1 I think you might have a hyperlink problem.

2 But it does seem that people who value their own lives as worthy will tend, on average, to view other people's lives as worthy too. And people who are cynical about the value of their own life will be even more cynical about the value of the lives of others.

The stopgap is respect for the rule of law, based on fear of the consequences.  That's what we've lost.

3 Gina Gerson was the bomb in Showgirls.

4 >>1 I think you might have a hyperlink problem. yup. got it.

5 Eh, it's just deism, Ace. Natural occurrence in a lot of dying Empires. Belief with no strings attached.

6 Gina Gerson was the bomb in Showgirls.

That's Gershon.


And she was a whole lot more awesomer in Bound.

7 If you want to understand the value of life, just look at Planned Parenthood and an entire political movement that supports it.

8 Most guys I know don't go to church because most Christian churches are in the "blame everything on men" boat. If women are having kids out of wedlock, it's the fault of men. If your wife cheats, it's your fault.

9 The stopgap is respect for the rule of law, based on fear of the consequences. That's what we've lost.>>

And random punishment will cause a loss of respect of the rule of law. Which is one of the drivers of that loss IMO.

10 Yep...as John Adams wrote: "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."

You're seeing the truth of that statement played out right before you.

11 4 >>1 I think you might have a hyperlink problem. yup. got it. Posted by: ace at March 26, 2013 11:51 AM (LCRYB) ________________ 'kay. Problem is Fishtown never had a strong belief in marriage--and ended up with weak family units. I always wanted to freak Liberals out and write it with a "hook"--because slavery.

12 The stopgap is respect for the rule of law, based on fear of the consequences. That's what we've lost. ^^^^^ This. A thousand times this!

13 I've been thinking for some time that men are the first abandoners of tradition and women tend to be the last preservers. I know that I tend to casually forget about social obligations and most women I know don't (or at least remember a lot more).

Wearing pants, for example. 

Here's what I say -- Fuck.  Wearing.  Pants.

14 >>>The stopgap is respect for the rule of law, based on fear of the consequences. That's what we've lost. I keep wondering if the proliferation of so many laws -- restrictions on everything, most of them dumb and not based in any kind of natural moral sense -- creates cynicism for the law. Fuck, if the law is so stupid to say you can't drink a Big Gulp, then maybe it's also stupid when it says you can't murder a man for an iPhone. And I think that is also related to infantilization. If adults are treated like infants they will act as infants. in the 1840s fifteen year olds were adults. Because they HAD to be, not because they wanted to be. I'm sure they would have liked being teenagers without responsibilities. And we've got all sorts of laws -- and subsidies and doles -- infantilizing us. We can be teenagers forever! And isn't that just lovely for society.

15 The stopgap is respect for the rule of law, based on fear of the consequences. That's what we've lost.

^^^^^
This. A thousand times this!

Posted by: rickb223 at March 26, 2013 11:54 AM (GFM2b)

There ARE no consequences (of note) if you're a member of a protected species.

16 IOW the institution of marriage is already dead somewhere....

17 Mike Bloomberg values my life at about 15 ounces.

18 And random punishment will cause a loss of respect of the rule of law. Which is one of the drivers of that loss IMO.

Agreed, but I don't see what you mean by random punishment.  I was arguing for the opposite, wherein violations of the law are met with very consistent punishment. 

19 Uh, maybe a media that paints conventional religions as backward drooling hillbillies has something to do with it?

20 A lot of the decline in religiosity is because of a decline in marriage and having kids.  Mary Eberstadt is out with a killer book on the subject.

Simply put, getting married and having kids makes you more religious and more conservative.

21 America's Religiosity is Declining huh

22 Most people don't pray when their plane is getting ready to take off, but they all pray when it looks like it might crash

23 #17 - Bloomberg values my life at 7 rounds.

24 a society with a million laws restricting all sorts of things putting prosecution in the discretion of the DA will produce a lot of random enforcements of law and hence cynicism about it.

25 I'm agnostic, but if I ever have a kid I'm dragging the little brat to church every week. Learn him some morality, and at the very least, absorb some knowledge about Western Civilization. I was always amazed at how few of my classmates had even a basic knowledge of bible stories.

26 If all rules are man-made, there are no rules. No rules, no sustainable society.

27 We're just getting a lot more diverse and in the process religion becomes so vague as to be regarded as missing.

I just listened to an audio version of William Manchester's 'A World Lit Only By Fire' which among other things discussed the period when religiosity was as close as it would ever be to 100% in the West. A notable feature of this was that there was just the one church. The Church. Jews existed but were a tiny minority and still recognized as having much of the same tradition in common. And Islam was as much a foreign government as a religion, as much military threat as cultural conqueror.

The schism that lead to the Protestant Reformation and dozens of new branches of Christianity was earthshaking in a way that is hard to imagine today. One big factor was the spread of movable type printing making it profitable to translate the Bible and other works into the local tongue and allow anyone who had the time and access to acquire literacy a better access to information and form their own opinions.

That has been magnified to the Nth degree in recent decades. We're in new territory.

28 The loss of Protestanism has concerned me, because I think the industriousness/Protestanism thing were synergistic. But if some folks want to be "all or nothing" types, it will be nothing. Rightfully so. Twilight of Protestanism. As far as the Rules--they work, what doesn't is the idea that those wielding power are people worth respecting. That brings discredit upon the rules.

29 Hence, the 'living' constitution folks likely make a great deal of sense, given our culture today.

We've unchained ourselves from religion. Good thing, eh?  Life seems so much more....delightful, now.

30 The stopgap is respect for the rule of law, based on fear of the consequences. That's what we've lost. Posted by: pep at March 26, 2013 11:50 AM (YXmuI) ______________________ Weren't crime rates higher per capita--in the 70's?

31 >>>lot of the decline in religiosity is because of a decline in marriage and having kids. Mary Eberstadt is out with a killer book on the subject. >>>Simply put, getting married and having kids makes you more religious and more conservative. yeah a lot of good habits are mutually reinforcing.

32 Any way you slice it, though, I don't think I agree with the atheists that we're entering a New Age of Beauty and Reason because we're abandoning religion. I fear it's might be more the direct opposite.







Look what passes for entertainment, education and leadership. Reason and logic are bigoted concepts now. We're in an age of ignorance and stupidity.

33 I wonder if part of this stems from "Fishtown" wanting to become like "Belmont" and thus emulating them. Obviously they can't emulate the economics, but they can emulate the social aspects. Oh, sure, Belmont isn't nearly as far gone as Fishtown in that regard. But what do the most visible citizens of Belmont do? What do the "smartest" citizens of Belmont repeatedly admonish the citizens of Fishtown over? I think there's a case to be made there.

34 Posted by: ace at March 26, 2013 11:55 AM (LCRYB)

I'm actually having this argument with a friend right now.  Whether our goverment can produce virtuous people through the law.
I say no, in fact these are contraindicated, because the law doesn't require reflection necessary to develop virtue.
He's being more cagey and insisting that my statement is not a universal truth (which I might not disagree with, except to say I can't step outside my current experience.)

He keeps referencing Aquinas's Summa Theological at me, apparently Aquinas describes a moral government designed to foster virtue as much as maintain order.  I haven't read his references yet, so I can't comment, but instinctively I think it can't exist in a pluralistic society.

35 It's easy to see why rich leftist elitists don't believe in God

They think THEY'RE gods

36 Awhile ago, Ace (I think) had a link to a story about John Cleese's dismay at what has happened to the British and their descent into yob culture.  He apparently just didn't see the role he and Monty Python played in destroying what remained of the old culture.  I remember watching it as a teen, and thinking how awesome they were, and how boring the old traditional types were.  They mocked religion, effort, civility and restraint, and now we see the result.  They weren't the only ones, of course, but they helped.  And yes, I still laugh at it.

37

And random punishment will cause a loss of respect of the rule of law

 

Sorry, what?

38 I think that 9 percent of athiests  who  believe  in God are the God haters.

 
And I agree that religiosity is a positive reinforcement to a healthy society.  It's the concept of aspiring to a higher ideal than ones-self.

39 >>>I say no, in fact these are contraindicated, because the law doesn't require reflection necessary to develop virtue. I think responsibility tends to produce virtue and good habits, and lack of responsibility (infantilization) produces the opposite.

40 24 a society with a million laws restricting all sorts of things putting prosecution in the discretion of the DA will produce a lot of random enforcements of law and hence cynicism about it. Posted by: ace at March 26, 2013 11:57 AM (LCRYB) ____________________ Also you end up with a police state because it has no moral foundation. Enforcing the Big Gulp law for example.

41 I think religion is declining for the same reason rape is declining. Video games and internet porn. More seriously, the internet is a huge factor. It's turning people into introverts. It provides just enough faux social interaction to meet the stunted needs of its denizens -- even while that same anonymous interaction further stunts them emotionally and socially. Internet job searches allow people to find work with a shallower social network. Internet dating allows people to find mates and dates with a shallower social network. There is less need for a strong social network. We can function, find work, and get laid with a social network 1/3rd the size of ones in the past. Social and fraternal organizations of all kinds are down.

42 25 "I'm agnostic, but if I ever have a kid I'm dragging the little brat to church every week........."
Probably this is the rationale of huge numbers of regular churchgoers in America. At least someone is doing what a failed nation does not do.

43 Last March, the same weekend of rally before SCOTUS was to hear Obamacare, atheist also held rally in DC.  In one bar, there were atheist everywhere and they were the most depressing group of people.  On of their big beefs about religion and government was laws regarding alcohol sales on Sundays and times bars were allowed to open and serve liquor. 

44 It only takes one generation to wipe out hundreds or thousands of years of tradition. Maybe while the Liberals were busy stripping symbols of Religiosity from the public landscape, we should've realized they were simultaneously squelching the discussion and practice of the virtues those symbols stood for.

45 Agreed, but I don't see what you mean by random punishment. I was arguing for the opposite, wherein violations of the law are met with very consistent punishment.>>

Everyday we see punishment doled out not by the crime but by social status etc. Keep the rules simple and the punishments equal and maybe respect for the law will come back.

46 1. Religion says guys should not bang every slut that offers up her ass. 2. Historically, such sluts were rare and/or heavily diseased, and thus there was not much temptation to indulge outside marriage. 3. Today, sluts are rampant and hotter than ever. 4. Thus there is a strong pressure on dudes to ignore religion, for the sake of guilt free poon slaying.

47 There seems to be a cultural trend away from participation in ALL organizations, not just churches.  Boy Scouts, labor unions, PTA, Shriners, you name it, they are all struggling to find people with a willingness to actively participate.

The internet age has tuned us to other means of connecting with our community, the definition of which shifts easily.  We easily "participate" in things now with people we will likely never meet face to face.  People also seem to have less time for extra-curriculars like church and community service as more hours are spent working outside the home to support the family compared to generations ago.

It's a bad trend, but I think it is here to stay.

48 It's easy to see why rich leftist elitists don't believe in God

They think THEY'RE gods

To me it's that they think the human condition is perfectable. 

It isn't.

49 Bring out the Chesterton quotes, bring them out!

There is a thought that stops thought. That is the only thought that ought to be stopped. That is the ultimate evil against which all religious authority was aimed. It only appears at the end of decadent ages like our own: and already Mr. H.G.Wells has raised its ruinous banner; he has written a delicate piece of scepticism called "Doubts of the Instrument." In this he questions the brain itself, and endeavours to remove all reality from all his own assertions, past, present, and to come. But it was against this remote ruin that all the military systems in religion were originally ranked and ruled. The creeds and the crusades, the hierarchies and the horrible persecutions were not organized, as is ignorantly said, for the suppression of reason. They were organized for the difficult defence of reason. Man, by a blind instinct, knew that if once things were wildly questioned, reason could be questioned first. The authority of priests to absolve, the authority of popes to define the authority, even of inquisitors to terrify: these were all only dark defences erected round one central authority, more undemonstrable, more supernatural than all--the authority of a man to think. We know now that this is so; we have no excuse for not knowing it. For we can hear scepticism crashing through the old ring of authorities, and at the same moment we can see reason swaying upon her throne. In so far as religion is gone, reason is going. For they are both of the same primary and authoritative kind. They are both methods of proof which cannot themselves be proved. And in the act of destroying the idea of Divine authority we have largely destroyed the idea of that human authority by which we do a long-division sum. With a long and sustained tug we have attempted to pull the mitre off pontifical man; and his head has come off with it.

50 The abandonment of religion will inevitably lead to a Golden Age of reason, rational discourse, and hopefully, some high quality head chopping devices.

51 And we've got all sorts of laws -- and subsidies and doles -- infantilizing us. We can be teenagers forever! And isn't that just lovely for society.

Posted by: ace at March 26, 2013 11:55 AM (LCRYB)

To the Left overlords, this is a feature...not a bug. 

52 One reason that Protestantism is declining that maybe Gerson is overlooking either by ignorance or choice;

Most of the Protestant "mainline" churches led by the Episcopals threw out the God stuff in favor of leftist proselytizing.

Why get up early on a Sunday to hear the same things you'd hear on the television or read in the Sunday paper

Many churches are God-optional social clubs for liberal professionals

53

People want to believe in something greater than themselves. 

Otherwise we are just a lonely little mote in the world, easily crushed and then forgotten. 

 

Many people are turning away from religion to fanatical beliefs in environmentalism or the power of the state. 

 

I have seen it too many times.  Acquaintenances that deride their parents' Christianity and glorify the greater involvement of government in everyones lives; or are fanatical about 'global warming' in their 3000 sqft house and 3 cars. 

 

 

54 yep it's a G-damn shame

55

This will change once people understand that evolution is a lie, and it's not science. 

 

And frankly once people understand that evolution is pretty much impossible mathematically and scientifically.

 

Once they understand that, then the real questions of creation and purpose will creep back in.  Believe in whatever you want, a flying spaghetti monster, muppets, aliens, etc.

 

But a belief that life as it exists now, is due to evolutionary randomness at the start and unguided processes to today from 4 billion years ago (to wit, "spontaneous generation") is so remote that to even include this "religion" in scientific textbooks is laughable.

56 Ace, your comment at 14 also made me start thinking about the low birth rate in this country. If you don't have kids, you and your spouse/partner/whatever can keep partying hard well past the age when people who have kids young(ish) settle down and become more responsible. Not saying every couple should have kids, but maybe society should value that lifestyle a little more.

57 >>>More seriously, the internet is a huge factor. It's turning people into introverts. It provides just enough faux social interaction to meet the stunted needs of its denizens -- even while that same anonymous interaction further stunts them emotionally and socially. this is definitely A Thing but I doubt it has much to do with the specific declines we're talking about. But this is definitely A Thing. I have to really push myself to go out and see people. When you get used to the computer being your "office" and also your "corner bar," well, etc. I won't belabor it.

58 "We don't need you, anymore, Jesus," The Grand Inquisitor explained. The State can feed and shelter people just fine.

59 >>>his will change once people understand that evolution is a lie, and it's not science. Oh Good Lord.

60 It seems it is Corolla who is putting the cheap price on the victim's lives and the horror their families have to live with. Shame on him.

61 What? Okay whatever Einsteins. These are the same people who will sign a petition to ban dihydrogen monoxide. There's a lot of them. Absolutely, positively, utterly clueless.

62 I've always considered industriousness and a good work ethic to be part of the set of moral values. Maybe thats a Lutheran thing.

63

Our lives are so filled with noise and distractions, we tend to forget that at the end of the day we're all dead.

 

Sobering thought.

64 Evolution isn't a lie.


Just...no.

65 Yeah the next time I deign to comment on God and His system I guess hit me in the temple with this hammer..

we are a nation of retards.

66

14 -

 

I think you're right about the proliferation of laws.  What I envision is a forest with so much gnarled undergrowth, nobody can see or get through it without getting tangled. 

 

Eventually a spark happens, and the resultant fire clears out all that undergrowth, allowing room for new growth.

 

The spark is coming. 

67 Weren't crime rates higher per capita--in the 70's?

They were, and even as a teen, I knew the system was rotten.  We recovered somewhat in the 80s, but the downturn now is more of a global, systemic thing that won't easily be reversed.  I'm speaking less of crime rates, which are largely individual in nature, and more of generational apathy and societal decay based on the coming demographic bust.  That opens the door for bad state actors, and is what really concerns me.

68

Ace,

 

Explain how evolutionary theory (we started from nothing to current life form) is science?

 

It is not.  It is a "model" with unknowable inputs.  Exactly what Crichton warned against.  That is not science.

69 >>>It seems it is Corolla who is putting the cheap price on the victim's lives and the horror their families have to live with. Those Toyotas sure are death traps. For shame!

70 Why do you think so many have fallen for the Global Warming hoax?  People have to believe in something.

71 Oh Good Lord.

ICwut  Udid thar.

72 If the Left thought there was political value in making String Theory a wedge issue, they'd do it. That's why debating evolution is so dumb. It is so inconsequential in our lives yet we get sucked into the absurdity of it all.

73

Well, I was just out and about and saw a bus--regular local bus, not private or anything--with the display saying "Happy Easter".

 

So that totally disproves everything.

 

Or not, but I'm still happy to be living in a place where stuff like that is the norm.

74 This will not become an evolution debate thread. This will not become an evolution debate thread. This will not become an evolution debate thread. This will not become an evolution debate thread. This will not become an evolution debate thread.

75 nd random punishment will cause a loss of respect of the rule of law. Which is one of the drivers of that loss IMO.


Are you meaning Random application of the law?

as in some are punished for doing exactly what some are not punished for  because of some  idea  of status?

 (just an example)govt  for example, stealing funds or threatening by coercion which a private citizen would go to jail for?

76 >>>It seems it is Corolla who is putting the cheap price on the victim's lives and the horror their families have to live with. Shame on him. well I wouldn't say shame on him for exploring an idea that is probably true. I don't like his conclusion about the young thug, though.

77 I'm actually having this argument with a friend right now. Whether our goverment can produce virtuous people through the law.


Posted by: tsrblke (work) at March 26, 2013 11:59 AM

No it cannot because those who write the laws exempt themselves and those in the elite ruling class

They can pontificate all they want, but people have no respect for the laws that the ruling class ignores, the only respect they have is for the guns carried by those hired to enforce the laws on the serfs

78

Posted by: Prescient11 at March 26, 2013 12:03 PM (tVTLU)

 

Dude, seriously, you're retarded.

79 the cart and the horse in the equation of is that in the Americas we were taught about frugality as the mark of a properly humble and God fearing man....

the line in There Will be Milkshakes for example about "we have only potato bread"....

ah screw it never mind....

we'll just luck into a healthy economy again...it was always "just luck" right?

80 The goals of Communism for America

#27 Infiltrate the churches and replace religion with "social" religion.  Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity wich does not need a "religious crutch."

#28 Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of "separation of church and state."

81

Posted by: Lemmenkainen, Freelance Warlord at March 26, 2013 11:53 AM (ZWvOb)

 

Bingo.... the modern conception of Christianity has morphed.... its been wimpified all out of its old beliefs.... leaving MEN out...

 

When your church suddenly tells you there is no justifiable War... and ALL fighting is wrong... even when there are plenty of examples in the Bible of God telling people to fight...

 

When the Church turns from Works... to intention... when all sin is forgiven at the drop of a hat.... and the hyporcrite is welcomed, not shun'd...

 

It takes a LOT to overcome the Parts of Any religion than strain intellectual consistancy... but when you add the constant glorification of Wimpiness.... and thus denigrate any Strength??

 

Essentialy, when a Church's Preaching do not coincide with either a Man's instincts (ie, the way God made us), nor will they work in the Real World (As Muslims kill us in the name of religion)....

 

I'm suprised more Men are not leaving church's...

82 You could have fooled me, everytime there is a press release I see a mooslim in a Jhabib, or several standing with our Government Officials. But then the Missouri Synod Lutherans like myself are myopic.

83 74 Hobojerky,

not on my end...

84 This will not become an evolution debate thread.

Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 74% more DOOM! at March 26, 2013 12:07 PM

Of course it won't

I'm going to make sure it's a gay marriage thread

85 Most folks, including self-described atheists, are completely noodle-limp on the subject.

They say whatever they think will make their peer group happy with them.

What is important is the percentage of folks that go to church once a week, and contribute regularly.  That percentage, while vocal, is very small. And a lot of those churches are not all that socially conservative, as others have pointed out.

86 I've decided that it's best just to ignore Prescient. When I start imagining that Prescient is the base of conservative thought, I go back to "fuck it, he can have Obama" mode.

87 I believe in devolution, too. See it nearly every day.

88 ::: It is not. It is a "model" with unknowable inputs. Exactly what Crichton warned against. That is not science. ::: It's a model that predicts the evidence lying about with some degree of success. Moreover, evolutionary history has almost no relevance to our present lives, while evolution in real time has every relevance. I'm a conservative Christian and comfortable with the second. That's all I need to be.

89 This will not become an evolution debate thread.

This will not become an evolution debate thread.


Nope.  Not me anyway.  If someone thinks evolution is a big lie that's fine with me.

90 Church - "Is there an app for that."

91 Dude, don't be Johnny OneNote, and make every argument the same argument.

92 ::::Any way you slice it, though, I don't think I agree with the atheists that we're entering a New Age of Beauty and Reason because we're abandoning religion. I fear it's might be more the direct opposite.:::: The reason I dismiss 99% of what atheists say regarding prescriptions for society is that 99% of them are retards. Atheists tend to know fuck-all about human nature. What they seem to be absolutely convinced of is their intellectual superiority and have pretty solid ideas about how everyone should govern their affairs. Normally, I would say "Who cares? Opinions are like assholes." However. When you get atheists with the power to put their beliefs into action, you get Pol Pot's Killing Fields, Kim Il Sung's Juche, Stalin's purges, and Mao's Long March through the institutions. Even Islamic theocracies don't commit wholesale murder of their own populations en masse like atheists have. You want a vision of the future under atheists? Picture a jackboot stamping a human face - forever. You want a vision of the future under me? Picture a guy eating ribs while watching football.

93 Oh, the anti-evolution nutter is here. Evolution is not a lie. It hasn't been proven a mathematical impossibility. Fucking magnets, how do they work?

94 >>>Explain how evolutionary theory (we started from nothing to current life form)is science? you're right we'll rewrite the biology textbooks to just say "God Did It, See the Bible, Genesis, 1-15" we'll get right on that.

95 Bye bye religious freedom.

96 Religiosity may be declining, but Obama is getting back on the climate change thing again - "do you believe?!!!".   Hide the decline.

97

68 -

 

You might want to seriously consider the possibility that you do not fully understand the concept of the theory of evolution.

 

If you're only arguing against a very narrow definition of it, people will think you're being silly. 

98 From the Book of Bloomberg: Thou shalt not purchase sugary beverages in chalices larger than 16 imperial ounces from food-service establishments in certain municipalities; except, thou may purchase such elixirs at convenience stores and grocery stores because such are not regulated by the cityÂ’s health department. Thus Endeth The Lesson.

99 Oh Yeah...I read that...the whole thing.

100 >>>It is a "model" with unknowable inputs At best, all that gets you is back to square one: our origin is unknown and beyond reason (arational =/= irrational). So you can get to theistic belief, and then creationism, as a rationally acceptable position. But you cannot establish that evolution is irrational. You only get to a stalemate.

101 96 Roy,

Tell Giggles to bring that shit to Indy metro this week...

he'll love the reception...

102 perhaps the ultimate benefit of religion might be to state  Life has purpose You were meant to exist?

103

Ace,

 

And to respond directly to your post regarding atheism, review exactly in what societies such a philosophy has been implemented.

 

Atheism is leftism.  The atrocities are in the millions slaughtered.  Nazis were occultists.  Soviets atheists.  Mao atheist, etc., etc., etc.

 

Only a moral people can self govern under our system.  De Tocqueville commented on this exact same subject.

 

Winston Churchill, in deciding who should be able to vote in South Africa, pondered whether a democracy full of illiterates could prosper.  I reckon the answer to that question is no.

 

South Africa is a mess since apartheid was ended.  Rhodesia/Zimbabwe - please.  Proper education and no/little corruption is the key to any prosperous society.

104 My observation as a church goer is that it's filled with women, not a bad thing. They just haven't been good the past 20 years in getting men into church. How many churches have women activities compared to men. I'm not saying they are going all feminist, they aren't, I think they are just adapting to their audience. I never see young singles in church, but I would say give it time. Those that actually get married and have kids tend to show up.(Point that people actually aren't getting married and having kids) Churches have been really good at children's activities. 

105 Like it matters.

106 "The reason I dismiss 99% of what atheists say regarding prescriptions for society is that 99% of them are retards. Atheists tend to know fuck-all about human nature. What they seem to be absolutely convinced of is their intellectual superiority and have pretty solid ideas about how everyone should govern their affairs. " Same for a lot of banner-carrying Libertarians.

107 52 One reason that Protestantism is declining that maybe Gerson is overlooking either by ignorance or choice; Most of the Protestant "mainline" churches led by the Episcopals threw out the God stuff in favor of leftist proselytizing. Why get up early on a Sunday to hear the same things you'd hear on the television or read in the Sunday paper Many churches are God-optional social clubs for liberal professionals Posted by: kbdabear at March 26, 2013 12:03 PM (mCvL4) That's definitely part of the decline. That portion of the "nones" who still believe in God/spirituality are frequently termed "spiritual but not religious" (SBNR). They're hungry for higher truths beyond the empty materialism of the secular culture, but there's a real gap between that desire and the leadership of those churches to provide it. When my wife (then fiancee) were looking for churches here in Maryland, we sat through a lot of sermons. I've read deeper musings in "Chicken Soup for the [insert demographic] Soul" books. Standing up for deeper truths, challenging the comforts of people who just want to hear that they don't have to change and are already good people . . . that's easy. It's safe. It doesn't ask you to do anything. It's why so many of these churches are dying, just a few years from shutting their doors completely. In twenty years, 95% of those congregations will be dead, and the fruits of that cultural stagnation will be even more abundant than today.

108 >>>The reason I dismiss 99% of what atheists say regarding prescriptions for society is that 99% of them are retards. Atheists tend to know fuck-all about human nature. What they seem to be absolutely convinced of is their intellectual superiority and have pretty solid ideas about how everyone should govern their affairs. Normally, I would say "Who cares? Opinions are like assholes." only 99% though right? I'm in the 1% Safe Harbor then right? I don't really agree with you that 99% of atheists are retards. I would say that 50% of atheists are fucking morons. I will tell you the truth that you already know -- 50% of the religious are fucking retards too. You know it's true. You know religious people and you know 50% of them are fucking morons, too. And that's because 50% of America are fucking retards. There's a lot of dumb people in the world.

109 Prescient11: Stop trying to define "science", you stupid retard. You know nothing about it.

Evolution only conflicts with the idiotic ideas of 6000 year old Earth supporters.

Intelligent religious folks have no problem with Evolution with God's finger on the scales. And even atheistic science folks like me will admit we can't prove that God ain't there.

110 The State can feed and shelter people just fine. That's what Rome thought. Until they couldn't.

111 When the Church turns from Works... to intention... when all sin is forgiven at the drop of a hat.... and the hyporcrite is welcomed, not shun'd...

I lean more to the Catholic / James view myself, as well.

But in defence of the Protestant / Paul view: the church which accepts penance based on "faith" is, I think, able to tell if the penance is real or just some line of bull he spouted. He might not be saved by works but his sincerity is certainly visible by works. So the Protestant church and its parishioners should be able to call BS on him if necessary.

112 I think the decline in religious affiliation is because most mainstream religions nowadays seem to be watering down their belief systems so as to appeal to a wider number of people--and to keep from pissing off liberals, who control the Media. 

The result is that the church doesn't seem to "stand for" anything, other than liberalism and socialism.  And whatever else they hope might get them good press.

113 ::: When you get atheists with the power to put their beliefs into action, you get Pol Pot's Killing Fields, Kim Il Sung's Juche, Stalin's purges, and Mao's Long March through the institutions. ::: B-b-b-but those were communists and not representative of good, moral atheists like Dawkins or the late Allahpundit idol Hitchens... Hey, remember when the French created a Goddess of Reason to quash any theocratic notions and subsequently dissolved into random and very efficient beheadings? Atheists don't.

114

>>Church - "Is there an app for that."

 

That reminds me of the libruls making stupid noises when there was a pic of Romney going to church with an iPad (or other tablet).

 

They thought he was playing Angry Birds or something. Never occured to them that those silly religious people had put their own books on it...

115 I kind of hate that we don't have a scientific answer to the origin of life, but what can you do? I've read a bunch of the " ...a carbon atom smashing into a chunk of unobtanium in a helium soup at or below sea level would generate a replicating cascade effect that allowed growth and required consumption of latent resources....." noodlers, and none of them were very compelling. Okay, maybe the theories weren't that 'tarded, but they might as well have been.

116 A reason for letting out young criminals is the argument that the young brain literally has less impulse control. Young men with low impulse control don't murder somebody for $300 cause they did any sort of calculation. They murdered somebody for looking at them wrong and took the $300 they guy happened to have on him. Or for looking at his girl wrong. Or for bumping and not apologizing. Or for looking like a dude that called him a pussy once. Problem is we have no way to measure impulse control to see if their brain has matured in prison. We could always just castrate them. Won't be committing much violence after that.

117 50% of people have below normal IQs.

118 ::: You know it's true. You know religious people and you know 50% of them are fucking morons, too. And that's because 50% of America are fucking retards. ::: QED

119 RE: Evolution

You can't deny the evidence, this is the flaw of most creation 'science', it denies the evidence for evolution. The only thing you can do is offer another, non-conspiratorial explanation for it. The other part is you can't reference earlier religious thinkers on the subject partly because the degree of evidence available in their time for the phenomenon was much less.

Most creation, ID science, etc, still argues within the same mechanistic framework, but makes God the 'efficient cause' of the machine. This is an error of approach, as the religious point of view never was centrally concerned with the efficient cause (it was assumed to be God in some fashion) as it was with the final cause; the classical Christian reading of Genesis primarily concerns the prefiguration of Christ and not the means by which the kinds of things were created. Prior to evidence this was assumed to be be 'out of nothing', but the text doesn't say that (the text never explicitly says ex nihilo in either Greek, Hebrew or Latin.) barring other evidence, spontaneous generation is a fair explanation of the occurrence of the various creatures, and in any case we have to admit that it is not impossible. But just because something is not impossible still doesn't mean that it was what happened.

In reaction to mechanistic science, Christians have compounded errors in trying to refute either the evidence or the explanation of the evidence for evolution. In short, instead of being the people discovering these things, they took the position of being the people trying to refute discoveries. Mendel was a monk; many of the brilliant thinkers and discoverers were Christians. It is worth noting that only in the post-Darwin era is it almost entirely non-Christians making these discoveries. This is a failure of Christians, particularly Western Christians, to comprehend their own intellectual tradition but instead become consumed with moralizing and creating ideological law. The society of Sunday-only Christians cannot last and lastly, cannot think.

120

heh

stupid in high gear

Ashley Judd has a puzzling location in mind for where sheÂ’d like to establish a campaign headquarters should she run for the U.S. Senate in Kentucky

Judd said that sheÂ’d use her famous motherÂ’s garage as a campaign headquarters, according to local media reports.

The problem? Her mother, country singer Naomi Judd, lives in Tennessee.

 

urrp

121 Ace: 50% of ALL groups are fucking idiots.

That is the definition of below average.


( I am one of those atheists that doesn't get his panties in a wad because someone wants to believe, or wants to put up a cross somewhere. )

122 >The rest of the nones describe themselves as indifferent to religion or as “nothing in particular.” Sixty-four percent of the nones, however, say they believe in God or a universal spirit with “absolute certainty.” <

Especially when there is a life-shattering or threatening event.

They are the causally disinterested, as they are in much of life and other matters of importance.

When faced with critical and sometimes existential matters they most often demur and are apathetic. They heed no call to action and are generally self-centered in their thoughts and self-serving in their actions.

They are more likely to be independent voters also. Because affiliation with anything is caustic because it requires commitment. Especially family and life matters.

I could do this all day and be right on every point...

123

I don't really agree with you that 99% of atheists are retards. I would say that 50% of atheists are fucking morons

 

The correct answer is 62%  are moronic fuckers.

 

Fucking retards.

124 108 Hal,

out of curiosity what part of MD are you in?

I had a jim dandy of a time trying to find a good Anglican Church in Harford County...

125 This is kind of why l like the Bible series so much, it shows the old testament. Both my sisters complained that it was too violent, I responded, yeah well that's how it was. The Old Testament God and the New Testament God are the same, I hate when people try to say they are different.

126

Some of this is straight demographics.  The Echo Boom generation are in their 20s and 30s, years when many if not most people "lose their religion."  Then they get married, and want to do that in a church or synagogue, and then they have children, and want to have them baptized or named and want them to go to religious school like they did. 

 

What is changing, as mentioned in comment #20, is that young people are not getting married and having children.  More single people = less religion. 

 

I'm on the vestry of my church and we are struggling now with a decline of membership.  This year we had to cut $25,000 out of our budget because we lost 9 families that had been giving that much together.  Our middle/high school Sunday school ceased to exist this year.  On many Sundays my daughter was the only one showing up.  Kids have jobs, play sports games on Sundays, and parents indulge them with all this stuff because they think it will help them get into college.   Parents are exhausted from working, sometimes two jobs to make ends meet in the Obama economy, and church goes out the window. 

 

BTW, Fishtown is a real neighborhood in Philly, and Belmont is a real suburb of Boston.  Fishtown was once a thriving blue-collar working-class white Catholic area northeast of downtown, then it declined and became a mostly-black ghetto, now the white secular hipsters are moving in and gentrifiying it. 

127

So Christianity is in decline in traditionally Christian countries, while the muslim brotherhood/taliban/whatever you want to call it is growing more powerful by the day. 

 

Sounds like a return to the dark ages.  Won't that be fun!

 

 

128 Mama AJ, our pastor emails his sermon out a day or so before Sunday. So one can be following along with a sermon on a handheld device also.

129 If we lived in a state where virtue was profitable, common sense would make us saintly. But since we see that avarice, anger, pride and stupidity commonly profit far beyond charity, modesty, justice and thought, perhaps we must stand fast a little, even at the risk of being heroes.


— Sir Thomas More in the movie A Man For All Seasons (1966, screenplay by Robert Bolt)

130 B-b-b-but those were communists and not representative of good, moral atheists like Dawkins or the late Allahpundit idol Hitchens...

Dawkins is an opportunistic pile of slime; Hitchens was not.

Unfortunately that means that in the Great Atheist Utopia, Dawkins would weasel his way in charge and Hitchens would lose his head on the first week. So I am forced to agree with you.

131 From the Book of Feinstein: Thou shalt smite those who possess 150 types of firearms in an effort to dry up the supply of these weapons over time. Thus Endeth The Lesson.

132 Being a religion-friendly atheist myself, I tend to view religion as sort of moral training wheels, and as a society, we are definitely NOT ready for them to come off.

133

So Christianity is in decline in traditionally Christian countries, while the muslim brotherhood/taliban/whatever you want to call it is growing more powerful by the day.

 

Word!

134 29% of Belmont and 38% of Fishtown And, then there are those that live in Fishmont, like Pelosi, Clinton, etc, who use religion to their advantage.

135 Burn her!

136 The Old Testament God and the New Testament God are the same, I hate when people try to say they are different.

Fine. I can see where I'm not welcome

137

Fine, I'll leave evolution alone.

 

But all you who believe in this lie have fucking nothing.  You have nothing.  Just look through the posts.

 

You have nothing but fucking insults.  You are worse than leftists.  You claim to be conservatives, libertarians, independent thinkers.

 

But you are nothing but fucking sheep.  Try to debate the subject with reason, facts, math and science and you offer nothing in retort but insults and bullshit.

 

It is amazing how much the left has control over your minds.  For you 2+2=5 for real.  Shameful.

 

Whenever there is a real wanting for scientific, rational discussion on the topic, I look forward to it.  For all those who offer nothing but insults and ridiculous comments, fuck off.

138 @sven

Harford Cty. doesn't have a good Anglican Church I think, you would need to have gone into Baltimore, but Mount Calvary is now Roman Catholic. Wish they had become Orthodox instead...

Or you could go out to Cecil, that's the Church I was baptized in as an infant, I think it's St. Mary's or somesuch.

139

117 -

 

I don't generally think of prison as punishment, or an opportunity to rehabilitate.  It's a place people go, so they won't be a danger to the rest of us.  For a while.

 

I don't care why you did it, if you murdered somebody, I don't ever want to see you on the streets again, because we don't need you  having another opportunity. 

140 127 Adam Smith's Invisible Pimp Hand,

that falsehood is a very useful tool...

if anything it speaks to me of an exasperated parent or lab thech politely granting one last chance....

when the entire point of your faith in the end is a stern moral code for the survival of your put upon group you probably are not gaining in a good way watering down the message for the retards in your community....

141 People aren't getting less religious they are just believing in whatever gets thrown in front of them. Trust me I've been in L.A. and have walked by the Scientology building which is more grandiose than any church I have seen in this state.

142 From the Book of Obama: I won. Thus Endeth The Lesson.

143 Obammy will be bringing a lot of people to meet Jesus, as soon as he levels the Nuclear Playing Field and Redistributes the Rights to Nuclear Armageddon  to the Iranians.. That said we need a Supreme Court Ruling on these matters immediatly and make damn sure it is also in Cyrillic for the Russian Mobsters present as all else is equal to the sum of Bammys destruction of the last vestige of the Freeworld that being the USA, now known as Equality for All Land and a little more for the imagined elite.

144

"I don't really agree with you that 99% of atheists are retards. I would say that 50% of atheists are fucking morons. I will tell you the truth that you already know -- 50% of the religious are fucking retards too."

 

I've got to disagree on the percentages.

 

Concerning the religious, (actually religious, not just people who go to church once in a while) as 80% retards. 

 

Atheists run about 25% retards, with the remaining 75% assholes.   

145 .>>BTW, Fishtown is a real neighborhood in Philly, and Belmont is a real suburb of Boston. Fishtown was once a thriving blue-collar working-class white Catholic area northeast of downtown, then it declined and became a mostly-black ghetto, now thewhite secular hipsters are moving in and gentrifiying it. oh. I'll change it.

146 Liberals now openly admit that they see no reason to protect the religious conscience of others. Being openly Christian now means that you're "discriminating" against the alphabet stew crew. Who needs that? Better to just shrug your shoulders and check "none" when asked your religion.

147

You have nothing but fucking insults. You are worse than leftists. You claim to be conservatives, libertarians, independent thinkers.

But you are nothing but fucking sheep. Try to debate the subject with reason, facts, math and science and you offer nothing in retort but insults and bullshit.

It is amazing how much the left has control over your minds. For you 2+2=5 for real. Shameful.

Whenever there is a real wanting for scientific, rational discussion on the topic, I look forward to it. For all those who offer nothing but insults and ridiculous comments, fuck off.

 

Cut.  Jib.  Newsletter

148 Posted by: RiverC at March 26, 2013 12:15 PM (El+h4)

This may be one of the best comments on the fracas I've read.

149 141 River C,

I looked at Cecil's Church...


good to hear...and know I was not alone.

TY

150 Obammy will be bringing a lot of people to meet Jesus, as soon as he levels the Nuclear Playing Field and Redistributes the Rights to Nuclear Armageddon  to the Iranians.. That said we need a Supreme Court Ruling on these matters immediatly and make damn sure it is also in Cyrillic for the Russian Mobsters present as all else is equal to the sum of Bammys destruction of the last vestige of the Freeworld that being the USA, now known as Equality for All Land and a little more for the imagined elite 7 the illegal Mexicans and Chinese in the Isle of Mexifornia..

151 Religion is something to cling to,   after they take away your guns.

152 So ace is 100% atheist? I think I over read the conclusion.

153 /soq.

Anyway this is probably true too: Atheists run about 25% retards, with theremaining 75% assholes.

154 ::: Dawkins is an opportunistic pile of slime; Hitchens was not. ::: Apparently Hitchens could still divine the presence of rose-colored glasses on the admirers of Mother Teresa while failing to notice his own. I own god is not Great. After enumerating the history of the Christian Serbian ethnic cleansers in the utmost detail, Hitch then contrasts it with his own two-sentence description of the atheist philosophy - "pleasant walks in the garden and sips of good tea" - WITH NO SENSE OF IRONY WHATSOEVER. The lesson I took from reading that book is that people suck, atheist or Christian.

155 Dear sirs: Your blog post on topic X reminds me about the thing I think about constantly and feel impelled to write about. Evolution is an evil communist lie. I had just been on a horse racing forum talking about how evolution is an evil communist lie when I happened upon your post on topic X. It was quite similar to how, just yesterday, I was on a message board for ceramics enthusiasts where I was discussing how evolution is an evil communist lie. It's really remarkable how many, in fact quite possibly all, things remind me that evolution is an evil communist lie. So I just thought I'd share this fact -- evolution is an evil communist lie. I wouldn't have mentioned it but your discussion of Topic X reminded me. Good day.

156 Belmont is a largely Mormon town, don't know if that was noted.

157

140 -

 

A more evolved argument would use the word "f*ck" less. 

158 We are too religious!

We voted for God !

159

If Religion is in decline in our country,

How would one explain the HUGE amount of de-facto evil that is attempting to power up here and now?

Maybe Evil in all it's cross-dresses and political fakery and socially sick nakedness.....is Very afraid of what is blooming here and now.

Looks like a major "Pull Out ALL the Stops"...last ditch effort to me...

Is that FEAR? i smell?......something Holy this way comes.......

 

Night/Morning

and a "Jolly Roger" to you all......

160 #121

Must be one of those gerrymandered Senate districts Bill Maher spoke of recently.

161 A couple of years ago I went in search of a church to attend that didn't browbeat me with the "social justice" bullshit. I finally gave up. ------------ Even Eastern Orthodox?

162 Prescienti11:

Dude, you have no proof for your position. Evolution is peer reviewed, and has been able to successfully predict real world phenomena, like anti-biotic resistance.

I don't have a problem with your belief that God is nudging evolutionary processes to create humans. That is something I cannot disprove, and I would not even try to.

But you will have to come up with far more than trying to conflate Crighton's fight with the AGW-retards into some kind of proof that Evolution does not correctly describe what is happening and what has happened.

163 47 to 50% of Americans (or people living here who vote) have found their "Messiah" and have gotten religion. 

164 :: nly 99% though right? I'm in the 1% Safe Harbor then right? ::: I wouldn't support your blog if you weren't. It's like my favorite backhanded racist compliments: "I wasn't talking about you, man. You're one of the Good Ones." And yes, my slapping 99% of atheists/agnostics is hyperbole. Have we met? Likewise, I don't ascribe high levels of genius to the religious by virtue of their belief. Many of them also live in closed ecosystems that would shock you at their naïveté regarding the history of human experience and the perfection of man. I grew up in such a church. But, I'm a Hater. I Hate. That's just how I get down, baby!

165 We are too religious!

We voted for God !

Posted by: 61 Million Stupid Americans

 

Here's your starship!

166

There is a HUGE story being missed here within those 'none' statistics, I bet.  There is a great growth of non-denominational "seeker" churches, that preach the gospel message to a modern world.  They are protestant, but many people may not identify them as such because they are rapidly attracting the formerly unchurched.  See Rick Warren's Saddleback in California, or Bill Hybel's Willow Creek in Chicago or Andy Stanley's satellite church networks in Atlanta. Consider my church in PA - LCBCchurch.com.  This past Sunday it had 3,000 more people attending than last Easter.  We now have 6 campuses in Southcentral and eastern PA. 

And Falwell's irrelevant?  Yeah right.  Liberty University is the 7th largest private university in the country and the largest university in Virginia.  It is the fastest growing University in America.

Jesus told Peter, I will build my church and the gates of hell will  not prevail against it.  God is not done using the U.S. to bless in the world if he is seeing to it that his church is still growing.

167 I  agree  with  Calvin  and  Hobbes  that  cannibalism  should  be  a  mitigating  factor  in  a  murder  case  because  it's  less  wasteful.

168 During the campaign Romney spoke a couple of times about wanting to promote good moral values, because those would in turn promote industriousness and a good work ethic and ultimately prosperity. I wondered, though, whether it wasn't the other way 'round: did industriousness, a good work ethic, and ultimately success produce in turn good moral values? (As in many things, it might be a mutually-reinforcing virtuous cycle, of course.) this sounds like deja vu I do not know how to put this, other than goodness comes out of goodness. You can argue anomalies, but on a much wider scale this is true. And, you can also argue what is deemed to be good, but then we would have to dive back to the philosophical string. But, most people know what is right/wrong, good and bad.

169 Murdering a man for a small amount of money... How about murdering a 13-month old baby in the coldest of blood? And not in the 'hood, where life is Hobbesian natural state, but in a quiet, industrious neighborhood. Evil is coming to us. And those young men who've abandoned religion have basically abandoned every vestige of responsibility for enhancing and protecting the culture. They're pure nihilists, existing to consume, watch football, and fuck. I had typed out something pretty inflammatory about how my Catholic church needs to get in the game but in the spirit of Holy Week I spiked it.

170 @ 164 your a Lutheran Missouri Synod type if you like Jello and Deer HUnting
Check em out
They also Drink , Smoke and Eat Pork Products like Bratts..

171 >>>ou have nothing but fucking insults. You are worse than leftists. You claim to be conservatives, libertarians, independent thinkers. Listen, Dude, there is no argument to be had. Or rather, it is a simple one. You believe that MAGIC should be part of a scientific explantion. Science has been defined as excluding magical explanations; you are determined to include them. This is a simple argument. "Math" don't fucking enter into it. The only question is whether we are now going to start proposing and "proving" SUPERNATURAL explanations for phenomenon, against 1200 years of scientific tradition forbidding just that. Whether evolution or darwinism is true is besides the point. Even if these mechanisms were provably false, science would next propose ANOTHER natural, NON-SUPERNATURAL explanation. You see? You act as if you win if you can only disprove "darwinism." Not so. Your real goal is to include Magic in Science, the way it was in the time of the alchemists. No matter WHAT the specific explnation, the scientific explnation for any phenomenon will ALWAYS exclude the supernatural. BY DEFINITION. What killed the dinosaurs? Why not just go your route and say "God sent down a mighty thunderbolt to kill the dinosaurs so that he could create a Garden of Eden"? You are determined to do that which is expressly forbidden by science, but then you claim you're doing "science" when doing so. You're not. You're doing theology. You can do theology all you like, but stop calling it by improper names.

172 125 108 Hal, out of curiosity what part of MD are you in? I had a jim dandy of a time trying to find a good Anglican Church in Harford County... Posted by: sven10077-ArkLaTex travelogue and Researcher at March 26, 2013 12:15 PM (LRFds) I live in Baltimore, which probably exacerbates the issue. Still, people in this part of the country are not religious, and those that are tend to be only superficially religious. We did end up settling on a wonderful (nominally) presbyterian church, Hunt Valley Church. Our pastor is a deep thinker, and he has a passion for the notion that a Christianity that only takes place on Sunday morning is fooling itself.

173 EgyptÂ’s prosecutor general on Monday ordered the arrest of five prominent political activists accused of inciting violence against President Mohamed MursiÂ’s Muslim Brotherhood. But, of course.

174 #144

That building was originally a hospital. I was born there when it was known as Cedars of Lebanon. The Scientologists took it over many years later.

175 If you look at religion over the ages, there is a cyclical nature to adherence and the population. Every so often, there are events which remind us of the importance of God in our lives. They are there often for those who look. But a large part of the population needs an occasional clarion call to accept and obey God.

In the Christian religion, God told us as much. While he won't destroy the world again until the end, there will indeed be challenges and tests of faith.

Such are the times in which we live. When those who allegedly "enlightened and reasoned demur at the mere mention of God. They feel philosophically in some way superior or above it all. They don't view religion in a moral or faith based sense- especially the latter. Anything left to faith is ridiculed as unsubstantiated, because it is not properly reasoned in their parochial philosophy that actually serves as their religion.

Not many people today read the great teachers of the Catholic Church such as Aquinas or Augustine.  If they did, they would find many answers to their so-called "unreasoned" proclamations. It's ultimately a product of fear, intellectual dishonestly or laziness.

176 in the 1840s fifteen year olds were adults.

Not legally, no.  They may have worked like adults, and were expected to act like adults, but until they were 21, males belonged to a parent or guardian, who managed any money or property they may have had (women always belonged to someone.  Ho-hum.).

I'm not quite sure when that changed, possibly after the Civil War.

177

For some reason I keep connecting this post back to the weird gay/transgender argument video post yesterday and thinking that the aggrieved nekkid guy/girl in that video could do with a whole lot more religion in the form of morality, like maybe it ain't right to waltz around in public nekkid no matter what aggrieved victim group you belong to.

 

 

But I'm with others who said that Gerson is missing one reason for the decline of religion, the fact that churches like the Episcopal church have moved so far away from God as to have one of its Bishops refuse to mention God in his prayer during the first Inaguaration of Obama.

178 A lot of atheists and/or Libertarians offer up-- government getting out of the marriage license business as a compromise-- that's actually more radical than allowing gay marriage.

179

And those young men who've abandoned religion have basically abandoned every vestige of responsibility for enhancing and protecting the culture. They're pure nihilists, existing to consume, watch football, and fuck.

 

Yesssss....

180 Reason leads to libertarianism. Libertarianism leads to anti-war peacenik ****heads. I'll take religiosity and war, thank you. The world's a tough place.

181 EgyptÂ’s Prosecutor General Orders Arrest Of Pro-Democracy Opposition LeadersÂ… Those crickets you hear chirping are coming from the White House. Weasel Zippers: Yeah that Mubarak had to go?

182 We're entering the great Apostasy, and following that - Judgment. Almost 60 million dead kids as a result of abortion in this country... how long does anyone think God's going to let that continue? Now, after the Supreme Court forces gay "marriage" on everyone... again? How much do you all think God is going to tolerate? There were roughly 2000 years between Moses and Jesus... in 20 years it'll be the 2000 year anniversary of Christ's death and Resurrection. The Israelites wandered in the desert for 40 years... we've been killing our kids for 40 years. I honestly don't think we've got much longer, because we're bringing judgment upon ourselves.

183 mugiwara:
>> I'm agnostic, but if I ever have a kid I'm dragging the little brat to church every week.

Funny.  I know a couple who I think were mostly agnostic, but who started going to church after having children, because they knew growing up in a church community was simply healthier.  (And now I think they've kinduv started to believe in God, but it's not really my place to pry.)

184

167

DANG!...and I was jus going to log off......

So it is,  I lay me head down, say my prayers and ask a special blessing for my fellow poster "E of J!"

Glad I waited........

185

Christians and those whom observe traditional values are going to become an ever increasingly persecuted and marginalized minorty in western societies over time. I tend to be staunchly conservative on most issues but break ranks when it comes to the death penalty. The thought of people with no moral code being the arbitors of life and death via the power of the state is frightening. Roman Empire style secret Christian congregations are probably not far around the corner. "If you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own. As it is, you do not belong to the world, but I have chosen you out of the world. That is why the world hates you."

186

Its almost like we've seen this before in a society we'll call Europe for the sake of argument and how the growth of their welfare state came to supplant the role of the church and religion generally until no one went to church but they had a welfare state.

It seems when the state is big, religion is small.

187 From Drudge: Man Goes On Rampage In TARGET Store, Stabs 4 People... Time to ban high-capacity Target stores?

188 When I was getting married we had already had the house, but didn't live in it. I tried to get married in the church in the town we were going to live. The priest reads me the riot act, and tells me we would have to start attending that week and become part of the parish. I explained that we didn't live in town and we couldn't be making that drive every week, but soon as we move we'll be there.

The fuckfacefuck tells me he better see us there making an effort to be part of the church starting now, or else "on the day of your wedding, I don't care what money you spent, what plans you made, and who is coming, but if I feel you're not being part of this church here, on that day I will refuse to marry you".

I stood up, told the priest to kiss my fucking ass, grabbed the wife to be, and we left. Since that day I only go to church for weddings and funerals.

189

Simply put, getting married and having kids makes you more religious and more conservative.

 

It also forces you to grow up.  I forget who wrote the book about the death of the adult, but the point stands.  What previous society (other than an hereditary aristocracy) would consider 25-year olds to be "children" still requiring subsistance from mother and father?

190 I haven't much to offer on this except the following general comments:

Many young people avoid marriage because the repayment schedule is based on the higher earner's income within a marriage. If you are repaying your loans at the rate of $200 per month and marriage is going to make those payments $700 per month, it makes potential spouses on both sides reconsider.

My grandson is on a high profile soccer team and frequently is out of town on Sunday.  His parents got him in a youth group that meets during the week, but there is no doubt that the churches are competing with sports, and yes it is because of college scholarship potential.

There is no stigma to being unmarried with children anymore,  except in a few families.  I have seen this migrate from the inner cities to the working class neighborhoods to the suburbs.  This is not good for either the children or the women who must raise them by themselves.

 I am a Catholic,  and perhaps we are withstanding this cultural change a bit better,  but a great deal of it is because we have Hispanics to fortify our numbers.  This is both good and bad, in that the traditions of German and Irish Catholicism are being lost.  

Myself,  I cannot imagine life without my Church.  It is like a solid place which always is there,  where I know I am valued,  and whom I can always look to for hope and help.

191 The Socons are the reason why religion is viewed bad. Their obnoxious in your face holier than thou attitude turns people off.

192

Search the internet, Farmer Joe.  There will be a church in your neighborhood that you can get with the program, but I doubt if it will be an old dead stuffy denomination, but rather a new, vibrant healing place that accepts people the way they are and helps them heal from pain and grow in grace. My church is excellent like that.  And since salvation is by grace, not works, there is no pressure to do anything.

 

193

174 -

 

Oh, now you went and did it.  You mentioned dinosaurs.  There were no dinosaurs,  you godless heathen you!

 

SCIENCE!!!

194 "And in the act of destroying the idea of Divine authority we have largely destroyed
the idea of that human authority by which we do a long-division sum."

Hockey stick  "science", for instance.

195 Last year I read an excellent article regarding the Muslim encroachment into Europe. The article pointed out that the Muslims would eventually have a large enough population to outvote the native Europeans, and at that point they would began pushing Islamic law into the Former European Nations. They would not be swayed by arguments of Reason, and Atheists will have a special treatment in their regard. Indeed, the only thing on earth which was capable of pushing them back was the Christian religion. You can't beat a belief with a non-belief, you have to have a belief at least as strong to engender the Zealotry and Fanaticism which could accomplish such a goal. In the end, (the article argued) Reason would be extinguished by it's own tolerance.

196 This site attracts a decent share of right-wing, non-churchy engineer and scientist types. We don't take kindly to crazy anti-evolution conspiracy theories. You really do sound retarded when you talk about it being "a mathematical impossibility" and pretty much mark yourself out as somebody who maxed out at about algebra and junior high "earth science" in their technical skills. I got no problem with religious people who want to say God guides evolution. Who knows, could be. But crazy angry screeds against the well-understood science of evolution are retarded.

197 The attack on science is not equal to the attack on religion. It's asymmetrical. Plenty of religious people believe in evolution.

198

But my point is, maybe Fishtown isn't getting poorer because it's getting less religious. Maybe it's partly also that as it gets poorer, it gets more cynical about things, more despairing of its place in the world, and then, because of that, it gets cynical about religion.

 

Institutions need the support of society  or they die off. Religion, marriage, even work. If people don't need to work, and  work is not actively encouraged, fewer people will work. If people don't need to marry, and it's not actively encourage, fewer  people  will marry. Religion  too. They don't run on  autopilot. It's not that complicated. These things wither without support.  They no longer have support.

 

199 >>>So ace is 100% atheist? to be honest saying you're "agnostic" is like saying "you don't define your sexuality." It means you're gay. agnostic because it is above my pay grade and above my capabilities to assess. Most versions of God are non-disprovable. God exists Beyond. I know nothing of beyond. At some point there really isn't that much difference between "not knowing" and "Actively disbelieving." I don't actively disbelieve primarily because I don't think about it much. It is in the category of "Unknowable even in theory."

200 I gotta say, anyone willing to be a useful-idiot in a Muslim country has to be a true idiot. As in wearing-pants-the-wrong-way, drooling, illiterate village idiot.

Did any of those starry-eyed idealists really think that in the land of the cliterodectomy, that this would end well?

201 Prescient's argument, which he should be clear about instead of implying it, is very simple. Despite the evidence, the probabilities are totally off; according to any reasonable science on the subject, we won the frickin' lottery.

This doesn't say that the path that is outlined and hypothesized is not impossible (as he is perhaps claiming) it just means that it is highly unlikely. This argument does not, however, offer another hypothesis that fits within the mechanistic framework that replaces the one it refutes.

My only point in this is what Chesterton made, descriptions of how our bodies came to be as they are do not answer or refute important questions about God or his Christ. If they do, you are doing what is called 'confirmation bias'. Science is bad metaphysics, soz.

In fact, 'made from the dust of the earth' is a very poetic and subtle way to say carbon-based. Everyone has to take off their blinders or we die.

Thanks!

202 Thanks very much, CPT Dick.

203

One of Obama's disciples, Caitlin Halligan, has withdrawn her nomination to the D.C. Court of Appeals.  Here's a blurb on this bitch from hell from Investors Daily:

 Halligan has a long record of judicial activism outside the mainstream of American political life. Her overreach in the New York legal system includes attempting to put gun manufacturers out of business as a "public nuisance," holding them accountable for any misuse of their products by individuals.

She's also championed the rights of Gitmo's finest, while adamantly advocating gay marriage.

Outside that, she's served as a director at places such as the National Center for Law and Economic Justice, which files lawsuits to force taxpayers to cough up cash in the name of "helping the poor" — but which in fact are bonanzas for left-leaning trial lawyers.

And most disturbingly, there is her public testimony to the Senate itself in its questionnaire, asking about her activities as a lawyer. On questions that could shed light on her views, her response to the committee has been "I have no notes, transcript or recording," a convenient thing for a judicial activist.

204 196 Search the internet, Farmer Joe. ----------- I think you're confusing me with the person I was quoting. I, personally, have no interest in finding a church.

205 200 flatbush joe,

um....

206 This is both good and bad, in that the traditions of German and Irish Catholicism are being lost. ____________________ How are those traditions significantly different? Were there ever that many German Catholics?

207

Conservative candidates need to chill on the religious  talk.

 

There is not one position conservatives take that can't be  advocated and defended without  referencing religion. Not one.

208 TVbdM

Oh great, now Hector's arrived

209

About that demographic housing thing. Harry S. Dent explained and predicted that in 1992. I listened, which worked out very well. His timing call for the housing crash was off by 18 months, and he predicted the crash almost 20 years ahead of time.

I didn't believe his prediction of 4% mortgage interest rates, but they are now 3.5%, so he looks pretty good there also.

I didn't pay attention to his stock market predictions, but then I've never cared much for stocks. The competition is too tough, too many pros in that business and I am an amateur. He made a lot of miscalls on stocks, but he was right on the big picture.

210

194  Miss Marple

If you are Catholic, why is an increasingly Hispanic RC bother you? Jesus bled for us all. I am Orthodox and view Catholics as my brother. I do not have any Serb Orthodox Church by me, so I go Greek Orthodox liturgy. If we are brothers and sisters in Christ, ethnicity and race do not matter.

211

Everyday we see punishment doled out not by the crime but by social status etc.

 

You said a mouthful!

 

- Sandy Berger

212 "Whenever there is a real wanting for scientific, rational discussion on the topic, I look forward to it. For all those who offer nothing but insults and ridiculous comments, fuck off."

The thing is: all parties view origins through faith. We, none of us, really KNOW, do we.

It's all faith-based belief. For the Christian, this isn't an uncomfortable place. For the irreligious, it's a troublesome place, hence the ridicule.

I wouldn't get the vapours over it. My church, the LCMS, holds to six day creation, although not necessarily young earth(as some members declare, anyway).

BTW: you want a manly church? Go LCMS or Orthdox Presby. Those elders/deacons will knock your socks off with their manly handling of the service, communion, etc. They don't fool around, just like Luther. We left the girly TEC and are so pleased.

213

The  rule  of  law  is  being  destroyed  before  our  eyes  and  that  is  having  an  adverse  effect.  HSBC  can  launder  drug  cartel  money  and  nothing  happens.  Corzine  can  steal  over  a  billion  dollars  and  nothing  happens.  He's  walking  around  free  as  a  bird  and  the  money  went  to  J.P.  Morgan  and  Jamie  Dimon  keeps  the  stolen  cash  and  nothing  happens.

 

We  have  overt  criminal  behavior  and  no  one  gets  punished  unless  they're  one  of  the  great  unwashed.  Steal  a  hundred  bucks  from  your  bank  and you're  going  to  do  time,  steal  millions  like  Tan Man  Mozillo  of  Countrywide  fame  and  you'll  get  a  token  fine  that's  less  than  ten  percent  of  what  you  stole  and  you  skip  off  to  an  Italian  villa  to  live  large. 

214 There is not one position conservatives take that can't be advocated and defended without referencing religion. Not one. ---------------- BS. Fiscal responsibility and small government don't need religious explanations. All they need are counterexamples (pretty much all of which can be provided by Germany between 1920 and 1940).

215 I believe they are ignoring the dilution/concentration issue. The commitment and fevor of the smaller flocks has an intensity that is amazing. No one is dragging their ass to church anymore, because they have too - they go because they believe. Look at the numbers for the pansy diocese and denominations versus the hard core.

216 I think Ace is right in his thinking.  We are called believers because we have a knowledge of a living God.  We KNOW him and he KNOWS us.  There are only people then who know God and those who don't know God.  So atheists are never going to prove to true believers that God does not exist no matter how much they get written into law.

217 The evolution discussion is like a douche'stone for too many people. Should I really fucking care what a politician thinks about evolution? It doesn't guide my life on a day-to-day basis--aside from the fact that it's quite obvious that modern life has become too easy for stupid people to keep breeding. I'm sure Obama (who's an atheist) believes in it; ironically, he ignores the economic principle of the survival of the fittest. Do political allegiances really align on this?

218

211 CJ

The religious talk turns people off and makes them dislike religion. There is a direct corelation between the decline of religion in America and the Republican Party's embrace of religious politics.

219 203 >>>So ace is 100% atheist? to be honest saying you're "agnostic" is like saying "you don't define your sexuality." It means you're gay. agnostic because it is above my pay grade and above my capabilities to assess. Most versions of God are non-disprovable. God exists Beyond. I know nothing of beyond. At some point there really isn't that much difference between "not knowing" and "Actively disbelieving." I don't actively disbelieve primarily because I don't think about it much. It is in the category of "Unknowable even in theory." Posted by: ace at March 26, 2013 12:32 PM (LCRYB) ________________ Okay--but last I heard you were flirting with Catholic--except it sounded like the Catholics that you hang around with are--quite frankly--assholes.

220 I wondered, though, whether it wasn't the other way 'round: did industriousness, a good work ethic, and ultimately success produce in turn good moral values?

Or morality is a luxury good that industriousness makes affordable. In its degenerate/mass-market form, morality is "a million laws restricting all sorts of things putting prosecution in the discretion of the DA," a culture shrunken down to what can slip between various affronted maidens' crusades, etc.

Then comes the burning.

It's sort of how I think WWI & II happened--in a fundamental, where-Lenin-would-say-"crisis of capitalism" sense. I think of those wars (and of fascism, political communism, etc.) as late Victorian, as matters of class and decorum--degenerate moralities that eventually demand mass death.

This is not an acceptable opinion, and I'm a crank. But.

We'll see. Their "decline of religiosity," e.g., looks a lot like ours.

221

Man is a spiritual creature. If he turns his back on God, he seems to want to replace God with some other god. I think that explains a lot of the acolytes of the Church of the State.

 

For me, I have lost my faith in the State. God is at least consistent.

222 ::::to be honest saying you're "agnostic" is like saying "you don't define your sexuality." It means you're gay. agnostic because it is above my pay grade and above my capabilities to assess.:::: See? He's a homo.

223 One of the biggest problems among atheists is they tend to view Judeo-Christian theology and Muslim theology as "the same". They will find out the hard way.

224 203 At some point there really isn't that much difference between "not knowing" and "Actively disbelieving." Best part of this blog is watching Ace struggle from time to time (I mean that in the most admirable way) with his own beliefs.

225 The Bible tv miniseries is drawing over 10x the viewers that "Girls" does

Tell me there's no God

226 Catholics are wrong on some important things, but if we are hoping to make good of a bad situation, it's our job to reach out to one another without compromising our beliefs. As FfT points out, a Catholic layman to an Orthodox is heterodox and not a heretic or apostate, and rejecting people who aren't one of those two is not part of our tradition, end of story.

227

As long as the federal government promotes/rewards poor moral choices, it doesn't make any difference if religion promotes morality or whether work ethic promotes morality.  I think that when people need to work to survive and feed their children, things work out well in general.  As long as excuses are made for them and others foot the bill, the result will be what we have now.

 

It's sad to think that every charitable instinct can be perverted, but that's closer to the truth than you may realize.  Charity is very delicate stuff, and the minute the recipient begins to assume it will be there, things go south.  One of the reasons why people on public assistance should be using OBVIOUS welfare funds or clearly labelled FOOD STAMPS is so they will be properly grateful, and properly ashamed.

 

Not being able to take care of yourself and your family is good cause for shame.  When did that change?

228 No, I think politicizing religion destroys it.

When you place religion in a political context it loses some of it's original meaning and becomes another societal commodity.

This is a culture of consumption where people have indeed largely becomes self-serving nihilists determined to live off others in order to get what contemporary society assigns material value to.

Anything beyond the material is not desirable and therefore is demoted in importance or seen as unnecessary. 

So-called, philosophical opposition is just another way the lazy man absolves himself of the intellectual arguments and truisms associated with religion.

229 I'm not quite sure when that changed, possibly after the Civil War. /rubber chicken drops from the ceiling!

230 >>>Prescient's argument, which he should be clear about instead of implying it, is very simple. Despite the evidence, the probabilities are totally off; according to any reasonable science on the subject, we won the frickin' lottery. His statistics are all based on supposition beneath the level of proof offered by evolution. He claims that every evolutionary move can be reduced to a (conveniently high) improbability, then multiplies these improbabilities, then says, see, based on the numbers I made up when assigning probabilities, this is wwayyy improbable, Jack. In fact, the weak-form of the anthropic principle answers this pretty directly: Only on a planet on which intelligent life had arisen could life there begin to speculate upon the improbability of its rising. Get it? There are could be 600 trillion planets where life DID NOT arise. It's only on the fraction of planets where it did that creatures can ask this question at all. i.e., our wonder over our existence is STRONGLY COLORED by the fact of our existence in the first place. Life forms that DON'T arise can't wonder about how they failed to arise.

231 184 Reason leads to libertarianism. Libertarianism leads to anti-war peacenik ****heads. I'll take religiosity and war, thank you. The world's a tough place.  
 

Posted by: The Mega Independent at March 26, 2013 12:28 PM (Lq5WC)

 

 

Looks at his DD214... really?

 

Or perhaps, for some of us.... Libertarianism leads to a different justification for war, and different way to fight?

 

We cannot dictate how other people are going to live... it just does not work... we should NOT be Nation Building... we should NOT be occupying other countries.... mainly because its a waste...

 

We SHOULD level the shit out of anyone who attacks us... and send them back to the stone age.... and that includes total war on the Population, because Libertarians like myself believe that a government cannot long endure without the support of the populace... and that if you make conditions BAD enough for the populace, THEY will change the Government to somthing that is not a threat.

 

But hey.... nothing I say will change your opinion... Libertarians are the Rights new 'Heretics'... and thus must be cast out... 

232 An old Charles Murray piece explored the growing differences between the Two Americas, one affluent and stable, the other poor and frequently in various states of instability such as family break-ups and drug abuse. My boss owns apartments in a shall we say transitional area. The rent there is under $100 less than what I pay in my nice middle class place. There are people constantly moving in and out and I commented one time about how could people just move out overnight since it took me a solid week of packing with Mommy's help to move not to mention a decent sized truck. His reply? They don't own anything. I'll admit, that was an eye opening comment to me.

233

203 -

 

No, I think you are saying you're agnostic.  There is a difference, and I don't understand how you trivialize it. 

 

Active athiests can explain it for themselves, but whenever they try it makes absolutely no sense to me.  What you are saying makes sense to me.

 

 

234 It also forces you to grow up.

Maybe it used to, but in the 21st century?  No guarantee.

(I don't think it ever was a guarantee; every generation has had parents who've run off and abandoned the spouse and kids to do something silly.)

235 Today, it is close to 20 percent. These gains can be found in all regions of the country, including the South. The trend is particularly pronounced among whites, among the young and among men. Look no further than the school system.

236

"At some point there really isn't that much difference between "not knowing" and "Actively disbelieving."

 

As a fellow atheist, I would like to make a small distinction.  Agnostics are much like the atheists who don't make their atheism a "cause". 

 

We've already established most atheists are assholes, it just comes with the territory.  However there are those who take their atheism and assholedness to cosmic levels by taking offense at anything resembling religion.

 

Just for the record.

237 >>>Or morality is a luxury good that industriousness makes affordable. a cynical but pithy way to put it.

238 I've noticed that a lot of prominent Atheists end up becoming Catholic. I wonder why that is?

239 229 KBDaBear,

Lena Dunham helped tilt the election to Giggles...

There is a God and his sense of humor and cynicism is apparent...

240 229 - yes and read my comments at 169.  I question the statistics of this survey, because I doubt that they asked the proper questions.

241 ::: This doesn't say that the path that is outlined and hypothesized is not impossible (as he is perhaps claiming) it just means that it is highly unlikely. This argument does not, however, offer another hypothesis that fits within the mechanistic framework that replaces the one it refutes. ::: I'm not going to be like Prescient and demand other people bow down to my worldview, partly because of the irreconcilable nature of methodological naturalism and theology. But I do want atheists to stop badgering Christians to accept evolutionary history or be considered an idiot. This is impossible, of course. Christians won't stop knocking atheism and its trappings. But it would be nice.

242 tasker, southern Germany remained pretty Catholic, and Austria did also. Part of why there was so much intermarriage between the Bavarian royal family and the Austrian imperial family was because of religion.

243 The religious talk turns people off and makes them dislike religion. There is a direct corelation between the decline of religion in America and the Republican Party's embrace of religious politics.

Posted by: Food for Thought at March 26, 2013 12:36 PM (TVbdM)

 

Show the correlation, then. Otherwise, you've spouted two random non sequiturs, one from the other, with no apparent connection. 

244 226 ::::to be honest saying you're "agnostic" is like saying "you don't define your sexuality." It means you're gay. agnostic because it is above my pay grade and above my capabilities to assess.:::: See? He's a homo. Posted by: Empire of Jeff at March 26, 2013 12:37 PM (JDIKC) __________________ I'm kind of agnostic on Ace homo--yet after that Donnie and Marie vid--and now that karate krap--I might be more in the "knowing" of it.

245

Gerson:  American religiosity is declining. 

Me:  America ......is declining.  Real fucking fast. 

246 If you are Catholic, why is an increasingly Hispanic RC bother you? Jesus bled for us all. ---------------- I think the issue is less that there are more hispanics in the church than that there are fewer of everyone else. It's probably not the best thing for the church to have so much of their membership concentrated in one part of the world (Central and South America).

247 I find it amazing that liberals with no kids give such a shit about evolution, they have voted themselves out of the gene pool.

248 240 JWest,

You rang?

//Cheethohs the Jazz Flautist

249 Hal: "That portion of the "nones" who still believe in God/spirituality are frequently termed "spiritual but not religious" (SBNR)."

We call them "fucking lazy", cafeteria catholics, layabout lutherans, easter episcopals, etc.

Everyone wants their God but without the work. Rulez iz hard n stuff.

But that is just part and parcel of the entire decline of our society.

we're all fooked.

250

220  Liberty Lover

I agree with everything you wrote. I think many Socons are insecure in their faith. They view government as a means of  reinforcing their beliefs. I really believe in my faith and do not need the government to support my faith.

Jesus said his kingdom is not of this world. I wish more Christian Conservatives would realize this.

251 I've often said that I don't actually believe we were endowed by our Creator with inalienable rights, among these Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. But we should pretend like we were.

252 We can be teenagers forever! And isn't that just lovely for society. Posted by: ace at March 26, 2013 11:55 AM (LCRYB) Teenagers with too much power on their hands. Hauntingly reminiscent of the movie we watched last night. It left a mark. (My husband said he dreamed about it, and he never remembers his dreams.) Three very different teenagers. The boy described above might have had $300 worth of anger, versus his perceived value of life. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1706593/?ref_=sr_1 worth a watch if you haven't seen it

253 No, it's definitely not good that America is becoming more secular.  The Left loves to trot that America's religiosity is the reason for every ill in society , apparently being judgmental (read: believing in right and wrong) is the ultimate form of evil.  I would argue amorality is when societies destroy themselves.

Regardless, this secular trend is unmistakeable, and conservatives need to decide if they want to go down with the ship and use politicians to try and create some sort of religious revival, or if they want to try and form political coalitions that non-religious voters can support.

254 Buthey.... nothing I say will change your opinion... Libertarians are the Rights new 'Heretics'... and thus must be cast out... -------------- Ayup.

255 " He suggested the kid probably just killed someone for a trivial amount of money -- say, $300 -- because he valued his own life about that cheaply. His life was cheap -- about $300's worth of life, all told -- and therefore every human life he saw walking down the street he also saw as being worth about $300. If you can get $300 out of it, kill that person. That's what people are worth." This would explain a lot of dangerous behavior you see in poor countries.

256 Buthey.... nothing I say will change your opinion... Libertarians are the Rights new 'Heretics'... and thus must be cast out...

I don't want to cast anyone out. But I do think peaceniks are dummies. I also think "only attack if attacked" sounds good on paper and that's it. But then, in my world most of the Middle East would have been glass by 9/13.

257

250  Farmer Joe

That is a very fair point.

258 246 tasker, southern Germany remained pretty Catholic, and Austria did also. Part of why there was so much intermarriage between the Bavarian royal family and the Austrian imperial family was because of religion. Posted by: Barb the Evil Genius at March 26, 2013 12:40 PM (WD0KF) _________________ Ah -hah. Thanks for the reply. That might explain Alsace Lorraine although I think Huguenots....wow nevermind--I'm not sure of that without the google assist.

259 /rubber chicken drops from the ceiling!

I thought Vic would be out on the porch by now.  Watched the first parts of the John Adams miniseries last night; I thought Clancy O'Connor did a nice job portraying him at the Continental Congress.

260 Trust me I've been in L.A. and have walked by the Scientology building which is more grandiose than any church I have seen in this state.

 

Posted by: Adam Smith's Invisible Pimp Hand at March 26, 2013 12:20 PM (NzBQO)

 

Isn't that the old Chateau Marmont?

261

247  troyriser

The Corelation is in this post. As the GOP began to use religion more in politics, the number of religious people declined.

262 We've already established most atheists are assholes, it just comes with the territory. However there are those who take their atheism and assholedness to cosmic levels by taking offense at anything resembling religion.

Just for the record.

Posted by: jwest at March 26, 2013 12:39 PM (u2a4R)

So much so that their atheism becomes.....

like a religion to them.

<cough>

263 36 Awhile ago, Ace (I think) had a link to a story about John Cleese's dismay at what has happened to the British and their descent into yob culture. He apparently just didn't see the role he and Monty Python played in destroying what remained of the old culture. I remember watching it as a teen, and thinking how awesome they were, and how boring the old traditional types were. They mocked religion, effort, civility and restraint, and now we see the result. They weren't the only ones, of course, but they helped. And yes, I still laugh at it. Posted by: pep at March 26, 2013 12:00 PM (YXmuI) Yep. That was me. Then I grew up. I laugh now, too. Then I reflect on what has been lost.

264 At some point there really isn't that much difference between "not knowing" and "Actively disbelieving."

I'd say there is a pretty big difference between saying "I don't know" and saying "I don't believe. Let's all get together and not believe at the same time on Tuesday." 

265 Qualia, watched Chronicle myself...well-done flick. The troubled kid looked just like me when I was that age. If he knew he had to look forward to male-pattern baldness, he'd have leveled the city.

266 The rise of the socons was reactionary. The left started tearing things apart, yet we yell at the ones trying to hold it together.

267 So much so that their atheism becomes.....
like a religion to them.
<cough>

Posted by: exsanguine at March 26, 2013 12:44 PM (GHsf9)

 

Exactly.

268 Oh, man. I missed a theology/apologetics thread. Dang it! Also- Barack Obama is a stuttering clusterf*ck of a malignant traitor.

269 The older I get the more religious I get. Especially the sacramental wine thing

270 OT: Behold! The inevitable intersection between stompy boots and the Second Amendment! http://tinyurl.com/cveywn6 Bayonetta not available for comment...

271 271 Lauren,

Put down the sail...hand the keys to the drunk...

let it fucking burn

272 >>>I think Ace is right in his thinking. We are called believers because we have a knowledge of a living God. We KNOW him and he KNOWS us. There are only people then who know God and those who don't know God. So atheists are never going to prove to true believers that God does not exist no matter how much they get written into law. i don't think I was thinking that but it's probably right. I'd never really try to prove to someone that God doesn't exist. 1, I couldn't, 2, why would I? What's m end-benefit? The only thing i don't want is to have things important to me (like science) dictated by a Holy Book I don't believe in. FYI, I really don't care if people don't believe in Evolution. An old commenter, Michael, explained it to me once: "If god has granted me salvation and asks me to believe this one other thing, how can I refuse?" Got it. No problem. Makes sense. Believe away. I just don't want to have to believe this stuff. And I think it's a false conflict, this science (evolution) and religion thing. I keep trying to make this point but no one seems to get me: Even if evolution were false and creation-by-God's-hand true, evolution would STILL be the scientific explantion, because science, by definition, is about mechanical, natural (non-supernatural) proceses. In this particular hypothetical -- we now have proof of God's creation by hand -- science would be disproven. But the scientific explanation would still be the scientific explnation -- it would just be false. In this case we would say "Science fails in this area, and can go no further, because it involves God." We would not say that the study of God and the Bible has now become science.

273

Religiosity --   or   morality, for those of a spirtual if not overtly religious nature --   and    secular   life can    support each other in a healthy symbiotic relationship,   so long as they're equally balanced.    Once one or the other becomes too powerful in society -- once religiosity becomes law (see   sharia)    or    secularism becomes religion   (see    progressivism) --     that symbiosis    falls apart.   People can no longer trust their inner judgment   because     they're either not moral enough ("Evil woman!  You should not show your eyes!")        or too moral    ("What do you mean you won't marry me and my homosexual lover?").   Furthermore they     can't trust the law    respect or guide them,       because they're either not moral enough    ("You say you were raped, but you were out on your own without a male relative!   It is YOU who is in the wrong!")     or too moral      ("Equal opportunity but not    equal outcomes?!        RACIST!").    In either case, the sanctity of the individual is destroyed    and    crushed under      the weight of the state.

 

Personally, I think you're better off in a world where   religiosity has a slight edge in society over secular matters, but that's just me.  

 

YMMV.  

274 251 I find it amazing that liberals with no kids give such a shit about evolution, they have voted themselves out of the gene pool. Posted by: Jean at March 26, 2013 12:41 PM (sTfkB) Much, much faster, please.

275 164 your a Lutheran Missouri Synod type if you like Jello and Deer HUnting
Check em out
They also Drink , Smoke and Eat Pork Products like Bratts..

This.  The Missouri Synod is extremely similar (they're practically the same).

Sing some hymns, listen to some Bible passages, a modest apolitical sermon- out in 45 minutes.

276 ::: So much so that their atheism becomes..... like a religion to them. ::: No joke, it would make things a lot easier if atheism was defined as a religious view. It's a statement of belief about the nature of the universe and existence itself. Sounds religious enough to me.

277 It's pretty simple. The religious person is largely concerned with that beyond the material and the sel-inspired. The irreligious person is not.
 

278

Clive Mantle, Game of Thrones actor, has his ear bitten off at a Travelodge.

 

Where was God?

279 Didn't the guy from SIDEWAYS already do an Adams series?

280 #205

That is simply incorrect. If lottery tickets were free, wouldn't you play at every opportunity the maximum number of times allowed? Over a vast stretch of time, under those circumstances, winning isn't especially remarkable. The only question is how many draws it took but it isn't like there was a schedule to keep. Whether it took you a thousand years to win or a billion is merely a detail. You know by virtue of your existence that the numbers eventually came up in your favor.

Steve Wozniak once did an ad for CA Lottery in which he gave the numbers he regularly played as 1 2 3 4 5 6. While this seemed an incredibly bad strategy, it was as valid as any other set of numbers if the generation were truly random. If the lottery were run for a billion years that set should turn up at least once on the basis that it was no more probable or improbable than any other set.

281 What Socons and their Neocon allies need to realize is that their numbers are declining. Libertarians are increasing. No amount of name calling will change this fact. Either the Necon/Socon Axis gives Libertarians a seat at the table or they will be destroyed by them in the future.

282 >>>ay there is a pretty big difference between saying "I don't know" and saying "I don't believe. Let's all get together and not believe at the same time on Tuesday." that's not even really atheism, that's Daddy issues with a social club.

283 in the 1840s fifteen year olds were adults. Because they HAD to be, not because they wanted to be. I'm sure they would have liked being teenagers without responsibilities. And we've got all sorts of laws -- and subsidies and doles -- infantilizing us. We can be teenagers forever! And isn't that just lovely for society. Posted by: ace at March 26, 2013 11:55 AM (LCRYB) I was re-reading Grave Mercy again the other night and was thinking about this very thing. This is yet another of my magic realism YA books but this one is set in 15th century Brittany and one of the striking things about it is how age is treated in a period appropriate manner. For example, Our Heroine is 17 and she is considered an old maid. The plot centers around getting the right person to be crowned as queen and then married off in an appropriate political union. Said girl is 13 years old. One of the male characters is considered ancient because he's nearly 45. When reaching 50 was considered a miracle, there's not enough time to have teen angst.

284 274The older I get the more religious I get. Especially the sacramental wine thing

Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 26, 2013 12:45 PM (9Bj8R)

 

 

 

You're still young. Wait a few years, until you can literally feel the crushing weight of your own mortality.

285 Erdogan: We insisted on Israeli apology Turkish premier says Ankara rejected several Israeli proposals to end diplomatic crisis prior to Obama's visit to region. 'They said, ‘Isn’t it enough if we pay?’ We said no' Ynet Published: 03.26.13, 18:27 / Israel News Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said Tuesday that his government had rejected several Israeli proposals for reconciliation before the two countries agreed to normalize their relations. According to Erdogan, Turkey insisted on three major conditions for the improvement of relations with Israel that included the use of the word "apology," Turkey's Hurriyet newspaper reported. Related stories: Billboards in Ankara: 'Thank you Erdogan' Op-ed: Righteousness of our cause Turkey: Israel has met our main demands In a meeting with fellow party members Erdogan said, "We constantly gave them three conditions. An apology. They wanted to express sorrow, but we said no. We wanted the word apology.” This Erdogan pig is milking the "Apology" for all it is worth for political reasons in Turkey and in the World Press. This will all backfire on Israel. Fucked up

286 277 Ace,

if there was not an evangelical anti-Christian personality cult of the decade en perpetual you would not see the rage/fear on the 6,000 year types part IMHO...

as I once said long ago...

there is no conflict God's book guides my heart and eases my soul so my science eyes can see...

287 ::: In this case we would say "Science fails in this area, and can go no further, because it involves God." We would not say that the study of God and the Bible has now become science. ::: That is a refreshing way to put it. Seriously.

288 I remember when Sunday really was a "sacred" day, whether one was religious or not. A time to reflect, and give thanks to our family and friends. Now, Sundays are driving kids around and catching up with errands and house work (especially for families with two working parents). And, football.

289

All the non-religious who view religion as unreason, ask yourself this question:

 

If the people who live within a quarter of a mile of your house, i.e., in your neighborhood, could magically be replaced by believing daily Mass-going Catholics, do you think your property values would go up or down?

 

I think they'd go up, way up, because neighborhoods with that kind of people tend to have stable families, stable work histories, low crime, low teenage birthrates, nice kids that you want your kids to hang out with, men and women who volunteer to organize block parties or reading groups or to sub for you in a car pool, etc.  

 

So why exactly does religion = unreason again?

290 They mocked religion, effort, civility and restraint, and now we see the result. They weren't the only ones, of course, but they helped. And yes, I still laugh at it. ------------- One of the defects of western culture (at least in modern times) is that we don't know how to react to satire. Make jokes about how stuffy religion is, and we don't try to make religion less stuffy, we abandon it all together. Monty Python were legitimately funny, and their targets were ripe for satire. But that doesn't mean that we have to destroy those targets. We can laugh about it and move on. Somewhere along the way, satire became a weapon where previously it had been a flashlight.

291 Episcopal Church embraced homosexuality two decades ago. How has that worked out? Not well:
http://tinyurl.com/7q966rg

292 You're still young. Wait a few years, until you can literally feel the crushing weight of your own mortality. Posted by: maddogg at March 26, 2013 12:49 PM (OlN4e) There are some days I feel pretty old. How old do you think I am by the way?

293 286 Yector,

Yeah yeah sure what the fuck ever...

I'll follow the word and have a seat at my table for the hungry, but by Jesus you'll hear the word and work.

294

235 Romeo13

Time is on our side against the Neocons/Socons. Their numbers are decreasing and ours increasing. We are being vindicated by events daily. Their hostility towards us is the last gasps of 2 dying movements.

Be patient, we are winning the battle for the Right!

295 But a belief that life as it exists now, is due to evolutionary randomness at the start and unguided processes to today from 4 billion years ago(to wit, "spontaneous generation") is so remote that to even include this "religion" in scientific textbooks is laughable. Posted by: Prescient11 at March 26, 2013 12:03 PM (tVTLU) You oughta get another string for your guitar. You are quite the Johnny One-note.

296 "I don't believe. Let's all get together and not believe at the same time on Tuesday."  I was briefly Unitarian in highschool. You've described their services perfectly. I left the "church" after a "Holiday Mass" i which all references to Jesus were scrubbed from Christmas Carols. Come on.

297 Strangely, Genesis does get the actual evolution of life in the correct order. Life began in the seas...etc. Strange coincidence for science knowledge of the time.

298

Posted by: The Mega Independent at March 26, 2013 12:42 PM (Lq5WC)

 

Why would that be unworkable?  With Modern Technology?

 

Key is that the threat of attack must be believable... you have to DO it a couple of times...

 

The Threat of a spanking from Mom never phased us kids... the threat from Dad would shut us up.... because we knew that Mom was 95% Talk.... Dad was 100% Action....  so we ended up getting spanked more by MOM, than Dad...

 

Countries, and peoples, are no different... Pain IS the Great Teacher... we learn through it faster than anything else...

 

Problem with our foreign policy, and War fighting, is that we are trying to make it so the Populace does not feel the pain.... when in reality, THEY are the ones who will stop their Government from doing stupid shit.

299 Hollowpoint, did you mean to talk about another religion in your reply instead of Missouri Synod? Anyway, Missouri Synod also considers the Sacraments to be important, specifically communing whenever possible.

300 Your religion is Fear, ace. And your daily prayer is "Please, merciless God, a giant terror strike killing thousands of Americans. Thank you God"

301

290 Nevergiveup

Like the Gaza ceasefire, Israel once again is groveling before the Muslim Brotherhood. This will not end well.

302 There are some days I feel pretty old. How old do you think I am by the way?

Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 26, 2013 12:50 PM (9Bj8R)

 

 

I was thinking late 30's-mid 40's. Am I short?

303 "There's a lot of dumb people in the world.
Posted by: ace"


And they vote, thus insuring our doom.

304 And erg's got nothin.

305 Buthey.... nothing I say will change your opinion... Libertarians are the Rights new 'Heretics'... and thus must be cast out...

Posted by: Romeo13 at March 26, 2013 12:38 PM (lZBBB)

 

That isn't true. Libertarian-leaning Senator Rand Paul is one of the darlings of the GOP, along with the more mainstream Marco Rubio, so if there's any casting out going on, it must be happening on a super-seekrit, behind-closed-doors level no one knows about--and I mean no one, it's that secret.

 

Libertarian ideas would be more warmly received if they didn't include evil Jewish banker cabals and Illuminati conspiracies. Most conservatives--myself included--like the 'leave people alone' aspect of libertarianism. Then your typical libertarian goes off on chemtrails or black helicopters or secret Illuminati genetic hybridization experiments, and loses me completely. I could go on, but you've only yourselves to blame.

306 Posted by: Farmer Joe at March 26, 2013 12:49 PM (Od5/V) nice post

307

305 The Third Horseman

Try Rand Paul.

308 >>>No joke, it would make things a lot easier if atheism was defined as a religious view. It's a statement of belief about the nature of the universe and existence itself. Sounds religious enough to me. I think you're conflating the ersatz religion the religious-but-godless make it into with the thing itself. I know several atheists and they never even think about it. barely talk about it. I wouldn't talk about it myself much except that it comes up in politics.

309 That building was originally a hospital. I was born there when it was known as Cedars of Lebanon. The Scientologists took it over many years later.

 

Posted by: epobirs at March 26, 2013 12:27 PM (kcfmt)

 

Little known fact:  it's the Los Arms Hospital in the Three Stooges short Men in Black.

310 erg, hector. hector, erg. You two go off and have hot, passionate sex and leave the decent people alone.

311 305 3dHorseFella of the Big Whoops,

Amen.....

charge of the Light in the Loafers Brigade...

our little movement has survived the world for 2,000 years....do your worst Occutards.

312

If you refrain from theft because you understand that    it is morally wrong to take    something that doesn't belong to you,   that's not    the same as refraining from theft because you don't want to get caught.    I would frame the former as an   appeal to religiosity,  the latter to secular law and order.    The former is about abiding by an inner code of morals and ethics    of which you yourself must be the judge.   The latter is about following the dictates of an external force that prescribes       certain consequences for not    adhering to    certain     behavioral expectations.    There will always be those of an immoral nature who will try to circumvent the rules of an orderly society; this is why we have prisons.   But moral individuals do NOT circumvent those rules,    except under extreme provocation,    because the rules of society in large part align with the rules they    impose   upon themselves.   

 

That's why I can look at this question:

 

I wondered, though, whether it wasn't the other way 'round: did industriousness, a good work ethic, and ultimately success produce in turn good moral values?

 

...and say with near certainty that no, this is not the case.   In certain instances it may be, but    in any group there will always be exceptions    to any rule.        Work ethic, industriousness, and success on their own    are  not going to encourage moral    values;     indeed, achieving success thru a LACK of morals     is    probably going to convince the individual that moralism is for chumps and immorality -- or amorality, as is largely the case -- is the way to go.  

 

If you don't have to answer to yourself,    let alone a Higher Power,      for your behavior -- if you don't feel shame for an immoral    decision,    consternation for an     amoral decision,   or fulfillment for a moral one --    then you have no reason to pursue a   life     enriched by moral values.   They just don't mean anything to you.   And if, by extension, you don't believe in some kind of life after death -- be it Heaven, Hell, reincarnation, or something else all together -- then there's no reason to curb your       actions    in deference to    the needs of others, because you aren't expecting to experience anything beyond the material world   of the Here and Now.       Hedonism becomes your driving force,   and self-gratification your    only     goal.

313 302 Strangely, Genesis does get the actual evolution of life in the correct order. Life began in the seas...etc. Strange coincidence for science knowledge of the time.    

Posted by: Ook? at March 26, 2013 12:51 PM (OQpzc)

 

 

I think of it this way.... Lets say Genesis was 'inspired' by somthing.... an Alien, or God, or an Angel, came down and told a Goat Herder how evolution worked...

 

The only way he could comprehend it was in terms HE understood at the time... the knowledge would process through his worldview... and THAT is how he would have to write it down...

314 The religious talk turns people off and makes them dislike religion. There is a direct corelation between the decline of religion in America and the Republican Party's embrace of religious politics.
Posted by: Food for Thought at March 26, 2013 12:36 PM

You're calling that Food for Thought? It would starve a hamster

315 >>>Your religion is Fear, ace. And your daily prayer is "Please, merciless God, a giant terror strike killing thousands of Americans. Thank you God" would a volcano do, dickbreath dum-dum?

316

311  troyriser

You are stereotyping Libertarians as anti-Semitic. That is a small miniscule numberof Libertarians who are like that. Most Libertarians hate Jihadists and are tired of nation building.

317 I keep trying to make this point but no one seems to get me: Even if evolution were false and creation-by-God's-hand true, evolution would STILL be the scientific explantion, because science, by definition, is about mechanical, natural (non-supernatural) proceses. First, granted that most Christians who disbelieve in Darwinian Evolution don't think about it beyond "I don't believe it." That said: those who do give it thought have lots of scientific problems with Darwinian Evolution. Inasmuch as it has been taken over by atheists, the first question it fails to answer is where the universe came from. If your philosophy can't answer that, or at least square the circle of a self-existent (and therefore infinite) Universe with the observations of our expanding (and therefore not infinite, and therefore not self-existent) universe, then you've got some big wholes. And they just start there. Now, here's the thing, Christians who are scientists have posited Intelligent Design, which basically says "Since God exists (see prior proof), it only make sense than an active and acting God would also direct the development of creatures along paths He chooses." Yet people who say that- and who agree on so much with DE advocates except the motivating force behind the mechanism are laughed at, called God Botherers, and told what they're advocating isn't "science." Except that what isn't "science" is an a priori commitment to the idea that God does not exist, or at least does not exert any influence over Evolution.

318 No one can "force" you to believe anything. That's a canard most often employed by the irreligious.

You may try to keep someone from expressing their belief, but the truth lays in their heart.

By the same token, those who believe in things such as evolution often try to force that belief upon us. In that regard, so-called science has become a substitute for religion.

That's mostly a despotic act of desperate people. They've corrupted "human evolution" and use it as a cudgel against God and those who believe in him.

That's mostly the objection to evolution as a matter of science. Which by the way has never been proven fully as a matter of so-called science.

319 Religion on the decline. Direction of Country is negative. Correlation. Causation?

320 When your church suddenly tells you there is no justifiable War... and ALL fighting is wrong... even when there are plenty of examples in the Bible of God telling people to fight... It's a shame Sean Bannion isn't about, because he's an infinitely better defender of the Catholic Church then I am. I can't gauge whether you're speaking to all Christianity, or just Protestant religions, or including Catholics. But the Catholic Church has specific codes in reference to whether a war is 'just' or not. I believe they have given that 'seal of approval' to at least one war in the past two hundred years. But it's a very tough set of circumstances to get the seal. Which is okay by me, as I believe war should be tough to initially engage in. Especially in the day of mega-tonnage nukes. I suspect that some people were initially disappointed that the Pope (JP?) didn't give his blessing to the Iraq War. I wasn't disappointed, it was exactly what I expected. The war turned out as I expected, too.

321 ensuring.  You see, I'm one of them.

322 Actually yes,  there are a lot of German Catholics,  because during the Reformation Bavaria remained Catholic (remember Pope Benedict was from Bavaria). 

My city had a lot of German immigrants who built many beautiful churches downtown.  As those people migrated to the suburbs or fell away,  those churches either consolidated or closed.    The traditions of different churches from different countries is the emphasis on certain saints and celebrations.  For example,  my church has a very elaborate mass and dinner for Our Lady of Guadalupe.  We really do nothing to celebrate Pentecost other than the vestments and readings. In the old days this was a big festival in the German churches.

323 I keep trying to make this point but no one seems to get me: Even if evolution were false and creation-by-God's-hand true, evolution would STILL be the scientific explantion, because science, by definition, is about mechanical, natural (non-supernatural) proceses. Agreed. I was taught (Catholic) the two concurrently. They are not necessarily at odds with each other. Who's to say that evolution is not a creation of God? In a way, Science may simply the human way to explain God. If someone has the answer, let me fucking know. When I let my mind bend on the whole No beginning, No end thingy, I have to start drinking.

324 The religious talk turns people off and makes them dislike religion. There is a direct corelation between the decline of religion in America and the Republican Party's embrace of religious politics.

Posted by: Food for Thought at March 26, 2013 12:36 PM (TVbdM)

 

Historically no. This is wrong. Ever hear of William Jennings Bryan?

325 The problem with "modern" Christianity, and the reason men have turned their backs on it, is that it has become unmanly.  It demands nothing of you except to come on Sunday, listen to the live caterwaulings of the latest "artist", buy their CD in the lobby (next to the Starbucks), and drop some cash in the basket while some dumbass tells you how God wants you to be rich.

Either that, or listen to some broad "reverend" prattle on about social justice and how Jesus loves you.

Indeed, Jesus loves you, but He also demands a hell of a lot out of you.  There is no more self-discipline required.  (Might want to take a look at the root of that word "discipline".)  Fasting, prayer, self-examination, confession, true repentance; these are the things Christ taught.

Not homo-marriage, "social justice", and "prosperity gospel".

The trouble with American Christianity is that it's unChristian, and men say "fuck that".

326 ::: That is simply incorrect. If lottery tickets were free, wouldn't you play at every opportunity the maximum number of times allowed? Over a vast stretch of time, under those circumstances, winning isn't especially remarkable. ::: Where it's really going to heat up is at the point that our understanding of abiogenesis makes it abundantly clear whether the formation of life is possible, given enough chances, or not. Fusion cannot progress beyond producing iron. It's not a chance thing. It'll never happen. Similarly, at some time in the future it may become clear whether it is an absolute impossibility that life could arise from a simple organic soup. Then things will get interesting.

327 I don't care about religion much one way or the other. I get annoyed when told not told a well-established science where we have a half century of detailed studies showing the exact mechanism at a biological, molecular level --- is all a communist lie. Don't demand I not believe in basic science. Don't demand that I not believe 2+2=4. Don't insult my intelligence. If the Pope can make his peace with evolution, so can you.

328 Time is on our side against the Neocons/Socons. Their numbers are decreasing and ours increasing. We are being vindicated by events daily. Their hostility towards us is the last gasps of 2 dying movements.
Be patient, we are winning the battle for the Right!

Posted by: Food for Thought at March 26, 2013 12:50 PM (TVbdM)

 

My advice? Stay away from the brown acid. I understand the microdot's okay, but that brown shit will fry your brain. Oh, wait. Too late.

329

The religious talk turns people off and makes them dislike religion. There is a direct corelation between the decline of religion in America and the Republican Party's embrace of religious politics.

 

Religion was in decline before the rise of the  Religious Right. People  "dislike" religion mainly because it tells  them to behave, and because they can't sleep in on Sundays.

330 Most guys I know don't go to church because most Christian churches are in the "blame everything on men" boat. If women are having kids out of wedlock, it's the fault of men. If your wife cheats, it's your fault.

 

Posted by: Lemmenkainen, Freelance Warlord at March 26, 2013 11:53 AM (ZWvOb)

 

Late to comment on, but eleventy!!!11!!!!!

331 162
If Religion is in decline in our country,
How would one explain the HUGE amount of de-facto evil that is attempting to power up here and now?
Maybe Evil in all it's cross-dresses and political fakery and socially sicknakedness.....is Very afraid of what is blooming here and now.
Looks like a major "Pull Out ALL the Stops"...last ditch effort to me...
Is that FEAR? i smell?......something Holy this way comes.......

Night/Morning
and a "Jolly Roger" to you all......
==========
Yup.
We may not be able to see what God is doing.
But Satan can.

332 I know several atheists and they never even think about it. barely talk about it. I wouldn't talk about it myself much except that it comes up in politics. So, like all those Religions "nones" from the article you linked, except atheist. Most people don't "think about" religion. Many very good Christians don't "think about" their religion- it's simply how they live every day. But do not doubt- you have a religion. You have a world view. Even if yours, when pressed, says "I dunno," you have one.

333 ore seriously, the internet is a huge factor. It's turning people into introverts. pros and cons There's nothing I hate more than shopping. I even went the grocery delivery service in LA when they had a few good ones -- little blue booties as not to mess your carpet, and all. But, online shopping allows me to read on my back deck -- in the sun -- more. I have never been one for parties and such, nor bars -- so maybe it helps to reinforce the stereotype, but I don't care. It frees me up quite a bit.

334 "Any way you slice it, though, I don't think I agree with the atheists that we're entering a New Age of Beauty and Reason because we're abandoning religion. I fear it's might be more the direct opposite." It interests me, Ace, that you as an Agnostic would think that and of course as a person of religious faith I don't think abandoning religion means the world s going to an age of beauty and reason. certainly it hasn't been an age of beauty and religion in countries such as Cuba or The Soviet Union that were traditionally Christian It grieves my heart that people abandon a relationship with the awesome Jesus Christ. Christ wants to conform us to his image-and who could be better example of how to live., IMO, but more importantly in the view of the NT writers than Jesus the Christ. A vague religiosity about a God who exists but didn't come in the flesh and seems to be there as a "something" that approves whatever they do but doesn't challenge them to grow spiritually seems to be pointless to me, but i find the more I know about Christ the more I want to know about HIM and be aimed at God.

335 the Resistance Is Futile Troll and a Distraction Troll in the same thread? this will not end well

336

330 Jollyroger

Williams Jennings Bryan was crushed in 3 staright elections by the Republican Party. The irony of history is that Bryan would be a Republican today.

337 Food for thought? So who's mind feasts on rat droppings?

338 I was thinking late 30's-mid 40's. Am I short? Posted by: maddogg at March 26, 2013 12:52 PM (OlN4e) 58, but thanks

339 It is not. It is a "model" with unknowable inputs. Exactly what Crichton warned against. That is not science.

Posted by: Prescient11 at March 26, 2013 12:06 PM (tVTLU)

 

Mr. Prescient11, I'll go you one further:  One of the knowable inputs are the  Laws of Thermodynamics.  Evolution is blind faith that somehow these Laws were suspended so that the Model works.  Evolution is science in the same way as Mann's Global Warming Hockey Stick; what is known (the Medieval Warming Period, the Laws of Thermodynamics) must be disregarded to make them feaseable as theory.   

340 Posted by: Flatbush Joe at March 26, 2013 12:57 PM (ZPrif)

Don't play with matches; that straw man might catch fire.

341 Most guys I know don't go to church because most Christian churches are in the "blame everything on men" boat. If women are having kids out of wedlock, it's the fault of men. If your wife cheats, it's your fault. Wait, what? Gone to church my entire life and I have never heard that. Not once.

342 No joke, it would make things a lot easier if atheism was defined as a religious view. It's a statement of belief about the nature of the universe and existence itself. Sounds religious enough to me.

I think you're conflating the ersatz religion the religious-but-godless make it into with the thing itself.

I know several atheists and they never even think about it. barely talk about it. I wouldn't talk about it myself much except that it comes up in politics.

Posted by: ace at March 26, 2013 12:53 PM (LCRYB)

 

Except that atheiests are evangalistic to thier cause, renting billboard space, starting church of atheism and whatnot. It seems they have taken the mainstream tenents of religion instead of leaving others alone.

343 Late to thread, didn't read all the comments.

I am a Christian.
I used to be a Lutheran.
I am not attending services anywhere, nor am I presently looking for such, as I think organized religion has been irredeemably infested by marxist infiltration (social gospel/justice and/or the missional trend). My former pastor used to lament how most of the expansion in Christianity (at the time) was occurring in the stricter, less inclusive sects. I think that may have more to do with what God has a use for than anything else.

I think preserving the remnant is the order of the day. This probably colors my view of other issues (i.e. Let it burn) as well.

My $.02

344 58, but thanks

Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 26, 2013 12:59 PM (9Bj8R)

Damn Nevergivup, I'm 59. Get off my lawn kid!

345

336 CJ

But the Religious "Right" I consider them Socialists really turned people off.

346

323 -

 

I don't understand why the  theory  of evolution has to explain the origin of the universe.  Aren't they two different things? 

347 The religious talk turns people off and makes them dislike religion. It turns off the yoots. No doubt. When they look around at that age, religion is so meh. I did the same. I had to grow up to understand the necessity of belief outside of the man-made.

348 The fastest way to turn someone religious is to tell them they have to work on a Sunday or on Christmas Day

349 343 Yector,

see we get your shit ala WJB and you guys try to take Lincoln and Reagan...

fuck you Yector

keep your shit...WJB belongs with Bobby Byrd right where he was in the Jackass caucus

350 ::: Except that what isn't "science" is an a priori commitment to the idea that God does not exist, or at least does not exert any influence over Evolution. ::: Well, the scientific method can't be applied to God. You can't expect to pray for a new BMW M3 five times in a row and conclude anything about His powers. You can't measure them.

351

@343

My point is that religion was front and center during those political campigns and religiosity itself did not wane which is what your thesis was. Bryan lost for other reasons.

352

Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Assault Hobbit at March 26, 2013 12:54 PM (4df7R)

 

You can make a moral case, that Survival of the Species depends on cooperation.  These moral codes... like property rights.. lead to cooperation.. and thus to survival of the species...

 

Which is good for YOUR comfort, and progeny as well.

 

Telling Lies? Kills cooperation... Stealing?.... same... Murder?  fear destroys the ability to cooperate, ...and the knowledge that our life would be MUCH harder without the society we've built?  Leads to following those Moral Codes (and trying to get others to follow them)... without a Divine Threat...

 

Which is one of the reason I harp so hard on the idea of Law... and the Just and Equal application thereof.... because without it... this country is done.... because without TRUST, this modern society falls apart (can you make your own electricity? medicine? Food?).

353 58, but thanksPosted by: Nevergiveup at March 26, 2013 12:59 PM (9Bj8R) Damn Nevergivup, I'm 59. Get off my lawn kid! Posted by: maddogg at March 26, 2013 01:00 PM (OlN4e) I sometimes feel real old when I am around all the "Kids" in my Unit

354

#304, Barb,  Don't get too down on the Missouri Synod.  These are the same type of Lutherans who fought Catholics for fun in the Thirty Years War.  I think their leadership is very critical of our culture and even sequestration (look at their Witness, Mery, Life Together blog). 

355 This is impossible, of course. Christians won't stop knocking atheism and its trappings. But it would be nice. Posted by: Yoshi, Aggrieved Victim of the White Man at March 26, 2013 12:40 PM (csi6Y) I guess my point is lost. I'll try again. It is only in a Christian based society are you tolerated as being an Atheist. In a Muslim society, they will cure you.

356 All you religious honkey scumbags are haters, that's your problem.

357 Our trolls are bad, and they should feel bad.

358 >Most guys I know don't go to church because most Christian churches are in the "blame everything on men" boat. If women are having kids out of wedlock, it's the fault of men. If your wife cheats, it's your fault. <

Huh?

There is a constant beat of personal responsibility and allegiance to God's law, regardless of gender, where I have gone for ages.

359 If the people who live within a quarter of a mile of your house, i.e., in your neighborhood, could magically be replaced by believing daily Mass-going Catholics, do you think your property values would go up or down?

Here in Colorado? They'd go down - right down. Even with the cheaper burritos.

If a bunch of nonpracticing Jews moved in, though...

360 If people give up on a growing relationship with Christ what are they going to believe in-the state,? their own awesomeness? God as a slightly senile grandfather types in a rocker who nods sleepily at the "young people" but has no power?

361 352 Starve the Beats,

and they were so turned off at "socialists" they empowered communists....makes perfect sense to a fucking retard Paulnut

362 28 Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of "separation of church and state." Posted by: Deli LLama at March 26, 2013 12:08 PM (lGu1O) Unless you are stepping on the word Jesus. Then, that's okay.

363 The priest reads me the riot act, and tells me we would have to start attending that week and become part of the parish. You expected a 2,000 year old church to welcome you with open arms and set aside their own rules because otherwise you would be inconvenienced. Grapes sour, much? // note to those who might be considering getting married in the Catholic Church... better plan way, way, ahead, like six months to a year.

364 #277

Under those circumstances, the Natural would then encompass God, and Science would be faced with devising methods to measure this entity. For something to provably exist or not exist, it needs to have a demonstrable presence or lack thereof. Something that can be measured.

This is why there are scientists who have no difficulty being religious and performing their work in a frame that excludes God. It has been pointed out as a reason for Western development racing ahead of the Muslim world. The Church take on the basic laws of reality is derived from the bit of Genesis where God tells Noah he will never mess with reality again by creating such impossible events like a worldwide flood. (Or at least not on such a scale, since miracles over much smaller regions and periods are still a big factor in the rest of the Bible.) This was interpreted as meaning God doesn't screw with us and play silly jokes like making dinosaur fossils or faking the age of the universe so that light from stars seemingly a million light years away is only a few years old.

This is considered blasphemous in hard core Islam. Allah can change the rules any time he likes. If the gravity is too high it might be reduced or increased on a whim if it suits Allah's purpose at that moment. This, of course, makes it hard to science when you make be murdered for suggesting that there are some hard and fast rules defining how the world works.

365 You are stereotyping Libertarians as anti-Semitic. That is a small miniscule numberof Libertarians who are like that. Most Libertarians hateJihadists and are tired of nation building.

Posted by: Food for Thought at March 26, 2013 12:55 PM (TVbdM)

 

Not a sterotype. Your former Dear Leader, Ron Paul, is/was blatantly antisemitic, with connections to Willis Carto, Spotlight publisher and  founder of the Holocaust denial 'movement'. The senior Paul also appeared on Iranian (!) television to blast Israeli 'warmongering'. He also willingly, happily starred in an Alex Jones movie called 'Endgame', where the central premise was of a Jewish (Rothschild) conspiracy to exterminate most of the human race and reduce all the rest to slavery, ruled over by a handful of near-immortal, genetically enhanced super-Jews. I'm not making this up.

366 You know... It just occurred to me that the whole tenor of this conversation changes when you start thinking of a lot of the leftist "isms" as religions (feminism, environmentalism, pacifism, (anti-)racism...) All of those things provide a moral direction and rules for adhering to it. Now, I'm not saying these are valid religions, or as good as religion, or anything like that, but if we recognize that these ideologies co-opt the mechanisms of religion (moral sense, social pressure to stick to the rules), then it turns out that America is just as religious as ever. Maybe even moreso. It's just that we've chosen bad religions.

367 @331, Das ist alles korrect. You state it perfectly. I want my Catholicism to become more Jesuit, which is more inspirational. I like what I'm seeing out of Pope Francis.

368 Which is one of the reason I harp so hard on the idea of Law... and the Just and Equal application thereof.... because without it... this country is done.... because without TRUST, this modern society falls apart (can you make your own electricity? medicine? Food?). Posted by: Romeo13 at March 26, 2013 01:01 PM (lZBBB) Working on it.

369 ::: I know several atheists and they never even think about it. barely talk about it. I wouldn't talk about it myself much except that it comes up in politics. ::: But religion is not defined by the proselytization of it, or lack thereof.

370 362 DiogenesLamp,

"we have an app for that..."

//Haji the 'Guest' in the UK and EUtopia....

371 We are winning! The future belongs to the fat, angry, lonely, and stinky! Victory!! I will now unroll my rolls of fat, find my shriveled, never-felt-the-touch-of-a-woman prick and fap for our Victory over the hated socons!!!

372

@350

 

I heard the social gospel bullshit at a methodist church I went to. I was shocked. The churches don't understand by growing the welfare state they are crowding thier role in the community out.  

373 ace, you old cockmeat receptacle, you. You don't believe in God, but you do believe in playing Godboy in order to hoodwink idiot values voters. You're a fucking fraud.

374 I thought Blog Of The Year was supposed to get us a better class of troll. We still have the same drooling shitbirds we already had. Dissappointment.

375 375 Diogenes Lamp,

You should go to the non blog...

may be able to get you some seed money...

I am getting ready for the bonfire of the vanitie....


gonna need allies.

376

Ace,

Thank you for posts like these. I may not always agree with you, but you are one of the few blogs that does not drink the Socon kool aid. Thanks for all that you do!

377 It is only in a Christian based society are you tolerated as being an Atheist. In a Muslim society, they will cure you.

Posted by: DiogenesLamp at March 26, 2013 01:02 PM (bb5+k)

 

You got a fever, and stones turn out to be the only cure

378 Except that what isn't "science" is an a priori commitment to the idea that God does not exist, or at least does not exert any influence over Evolution. Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channeling Breitbart at March 26, 2013 12:55 PM (nUH8H) It's a mistaken view of the limits and constraints of cosmonogy vs. cosmology. Those are not the same thing but people from column B seem completely, utterly and absolutely convinced that their theories explain column A. They do not. They simply don't, those are two distinct things. Dr. Sheldon Cooper, Ph.D. can happily spend his entire career working for that Nobel to explain how the Universe works without ever once needing to care why the Universe exists.
Since we're discussing what does and does not constitute Religion, I think the Scientific Method should be included on that list. The reason that people freaked the fuck out when that study was done showing that the Right does not trust scientists with the study then being reported that the Right doesn't trust science is that for far, far, far too many who deem themselves scientific, Science is a religion. Questioning scientists is the equivalent of questioning priests or rabbis or imans or whomever. What is hilarious about that is that questioning scientists is rather the hallmark of the Scientific Method.

379 277.

I really don't get why what someone believes regarding evolution is such an obssession of non-religious people, especially the Left.  If someone believes light is a particle versus a wave, for some strange reason they don't face the same ridicule.  I think it's because if Evolution is not true, there really is no other explanation than the supernatural.  So any opening on that front needs to be stamped out, with careers ruined if needed.

Personally, I went from being a Christian that believes evolution was how God created the Earth to being a Christian that believes in Intelligent design with small changes occurring from adaptation.

I would love to be able to believe in mainstream evolution, but I simply can't, and I know I'm labeled as a backward, knuckle-dragging retard.

But speaking politically, this is an easy issue for me to ignore. I don't want the GOP pushing for the teaching of intelligent design in public schools, I know that's a political loser.  I just don't know why other SoCons can't understand they are in a minority on certain issues and know when to cut their losses.

380 @138

The real Fishtown's around 96% white and has been for a very long time. What the realtors call Fishtown is another matter...

381 I don't understand why the theory of evolution has to explain the origin of the universe. Aren't they two different things? Well, it doesn't necessarily. Unless you believe that God doesn't exist. The thing is, DE apologists often assert that God doesn't exist. Okay, if that's the case, you don't just have to prove evolution, you have to prove how we have a finite universe that (somehow) does not have a cause. Have fun with that. OTOH, the moment DE advocates allow that God exists, they lose every argument they have against ID. If God exists and is a self-evidently active God (He made the universe) then there is no valid reason for an a priori commitment to the idea that He would not direct the advancement (evolution) of the creatures He created. Well, the scientific method can't be applied to God. You can't expect to pray for a new BMW M3 five times in a row and conclude anything about His powers. You can't measure them. No, it can't. But Philosophy can be. And it's only very, very recently that we tried to divorce philosophy and science. What science can do, though, is explain how our universe is- and science says the Universe began at a certain instant and is expanding at an accelerating rate. That indicates it is finite. If it is finite (here's where philosophy comes in) it logically must have had a cause- that is a "something" which caused it.

382 348 Most guys I know don't go to church because most Christian churches are in the "blame everything on men" boat. If women are having kids out of wedlock, it's the fault of men. If your wife cheats, it's your fault. ____________________________ Wait, what? Gone to church my entire life and I have never heard that. Not once. Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channeling Breitbart at March 26, 2013 12:59 PM (nUH8H) Never heard that. Ever.

383 The Ronulans think they will win against the Free Stuff Army? One barrage from the 'YOU'RE KILLING GRANDMA' cannons and they'll be forced back into their fortifications of empty Dorito bags and Guy Falkes masks.

384
380

383


..... OMG.

The oldest trick in the book.

Good Troll - Bad Troll.


Fiendishly clever bastards.

385

Heee, look at ergie!   Trying SO HARD to be     cutting,      and     failing completely.

 

Have you been to    Nebraska lately, ergie?  Check out the volcanoes   next time you roll through.  Breathtaking.

386

Posted by: illegally posting anonymously on the internet at March 26, 2013 12:55 PM (feFL6)

 

Was speaking of personal Experience... in the United Methodist Church I was raised in...

 

Choir Boy... Family Pew... in a Military Town (SAC Base 1.5 miles away)...

 

Joined the Navy in 79.... saw the world... came back... and the Church had reallllllyyyy changed...

387 I fill my sad life with hatred towards those who have families and people who love them.

388 Err, 128.

389 " 373 You know... It just occurred to me that the whole tenor of this conversation changes when you start thinking of a lot of the leftist "isms" as religions (feminism, environmentalism, pacifism, (anti-)racism...) All of those things provide a moral direction and rules for adhering to it. Now, I'm not saying these are valid religions, or as good as religion, or anything like that, but if we recognize that these ideologies co-opt the mechanisms of religion (moral sense, social pressure to stick to the rules), then it turns out that America is just as religious as ever. Maybe even moreso. It's just that we've chosen bad religions." This X 1000

390 It seems like a good time for another Fenelon Quote. :^) The important question is not how much you enjoy religion, but whether you will whatever God wills. Humbly confess your faults; be detached from the world, and abandoned to God; love Him more than yourself, and his glory more than your life; the least you can do is to desire and ask for such a love.

391

"This is a simple argument. "Math" don't fucking enter into it. The only question is whether we are now going to start proposing and "proving" SUPERNATURAL explanations for phenomenon, against 1200 years of scientific tradition forbidding just that. "

 

Of course, this isn't even touching on whether science if even competent to answer many of the questions it tries to.

 

In many ways, "science" gets to be a magic all its own.

392 384 JollyRoger,

if the prof who had "stompy Jesus" day down in florida had his head lopped off....

well we might get some genuine comity towards our faith...

the atheists love genuflecting to Islam after all...

so when in Rome as it were yes?

393

356 sven10077

WJB is the direct political ancestor of people like Jerry Fawell, Pat Buchana, Rick Santorum, Mike Huckabee and George W. Bush. He would fit in perfectly with you Socons.

The Religious "Right" are just Bible thumping Nanny State Socialists.

394 203 >>>So ace is 100% atheist?

to be honest saying you're "agnostic" is like saying "you don't define your sexuality." It means you're gay.

agnostic because it is above my pay grade and above my capabilities to assess. Most versions of God are non-disprovable. God exists Beyond. I know nothing of beyond.

At some point there really isn't that much difference between "not knowing" and "Actively disbelieving." I don't actively disbelieve primarily because I don't think about it much. It is in the category of "Unknowable even in theory."

Posted by: ace at March 26, 2013 12:32 PM (LCRYB)

++++

^^ This.  God is an unprovable and undisprovable hypothesis.  I used to think I was an agnostic, since I had no evidence for his non-existence.  Then I realized that I also had no evidence for the non-existence of the easter bunny.  It was a big breakthrough for a 17-year-old in Catholic school.

35 years later, I wish God did exist.

395 The trolls around this place always have these creepy 'want to live in your skin' things for Ace.

396 Ace, I was in the middle of writing an answer to your post, when I got a visitor. But AllenG summed it up pretty well.  The scientific discoveries will   never bother me because they will ultimately prove God's work.  So, for sure, begin and carry through without a 'God' bias.  I have a great friend who wrote a book "No Argument for God" by John Wilkerson.  His premise is that you cannot prove that God exists through science because ultimately we come to know God through faith.  So trying to convert unbelievers by disproving evolution is fruitless.  God designed us to have a relationship with Him and that takes the ultimate choice - taking a step of faith.  Once, we do, then everything else makes sense to us.

397 Posted by: sven10077-ArkLaTex travelogue and Researcher at March 26, 2013 01:04 PM (LRFds) Saw an article just this week. Even a British Lefty has now admitted they made a huge mistake letting in all these immigrants.

398

The only way he could comprehend it was in terms HE understood at the time... the knowledge would process through his worldview... and THAT is how he would have to write it down...

Posted by: Romeo13 at March 26, 2013 12:54 PM (lZBBB)

 

I'm inclined to agree with you there.

 

On a prayer works note: I got a job. After 2 years, I got a job with a local government. I didn't qualify for it except at the edges. I don't know anyone in the local government. It pays well and they are going to train me. I've been doing the happy dance since yesterday. I got a job. I got a job. I got a job.

 

God is good.

399

390 zsasz

The Free Shit Army is in you head. Its an excuse to admit that your version of Socon/Neocon Republicanism is dead.

400 #346

Wow, you types dig up the same old claim no matter how many times it is debunked. This was covered in the 19th Century. Evolution does not violate Thermodynamics in any way. You might have noticed a bright shiny light in the sky during much of the day? It's called the Sun. The volume of energy it pumps into the local frame is vastly in excess of any needed to overcome entropic effects in our tiny portion of its neighborhood.

401 I think erg's pissy because someone was already trolling this thread.

402

In two hundred years when Anthropomorphic Global Warming is the only accepted explanation for the return of glaciation to the Northern parts of Canada enough propagandization through media and the school's official textbooks that AGW skeptics will be considered idiots.  Like evolution, the cry goes out: THE SCIENCE IS SETTLED!!!!

You people are as close minded as anyone in an organized religion. 

 

403 agnostic because it is above my pay grade and above my capabilities to assess. Most versions of God are non-disprovable. God exists Beyond. I know nothing of beyond.

At some point there really isn't that much difference between "not knowing" and "Actively disbelieving." I don't actively disbelieve primarily because I don't think about it much. It is in the category of "Unknowable even in theory."

Posted by: ace at March 26, 2013 12:32 PM (LCRYB)

This is a form of a weasel.

404 @179 (women always belonged to someone. Ho-hum.).

I suggest you have a good long hard think on that one.
There were two overweening legal and ethical issues of the generation between the founding and the abolition movement. One was the disestablishment of state religions. The other was the legal standing of women.

Once you've climbed that mountain, you might peek over and see that women's deprivation of property and personal rights in old Europe wasn't just a religious prejudice. There was some real sad experience. Yerp climbed down into that hole, this republic began the long climb out of it, and you're giving it no credit for that.

Please, call me names now. 

405 Most atheists are not true atheists (and the same goes for agnostics): they are true believers in the New Age cult of mind, body, spirit (children of the sun and all that mumbo jumbo that should make us all blush in shame). Even many so called "religious" have fallen into it as well (how many of those church going, tithe paying Belmonters are truly practicing their faith? hmmm, I wonder); the secular humanists, but of course. It appeals to our egos, our sense of entitlement, and is so much easier and convenient to go along with than moral/ethical teachings which demand more from you than self regard, from navel gazing -- because it turns "do what thou will" into a blessing, rather than a curse, and moral imperative of the "beautiful people" even. And everybody hankers to be in on that gig (contemplating the miseries of others is just a cherry on top, a really tempting cherry).

406 Romeo13 at March 26, 2013 01:07 PM (lZBBB) Oh, sorry. Whenever I see priest I think Catholic. When I see ministers or reverend I think Protestant. My bad.

407 t is only in a Christian based society are you tolerated as being an Atheist. In a Muslim society, they will cure you.
Posted by: DiogenesLamp at March 26, 2013 01:02 PM (bb5+k)

----

Now.... dont disparage the Muslims.   They have a great many contributions to science.... especially mathematics with Arabic numerals and the invention of zero.

In fact..... in 1262.... Muslims invented the first prophylactic..... made out of the large intestine of a goat.

It was the British, however, in 1864....that made that invention popular and practical by actually removing the intestine from the goat.

408

Stable, industrious tax producing people own homes.  Ergo we should give home loans to the poor, unfortunate, lazy rabble because it is home ownnership that makes one a good citzen, not that good citizens are more likely to own homes.  So how'd that work out?

Personally the most improtant thing about religon, and Christianity in particular, is humility.  Humility is in essense, realism. An aknowledgement and acceptence of your place in the scheme of things. 

Cynacism = my situation sucks and there is nothing I can do to improve it. Realism = my situation sucks, and here is what I need to do to remedy the situation.

Listen to rap music some time - hear any humility there?  Worst thing a person can do is thump their chest and say "I am somebody".  What they should say is "I'm nobody, but maybe my kids can be somebody".

409 Since we're discussing what does and does not constitute Religion, I think the Scientific Method should be included on that list. The reason that people freaked the fuck out when that study was done showing that the Right does not trust scientists with the study then being reported that the Right doesn't trust science is that for far, far, far too many who deem themselves scientific, Science is a religion. Questioning scientists is the equivalent of questioning priests or rabbis or imans or whomever. What is hilarious about that is that questioning scientists is rather the hallmark of the Scientific Method. Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Mmmm. Tea. at March 26, 2013 01:05 PM
=============
The nub of it, for me, is: Trust science, but not scientists.

410 55 This will change once people understand that evolution is a lie, and it's not science. 

And frankly once people understand that evolution is pretty much impossible mathematically and scientifically.  Once they understand that, then the real questions of creation and purpose will creep back in.

...

Posted by: Prescient11 at March 26, 2013 12:03 PM (tVTLU)

I think you're a little optimistic to see the problem as just a matter of information.   I think we have an issue with people not seeking understanding or knowledge, because they have rejected truth itself.   As a leftist says, "what does it matter?"    To such a person, it doesn't even matter that they believe in lies, because they don't have a desire to find truth.    


"For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened."

411 Hollowpoint, did you mean to talk about another religion in your reply instead of Missouri Synod? Anyway, Missouri Synod also considers the Sacraments to be important, specifically communing whenever possible.

No. 

I've attended both and they're very, very similar (as opposed to a big difference from synods like the ELCA).  If not for the sign outside, you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference between Missouri and Lutheran synods from attending a couple services from each.

The Missouri and Lutheran synods split over differences regarding communion, but in the grand scheme of things it's not a wide gulf between the two at all.

Some Lutheran Synod churches might not do communion every service and/or have slightly different practices regarding communion, but they do also consider it important.

412 ::: No, it can't. But Philosophy can be. And it's only very, very recently that we tried to divorce philosophy and science. ::: By philosophy, you include theology. Well, you can unite science and theology in a quest for truth - here's why the universe came to be, God made it, and here's why it works - but it will still be a union of two separate things. I do think science could be applied to understand questions such as how Noah's Ark was the progenitor of all animal biodiversity, but there are some things that are plainly not scientific. Ex nihilo.

413 385 AlexTheChick,

The AGW cult has "more faith" in AGW than I had in God.

I renounced, reset to zero and analyzed the faith for a half decade ruminating over what it is and is not.

No AGW cultist allows the possibility, let alone the inherent from analysis likelihood that 'what if this is all wrong?"

AGW it's made from sheeple, sheeple....!

Nice post ma'am.

414

Posted by: troyriser at March 26, 2013 01:03 PM (vtiE6)

 

Saying that Ron Paul speaks for most Libertarians, is like saying the West Boro Baptist church speaks for most Christians...

 

Or that the National Organization of Women, speaks for All Women...

 

The Media, the the RIGHT, have chosen Ron Paul as the spokesman for Libertainaism... and its a Page right out a Alinsky.... personalize it.... freeze it...

415 But I am a Theist.

416 What is hilarious about that is that questioning scientists is rather the hallmark of the Scientific Method.

Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Mmmm. Tea. at March 26, 2013 01:05 PM (VtjlW)

 

My only issue with considering the Scientific Method a manner of religion is AGW.   In the case of AGW believers,   the scientific method is only useful so far as it advances their cause.   In any instance where the scientific method does not match their "consensus," the    individual   who dared to commit such heresy is    ritually   (if metaphorically)   stoned, shunned and excommunicated.  

 

Possibly   "Climate Change believers" are a very devout sect of the Church of Scienciness.   It's LIKE science -- smells like science, sounds like science,    tastes like science --   but it's not REALLY science.   When held up to the lens of actual science, it falls apart.  

417 The trolls around this place always have these creepy 'want to live in your skin' things for Ace.

Posted by: zsasz at March 26, 2013 01:08 PM (MMC8r)

 

I don't think someone has arrived as a celebrity of any sort until they get a stalky, psychotic superfan who wants to love them and hold them and consume them so they will always and forever be together as one.

418

372 troyriser

Your former dear leader George W. Bush set up a Sharia state in Iraq. Your hero Bush called Islam the religion of peace and brought in Somali refugees. Bill Kristol, Dick Cheney, Fox News and the Republicans in Washington are now calling to invade Syria and install an Islamic regime.

Your ideas are helping AL Qaeda, not mine.

419

I stood up, told the priest to kiss my fucking ass, grabbed the wife to be, and we left. Since that day I only go to church for weddings and funerals.

 

Posted by: Berserker at March 26, 2013 12:30 PM (FMbng)

 

They did that to me and my wife too. It can be annoying  at first, but it's their job. They're not a Vegas chapel.

 

I go to church now mainly for my kids.

420 You got a fever, and stones turn out to be the only cure Posted by: Jollyroger at March 26, 2013 01:05 PM (t06LC) Exactly. I have pointed out for over a decade that it is the Christian influence which made Western Civilization more successful than other civilizations. Now that it is waning, I see degradation in the structure of Western Society everywhere. As Ace mentioned, these various factors are interactive. The Whole system is one big interacting multipath feedback loop. Tampering with pieces will have unintended consequences.

421 418 55
I think you're a little optimistic to see the problem as just a matter of information. I think we have an issue with people not seeking understanding or knowledge, because they have rejected truth itself. As a leftist says, "what does it matter?" To such a person, it doesn't even matter that they believe in lies, because they don't have a desire to find truth.
========================
Well said.

422 343 330 Jollyroger
Williams Jennings Bryan was crushed in 3 staright elections by the Republican Party. The irony of history is that Bryan would be a Republican today. Posted by: Food for Thought at March 26, 2013 12:58 PM

And the Republican party of today would welcome a populist who had the support of labor unions and wanted to stick it to the rich?

Better get some more food for your brain, and it appears to be oxygen starved too

423 Fusion cannot progress beyond producing iron. It's not a chance thing. It'll never happen. Similarly, at some time in the future it may become clear whether it is an absolute impossibility that life could arise from a simple organic soup. The problem with "we'll find out" is that he have found out- with the same certitude we have with fusion not progressing beyond producing iron. All of modern medicine is basically based on the idea that life does not arise from non-life. The dead cannot give birth to the living. To the extent that when a body dies, we can't bring it back to life (outside that very small timeframe when we call it "resuscitation"). We know everything in the body works. We can make the heart beat and lungs function mechanically- but we can't do it enough to bring the dead back to life. If life could arise from non-life, that would be the shortest step, no?

424 God is good.

Posted by: Ook? at March 26, 2013 01:09 PM (OQpzc)

 

Congratulations, Ook!   God is indeed good!

 

Have a celebratory banana. 

425 Saying that Ron Paul speaks for most Libertarians, is like saying the West Boro Baptist church speaks for most Christians...

Or that the National Organization of Women, speaks for All Women...

The Media, the the RIGHT, have chosen Ron Paul as the spokesman for Libertainaism... and its a Page right out a Alinsky.... personalize it.... freeze it...

Posted by: Romeo13 at March 26, 2013 01:12 PM (lZBBB)

 

You're being disingenous. You can't blame Alinsky or the press or anyone else for Ron Paul, who ran for president on the basis of his support from his libertarian followers. Own it and move on.

426 I have here in my hand incontrovertible proof that there are currently 63...no 97!...socons currently operating in the Republican Party!

427

422 Romeo13

I just laugh when the Neocons calls us Jew haters. They are the ones in bed with the Muslim Brotherhood, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Al Qaeda. It is the Neocons who want to invade Syria and set up an Islamic state.

They project onto us their true anti-Israel policies. Most Libertarians I know hate Islam with a passion. It was the Neocon Hero Bush who called Islam the religion of Peace last time I look.

Hey glad to meet another Libertarian who gets it!

428

@ 407 - "Wow, you types dig up the same old claim no matter how many times it is debunked. This was covered in the 19th Century. Evolution does not violate Thermodynamics in any way. You might have noticed a bright shiny light in the sky during much of the day? It's called the Sun. The volume of energy it pumps into the local frame is vastly in excess of any needed to overcome entropic effects in our tiny portion of its neighborhood."

 

This is rather simple-minded.  You do know that simply adding energy to a system does not "overcome entropic effects," right?  Indeed, simply adding energy to a system often INCREASES those very entropic effects.

429

Gone to church my entire life and I have never heard that. Not once.

 

AllenG - Went with a GF to her church one Saturday evening.  Megachurch.  Fellowship of the Woodlands with Pastor Kerry Shook  and wife giving the sermon / message / homily.    They're on TV, too. 

 

The series was about the man / woman relationship and God's plan.  Advertised as a series for couples, so  hence the "date" to the church service.  Right outta the box Pastor Shook starting clowning  / playacting about all the things men do wrong.  His wife playacting the role of the paragon of virtue that is  all women.  It was the usual stuff you see on TV shows nowadays with the incompetent boob husband and the all-wise, all-knowing, keeps-it-all-together saintly wife.

 

If I wasn't on a date and  sitting with a group of her  church friends, I would have gotten up and walked out in disgust.

430 And the Republican party of today would welcome a populist who had the support of labor unions and wanted to stick it to the rich?

Boehner does love him some SCOAMF.

431

Stable, industrious tax producing people own homes. Ergo we should give home loans to the poor, unfortunate, lazy rabble because it is home ownnership that makes one a good citzen, not that good citizens are more likely to own homes. So how'd that work out?

 

Worked out about as well as  "College graduates  make more money, so let's make everyone a college graduate."

432 #398

Only when people claim science to be something it isn't. Science is a methodology for deriving information. That is all. It doesn't deal in good or evil, right or wrong, or any other judgment. That is where people come in, taking the information derived and interpreting it to serve their desires.

Many fields of study that claim to be science don't measure up because they are heavily reliant on human factors. Psychology, for example, is far more an Art than a Science.

433 Unless you are stepping on the word Jesus. Then, that's okay. I don't see a problem there.

434

428  kbdabear

The Republican party of today embarces Rick Santoruma nd Mike Huckabee. They are socialist and embraced by the GOP.

435 if the prof who had "stompy Jesus" day down in florida had his head lopped off.... well we might get some genuine comity towards our faith... the atheists love genuflecting to Islam after all... so when in Rome as it were yes? Posted by: sven10077-ArkLaTex travelogue and Researcher at March 26, 2013 01:08 PM (LRFds) I make this point as often as I can. If WE behaved the way Muslims do, then maybe WE might not have asswipes like Jim Carrey taking swipes at us. The Words "Respect" and "Fear" are almost synonymous.

436

"To the extent that when a body dies, we can't bring it back to life (outside that very small timeframe when we call it "resuscitation"). We know everything in the body works. We can make the heart beat and lungs function mechanically- but we can't do it enough to bring the dead back to life."

 

Probably because the doctors just don't believe hard enough. 

437 Possibly "Climate Change believers" are a very devout sect of the Church of Scienciness. It's LIKE science -- smells like science, sounds like science, tastes like science -- but it's not REALLY science. When held up to the lens of actual science, it falls apart. Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Assault Hobbit at March 26, 2013 01:13 PM (4df7R) I like the Church of Scienciness because that really sums it up. Also nood kicking NBC in the nads.

438 Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channeling Breitbart at March 26, 2013 01:14 PM (nUH8H) We haven't. If you don't believe me, read about the hypothetical RNA world or some hypotheses about the origin of the cellular membrane. A lot of creationists still argue against abiogenesis in probabilistic language - "the odds of a self-replicating RNA structure spontaneously forming are so low that..." But it still leaves room for the one-in-a-million shot, as it were. Moreover, you overestimate our current medical and biological knowledge base. We are at the tip of what we could know.

439 @424 Republicans like McCain and Graham assume it is always good guys v. bad guys. Never assume good guys.

440

431  troyriser

Did not your Neocon hero Bush say Islam is the religion of Peace/ Did he not do outreach to Muslims and sent 3,000 Americans to die to create an Islamic Republic in Iraq?

Why are you Neocons now wanting to help Al Qaeda take over Syria?

441 The splitting into different groups is man made and not of God. Satan desires it that way because we would be united if we weren't so concerned about others doing it wrong and our particular group doing it right. People are to be commended because they want to follow Scripture. The sad fact is they often get concerned with their own interpretation of selected verses and not the whole counsel of God and lifting up Jesus the Lord who can be "seen" throghout the entirety of Scripture. Sadly. Jesus often gets lost in all these debates.

442 #434

No kidding. But that isn't an issue in this case until such time as the Sun goes nova.

It doesn't change the fact that the Thermodynamics argument against evolution is not only nonsense, it's really, really old nonsense. Get a new argument. That is what a scientist does when then old one is found wanting under examination.

443

445 - Beagle

The Necons are in bed with the Islamists.

444 Your former dear leader George W. Bush set up a Sharia state in Iraq. Your hero Bush called Islam the religion of peace and brought in Somali refugees. Bill Kristol, Dick Cheney, Fox News and the Republicansin Washington are now calling to invade Syria and install an Islamic regime.
Your ideas are helping AL Qaeda, not mine.

Posted by: Food for Thought at March 26, 2013 01:13 PM (TVbdM)

 

Hussein attempted to assassinate George H. W. Bush, a former President of the United States. Historically, that alone was an adequate casus belli and merited the Iraq invasion and Hussein's execution. W. called Islam a religion of peace because he didn't want to start a fight with a billion Muslims. He brought in Somali refugees because he was too kindhearted for his own good--certainly for our own good. Bill Kristol, Dick Cheney, et al can call for invasion all they want. They're wrong on this issue on its face, but I think they're motivated by a desire to put military cutbacks into the spotlight.

 

Foreign policy idiocy helps Al Queda. Libertarians are chock-full of foreign policy idiocy.

445 105 My observation as a church goer is that it's filled with women, not a bad thing. They just haven't been good the past 20 years in getting men into church. How many churches have women activities compared to men. I'm not saying they are going all feminist, they aren't, I think they are just adapting to their audience. I never see young singles in church, but I would say give it time. Those that actually get married and have kids tend to show up.(Point that people actually aren't getting married and having kids) Churches have been really good at children's activities. Posted by: Adam Smith's Invisible Pimp Hand at March 26, 2013 12:12 PM (NzBQO) When I became a Christian (1990s), I searched for a church that had an equal distribution of men in it and found one (non-denominational Protestant). Spiritual reason: pastors of churches which have more women than men also have a tendency to skew their messages toward 'women things.' I go to church to hear the Word of God rightly divided, not to hear about make-up tips. Personal reason: the last thing I want to look at on Sunday morning--or any time, for that matter--is a bunch of broads.

446 By philosophy, you include theology. Well, you can unite science and theology in a quest for truth - here's why the universe came to be, God made it, and here's why it works - but it will still be a union of two separate things. No, actually, I don't. By philosophy I mean sound thinking and argument. Today people might call it "logic and rhetoric" but those are only parts of philosophy. I believe that philosophy, rigorously pursued, does point to God, and therefore to Theology, but Theology is a different thing altogether. In Christian circles we call it the difference between General Revelation (what the Universe tells us about God's existence or lack thereof) and Special Revelation (those things about God that the Religious know that the irreligious do not). Philosophy can get you to General Revelation, but it cannot get you to Special Revelation.

447 #285

Again, you're missing the point (showing that you've not seen the argument in full, which it seems few have) - if you play the lottery 1000 times and the lottery has a 1/1000 chance of winning, it would not be a surprise if you won. (You might not win, or you could win multiple times, as these are independent chances.)

The problem though, isn't simply that 1000 times isn't enough to win a 1/1,000,000,000 lottery and that if you played say, 1,000,000,000 times it's not weird that you would win. It was that the numbers were so astronomically high (1/2^1000 or something) that the current model of the universe simply didn't have enough spacetime to make the occurrence of life probable or even sensible.

Now, I'm saying this not necessarily agreeing with this argument, but I want to make it clear that this is what the argument is, not some 'thinking the world is 6k years old and thinking that's not enough time for mice to turn into men' or some larger version thereof.

My opinion on the figures is as follows:

1. Some mechanisms are missing in the hypothesis. This is pretty much confirmed as when I took biology in college, they noted that natural selection is not 'complexifying' - it does not create complexity; it can also reduce complexity. So alone, it is not an explanation. If you're required to stick to it and just it, you have (realistically) the following: 'Natural selection and the Devil's luck.' The theory still stands and has not been refuted (it slightly veers into the territory of the unfalsifiable, at least with our current technology) but figuring out the mechanism by which it occurred needs more than simply natural selection.

2. (repeat from above) this idea does not offer a counter-hypothesis of the same kind, but is purely deconstructive as usually presented. Because of this, people who are trying to figure or want to figure this thing out are exasperated by it and reject it. As with the concept of evolution, this mathematical theory should not be taken as the end, but as evidence that we don't quite understand things clearly.

However, given the ripeness of evolution-based stupidity ('evolutionary psychology' for instance) I say let them burn each other down. According to Sun Tzu, 'watch the fires burn across the river' is a valid strategy to defeat two strong enemies that oppose each other.

448

Saw an article just this week. Even a British Lefty has now admitted they made a huge mistake letting in all these immigrants.

 

Enoch Powell says "DUH!"

449 The Media, the the RIGHT, have chosen Ron Paul as the spokesman for Libertainaism... and its a Page right out a Alinsky.... personalize it.... freeze it... Posted by: Romeo13 at March 26, 2013 01:12 PM (lZBBB) From my experience discussing issues with Libertarians, I would suggest that the best way to pick a spokesman for them is to look around for the craziest guy you can find. Ron Paul is apparently that guy, though not all of what he says is crazy. Just a lot.

450 If we behaved the way Militant Muslims do we would not be following Jesus

451 If I wasn't on a date and sitting with a group of her church friends, I would have gotten up and walked out in disgust. I would have left anyway. Of course, I'm skeptical of those "Mega Churches" anyway.

452 456 FenlonSpoke,

We were a LOT harder faith once upon a time, I suspect the fuel for our greatness came from our tolerance but like most tolerant hosts we're near the point where we might have to enforce the rules.

453 Have a celebratory banana.

Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Assault Hobbit at March 26, 2013 01:15 PM (4df7R)

 

Heh. Thanks. Took my wife out for a celebratory ribeye at Texas Land and Cattle. She's doing the happy dance too. I won't have to sell a kidney. Seriously, this was from God. A couple more months we would have been homeless.

454

@448 "Get a new argument. That is what a scientist does when then old one is found wanting under examination."

 

Well, when that happens I will.  Until then, nah.

 

Your argument doesn't change the fact that I'm right.  You don't just "add energy" and get order.  Not even in self-assembling systems.

 

455 The Missouri and Lutheran synods split over differences regarding communion, but in the grand scheme of things it's not a wide gulf between the two at all.

Did you mean "Wisconsin" instead of "Lutheran"? 

I stopped going to the LCMS when they told me I was going to hell because no one ever wanted to marry me.  Ho-hum.  Perhaps my parents should have offered some goats as a dowry.

456

450  troyriser

Nice try, Bush was a lackey of Saudi Arabia. They pulled his strings and he did their bidding. Bush set up a Sharia state in iraq and supported the ethnic cleansing of Iraqi Christians. But you are OK with that I bet!

Kristol, McCain and Cheney are Qatari/Muslim Brotherhood agents who want to help Al Qaeda like they did in Libya. Why is in America's interest to install an Islamic terror Regime in Syria? Al Qaeda attacked us on 9/11 and now you want to help them?

Its funny seeing how the so called Pro-Israel Neocons support an agenda that is detrimental to Israel. Yet people like me who oppsoe your Islmaist agenda are called anti-Semites. Maybe you Neocons should look in the mirror. You are lackies of islamic terrorists and are endangering Israel.

457

There is coming a time,  truely within our lifetime of posting here, where we all will have to take a stand in this looming war that marches upon us as surely as I  t y p e  these words with my two fingers...

THIS! is what I believe.....and my life is worth nothing unless I defend this...

because THIS is what I believe....

 

put that in your pipe and smoke it.......

Jjjeeezzz....now look, only 5 hours of sleep til the next shift.....

 

I never learn.

458

Bazinga.  That Saturday evening church service was filled with women.  The pastor and his wife were telling the audience what they wanted to hear, that the men were hairy beasts with loutish behavior.

 

When I (later) explained to my GF what the problem was   and why  I would not be going back for the next  episode, realization sunk into her too.

459 @heather

Should've become Orthodox... Virginity* is the superior path, or so they say.

*Celibacy also works too

460 457 AllenG,

I did leave a megaChurch when courting wife.  her mom had taken the time to tell the flock I was a lapsed Catholic and I got to be the "project" for about 200 Pentecostals at once...


the third laying of hands on my neck...

yeah I popped smoke and ran like hell...

I know I love my wife or I would never have stopped running.

461 Yeah, Fishtown is getting poorer...with an X-Box, two cars, two or more TVs, central A/C, and DSL.

462 Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channeling Breitbart at March 26, 2013 01:22 PM (nUH8H) All right, but in matters of history where a Christian invokes God rather than the laws of nature He has set in motion, the scientific method can't really apply. You can't understand how God spoke things into existence with science any more than you can understand how he changes a person's heart, with science. I apologize if I misunderstood your position.

463   We haven't. If you don't believe me, read about the hypothetical RNA world or some hypotheses about the origin of the cellular membrane. A lot of creationists still argue against abiogenesis in probabilistic language - "the odds of a self-replicating RNA structure spontaneously forming are so low that..."

But it still leaves room for the one-in-a-million shot, as it were.  Moreover, you overestimate our current medical and biological knowledge base. We are at the tip of what we could know. 

Posted by: Yoshi, Aggrieved Victim of the White Man at March 26, 2013 01:19 PM (csi6Y)

"There's still a chance".    Ever hear of this statistical tool called "Expected Value"?   

You'd rightly think a leftist insane if he treated a one time MILLION dollar tax windfall as a significant step towards balancing a trillion dollar deficit.  (yearly loss vs. one time cash infusion) 

Those numbers never balance.   You can grasp that.  

The problem with probability and origin of life is that even the most basic life form we have (bacteria) is complex to the point that you're dealing with 1 in 1 googol level chances.   It's reaching the point that if every atom in the universe was an independent experiment for life, you don't have enough *atoms* to reach an expected value of 1.    

Those numbers never balance.    For an idea of the complexity - think of Win7/8 or MacOS - now imagine the chances of that software popping into existence by random bit flipping - the origin of life problem is HARDER.    

464 ::: Your argument doesn't change the fact that I'm right. You don't just "add energy" and get order. Not even in self-assembling systems. ::: Entropy is considered a synonym for complexity in biological systems.

465 Where was God? Posted by: jwest at March 26, 2013 12:47 PM (u2a4R) Staying in a Holiday Inn Express, obviously.

466 I've never been part of a megachurch or attended one but in my 35 plus years of attending churches of various sizeso I've never heard any sermons about "terrible men". I've heard sermons on accountability to God and that were not supposed to be picked on a shelf until Jesus returns (ie, we accept Jesus as Lord and that's it) but they were never directed in a pejorative ways towards men.

467 @FfT

I wish people would be honest and just get on with being an Empire. America's problem is that it spends so much time pretending to be other than it is, by the time it is forced to admit it is that thing (applies to our elites) it does a totally half-arsed job at being it to boot.

I've stopped trying to figure out our Middle East policy... if it were simply Zionist it would have certain features to it that it doesn't. But maybe it's the schizophrenia of the two parties playing out their fantasies on the world at large.

That makes it sound even worse.

468 ::: The problem with probability and origin of life is that even the most basic life form we have (bacteria) is complex to the point that you're dealing with 1 in 1 googol level chances. ::: No, you don't even have to deal with chance at all. The chance that bacteria can randomly assemble out of its component parts is zero. You've heard of the tornado assembling a 747 argument, too - well, the chance of that is also zero. The simple lifeforms under discussion are self-replicating RNA strands, which are orders of magnitude less complex than bacteria - as little as a few dozen or hundred base pairs. Most creationists concede there is a chance of one of those assembling - for now.

469 160 140 - A more evolved argument would use the word "f*ck" less. Posted by: BurtTC at March 26, 2013 12:22 PM (TOk1P) I care nothing about evolution and despise evolution conversations, mostly because they always *devolve* into the insults like those that were heaped on prescient11. Personally, I think he was very restrained in response. Were it me, I would have added KMA.

470

Hollowpoint,  You're right and wrong.  There are tons of similarities but the doctrinal differences are big.  The ELCA just like the episcopal church approves gay and lesbian clergy.  I used to be ELCA until they used my money to spread communism and gender equity in mexico instead of evangelical missionaries.

471 I do think we have lost a lot in making Jesus our friend. He is our friend who sticks closer than a brother but we can be too cuddly about Jesus, if you know what I mean. What Islam has that we tend not to is the awesome majesty of God. He's not someone they trifle with.

472

I respect the Agnostic admission.  What an Agnostic says is "I don't have sufficient information to come to a conclusion on the existence of God. And I don't have the faith that there is a God." 

The religious position is "I believe because I have faith that there is a God. If I had conclusive proof there would be no need for faith."

The atheist position is "I am omniscient and I have the information that there is no God."

 

 

473 All right, but in matters of history where a Christian invokes God rather than the laws of nature He has set in motion, the scientific method can't really apply. You can't understand how God spoke things into existence with science any more than you can understand how he changes a person's heart, with science.

Posted by: Yoshi, Aggrieved Victim of the White Man at March 26, 2013 01:29 PM (csi6Y)


Science is not the tool to discover history.   There are no control groups.   You do not see the past by observing the present.   You cannot perform experiments that demonstrate what happened in the past.  

You can see what happens in the present and extrapolate, but that is educated guessing; not anything like proving E=MC^2 or Guass's laws.  

474

Of course, I'm skeptical of those "Mega Churches" anyway.

 

Ditto  Here locally we have Ed Young at Second Baptist, Joel Osteen and wife at Lakewood Church, and Kerry Shook and wife at Fellowship of the Woodlands.  There are a buncha 2nd tier megachurch wannabes too.

 

Best local church to me is a small one - a bible church.  Sticks to the  Bible  and the Word like glue, no more and no less.

475 @449 Clinton was with al Qaeda in the Balkans. Carter and Reagan supported mujahideen in Afghanistan. Libya. Egypt... It is a bad habit of US leadership, not "neocons" which is just old ad hominem. Use interventionist. You might persuade someone.

476 So we're expecting the French Revolution Part Duex?

So did anyone ever wonder if its because Christianity shaped the successful culture, the culture's successful?

Look at science. It was the Christian idea that God created the universe, that it was ordered, and its mysteries are discoverable, that led to the modern scientific method and everything that came from it (of course ironically to scientists using the scientific method created to understand God to disprove God). Other societies that had a different view of God, did not have the scientific progress that occurred in the west.  

477 438 #398

Only when people claim science to be something it isn't. Science is a methodology for deriving information. That is all. It doesn't deal in good or evil, right or wrong, or any other judgment. That is where people come in, taking the information derived and interpreting it to serve their desires.

Many fields of study that claim to be science don't measure up because they are heavily reliant on human factors. Psychology, for example, is far more an Art than a Science.
======================
Even hard science itself is subject to bias, if only because scientists often are so hopeful of achieving a particular result that their research is flawed. There are too many examples to list, but Cold Fusion, and more significantly, the Wolfe-Simon fiasco at NASA come to mind.

478

It was the Neocon Hero Bush who called Islam the religion of Peace last time I look.

 

It amuses me no end the way trolls think we treat every word out of Bush's mouth as Holy Writ.  Bush was a gibbering, pansy-ass clown to call Islam the religion of peace.

 

That doesn't excuse you from being a 14 carat moron, though.

479 109 >>>The reason I dismiss 99% of what atheists say regarding prescriptions for society is that 99% of them are retards. Atheists tend to know fuck-all about human nature. What they seem to be absolutely convinced of is their intellectual superiority and have pretty solid ideas about how everyone should govern their affairs. Normally, I would say "Who cares? Opinions are like assholes." --EoJ only 99% though right? I'm in the 1% Safe Harbor then right? --ace Wait. I thought you were an agnostic.

480 The simple lifeforms under discussion are self-replicating RNA strands, which are orders of magnitude less complex than bacteria - as little as a few dozen or hundred base pairs. Most creationists concede there is a chance of one of those assembling - for now. 

Posted by: Yoshi, Aggrieved Victim of the White Man at March 26, 2013 01:33 PM (csi6Y)

"Lifeform".     For an extremely generous definition of "life".    

Please consider carefully the difference in capability of the self-replicating RNA "lifeform" and a basic bacterium.    It's more than the difference between a toy car and the spaceship system that takes a human to the moon and back.   

481 "Its funny seeing how the so called Pro-Israel Neocons support an agenda that is detrimental to Israel. Yet people like me who oppsoe your Islmaist agenda are called anti-Semites. Maybe you Neocons should look in the mirror. You are lackies of islamic terrorists and are endangering Israel."

Posted by: Food for Thought at March 26, 2013 01:27 PM (TVbdM)

 

Iran will have the bomb soon--yes, Iran, who Ron Paul claimed was the aggrieved party in Middle Eastern affairs, unfairly punished with sanctions by the United States. Any discussion of Israel after that point will, by necessity, be from a historical perspective.

482 The problem isn't the disappearance of religion, per se; the problem is that it's being replaced with scientific materialism (which is technically a religion itself, but that's another matter). A society that doesn't believe in free will cannot be a free society. (Duh.)

483 Funny thing about untethered boats...they kinda drift around with the breeze and wind up anywhere.

484 "Christianity has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult and not tried." - Gilbert K. Chesterton

485 Staying in a Holiday Inn Express, obviously.

Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at March 26, 2013 01:31 PM (29+x5)

 

Nothing wrong with Holiday Inn Express. Of course, I don't mind any motel as long as the shower's hot, the sheets are clean, and the bugs are invisible.

486 Did you mean "Wisconsin" instead of "Lutheran"?

Yes.

487

"Entropy is considered a synonym for complexity in biological systems."

Not exactly.  Entropy is considered a *possible source* for complexity in biological systems, but then again, complexity is not itself synonymous with "viability."  Traditional biology, at least, views the continuation of a life system as the ongoing reduction of entropy in an organism.  As Jayant Ugdoankar defined it (in the negative), "Death is the thermodynamically favoured state: it represents a large increase in entropy as molecular structure yields to chaos."  Simply saying "entropy increases in a biological system" is not the same thing as saying that a biological system is more viable or fitted for reproduction.

 

Further, the problem with your argument lies in that the increased entropy of biological systems occurs only within circumstances where there is already "somethuing" directing the "application" of this entropy towards creater complexity - though the definition of both "entropy" and "complexity" with regards to what you're talking about are a bit different from those used in classical physical thermodynamics.  But the classical physical thermodynamics has to come fit, before the you can even talk about increasing complexity in biological systems.  That's where the argument falls apart.

 

 

488 ::: "Lifeform". For an extremely generous definition of "life". ::: It's the right definition. An independent, self-replicating entity with the capability to mutate.

489 Joel Osteen is one of my pet peeves. He has no theological training and he sounds like a slicker version of a religious used car salesman. I'm not doubting his faith in Jesus but I found his messages shallow. The cross-if he mentions it at all if just something you get over on the way to victory -not central to the faith. The power of positive thinking in its modern incarnation does nothing for me. My BIL gave me "Your best Life yet" by Osteen. I grimaced through much of the entire book. It's all about "me" and what God can do for me-not about the Living Christ. This is not knock on people who like Osteen. I can see why he would appeal but it doesn't appeal to me.

490 #494

So that's the current definition of a life form?

Can we all just finally admit that the whole cosmos is alive, albeit to varying degrees in different locations?

The definition of life form or 'alive' changes every time I hear it.

491 ::: Not exactly. Entropy is considered a *possible source* for complexity in biological systems, but then again, complexity is not itself synonymous with "viability." ::: Well, it helps sometimes. ::: though the definition of both "entropy" and "complexity" with regards to what you're talking about are a bit different from those used in classical physical thermodynamics. ::: Yes. That's the point. A rusting iron bar does not look at thermodynamics the same way as a bacterium.

492 My experience probably is typical of someone who lives in Belmont. My wife and I are college education, in our early 60s now. We married at the age of 26, in 1978. Both of us had been raised Catholic, but neither of us attended church at the time of our marriage; we went to city hall to tie the knot. However, after our first child was born, we felt a strong urge to reconnect with the church, not because of some metaphysical conviction or conversion experience (that came later), but because we wanted our child to grow up in a community in which people had values with which we agreed. The key words for us were "community" and "values": we wanted to be in a community, in a group of people who looked out for each other and helped each other and lived their lives together; and that community had to promote values with which we agreed - starting with, as Ace has pointed out, that life is worthwhile.

By the way, the influence of religion probably is greater in this country than in many others, particularly in Europe, because there's no state religion. The choice of whether to participate or not participate, and, if participating, which denomination to join, is entirely up to the individual. Just as people are inoculated by disease by being exposed to a killed virus, people can be inoculated against religion by being exposed to killed religion; and state religions are, by and large, killed religions.

493 ::: Can we all just finally admit that the whole cosmos is alive, albeit to varying degrees in different locations? ::: No. Stars do not replicate or mutate. They just burn.

494 495 FenlonSpoke,

Yup...part of my "apathy" in matters of faith has to do with the reduction of God and the mission into "My Buddy The Jesus Version"...

This faith will ideally outlast me and i am at best one voice among many simply guiding man to tomorrow.

495 Atheists who think we'll be entering a new age of beauty and reason if we have no religion are delusional.

496 When did Nutter Butter Cookies get a TV channel?

Posted by: Beefy Meatball at March 26, 2013 01:15 PM (i7B17)

497

"Yes. That's the point. A rusting iron bar does not look at thermodynamics the same way as a bacterium."

 

Well, yes, they do.  The difference is that the bacterium already has in place information-containing structures and mechanisms that allow it convert free energy into ordered structures which, though ordered nevertheless constitute growth and diversification, thereby fitting a technical definition of increasing entropy.

 

An iron bar does not, so addition of free energy will merely accelerate the rate at which it rusts - unless it melts and/or vapourises - resulting in an increase in entropy either way.

498 Of course, I'm skeptical of those "Mega Churches" anyway.

My former pastor is a big Rick Warren fan. Who I think is a vapid buffoon at the best of times. But there was a thing last year about his relationship with Islam, that my pastor insisted wasn't the case because there are always accusations being made about 'christians' who reach out to muslims to find common ground.

Never reolved that. However, in the process, I checked Warren's own website to try and get his version. I noticed two things. His picture is everywhere. And not one smiling, happy  stickied to a corner of the page, but a variety of empty dictator staring into a camera poses. Second was his grand plan to mobilize all of Christendom to achieve five points which included the eradication of disease, poverty, and conflict.

Besides being spectacularly arrogent, and pretty much the same bullshit leftists have been pushing for 100 years, its obviously contrary to anything the Bible has to say (Jesus said the poor will always be with us and Revelation throws cold water on the notion of fixing the world).

499

"No. Stars do not replicate or mutate. They just burn."

 

Actually, they fuse.  Burning presupposes oxidation.

500 Everything I know about biology, I learned from Spore.

501 @482 How would one even go about disproving God? Usually I can spitball something. Science can only irritate strict literalists.

502 ::: Actually, they fuse. Burning presupposes oxidation. ::: Yep.

503 #429

No, not even close. We do things today that would have been regarded as miraculous a century ago. Not just remarkable but in actual violation how the biological mechanism were believed to function. Show somebody from 1935 an episode of E.R. with a patient revived by defibrillator and it would be scarcely any different from Dr. Frankenstein imbuing a corpse with life.

The biggest challenge today is the brain. If we cannot preserve the information state of the mind it doesn't matter if the rest of the body can be sustained. If enough cells in the brain are lost the person is lost regardless of whether the rest of the body intact or repaired. But if brain state can be copied or preserved independently of bodily function, all bets are off. If you have no concern about about neuron loss or can preserve the information state until new neurons can be put in place, this changes quite a lot. Unthinkable today but so were a lot of thing once that are now common.

I have a niece who was born with an incomplete esophagus. This actually wasn't her biggest problem at birth. Severe prematurity lead that list. Eventually, she had a section of colon made into a replacement for her missing esophagus. Today, she is 22 and fairly normal considering what she went through. But that surgical fix will not last forever. There is a failure rate increasing over time for the procedure.

How long it lasts will determine if a solution is readily available that great improves on what she has now. Lab grown replacement tissues were science fiction when I was a child reading Larry Niven's 'A Gift From Earth' for the first time. That was set in the 23rd Century but several of the bio-technologies he suggested are being developed today. There are now thousands of people enjoying the use of lab grown tissues to replacement something they were born without or lost. One prominent research group has specifically targeted the esophagus as their goal because it is a relatively simple organ compared to a kidney or a heart. They look upon it as an attainable stepping stone in the near future. So there is hope for my niece for an improved replacement when she needs it rather than a miserable existence of being fed through a g-tube and other problems.

Had she been born a few years earlier she would simply be dead. Now, the question is not survival but the quality of it.

Just because we cannot do something today does not mean it won't be possible down the road as increased knowledge expands our potential. Science does that for us. How we apply it is a separate matter.

504 Food For Thought: You bear the stench of a concern troll. How can I tell? You use the word "neocon." Nobody but liberal shits uses that word.

505 @ Yoshi: 

Found an abstract that may be about the "self-replicating" RNA.

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/323/5918/1229.abstract

These cross-replicating RNA enzymes undergo self-sustained exponential amplification in the absence of proteins or other biological materials.


In a lab environment, with carefully provided and concentrated chemicals, you have self-replicating RNA system.  

Will that randomly occur in a real world environment in a puddle of chemicals?   Does that RNA have the ability to function outside of a carefully protected environment?  (Note that all life has the ability to provide a controlled environment for the proteins that sustain their function)  Or will it tend towards the lowest entropy state - broken down into the base chemicals that make up RNA?   

Calling that RNA strand life is a bit like calling an LED display a car.   A car can contain the display as a component, but you're missing everything else that makes the car a car.   

506   No, not even close. We do things today that would have been regarded as miraculous a century ago. Not just remarkable but in actual violation how the biological mechanism were believed to function. Show somebody from 1935 an episode of E.R. with a patient revived by defibrillator and it would be scarcely any different from Dr. Frankenstein imbuing a corpse with life. 

Posted by: epobirs at March 26, 2013 01:59 PM (kcfmt)


You've missed a part of AllenG's point which is that you're still only sustaining a life that was alive in the first place.    This is different than taking non-living matter and building a new life from scratch.   

Perhaps that latter part will be possible; but the assumption that we can is based on the belief that it happened before with evolution.    If that assumption is wrong, then we will find out in some time in the future that we can't build life despite having all the material parts.  

507 ::: Calling that RNA strand life is a bit like calling an LED display a car. A car can contain the display as a component, but you're missing everything else that makes the car a car. ::: Well, organelles and cellular membranes aren't intrinsic to life, and there's no reason why they should be. You could attack the premise such an RNA strand would have formed, or the premise of its path to form the first primitive cell. You don't need a new definition of life to do that.

508 "Besides being spectacularly arrogent, and pretty much the same bullshit leftists have been pushing for 100 years..."

Posted by: Methos at March 26, 2013 01:55 PM (hO9ad)

 

They haven't always been called 'Leftists', which is a relatively modern construct, and they've been at it for thousands of years. Nothing is new.

509 405   -  Adding energy to a system increases entropy.

510 > Never heard that. Ever. I've heard a few "wonderful" Methodist sermons about how men need to step up and be fathers so all these single moms don't have to raise kids alone. Must really depend on the denomination I guess.

511 #453

Yes, I've seen the full argument. I just don't find it compelling and I was trying to be succinct.

If something need only happen once to get things started (though the initial event was likely replicated many times) it doesn't matter how probable it is. Not that we have enough information about the details to know what the real probability is. Given rapid interstellar travel, we might find nearly every planet with similar conditions produced life or we might find it extremely rare. We just don't know and have to work with what we've got. We form hypotheses starting with the bits we can nail down and trying to fill in the blanks, hopefully finding something testable along the way.

We know one thing for a certainty: no matter how improbable the initial events were, they did happen. Otherwise we wouldn't be having the conversation while other compelling explanations are lacking.

But there is another fallacy, in requiring a perfectly complete explanation with all details in place or the whole thing must be false. Nobody honest is claiming to have ALL of the answers, just to be pursuing a path that is more promising than any others proposed. We know a fair bit more than we did previously and can expect to learn more. Knowing that future generations will have that advantage doesn't mean we stop trying in the here and now. Otherwise, where will those future generations have gotten their knowledge to in turn increase.

512 ace wrote: "You believe that MAGIC should be part of a scientific explantion. Science has been defined as excluding magical explanations; you are determined to include them." For the record, academic "anti-evolution" types - eg, Michael Behe or Phillip Johnson - take the position that the evidence simply does not support the larger claims of evolution. In short, one can be a critic of evolutionary theory without inserting magic into science. Query, however, how far science gets without religiously-grounded assumptions about the rationality of the universe. A query addressed with no small amount of erudition in Stanley Jaki's "The Savior of Science," available at an Amazon near you.

513 ::: We know one thing for a certainty: no matter how improbable the initial events were, they did happen. ::: That's only a certainty if you exclude supernatural explanations a priori. While that is necessary for a scientific explanation, it is not a necessary condition if your goal is the absolute truth.

514 500 comments and I can't believe this hasn't been mentioned.

Loss of shared culture. Take a look at http://www.mcguffeyreaders.com/. Schools used to teach moral values. King James version of the Bible was standard in homes and most Americans would have been familiar with it. We've made it so that we can't teach any of this in the schools any more. Why is it surprising that people aren't religious or moral as a result?

Also, the media makes fun of Christians every chance they get. In sitcoms, they are the butt of jokes. In crime shows, they are the killers. (I saw a Cold Case Files where the killers were members of a Bible study group. They all committed the murders together. Charming.) Basically you are considered a fool if you are a Christian. No wonder we have so many blacks converting to Islam. They are no longer taught about how the black churches were involved in the civil rights movement.

Churches that don't say no. We have too many churches afraid to say no to their parishioners for fear that they'll leave. They don't say that divorce or adultery is wrong.  It's become the happy church, where everything is okay. I really miss Pastor George, who ministered in a tiny church up in the woods. People loved him and respected him because he really lived the Christian life. He would tell you if something was wrong, but he still loved you as a child of God.

People may not consider themselves Christians, but they still hunger for God. You can tell by all that restless searching, trying to fill up the emptiness inside.

515 @512 As the sun is a third generation star, we may have to look even further back for parts of the story. Science has really only been turbocharged for a couple three centuries or so. I am not surprised there is agreat deal more unknown. Science produces as much new unknown as known.

516   Well, organelles and cellular membranes aren't intrinsic to life, and there's no reason why they should be. 

You could attack the premise such an RNA strand would have formed, or the premise of its path to form the first primitive cell. You don't need a new definition of life to do that. 

Posted by: Yoshi, Aggrieved Victim of the White Man at March 26, 2013 02:10 PM (csi6Y)

You're creating the new definition of life.    We know that humans, animals, plants, bacteria, are alive.    Does the RNA molecule you're looking at have enough in common with existing life to be lumped in as "life" in the same sense?       There is a lot of functionality inherent to the set of things we call "life", and when you lump RNA into that set, you're implying that functionality - but you don't have it.    You're obfuscating the language, and if deliberate, it's dishonest.   

I suppose life doesn't have to have organelles or cellular membranes as we see them in nature, but anything that is "life" has to have the ability to survive the environment it will live in and the ability to self-replicate.  

Self-replication is functionality - you need some configuration of molecules that can build itself.   That also requires the ability to acquire and concentrate the building blocks, as well as harvest the energy needed to perform all these operations.  

A membrane provides several functions that are essential to life.    A life without "membranes" must have something equivalent, which could be honestly described as a "membrane" anyways.    This is because concentration is key to all chemical reactions.    You need inputs in the right ratio, you need to expel waste products, and you need to avoid letting reversible processes go in reverse.   The membrane has to be able to discriminate between all of those types of chemicals and regulate the concentrations. 

RNA that can replicate itself in a very carefully controlled environment falls short of the functionality we associate with things called "life".    Life as we know it doesn't need that help.    Randomly formed "natural" life cannot expect that help.  

517 " Sixty-four percent of the nones, however, say they believe in God or a universal spirit with “absolute certainty.” "


I don't go to any Church because any Church hard-core enough for me to want to attend would not have me as a member, conversely any Church soft enough to allow me as a member in good standing is probably a progressive church that I would walk out of during the first sermon.

518 "People may not consider themselves Christians, but they still hunger for God. You can tell by all that restless searching, trying to fill up the emptiness inside."

Posted by: notsothoreau at March 26, 2013 02:32 PM (5HBd1)

 

G.K. Chesterton wrote (paraphrasing because I'm too lazy to look it up): "A man who won't believe in God will believe in anything."

519 #512

I didn't miss it. I just didn't see how it was germane. Just because we don't know yet how to jump start an intact brain like we do a heart is not evidence in of itself of a supernatural element. It is evidence of our far from complete understanding of brains.

Is an apple seed alive? Not by most definitions. Yet an apple tree is very much alive. What does it mean if we create a functional plant seed from scratch with no parent plant? Have we created life or are we just finding where bio-machines get interesting? It will be a major accomplishment for us but a century from now a much duller thing as it becomes as common to build from organics as inorganics.

We'll likely know far more about this fairly soon. There are researchers actively pursuing it. They've worked their way up by replicating components of life and non-life that interacts in a near-living way aka viruses. Assembling a bacterium at the molecular level is something we may see within a decade.

Thus far there is no indication of a supernatural spark needed. But we aren't there yet, so it is still in the realm of conjecture. The funny thing is that it will be much less interesting if the assembled bio-machine or organism just works. If everything is there and seemingly ready to respond to the environment i.e. a seed sprouting, but nothing happens, that will make things more interesting because it will indicate there is something involved we don't understand or haven't detected. A new puzzle to examine.

520

You have to understand ... Belmont is still pretty much the same old Belmont, but Fishtown is now a "Jerry Springer territory."

When you're competing to race to the bottom, religiosity will decline.

521 Hollowpoint, did you catch my statement at #476?  Do you still think Missouri Synod and ELCA are that similar?

522 If something need only happen once to get things started (though the initial event was likely replicated many times) it doesn't matter how probable it is. ...

We know one thing for a certainty: no matter how improbable the initial events were, they did happen. Otherwise we wouldn't be having the conversation while other compelling explanations are lacking.  But there is another fallacy, in requiring a perfectly complete explanation with all details in place or the whole thing must be false.

Posted by: epobirs at March 26, 2013 02:25 PM (kcfmt)


"need only happen once" is wrong.    Failure is always a possibility, and is in fact the expected fate.   (universe heat death, everybody dies)    How probable it is also matters, because we don't expect things that are possible but improbable.   (ex:   Winning the lottery 20 times in a row)   

"it must have happened since we are here" is a false dilemma, because creation by a higher order being is in fact a truthful possible alternative to randomly happened.   If we created a "simulated" universe inside a computer with "intelligent life", they'd be right to think they were created, even if the "simulated" universe provided no information that it exists in our world.  

523 ::: You're creating the new definition of life...You're obfuscating the language, and if deliberate, it's dishonest. ::: Hardly. This is the definition of life, and has been for a while. ::: A membrane provides several functions that are essential to life. ::: They are only essential to life for a bacterium or higher. A ribozyme doesn't have any waste products. Its folded/unfolded state is reversible according to temperature, but that's hardly something a membrane would help with, and the fold itself is determined by the most thermodynamically efficient arrangement of bases. The scientists that foster these things are not taking the place of otherwise essential functions, as you appear to be imagining. They are just giving it the raw materials to replicate itself. ::: I suppose life doesn't have to have organelles or cellular membranes as we see them in nature, but anything that is "life" has to have the ability to survive the environment it will live in and the ability to self-replicate. ::: This is the crux of your argument, that the environment that ribozymes can replicate themselves in is not realistic. Yes, you can talk about that. But notice we have not changed the definition of life.

524

"As the sun is a third generation star"

Looks like Yoshi was wrong - stars DO reproduce!

 

/ducks

525 #519

It's pretty much a given the supernatural must be excluded. Otherwise it all comes down to, "There's this guy..."

That isn't an explanation. It's an alibi. I find nothing useful in it.

526 Some of the blow up so fast... Sniff.

527

"That isn't an explanation. It's an alibi. I find nothing useful in it."

 

Perhaps.  But your personal decision to find something useful in it or not has no bearing on its actual truth value.

528 ::: That isn't an explanation. It's an alibi. I find nothing useful in it. ::: Well, it could still be true. If so, whether you find it "useful" or not, whatever you mean by that, is immaterial. Posted by: Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus at March 26, 2013 02:49 PM (YYJjz) I forgot about the star stork

529   Is an apple seed alive? Not by most definitions. Yet an apple tree is very much alive. What does it mean if we create a functional plant seed from scratch with no parent plant? Have we created life or are we just finding where bio-machines get interesting? It will be a major accomplishment for us but a century from now a much duller thing as it becomes as common to build from organics as inorganics.

The seed is alive at the cellular level.    Hibernating animals are not dead, and a dormant seed waiting for the right growing conditions is still alive.  

We can kill seeds such that no tree can grow from it.  (crush it, cook it)   How do you kill something that has no life?   



Thus far there is no indication of a supernatural spark needed. But we aren't there yet, so it is still in the realm of conjecture. The funny thing is that it will be much less interesting if the assembled bio-machine or organism just works. If everything is there and seemingly ready to respond to the environment i.e. a seed sprouting, but nothing happens, that will make things more interesting because it will indicate there is something involved we don't understand or haven't detected. A new puzzle to examine. 

Posted by: epobirs at March 26, 2013 02:42 PM (kcfmt)


I didn't say supernatural.   I'm just saying we're trying to reverse engineer something that is both more ancient than human knowledge, yet with more integrated functionality than anything humanity has built.   

That we exist clearly shows that it is possible to "build" us.    But that is not a guarantee that humans can do it.   Failure is always an option.    

Do you think humans have the ability to build a sun or a planet?    At a theoretical level, there's nothing stopping us.   But in terms of the energy and tools needed - do we?   

530 What James says: True obedience to God's word, according to James, involves (1) controlling the tongue, (2) helping the helpless, and (3) avoiding worldliness. "These three manifestations of obedience to the word introduce or touch on key ideas that James will return to again in the letter" (Moo). 1.Controlling the tongue - 1:19-20; 3:1-12; 4:11-13 2.Concern for the helpless - 2:1-13, 15-16; 5:1-6 3.Avoiding worldliness - 4:4-10 We are not exempt from helping the poor which is not the same as the way leftist talk about it which is the government stealing from one group of people to help others.

531 troyriser, if you're still here, I did give you a response in last nights religion thread. Was a few hours after you posted so I dunno if you saw it.

532 Jesus saying "the poor you will have with you always" is not an excuse not to help them. It's a question of priorities. In that context Jesus was about to give up his life-so they act of the woman who anointed him was an act of extravagant love for Jesus. You can love Jesus and also help the poor. One of the problem is when helping the poor is separated from the Gospel and the church becomes merely what the POpe calls a a "non Governmental Organization"

533 #533

It has huge bearing. Are we talking capital-T Truth? You can go all your life without finding that because it is intangible.

If you're looking for some simple facts that lend some clarity to why the world works as it does, I'll want something that doesn't rely on supernatural elements. Supernatural elements were once used to explain nearly everything a person dealt with in life. And that life generally sucked because those explanations were largely useless in mitigating the ills and discomforts a person faced.

Things got better as we put hard definitions on more of our reality and had useful means to change our lives. Even if it gave mental discomfort to those who preferred the old supernatural explanations. They were so much easier to learn and remember than hard stuff like math and biology. (They forgot the bit about the Tree of Knowledge and the resulting requirement that Man solve his own problems rather than live as a beast.) I like the things that non-supernatural explanations have given us, such as the computer I'm typing away at now.

I've little doubt you like these things too. You've run up against you discomfort zone when science is looking hard at things that might require new thinking about the supernatural explanation you've embraced. Such is life for every generation. I've little doubt that things people will take for granted a century hence will be a cause of much turmoil in the near term.

I'm far more concerned about choices made outside the realm of science, although some claim to have a science driving their beliefs. When it comes to thing like government that can be very troubling, as much as those who claim to have the backing of a supernatural entity.

534 529 ::: You're creating the new definition of life...You're obfuscating the language, and if deliberate, it's dishonest. ::: 

Hardly. This is the definition of life, and has been for a while.

Definition of life according to ... ?  


This is the crux of your argument, that the environment that ribozymes can replicate themselves in is not realistic. Yes, you can talk about that. But notice we have not changed the definition of life. 

Posted by: Yoshi, Aggrieved Victim of the White Man at March 26, 2013 02:48 PM (csi6Y)

"We" aren't sharing the same definition of life.   Neither of our definitions have changed, but we're talking about different concepts with the same word, so the observation that the definition hasn't changed is meaningless.  


By your definition of life, when we build a 3d printer that can build itself, that will be life, even though it is a machine utterly dependent on human operators providing the design, input and maintenance.    

535 ::: Definition of life according to ... ? ::: Every biologist. ::: By your definition of life, when we build a 3d printer that can build itself, that will be life, even though it is a machine utterly dependent on human operators providing the design, input and maintenance. ::: Incorrect. Successive generations of 3D printers would not be able to mutate. As you said, humans input the design. That would be like saying a cell minus the nuclear DNA is alive. Do you see why biologists have arrived at this definition?

536 Posted by: Trimegistus at March 26, 2013 02:01 PM (6rUH Bingo! That's what I thought-concern troll.

537 ::: It has huge bearing. Are we talking capital-T Truth? You can go all your life without finding that because it is intangible. ::: Are you really going down the postmodern rabbit hole...is it the Truth that the keyboard you are typing on exists? That seems tangible enough to me. Similarly, God does or does not exist. He did or did not create us. There is no reason to refuse to acknowledge this possibility in the question of Truth.

538

Loss of religiosity is one of the left's objectives.  From:  Meet the Lefts Founding Fathers  http://tinyurl.com/76qjztt 
  16. Gyorgy Lukacs. Lukacs was a primary advocate of sexualizing youth in order to destroy Christian culture. LukacsÂ’s argument was that the use of the education system to teach the young sexual perversion would "liberate" them from Christianity, and cause them to rebel against their parents.

539

@ 539 - "If you're looking for some simple facts that lend some clarity to why the world works as it does, I'll want something that doesn't rely on supernatural elements. Supernatural elements were once used to explain nearly everything a person dealt with in life. And that life generally sucked because those explanations were largely useless in mitigating the ills and discomforts a person faced."

 

"Things got better as we put hard definitions on more of our reality and had useful means to change our lives. Even if it gave mental discomfort to those who preferred the old supernatural explanations. They were so much easier to learn and remember than hard stuff like math and biology. (They forgot the bit about the Tree of Knowledge and the resulting requirement that Man solve his own problems rather than live as a beast.) I like the things that non-supernatural explanations have given us, such as the computer I'm typing away at now."



I see that your understanding of history is rather deficient, if nothing else.  Please.  This is the 21st century.  The "enlightenment" view of history, science, and religion has no relevancy anymore - which may well be a fact that brings you into your "discomfort zone."


"I've little doubt you like these things too. You've run up against you discomfort zone when science is looking hard at things that might require new thinking about the supernatural explanation you've embraced. Such is life for every generation. I've little doubt that things people will take for granted a century hence will be a cause of much turmoil in the near term."

 

I'm not exactly sure you have a clue what my "discomfort zone" would even be.  I stand in an odd position w.r.t. creation and evolution.  I am a creationist who doesn't find many aspects of "evolution" (whatever is meant by that term) to be troubling, because I don't think either side even understands much of what their own text-set really means. 

 

Needless to say, however, my "discomfort zone" begins at the point where science erroneously believes it can provide answers to questions about which it is not competent to address, and insists that "you MUST believe this" or else you don't "know science."  My response tends to be, "Sure.  Whatever."  In other words, the point where "magic," as Ace calls it, enters into science, but is not "called" magic because it happens to fit the predispositions of some (but certainly not all) scientists. 

 

Science has its proper sphere.  I just don't believe that sphere is as large as those who follow the philosophy of scientism think it is.  Has nothing to do with a "discomfort zone" - in fact, I'm eminently comfortable not attributing to science the epistemic finality that many seem to think it has. 

 

540

@ 541 - "Incorrect. Successive generations of 3D printers would not be able to mutate."

 

You've apparently never seen the Terminator movies.

541 541 ::: Definition of life according to ... ? ::: 

Every biologist.

Bullshit.   My brief description earlier was cribbed from some biologist's overview of what life entails.    That's already one biologist supporting my definition.   

So, care to back up that "No True Scotsman" fallacy?   I'm counting your appeal to non-cited authorities as a point against your argument - but you could make a save if you could demonstrate how "every biologist" hews to a curiously lax definition that supports your argument.  


::: By your definition of life, when we build a 3d printer that can build itself, that will be life, even though it is a machine utterly dependent on human operators providing the design, input and maintenance. ::: 

Incorrect. Successive generations of 3D printers would not be able to mutate. As you said, humans input the design. That would be like saying a cell minus the nuclear DNA is alive.  Do you see why biologists have arrived at this definition? 

Posted by: Yoshi, Aggrieved Victim of the White Man at March 26, 2013 03:18 PM (csi6Y)

3D printers have their design saved as a corruptible ("mutate-able") computer file that they then print.  Corrupt that file and you get your mutation.  

Ex:  Tell the first printer to print itself and for each new printer to print a new one.     Each generation has a non-zero chance to corrupt the build of the next generation.  ("mutation")   The humans could even choose the design to mutate itself each generation.

Of course, random mutations will more likely than not destroy the functionality of the self-replication, but evolutionary proponents will be quick to insist that we can't infer anything about complex biological information systems from the behavior of simpler electro-mechanical information systems.  

542 #535

Do we have the capability at this present moment? No. Is it conceivable we could acquire the capability? Entirely.

More ancient than human knowledge? Why is that a factor? A simple life form is a simple life form regardless of how many billion years it has been around. Nature doesn't get rid of old stuff that worked just because it hit something new. Human brains have only been around a few tens of thousands of years and we've only gotten serious about understanding the universe fairly recently. But we appear to have made some appreciable progress and don't appear to be slowing down.

Of course making a bacteria from scratch is complex. Why else would we start with simpler stuff like RNA strands and viruses? But doing this this helps deepen our comprehension of a lot of related stuff we really want to know. How cells organize within a multi-cellular organism and how growth is controlled. We know a little and want a lot more.

Think about growing a new limb on an amputee. The guys thinking seriously about this have a few more pieces of the puzzle than a decade ago. But just a few and this is a hugely desirable achievement, so whole careers will likely be dedicated to this without seeing it happen.

Do we grow a baby limb on the stump? Does it take as long as the original to mature? Can we accelerate the growth rate without all sorts of problems like cancer? Can we grow an adult limb? Do we do it in situ or in a vat and attach it at maturity?

We need to know a lot more about cellular biology to make any of this work. Building a cell from scratch is a good way to learn how the natural versions work. It starts with the simplest and works up from there, giving some vital clues for applications along the way.

543

@ 547 - "So, care to back up that "No True Scotsman" fallacy? I'm counting your appeal to non-cited authorities as a point against your argument - but you could make a save if you could demonstrate how "every biologist" hews to a curiously lax definition that supports your argument."

 

No True Scotsman would ever say that entropy is defined as greater complexity.

544 1.Controlling the tongue - 1:19-20; 3:1-12; 4:11-13
---
Like everything else there is a time for harsh language. It should be preceded by thought, though.
---
2.Concern for the helpless - 2:1-13, 15-16; 5:1-6
---
Helpless!=poor. Orphaned children and the blind are helpless. Idiots without jobs because they keep voting for the party that will most quickly destroy the economy in order to provide free shit do not qualify.
---
3.Avoiding worldliness - 4:4-10
---
From my vantage point, socialism is worldliness. Free market capitalism (to the extent anyone ever got there) was largely unique to us and copied by a few
who had the sense to see the benefits we got from it. As it is a rejection of the usual worldy way of things, a believe it is Godly.
---
We are not exempt from helping the poor which is not the same as the way leftist talk about it which is the government stealing from one group of people to help others.
---
I see where you're coming from and don't really intend to dispute but expand. One of my early problems was that *someone* was slipping into the Sunday prayers that government would be blessed in meeting the needs of the poor.

545 Do we have the capability at this present moment? No. Is it conceivable we could acquire the capability? Entirely.

There's a difference between,

"There's a possibility that humans will gain sufficient genetic mastery to create new organisms from scratch"

and

"Humans will gain sufficient genetic mastery to create new organisms from scratch"

That's where we're disagreeing.    We are agreed that it is "conceivable".   I am saying we cannot treat it as inevitable, though we won't know until we try or find a convincing proof that shows we can't.  


More ancient than human knowledge? Why is that a factor?

We are something that is so complex that we haven't comprehended it for the entirety of human existence.    That trend can continue - and it's possible that we won't ever comprehend it.    Why should an ant comprehend nuclear engineering?   

546 Jesus saying "the poor you will have with you always" is not an excuse not to help them.

It's not an excuse. My conscience is clear as far as tending to the poor goes. The point I intended to make was that the statement is predictive (if not inherently obvious to anyone with a basic understanding of economics-it is impossible for wealth to be equal as even if it could be set as such, variances would immediately appear due to human decisions). As such it is a fool's errand and not of God to seek to "eradicate global poverty."

547 498 But in the process are you doing everything commanded of you by your faith? If you are not, that's fine -- simply size it up that you have found your church to be a good place to socialize...but nothing more. Again, that's your choice as a person of free will -- but it is not true religious faith then.

548   No True Scotsman would ever say that entropy is defined as greater complexity. 

Posted by: Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus at March 26, 2013 03:42 PM (YYJjz)


Heh.   No True Scotsman could be that stupid.   

(though to be honest, I forgot how to interpret higher/lower entropic states and had to refresh my memory.   ) 

549 It's not an excuse. My conscience is clear as far as tending to the poor goes. The point I intended to make was that the statement is predictive (if not inherently obvious to anyone with a basic understanding of economics-it is impossible for wealth to be equal as even if it could be set as such, variances would immediately appear due to human decisions). As such it is a fool's errand and not of God to seek to "eradicate global poverty." 

Posted by: Methos at March 26, 2013 03:46 PM (hO9ad)


I've gotten into hot water on Facebook for contesting a fellow Christian who said "Fixing welfare should only be done after poverty is eliminated".   If poverty will always exist, we will never fix welfare.  

On the flip-side, we are called to be perfect as our Father in heaven is perfect; so there is a place in the Christian life for "impossible" goals.  

550 I doubt anybody is always doing everything commanded by their faith, and if person went to church for community and shared values and through that came to a lively belief in Christ it's still the work of the Holy Spirit moving in their lives.

551 #543

Oh please, don't drag the postmodernist nonsense into it.

You are treating the testable and untestable as one. I can demonstrate the existence of the keyboard. Not matter how intensely I may believe the keyboard is illusory, if someone picks it up and smack me with it I'll be forced to accept it is at least a real object.

God evades any test I can devise by virtue of being supernatural. Nor does the belief in such a being offer me any useful application in my life. It neither settles material problems nor philosophical ones. I'm not wired with the inclination toward belief. If I had an odd cognitive deformation that caused me to disregard the existence of keyboards, it would be a significant handicap, especially in my line of work. A lack of inclination to believe in supernatural beings changes my universe not at all. If a God exists it apparently does not want to be knowable. (I also don't buy into Pascal's Wager. If such a God exists, he knows a weasel when he sees one and would send you to Hell if your belief were merely to hedge your bets.)

I don't believe in Truth, as in a grand explanation for all of existence and an underlying intent. When  use the word truth I refer to thing which can be tested and found to be factual unless solely in the realm of opinion. I may think a particular woman wildly attractive while she does nothing for you and vice versa. But we would both agree that she were female and could agree upon a set of facts that would determine that.

Humans invent a lot of things to avoid dealing with hard questions. One of those things is the idea that there is a great plan to the universe. There may be but I've yet to encounter any practical reason for pondering it. It strikes me as trying to run before one has even gotten the hang of cell division, or trying to find some greater meaning in a movie by looking at the film on the reel rather than the frames in sequence.

552 ::: Bullshit. My brief description earlier was cribbed from some biologist's overview of what life entails. That's already one biologist supporting my definition. ::: If you want to get rude with me, I'll be more blunt. If this definition of life you favor is that life requires a mechanism to eliminate waste, then that's arbitrary. If your definition is instead that life must be able to exist in a given environment and is self-reproducing, congratulations, it jives with what I was talking about. ::: 3D printers have their design saved as a corruptible ("mutate-able") computer file that they then print. Corrupt that file and you get your mutation. ::: If we grant the conditions that 1) the 3D printer can power itself, and 2) the 3D printer has a method of intaking construction components from the natural environment and not prefabricated material supplied by humans, and that 3) that the corrupted files are not simply broken and unopenable, as corrupted files tend to be, so corruption produces incremental changes that may be printed, then congratulations, you have arrived at a massive version of the hypothetical "grey goo" nanobot: a scientifically created lifeform. It is independent, unlike a virus, it can self-replicate, and it can change with each successive generation. They will form a population and exist just like a plant or a buffalo.

553 550 Did Jesus preach that only those who vote the right way are deserving of help? Following religious instruction isn't supposed to be fit into a shoehorn of personal ideas -- especially and including political ideology. This goes for the left as well -- they do not get to make the religious teaching of charity and care for the poor into a political tool, but that doesn't mean the right side of the aisle gets to play fun and games with it either.

554 ::: You are treating the testable and untestable as one...God evades any test I can devise by virtue of being supernatural. ::: Whether something is testable or not according to the wherewithal you have to test it is immaterial to whether or not it absolutely exists. You are just repeating that you dislike the concept of God because it is not within your purview to study according to the scientific method. ::: Humans invent a lot of things to avoid dealing with hard questions. One of those things is the idea that there is a great plan to the universe. There may be but I've yet to encounter any practical reason for pondering it. ::: Right, there MAY BE. The whole point of this conversation was to refute the notion that "just because we are aware of the mystery of our origins ipso facto means that we were formed by a chance arrangement of chemicals."

555 Methos,  It is true that Christians are supposed to control their tongues.  We don't have to pull punches and cannot harshly criticize people.  Jesus himself scolded a group of people called Pharissees.  You should check out some insults from Luther.  http://ergofabulous.org/luther/

556 I doubt anyone is living up to the entire commands of their faith. However, if someone came to church for community and for shared ethics and then came to a lively faith in Christ it's still the work of the Holy Spirit in their lives.

557 As a philosophy teacher I find that there is very little common knowledge of the proper definitions of "atheist" and "agnostic." There is plenty of debate within philosophy as to whether the terms actually pick out different groups of people, in fact. Some argue that all agnostics are atheists, while many agnostics are agnostics about everything and argue that atheists are only wishful atheists, meaning that they would like to be able to say that they "know" that G-d doesn't exist, but really can't because they -- like everyone else -- can't know anything at all, and any attempts to lay claim to knowledge will therefore fall apart.

The best debates are those where the agnostics are forced to accept that the only true agnostic is someone who never says anything, while the atheists are forced to realize that they are more fundamentalist than the most rabid evangelical or jihadist.

Good times, good times.

558 On the flip-side, we are called to be perfect as our Father in heaven is perfect; so there is a place in the Christian life for "impossible" goals.

We can certainly choose whatever goals we want. I'm just saying there's no reason to believe that God's on board with it, and some to suggest He is not.

559 If you want to get rude with me, I'll be more blunt. If this definition of life you favor is that life requires a mechanism to eliminate waste, then that's arbitrary.

Elimination of waste is not part of the definition of life, but waste is a byproduct of life, and life needs an ability to prevent waste from breaking itself.   The things that we can clearly agree to be life all have mechanisms that regulate their waste products, which is part of a broader concept called homeostasis.   It's control over internal environment, which is a fancy way to say that it performs work to maintain its own life.    

Life means more than "self-replicator".    It's actually a bit of a fuzzy concept, which is why your claim that "every biologist" agrees on your definition is ... odd.   I expected that we would have to come to an agreement on what "life" actually is, and found your appeal to the "authority" of "every biologist" to be so wrong that it harms your argument immensely.  

As far as you find me rude, dishonest arguments are rude.    Tit for tat.   You have also not cited anything in support of your definition.   Are you conceding the point, or will you show me how "every biologist" uses your definition of life?  


If we grant the conditions that

1) the 3D printer can power itself, and
2) the 3D printer has a method of intaking construction components from the natural environment and not prefabricated material supplied by humans, and that
3) that the corrupted files are not simply broken and unopenable, as corrupted files tend to be, so corruption produces incremental changes that may be printed,

then congratulations, you have arrived at a massive version of the hypothetical "grey goo" nanobot: a scientifically created lifeform. It is independent, unlike a virus, it can self-replicate, and it can change with each successive generation. They will form a population and exist just like a plant or a buffalo.

"Power itself"?    You mean the printer needs to find its own inputs in order to be considered life?     This contradicts your claim that ribozymes provided inputs in a lab environment are life.   You're *changing* your definition of life mid-discussion to exclude the 3d printer.   (I have not, because my definition of life excluded it in the first place)  

Your (3) is also different than your earlier requirement for just "mutation".   Ability to mutate doesn't imply anything about the ability to survive, though it is pretty trivial to think of a design for a 3d printer that can survive mutation. 

560

"We can certainly choose whatever goals we want. I'm just saying there's no reason to believe that God's on board with it, and some to suggest He is not."

 

Yes, there is a reason.  A man named Jesus was crucified for saying he was the son of God.  If you believe him, then you have reason that God's on board with it.  Do you disagree that Jesus existed and was crucified for saying he was the son of God?  If you do, then you disagree with roman historians, jewish historians, and christian historians.  On the funny side, muslims all say Jesus never said that but was a prophet.

561 We can certainly choose whatever goals we want. I'm just saying there's no reason to believe that God's on board with it, and some to suggest He is not. 

Posted by: Methos at March 26, 2013 04:18 PM (hO9ad)

The goal I cited is a command from God.    It's not optional.    (people can still choose, but that's not the same thing as those choices being good)  

I'd also say that the quoted verse is an observation that poverty is inevitable in a cursed world, rather than God being "on board with it".

562 Did Jesus preach that only those who vote the right way are deserving of help?

Following religious instruction isn't supposed to be fit into a shoehorn of personal ideas -- especially and including political ideology.

A fool and his money are soon parted-somwhere in Proverbs. Which is to say that in many cases what we consider poor (which is a joke by historic standards) is the punishment for/consequence of wicked actions. Namely voting for free shit runs afoul of the commandment "Thou shalt not steal."

You can minister to those who have fallen far enough to repent of their misdeeds, as Jesus primarily did (He wasn't hanging out with prostitutes and tax collectors because they were paragons of virtue, after all) as their souls are salvageable, but it is less than pointless to give handouts to anyone who thinks they 'deserve' it.

As to your second point, loyalty to God should absolutely modify your personal ideas, especially political ideology. You cannot claim to love your neighbor if you support a government that steals his stuff. Or that fashions itself a god and demands his (or your) worship.

563 ::: Elimination of waste is not part of the definition of life, but waste is a byproduct of life, ::: Actually, no. It seems you're hung up on this part for some reason. Most life produces waste, but that has no bearing on the reproduction of a ribozyme, which is wasteless as the only bases involved in producing a new ribozyme are all part of the new lifeform. ::: You have also not cited anything in support of your definition. Are you conceding the point, or will you show me how "every biologist" uses your definition of life? ::: Take a basic biology course at any reputable university. Or you can read about it in Campbell's Biology, 7th ed. This is about the time I might have to demonstrate every biologist believes in epigenetics, or that HIV causes AIDS. ::: "Power itself"? You mean the printer needs to find its own inputs in order to be considered life? This contradicts your claim that ribozymes provided inputs in a lab environment are life. ::: Ribozymes find their own nutrients within their environment, which would be Stanley Miller's organic soup of yore or at least a variant on it. The "soup" is considered to be the natural environment of the young Earth and is created by electrical discharge in a solution of inorganic molecules. In other words, there is no prefabricated "food" provided. ::: Your (3) is also different than your earlier requirement for just "mutation". Ability to mutate doesn't imply anything about the ability to survive, though it is pretty trivial to think of a design for a 3d printer that can survive mutation. ::: A broken, unreadable file is not a "mutation." It is simply a structural failure. If you can't understand this then consider why the denaturing of DNA by higher temperatures is not considered a "mutation."

564 Methos, I think I misunderstood your previous post.  Were you trying to say there was no reason to think that God isn't "on board" with Christians and people living perfect lives?  Were you talking about God not being on board with stealing via government?

565 Yes, there is areason. A man named Jesus was crucified for saying he was the son of God. If you believe him, then you have reason that God's on board with it. Do you disagree that Jesus existed and was crucified for saying he was the son of God?

I think we've just demonstrated the problem with using pronouns on the internet. If by "it" you mean spreading the Good News that Jesus died to pay our sin debt, than obviously God is on board with that. I'm not sure why you think I'm making that case. I tried to specify Warren's utopian bullshit notion of eradicating global poverty as being that which God is not at all on board with.

The goal I cited is a command from God. It's not optional.

But the comment you made seems to imply that the Warren nonsense fell within that command. It does not. God does not say anywhere in the Bible that poverty, disease, and conflict will be solved this side of Eternity (and in fact will only be solved after feeding the multitudes of His enemies through the winepress of His wrath and shuffling them off to the eternal fire). What He wrote is that such things will tend to get worse, and then very near the end, a great deal worse.

This notion that a perfect kingdom can be built on this earth of us sinners isn't of God. It's a Satanic deception and should be obvious by now in the observation of every single time it has been attempted.

566 Yup, you're about that "it," thing.  Oh, I agree with you that God does not say that povery, disease, and conflict will be solved and that the belief we can is a satanic deception.  I believe satan exists and is corrupting this world.  I'm glad we were able to clarify over that "it."

567 Methos, I think I misunderstood your previous post. Were you trying to say there was no reason to think that God isn't "on board" with Christians and people living perfect lives?

Yes, I guess I wasn't expressing myself clearly. The answer to that question is more complicated. I believe God expects us to aspire to live perfectly. Genuinely aspire-not shrugging every fall off with an "Oops, there I go again-oh, well". I don't think living a perfect life is possible because I have no experience being perfect. We are yet sinners, and Paul talked about having a thorn in the flesh, that I think was some hang up he couldn't beat, that God left in him to keep him short of perfect so as to keep him mindful of his ongoing need for forgiveness. I think if we're honest we can all find some thorns of our own. And I think the warning to be aware of the plank in our own eyes is given because we are far to ready to believe that we've reached perfection.

 Were you talking about God not being on board with stealing via government?

Partially. I am more concerned with the consequences to the faith of people who buy into Warren's fix the world bluster. He's got a lot of people around him who buy into what's he's saying. When it doesn't happen, and I think an economic catastrophe is soon in the offing instead, a lot of harm is going to be done to that faith (at a time when faith is all that many of us will have).

568 Actually, no. It seems you're hung up on this part for some reason. Most life produces waste, but that has no bearing on the reproduction of a ribozyme, which is wasteless as the only bases involved in producing a new ribozyme are all part of the new lifeform.
Read the sentence that followed the one you selectively quoted.    Then consider my citation.  


Take a basic biology course at any reputable university. Or you can read about it in Campbell's Biology, 7th ed. This is about the time I might have to demonstrate every biologist believes in epigenetics, or that HIV causes AIDS.
Still refuse to give up the "No True Scotsman" fallacy?     "Any reputable university", heh.     Keep this up, and you will earn any mockery and scorn you receive.    

Wiki is wiki, but read this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life#Biology

Item #1:   Homeostasis.   Control over internal environment.    Do ribozyme strands have this?    No.    In the study I linked, they were provided an environment limited to RNA building blocks and the abstract acknowledged that the study excluded other organic molecules - you haven't provided an alternative study.   I have linked evidence, you have provided no evidence. 

Item #6 is something that I didn't think of, but which is common to all known life - response to stimuli.   (which is the ability to collect, process, and react to information)   None of that in ribozymes.  

Ribozymes find their own nutrients within their environment, which would be Stanley Miller's organic soup of yore or at least a variant on it. The "soup" is considered to be the natural environment of the young Earth and is created by electrical discharge in a solution of inorganic molecules. In other words, there is no prefabricated "food" provided.

Stanley Miller's "organic soup" mostly contained burnt organic molecules like tar, but he artificially made the system concentrate the amino acids in a separate reservoir.    The "primordial soup" is a figment of the evolutionary scientist's imagination with no evidence for it outside of its necessity for a naturalistic origin of life.    

Ribozymes do not "find" nutrients.    They wait for a lucky collision with the next molecule that they need; within a living cell, the cell regulates the environment of the ribozymes to have a high concentration of their inputs.   Outside a cell, the scientist provided the ribozyme with a test tube full of building blocks.    Ribozymes are certainly powerless to create the necessary building blocks from "raw materials", the point (2) you used against 3d printers being life.  


A broken, unreadable file is not a "mutation." It is simply a structural failure. If you can't understand this then consider why the denaturing of DNA by higher temperatures is not considered a "mutation."

If it's based on the source file, any variation you generate is a "mutation".   Mutation implies nothing about usability or functionality.    

Denaturing DNA with higher temperatures is not a mutation because you're destroying the container of information, rather than modifying the information content.   In the same way melting your HD does not mutate the files either, in that you have no media to read the files from afterwards.   Media destruction is different than content mutation.   

The difference between media and content is the difference between the ASCII character strings I've typed up, and the monitor you're reading them on.     Destroying the monitor doesn't mutate what I typed, even though the monitor is necessary to see what I say.  

On the other hand, corruption of files is a form of mutation, because the media is intact, it's just that the content has been modified in a way that is likely to destroy the information encoded in the file.  

569  

Crap.  Barrel.  

570 Gonna repaste since all italics is hard to read. 


Actually, no. It seems you're hung up on this part for some reason. Most life produces waste, but that has no bearing on the reproduction of a ribozyme, which is wasteless as the only bases involved in producing a new ribozyme are all part of the new lifeform.

Read the sentence that followed the one you selectively quoted. Then consider my next point. 

Take a basic biology course at any reputable university. Or you can read about it in Campbell's Biology, 7th ed. This is about the time I might have to demonstrate every biologist believes in epigenetics, or that HIV causes AIDS.

Still refuse to give up the "No True Scotsman" fallacy? "Any reputable university", heh. Keep this up, and you will earn any mockery and scorn you receive. 

Wiki is wiki, but read this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life#Biology 

Item #1: Homeostasis. Control over internal environment. Do ribozyme strands have this? No. In the study I linked, they were provided an environment limited to RNA building blocks and the abstract acknowledged that the study excluded other organic molecules - you haven't provided an alternative study. I have linked evidence, you have provided no evidence. 

Item #6 is something that I didn't think of, but which is common to all known life - response to stimuli. (which is the ability to collect, process, and react to information) None of that in ribozymes. 

Ribozymes find their own nutrients within their environment, which would be Stanley Miller's organic soup of yore or at least a variant on it. The "soup" is considered to be the natural environment of the young Earth and is created by electrical discharge in a solution of inorganic molecules. In other words, there is no prefabricated "food" provided.

Stanley Miller's "organic soup" mostly contained burnt organic molecules like tar, but he artificially made the system concentrate the amino acids in a separate reservoir. The "primordial soup" is a figment of the evolutionary scientist's imagination with no evidence for it outside of its necessity for a naturalistic origin of life. 

Ribozymes do not "find" nutrients. They wait for a lucky collision with the next molecule that they need; within a living cell, the cell regulates the environment of the ribozymes to have a high concentration of their inputs. Outside a cell, the scientist provided the ribozyme with a test tube full of building blocks. Ribozymes are certainly powerless to create the necessary building blocks from "raw materials", the point (2) you used against 3d printers being life.  


A broken, unreadable file is not a "mutation." It is simply a structural failure. If you can't understand this then consider why the denaturing of DNA by higher temperatures is not considered a "mutation."

If it's based on the source file, any variation you generate is a "mutation". Mutation implies nothing about usability or functionality. 

Denaturing DNA with higher temperatures is not a mutation because you're destroying the container of information, rather than modifying the information content. In the same way melting your HD does not mutate the files either, in that you have no media to read the files from afterwards.

Media destruction is different than content mutation.  The difference between media and content is the difference between the ASCII character strings I've typed up, and the monitor you're reading them on. Destroying the monitor doesn't mutate what I typed, even though the monitor is necessary to see what I say. 

On the other hand, corruption of files is a form of mutation, because the media is intact, it's just that the content has been modified in a way that is likely to destroy the information encoded in the file.   For example, that all italics post I just made is a "mutation" from what I intended to say. 

571 ace wrote: "I keep trying to make this point but no one seems to get me: Even if evolution were false and creation-by-God's-hand true, evolution would STILL be the scientific explantion, because science, by definition, is about mechanical, natural (non-supernatural) proceses." This remarks assumes evolutionary theory is 100% true. There is another possibility -- that evolutionary theory is analogous to something like the geocentric theory of the universe, i.e., a theory that corresponds to much of the phenomena, and even has substantial predictive value, but is still ultimately incorrect. Again, academic critics of evolution like Phillip Johnson and Michael Behe criticize evolutionary theory on the basis of (strictly natural, physical) evidence and logic, i.e., on scientific rather than supernatural grounds. Their position - analogous to a critique of Mann's hockey stick - is that the *scientific* evidence does not support larger evolutionary claims. ace wrote (circa Sept 2011): "Evolutionary theory has been challenged and indeed displaced. "Darwinism" is no longer the theory. (Which some Creationists take to mean evolution was discarded; no, just the particular mechanisms called "Darwinism.")" You don't find this odd? Suppose I propose a theory of a perpetual motion machine. The scientific community vigorously approves for a few decades, then says: "Eh, fail. We discovered some new shit we never thought about before, and we now conclude that your mechanisms are all wrong. "But, no worries. We really do like the idea of perpetual motion, and we have this shiny new, albeit untestable theory of perpetual motion which *is* correct." By which I mean -- much of the prestige of evolutionary theory comes from its status as "science." But the retrospective, historical and untestable nature of much of evolutionary theory (you going to re-run the Big Bang, bra?; or the evolution of man?) is a far different thing than the prospective, eminently testable science of, say, putting a man on the moon, or erecting a 100-story tower. You simply cannot experimentally test the theoretical concepts and mechanisms of evolution in the way you can experimentally test the theoretical concepts and mechanisms that allowed us to put a man on the moon or build a 100-story tower. The deserved prestige of modern science rests on the scientific method, i.e., experimental testing, but *much* of evolutionary theory is simply outside the scope of experimental testing.

572 // The goal I cited is a command from God. It's not optional. 

But the comment you made seems to imply that the Warren nonsense fell within that command. It does not. God does not say anywhere in the Bible that poverty, disease, and conflict will be solved this side of Eternity (and in fact will only be solved after feeding the multitudes of His enemies through the winepress of His wrath and shuffling them off to the eternal fire). What He wrote is that such things will tend to get worse, and then very near the end, a great deal worse.  This notion that a perfect kingdom can be built on this earth of us sinners isn't of God. It's a Satanic deception and should be obvious by now in the observation of every single time it has been attempted. 

Posted by: Methos at March 26, 2013 04:44 PM (hO9ad)

God does not say that he will solve poverty, disease and conflict in this life.   On the other hand, Christians working towards reducing poverty, disease and conflict is a noble and good goal.   

If we aim for complete reduction, that is little different than us aiming to have no sin in our lives.   Not possible for us ("if you claim to be without sin, you make God a liar"), yet something we are commanded to do.  ("be perfect as your Father is perfect")   

You could make the argument that the type of perfect in the command is different than "no sin", but I find it hard to believe that we can claim to be perfect while having sin in our own lives.   

All that said, I am in agreement that gov't has made poverty worse and that is prone to corruption and abuse; and that gov't action should not replace personal action.   

573 I spoke with an atheist one time who identified himself as strongly in favor of Christianity in society. His reasons weren't metaphysical, but practical: Christianity (or I suppose any number of other well-behaving, good-results-promoting religions) tends to produce good social results in society. Whether Christianity is the truth was a separate question (which he answered in the negative); but he couldn't help observing that the combination of capitalism, democracy, stable British-derived law and Christian moral philosophy (which tended to support the other three) seemed to work well, and countries without any of these seemed to be on the whole pretty crappy.



--Churchill remarked that he was not a pillar of the church, but a buttress (i.e., he supported it from the outside, not the inside).

574 ::: Item #1: Homeostasis. Control over internal environment. Do ribozyme strands have this? No. ::: Ribozymes do not have an "internal environment" to have control over save a small catalyzing pocket which operates by virtue of the active R groups alone. Since the pocket literally cannot do anything else other than its intended function when it is folded, it does not require "control." You really need to gut check yourself before you think you can discuss basic biochemistry. ::: Item #6 is something that I didn't think of, but which is common to all known life - response to stimuli. (which is the ability to collect, process, and react to information) None of that in ribozymes. ::: Irrelevant. Response to stimuli is a survival mechanism which the ribozyme need not avail itself of in an organic soup. At this point, you have made your ignorance depressingly clear. Please consult a general biology text in current use (not wikipedia) before you go any further into the weeds. ::: Stanley Miller's "organic soup" mostly contained burnt organic molecules like tar, but he artificially made the system concentrate the amino acids in a separate reservoir. ::: Concentrated or not, the point was that 20 amino acids were produced out of basic inorganic molcules which were thought to be readily available on a primordial Earth surface. Miller did not attempt to prove that the amino acids would spontaneously assemble themselves into something greater. You really don't have a clue in hell about ribozymes. Do you even know what the "building blocks" are, or do you need to wikipedia that as well? Do you understand that all necessary building blocks were formed in the Miller-Urey experiment? Do you understand that increasing concentration merely affects the speed of the reaction, not whether it happens? ::: Denaturing DNA with higher temperatures is not a mutation because you're destroying the container of information, rather than modifying the information content. ::: Did you just imply that DNA is NOT the code of life? So if the sequence of DNA base pairs is only considered the "container" of information, what is the information? Magic stored between the base pairs? Your flailing about is getting more and more pathetic. I'm not sure if it's ego fueling you at this point, or something else, but you need to stick to your day job.

575   Ribozymes do not have an "internal environment" to have control over save a small catalyzing pocket which operates by virtue of the active R groups alone. Since the pocket literally cannot do anything else other than its intended function when it is folded, it does not require "control." You really need to gut check yourself before you think you can discuss basic biochemistry.

Irrelevant. Response to stimuli is a survival mechanism which the ribozyme need not avail itself of in an organic soup. At this point, you have made your ignorance depressingly clear. Please consult a general biology text in current use (not wikipedia) before you go any further into the weeds.

Thus, self-replicating ribozymes do not meet this definition of life.    Now, I have explained why I don't consider it life, I have pointed out why the definition of life should conform to the set of things that we agree are life (bacteria to humans), and I have cited a wiki article.   The wiki article is not an authority, but it does agree with my definition and shows that it is common.   You have even more work to do to claim that "every biologist" uses the definition you provided.  

You, in contrast, rely on personal attacks, logical fallacies, and have still failed to provide a proper source to show that life is defined as  "just self-replicating with mutations".     I don't know who you think you're fooling, but you've consistently failed to make your case or show expertise in what you're talking about.   


Did you just imply that DNA is NOT the code of life? So if the sequence of DNA base pairs is only considered the "container" of information, what is the information? Magic stored between the base pairs?

No.   I am pointing out that there is a difference between media and content.   If you work with any type of computer, you ought to know the difference.   A CD, DVD, USB stick, etc, are all media.    They are physical mediums used to store and transmit information.   In contrast, text files, pictures, videos, are types of information that can be stored on media.   

DNA is media.   The sequence of base pairs is the information.   Change the sequence of base pairs, change the information.   If we transcribe a DNA sequence to a text string (ex: "GACTCTCCCTAACTG"), we have switched media, but the information is the same, and could be reproduced faithfully in DNA with a bit of effort.  

A denatured DNA is no longer able to be decoded by the proteins that work with DNA, which is no different than a cracked CD being unreadable by a CD drive.    Media damage can corrupt the information contained within, but information can be corrupted without media damage.    Any form of the latter qualifies as a "mutation", and it is something that can and does happen in the world of computing. 


Your flailing about is getting more and more pathetic. I'm not sure if it's ego fueling you at this point, or something else, but you need to stick to your day job.

Heh.  

576 Missed a few points to respond to:

Concentrated or not, the point was that 20 amino acids were produced out of basic inorganic molcules which were thought to be readily available on a primordial Earth surface. Miller did not attempt to prove that the amino acids would spontaneously assemble themselves into something greater.

A quick link:  
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller%E2%80%93Urey_experiment#Chemistry_of_experiment

Look at the diagram of the experimental setup.   Notice how the trap where the samples are taken is carefully isolated from the heated "ocean"?    

Why might that be?    What do you think happens to amino acids and proteins when heated?  

Then consider the results:  " Two percent of the carbon had formed amino acids that are used to make proteins in living cells"    What did the other 98% of carbon become?   

It's not enough to perform an experiment - one needs to understand what assumptions were built into the experiment, and what the results mean in the light of those assumptions.  


You really don't have a clue in hell about ribozymes. Do you even know what the "building blocks" are, or do you need to wikipedia that as well? Do you understand that all necessary building blocks were formed in the Miller-Urey experiment? Do you understand that increasing concentration merely affects the speed of the reaction, not whether it happens?

I linked a self-replicating RNA study: 
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/323/5918/1229.abstract 

"These cross-replicating RNA enzymes undergo self-sustained exponential amplification in the absence of proteins or other biological materials."

The ribozymes for this study were put into a mixture that was pure of unwanted inputs.     Ribozymes in the wild wouldn't have had that luxury.  Oh, and what do you think happens to the ribozymes if they're heated, like the soup in Miller's experiment?   

Now, would you like to cite a specific study that backs up your claims, are are you content for me to do all the heavy lifting?   

577 ::: Thus, self-replicating ribozymes do not meet this definition of life. ::: I trust a definition of life from Wikipedia about as much as I trust the emails I get from Nigerian bankers. At this point, sad to say it, reasoning has failed. You will either willfully misinterpret what I am typing due to your lack of experience with biology or you will simply insist on arbitrary conditions such as stimuli response patterns (take any creature, remove all possible threats and place them in a free-food environment - why would you need response?). Please pick up a biology text in common use, like the one I cited earlier, and consider whether the "expertise" it offers is suitable to your expert discernment as an armchair internet biologist. ::: A denatured DNA is no longer able to be decoded by the proteins that work with DNA, which is no different than a cracked CD being unreadable by a CD drive. ::: Indeed. The point is that it is unreadable. A corruption that would render the printer's design file unreadable is functionally indistinguishable from denaturation of DNA as it would immediately terminate capability of the printer to "read" it, much as compromised DNA is unable to be "read" by proteins. I'm guessing you probably won't do any further reading. Don't worry, wikipedia will be "good" enough.

578 Responsibility produces virtue ace? Really? One of, if not the most backwards statements I have ever read. You really, really really don't want there to be a God do you. Well, He is the only one who can remove the scales from your eyes and change your heart. I pray He does. Only then will you accept all of the evidence out there, and the amount is staggering, that proves His existence and that Jesus Christ was who he said He was.

579 I trust a definition of life from Wikipedia about as much as I trust the emails I get from Nigerian bankers. At this point, sad to say it, reasoning has failed. You will either willfully misinterpret what I am typing due to your lack of experience with biology or you will simply insist on arbitrary conditions such as stimuli response patterns (take any creature, remove all possible threats and place them in a free-food environment - why would you need response?). Please pick up a biology text in common use, like the one I cited earlier, and consider whether the "expertise" it offers is suitable to your expert discernment as an armchair internet biologist.

You see the little footnote icons?    You can follow those through to scholarly article.  

On the other hand, I'm still waiting for you to cite *anything*.    "every biologist", "respectable university" and "any biology textbook" are not citations.    


Indeed. The point is that it is unreadable. A corruption that would render the printer's design file unreadable is functionally indistinguishable from denaturation of DNA as it would immediately terminate capability of the printer to "read" it, much as compromised DNA is unable to be "read" by proteins.

A corruption of the file contents is not the same as media damage.   

Random bit flips can yield a "readable" file that has some errors in it.    A corruption of the file contents is more analogous to DNA insertion/deletion than DNA denaturing.  

The information system concepts from computing are directly applicable to the information systems in biology.    Because when you get down to it, computing isn't really about transistors and ICs, it's about math and statistics.   

580 An observation about Corolla's comment. Though I'm speaking very broadly here I'm completely serious. If you put a kid in prison for a lengthy stay at a fairly young age best to simply leave him there the rest of his life. There are exceptions of course which is supposed to be the Parole Boards's function, though that seldom works as intended. Modern prisons are the polar opposite of rehabilitation centers. All those institutions that changed their name something soft and squishy are selling snake oil. Prisons are semi-permanent way stations for those who will never again be able to live as productive citizens. Because Parole doesn't work and our recidivism rates are nearly 100 percent those who are adjudged prison worthy should simply go away forever. This is essentially why drug laws are so evil. We're young men and women, who might otherwise be salvageable societally, to an existence where the acquisition of antisocial skills and the abandoning of social mores is the only path to survival. Rehab is for those rehabilitable. Prison is for those not. Yes, Bob Houk was right. Some people really do need to be kicked out of the world.

581 Take a basic biology course at any reputable university. Or you can read about it in Campbell's Biology, 7th ed. ...

Posted by: Yoshi, Aggrieved Victim of the White Man at March 26, 2013 04:37 PM (csi6Y)


You'll excuse me for not using a direct citation from the textbook, since it's not available online.    However, I have found a site that hosts some lecture notes based on the book. 

http://www.course-notes.org/Biology/Slides/Campbells_Biology_7th_Edition

So what is life? 
"Defies a simple, one-sentence definition"
"We recognize life by what living things do"
"Some properties of life:"
"c.) Response to the environment"  (AKA stimulus response)
"d.) Regulation" (aka homeostasis)  

In short, the one biology text you've referred to (but didn't bother to cite) supports the way I've defined life.   

582 ::: On the other hand, I'm still waiting for you to cite *anything*. "every biologist", "respectable university" and "any biology textbook" are not citations. ::: You miss Campbell-Reece, Biology, 7th ed upthread? Sorry, that's as good as a rank amateur is going to get, and it suits your purposes just fine. ::: Random bit flips can yield a "readable" file that has some errors in it. A corruption of the file contents is more analogous to DNA insertion/deletion than DNA denaturing. ::: oh, you were talking about incremental mutations all along? Then we don't need to have this discussion. ::: The ribozymes for this study were put into a mixture that was pure of unwanted inputs. Ribozymes in the wild wouldn't have had that luxury. ::: Repeat after me: concentration affects speed. Activation energy determines reaction status. Paper 1: self-replicators "feed" on nucleotide triphosphates http://www.sciencemag.org/content/292/5520/1319.full Paper 2: those ingredients are plausible early-Earth resources http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19444213 But please, continue to cherry-pick one sentence fragment out of an abstract. It's what scientists do.

583 ::: In short, the one biology text you've referred to (but didn't bother to cite) supports the way I've defined life. ::: Yeah, you know what? Let's just read a couple sentences and we'll be good to go. Honest.

584 oh, you were talking about incremental mutations all along? Then we don't need to have this discussion.

Not my fault you don't know what file corruption means.   You could have asked, but I guess that wouldn't let you entertain your notions of superiority.   


Repeat after me: concentration affects speed. Activation energy determines reaction status.

And the types of chemicals present affect which chemical reaction actually takes place, and which chemical outputs you end up with.    "Pure of unwanted inputs" isn't talking about concentration, it's talking about the existence of unwanted inputs.     There some process filtering the primordial soup of all unwanted inputs now?  


Paper 1: self-replicators "feed" on nucleotide triphosphates

"feed" implies some sort of agency.    The lurking ribozyme sneaks up on an unsuspecting nucleotide triphosphate ....  

Sure.    What you're really doing is using obfuscating language to spice up the description of a chemical reaction.  That's not what the paper is about.  


Paper 2: those ingredients are plausible early-Earth resources

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19444213

" The starting materials for the synthesis [...] are plausible prebiotic feedstock molecules, and the conditions of the synthesis are consistent with potential early-Earth geochemical models"

Do you understand what you are linking?   This study was built on an assumption on what early-Earth resources were available, and what early Earth conditions were like.   That's what a "model" is .    Assumptions made into rules.  

This is not a study that proves the plausibility of what resources are available.     This is a study that takes the assumed resources and sees what happens when you mix them.    Resource plausibility is assumed, not concluded.    Assumptions are not evidence.


But please, continue to cherry-pick one sentence fragment out of an abstract. It's what scientists do.

Cherry pick?    That limitation is essential to the result!     They didn't say, "this self-replication happens in any type of environment", because that would be a lie.     

You're trying to pretend that biochemistry is some mystical discipline when the claims (and the limitations of the claims) are there in plain english.  


  Yeah, you know what? Let's just read a couple sentences and we'll be good to go. Honest. 

Posted by: Yoshi, Aggrieved Victim of the White Man at March 26, 2013 07:19 PM (csi6Y)

Think of all the poor students being lectured.   They'll read the book, be shown a slide with the phrasing I quoted, and come to the scary conclusion that life is defined by the traits of living things!  

Notably absent is evidence of how your "correct" definition of life is held by "every biologist".     It's too bad you dug yourself into a corner with "every".    To really support that claim, you have to cite everyone, and I've already found a body of writing that contradicts your claim, including the one you recommended yourself.   

I guess you could walk back your claim, but that requires you to admit you were wrong and that my position is justified.   (note:  not Right, only justified)  

585

@ 580 - "Concentrated or not, the point was that 20 amino acids were produced out of basic inorganic molcules which were thought to be readily available on a primordial Earth surface. Miller did not attempt to prove that the amino acids would spontaneously assemble themselves into something greater."

 

I think the other poster's point is that even though Miller didn't attempt to prove it, others after him have used his experiment as proof for the spontaneous polymerisation of amino acids in this "early earth" ocean.  And his criticisms of their attempts are right on the money, BTW.

 

Look, let's face it - you can't just throw amino acids into an ocean and expect them to polymerise into proteins.  It doesn't work that way.  Energetically, that is a non-starter.  Even in the lab, when we want to polymerise AAs, we have to set up very specific experimental conditions which minimise contact of the AAs with water while yet maintaining them in solution.  Even with things like "directing clays" and other workarounds that evolutionists have tried to come up with to support oceanic abiogenesis, simple crystalline patterns still don't provide enough reduction of the energy barriers to overcome the strong equilibrium effects against AA polymerisation.