Guest posts by airframe

1

Humor / In capitalist America...

« on: October 20, 2010, 08:34:07 am »

2

Religion / Re: Responses to a few common arguments

« on: October 17, 2010, 11:38:05 pm »

If gravity was weaker, then all matter in the universe would disperse out into infinity. Again, making it weaker beyond that makes no difference on the end result.

So what we have is a finite range in which life is feasable, over an infinite possible range of values.

Clearly there is no infinite range of possible values, since universe would disperse is gravity was too weak and collapse if it was too strong.
 And is there any quarantee that universe will not collapse or disperse as it is?

I'm kind of interested what is it that you would consider to be logical atheistic position?

3

Religion / Re: Is belief in Relgion dangerous?

« on: July 27, 2010, 12:03:07 pm »

I'm not trying to be rude, it's just that some of the things people are casually discussing here are making me really, really uncomfortable. Try reading through some of the posts in this section, but switch out religious/christian/muslim/jewish (or whatever) for "atheist" and pretend they were talking about you. Do they still seem reasonable?

In short, yes. Religions don't need any special protection.

I just assumed you meant nazis because it fitted well what you were implying without actually saying it. Wouldn't be anything I haven't heard, same with communists. While I don't mind it and it's quite farfetched, it bugs that religions aren't as easily subjected to same critizism that atheism is.

4

Religion / Re: Why all the venom?

« on: July 27, 2010, 10:20:02 am »

I was a member of a christian religion before I decided I don't want to be part of it. How many religious people have tried living without religion?

5

Religion / Re: Is belief in Relgion dangerous?

« on: July 25, 2010, 06:27:01 am »

Notably, the Cold War, which is definitely the closest humanity has ever come to wiping itself out, was between the US (a country that claims neutrality on religious grounds, though that's debatable) and the USSR, which was one of the few officially atheistic states ever to exist. They even enforced atheism by law.

Incidentally wasn't the USSR also known for repressing people and a heavy emphasis on big brother/secret police type policies?

Just saying, there aren't to many examples of purely atheistic states out there, and some of the ones that are out there aren't exactly shining stars of freedom, peace and happiness.

Religious beliefs are frequently corrupted/manipulated for propaganda purposes, but blaming wars on religion is like blaming the USA's foreign policy on eagles.

"Doing away with" religion has been tried before. It's usually called genocide. It hasn't turned out well in the past.

Atheism is just lack of religious beliefs, it's not communism. Also, lack of beliefs doesn't imply wanting exterminate all religious believers. Your probably talking about Hitlers final solution where nazis tried to exterminate one religious group. Not all of them, one of them.
Soviets tried invading Finland but I would hardly say it was because of religious convictions or the lack of them.

6

Religion / Re: Evolution and Intelligent Design

« on: July 24, 2010, 05:53:33 pm »

@airframe: Two instances of hostility throughout all recorded history hardly make for a compelling case to blanket label all religions as hostile, even if we take it at face value that both of those instances are solely caused by religion (which I really don't buy for a moment). And I could just as easily cite cases of atheistic institutions that caused wide-scale persecution and wars.

Simply put, yes, you do need to back that up. Possibly on a different thread since it's off-topic for this one.

Two instances througout all recorded history? I'm sure you can think more yourself. Jihads, maybe? I'm not going to even try to list all instances.  Yes, some might have happened even without religions, but often hostilities have been driven by religious beliefs.

No not all religions are hostile, but we're really talking about christianity when discussing about ID.


@TheOwner: So you think not all things in the bible sound right? Sounds like you are picking which bibllical rules to follow and which not, and deciding it by yourself.

7

WoE Archive / Re: Cities and Towns: Names

« on: July 24, 2010, 04:39:21 pm »

 Some ideas, maybe you like them.

  Kalmisto
  Tuonela
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuonela
  Loviatar
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loviatar_%28mythology%29 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loviatar_%28mythology%29)

  Ilmatar

  Mielikki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mielikki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mielikki)

  Turisas
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iku-Turso (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iku-Turso)

8

Religion / Re: Evolution and Intelligent Design

« on: July 24, 2010, 03:23:03 pm »

Well, religion is characterized by make believe and tradional outgroup hostility. Often dividing everything into your own religious sect and "others".


I think use of vs is somewhat appropriate when talking about evolution and intelligent design.

*cough cough* speaking of outgroup hostility . . . seriously though, you can't just make bold accusations like "religion is characterized by make believe and tradional outgroup hostility" without even citing any supporting evidence. Innocent until proven guilty and all that, no?

If you're worried about going off topic with your argument there is a thread for that.

and as the rest of my post indicated, most authorities on either ID or evolution find the two to be compatible, so why would "vs" be appropriate?

Anyways, when I originally used the term "vs" it was in referrence to lawlmaster's post stating that it was him "vs" other people, and I was trying to indicate that I didn't think a "me versus them" attitude was constructive when trying to discuss something rationally.

How about crusades or the inquisition? Do I really need back that up?

9

Religion / Re: Evolution and Intelligent Design

« on: July 23, 2010, 08:19:25 pm »

religion and anything is incompatible.

Well, religion is characterized by make believe and tradional outgroup hostility. Often dividing everything into your own religious sect and "others".


I think use of vs is somewhat appropriate when talking about evolution and intelligent design.

10

General Discussion / Re: FAVE DRAGON?????

« on: July 23, 2010, 05:43:27 pm »

I happen to like dragonfly, it doesn't make a too big number of of itself.

11

Religion / Re: Evolution and Intelligent Design

« on: July 22, 2010, 05:22:06 pm »

@Puppychow
Well, since Im a Christian, I believe that common designer to be God.  Ive come to this conclusion because of personal convictions.

You probabaly ment "@airframe".

I honestly hanve no idea what you mean by that. You simply decided that everything has been created by a god?

12

Religion / Re: Evolution and Intelligent Design

« on: July 21, 2010, 04:39:00 pm »

Many Chrsitians believe that God guided evolution, me on the other hand, see common designer instead of common descent when I look at biology, and archeology.

If you think of natural selection as a designer, then yes, it's same for all living things.

But how you come to think it's a god.

?? Im confused as to what you are asking.
[/quote]
Well, what do you think this commmon designer is and how did you come to that conclusion.