Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

How come Atheists are against anti blasphemy laws but are OK with bashing other .....

1356

Comments

  • #102
    Dades
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 25,558 Mod ✭✭✭✭Dades


    Oranage2, I think, is done with the current (useful) evolution thread. It's pretty clear that mind is not open to change.


  • #103
    Galvasean
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 30,746 ✭✭✭✭Galvasean


    Dades wrote: »
    Oranage2, I think, is done with the current (useful) evolution thread. It's pretty clear that mind is not open to change.

    We'll make him change! :)

    hammer.gif


  • #104
    joseph brand
    Registered Users Posts: 4,537 ✭✭✭joseph brand


    Oranage2 wrote: »
    There is evidence, take a look at the universe, it's far too complex just to exist. It's like the wind, you cant see the wind so does wind not exist?

    Are you saying you cannot feel the wind? See leaves blowing? A kite?

    Glass is also hard to see. I'll find a really clean glass door and you have to run straight into it (it's invisible). If you can't see it it's not there. (Although you can touch it, and see it from a different angle)

    Is the blood from your nose real? :pac:


  • #105
    Oranage2
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,128 ✭✭✭✭Oranage2


    RichieC wrote: »
    Evolution you have to see to believe but God!, well, he's real and you heathens are going to hell.... You referred to it as pseudo science, so yes. you were trolling that thread, even after the evidence was presented to you, it didnt convince you. you either didn't read it, or didn't understand it. or as I suspect, didn't give a dam, you just wanted to wreak a thread.

    I did no such thing excuse you!

    I asked a question and it was answered - The evidence presented wasnt enough for me to completely change my mind. I've still a few questions like why cant fish do mathematics or why are we so much smarter than any other species which just doesnt add up for me.

    Now you admit it that you were trolling on that thread!
    joseph brand wrote: »
    See to believe? Where and when did you see god?

    Here's a photo of a fossil I have:

    uetAa.jpg

    Not as rare as you think.

    I'm just seeing a rock - if thats the case I've a dragon fossil out my back.
    Dades wrote: »
    Oranage2, I think, is done with the current (useful) evolution thread. It's pretty clear that mind is not open to change.

    Not done at all, perhaps done with replying but certainly not done reading it - As you might imagine DNA wouldnt be my mastermind subject so if I cant add anything useful I dont bother replying.

    And my mind is open - I'd be willing to change my mind that God created each species to God created evolution.


  • #106
    Solair
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,230 ✭✭✭Solair


    Oranage2 wrote: »
    I'm just seeing a rock - if thats the case I've a dragon fossil out my back.

    Right, so you don't notice the rather large insect type thing that's fossilized into the rock???

    Interesting....


  • #107
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    Oranage2 wrote: »
    I'm just seeing a rock - if thats the case I've a dragon fossil out my back.

    A fossil is a type of rock.

    What did you expect to see?


  • #108
    Oranage2
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,128 ✭✭✭✭Oranage2


    Full skellington or something I'm not a archaeologist.


  • #109
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Amtmann: I don't really believe it's all that difficult not to be obnoxious about it. All it takes is to listen, consider and respond on the basis of what is logically sound / unsound about it in a respectful manner. I've done the same with other positions that I disagree with, and it's proven beneficial. I can't imagine any case where anyone resorts to ridicule being beneficial for anyone. Generally, it's a good sign post for me to know when to realise that it is pointless to continue as it is unlikely that anyone's understanding will progress.


  • #110
    Sarky
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,967 ✭✭✭✭Sarky


    When were you planning on putting that into practice, by the by?


  • #111
    swampgas
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,579 ✭✭✭swampgas


    Oranage2 wrote: »
    Full skellington or something I'm not a archaeologist.

    You don't need to be an archaeologist, you don't need to stay ignorant either. You can read and use your own common sense.

    Maybe try starting here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil


  • Advertisement
  • #112
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Sarky wrote: »
    When were you planning on putting that into practice, by the by?

    I think largely I already do in respect to missionaries that I speak to out in the street advocating for any number of ideologies. My first response isn't to burst out and laugh, but rather it is to listen to them and give them a response on the basis of my POV. Likewise most of the time on boards.ie, genuinely I would say that it what I would desire from most discussions. I can't ever say that I've burst out laughing at atheism on many occasions, but rather I've listened to it and given what objections I have to it. On a number of occasions that I've had with non-Christian friends of mine, this has largely been my approach also.


  • #113
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    Oranage2 wrote: »
    Full skellington or something

    You can see a fossil of the full skeleton, it is the top right hand side of the rock. The fossilized skeleton though is still a rock.
    Oranage2 wrote: »
    I'm not a archaeologist.

    So is your rejection of evolution based merely on ignorance?


  • #114
    krudler
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 34,788 ✭✭✭✭krudler


    Oranage2 wrote: »
    Didnt really mean to ignore most your post it's just not my style to nit pick every sentence or word with a fine tooth comb.

    And you shouldnt be angry with God, he's a loving God, and as Dades says he does work in mysterious ways. The fact that he hasnt smite anyone on this forum yet shows he's real and a forgiving God.

    except that whole wiping out people willy nilly teenage phase he went through at the beginning of the bible, like most lads once the first kid arrived he matured and calmed down a bit though.

    really though thats just staggeringly stupid reasoning for a god to exist, I didnt get hit by a tractor today, god must love me!

    the more I think about it the more I question why anyone would actually WANT to go heaven, it'd be like moving in with a girlfriend you already know is a hormonal cyclone with arbitrary interchangeable rules.


  • #115
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    krudler: I don't believe God changed one bit. The Bible accounts for one revelation to mankind as far as most Christians are concerned, not two.


  • #116
    Sarky
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,967 ✭✭✭✭Sarky


    philologos wrote: »

    I think largely I already do in respect to missionaries that I speak to out in the street advocating for any number of ideologies. My first response isn't to burst out and laugh, but rather it is to listen to them and give them a response on the basis of my POV. Likewise most of the time on boards.ie, genuinely I would say that it what I would desire from most discussions. I can't ever say that I've burst out laughing at atheism on many occasions, but rather I've listened to it and given what objections I have to it. On a number of occasions that I've had with non-Christian friends of mine, this has largely been my approach also.

    So we can expect either an admission that you believe because you don't like the alternative, or an actual explanation as to how totally subjective feelings are integral to logic? Because every single time it comes down to this, and every single time so far you've buggered off for a while and when you come back you pretend it never happened. It seems a bit... disrespectful, to be honest.


  • #117
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    I rarely argue from subjective feelings. Most of the time what I do argue is on the basis of the world around me, it seems likely that Christianity is true for X, Y and Z reason. That's generally

    I've done this many times since I started posting after I became a Christian in 2007 (I used my account since 2005 but a lot of what you will find before 2007 will be devoid of Christianity) I can even link to you to a large number of posts where I've done this later if you'd like both here and over yonder.

    The argument has been by and large exhausted at this point. The only way I think that the argument can be reinvigorated is if atheists are also willing to argue as to why they believe God's existence is improbable.


  • #118
    MagicMarker
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 32,865 ✭✭✭✭MagicMarker


    Oranage2 wrote: »
    Full skellington or something I'm not a archaeologist.
    Ignorance really is bliss eh?


  • #119
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    philologos wrote: »
    I rarely argue from subjective feelings. Most of the time what I do argue is on the basis of the world around me, it seems likely that Christianity is true for X, Y and Z reason. That's generally

    I've done this many times since I started posting after I became a Christian in 2007 (I used my account since 2005 but a lot of what you will find before 2007 will be devoid of Christianity) I can even link to you to a large number of posts where I've done this later if you'd like both here and over yonder.

    The argument has been by and large exhausted at this point. The only way I think that the argument can be reinvigorated is if atheists are also willing to argue as to why they believe God's existence is improbable.

    How about we just argue that Christianity is not likely because of X, Y and Z reasons.

    Without a rational reason for being a Christian you would stop being a Christian, correct? Or is being a Christian more about emotion and promise than rational reasoning?


  • #120
    Oranage2
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,128 ✭✭✭✭Oranage2


    MagicMarker wrote: »
    Ignorance really is bliss eh?


    Do you actually add anything to threads or do you just come in and have a go at people?


  • Advertisement
  • #121
    Sonics2k
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,253 ✭✭✭Sonics2k


    Oranage2 wrote: »
    Full skellington or something I'm not a archaeologist.
    Oranage2 wrote: »
    Full skellington


    Oranage2 wrote: »
    skellington

    :pac:


  • #122
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    Sonics2k wrote: »
    :pac:



    images?q=tbn:ANd9GcS4jJWdodLt-qrGYM71Q-HqRUaAvTp3dpwN3tpNVD7P7xGAeu5L_dor-SGT


  • #123
    Calibos
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,810 ✭✭✭Calibos


    Cocksure...to be sure to be sure


  • #124
    Sarky
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,967 ✭✭✭✭Sarky


    Hmm, I am pretty certain about my own penis...


  • #125
    Galvasean
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 30,746 ✭✭✭✭Galvasean


    Oranage2 wrote: »
    I've still a few questions like why cant fish do mathematics

    90ad9322_wtf-are-you-talking-about.jpg


  • #126
    CiaranMT
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,092 ✭✭✭CiaranMT


    Oranage2 wrote: »
    Full skellington or something I'm not a archaeologist.

    Clearly.


  • Advertisement
  • #127
    RichieC
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,333 ✭✭✭RichieC


    Jack_Skellington.jpeg


  • #128
    Galvasean
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 30,746 ✭✭✭✭Galvasean


    FWIW, when dealing with fossils it's usually palaeontology, not archaeology.


  • #129
    Oranage2
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,128 ✭✭✭✭Oranage2


    Galvasean wrote: »
    FWIW, when dealing with fossils it's usually palaeontology, not archaeology.

    Either way they should get a real job.



    Anyway and since I've been goaded into a response.


    Galvasean wrote: »
    We'll make him change! :)

    hammer.gif

    Can I just get some clarity that this cartoon hammer isnt a threat on my well being?

    I get jokes and I take it that Galvasean is using the metaphorical Maslow's 'golden hammer' meaning that he will try a different tactic to change my opinion instead of the one size fits all approach.

    But just to be sure as we know you cant take internet threats too lightly.
    RichieC wrote: »
    [IMG][/IMG]

    I see Mr. Ritchie that you're still not accepting that you were trolling the other thread. Well I will accept an apology if you're not man enough to admit your wrong doing. Or maybe atleast be more tolerant to the people that dont believe in things on anecdotal evidence.




    Alas, the thing about the fish and math, it just seems strange to me that humans being a relativity new species is the smartest but the other species who have billions of years on us are stupid, if we all evolved from the same origin then surely whales should have their under water civilisations or something. It just seems very strange, there's no way that humans have evolved from anything, we're just too smart and complex to have evolved from a plant or what not. And if evolution was true to the extent you believe then why havent some humans developed gills or wings?


  • #130
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,420 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    Oranage2 wrote: »
    it just seems strange to me that humans being a relativity new species is the smartest but the other species who have billions of years on us are stupid, if we all evolved from the same origin then surely whales should have their under water civilisations or something. It just seems very strange, there's no way that humans have evolved from anything, we're just too smart and complex to have evolved from a plant or what not. And if evolution was true to the extent you believe then why havent some humans developed gills or wings?
    If you want to discuss evolution, there are two threads going in A+A:

    This one if you're not interested in learning anything, and this one if you are.


  • #131
    Doctor DooM
    Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 25,868 Mod ✭✭✭✭Doctor DooM


    Oranage2 wrote: »

    Alas, the thing about the fish and math, it just seems strange to me that humans being a relativity new species is the smartest but the other species who have billions of years on us are stupid, if we all evolved from the same origin then surely whales should have their under water civilisations or something. It just seems very strange, there's no way that humans have evolved from anything, we're just too smart and complex to have evolved from a plant or what not. And if evolution was true to the extent you believe then why havent some humans developed gills or wings?

    I wish I wasn't an atheist so I could go "Dear God" right now and mean it.


    Just in case this isn't a Godwin: Human foetus' have vestigial gills: wings are pentadactyl limbs, like our hands. So we do actually have them.


  • Advertisement
  • #132
    Northclare
    Closed Accounts Posts: 724 ✭✭✭Northclare


    You made a good point there Orange about evolution.

    I'm sure fish have their own version of mathematics, ffs a plant has more common sense than some people LOL

    The human feteus goes through every stage of evolution in the womb but it causes heated discussion when peoples say Atheists develop more of a reptilian brain than spiritual people :)


  • #133
    Galvasean
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 30,746 ✭✭✭✭Galvasean


    Oranage2 wrote: »
    Either way they should get a real job.

    Curious. Would you consider a priest as having a real job?

    Oranage2 wrote: »
    Can I just get some clarity that this cartoon hammer isnt a threat on my well being?

    I get jokes and I take it that Galvasean is using the metaphorical Maslow's 'golden hammer' meaning that he will try a different tactic to change my opinion instead of the one size fits all approach.

    Not quite as intellectual an approach as the 'golden hammer', but rather more along the lines of, "We must continue to hammer the point home!"


  • #134
    Galvasean
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 30,746 ✭✭✭✭Galvasean


    Oranage2 wrote: »
    Either way they should get a real job.

    Actually, I must comment on this statement again.
    Just who are you to make snide comments about archaeologists and palaeontologists no having real jobs when you have demonstrated yourself to not have the slightest clue as to what it is they actually do?


  • #135
    Northclare
    Closed Accounts Posts: 724 ✭✭✭Northclare


    Oh here we go LOL


  • #136
    SheFiend
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 362 ✭✭SheFiend


    "Or maybe atleast be more tolerant to the people that dont believe in things on anecdotal evidence."

    This has got to be a wind up


  • #137
    Sarky
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,967 ✭✭✭✭Sarky


    When did ignorance become something to be proud of? :(


  • #138
    seamus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    Oranage2 wrote: »
    we're just too smart and complex to have evolved from a plant or what not.
    This would be a fairly typical example of where we humans vastly overestimate our position in the universe. It also shows a fundamental classical misunderstanding of what evolution is.

    To be fair, science fiction often enforces this misunderstanding.

    Evolution does not continually improve an organism in a certain way. Unlike technology which we continually make "better", even when it may not be necessary, evolution makes a organism better suited to its environment. There is no pinnacle of evolution. We will not encounter and alien species who look like us but have developed telepathy because they'd had more time to passively evolve. That's not how evolution works.

    We are not the "top" of the evolutionary tree. We are not the "most evolved" species. We have evolved to suit our environment, which is temperate, arable environments above water and roughly at sea level.
    When it comes to living on frozen tundra, we're ****. Penguins are far better evolved than we are.
    Where it comes to living in the sea, we're even worse. We can't even breathe there FFS. Practically every sea creature are millions of years more evolved than us when it comes to living in the sea.
    Very warm environments, low pressure environments, high acidity environments, all inaccessible to us. Let's face it, we're a fairly weak and flimsy bucnh when it comes down to it.

    Sure, our particular evolutionary adaptations have allowed us to create ways to temporarily exist in these environments, but that doesn't make use "more evolved". Pound for pound a whale is far superior in every single way when in the water.

    If "more evolved" is the determination of who is best able to survive and procreate in a large number of environments, then we're high up there, right? Nope. That crown goes to insects. We are way below many insect species on that measure, we can't even compete with their evolutionary position on it.

    What we do have is this large brain which has allowed us to develop complex speech and language. This allows for complex ideas to be communicated and formulated succinctly to other members of our species. Other animals are capable of complex reasoning and logic, but they are largely incapable of communicating these thoughts to other members of their species. So when they get a good idea, that good idea dies with them.
    Unforunately this adaptation also allows us to communicate both good and stupid ideas such as the idea that we are very important, very special, and "top" of any chain.


  • #139
    Galvasean
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 30,746 ✭✭✭✭Galvasean


    Can we just change the thread title to 'How come Orange2 has no bloody clue about anything?'


  • #140
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,420 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    SheFiend wrote: »
    This has got to be a wind up
    Looks like one to me.


  • #141
    Northclare
    Closed Accounts Posts: 724 ✭✭✭Northclare


    It's only a wind up if your wound up.

    Google "John Moriarty Prometheus and the Dolphin"


  • Advertisement
  • #142
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    Galvasean wrote: »
    Can we just change the thread title to 'How come Orange2 has no bloody clue about anything?'

    DO NOT even joke about changing thread titles!!!:eek:

    *cue flashbacks of that Spanish bishop thread*


  • #143
    Oranage2
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,128 ✭✭✭✭Oranage2


    Galvasean wrote: »
    Can we just change the thread title to 'How come Orange2 has no bloody clue about anything?'

    A little harsh dont you think, perhaps I was also harsh with the job commenting, nobody should put anybody down for doing a job they love.

    robindch wrote: »
    Looks like one to me.

    I thought I asked reasonable questions and gave reasonable answers - Perhaps I'm not as 'educated' about some matters as much as some of the other members here but doesnt mean i'm on a wind up.
    Sarky wrote: »
    When did ignorance become something to be proud of? :(


    “He who knows nothing is closer to the truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods and errors.”

    ~Thomas Jefferson


  • #144
    Galvasean
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 30,746 ✭✭✭✭Galvasean


    Oranage2 wrote: »
    A little harsh dont you think, perhaps I was also hash with the job commenting, nobody should put anybody down for doing a job they love.

    Alright cool.Clean slate so?
    Oranage2 wrote: »
    “He who knows nothing is closer to the truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods and errors.”

    ~Thomas Jefferson

    Did you know Thomas Jefferson was a keen palaeontologist?
    http://www.ansp.org/museum/jefferson/


  • #145
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    Galvasean wrote: »



    Did you know Thomas Jefferson was a keen palaeontologist?
    http://www.ansp.org/museum/jefferson/

    and slave owner who paradoxically also stated that all men were born equal...


  • #146
    Galvasean
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 30,746 ✭✭✭✭Galvasean


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    and slave owner who paradoxically also stated that all men were born equal...

    That's not a paradox. They were born equal. They were just made unequal when wrapped in chains and forced to work on cotton plantations.


  • #147
    CerebralCortex
    Registered Users Posts: 3,809 ✭✭✭CerebralCortex


    Oranage2 wrote: »


    “He who knows nothing is closer to the truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods and errors.”

    ~Thomas Jefferson

    :rolleyes: The religious claim to know the truth!


  • #148
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    Galvasean wrote: »
    That's not a paradox. They were born equal. They were just made unequal when wrapped in chains and forced to work on cotton plantations.

    It is when the plantation they were born on - into slavery - belonged to Jefferson - not to mention that some of those slaves were also Jefferson's biological children:D.

    Sorry - I have a thing about Jefferson. I see him held up as some enlightened figurehead and advocate of freedom when in reality he lived (very well) because the slaves at Monticello did all the bloody work and he justified this by resorting to race theories about the superiority of whites...:mad:


  • #149
    Galvasean
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 30,746 ✭✭✭✭Galvasean


    CerebralCortex wrote: »
    :rolleyes: The religious claim to know the truth!

    To Jefferson's credit he took a very scientific approach to religion. He followed the teachings of Jesus Christ but seemed very much at odds with the idea of organised religion. He also dismissed the idea of God being a non-physical entity, insisting that he must be matter based to exist (he did believe in God, but to him God was a physical being).
    He was also a Young Earth Creationist for most of his life, but through his studies in palaeontology he admitted that extinction does occur and that the world was most likely very old, while at the same time not endorsing evolution.
    Certainly one of the intellectual powerhouses of his time.


  • #150
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    CerebralCortex wrote: »
    :rolleyes: The religious claim to know the truth!

    They do don't they. What confuses me it how many different 'truths' they know. Dare I say contradictory 'truths'... I dare, I dare.


  • Advertisement
  • #151
    oldrnwisr
    Registered Users Posts: 1,594 ✭✭✭oldrnwisr


    Oranage2 wrote: »
    And if evolution was true to the extent you believe then why havent some humans developed gills or wings?

    Why would we wan't to develop gills. I don't even like swimming. Sure wings would be cool but I don't like the idea of having to get every piece of clothing tailor made.

    Anyway, I'm really leaning toward this being a troll at the moment but I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt one last time.

    As it turns out, you've got it completely arse backwards. We developed from fish-like creatures. We abandoned gills in favour of lungs. Why would we end up going back there?

    This is an SEM image of a human embryo.

    arches.png

    Those folded structures that you can see are called pharyngeal arches. These structures are found in a wide variety of animals and in fish, these develop into gills. Obviously they don't develop into gills in humans but they develop into our parathyroid and thyroid glands instead. These glands perform the same function in us as the gills do in fish, regulating calcium and they are located in roughly the same place in humans and fish (the neck). Now if you want I can post some of the research which demonstrates this but I'm getting the feeling that such research might be beyond you.


    As for the comment about humans being so much smarter than other species, that demonstrates a much more fundamental lack of understanding of evolution but seamus has already pointed out what's wrong with that comment in great detail so I'll not mince words. What he said.


Advertisement