What automatically makes you disrespect someone?

Raic · 20-06-2013 05:06PM

zonEEE wrote: »

I don't have any long held beliefs, like how can you explain quantum entanglement then what makes one talk to the other? Theres something happening that we do not understand or explain with science. And if you can , I think it time to get off boards and head out to NASA or something. You talk about facts and evidence however science starts with a presumption of the big bang just happening, but still it doesn't explain how it was there in the first place.

So all your facts and evidence is based on a presumption. Nice.

I don't believe in any sort of Christian God or Allah or anything but I do think there's a higher programmer of this simulated reality.

Wow. I don't even know where to start. You just list various scientific ideas and say "Hah, you can't explain this one!". If I detail the concepts you'll just choose more. You're completely ignoring the point I was making which is that even if science can't explain something (yet) it's still the best way to approach a topic. Science tries to explain observations using the information we have. How does saying some higher being did it all make more sense? Where is the evidence for your belief in this higher programmer?

I can't respect someone who refuses to be rational and weigh evidence and instead chooses some obscure alternate belief and thinks I'm the unreasonable one.

zonEEE · 20-06-2013 05:07PM

endacl wrote: »

"It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it."

- Einstein

Niels Bohr

Take two next time, to catch up after your Einstein mistake.

I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with the fates and actions of human beings. (Albert Einstein)

Raic · 20-06-2013 05:11PM

zonEEE wrote: »

I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with the fates and actions of human beings. (Albert Einstein)

The quote Enda gave explains what he meant by this. Don't you think you are being silly by choosing to believe what some strange fringe "scientist" says and rejecting mainstream scientific consensus?

Perhaps it's time for myself and Enda to back off this completely. It's been a good explain of a way to "earn" my disrespect, but this it's really starting to damage an interesting thread.

Crooked Jack · 20-06-2013 05:12PM

hullaballoo wrote: »

Spitting in public.

Immediate irrevocable disrespect.

woah woah woah. Sometime you just gotta do it. I'm betting you're a woman, in which case you wouldn't understand.

zonEEE · 20-06-2013 05:13PM

Raic wrote: »

Wow. I don't even know where to start. You just list various scientific ideas and say "Hah, you can't explain this one!". If I detail the concepts you'll just choose more. You're completely ignoring the point I was making which is that even if science can't explain something (yet) it's still the best way to approach a topic. Science tries to explain observations using the information we have. How does saying some higher being did it all make more sense? Where is the evidence for your belief in this higher programmer?

I can't respect someone who refuses to be rational and weigh evidence and instead chooses some obscure alternate belief and thinks I'm the unreasonable one.

I think your missing the point, im not knocking science what im saying is science can not explain everything, this is were conscious comes in.

As for evidence on the other theory have a look at tom campbells videos

also

endacl · 20-06-2013 05:13PM

Raic wrote: »

The quote Enda gave explains what he meant by this. Don't you think you are being silly by choosing to believe what some strange fringe "scientist" says and rejecting mainstream scientific consensus?

Perhaps it's time for myself and Enda to back off this completely. It's been a good explain of a way to "earn" my disrespect, but this it's really starting to damage an interesting thread.

Agreed.*

* Backs away slowly, while avoiding eye contact and sudden movements...

Chauncey · 20-06-2013 05:13PM

God and quantum entanglement my arse, this fella knows what's really going on:

The single comment under that video on youtube is well worth reading.

zonEEE · 20-06-2013 05:20PM

I suppose the guys from MIT and James Gates are just old fools aswell?

endacl · 20-06-2013 05:23PM

OK. back on topic. How about.... people who just won't let it go...?

Start a new thread dude. I'll ignore you over there.

Duggys Housemate · 20-06-2013 05:26PM

Plenty of serious scientists agree we could be in a simulation, oe a universe - at least created by Aliens.

the logic.

1) This universe is probably not the only one. The multiverse theory.
2) tiny changes in initial conditions would cause most universes to collapse, or not have enough gravity to create stars, or not be able to produce enough complex elements for life. I mean tiny percentages would produce life 0.000000xxx01 percent.
3) However the multiverse is probably infinite or very very large.
4) Some race has therefore evolved somewhere on some universe where life did exist with the power to create mini-big bangs. ( This wouldn't blow up their universe as the 3 spatial dimensions would expand in the new universe not theirs. They just get the thrill of setting it going and having a universe to play with, not that they can do much with it.).
5) These aliens can fine pick the initial conditions for life so...
6) its more probable you are in a created universe than a random one.

kkontour · 20-06-2013 05:28PM

endacl wrote: »

Oh! And gingers. They don't have souls.

Yes they do

Original http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sV5W11X_uW0

Optimalprimerib · 20-06-2013 05:38PM

ColeTrain wrote: »

Let's just say you've just met someone and you find out that they like or are 'into something' that you loathe and have no respect for?

What is it?

There's a very obvious one, I wonder how long it will take to pop up :pac:

Personally speaking, I find anyone who buys strawberry based products instead of an alternative, comes across as a very bland person and they should take a long hard look at themselves.

Whats wrong with strawberry based products. I dont get that

20-06-2013 05:44PM

Optimalprimerib wrote: »

Whats wrong with strawberry based products. I dont get that

I think it's the jam wars

harry Bailey esq · 20-06-2013 05:52PM

apollonia wrote: »

hunting
anal sex
gambling
litter
cheating
- and country music+golf :pac:

you have the makings of a good weekend listed there,apart from the littering,that's just bad form.

old hippy · 20-06-2013 05:58PM

audi12 wrote: »

young hippy it is not my fault if you cannot understand basic points that are made on here. I use it to look at pictures of people and sneer at them what total and utter rubbish.You may not have heard of the term Facebook friends maybe you should look it up not everyone a person is friends with on facebook is genuine friends unless you think most people have 200 or 300 genuine friends

The basic point made was you are sneering at a girl who wants a baby and you don't want to see her pictures anymore. I suggested perhaps you hide all feeds from her, if she bothers you so much.

All my mates on FB are genuine friends, otherwise what would be the reason having them on there?

As for having 200 or 300 friends on FB, why? If they're not genuine and you think some of them are "sad" and "annoying" why have them as friends or look at their photos?

Killer Wench · 20-06-2013 06:03PM

People who say that they have never, EVER had a racist, sexist, homophobic, sectarian, xenophobic, or any other type of prejudicial thought in their life.

audi12 · 20-06-2013 06:11PM

Anyone who thinks they have 200 or 300 real friends is deluded don't know how many you have on Facebook ..I never said it bothers me that much she puts baby pics up just think its very sad and desperate of her but it doesn't surprise me knowing her

DaveDaRave · 20-06-2013 06:13PM

apollonia wrote: »

hunting
anal sex
gambling
litter
cheating
- and country music+golf :pac:

sounds like a list of your ex-bfs interests

audi12 · 20-06-2013 06:28PM

Since when did this thread become about the bloody universe

20-06-2013 07:45PM

Killer Wench wrote: »

People who say that they have never, EVER had a racist, sexist, homophobic, sectarian, xenophobic, or any other type of prejudicial thought in their life.

Who says that? :pac:

Jester252 · 20-06-2013 07:56PM

People who get into fights about science and religion. They don't achive anything and without access to the internet they won't know anything.
Both sides just come across as stupid.
People who can't understand how science and religion work together and will fight it.
People who are into science because its "cool".

endacl · 20-06-2013 08:11PM

Jester252 wrote: »

People who get into fights about science and religion. They don't achive anything and without access to the internet they won't know anything.
Both sides just come across as stupid.
People who can't understand how science and religion work together and will fight it.
People who are into science because its "cool".

1. Insecure religious people. Gotta agree on this one.

2. Have to pull you up on this one. Both sides may come across as stupid, but only one demonstrably is willfully so.

3. That's just silly. They don't. That's not to say of course that they can't co-exist. Its like saying swimming and stamp collecting can work together. You could put both in the same place, but it wouldn't work. The stamps would get soggy. Each works fine. In its own arena.

4. What if they find it fascinating and challenging, as well as cool? Would that be OK?

discus · 20-06-2013 08:16PM

People who constantly berate religions, usually Richard Hawkins fans. If you have to belittle someones views at every given chance then you need to make some time to look at why you feel the need to do that.

endacl · 20-06-2013 08:18PM

discus wrote: »

People who constantly berate religions, usually Richard Hawkins fans. If you have to belittle someones views at every given chance then you need to make some time to look at why you feel the need to do that.

Richard Hawkins?!?

What does an Elizabethan explorer have to do with anything?!?

LordSutch · 20-06-2013 08:19PM

Noisy eaters who eat with their mouths open, while smacking their lips.

endacl · 20-06-2013 08:21PM

People who chew gum.

Why? No idea. Just annoys me. No good reason.

zonEEE · 20-06-2013 08:30PM

People who don't have an open mind and cant see that there's usually two sides to every story.

endacl · 20-06-2013 08:31PM

zonEEE wrote: »

People who don't have an open mind and cant see that there's usually two sides to every story.

Only two? That's quite closed minded of you I must say.

zonEEE · 20-06-2013 08:33PM

endacl wrote: »

Only two? That's quite closed minded of you I must say.

"Usually"

Learn to read.

20-06-2013 08:35PM

zonEEE wrote: »

"Usually"

Learn to read.

Jaysis chill, mr 'open-minded' :pac:

What automatically makes you disrespect someone?

Comments