BIGDAN Posted June 17, 2011 Share Posted June 17, 2011 as i have said elsewhere on this forum ( i think in this thread ? ), this line of thinking usually makes people with other points of view ridicule this view. i am guessing that there are a few forum members who see me as a bit of a crackpot after expressing my views. Dont worry Slave, if you are a nutter you'll be the last to know.. Kind Regards, Danny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slave to zep Posted June 17, 2011 Share Posted June 17, 2011 Dont worry Slave, if you are a nutter you'll be the last to know.. Kind Regards, Danny thanks. that has really helped me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silver Rider Posted June 17, 2011 Share Posted June 17, 2011 He's not alone. It's lunchtime when the Adventure Photo Tours SUV pulls into the parking lot at The A'Le'Inn in Rachel and parks near a UFO parking space, alien mural and sign reading, "Earthlings Welcome." Langley, who is standing in front of the inn smoking, says he meets more people standing at this tourist destination than he would in the Atlanta airport. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ As the group eats lunch, A’Le’inn owner Connie West says that Rachel plays host to people of every shape, size and nationality. With seven rooms for lodging, the inn, restaurant and gift shop has no typical customer. “I’ve got people from all walks of life coming out here. Some pretty normal, some out there,” says West. “People bawl their eyes out — they’ve been waiting their whole life to be here. We are also a watering hole for the military, or anyone who comes down the highway.” vegas.com/attractions/outside_lasvegas/extraterrestrial Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIGDAN Posted June 17, 2011 Share Posted June 17, 2011 thanks. that has really helped me No thanks necessary, always a pleasure to help the mentaly challenged, well i'm mentally challenged too ya know? Kind Regards, Danny PS, Noah built the first Aircraft Carrier 2500 years before any Aircraft were invented, how far seeing is that? He called it the "Ark Royal". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slave to zep Posted June 17, 2011 Share Posted June 17, 2011 No thanks necessary, always a pleasure to help the mentaly challenged, well i'm mentally challenged too ya know? Kind Regards, Danny PS, Noah built the first Aircraft Carrier 2500 years before any Aircraft were invented, how far seeing is that? He called it the "Ark Royal". are you saying i am mentally challenged? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIGDAN Posted June 17, 2011 Share Posted June 17, 2011 are you saying i am mentally challenged? NO, I AM. Kind Regards, Danny PS, You must keep up with my humour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slave to zep Posted June 17, 2011 Share Posted June 17, 2011 NO, I AM. Kind Regards, Danny PS, You must keep up with my humour. sorry. ok, i'll try. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIGDAN Posted June 17, 2011 Share Posted June 17, 2011 sorry. ok, i'll try. Not your fault, its all mine as usual, trying to be funny, and not making it. Kind Regards, Danny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beatbo Posted June 17, 2011 Share Posted June 17, 2011 Not your fault, its all mine as usual, trying to be funny, and not making it. Kind Regards, Danny i laughed! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweetredwine Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 thanks for the link, sweetredwine. i hope you didn't think i was ridiculing the amish, i wasn't. i just thought that they didn't use technology, and that if you were suggesting that the amish is the way to go, then you would have to give up your computer, that's all. i don't ridicule people for their beliefs, and i would ask the same in return. i may not agree with your beliefs, but i would never ridicule you ( or anybody else ). Maybe the Amish should give up their new technologies ... Amish sexter busted for buggy sex invite to girl, 12 ... and maybe we all should, considering that the new technologies seem to do more harm than good lately -- That is, if we truly care about our children. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIGDAN Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 Hi All, Do i detect a get out of jail card being played here? "Can religious teachings prove evolution to be true? "One scientist has decided to use creation science to test the validity of evolution. Because, he says, if it turns out that creation science proves evolution, then by its own logic, it will have to reject its own canon of research that previously denied it. It’s a clever idea, because it once again puts evidence, rather than faith, at the centre of the debate." http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/wondermonkey/2011/07/faith-versus-science-does-crea.shtml Regards, Danny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweetredwine Posted November 4, 2011 Share Posted November 4, 2011 my best option? how about everyone in the world letting go of the whole idea of religion, and concentrating on just getting along with eachother, before we destroy the planet completely. the amish limit the use of the internet? i thought they didn't use technology at all? my mistake, i thought their whole idea was to live as people did back in the days before electricity, let alone the internet, but i was just supposing that, so if i'm wrong about that i'm sorry. that is was my last comment was in reference to also, that i didn't think the amish way allowed alcohol, but again, i could be wrong about that too. i am open and honest, love. i don't have a motive for being on this planet, i was just born here. do you? Well, Lady Gaga is in Rome today, but that's probably not going to help people get along with each other ... The Amish have been ridiculed and abused for ages, but they do have good ideas, please read this link Do the Amish use computers and the internet? Well, I do hope to make myself, my family, society and this world a better place to live in - somehow - but it sure isn't easy. I sure don't want to be a slave or just exist! People need to wake up and realize that we can't live like Epicurus or Osho if we hope to hold our world together, because marriage and pollitical office are necessary on this planet - where there are also children. ... and evidently the Tibetans don't want to be slaves either http://edition.cnn.c....html?hpt=hp_t2 ... The sad Truth is, if it weren't for saints and martyrs, this world would be nothing but and there would be no reason to really love and because there would be no hope for change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mastress of procrastinate Posted November 4, 2011 Share Posted November 4, 2011 I am definitely not a communist, yet I have to quote Marx: "Religion is opium for the masses". Faith is something else, though. Intelligent design just seems like a load of rotten garbage to me. Evolution happens everyday, or how else would certain types of bacteria become immune to antibiotics? Technically, one could deny evolution, but it wouldn't make no sense. But accepting science does not necessarily clash with being a religious person, evolution just describes how life evolved, the beginning, for many, was initialised by a god. But arguing who has the right religion is pointless. Someone who is convinced of their believes being right won't change them just because someone else has different believes they consider right for themselves. Also, does it affect my life at all whether my neighbour is praying? No. People can do whatever tickles their fancy, believe whatever helps them and makes them feel better. As long as they don't break any laws, let them be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greenman Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 In my opinion science often crosses over in some ways to a religion because it takes some monumental assumptions which could only be based on faith to arrive at their speculations. Where did the primordial atom come from? How is the transition from primate to man proven when there are gaps in the fossil record that span somtimes tens of thousans of years? (in that case the ancient astronaut theory could make more sense). And the other thing that often strikes me about science is the way in which some very large egos are so invested in a "theory" that they defend it like a faith. In that respect they remind me of religious leaders who will see it only one way, because to back track would mean the foundations of the theory may be wrong too. The clear difference though is that science has a clear and well defined(but also continually evolving) methodology designed to uncover the truth with as high a degree of certainy as possible. It can be missused of course and its methods or terminology co opted by individuals/groups who do not follow its standards but the standards are there. Religion on the other hand is just the opposite, the central tenant of pretty much any religion is adherance to dogma. Many relgious individuals may seek out truth but when that truth goes agenst dogma its invarabley surpressed. I'd say just the opposite infact, the lack of faith in scienece is partly a result of the gap in knowledge between the general public and the well educated. The less knowledgeble make up the majority of the population so theres more money and power to be gained by feeding there ego's that their ignorance of scientific matters doesnt exist, espeically by relgion that it threatened by scienetific discoverys contridicting its dogma. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweetredwine Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 I am definitely not a communist, yet I have to quote Marx: "Religion is opium for the masses". Faith is something else, though. Intelligent design just seems like a load of rotten garbage to me. Evolution happens everyday, or how else would certain types of bacteria become immune to antibiotics? Technically, one could deny evolution, but it wouldn't make no sense. But accepting science does not necessarily clash with being a religious person, evolution just describes how life evolved, the beginning, for many, was initialised by a god. But arguing who has the right religion is pointless. Someone who is convinced of their believes being right won't change them just because someone else has different believes they consider right for themselves. Also, does it affect my life at all whether my neighbour is praying? No. People can do whatever tickles their fancy, believe whatever helps them and makes them feel better. As long as they don't break any laws, let them be. But ... what are the laws, and who is making them? That's exactly the problem between the Tibetans and the Chinese ... laws determine how people arrange their lives - how many hours they work, if/how/when/what they should study, and exactly how their day should be arranged: hours waking/sleeping/eating/relaxing/ etc. Laws also determine how your life should be lived - for example, they regulate personal consumption (especially alcohol and drugs) and form cultures deciding how many children one is permitted to have and how they will be raised - ... and the type of punishment one is expected to endure if laws are ignored or broken. For example, The world's leading executioner (China) is estimated to kill about as many prisoners in three days as does the U.S., the world's fifth-ranked, in a year ! http://www.theatlant...n-china/245520/ "... China has the largest population on Earth with 1.3 billion people; 5,000 executions would mean one in every 260,000 residents. In the U.S., the rate in 2010 was one in every 6.7 million. Iran and North Korea executed about one in every 300,000 and 460,000, respectively...." The idea that "People can do whatever tickles their fancy" isn't realistically "Chinese", and in fact (from http://www.kiiitv.co...self-immolation ) "If you protest in Tibet, more often than not you get arrested, or beaten up, sometimes tortured, sometimes you disappear, sometimes you die." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greenman Posted November 6, 2011 Share Posted November 6, 2011 I am definitely not a communist, yet I have to quote Marx: "Religion is opium for the masses". Faith is something else, though. I'd say the opposite, faith based on ignorance and not checked by morals is just as dangerous as relgion with communism as the most obvious example. The reality is that most communist regimes have ended up as pseudo religion promising an eathly "workers paradise" while they elivated the leader to godlike status, Stalin , Mao, Kim Il Sung etc. The Chinese presenese in Tibet and far wester China is simpley imperialism, whats changed since the days of Mao is that genocide has given way to more dipolmatically acceptable ethnic and cultural replacement. Millions of Chinese are encouraged to emigrate to these areas until they outnumber the locals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweetredwine Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 I'd say the opposite, faith based on ignorance and not checked by morals is just as dangerous as relgion with communism as the most obvious example. The reality is that most communist regimes have ended up as pseudo religion promising an eathly "workers paradise" while they elivated the leader to godlike status, Stalin , Mao, Kim Il Sung etc. The Chinese presenese in Tibet and far wester China is simpley imperialism, whats changed since the days of Mao is that genocide has given way to more dipolmatically acceptable ethnic and cultural replacement. Millions of Chinese are encouraged to emigrate to these areas until they outnumber the locals. ... but the Tibetans don't consider ethnic and cultural replacement to be diplomatically acceptable - http://www.savetibet...inese-crackdown "...By early July the authorities in Kardze indicated their alarm over the continuing peaceful actions by Tibetans in statements made in the state-run Ganzi Daily. Li Dao Ping, the Vice President of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference in Sichuan province, visited Kardze in early July, and was reported as saying that: “We should firmly smash separatist activities, firmly protect social stability and make an effort to equally develop all nationalities” ... According to the Ganzi Daily, Li visited a senior citizen center and a nomad resettlement home during his time in Kardze. Despite Kardze’s “autonomous” formal designation, in a clear message targeting dissent, Li emphasized the government’s demand to adhere to the Party’s plan for modernization through social stability, telling one resettled nomad that “If you work hard, you will have a brighter tomorrow”. So ... who's right, the Chinese or the Tibetans ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweetredwine Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 ... but the Tibetans don't consider ethnic and cultural replacement to be diplomatically acceptable - http://www.savetibet...inese-crackdown "...By early July the authorities in Kardze indicated their alarm over the continuing peaceful actions by Tibetans in statements made in the state-run Ganzi Daily. Li Dao Ping, the Vice President of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference in Sichuan province, visited Kardze in early July, and was reported as saying that: “We should firmly smash separatist activities, firmly protect social stability and make an effort to equally develop all nationalities” ... According to the Ganzi Daily, Li visited a senior citizen center and a nomad resettlement home during his time in Kardze. Despite Kardze’s “autonomous” formal designation, in a clear message targeting dissent, Li emphasized the government’s demand to adhere to the Party’s plan for modernization through social stability, telling one resettled nomad that “If you work hard, you will have a brighter tomorrow”. So ... who's right, the Chinese or the Tibetans ? ... and ... how has "the evolution of man" occurred - by pure chance or by the development of "superior worth" ("Intelligent design") - and if it has developed by "superior worth" what exactly is "superior worth" and how is it determined ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greenman Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 So ... who's right, the Chinese or the Tibetans ? Clearly the Tibetans, when I said "dipolmatically acceptable" I didnt mean "morally correct" just that its easier for the CPR to make sure Han Chinese dominate these areas and there resouces by immigration rather than genocide while maintaining dipolmatic and trade relations with the west. The reality is that todays "China" is an empire thats taken control of areas the Qing Empire had nominal sovereignty over a century ago, ruthless communism has given way to ruthless capitalism run for the benefit of those with the proper connections. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweetredwine Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 Clearly the Tibetans, when I said "dipolmatically acceptable" I didnt mean "morally correct" just that its easier for the CPR to make sure Han Chinese dominate these areas and there resouces by immigration rather than genocide while maintaining dipolmatic and trade relations with the west. The reality is that todays "China" is an empire thats taken control of areas the Qing Empire had nominal sovereignty over a century ago, ruthless communism has given way to ruthless capitalism run for the benefit of those with the proper connections. ... and ... how has "the evolution of man" occurred - by pure chance or by the development of "superior worth" ("Intelligent design") - and if it has developed by "superior worth" what exactly is "superior worth" and how is it determined ? So ... if evolutive survival - "superior worth" - is determined by the "proper connections", how did they get those? By working harder? Are they (the "proper connections") just inherited - or is there another way ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweetredwine Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 So ... if evolutive survival - "superior worth" - is determined by the "proper connections", how did they get those? By working harder? Are they (the "proper connections") just inherited - or is there another way ? If the right to evolve (evolutive survival) is determined by working harder - the Tibetans don't stand much of a chance ... and the rest of us might as well start learning how to live according to Chinese expectations too -- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweetredwine Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 If the right to evolve (evolutive survival) is determined by working harder - the Tibetans don't stand much of a chance ... and the rest of us might as well start learning how to live according to Chinese expectations too -- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweetredwine Posted December 22, 2011 Share Posted December 22, 2011 We are "made of stardust just like everything else that exists", but it's up to us if we choose to become "just planetary mold". And just because most people might think that "our function in the Universe is to do exactly what we're doing....use up every resource available" doesn't mean that everybody feels - or should feel - that way. No doubt that "In the end, you'll turn back into stardust, just like that little ant you may have just stepped on" - but where will you go? I've had dreams of much better places than the world we live in right now, but was told I had to "go back to this world" and finish my assignment to be able to deserve to go to the "better world" ... Funny thing is, many people would probably perceive the "better world" as less interesting - one didn't have to eat (there was no need to - no feelings of thirst to quench or hunger to satisfy either), there was no change of seasons or drastic weather, there was no illness, there was no aging, the people were all very nice, and there was no growth (no growing babies, children, teens, etc.). It was basically a world of "singles" who would hang around from time to time, exchanging partners and friends freely, feeling good and helping others feel good too - but nobody could ever produce children. So anyway, when I woke up I realized the true beauty about this world - the beauty of growth, the beauty of the children. Seems to me there are many people nowadays with conflicting emotions, they desire the "better world" but still want to hang around in "this world" -- how else could you explain the reality of new retirement communities like this one ... http://www.thevillages.com/videoPlayer/videoiFrame.asp?video=ComeVisitMikeGrzesik The Villages - Creating a Retirement Community where peoples dreams can come true ... that locate themselves only 57 miles from DisneyWorld ? Problem is, they aren't really making "this world" very much of a "better world" in the process ... And when precious children arelegally, repeatedly and unlimitedly abused by other children in daycare centers because their mothers prefer to leave them with strangers and work at unnecessary jobs rather than taking care of them personally in their own home http://www.dailymail...2-year-old.html - and everybody thinks such incredibly horrible disgusting behavior is "okay", that the only concern should be to remove the offending child/children from the daycare and return to "business as usual" - then human life should not exist on this planet. Period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweetredwine Posted December 24, 2011 Share Posted December 24, 2011 Going back to the beginning: No way of proving this one catagorically one way or the other. I've got to admit that I waver between,"When you see some of the appalling things going on in the world, how can there be a God?", to "When you look at all the diversity of life on the planet and all the real beauty all around us,surely it can't be the result of pure chance"... So ... what's our final decision? Is it Intelligent Design or Pure Chance? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wA_YmII8MYw Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweetredwine Posted December 24, 2011 Share Posted December 24, 2011 So ... what's our final decision? Is it Intelligent Design or Pure Chance? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wA_YmII8MYw (from Tao Te Ching chapter 25 http://acc6.its.brooklyn.cuny.edu/~phalsall/texts/taote-v3.html#25) There was something formless and perfect before the universe was born. It is serene. Empty. Solitary. Unchanging. Infinite. Eternally present. It is the mother of the universe. For lack of a better name, I call it the Tao. It flows through all things, inside and outside, and returns to the origin of all things. The Tao is great. The universe is great. Earth is great. Man is great. These are the four great powers. Man follows the earth. Earth follows the universe. The universe follows the Tao. The Tao follows only itself." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.