Old Gold Posted January 10, 2007 Report Share Posted January 10, 2007 *resumes hostilities with The Claptonites*Haha! Post of the year, easy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Posted January 10, 2007 Report Share Posted January 10, 2007 Namely...?Wiki has all the answers! Here is a list of some good old fashion "my religion is better than your religion" type wars:List of religious wars - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaOf course, if you wanted a list of the conflicts where religion has played a significant role (the Troubles in Northern Ireland, on-going Israeli/Palestinian conflict etc) then that would much more difficult to list, not to mention more contentious.Has religion caused lots of wars? Yes. Has it been responsible for more wars than anything else? No, and to prove just that here is yet another, somewhat grim, list of all major conflicts and the death tolls they have inflicted on the populace of the world throughout history: List of wars and disasters by death toll - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hog Posted January 10, 2007 Report Share Posted January 10, 2007 Wiki has all the answers! Here is a list of some good old fashion "my religion is better than your religion" type wars:List of religious wars - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaOf course, if you wanted a list of the conflicts where religion has played a significant role (the Troubles in Northern Ireland, on-going Israeli/Palestinian conflict etc) then that would much more difficult to list, not to mention more contentious.Has religion caused lots of wars? Yes. Has it been responsible for more wars than anything else? No, and to prove just that here is yet another, somewhat grim, list of all major conflicts and the death tolls they have inflicted on the populace of the world throughout history: List of wars and disasters by death toll - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaOuch, WW2 must of stung a bit! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Posted January 10, 2007 Report Share Posted January 10, 2007 The God Delusion could have been written by any aggrieved teenager with a laptop and a grudge. You've evidently not read the book then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AKMartin Posted January 11, 2007 Report Share Posted January 11, 2007 "You've evidently not read the book then."Here's what I didn't say:The God Delusion could have been written by any aggrieved teenager with a laptop and a grudgeHere's what I did say:Most of The God Delusion could have been written by any aggrieved teenager with a laptop and a grudgeI have read the book, and much of it is written in that decidedly sneering, subjective tone that is becoming Dawkins' trademark. So much for the calm, measured voice of science.AKM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GraemeC Posted January 11, 2007 Author Report Share Posted January 11, 2007 Ok...Prof. Richard Dawkins....I'm with you now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Gold Posted January 11, 2007 Report Share Posted January 11, 2007 I must admit that the God Delusion has a lot of presentation issues, such as the incredibley blunt title, the Dan Brown style front cover and the pretty harsh tone it takes.Still, it's not like Dawkins is trying to rope anybody into any sort of control like the authors of so many pro-religion books. I find the writing - although pretty cruel - very honest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TR!ΔNGL€ T€€TH Posted January 12, 2007 Report Share Posted January 12, 2007 *resumes hostilities with The Claptonites*Eric Clapton can suck my baws. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon Posted June 13, 2007 Report Share Posted June 13, 2007 I believe neither in God nor Clapton. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pogofish Posted June 19, 2007 Report Share Posted June 19, 2007 But dont they claim or reccon that he did this wonderous deed 4000 odd years ago? so where am i "a bit off".??Created in 4004BC it seems:And fossils date from the layers formed in flood, only 4350 years ago!From here:Behold the Creation Museum - a photoset on FlickrInteresting! o_O Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TR!ΔNGL€ T€€TH Posted June 19, 2007 Report Share Posted June 19, 2007 Cheers for that Pogofish, that's cleared things up nicely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lepeep Posted June 19, 2007 Report Share Posted June 19, 2007 I love those Christian examples of how science is wrong, by using science...the examples of the fossils, are all true enough, these "living fossils" have been embedded in mud (millions of years ago), just because they exist today...does that mean that they COULDN'T have been fossilised millions of years ago too?and note, they forget to put in the fossils that DON'T exist as living animals today...interesting "omission" that.there was a great article in the new scientist, with brilliant arguments. the best was, if these creationists think that science is shit, and the word of god is true...why do they use planes, cars, televisions etc?....they've all been "invented" due to sound scientific research...(or was that just god kindly steering scientists in the right direction, to "aid" our development (he doesn't "usually" intervene like that, does he...)gotta love that "mysterious ways" clause. They've got it all covered, good stuff = god's will, bad stuff = "he's testing you" (good old "kind" god : god = love (if you believe him (it) and follow all the orders you are given, and even then, that doesn't protect you from your mum getting cancer and dying, as that's another test)....I am rambling...so many points to make, and no point in it. Religion will always exist, so will science. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Addi Posted June 19, 2007 Report Share Posted June 19, 2007 I had trouble parsing your ramble because you didn't close a set of brackets on line 4. I had a software testing and analysis exam today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lepeep Posted June 19, 2007 Report Share Posted June 19, 2007 I knew I didn't close those parenthasis...but I was ranting...so I "switched off"...doh! - not good when arguing the "pro's and con's" of science Vs religion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GraemeC Posted February 25, 2008 Author Report Share Posted February 25, 2008 just re-read this thread....it was fun:popcorn: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Gold Posted February 25, 2008 Report Share Posted February 25, 2008 Simpler times... life's been great since God was proven wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GraemeC Posted February 26, 2008 Author Report Share Posted February 26, 2008 Simpler times... life's been great since God was proven wrong.Proven wrong?....was he/she/it...?Was it on the news?I missed that... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrT Posted February 26, 2008 Report Share Posted February 26, 2008 I'm going to make a guess here and say..."Thou can't believe in what thou has't never seen with thou's own een"?Do you believe in wind? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GraemeC Posted February 26, 2008 Author Report Share Posted February 26, 2008 Do you believe in wind?I do...After 12 pints of Guinness and an egg Vidaloo...o_O Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrT Posted February 26, 2008 Report Share Posted February 26, 2008 The reason I started this thread was the worrying trend of US government on insisting that they teach kids that god created the heavens and earth and all things in it in 6 days as actual fact, this now appears to be creeping into the curriculum of UK schools.This of course renders the thinking of Darwin and all discoveries by scientists before and after his amazing revelations as lies....I don't think so.And another point, can any believers out there (thats if your keen to pop your head above the battlements) explain how someone was able to write the books of Genesis 'in chronological detail' when there was no fucker there...??Have they not always tought this in UK schools seeing as this is considered to be a Christian country? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrT Posted February 26, 2008 Report Share Posted February 26, 2008 have you not seen the bit in the borat film where the christian guy is going on about he 'is what he is' and didn't evolve from monkeys? seriously though, while i agree that teaching the creation parts of the bible as literal truth doesn't deem 'all scientists' liars it's still at odds with evolution. i don't claim to be that familiar with the bible, but as far as i recall, it claims that god personally created adam and eve; they were the first humans and we're directly descended from them. people who know anything about evolution know we evolved from monkeys or apes or whatever. thus, people who take the bible's account of creation literaly, think the theory of evolution is telling porkies. theres a reason these american fundamentalist types banned teaching darwin's theories in schools and at least one person was indeed prosecuted for doing it (ok this was in the 1920s but origin of the species was published in 1859 or thereabouts). also, i dunno many 'natural philosophers' but Darwin had huge problems reconciling his discoveries with his (previous) religious beliefs. admittedly, the fact he risked being accused of blasphemy and whatnot could hardly have eased his state of mind. minor point anyway, whether he felt good about it or not doesn't change the fact his theory is at odds with the adam and eve myth.also, no offence but i think you're analogies are pish. i see what you're saying (i think it's rubbish, but then most likely so do you; unless you're a christian fundamentalist you're just putting this forward for arguments sake) but you could just say 'he's god, he can make the world look however old he wants too, cos he's a supremely powered being/ wizard.' i don't see how it compares to playing a video game. if you were half an hour into a save then it's irrelevant whether you've being sitting their for 30mins or not... definitely not quite the same as faking the difference between 6 days and a few billion years. if you tried to fake you were 100 hours played into a game without saving then maybe but it'd be easy to tell: if you're lying dead in a pile of your own shit you did it one go, if not you loaded a save... waste of time to type this bit... o_ODidn't darwin become a Christian and say all his theories were a load of bollocks before he died? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrT Posted February 26, 2008 Report Share Posted February 26, 2008 Heh. I prefer to trust things like, "carbon dating" and science over the words of a book written hundreds of years after the death of the alleged, "son of god" who historically came from a family of theives. Carbon dating is well known to be completely wrong a lot of the time. There is far too much physical evidence on the planet that lines up with the Bible to completely discount it's content. Many scientists use it as a guide for their research. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Posted February 26, 2008 Report Share Posted February 26, 2008 Have they not always tought this in UK schools seeing as this is considered to be a Christian country?Isn't the problem that some US schools teach creationism instead of evolution in science subjects, not teaching it alongside evolution in a seperate theology based subject like RE which we get over here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrT Posted February 26, 2008 Report Share Posted February 26, 2008 Isn't the problem that some US schools teach creationism instead of evolution in science subjects, not teaching it alongside evolution in a seperate theology based subject like RE which we get over here.I believe Creationism has been banned in most US schools except for those that are Christian schools. I think this is just as bad as not allowing other subjects to be taught alongside. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lepeep Posted February 26, 2008 Report Share Posted February 26, 2008 Carbon dating is well known to be completely wrong a lot of the time. There is far too much physical evidence on the planet that lines up with the Bible to completely discount it's content. Many scientists use it as a guide for their research.ha ha!....that's pretty funny.I forgot the bible came before nature.Carbon Dating: Why you cant trust it or other radiometric dating methods. creation evolution young earth evidence old earth biblethis is funny too, how "carbon dating is wrong"...(written by a creationist). (i love the "citations" at the bottom)...{edit}"The biggest problem with dating methods is the assumption that the rate of decay has remained constant. There is no way to prove it. In fact there is much evidence to show this rate has not remained constant, and that it is decaying quicker and quicker. Just what the bible, and a Devolution and degenerating model of the earth would predict. "he he..."sin" is responsible for carbon 14 decay "speeding up"...of course! (god, he is a tricky prankster, eh!)tell me...do you have a watch? - is it a quartz one? (I hope you don't believe it's right then?)...faith, and science should actually never cross paths, especially on an ill educated web forum, we're all hardly experts in theology or science (bar a few exceptions...who probably (rightly) can't be arse posting in this "debate"). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.