US presidential election 2012 - Page 69 - MensTennisForums.com
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #1021 of 1174 (permalink) Old 11-02-2012, 10:12 PM
Registered User
 
GSMnadal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Netherlands
Age: 24
Posts: 16,533
                     
Re: US presidential election 2012

What really bothered me is that, in the school I attended, they sort of laughed at the ideas of the Romans and Greeks with their multiple gods as being 'stupid' and 'blasphemous', while they diehard preached the word of 'the one true god' as the absolute truth.

Come on, there isn't any more evidence for that as there is for the other cases. But, this isn't really about the elections, so I'll stop now

RAFAEL NADAL

'Rafael Nadal is the best ever' - John McEnroe

1 AO - 9 RG - 2 W - 2 USO
GSMnadal is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #1022 of 1174 (permalink) Old 11-02-2012, 10:15 PM
Registered User
 
abraxas21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Age: 30
Posts: 13,032
                     
Re: US presidential election 2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Har-Tru View Post
We should teach children the truth. Period.

And in a science class (which is where evolution is taught) science is the only thing that should be taught.
son, we aren't even close to figure out what the truth is about anything.

the evolution theory is like the name says, just a theory. the one that's more widely accepted given the scientific proof it has compared to others but still is, nevertheless, a theory that will probably be ditched or at the very least adjusted in the next couple of centuries. on this subject, i recommend reading thomas khun's great book "the structure of scientific revolutions".

abraxas21 is offline  
post #1023 of 1174 (permalink) Old 11-02-2012, 10:19 PM
Registered User
 
abraxas21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Age: 30
Posts: 13,032
                     
Re: US presidential election 2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by GSMnadal View Post
What really bothered me is that, in the school I attended, they sort of laughed at the ideas of the Romans and Greeks with their multiple gods as being 'stupid' and 'blasphemous', while they diehard preached the word of 'the one true god' as the absolute truth.
greeks and romans had a very rich religious concept of their gods. As a Christian man myself, I can't help but to be totally amazed by it.

Reading their thoughts, i find it amazing how some diehard atheists can think that religion is unnecessary or stupid. the idea of religion must be one of the greatest inventions of humankind.


Last edited by abraxas21; 11-02-2012 at 10:27 PM.
abraxas21 is offline  
post #1024 of 1174 (permalink) Old 11-02-2012, 10:43 PM
Registered User
 
Tommy_Vercetti's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Age: 33
Posts: 1,564
                     
Re: US presidential election 2012

Seeing that religion was responsible for drastically halting the advancement of society in Europe and the Middle East. I would strongly disagree. At least in antiquity, their religion didn't stop them from scientific research and cultural advancement. Unlike Christianity and Islam in particular.

Signature Censored
Tommy_Vercetti is offline  
post #1025 of 1174 (permalink) Old 11-02-2012, 11:29 PM
Registered User
 
Nidhogg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,772
                     
Re: US presidential election 2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by abraxas21 View Post
son, we aren't even close to figure out what the truth is about anything.

the evolution theory is like the name says, just a theory. the one that's more widely accepted given the scientific proof it has compared to others but still is, nevertheless, a theory that will probably be ditched or at the very least adjusted in the next couple of centuries. on this subject, i recommend reading thomas khun's great book "the structure of scientific revolutions".
Quote:
Originally Posted by abraxas21 View Post
greeks and romans had a very rich religious concept of their gods. As a Christian man myself, I can't help but to be totally amazed by it.

Reading their thoughts, i find it amazing how some diehard atheists can think that religion is unnecessary or stupid. the idea of religion must be one of the greatest inventions of humankind.
This is silly on so many levels. Firstly, the theory of evolution is about as obvious as the theory of gravity. Evolution is just a word which explains what you get when you mix dynamic life in a dynamic world and let it simmer. Cue the forces of mutation and all life's will to live and spread its genes, and there you go. Adaptation. Hardly something magical, would you say?

It's fun to see you being near certain that it will be scrapped in the future. Myself I highly doubt it, but who knows. Maybe the Earth's gravity is just in our heads as well.

As for theories being adjusted and improved over time? Yeah, have you ever heard of the word science and how that works?

I'll make this easy for you:

http://i.imgur.com/FuqZV.png

Religion came about partly because our intellect evolved to the extent that we started to seek and feel a desire for a deeper meaning to life. If that's your thing, fine. I don't really mind people being spiritual on a personal level.

The idea that it could substitute and should deserve as much place as empirical knowledge when it comes to describe the world, however, is beyond stupid. Faith has nothing to do with knowledge.
Nidhogg is offline  
post #1026 of 1174 (permalink) Old 11-02-2012, 11:39 PM
RAVE ON
 
buddyholly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: LUBBOCK TX
Posts: 15,771
                     
Re: US presidential election 2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by abraxas21 View Post
son, we aren't even close to figure out what the truth is about anything.

the evolution theory is like the name says, just a theory. the one that's more widely accepted given the scientific proof it has compared to others but still is, nevertheless, a theory that will probably be ditched or at the very least adjusted in the next couple of centuries. on this subject, i recommend reading thomas khun's great book "the structure of scientific revolutions".
You certainly aren't, gramps.

We know gravity is a fact and the theory of gravity explains it. The theory is an explanation of the fact. When we talk of the theory of Gravity we are not talking about whether or not gravity exists.

We now know evolution is a fact. Darwin's theory was an attempt to explain that fact. He knew evolution was a fact and used natural selection as the foundation for his explanation of the fact. He did not have all the DNA information that we have today that makes the explanation of the fact so elegant and simple. When we talk about Darwin's Theory we are not talking about whether or not evolution exists. We are talking about how it works.

PS I guess Nidhogg and I were writing at the same time.

JOIN THE CHURCH OF THE FLYING SPAGHETTI MONSTER TODAY
buddyholly is offline  
post #1027 of 1174 (permalink) Old 11-03-2012, 12:19 AM
-LIFETIME MEMBER-
 
Har-Tru's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Germany
Age: 30
Posts: 20,524
                     
Re: US presidential election 2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimnik View Post
The question was "what should be taught in schools", not "what should be taught in science class".
The original question referred to evolution, which is a scientific theory.
Har-Tru is offline  
post #1028 of 1174 (permalink) Old 11-03-2012, 12:26 AM
-LIFETIME MEMBER-
 
Har-Tru's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Germany
Age: 30
Posts: 20,524
                     
Re: US presidential election 2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by abraxas21 View Post
son, we aren't even close to figure out what the truth is about anything.

the evolution theory is like the name says, just a theory. the one that's more widely accepted given the scientific proof it has compared to others but still is, nevertheless, a theory that will probably be ditched or at the very least adjusted in the next couple of centuries. on this subject, i recommend reading thomas khun's great book "the structure of scientific revolutions".
You have no idea what you're talking about, son. As Nidhogg and buddyholly already pointed out, your concept of theory does not correspond to the scientific meaning of the word "theory", as in theory of gravity, germ theory, theory of relativity or theory of evolution.
Har-Tru is offline  
post #1029 of 1174 (permalink) Old 11-03-2012, 12:30 AM
Registered User
 
Tommy_Vercetti's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Age: 33
Posts: 1,564
                     
Re: US presidential election 2012

Most of the major religions preach that the world is only thousands of years old. That's a basic belief. Which is complete and total bullshit. Anyone who can simply try and dismiss that or make excuses is only kidding themselves. Which is what they all do. Because to actually believe that is to believe the dinosaurs never existed and what not. So they talk around that and ignore that part of their "faith". Which just shows how deluded people can be.

I remember when I was a kid and decided to look into religion, it took me about one weekend to realize that it was all just superstitious nonsense. I think I was 10 at the time and nothing has ever changed my mind on the subjects, only reinforced it. How people can be against abortion, stem cell research, gay rights or believe that society should pay out the ass to take care of capital criminals rather than executing them because it's up to God to decide all that is just beyond the pale. And this is who the Republicans have been forced to pander to. Teddy Roosevelt has to be turning in his grave.

Signature Censored
Tommy_Vercetti is offline  
post #1030 of 1174 (permalink) Old 11-03-2012, 02:16 AM
Registered User
 
abraxas21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Age: 30
Posts: 13,032
                     
Re: US presidential election 2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nidhogg View Post
This is silly on so many levels. Firstly, the theory of evolution is about as obvious as the theory of gravity. Evolution is just a word which explains what you get when you mix dynamic life in a dynamic world and let it simmer. Cue the forces of mutation and all life's will to live and spread its genes, and there you go. Adaptation. Hardly something magical, would you say?

It's fun to see you being near certain that it will be scrapped in the future. Myself I highly doubt it, but who knows. Maybe the Earth's gravity is just in our heads as well.

As for theories being adjusted and improved over time? Yeah, have you ever heard of the word science and how that works?

I'll make this easy for you:

http://i.imgur.com/FuqZV.png

Religion came about partly because our intellect evolved to the extent that we started to seek and feel a desire for a deeper meaning to life. If that's your thing, fine. I don't really mind people being spiritual on a personal level.

The idea that it could substitute and should deserve as much place as empirical knowledge when it comes to describe the world, however, is beyond stupid. Faith has nothing to do with knowledge.
Quote:
Originally Posted by buddyholly View Post
You certainly aren't, gramps.

We know gravity is a fact and the theory of gravity explains it. The theory is an explanation of the fact. When we talk of the theory of Gravity we are not talking about whether or not gravity exists.

We now know evolution is a fact. Darwin's theory was an attempt to explain that fact. He knew evolution was a fact and used natural selection as the foundation for his explanation of the fact. He did not have all the DNA information that we have today that makes the explanation of the fact so elegant and simple. When we talk about Darwin's Theory we are not talking about whether or not evolution exists. We are talking about how it works.

PS I guess Nidhogg and I were writing at the same time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Har-Tru View Post
You have no idea what you're talking about, son. As Nidhogg and buddyholly already pointed out, your concept of theory does not correspond to the scientific meaning of the word "theory", as in theory of gravity, germ theory, theory of relativity or theory of evolution.
quite funny. as khun himself explained, any attempt to show that a widely accepted theory could be wrong has been historically attacked by all fronts, esp by the closed minded ones.

gotta split now. i'll address the "gravity comparison" tomorrow

abraxas21 is offline  
post #1031 of 1174 (permalink) Old 11-03-2012, 03:29 AM
the pirate queen.
 
Pirata.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: usa
Age: 28
Posts: 13,370
                     
Re: US presidential election 2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tommy_Vercetti View Post
Seeing that religion was responsible for drastically halting the advancement of society in Europe and the Middle East. I would strongly disagree. At least in antiquity, their religion didn't stop them from scientific research and cultural advancement. Unlike Christianity and Islam in particular.
Uh, weren't the Islamic Moors pretty much the most scientifically advanced culture in the Medieval period?

Rafael Nadal & Novak Djokovic: The Evoulution of a Handshake
federer ferrer wawrinka raonic flopez istomin mannarino pospisil
verdasco

Quote:
Originally Posted by QuitYerWhining View Post
Ever trolled, ever failed, no matter.
Post again, troll again, troll harder.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clay Death View Post
mods drag this thread outside and have several spotted hyenas shit on it for 4 straight days. you may have to bribe the hyenas but they will shit on it.
Pirata. is offline  
post #1032 of 1174 (permalink) Old 11-03-2012, 10:31 AM
-LIFETIME MEMBER-
 
Har-Tru's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Germany
Age: 30
Posts: 20,524
                     
Re: US presidential election 2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by abraxas21 View Post
quite funny. as khun himself explained, any attempt to show that a widely accepted theory could be wrong has been historically attacked by all fronts, esp by the closed minded ones.

gotta split now. i'll address the "gravity comparison" tomorrow
On the contrary, Nidhogg has stated very clearly scientific theories can be adjusted as new evidence comes along. And yes, scientific theories are, by definition, subject to be proven wrong, even entirely wrong. All you need is evidence that shows them to be wrong.

Which stands in stark contrast to religious "theories", which are not based on evidence and are therefore worthless for all practical purposes. A theory that can explain everything actually explains nothing.
Har-Tru is offline  
post #1033 of 1174 (permalink) Old 11-03-2012, 10:32 AM
-LIFETIME MEMBER-
 
Har-Tru's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Germany
Age: 30
Posts: 20,524
                     
Re: US presidential election 2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pirata. View Post
Uh, weren't the Islamic Moors pretty much the most scientifically advanced culture in the Medieval period?
Yes. Like a millenium ago.
Har-Tru is offline  
post #1034 of 1174 (permalink) Old 11-03-2012, 12:50 PM
Registered User
 
Nidhogg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,772
                     
Re: US presidential election 2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by abraxas21 View Post
quite funny. as khun himself explained, any attempt to show that a widely accepted theory could be wrong has been historically attacked by all fronts, esp by the closed minded ones.

gotta split now. i'll address the "gravity comparison" tomorrow
Nice try, and you're completely missing the point. It doesn't even matter if evolution eventually would turn out to be disproven in the future as it right now is the by far most plausible theory which has been formulated in a scientific manner. If you have an explanation which you deem more credible, by all means hook us up. I'd be impressed if it tops something which has been under intense scientific scrutiny for 150 years.

Also note that like most ideas in their infancy it started out as more primitive than its current form. People believed in "missing links", so if we evolved from apes they wanted to find evidence of a creature half-ape / half-human. They had no broader understanding of how many changes over time could lead to a myriad of new species evolving depending on their niche.

Kuhn is saying that personal investment as well as forces that are reluctant to change can get in the way of ideals. Well, duh? You want a good historic example of that in the scientific field?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bone_Wars

Nothing is perfect and fall proof when humans are involved in the equation. Is that your point? Science and faith still doesn't compare in this regard. Science revolves around coming up with an idea based on evidence and then continually try it against all new evidence. The core and strength of this philosophy is that it's dynamic and pragmatic, as the theories that are formed are merely a manifestation of the scientific mindset.

Faith is based on a static idea which isn't grounded in reality and revolves around that idea to then never be questioned or disproven no matter the evidence. "The lord works in mysterious ways."

See the difference?

By all means, have at it with the comparison of gravity and evolution. I can't wait.
Nidhogg is offline  
post #1035 of 1174 (permalink) Old 11-03-2012, 03:08 PM
Registered User
 
Lopez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Age: 29
Posts: 7,481
                     
Re: US presidential election 2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pirata. View Post
Uh, weren't the Islamic Moors pretty much the most scientifically advanced culture in the Medieval period?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Har-Tru View Post
Yes. Like a millenium ago.
Yeah it's sad to see the Arab world so far behind in something that they used to be ahead in. Nowadays we see the least amount of scientific publications and research in these countries IIRC.

After Nadal beat Monfils at Doha, before AO 2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by GSMnadal View Post
lol, who will beat him? Wawrinka? Berdych? Gulbis? Rosol? Federer?

Only Del Potro can take him out before the semis, and he won't. Nadal is winning the AO, bet your house on it.
Somewhere out there, there is a homeless person who once took betting advice from GSMnadal
Lopez is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the MensTennisForums.com forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome