seems you have your own unique definition of 'scientific law'.

Navigator · 22nd June 2012, 01:33 AM

Originally Posted by kerikiwi

It seems you have your own unique definition of 'scientific law'.

Perhaps I do.

What do you think of this?
Carl Sagan - Pale Blue Dot
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p86BPM1GV8M

It is relative to this thread OP.

How about this?
Newton's Third Law of Motion
http://www.physicsclassroom.com/clas...laws/u2l4a.cfm

Navigator · 22nd June 2012, 01:39 AM

Originally Posted by gambling_cruiser

Is your message be nice to each other and try to develop a sustainable world?
Or what are you trying to achieve here?

I have no message.

The subject (be nice to each other - develop a sustainable world) was brought into the thread and is aligned with the OP

I am not trying to achieve anything in particular.

Are you?

Navigator · 22nd June 2012, 01:41 AM

Originally Posted by Krikkiter

Time to start making sense.

Of what? What is it you don't understand about the OP?

Navigator · 22nd June 2012, 01:46 AM

Originally Posted by Krikkiter

And here we are again. You don't like people disagreeing with you and you turn that into a problem with the way the forums operate. Your solution is not to voice your concerns with mods or admin but to use it as some kind of shield against rational discussion.

I think you should try getting to the point at some stage.

1: I have no problem with anyone disagreeing with me.
2: I have no issue with the way this forum is run.
3: Rational discussion is preferable to what most replies to this thread are offering so far.
4: There is no 'point' to get to.

Jack by the hedge · 22nd June 2012, 01:56 AM

Originally Posted by Navigator

Perhaps I do.

What do you think of this?
Carl Sagan - Pale Blue Dot
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p86BPM1GV8M

It is relative to this thread OP.

How about this?
Newton's Third Law of Motion
http://www.physicsclassroom.com/clas...laws/u2l4a.cfm

OK. Sagan's pale blue dot reminds us that earth is the only home we have, so we ought to look after it. Nothing particularly contentious or novel there.

Newton's third law reminds us of the conservation of momentum. No problem with that.

Oh. Wait: Is this like a cryptic crossword clue and they both concern conservation? Do I win something?

If that's not it then I have no idea what point you are trying to make, so maybe you could just state it plainly instead of making all these longwinded, oblique allusions.

kerikiwi · 22nd June 2012, 02:01 AM

Originally Posted by Navigator

Perhaps I do.

What do you think of this?
Carl Sagan - Pale Blue Dot
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p86BPM1GV8M

It is relative to this thread OP.

How about this?
Newton's Third Law of Motion
http://www.physicsclassroom.com/clas...laws/u2l4a.cfm

You mean relevant, do you not, not relative?
But that has absolutely no connection to your unique definition of 'scientific law.'

Krikkiter · 22nd June 2012, 02:01 AM

Originally Posted by Navigator

1: I have no problem with anyone disagreeing with me.
2: I have no issue with the way this forum is run.
3: Rational discussion is preferable to what most replies to this thread are offering so far.
4: There is no 'point' to get to.

1. I disagree and I believe your posts are evidence of this.
2. I disagree - see above.
3. FWIW, I've been trying to discuss things rationally with you but considering 4: it seems like you're not interested.

Do you just enjoy typing?

Jack by the hedge · 22nd June 2012, 02:02 AM

Ah. I see that while I was contemplating your questions, you announced there was in fact no point to this thread at all, although you do encourage us to be nice to each other and look after the planet. OK. Thanks.

So, why is the thread called GOD?

dafydd · 22nd June 2012, 02:02 AM

Originally Posted by Navigator

What I said - that you quoted was indeed an explanation.

GOD is feminine and the SOURCE of embroidery. By your standard that is an explanation too.

dafydd · 22nd June 2012, 02:04 AM

Originally Posted by Navigator

3: Rational discussion is preferable to what most replies to this thread are offering so far.

You first. Start discussing rationally.

dafydd · 22nd June 2012, 02:06 AM

Originally Posted by Navigator

http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php...&postcount=116

I think I may also have mentioned the law prior to this post, but there it is in this one.

Do you know what the word ''science'' means?

Jack by the hedge · 22nd June 2012, 02:06 AM

All this thread teaches us so far is obscurantism =/= profundity.

Krikkiter · 22nd June 2012, 02:14 AM

Originally Posted by Navigator

Of what? What is it you don't understand about the OP?

Well, it's not just the OP it's also all your subsequent posts. You make all these vague and ambiguous statements (in the most convoluted way possible) about God and proper discussion and the Earth and life and the Big Bang and science and laws and so on, but you won't answer questions (or if you do the answers are just as vague) and refuse to elucidate.

So, just so I don't get pinged for going off topic, what is the topic of conversation?

dafydd · 22nd June 2012, 02:24 AM

Originally Posted by Krikkiter

So, just so I don't get pinged for going off topic, what is the topic of conversation?

Some kind of masculine god source, as far as I can make out. His posts are very disjointed and full of vague New Age speak.

Cactus Wren · 22nd June 2012, 02:32 AM

Originally Posted by Foster Zygote

And you know this how? You seem a bit like someone born 500 years ago to a small community of people on a tiny, isolated island in the middle of the Pacific ocean who declares that dry land is an anomaly in the world.

Halfcentaur · 22nd June 2012, 02:46 AM

Originally Posted by Navigator

What are you doing to contribute to the solution?I don't ignore that this board is concerned with exposing what this board regards as 'the problem' anymore than I ignore hypocrisy.

Call what 'god'?

What do you think about this message?

-SNIP-
It is appropriate to the OP.

The OP is apparently not willing to discussing anything but for the shortcomings of those who do not grasp the contents in their opening post, they are using blatant manipulative tactics and employing obfuscation as if it invokes or alludes to the profound.

Me? What about you? Me? What about you? Me? What about you? Remember when you said this? It might mean something about what I said, are you smart enough to glean the hints? Why aren't you smart enough? Who me? Not me, but maybe you. I know you are but what am I? No I didn't say that, but you seem to be saying that. Now that I've told you off, I'm going to point out you're just here to tell me off and not discuss anything, and I'm going to hint at a few things that give the impression of the profound. Who me? What about you?

This is a game, this is not a discussion.

Navigator · 22nd June 2012, 02:56 AM

Originally Posted by kerikiwi

You mean relevant, do you not, not relative?
But that has absolutely no connection to your unique definition of 'scientific law.'

Good you are making and effort not to be pedantic. You wouldn't believe how many individuals won't even acknowledge those who don't use English correctly or are considered lesser beings for not understanding exactly everything.

Okay so Newtons 3rd law of motion is not a scientific law?

21st June 2012, 04:39 PM	#121
dafydd Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Belgium (Flatland) Posts: 31,443	Originally Posted by Navigator 2: The OP explains that 'God' is masculine and further explains that the concept regarding 'Gods and Goddesses' is most definitely human in origin. You just saying something is not an explanation. Quote: So we need then to remove the masks and costumes that have adorned the god concepts of human beings before we can even begin sensible discussion regarding GOD.[/i] How can we have a sensible discussion about an imaginary being? We may as well attempt to have a sensible discussion about the Tooth Fairy.
	__________________ Yesterday upon the stairs I met a man who wasn't there He wasn't there again today I wish that he would go away.

21st June 2012, 04:51 PM	#123
Gawdzilla 121.92-meter mutant fire-breathing lizard-thingy Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Northern St. Louis County, Missouri. Posts: 13,358	Originally Posted by dafydd GOD has been known to be a SADIST too. And utterly incompetent. The bungles in the Gard of Eden, for starters. And then he had to kill almost every living thing on the planet to get rid of a rogue batch of humans. (Most of whom would have never heard of him.) A GOD who can't just wave his hand and correct a mistake? A GOD who makes mistakes! A bungling moron.
	__________________ World War II Diplomatic and Political Resources Hyperwar, WWII Military History Kido Butai did not transmit. 木戸舞台は、無線メッセージを送信しませんでした

21st June 2012, 07:08 PM	#126
Navigator Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 1,034	Originally Posted by dafydd You just saying something is not an explanation. What I said - that you quoted was indeed an explanation.
	__________________ "I have walked a mile in your shoes and discovered what your problem is...your feet are too small" ~σκεπτικιστής ακραίες

21st June 2012, 07:12 PM	#127
Navigator Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 1,034	Originally Posted by Krikkiter Navigator, could you explain to me the nature and properties of this "SOURCE"? I said : The metaphor explains how humans took a concept which is invisible and dressed it in their own understanding. This is explainable and acceptable as part of the evolution of our specie. Remove the costumes and masks and what remains is Source. What that Source is, is most likely incomprehensible. The incomprehensible is not the same as ‘does not exist’ Pay attention people!
	__________________ "I have walked a mile in your shoes and discovered what your problem is...your feet are too small" ~σκεπτικιστής ακραίες

21st June 2012, 07:21 PM	#129
Navigator Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 1,034	Originally Posted by dafydd How can we have a sensible discussion about an imaginary being? We may as well attempt to have a sensible discussion about the Tooth Fairy. Certainly on this board (but not this one alone) there are the usual stupid comments and conversations regarding those gods - especially the Judeo/Christian god concepts. Quiet right they are not sensible. In order to have sensible discussion on must remove themselves from the stupidity of mere argument, pointless adolescent immaturity and also hate/blame etc. Pointless even but I suppose it keeps the small-minded entertained and preoccupied. Ironic. How? Well if one were to have a sensible discussion about the tooth fairy - or santa clause for that matter, one would need to behave sensibly. It is possible. you have to make the effort of course.
	__________________ "I have walked a mile in your shoes and discovered what your problem is...your feet are too small" ~σκεπτικιστής ακραίες

21st June 2012, 04:41 PM	#122
Krikkiter Graduate Poster Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 1,261	Navigator, could you explain to me the nature and properties of this "SOURCE"?

21st June 2012, 04:54 PM	#124
Jack by the hedge Safely Ignored Join Date: Oct 2009 Posts: 5,403	Of course his idea of stripping back the human concept of God to reveal its true essence presupposes that the idea of God is constructed around something real in the first place. Like many others here, I make no such assumption.

21st June 2012, 05:14 PM	#125
Krikkiter Graduate Poster Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 1,261	Originally Posted by Jack by the hedge Of course his idea of stripping back the human concept of God to reveal its true essence presupposes that the idea of God is constructed around something real in the first place. Like many others here, I make no such assumption. God is a human construct. Which is why Navigator's spiel is so meaningless to me. He seems to be asking us to discuss (not argue - that would be stupid!) the concept of God as if God wasn't a human construct at all. In which case, why frame the argument in convoluted ravings? Why not just present evidence of this 'essence' or 'SOURCE' so we can discuss the properties of God? My guess is that, as I pointed out in my first post in this thread, Navigator doesn't have a proper argument. Just incoherent and thoughtless ramblings.

21st June 2012, 07:18 PM	#128
Krikkiter Graduate Poster Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 1,261	Originally Posted by Navigator I said : The metaphor explains how humans took a concept which is invisible and dressed it in their own understanding. This is explainable and acceptable as part of the evolution of our specie. Remove the costumes and masks and what remains is Source. What that Source is, is most likely incomprehensible. The incomprehensible is not the same as ‘does not exist’ Pay attention people! Thank you for verifying that you have absolutely nothing to discuss despite your lengthy, rambling musings. Oh and by the way, I'm sure that you understand that just as God is a human construct, so is your incomprehensible SOURCE.

21st June 2012, 07:23 PM	#130
Navigator Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 1,034	Originally Posted by Krikkiter Oh and by the way, I'm sure that you understand that just as God is a human construct, so is your incomprehensible SOURCE. Not at all although I accept that it may be the case for you. You ignore the Science (already mentioned).
	__________________ "I have walked a mile in your shoes and discovered what your problem is...your feet are too small" ~σκεπτικιστής ακραίες

21st June 2012, 07:32 PM	#131
Krikkiter Graduate Poster Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 1,261	Originally Posted by Navigator Not at all although I accept that it may be the case for you. You ignore the Science (already mentioned). I must apologise profusely Navigator but I seem to have missed the science that's been discussed. I have read the whole thread and I can't find it. Could you quote the Science you've presented or link to it? Many thanks, Krikkiter.

21st June 2012, 08:26 PM	#132
Foster Zygote Dental Floss Tycoon Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Between the pit of man's fears and the summit of his knowledge Posts: 14,384	Originally Posted by Navigator Life on Earth is an anomaly... And you know this how? You seem a bit like someone born 500 years ago to a small community of people on a tiny, isolated island in the middle of the Pacific ocean who declares that dry land is an anomaly in the world. Quote: ...but even if it were the only planet in the universe, this would not necessarily signify that it thus needs a title of ‘extraordinary’. Indeed, that word belongs with ‘paranormal’ and ‘supernatural’. Actually, yes, it would signify that life is extraordinary. If the Earth was the only planet with life out of all the planets orbiting the 10²² to 10²⁴ stars estimated to exist in the universe, then the ordinary planet would be lifeless. This would make the Earth not an ordinary planet regarding the presence of life. Extraordinary: ORIGIN late Middle English: from Latin extraordinarius, from extra ordinem ‘outside the normal course of events.’ The only planet among tens or even hundreds of septillions of planets to have life would most certainly be "outside the normal course of events". "Extraordinary" denotes something rare. "Supernatural" denotes something that exists outside of nature. They are not the same thing. You simply have a poor understanding of the word "extraordinary".
	__________________ It looks just like a Telefunken U47... You'll love it. Last edited by Foster Zygote; 21st June 2012 at 08:28 PM.

21st June 2012, 09:41 PM	#133
Navigator Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 1,034	Originally Posted by Foster Zygote And you know this how? You seem a bit like someone born 500 years ago to a small community of people on a tiny, isolated island in the middle of the Pacific ocean who declares that dry land is an anomaly in the world. Actually, yes, it would signify that life is extraordinary. If the Earth was the only planet with life out of all the planets orbiting the 10²² to 10²⁴ stars estimated to exist in the universe, then the ordinary planet would be lifeless. This would make the Earth not an ordinary planet regarding the presence of life. Extraordinary: ORIGIN late Middle English: from Latin extraordinarius, from extra ordinem ‘outside the normal course of events.’ The only planet among tens or even hundreds of septillions of planets to have life would most certainly be "outside the normal course of events". "Extraordinary" denotes something rare. "Supernatural" denotes something that exists outside of nature. They are not the same thing. You simply have a poor understanding of the word "extraordinary". Okay I will go with that estimate, and acknowledge that in your opinion this would indeed be extraordinary. Its fits well with the general message of the OP. Now, what are you doing with the life you are living upon this extraordinary Planet? Are you part of the problem or part of the solution? Is it right for me to ask? Is it my business? I think so. Do you behave in the real world toward others as if you understand that they are part of this extraordinary reality? Do you also behave this way in cyberland? Think about this extraordinary thing – part of your reality…likely all of your reality! What are YOU doing to input your nurturing aspects into the world -your humanity? Are you among those who appear hopeless and angry and have no idea really what to do to contribute to change? Are you one of those who picks out a particular type (for example…Christians) and focuses blame upon them for the woes of your world and so choose to verbally deride them? I am not saying you are or do. I could go take a look, but suffice to say that many are doing just that. It is a symptom of their frustration and feeling of powerlessness to behave as such, and offers some sort of relief from that frustration I would suppose, but what is it really achieving? It appears to be like a drug for some. If the focus of ones anger and frustration happens to wander in and post, then wham bang and ye hah! Fix for the day! (Nothing extraordinary in that.) If they don’t, then someone will start some thread like this one here: http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=238308 which acts as a synthetic fix while ‘the real thing’ remains allusive. It is interesting. I read a similar thread on another board which also mentioned the ‘fig tree’ subject in passing (the thread was called “Christianity and Violence”) and while there are many sceptics on that board, they are able to hold discussions. It could be just as easy for any other skeptic based board to do the same…indeed I would say this board is likely known as THE skeptic board, but maybe not. Yet it appears (appearances can be deceptive) that the sceptical membership is distracted by pettiness and the need to argue, as if – as I mentioned – it is a ‘fix’ and simply habitual and addictive. Here is a snippet from that fig tree related comment: I love that story...from daybreak to after dark...it is one of the funniest! All day long Jesus was having a 'bad hair day' - things were getting nearer to 'the time' and his patience wore a bit thin...he was also wanting to be noticed (hence both - and other - incidences) but after he had 'whipped things into shape, he left town and felt hungry and went to a fig tree...oops wrong season for fruiting! Your bad fig tree - you are soooo out of here! (Not exactly something a peace loving tree hugger would do) so here is god cursing yet another one of his creations for not pleasing him! Seriously? The real laugh comes later went - settling in for the night and talking around the fire, Jesus talks at length on the subject of 'Forgiveness'...it is not recorded which - if any - of the disciples asked him where his actions re the angry outburst an physical assault and re the fig tree fitted in with 'forgiveness' but maybe they forgave him. http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com...0%20tree&st=45 A much more mature observation and use of humor than the one mentioned on this board – I agree. Come on people! Get extraordinary! (Krikkiter No doubt I will be mentioning that scientific law again. Maybe you will catch it then.)
	__________________ "I have walked a mile in your shoes and discovered what your problem is...your feet are too small" ~σκεπτικιστής ακραίες

21st June 2012, 09:43 PM	#134
Navigator Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 1,034	PS: here check out this vid...I found it appropriate and humorous. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nw5W3CszeAI
	__________________ "I have walked a mile in your shoes and discovered what your problem is...your feet are too small" ~σκεπτικιστής ακραίες

21st June 2012, 10:14 PM	#135
Krikkiter Graduate Poster Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 1,261	Originally Posted by Navigator (Krikkiter No doubt I will be mentioning that scientific law again. Maybe you will catch it then.) I'll take that as a no. The fact that you can't or won't show me where you presented your "Science" is telling. Science deals with evidence. Where is your evidence? So far all I've seen is textual diarrhea.

21st June 2012, 10:27 PM	#136
Halfcentaur Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 5,935	Originally Posted by Navigator Okay I will go with that estimate, and acknowledge that in your opinion this would indeed be extraordinary. Its fits well with the general message of the OP. Now, what are you doing with the life you are living upon this extraordinary Planet? Are you part of the problem or part of the solution? Is it right for me to ask? Is it my business? I think so. Do you behave in the real world toward others as if you understand that they are part of this extraordinary reality? Do you also behave this way in cyberland? Think about this extraordinary thing – part of your reality…likely all of your reality! What are YOU doing to input your nurturing aspects into the world -your humanity? Are you among those who appear hopeless and angry and have no idea really what to do to contribute to change? Are you one of those who picks out a particular type (for example…Christians) and focuses blame upon them for the woes of your world and so choose to verbally deride them? I am not saying you are or do. I could go take a look, but suffice to say that many are doing just that. It is a symptom of their frustration and feeling of powerlessness to behave as such, and offers some sort of relief from that frustration I would suppose, but what is it really achieving? It appears to be like a drug for some. If the focus of ones anger and frustration happens to wander in and post, then wham bang and ye hah! Fix for the day! (Nothing extraordinary in that.) If they don’t, then someone will start some thread like this one here: http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=238308 which acts as a synthetic fix while ‘the real thing’ remains allusive. It is interesting. I read a similar thread on another board which also mentioned the ‘fig tree’ subject in passing (the thread was called “Christianity and Violence”) and while there are many sceptics on that board, they are able to hold discussions. It could be just as easy for any other skeptic based board to do the same…indeed I would say this board is likely known as THE skeptic board, but maybe not. Yet it appears (appearances can be deceptive) that the sceptical membership is distracted by pettiness and the need to argue, as if – as I mentioned – it is a ‘fix’ and simply habitual and addictive. Here is a snippet from that fig tree related comment: I love that story...from daybreak to after dark...it is one of the funniest! All day long Jesus was having a 'bad hair day' - things were getting nearer to 'the time' and his patience wore a bit thin...he was also wanting to be noticed (hence both - and other - incidences) but after he had 'whipped things into shape, he left town and felt hungry and went to a fig tree...oops wrong season for fruiting! Your bad fig tree - you are soooo out of here! (Not exactly something a peace loving tree hugger would do) so here is god cursing yet another one of his creations for not pleasing him! Seriously? The real laugh comes later went - settling in for the night and talking around the fire, Jesus talks at length on the subject of 'Forgiveness'...it is not recorded which - if any - of the disciples asked him where his actions re the angry outburst an physical assault and re the fig tree fitted in with 'forgiveness' but maybe they forgave him. http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com...0%20tree&st=45 A much more mature observation and use of humor than the one mentioned on this board – I agree. Come on people! Get extraordinary! (Krikkiter No doubt I will be mentioning that scientific law again. Maybe you will catch it then.) You ignore the fact this board is concerned with exposing the things our species as a norm distort about reality, and that on a near daily basis people come here making common distortions of reality and accuse the mean old skeptics of being close minded and dogmatic for not entertaining the same arguments from ignorance and confirmation bias as you have resorted to doing, rather than discuss the topic you choose to personalize the issues. This seems like nothing more than you asserting your sense of self worth through projection, and you're lecturing people on projection, which makes it a tangled mess of ego stroking and mental masturbation. If you can resist the constant tit for tat, what makes you think for a second that a god is even to be considered as more than human construct? Why call it god?
Halfcentaur Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 5,935

21st June 2012, 10:58 PM	#137
kerikiwi Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Bay of Islands NZ Posts: 5,843	Originally Posted by Navigator No doubt I will be mentioning that scientific law again. Maybe you will catch it then.) Again? Why not just point us to where you mentioned it the first time?

21st June 2012, 11:37 PM	#138
Navigator Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 1,034	Originally Posted by Halfcentaur You ignore the fact this board is concerned with exposing the things our species as a norm distort about reality... What are you doing to contribute to the solution? I don't ignore that this board is concerned with exposing what this board regards as 'the problem' anymore than I ignore hypocrisy. Originally Posted by Halfcentaur If you can resist the constant tit for tat, what makes you think for a second that a god is even to be considered as more than human construct? Why call it god? Call what 'god'? What do you think about this message? Look again at that dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives. The aggregate of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions, ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every "superstar," every "supreme leader," every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there--on a mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam. The Earth is a very small stage in a vast cosmic arena. Think of the rivers of blood spilled by all those generals and emperors so that, in glory and triumph, they could become the momentary masters of a fraction of a dot. Think of the endless cruelties visited by the inhabitants of one corner of this pixel on the scarcely distinguishable inhabitants of some other corner, how frequent their misunderstandings, how eager they are to kill one another, how fervent their hatreds. Our posturings, our imagined self-importance, the delusion that we have some privileged position in the Universe, are challenged by this point of pale light. Our planet is a lonely speck in the great enveloping cosmic dark. In our obscurity, in all this vastness, there is no hint that help will come from elsewhere to save us from ourselves. The Earth is the only world known so far to harbor life. There is nowhere else, at least in the near future, to which our species could migrate. Visit, yes. Settle, not yet. Like it or not, for the moment the Earth is where we make our stand. It has been said that astronomy is a humbling and character-building experience. There is perhaps no better demonstration of the folly of human conceits than this distant image of our tiny world. To me, it underscores our responsibility to deal more kindly with one another, and to preserve and cherish the pale blue dot, the only home we've ever known. -- Carl Sagan (1934-1996) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PN5J...layer_embedded It is appropriate to the OP.
	__________________ "I have walked a mile in your shoes and discovered what your problem is...your feet are too small" ~σκεπτικιστής ακραίες Last edited by Navigator; 21st June 2012 at 11:41 PM.

21st June 2012, 11:56 PM	#139
Navigator Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 1,034	Originally Posted by kerikiwi Again? Why not just point us to where you mentioned it the first time? http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php...&postcount=116 I think I may also have mentioned the law prior to this post, but there it is in this one.
	__________________ "I have walked a mile in your shoes and discovered what your problem is...your feet are too small" ~σκεπτικιστής ακραίες

21st June 2012, 11:57 PM	#140
gambling_cruiser Muse Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Vienna, Austria Posts: 690	Is your message be nice to each other and try to develop a sustainable world? Or what are you trying to achieve here?

22nd June 2012, 12:00 AM	#141
Krikkiter Graduate Poster Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 1,261	Originally Posted by Navigator What are you doing to contribute to the solution? I don't ignore that this board is concerned with exposing what this board regards as 'the problem' anymore than I ignore hypocrisy. <snip rambling> And here we are again. You don't like people disagreeing with you and you turn that into a problem with the way the forums operate. Your solution is not to voice your concerns with mods or admin but to use it as some kind of shield against rational discussion. I think you should try getting to the point at some stage.

22nd June 2012, 12:17 AM	#142
Krikkiter Graduate Poster Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 1,261	Originally Posted by Navigator http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php...&postcount=116 I think I may also have mentioned the law prior to this post, but there it is in this one. You mean this? Originally Posted by Navigator In the case of the OP, The SOURCE is not such an example of mistake. I do not myself attribute any particular persona/character to that Source. I simply acknowledge that – given the present Science – the universe had a beginning and the evidence suggested by science is commonly referred to as ‘the Big Bang’. Given that we understand all subsequent events within the Universe can be traced to that one event and that those subsequent events are a chain of causes and effects following the law I have mentioned, the Big Bang is also an effect of a cause and the cause is the SOURCE. You've certainly used the word law and you actually used the word science too. Have you given an explanation of this "law"? No. Have you presented any science? No. Then again, maybe you think using words in sentences counts as explanation? Time to start making sense.

22nd June 2012, 01:07 AM	#143
kerikiwi Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Bay of Islands NZ Posts: 5,843	Originally Posted by Navigator http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php...&postcount=116 I think I may also have mentioned the law prior to this post, but there it is in this one. It seems you have your own unique definition of 'scientific law'.

22nd June 2012, 01:33 AM	#144
Navigator Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 1,034	Originally Posted by kerikiwi It seems you have your own unique definition of 'scientific law'. Perhaps I do. What do you think of this? Carl Sagan - Pale Blue Dot http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p86BPM1GV8M It is relative to this thread OP. How about this? Newton's Third Law of Motion http://www.physicsclassroom.com/clas...laws/u2l4a.cfm
	__________________ "I have walked a mile in your shoes and discovered what your problem is...your feet are too small" ~σκεπτικιστής ακραίες

22nd June 2012, 01:39 AM	#145
Navigator Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 1,034	Originally Posted by gambling_cruiser Is your message be nice to each other and try to develop a sustainable world? Or what are you trying to achieve here? I have no message. The subject (be nice to each other - develop a sustainable world) was brought into the thread and is aligned with the OP I am not trying to achieve anything in particular. Are you?
	__________________ "I have walked a mile in your shoes and discovered what your problem is...your feet are too small" ~σκεπτικιστής ακραίες Last edited by Navigator; 22nd June 2012 at 01:48 AM.

22nd June 2012, 01:41 AM	#146
Navigator Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 1,034	Originally Posted by Krikkiter Time to start making sense. Of what? What is it you don't understand about the OP?
	__________________ "I have walked a mile in your shoes and discovered what your problem is...your feet are too small" ~σκεπτικιστής ακραίες

22nd June 2012, 01:46 AM	#147
Navigator Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 1,034	Originally Posted by Krikkiter And here we are again. You don't like people disagreeing with you and you turn that into a problem with the way the forums operate. Your solution is not to voice your concerns with mods or admin but to use it as some kind of shield against rational discussion. I think you should try getting to the point at some stage. 1: I have no problem with anyone disagreeing with me. 2: I have no issue with the way this forum is run. 3: Rational discussion is preferable to what most replies to this thread are offering so far. 4: There is no 'point' to get to.
	__________________ "I have walked a mile in your shoes and discovered what your problem is...your feet are too small" ~σκεπτικιστής ακραίες

22nd June 2012, 01:56 AM	#148
Jack by the hedge Safely Ignored Join Date: Oct 2009 Posts: 5,403	Originally Posted by Navigator Perhaps I do. What do you think of this? Carl Sagan - Pale Blue Dot http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p86BPM1GV8M It is relative to this thread OP. How about this? Newton's Third Law of Motion http://www.physicsclassroom.com/clas...laws/u2l4a.cfm OK. Sagan's pale blue dot reminds us that earth is the only home we have, so we ought to look after it. Nothing particularly contentious or novel there. Newton's third law reminds us of the conservation of momentum. No problem with that. Oh. Wait: Is this like a cryptic crossword clue and they both concern conservation? Do I win something? If that's not it then I have no idea what point you are trying to make, so maybe you could just state it plainly instead of making all these longwinded, oblique allusions.

22nd June 2012, 02:01 AM	#149
kerikiwi Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Bay of Islands NZ Posts: 5,843	Originally Posted by Navigator Perhaps I do. What do you think of this? Carl Sagan - Pale Blue Dot http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p86BPM1GV8M It is relative to this thread OP. How about this? Newton's Third Law of Motion http://www.physicsclassroom.com/clas...laws/u2l4a.cfm You mean relevant, do you not, not relative? But that has absolutely no connection to your unique definition of 'scientific law.'

22nd June 2012, 02:01 AM	#150
Krikkiter Graduate Poster Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 1,261	Originally Posted by Navigator 1: I have no problem with anyone disagreeing with me. 2: I have no issue with the way this forum is run. 3: Rational discussion is preferable to what most replies to this thread are offering so far. 4: There is no 'point' to get to. 1. I disagree and I believe your posts are evidence of this. 2. I disagree - see above. 3. FWIW, I've been trying to discuss things rationally with you but considering 4: it seems like you're not interested. Do you just enjoy typing?

22nd June 2012, 02:02 AM	#151
Jack by the hedge Safely Ignored Join Date: Oct 2009 Posts: 5,403	Ah. I see that while I was contemplating your questions, you announced there was in fact no point to this thread at all, although you do encourage us to be nice to each other and look after the planet. OK. Thanks. So, why is the thread called GOD?

22nd June 2012, 02:02 AM	#152
dafydd Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Belgium (Flatland) Posts: 31,443	Originally Posted by Navigator What I said - that you quoted was indeed an explanation. GOD is feminine and the SOURCE of embroidery. By your standard that is an explanation too.
	__________________ Yesterday upon the stairs I met a man who wasn't there He wasn't there again today I wish that he would go away.

22nd June 2012, 02:04 AM	#153
dafydd Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Belgium (Flatland) Posts: 31,443	Originally Posted by Navigator 3: Rational discussion is preferable to what most replies to this thread are offering so far. You first. Start discussing rationally.
	__________________ Yesterday upon the stairs I met a man who wasn't there He wasn't there again today I wish that he would go away.

22nd June 2012, 02:06 AM	#154
dafydd Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Belgium (Flatland) Posts: 31,443	Originally Posted by Navigator http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php...&postcount=116 I think I may also have mentioned the law prior to this post, but there it is in this one. Do you know what the word ''science'' means?
	__________________ Yesterday upon the stairs I met a man who wasn't there He wasn't there again today I wish that he would go away.

22nd June 2012, 02:06 AM	#155
Jack by the hedge Safely Ignored Join Date: Oct 2009 Posts: 5,403	All this thread teaches us so far is obscurantism =/= profundity.