Discussion:
Has any book inspired you to take action?
(too old to reply)
a***@gmail.com
2020-03-30 23:04:31 UTC
Permalink
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course they can. Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried to emulate the actions of the protagonist?

Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why writers create characters who are moral role models.

But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.

Abhinav Lal

"Choose wisely"
Lynn McGuire
2020-03-30 23:20:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course they can. Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried to emulate the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why writers create characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.

Lynn
David Johnston
2020-03-31 00:01:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course they can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously.  Have you ever tried to emulate
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books.  Books inspire life.  That is why writers create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it on with his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in providing role
models.
a***@gmail.com
2020-03-31 00:11:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course they can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously.  Have you ever tried to emulate
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books.  Books inspire life.  That is why writers create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it on with his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in providing role
models.
Humanity has progressed morally, since the Bible was written. And authors cannot be held responsible for their reader's actions. Because we can experience our darkest fantasies, like violence, through fiction.

Abhinav Lal

"Nature is cruel"
Wolffan
2020-03-31 02:09:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course they can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried to emulate
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why writers create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it on with his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in providing role
models.
Hey, there’s more incest in the Bible than in Game of Thrones. Fewer
dragons, though.
Dorothy J Heydt
2020-03-31 02:35:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course they can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried to emulate
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why writers create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it on with his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in providing role
models.
Hey, there’s more incest in the Bible than in Game of Thrones.
Well, when you start with *two* humans, one of whom is a clone of
the other with one chromosome changed.....
--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
www.kithrup.com/~djheydt/
Wolffan
2020-03-31 03:12:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Wolffan
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course they can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried to emulate
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why writers create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it on with his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in providing role
models.
Hey, there’s more incest in the Bible than in Game of Thrones.
Well, when you start with *two* humans, one of whom is a clone of
the other with one chromosome changed.....
Hmm. So the Bible is a late Heinlein story...
o***@gmail.com
2020-03-31 21:35:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wolffan
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by Wolffan
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course they can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried to emulate
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why writers create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it on with his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in providing role
models.
Hey, there’s more incest in the Bible than in Game of Thrones.
Well, when you start with *two* humans, one of whom is a clone of
the other with one chromosome changed.....
Hmm. So the Bible is a late Heinlein story...
It is interesting that The Master made his thoughts evident in _Job_ .
Lynn McGuire
2020-03-31 18:00:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course they can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried to emulate
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why writers create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it on with his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in providing role
models.
Hey, there’s more incest in the Bible than in Game of Thrones.
Well, when you start with *two* humans, one of whom is a clone of
the other with one chromosome changed.....
And who did their kids marry XXXXX shack up with ?

Of course, that first person probably had perfect DNA, no bad stuff.

Lynn
J. Clarke
2020-03-31 21:11:05 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 31 Mar 2020 13:00:11 -0500, Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course they can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried to emulate
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why writers create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it on with his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in providing role
models.
Hey, there’s more incest in the Bible than in Game of Thrones.
Well, when you start with *two* humans, one of whom is a clone of
the other with one chromosome changed.....
And who did their kids marry XXXXX shack up with ?
Of course, that first person probably had perfect DNA, no bad stuff.
Friend of mine was a biblical scholar. His area of interest was the
first books of Genesis. He'd take a word, in Hebrew, and use his
computer to find everywhere else in the Bible that word appeared and
how it was used.

One of the things he got out of it was that there was more than one
word in Hebrew that referred to people. Adam and Eve were one kind of
people, the rest of us were another kind. What made one kind
different from another wasn't clear, but Adam and Eve were the first
of this new kind of person, not the first people of any kind. At
least that was his take on it after digging into it for 20 years or
so.

Note--he told me this a long time ago, my memory is shot, and he is
dead, so I can't provide details.
Lynn McGuire
2020-03-31 21:41:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
On Tue, 31 Mar 2020 13:00:11 -0500, Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course they can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried to emulate
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why writers create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it on with his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in providing role
models.
Hey, there’s more incest in the Bible than in Game of Thrones.
Well, when you start with *two* humans, one of whom is a clone of
the other with one chromosome changed.....
And who did their kids marry XXXXX shack up with ?
Of course, that first person probably had perfect DNA, no bad stuff.
Friend of mine was a biblical scholar. His area of interest was the
first books of Genesis. He'd take a word, in Hebrew, and use his
computer to find everywhere else in the Bible that word appeared and
how it was used.
One of the things he got out of it was that there was more than one
word in Hebrew that referred to people. Adam and Eve were one kind of
people, the rest of us were another kind. What made one kind
different from another wasn't clear, but Adam and Eve were the first
of this new kind of person, not the first people of any kind. At
least that was his take on it after digging into it for 20 years or
so.
Note--he told me this a long time ago, my memory is shot, and he is
dead, so I can't provide details.
Adam and Even did not have belly buttons.

My wife has a fake belly button. She had her original belly button
removed in 2005 as a part of cancer surgery.

Lynn
Paul S Person
2020-04-01 16:46:06 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 31 Mar 2020 16:41:29 -0500, Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by J. Clarke
On Tue, 31 Mar 2020 13:00:11 -0500, Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course they can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried to emulate
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why writers create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it on with his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in providing role
models.
Hey, there’s more incest in the Bible than in Game of Thrones.
Well, when you start with *two* humans, one of whom is a clone of
the other with one chromosome changed.....
And who did their kids marry XXXXX shack up with ?
Of course, that first person probably had perfect DNA, no bad stuff.
Friend of mine was a biblical scholar. His area of interest was the
first books of Genesis. He'd take a word, in Hebrew, and use his
computer to find everywhere else in the Bible that word appeared and
how it was used.
One of the things he got out of it was that there was more than one
word in Hebrew that referred to people. Adam and Eve were one kind of
people, the rest of us were another kind. What made one kind
different from another wasn't clear, but Adam and Eve were the first
of this new kind of person, not the first people of any kind. At
least that was his take on it after digging into it for 20 years or
so.
Note--he told me this a long time ago, my memory is shot, and he is
dead, so I can't provide details.
Adam and Even did not have belly buttons.
I ran across a reference to a book (sadly, I don't even recall the
source of the reference, never mind that of the book) which WikiPedia
(IIRC) summarized as, among other things, asserting that they /got/
belly buttons when they Fell because they were now in a world where
people had belly buttons.

That is, that one effect of the Fall was to turn them into people as
we know them. I would regard this as extremely speculative.

This book, BTW, was a /creationist/ defense of the Bible.
Post by Lynn McGuire
My wife has a fake belly button. She had her original belly button
removed in 2005 as a part of cancer surgery.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."
Wolffan
2020-03-31 21:26:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course they can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried to emulate
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why writers create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it on with his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in providing role
models.
Hey, there’s more incest in the Bible than in Game of Thrones.
Well, when you start with *two* humans, one of whom is a clone of
the other with one chromosome changed.....
And who did their kids marry XXXXX shack up with ?
Of course, that first person probably had perfect DNA, no bad stuff.
Lynn
So... what about Noah? Allegedly Ye Ark carried a crew of eight:
multi-century-old Noah, his equally elderly wife, their three sons, and the
sons’ wives. Lots and lots of incest to be had... And Noah was well after
the ‘first person’ with the ‘perfect DNA’. I won’t go into the two
different Flood stories (one had just two of each animal, one had two of the
‘unclean’ animals and _seven_ od the ‘clean’ ones. As the
clean/unclean division wasn’t handed down until Moses, exactly how did Noah
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder, rape, genocide,
atrocity, and more.
Lynn McGuire
2020-03-31 21:43:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course they can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried to emulate
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why writers create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it on with his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in providing role
models.
Hey, there’s more incest in the Bible than in Game of Thrones.
Well, when you start with *two* humans, one of whom is a clone of
the other with one chromosome changed.....
And who did their kids marry XXXXX shack up with ?
Of course, that first person probably had perfect DNA, no bad stuff.
Lynn
multi-century-old Noah, his equally elderly wife, their three sons, and the
sons’ wives. Lots and lots of incest to be had... And Noah was well after
the ‘first person’ with the ‘perfect DNA’. I won’t go into the two
different Flood stories (one had just two of each animal, one had two of the
‘unclean’ animals and _seven_ od the ‘clean’ ones. As the
clean/unclean division wasn’t handed down until Moses, exactly how did Noah
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder, rape, genocide,
atrocity, and more.
Just like the news of today.

Lynn
Wolffan
2020-04-01 21:07:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course they can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried to emulate
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why writers create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it on with his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in providing role
models.
Hey, there’s more incest in the Bible than in Game of Thrones.
Well, when you start with *two* humans, one of whom is a clone of
the other with one chromosome changed.....
And who did their kids marry XXXXX shack up with ?
Of course, that first person probably had perfect DNA, no bad stuff.
Lynn
multi-century-old Noah, his equally elderly wife, their three sons, and the
sons’ wives. Lots and lots of incest to be had... And Noah was well after
the ‘first person’ with the ‘perfect DNA’. I won’t go into the two
different Flood stories (one had just two of each animal, one had two of the
‘unclean’ animals and _seven_ od the ‘clean’ ones. As the
clean/unclean division wasn’t handed down until Moses, exactly how did Noah
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder, rape, genocide,
atrocity, and more.
Just like the news of today.
Lynn
CNN/FOX/whatever ain’t supposed to be holy books.
Lynn McGuire
2020-04-01 21:28:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course they can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried to emulate
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why writers create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it on with his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in providing role
models.
Hey, there’s more incest in the Bible than in Game of Thrones.
Well, when you start with *two* humans, one of whom is a clone of
the other with one chromosome changed.....
And who did their kids marry XXXXX shack up with ?
Of course, that first person probably had perfect DNA, no bad stuff.
Lynn
multi-century-old Noah, his equally elderly wife, their three sons, and the
sons’ wives. Lots and lots of incest to be had... And Noah was well after
the ‘first person’ with the ‘perfect DNA’. I won’t go into the two
different Flood stories (one had just two of each animal, one had two of the
‘unclean’ animals and _seven_ od the ‘clean’ ones. As the
clean/unclean division wasn’t handed down until Moses, exactly how did Noah
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder, rape, genocide,
atrocity, and more.
Just like the news of today.
Lynn
CNN/FOX/whatever ain’t supposed to be holy books.
Oh don't worry, they are not.

Lynn
Wolffan
2020-04-01 22:14:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course they can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried to
emulate
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why writers create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it on with his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in providing role
models.
Hey, there’s more incest in the Bible than in Game of Thrones.
Well, when you start with *two* humans, one of whom is a clone of
the other with one chromosome changed.....
And who did their kids marry XXXXX shack up with ?
Of course, that first person probably had perfect DNA, no bad stuff.
Lynn
multi-century-old Noah, his equally elderly wife, their three sons, and the
sons’ wives. Lots and lots of incest to be had... And Noah was well after
the ‘first person’ with the ‘perfect DNA’. I won’t go into the two
different Flood stories (one had just two of each animal, one had two of the
‘unclean’ animals and _seven_ od the ‘clean’ ones. As the
clean/unclean division wasn’t handed down until Moses, exactly how did Noah
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder, rape, genocide,
atrocity, and more.
Just like the news of today.
Lynn
CNN/FOX/whatever ain’t supposed to be holy books.
Oh don't worry, they are not.
Lynn
then why did you mention today’s news? Fact: the Bible is _full_ of murder,
rape, support for slavery, etc... and is supposed to be a guide. You said so
yourself. A guide to being a rapist, a murderer, a slave-holder? Comparing it
to ’the news of today’ makes zero sense.
Lynn McGuire
2020-04-01 22:23:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course they can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried to emulate
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why writers create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it on with his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in providing role
models.
Hey, there’s more incest in the Bible than in Game of Thrones.
Well, when you start with *two* humans, one of whom is a clone of
the other with one chromosome changed.....
And who did their kids marry XXXXX shack up with ?
Of course, that first person probably had perfect DNA, no bad stuff.
Lynn
multi-century-old Noah, his equally elderly wife, their three sons, and the
sons’ wives. Lots and lots of incest to be had... And Noah was well after
the ‘first person’ with the ‘perfect DNA’. I won’t go into the two
different Flood stories (one had just two of each animal, one had two of the
‘unclean’ animals and _seven_ od the ‘clean’ ones. As the
clean/unclean division wasn’t handed down until Moses, exactly how did Noah
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder, rape, genocide,
atrocity, and more.
Just like the news of today.
Lynn
CNN/FOX/whatever ain’t supposed to be holy books.
Oh don't worry, they are not.
Lynn
then why did you mention today’s news? Fact: the Bible is _full_ of murder,
rape, support for slavery, etc... and is supposed to be a guide. You said so
yourself. A guide to being a rapist, a murderer, a slave-holder? Comparing it
to ’the news of today’ makes zero sense.
My point was that people have not changed since Cain killed his brother
Able. The first murder occurred in the second generation.

Lynn
Alan Baker
2020-04-02 04:48:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course they can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried to emulate
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why writers create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it on with his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in providing role
models.
Hey, there’s more incest in the Bible than in Game of Thrones.
Well, when you start with *two* humans, one of whom is a clone of
the other with one chromosome changed.....
And who did their kids marry XXXXX shack up with ?
Of course, that first person probably had perfect DNA, no bad stuff.
Lynn
multi-century-old Noah, his equally elderly wife, their three
sons, and
the
sons’ wives. Lots and lots of incest to be had... And Noah was well after
the ‘first person’ with the ‘perfect DNA’. I won’t go into the two
different Flood stories (one had just two of each animal, one had
two of
the
‘unclean’ animals and _seven_ od the ‘clean’ ones. As the
clean/unclean division wasn’t handed down until Moses, exactly how
did
Noah
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder, rape, genocide,
atrocity, and more.
Just like the news of today.
Lynn
CNN/FOX/whatever ain’t supposed to be holy books.
Oh don't worry, they are not.
Lynn
then why did you mention today’s news? Fact: the Bible is _full_ of murder,
rape, support for slavery, etc... and is supposed to be a guide. You said so
yourself. A guide to being a rapist, a murderer, a slave-holder? Comparing it
to ’the news of today’ makes zero sense.
My point was that people have not changed since Cain killed his brother
Able.  The first murder occurred in the second generation.
Please tell me you accept the literal story of the creation of Man (and
hence, the Earth and the Universe)...
Chrysi Cat
2020-04-02 12:27:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
In
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course they can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried to
emulate
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why writers create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it on with his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in providing role
models.
Hey, there’s more incest in the Bible than in Game of Thrones.
Well, when you start with *two* humans, one of whom is a clone of
the other with one chromosome changed.....
And who did their kids marry XXXXX shack up with ?
Of course, that first person probably had perfect DNA, no bad stuff.
Lynn
multi-century-old Noah, his equally elderly wife, their three
sons, and
the
sons’ wives. Lots and lots of incest to be had... And Noah was well after
the ‘first person’ with the ‘perfect DNA’. I won’t go into the two
different Flood stories (one had just two of each animal, one had
two of
the
‘unclean’ animals and _seven_ od the ‘clean’ ones. As the
clean/unclean division wasn’t handed down until Moses, exactly
how did
Noah
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder, rape, genocide,
atrocity, and more.
Just like the news of today.
Lynn
CNN/FOX/whatever ain’t supposed to be holy books.
Oh don't worry, they are not.
Lynn
then why did you mention today’s news? Fact: the Bible is _full_ of murder,
rape, support for slavery, etc... and is supposed to be a guide. You said so
yourself. A guide to being a rapist, a murderer, a slave-holder? Comparing it
to ’the news of today’ makes zero sense.
My point was that people have not changed since Cain killed his
brother Able.  The first murder occurred in the second generation.
Please tell me you accept the literal story of the creation of Man (and
hence, the Earth and the Universe)...
Number one, I'm thinking you meant to include a "don't" either before
"tell" or after "you".

Number two, I'm REALLY terrified he actually /does/. It seems Trump
supporters more often are of that side than not.

As are Hungarians, apparently, considering that they're going to
basically say that "all trans-people can legally become here, at the
most, is crossdressing gays. And we're going to discourage both parts of
even that". Which of course they pointedly decreed on Trans Visibility Day.

As for me: I'm giving one last shot to _any_ degree of biblical
literalism. Considering this _really_ looks like the End Times, I'll
remain open to arguments that this is the Lesser Tribulation (we don't
need to debate who the Antichrist would be, but suffice it to say I have
one particular person in mind). If, however, I survive the timeframe
that would be the _Great_ Tribulation without dying, I'll abandon faith
in the God of the Christians _entirely_ if I don't see Someone riding
down from Heaven on a white horse by a set date that coincides with "84
months after the possible beginning of the Lesser Tribulation".
Basically, to me at least, that would be a case of Christianity finally
being falsifiable and indeed being successfully proven false.

It should be noted that I'd be fine with the idea of Rapture being
entirely condemned as heresyby all comers at this point, as if _THE_
Antichrist isn't operating now, there's very little argument that they
can exist at all...and there obvs wasn't any rapture before any possible
Tribulation started...
--
Chrysi Cat
1/2 anthrocat, nearly 1/2 anthrofox, all magical
Transgoddess, quick to anger.
Call me Chrysi or call me Kat, I'll respond to either!
Paul S Person
2020-04-02 17:38:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chrysi Cat
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
In
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course
they can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried to
emulate
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why
writers create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it on with his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in
providing role
models.
Hey, there’s more incest in the Bible than in Game of Thrones.
Well, when you start with *two* humans, one of whom is a clone of
the other with one chromosome changed.....
And who did their kids marry XXXXX shack up with ?
Of course, that first person probably had perfect DNA, no bad stuff.
Lynn
multi-century-old Noah, his equally elderly wife, their three
sons, and
the
sons’ wives. Lots and lots of incest to be had... And Noah was well
after
the ‘first person’ with the ‘perfect DNA’. I won’t go into the
two
different Flood stories (one had just two of each animal, one had
two of
the
‘unclean’ animals and _seven_ od the ‘clean’ ones. As the
clean/unclean division wasn’t handed down until Moses, exactly
how did
Noah
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder, rape, genocide,
atrocity, and more.
Just like the news of today.
Lynn
CNN/FOX/whatever ain’t supposed to be holy books.
Oh don't worry, they are not.
Lynn
then why did you mention today’s news? Fact: the Bible is _full_ of
murder,
rape, support for slavery, etc... and is supposed to be a guide. You said so
yourself. A guide to being a rapist, a murderer, a slave-holder? Comparing it
to ’the news of today’ makes zero sense.
My point was that people have not changed since Cain killed his
brother Able.  The first murder occurred in the second generation.
Please tell me you accept the literal story of the creation of Man (and
hence, the Earth and the Universe)...
Number one, I'm thinking you meant to include a "don't" either before
"tell" or after "you".
Number two, I'm REALLY terrified he actually /does/. It seems Trump
supporters more often are of that side than not.
As are Hungarians, apparently, considering that they're going to
basically say that "all trans-people can legally become here, at the
most, is crossdressing gays. And we're going to discourage both parts of
even that". Which of course they pointedly decreed on Trans Visibility Day.
As for me: I'm giving one last shot to _any_ degree of biblical
literalism. Considering this _really_ looks like the End Times, I'll
remain open to arguments that this is the Lesser Tribulation (we don't
need to debate who the Antichrist would be, but suffice it to say I have
one particular person in mind). If, however, I survive the timeframe
that would be the _Great_ Tribulation without dying, I'll abandon faith
in the God of the Christians _entirely_ if I don't see Someone riding
down from Heaven on a white horse by a set date that coincides with "84
months after the possible beginning of the Lesser Tribulation".
Basically, to me at least, that would be a case of Christianity finally
being falsifiable and indeed being successfully proven false.
I can sort-of follow that because I recently read a book, written 100
or so years ago, touting post-millenialism by attacking
pre-mellenialism (well, how else?). It was written by a modernist and,
while it had some good information in it, it also had a lot of really
sloppy stuff and even what appeared to be a modernist myth.

As for me, I have long accepted Ronald Wilson Reagan (666) as the
Beast. How else can you explain the election of the someone so bland
as the elder Bush except by regarding him as the Little Beast, whom
the Beast caused to be worshipped?

That leave "Abomination of Desolation" for Trump.

I also reasonably recently read a couple of commentaries on
Revelation, also quite old, which stressed it's continuing message for
Christians: hold firm and see the troubles through.

Then again, as I post-milennial myself, I don't but too much stock in
such amusing identifications.
Post by Chrysi Cat
It should be noted that I'd be fine with the idea of Rapture being
entirely condemned as heresyby all comers at this point, as if _THE_
Antichrist isn't operating now, there's very little argument that they
can exist at all...and there obvs wasn't any rapture before any possible
Tribulation started...
As to the Rapture, I have been known to suggest that the
"disappearances" in Latin America are, in fact, that event. After all,
since Jesus came for the poor, and since nobody in America is poor in
sense that people in the poorer nations are poor, it seems unlikely
that any Americans would make the cut.

This, of course, is also a form of humor. Whether it should be or not
is a different issue.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."
o***@gmail.com
2020-04-02 19:37:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chrysi Cat
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
In
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course
they can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried to
emulate
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why
writers create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it on
with his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were
annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in
providing role
models.
Hey, there’s more incest in the Bible than in Game of Thrones.
Well, when you start with *two* humans, one of whom is a clone of
the other with one chromosome changed.....
And who did their kids marry XXXXX shack up with ?
Of course, that first person probably had perfect DNA, no bad stuff.
Lynn
multi-century-old Noah, his equally elderly wife, their three
sons, and
the
sons’ wives. Lots and lots of incest to be had... And Noah was well
after
the ‘first person’ with the ‘perfect DNA’. I won’t go into the
two
different Flood stories (one had just two of each animal, one
had two of
the
‘unclean’ animals and _seven_ od the ‘clean’ ones. As the
clean/unclean division wasn’t handed down until Moses, exactly
how did
Noah
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder, rape,
genocide,
atrocity, and more.
Just like the news of today.
Lynn
CNN/FOX/whatever ain’t supposed to be holy books.
Oh don't worry, they are not.
Lynn
then why did you mention today’s news? Fact: the Bible is _full_ of murder,
rape, support for slavery, etc... and is supposed to be a guide. You said so
yourself. A guide to being a rapist, a murderer, a slave-holder? Comparing it
to ’the news of today’ makes zero sense.
My point was that people have not changed since Cain killed his
brother Able.  The first murder occurred in the second generation.
Please tell me you accept the literal story of the creation of Man
(and hence, the Earth and the Universe)...
Number one, I'm thinking you meant to include a "don't" either before
"tell" or after "you".
Number two, I'm REALLY terrified he actually /does/. It seems Trump
supporters more often are of that side than not.
As are Hungarians, apparently, considering that they're going to
basically say that "all trans-people can legally become here, at the
most, is crossdressing gays. And we're going to discourage both parts of
even that". Which of course they pointedly decreed on Trans Visibility Day.
As for me: I'm giving one last shot to _any_ degree of biblical
literalism. Considering this _really_ looks like the End Times, I'll
remain open to arguments that this is the Lesser Tribulation (we don't
need to debate who the Antichrist would be, but suffice it to say I have
one particular person in mind). If, however, I survive the timeframe
that would be the _Great_ Tribulation without dying, I'll abandon faith
in the God of the Christians _entirely_ if I don't see Someone riding
down from Heaven on a white horse by a set date that coincides with "84
months after the possible beginning of the Lesser Tribulation".
Basically, to me at least, that would be a case of Christianity finally
being falsifiable and indeed being successfully proven false.
It should be noted that I'd be fine with the idea of Rapture being
entirely condemned as heresyby all comers at this point, as if _THE_
Antichrist isn't operating now, there's very little argument that they
can exist at all...and there obvs wasn't any rapture before any possible
Tribulation started...
You know, as far as apocalypses go, the SARS-2, COVID-19, pandemic is
not much of a pandemic. Real pandemics have dead bodies laying in the
streets around the world. Tens or hundreds of millions dead. Maybe
even billions dead. Not happening today, not happening tomorrow.
Lynn
Just read a blurb (dunno if well researched or some crazy) that said British deaths are "average"; e.g. X/month as it has been for years. It also suggested that "died of carona" be compared / contrasted with "died WITH carona".
Alan Baker
2020-04-02 22:26:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Chrysi Cat
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
In
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course
they can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried to
emulate
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why
writers create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it on
with his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were
annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in
providing role
models.
Hey, there’s more incest in the Bible than in Game of Thrones.
Well, when you start with *two* humans, one of whom is a clone of
the other with one chromosome changed.....
And who did their kids marry XXXXX shack up with ?
Of course, that first person probably had perfect DNA, no bad stuff.
Lynn
multi-century-old Noah, his equally elderly wife, their three
sons, and
the
sons’ wives. Lots and lots of incest to be had... And Noah was well
after
the ‘first person’ with the ‘perfect DNA’. I won’t go into the
two
different Flood stories (one had just two of each animal, one
had two of
the
‘unclean’ animals and _seven_ od the ‘clean’ ones. As the
clean/unclean division wasn’t handed down until Moses, exactly
how did
Noah
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder, rape,
genocide,
atrocity, and more.
Just like the news of today.
Lynn
CNN/FOX/whatever ain’t supposed to be holy books.
Oh don't worry, they are not.
Lynn
then why did you mention today’s news? Fact: the Bible is _full_ of murder,
rape, support for slavery, etc... and is supposed to be a guide. You said so
yourself. A guide to being a rapist, a murderer, a slave-holder? Comparing it
to ’the news of today’ makes zero sense.
My point was that people have not changed since Cain killed his
brother Able.  The first murder occurred in the second generation.
Please tell me you accept the literal story of the creation of Man
(and hence, the Earth and the Universe)...
Number one, I'm thinking you meant to include a "don't" either before
"tell" or after "you".
Number two, I'm REALLY terrified he actually /does/. It seems Trump
supporters more often are of that side than not.
As are Hungarians, apparently, considering that they're going to
basically say that "all trans-people can legally become here, at the
most, is crossdressing gays. And we're going to discourage both parts of
even that". Which of course they pointedly decreed on Trans Visibility Day.
As for me: I'm giving one last shot to _any_ degree of biblical
literalism. Considering this _really_ looks like the End Times, I'll
remain open to arguments that this is the Lesser Tribulation (we don't
need to debate who the Antichrist would be, but suffice it to say I have
one particular person in mind). If, however, I survive the timeframe
that would be the _Great_ Tribulation without dying, I'll abandon faith
in the God of the Christians _entirely_ if I don't see Someone riding
down from Heaven on a white horse by a set date that coincides with "84
months after the possible beginning of the Lesser Tribulation".
Basically, to me at least, that would be a case of Christianity finally
being falsifiable and indeed being successfully proven false.
It should be noted that I'd be fine with the idea of Rapture being
entirely condemned as heresyby all comers at this point, as if _THE_
Antichrist isn't operating now, there's very little argument that they
can exist at all...and there obvs wasn't any rapture before any possible
Tribulation started...
You know, as far as apocalypses go, the SARS-2, COVID-19, pandemic is
not much of a pandemic. Real pandemics have dead bodies laying in the
streets around the world. Tens or hundreds of millions dead. Maybe
even billions dead. Not happening today, not happening tomorrow.
Lynn
Just read a blurb (dunno if well researched or some crazy) that said British deaths are "average"; e.g. X/month as it has been for years. It also suggested that "died of carona" be compared / contrasted with "died WITH carona".
You "just read" this...

...but can't quote or cite it.
o***@gmail.com
2020-04-02 23:52:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alan Baker
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Chrysi Cat
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
In
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course
they can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried to
emulate
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why
writers create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it on
with his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were
annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in
providing role
models.
Hey, there’s more incest in the Bible than in Game of Thrones.
Well, when you start with *two* humans, one of whom is a clone of
the other with one chromosome changed.....
And who did their kids marry XXXXX shack up with ?
Of course, that first person probably had perfect DNA, no bad
stuff.
Lynn
multi-century-old Noah, his equally elderly wife, their three
sons, and
the
sons’ wives. Lots and lots of incest to be had... And Noah was well
after
the ‘first person’ with the ‘perfect DNA’. I won’t go into the
two
different Flood stories (one had just two of each animal, one
had two of
the
‘unclean’ animals and _seven_ od the ‘clean’ ones. As the
clean/unclean division wasn’t handed down until Moses, exactly
how did
Noah
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder, rape,
genocide,
atrocity, and more.
Just like the news of today.
Lynn
CNN/FOX/whatever ain’t supposed to be holy books.
Oh don't worry, they are not.
Lynn
then why did you mention today’s news? Fact: the Bible is _full_ of murder,
rape, support for slavery, etc... and is supposed to be a guide. You said so
yourself. A guide to being a rapist, a murderer, a slave-holder? Comparing it
to ’the news of today’ makes zero sense.
My point was that people have not changed since Cain killed his
brother Able.  The first murder occurred in the second generation.
Please tell me you accept the literal story of the creation of Man
(and hence, the Earth and the Universe)...
Number one, I'm thinking you meant to include a "don't" either before
"tell" or after "you".
Number two, I'm REALLY terrified he actually /does/. It seems Trump
supporters more often are of that side than not.
As are Hungarians, apparently, considering that they're going to
basically say that "all trans-people can legally become here, at the
most, is crossdressing gays. And we're going to discourage both parts of
even that". Which of course they pointedly decreed on Trans Visibility Day.
As for me: I'm giving one last shot to _any_ degree of biblical
literalism. Considering this _really_ looks like the End Times, I'll
remain open to arguments that this is the Lesser Tribulation (we don't
need to debate who the Antichrist would be, but suffice it to say I have
one particular person in mind). If, however, I survive the timeframe
that would be the _Great_ Tribulation without dying, I'll abandon faith
in the God of the Christians _entirely_ if I don't see Someone riding
down from Heaven on a white horse by a set date that coincides with "84
months after the possible beginning of the Lesser Tribulation".
Basically, to me at least, that would be a case of Christianity finally
being falsifiable and indeed being successfully proven false.
It should be noted that I'd be fine with the idea of Rapture being
entirely condemned as heresyby all comers at this point, as if _THE_
Antichrist isn't operating now, there's very little argument that they
can exist at all...and there obvs wasn't any rapture before any possible
Tribulation started...
You know, as far as apocalypses go, the SARS-2, COVID-19, pandemic is
not much of a pandemic. Real pandemics have dead bodies laying in the
streets around the world. Tens or hundreds of millions dead. Maybe
even billions dead. Not happening today, not happening tomorrow.
Lynn
Just read a blurb (dunno if well researched or some crazy) that said British deaths are "average"; e.g. X/month as it has been for years. It also suggested that "died of carona" be compared / contrasted with "died WITH carona".
You "just read" this...
...but can't quote or cite it.
Correct.......

That is why I referred to it as a "blurb" and even went on to "undefine" it as authoritative.

....seems you are a teen, homeschooling your first debate class.....
Alan Baker
2020-04-03 01:24:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Alan Baker
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Chrysi Cat
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
In
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course
they can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried to
emulate
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why
writers create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it on
with his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were
annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in
providing role
models.
Hey, there’s more incest in the Bible than in Game of Thrones.
Well, when you start with *two* humans, one of whom is a clone of
the other with one chromosome changed.....
And who did their kids marry XXXXX shack up with ?
Of course, that first person probably had perfect DNA, no bad
stuff.
Lynn
multi-century-old Noah, his equally elderly wife, their three
sons, and
the
sons’ wives. Lots and lots of incest to be had... And Noah was well
after
the ‘first person’ with the ‘perfect DNA’. I won’t go into the
two
different Flood stories (one had just two of each animal, one
had two of
the
‘unclean’ animals and _seven_ od the ‘clean’ ones. As the
clean/unclean division wasn’t handed down until Moses, exactly
how did
Noah
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder, rape,
genocide,
atrocity, and more.
Just like the news of today.
Lynn
CNN/FOX/whatever ain’t supposed to be holy books.
Oh don't worry, they are not.
Lynn
then why did you mention today’s news? Fact: the Bible is _full_ of murder,
rape, support for slavery, etc... and is supposed to be a guide. You said so
yourself. A guide to being a rapist, a murderer, a slave-holder? Comparing it
to ’the news of today’ makes zero sense.
My point was that people have not changed since Cain killed his
brother Able.  The first murder occurred in the second generation.
Please tell me you accept the literal story of the creation of Man
(and hence, the Earth and the Universe)...
Number one, I'm thinking you meant to include a "don't" either before
"tell" or after "you".
Number two, I'm REALLY terrified he actually /does/. It seems Trump
supporters more often are of that side than not.
As are Hungarians, apparently, considering that they're going to
basically say that "all trans-people can legally become here, at the
most, is crossdressing gays. And we're going to discourage both parts of
even that". Which of course they pointedly decreed on Trans Visibility Day.
As for me: I'm giving one last shot to _any_ degree of biblical
literalism. Considering this _really_ looks like the End Times, I'll
remain open to arguments that this is the Lesser Tribulation (we don't
need to debate who the Antichrist would be, but suffice it to say I have
one particular person in mind). If, however, I survive the timeframe
that would be the _Great_ Tribulation without dying, I'll abandon faith
in the God of the Christians _entirely_ if I don't see Someone riding
down from Heaven on a white horse by a set date that coincides with "84
months after the possible beginning of the Lesser Tribulation".
Basically, to me at least, that would be a case of Christianity finally
being falsifiable and indeed being successfully proven false.
It should be noted that I'd be fine with the idea of Rapture being
entirely condemned as heresyby all comers at this point, as if _THE_
Antichrist isn't operating now, there's very little argument that they
can exist at all...and there obvs wasn't any rapture before any possible
Tribulation started...
You know, as far as apocalypses go, the SARS-2, COVID-19, pandemic is
not much of a pandemic. Real pandemics have dead bodies laying in the
streets around the world. Tens or hundreds of millions dead. Maybe
even billions dead. Not happening today, not happening tomorrow.
Lynn
Just read a blurb (dunno if well researched or some crazy) that said British deaths are "average"; e.g. X/month as it has been for years. It also suggested that "died of carona" be compared / contrasted with "died WITH carona".
You "just read" this...
...but can't quote or cite it.
Correct.......
That is why I referred to it as a "blurb" and even went on to "undefine" it as authoritative.
....seems you are a teen, homeschooling your first debate class.....
If it's that unauthoritative...

...why even bring it up?

Why not check the facts... ...or remain "silent".
Titus G
2020-04-03 04:43:30 UTC
Permalink
overdue snippage
Post by Alan Baker
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Alan Baker
Post by o***@gmail.com
Just read a blurb (dunno if well researched or some crazy) that said
British deaths are "average"; e.g. X/month as it has been for
years.  It also suggested  that "died of carona" be compared /
contrasted with "died WITH carona".
You "just read" this...
...but can't quote or cite it.
Correct.......
That is why I referred to it as a "blurb" and even went on to
"undefine" it as authoritative.
....seems you are a teen, homeschooling your first debate class.....
If it's that unauthoritative...
....why even bring it up?
Why not check the facts... ...or remain "silent".
(Forgive me William Hyde.)
Here is a website that Lynn would be proud to call facts.

https://videos.whatfinger.com/2019/09/22/my-gift-to-climate-alarmists-climate-alarmists-debunked/
o***@gmail.com
2020-04-03 19:06:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alan Baker
If it's that unauthoritative...
...why even bring it up?
Why not check the facts... ...or remain "silent".
I was intrigued by:

"It also suggested that "died of carona" be compared / contrasted with "died WITH carona".

....and posted it here, hoping that the BIG BRAINS might have some ideas related to it.

[ learn to snip ]
Alan Baker
2020-04-03 19:42:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Alan Baker
If it's that unauthoritative...
...why even bring it up?
Why not check the facts... ...or remain "silent".
"It also suggested that "died of carona" be compared / contrasted with "died WITH carona".
....and posted it here, hoping that the BIG BRAINS might have some ideas related to it.
What a load of tripe.
Post by o***@gmail.com
[ learn to snip ]
I know how to snip...

...but I don't because quite often asshats use it as a way to lie by
omission.

:-)
Titus G
2020-04-04 03:35:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Alan Baker
If it's that unauthoritative...
...why even bring it up?
Why not check the facts... ...or remain "silent".
Further to the secret rasfw committee meeting at an undisclosed place at
an undisclosed time, it is rumoured that a group Political Officer has
been secretly appointed.
Post by o***@gmail.com
"It also suggested that "died of carona" be compared / contrasted with "died WITH carona".
.....and posted it here, hoping that the BIG BRAINS might have some ideas related to it.
[ learn to snip ]
Are you arguing with the Political Officer?
(We know where you live.)
Alan Baker
2020-04-02 22:21:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chrysi Cat
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
In
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course
they can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried to
emulate
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why
writers create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it on with his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in
providing role
models.
Hey, there’s more incest in the Bible than in Game of Thrones.
Well, when you start with *two* humans, one of whom is a clone of
the other with one chromosome changed.....
And who did their kids marry XXXXX shack up with ?
Of course, that first person probably had perfect DNA, no bad stuff.
Lynn
multi-century-old Noah, his equally elderly wife, their three
sons, and
the
sons’ wives. Lots and lots of incest to be had... And Noah was well after
the ‘first person’ with the ‘perfect DNA’. I won’t go into the two
different Flood stories (one had just two of each animal, one
had two of
the
‘unclean’ animals and _seven_ od the ‘clean’ ones. As the
clean/unclean division wasn’t handed down until Moses, exactly
how did
Noah
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder, rape, genocide,
atrocity, and more.
Just like the news of today.
Lynn
CNN/FOX/whatever ain’t supposed to be holy books.
Oh don't worry, they are not.
Lynn
then why did you mention today’s news? Fact: the Bible is _full_ of murder,
rape, support for slavery, etc... and is supposed to be a guide. You said so
yourself. A guide to being a rapist, a murderer, a slave-holder? Comparing it
to ’the news of today’ makes zero sense.
My point was that people have not changed since Cain killed his
brother Able.  The first murder occurred in the second generation.
Please tell me you accept the literal story of the creation of Man
(and hence, the Earth and the Universe)...
Number one, I'm thinking you meant to include a "don't" either before
"tell" or after "you".
Nope. I'm hoping he'll reveal himself.
Alan Baker
2020-04-02 22:25:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chrysi Cat
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
In
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course
they can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried to
emulate
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why
writers create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it
on with his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in
providing role
models.
Hey, there’s more incest in the Bible than in Game of Thrones.
Well, when you start with *two* humans, one of whom is a clone of
the other with one chromosome changed.....
And who did their kids marry XXXXX shack up with ?
Of course, that first person probably had perfect DNA, no bad stuff.
Lynn
multi-century-old Noah, his equally elderly wife, their three
sons, and
the
sons’ wives. Lots and lots of incest to be had... And Noah was
well
after
the ‘first person’ with the ‘perfect DNA’. I won’t go into the
two
different Flood stories (one had just two of each animal, one
had two of
the
‘unclean’ animals and _seven_ od the ‘clean’ ones. As the
clean/unclean division wasn’t handed down until Moses, exactly
how did
Noah
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder, rape,
genocide,
atrocity, and more.
Just like the news of today.
Lynn
CNN/FOX/whatever ain’t supposed to be holy books.
Oh don't worry, they are not.
Lynn
then why did you mention today’s news? Fact: the Bible is _full_ of murder,
rape, support for slavery, etc... and is supposed to be a guide. You said so
yourself. A guide to being a rapist, a murderer, a slave-holder? Comparing it
to ’the news of today’ makes zero sense.
My point was that people have not changed since Cain killed his
brother Able.  The first murder occurred in the second generation.
Please tell me you accept the literal story of the creation of Man
(and hence, the Earth and the Universe)...
Number one, I'm thinking you meant to include a "don't" either before
"tell" or after "you".
Number two, I'm REALLY terrified he actually /does/. It seems Trump
supporters more often are of that side than not.
As are Hungarians, apparently, considering that they're going to
basically say that "all trans-people can legally become here, at the
most, is crossdressing gays. And we're going to discourage both parts
of even that". Which of course they pointedly decreed on Trans
Visibility Day.
As for me: I'm giving one last shot to _any_ degree of biblical
literalism. Considering this _really_ looks like the End Times, I'll
remain open to arguments that this is the Lesser Tribulation (we don't
need to debate who the Antichrist would be, but suffice it to say I
have one particular person in mind). If, however, I survive the
timeframe that would be the _Great_ Tribulation without dying, I'll
abandon faith in the God of the Christians _entirely_ if I don't see
Someone riding down from Heaven on a white horse by a set date that
coincides with "84 months after the possible beginning of the Lesser
Tribulation". Basically, to me at least, that would be a case of
Christianity finally being falsifiable and indeed being successfully
proven false.
It should be noted that I'd be fine with the idea of Rapture being
entirely condemned as heresyby all comers at this point, as if _THE_
Antichrist isn't operating now, there's very little argument that they
can exist at all...and there obvs wasn't any rapture before any
possible Tribulation started...
You know, as far as apocalypses go, the SARS-2, COVID-19, pandemic is
not much of a pandemic.  Real pandemics have dead bodies laying in the
streets around the world.  Tens or hundreds of millions dead.  Maybe
even billions dead. Not happening today, not happening tomorrow.
What a brave prediction...

Care to tell us what you think the final toll will be?

I'm betting that, if asked 6 weeks ago, you'd have told us that cases in
the US would NEVER reach 241,658.
Titus G
2020-04-03 04:27:04 UTC
Permalink
You know, as far as apocalypses go, the SARS-2, COVID-19, pandemic is
not much of a pandemic.  Real pandemics have dead bodies laying in the
streets around the world.  Tens or hundreds of millions dead.  Maybe
even billions dead. Not happening today, not happening tomorrow.
Lynn
Cheer up. Surely there is worse to come?
Paul S Person
2020-04-03 17:17:03 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 2 Apr 2020 13:27:45 -0500, Lynn McGuire
Post by Chrysi Cat
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
In
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course
they can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried to
emulate
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why
writers create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it on
with his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in
providing role
models.
Hey, there’s more incest in the Bible than in Game of Thrones.
Well, when you start with *two* humans, one of whom is a clone of
the other with one chromosome changed.....
And who did their kids marry XXXXX shack up with ?
Of course, that first person probably had perfect DNA, no bad stuff.
Lynn
multi-century-old Noah, his equally elderly wife, their three
sons, and
the
sons’ wives. Lots and lots of incest to be had... And Noah was well
after
the ‘first person’ with the ‘perfect DNA’. I won’t go into the
two
different Flood stories (one had just two of each animal, one
had two of
the
‘unclean’ animals and _seven_ od the ‘clean’ ones. As the
clean/unclean division wasn’t handed down until Moses, exactly
how did
Noah
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder, rape,
genocide,
atrocity, and more.
Just like the news of today.
Lynn
CNN/FOX/whatever ain’t supposed to be holy books.
Oh don't worry, they are not.
Lynn
then why did you mention today’s news? Fact: the Bible is _full_ of
murder,
rape, support for slavery, etc... and is supposed to be a guide. You said so
yourself. A guide to being a rapist, a murderer, a slave-holder? Comparing it
to ’the news of today’ makes zero sense.
My point was that people have not changed since Cain killed his
brother Able.  The first murder occurred in the second generation.
Please tell me you accept the literal story of the creation of Man
(and hence, the Earth and the Universe)...
Number one, I'm thinking you meant to include a "don't" either before
"tell" or after "you".
Number two, I'm REALLY terrified he actually /does/. It seems Trump
supporters more often are of that side than not.
As are Hungarians, apparently, considering that they're going to
basically say that "all trans-people can legally become here, at the
most, is crossdressing gays. And we're going to discourage both parts of
even that". Which of course they pointedly decreed on Trans Visibility Day.
As for me: I'm giving one last shot to _any_ degree of biblical
literalism. Considering this _really_ looks like the End Times, I'll
remain open to arguments that this is the Lesser Tribulation (we don't
need to debate who the Antichrist would be, but suffice it to say I have
one particular person in mind). If, however, I survive the timeframe
that would be the _Great_ Tribulation without dying, I'll abandon faith
in the God of the Christians _entirely_ if I don't see Someone riding
down from Heaven on a white horse by a set date that coincides with "84
months after the possible beginning of the Lesser Tribulation".
Basically, to me at least, that would be a case of Christianity finally
being falsifiable and indeed being successfully proven false.
It should be noted that I'd be fine with the idea of Rapture being
entirely condemned as heresyby all comers at this point, as if _THE_
Antichrist isn't operating now, there's very little argument that they
can exist at all...and there obvs wasn't any rapture before any possible
Tribulation started...
You know, as far as apocalypses go, the SARS-2, COVID-19, pandemic is
not much of a pandemic. Real pandemics have dead bodies laying in the
streets around the world. Tens or hundreds of millions dead. Maybe
even billions dead. Not happening today, not happening tomorrow.
In /Apocalypse/, Jacques Ellul suggests that the reason that /only/
1/3 of the stars, people, whatever are destroyed is because of God's
forbearance, without which it would have been much worse.

But I would agree that, so far, we don't appear to be up to the 1/3
standard. But then, there is next fall and next spring to get through
before that can really be said with certainty.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."
Wolffan
2020-04-02 14:06:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course
they can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried to
emulate
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why writers
create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it on
with his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were
annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in
providing role
models.
Hey, there’s more incest in the Bible than in Game of
Thrones.
Well, when you start with *two* humans, one of whom is a clone of
the other with one chromosome changed.....
And who did their kids marry XXXXX shack up with ?
Of course, that first person probably had perfect DNA, no bad stuff.
Lynn
multi-century-old Noah, his equally elderly wife, their three
sons, and
the
sons’ wives. Lots and lots of incest to be had... And Noah was well
after
the ‘first person’ with the ‘perfect DNA’. I won’t go into
the
two
different Flood stories (one had just two of each animal, one had
two of
the
‘unclean’ animals and _seven_ od the ‘clean’ ones. As the
clean/unclean division wasn’t handed down until Moses, exactly how
did
Noah
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder, rape,
genocide,
atrocity, and more.
Just like the news of today.
Lynn
CNN/FOX/whatever ain’t supposed to be holy books.
Oh don't worry, they are not.
Lynn
then why did you mention today’s news? Fact: the Bible is _full_ of murder,
rape, support for slavery, etc... and is supposed to be a guide. You said so
yourself. A guide to being a rapist, a murderer, a slave-holder? Comparing it
to ’the news of today’ makes zero sense.
My point was that people have not changed since Cain killed his brother
Able. The first murder occurred in the second generation.
Please tell me you accept the literal story of the creation of Man (and
hence, the Earth and the Universe)...
oh, he’s a creationist, alright.
Alan Baker
2020-04-02 22:22:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wolffan
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course
they can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried to
emulate
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why writers
create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it on with his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in
providing role
models.
Hey, there’s more incest in the Bible than in Game of Thrones.
Well, when you start with *two* humans, one of whom is a clone of
the other with one chromosome changed.....
And who did their kids marry XXXXX shack up with ?
Of course, that first person probably had perfect DNA, no bad stuff.
Lynn
multi-century-old Noah, his equally elderly wife, their three
sons, and
the
sons’ wives. Lots and lots of incest to be had... And Noah was well after
the ‘first person’ with the ‘perfect DNA’. I won’t go into
the
two
different Flood stories (one had just two of each animal, one had
two of
the
‘unclean’ animals and _seven_ od the ‘clean’ ones. As the
clean/unclean division wasn’t handed down until Moses, exactly how
did
Noah
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder, rape, genocide,
atrocity, and more.
Just like the news of today.
Lynn
CNN/FOX/whatever ain’t supposed to be holy books.
Oh don't worry, they are not.
Lynn
then why did you mention today’s news? Fact: the Bible is _full_ of murder,
rape, support for slavery, etc... and is supposed to be a guide. You said so
yourself. A guide to being a rapist, a murderer, a slave-holder? Comparing it
to ’the news of today’ makes zero sense.
My point was that people have not changed since Cain killed his brother
Able. The first murder occurred in the second generation.
Please tell me you accept the literal story of the creation of Man (and
hence, the Earth and the Universe)...
oh, he’s a creationist, alright.
Oh, dear god...

...not above, but who only exists as a thing I learned to say in our
society.

;-)
Wolffan
2020-04-02 14:05:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course they can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried to
emulate
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why writers
create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it on with
his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in providing
role
models.
Hey, there’s more incest in the Bible than in Game of Thrones.
Well, when you start with *two* humans, one of whom is a clone of
the other with one chromosome changed.....
And who did their kids marry XXXXX shack up with ?
Of course, that first person probably had perfect DNA, no bad stuff.
Lynn
multi-century-old Noah, his equally elderly wife, their three sons, and
the
sons’ wives. Lots and lots of incest to be had... And Noah was well
after
the ‘first person’ with the ‘perfect DNA’. I won’t go into the
two
different Flood stories (one had just two of each animal, one had two of
the
‘unclean’ animals and _seven_ od the ‘clean’ ones. As the
clean/unclean division wasn’t handed down until Moses, exactly how did
Noah
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder, rape,
genocide,
atrocity, and more.
Just like the news of today.
Lynn
CNN/FOX/whatever ain’t supposed to be holy books.
Oh don't worry, they are not.
Lynn
then why did you mention today’s news? Fact: the Bible is _full_ of murder,
rape, support for slavery, etc... and is supposed to be a guide. You said so
yourself. A guide to being a rapist, a murderer, a slave-holder? Comparing it
to ’the news of today’ makes zero sense.
My point was that people have not changed since Cain killed his brother
Able. The first murder occurred in the second generation.
Lynn
And what does that have to do with using the Bible for ‘guidance’? The
collected folk tales of neolithic/early bronze age goatherds have very little
to do with current events. Especially as most of those tales were stolen from
others... and the ones whch weren’t were heavily edited by later
generations. For example, before he became the One True God, m’man Yahweh
had a female consort who was almost as powerful as he was. The consort became
an unperson (ungoddess?) when the followers of Yahweh had a bit of an
argument with some ol’ boys who had a powerful goddess and the equivalent
of the Ministry of Truth airbrushed out most references to Yahweh’s
girlfriend...
Cain & Able never existed. Adam and Eve never existed. They’re fables.
There is no evidence, other than Biblical accounts, that the ‘Israelites’
were slaves in Egypt. There is evidence, lots of it, that at the time Joshua
marched outside the walls of Jericho, Jericho had no walls, as it had been
conquered and the walls razed by someone else decades prior. And no, the sun
did not stand still for a day; that would really have meant that the Earth
stopped rotating, and people would have noticed the sudden stop... in the
milliseconds before the released kinetic energy vaporized them all. And,
should they have survived by some miracle, there were astronomers in places
line India and China and the Americas who would have noticed the long
twilights or the long night. Genesis is all fables. Exodus, Joshua, the same.
Particularly the plagues in Egypt and the bits about wooden staffs turning
into snakes.
Paul S Person
2020-04-02 17:39:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course they can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried to
emulate
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why writers
create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it on with
his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in providing
role
models.
Hey, there’s more incest in the Bible than in Game of Thrones.
Well, when you start with *two* humans, one of whom is a clone of
the other with one chromosome changed.....
And who did their kids marry XXXXX shack up with ?
Of course, that first person probably had perfect DNA, no bad stuff.
Lynn
multi-century-old Noah, his equally elderly wife, their three sons, and
the
sons’ wives. Lots and lots of incest to be had... And Noah was well
after
the ‘first person’ with the ‘perfect DNA’. I won’t go into the
two
different Flood stories (one had just two of each animal, one had two of
the
‘unclean’ animals and _seven_ od the ‘clean’ ones. As the
clean/unclean division wasn’t handed down until Moses, exactly how did
Noah
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder, rape,
genocide,
atrocity, and more.
Just like the news of today.
Lynn
CNN/FOX/whatever ain’t supposed to be holy books.
Oh don't worry, they are not.
Lynn
then why did you mention today’s news? Fact: the Bible is _full_ of
murder,
rape, support for slavery, etc... and is supposed to be a guide. You said so
yourself. A guide to being a rapist, a murderer, a slave-holder? Comparing it
to ’the news of today’ makes zero sense.
My point was that people have not changed since Cain killed his brother
Able. The first murder occurred in the second generation.
Lynn
And what does that have to do with using the Bible for ‘guidance’? The
collected folk tales of neolithic/early bronze age goatherds have very little
to do with current events. Especially as most of those tales were stolen from
others... and the ones whch weren’t were heavily edited by later
generations. For example, before he became the One True God, m’man Yahweh
had a female consort who was almost as powerful as he was. The consort became
an unperson (ungoddess?) when the followers of Yahweh had a bit of an
argument with some ol’ boys who had a powerful goddess and the equivalent
of the Ministry of Truth airbrushed out most references to Yahweh’s
girlfriend...
Cain & Able never existed. Adam and Eve never existed. They’re fables.
There is no evidence, other than Biblical accounts, that the ‘Israelites’
were slaves in Egypt. There is evidence, lots of it, that at the time Joshua
marched outside the walls of Jericho, Jericho had no walls, as it had been
conquered and the walls razed by someone else decades prior. And no, the sun
did not stand still for a day; that would really have meant that the Earth
stopped rotating, and people would have noticed the sudden stop... in the
milliseconds before the released kinetic energy vaporized them all. And,
should they have survived by some miracle, there were astronomers in places
line India and China and the Americas who would have noticed the long
twilights or the long night. Genesis is all fables. Exodus, Joshua, the same.
Particularly the plagues in Egypt and the bits about wooden staffs turning
into snakes.
What an amazing colleciton of anti-religious propaganda.

Better watch out -- someone a bit unstable might read that and you
would find yourself responsible for a Terrorist Act.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."
Wolffan
2020-04-02 19:48:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course they
can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried to
emulate
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why writers
create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it on with
his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in providing
role
models.
Hey, there’s more incest in the Bible than in Game of
Thrones.
Well, when you start with *two* humans, one of whom is a clone of
the other with one chromosome changed.....
And who did their kids marry XXXXX shack up with ?
Of course, that first person probably had perfect DNA, no bad stuff.
Lynn
multi-century-old Noah, his equally elderly wife, their three sons,
and
the
sons’ wives. Lots and lots of incest to be had... And Noah was well
after
the ‘first person’ with the ‘perfect DNA’. I won’t go into
the
two
different Flood stories (one had just two of each animal, one had two
of
the
‘unclean’ animals and _seven_ od the ‘clean’ ones. As the
clean/unclean division wasn’t handed down until Moses, exactly how
did
Noah
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder, rape,
genocide,
atrocity, and more.
Just like the news of today.
Lynn
CNN/FOX/whatever ain’t supposed to be holy books.
Oh don't worry, they are not.
Lynn
then why did you mention today’s news? Fact: the Bible is _full_ of murder,
rape, support for slavery, etc... and is supposed to be a guide. You said so
yourself. A guide to being a rapist, a murderer, a slave-holder? Comparing it
to ’the news of today’ makes zero sense.
My point was that people have not changed since Cain killed his brother
Able. The first murder occurred in the second generation.
Lynn
And what does that have to do with using the Bible for ‘guidance’? The
collected folk tales of neolithic/early bronze age goatherds have very little
to do with current events. Especially as most of those tales were stolen from
others... and the ones whch weren’t were heavily edited by later
generations. For example, before he became the One True God, m’man Yahweh
had a female consort who was almost as powerful as he was. The consort became
an unperson (ungoddess?) when the followers of Yahweh had a bit of an
argument with some ol’ boys who had a powerful goddess and the equivalent
of the Ministry of Truth airbrushed out most references to Yahweh’s
girlfriend...
Cain & Able never existed. Adam and Eve never existed. They’re fables.
There is no evidence, other than Biblical accounts, that the
‘Israelites’
were slaves in Egypt. There is evidence, lots of it, that at the time Joshua
marched outside the walls of Jericho, Jericho had no walls, as it had been
conquered and the walls razed by someone else decades prior. And no, the sun
did not stand still for a day; that would really have meant that the Earth
stopped rotating, and people would have noticed the sudden stop... in the
milliseconds before the released kinetic energy vaporized them all. And,
should they have survived by some miracle, there were astronomers in places
line India and China and the Americas who would have noticed the long
twilights or the long night. Genesis is all fables. Exodus, Joshua, the same.
Particularly the plagues in Egypt and the bits about wooden staffs turning
into snakes.
What an amazing colleciton of anti-religious propaganda.
facts are ‘anti-religious propaganda’? Pray elaborate.
Post by Paul S Person
Better watch out -- someone a bit unstable might read that and you
would find yourself responsible for a Terrorist Act.
Interesting. Where did _that_ come from?
Wolffan
2020-04-03 21:18:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wolffan
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
,
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course they
can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried to
emulate
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why writers
create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it on
with
his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were
annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in
providing
role
models.
Hey, there’s more incest in the Bible than in Game of
Thrones.
Well, when you start with *two* humans, one of whom is a clone of
the other with one chromosome changed.....
And who did their kids marry XXXXX shack up with ?
Of course, that first person probably had perfect DNA, no bad
stuff.
Lynn
multi-century-old Noah, his equally elderly wife, their three sons,
and
the
sons’ wives. Lots and lots of incest to be had... And Noah was
well
after
the ‘first person’ with the ‘perfect DNA’. I won’t go into
the
two
different Flood stories (one had just two of each animal, one had
two
of
the
‘unclean’ animals and _seven_ od the ‘clean’ ones. As the
clean/unclean division wasn’t handed down until Moses, exactly how
did
Noah
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder, rape,
genocide,
atrocity, and more.
Just like the news of today.
Lynn
CNN/FOX/whatever ain’t supposed to be holy books.
Oh don't worry, they are not.
Lynn
then why did you mention today’s news? Fact: the Bible is _full_ of
murder,
rape, support for slavery, etc... and is supposed to be a guide. You
said
so
yourself. A guide to being a rapist, a murderer, a slave-holder?
Comparing
it
to ’the news of today’ makes zero sense.
My point was that people have not changed since Cain killed his brother
Able. The first murder occurred in the second generation.
Lynn
And what does that have to do with using the Bible for ‘guidance’? The
collected folk tales of neolithic/early bronze age goatherds have very little
to do with current events. Especially as most of those tales were stolen from
others... and the ones whch weren’t were heavily edited by later
generations. For example, before he became the One True God, m’man Yahweh
had a female consort who was almost as powerful as he was. The consort became
an unperson (ungoddess?) when the followers of Yahweh had a bit of an
argument with some ol’ boys who had a powerful goddess and the equivalent
of the Ministry of Truth airbrushed out most references to Yahweh’s
girlfriend...
Cain & Able never existed. Adam and Eve never existed. They’re fables.
There is no evidence, other than Biblical accounts, that the ‘Israelites’
were slaves in Egypt. There is evidence, lots of it, that at the time Joshua
marched outside the walls of Jericho, Jericho had no walls, as it had been
conquered and the walls razed by someone else decades prior. And no, the sun
did not stand still for a day; that would really have meant that the Earth
stopped rotating, and people would have noticed the sudden stop... in the
milliseconds before the released kinetic energy vaporized them all. And,
should they have survived by some miracle, there were astronomers in places
line India and China and the Americas who would have noticed the long
twilights or the long night. Genesis is all fables. Exodus, Joshua, the same.
Particularly the plagues in Egypt and the bits about wooden staffs turning
into snakes.
What an amazing colleciton of anti-religious propaganda.
facts are ‘anti-religious propaganda’? Pray elaborate.
I see no facts worth mentioning.
Then you wouldn’t know a fact if one bit you on the arse.
Just irrelevancies.
But what can be expected from the anti-religious fanatic crowd?
Laddie, I’m a deacon and an ex-altar boy. If that’s an anti-religious
fanatic...
Post by Wolffan
Post by Paul S Person
Better watch out -- someone a bit unstable might read that and you
would find yourself responsible for a Terrorist Act.
Interesting. Where did _that_ come from?
It is unavoidable.
yeah, right.
Any strongly-held ideology will eventually inspire someone to action.
as you’re wrong about my being an anti-religious fanatic, you’re wrong
here too.
This is not an argument against belief; it is a caution on how belief
is expressed. But, be my guest. Better speech than action.
yep, you’re a nutbag.
Paul S Person
2020-04-04 16:46:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
,
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course they
can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried to
emulate
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why writers
create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it on
with
his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were
annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in
providing
role
models.
Hey, there’s more incest in the Bible than in Game of
Thrones.
Well, when you start with *two* humans, one of whom is a clone of
the other with one chromosome changed.....
And who did their kids marry XXXXX shack up with ?
Of course, that first person probably had perfect DNA, no bad
stuff.
Lynn
multi-century-old Noah, his equally elderly wife, their three sons,
and
the
sons’ wives. Lots and lots of incest to be had... And Noah was
well
after
the ‘first person’ with the ‘perfect DNA’. I won’t go into
the
two
different Flood stories (one had just two of each animal, one had
two
of
the
‘unclean’ animals and _seven_ od the ‘clean’ ones. As the
clean/unclean division wasn’t handed down until Moses, exactly how
did
Noah
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder, rape,
genocide,
atrocity, and more.
Just like the news of today.
Lynn
CNN/FOX/whatever ain’t supposed to be holy books.
Oh don't worry, they are not.
Lynn
then why did you mention today’s news? Fact: the Bible is _full_ of
murder,
rape, support for slavery, etc... and is supposed to be a guide. You
said
so
yourself. A guide to being a rapist, a murderer, a slave-holder?
Comparing
it
to ’the news of today’ makes zero sense.
My point was that people have not changed since Cain killed his brother
Able. The first murder occurred in the second generation.
Lynn
And what does that have to do with using the Bible for ‘guidance’? The
collected folk tales of neolithic/early bronze age goatherds have very little
to do with current events. Especially as most of those tales were stolen from
others... and the ones whch weren’t were heavily edited by later
generations. For example, before he became the One True God, m’man Yahweh
had a female consort who was almost as powerful as he was. The consort became
an unperson (ungoddess?) when the followers of Yahweh had a bit of an
argument with some ol’ boys who had a powerful goddess and the equivalent
of the Ministry of Truth airbrushed out most references to Yahweh’s
girlfriend...
Cain & Able never existed. Adam and Eve never existed. They’re fables.
There is no evidence, other than Biblical accounts, that the ‘Israelites’
were slaves in Egypt. There is evidence, lots of it, that at the time Joshua
marched outside the walls of Jericho, Jericho had no walls, as it had been
conquered and the walls razed by someone else decades prior. And no, the sun
did not stand still for a day; that would really have meant that the Earth
stopped rotating, and people would have noticed the sudden stop... in the
milliseconds before the released kinetic energy vaporized them all. And,
should they have survived by some miracle, there were astronomers in places
line India and China and the Americas who would have noticed the long
twilights or the long night. Genesis is all fables. Exodus, Joshua, the same.
Particularly the plagues in Egypt and the bits about wooden staffs turning
into snakes.
What an amazing colleciton of anti-religious propaganda.
facts are ‘anti-religious propaganda’? Pray elaborate.
I see no facts worth mentioning.
Then you wouldn’t know a fact if one bit you on the arse.
Just irrelevancies.
You ignored the important part:

the facts are /not worth mentioning/ because they are /not relevant/
to anything

You are confusing scholarship with reality.
But what can be expected from the anti-religious fanatic crowd?
Laddie, I’m a deacon and an ex-altar boy. If that’s an anti-religious
fanatic...
That is how you are coming across.

What, you thought something else?
Post by Paul S Person
Better watch out -- someone a bit unstable might read that and you
would find yourself responsible for a Terrorist Act.
Interesting. Where did _that_ come from?
It is unavoidable.
yeah, right.
Any strongly-held ideology will eventually inspire someone to action.
as you’re wrong about my being an anti-religious fanatic, you’re wrong
here too.
If it quacks like a duck ...
This is not an argument against belief; it is a caution on how belief
is expressed. But, be my guest. Better speech than action.
yep, you’re a nutbag.
Because I support freedom of speech?
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."
Wolffan
2020-04-04 17:43:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Wolffan
Post by Wolffan
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
m>
,
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course
they
can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried
to
emulate
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why writers
create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it on
with
his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were
annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in
providing
role
models.
Hey, there’s more incest in the Bible than in Game of
Thrones.
Well, when you start with *two* humans, one of whom is a clone
of
the other with one chromosome changed.....
And who did their kids marry XXXXX shack up with ?
Of course, that first person probably had perfect DNA, no bad
stuff.
Lynn
multi-century-old Noah, his equally elderly wife, their three
sons,
and
the
sons’ wives. Lots and lots of incest to be had... And Noah was
well
after
the ‘first person’ with the ‘perfect DNA’. I won’t go
into
the
two
different Flood stories (one had just two of each animal, one had
two
of
the
‘unclean’ animals and _seven_ od the ‘clean’ ones. As the
clean/unclean division wasn’t handed down until Moses, exactly
how
did
Noah
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder, rape,
genocide,
atrocity, and more.
Just like the news of today.
Lynn
CNN/FOX/whatever ain’t supposed to be holy books.
Oh don't worry, they are not.
Lynn
then why did you mention today’s news? Fact: the Bible is _full_ of
murder,
rape, support for slavery, etc... and is supposed to be a guide. You
said
so
yourself. A guide to being a rapist, a murderer, a slave-holder?
Comparing
it
to ’the news of today’ makes zero sense.
My point was that people have not changed since Cain killed his brother
Able. The first murder occurred in the second generation.
Lynn
And what does that have to do with using the Bible for ‘guidance’?
The
collected folk tales of neolithic/early bronze age goatherds have very
little
to do with current events. Especially as most of those tales were stolen
from
others... and the ones whch weren’t were heavily edited by later
generations. For example, before he became the One True God, m’man
Yahweh
had a female consort who was almost as powerful as he was. The consort
became
an unperson (ungoddess?) when the followers of Yahweh had a bit of an
argument with some ol’ boys who had a powerful goddess and the
equivalent
of the Ministry of Truth airbrushed out most references to Yahweh’s
girlfriend...
Cain & Able never existed. Adam and Eve never existed. They’re
fables.
There is no evidence, other than Biblical accounts, that the
‘Israelites’
were slaves in Egypt. There is evidence, lots of it, that at the time
Joshua
marched outside the walls of Jericho, Jericho had no walls, as it had
been
conquered and the walls razed by someone else decades prior. And no, the
sun
did not stand still for a day; that would really have meant that the
Earth
stopped rotating, and people would have noticed the sudden stop... in
the
milliseconds before the released kinetic energy vaporized them all. And,
should they have survived by some miracle, there were astronomers in
places
line India and China and the Americas who would have noticed the long
twilights or the long night. Genesis is all fables. Exodus, Joshua, the
same.
Particularly the plagues in Egypt and the bits about wooden staffs
turning
into snakes.
What an amazing colleciton of anti-religious propaganda.
facts are ‘anti-religious propaganda’? Pray elaborate.
I see no facts worth mentioning.
Then you wouldn’t know a fact if one bit you on the arse.
Just irrelevancies.
the facts are /not worth mentioning/ because they are /not relevant/
to anything
You are confusing scholarship with reality.
moving the goalposts, laddie.
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Wolffan
But what can be expected from the anti-religious fanatic crowd?
Laddie, I’m a deacon and an ex-altar boy. If that’s an anti-religious
fanatic...
That is how you are coming across.
nope.
Post by Paul S Person
What, you thought something else?
you clearly can’t think.
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Wolffan
Post by Wolffan
Post by Paul S Person
Better watch out -- someone a bit unstable might read that and you
would find yourself responsible for a Terrorist Act.
Interesting. Where did _that_ come from?
It is unavoidable.
yeah, right.
Any strongly-held ideology will eventually inspire someone to action.
as you’re wrong about my being an anti-religious fanatic, you’re wrong
here too.
If it quacks like a duck ...
and now you’re trolling.
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Wolffan
This is not an argument against belief; it is a caution on how belief
is expressed. But, be my guest. Better speech than action.
yep, you’re a nutbag.
Because I support freedom of speech?
_you_ would be the one trying to shut down _my_ speech, laddie.
Paul S Person
2020-04-05 17:20:13 UTC
Permalink
<looks like I omitted two levels of Wolffan/Person>
<the start of the discussion>
Post by Wolffan
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course
they
can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried
to
emulate
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why writers
create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
<the response to the question>
Post by Wolffan
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
The Bible.
<an exercise in smart-assery>
Post by Wolffan
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by David Johnston
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it on
with
his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were
annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in
providing
role
models.
<continued by a kindred spirit>
Post by Wolffan
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Hey, there’s more incest in the Bible than in Game of
Thrones.
<snip a couple of reasonable responses>
<and return to the onslaught>
Post by Wolffan
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
multi-century-old Noah, his equally elderly wife, their three
sons,
and
the
sons’ wives. Lots and lots of incest to be had... And Noah was
well
after
the ‘first person’ with the ‘perfect DNA’. I won’t go
into
the
two
different Flood stories (one had just two of each animal, one had
two
of
the
‘unclean’ animals and _seven_ od the ‘clean’ ones. As the
clean/unclean division wasn’t handed down until Moses, exactly
how
did
Noah
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder, rape,
genocide,
atrocity, and more.
which is what triggered my "anti-religious fanatic alert".

Who else but an anti-religious fanatic would even /think/ that this
had anything to do with
Post by Wolffan
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
The Bible.
and, when faced with a relevant fact (relevent to /his/ post, not the
Post by Wolffan
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Lynn McGuire
Just like the news of today.
Lynn
CNN/FOX/whatever ain’t supposed to be holy books.
<snippo>
Post by Wolffan
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Paul S Person
And what does that have to do with using the Bible for ‘guidance’?
The
collected folk tales of neolithic/early bronze age goatherds have very
little
to do with current events. Especially as most of those tales were stolen
from
others... and the ones whch weren’t were heavily edited by later
generations. For example, before he became the One True God, m’man
Yahweh
had a female consort who was almost as powerful as he was. The consort
became
an unperson (ungoddess?) when the followers of Yahweh had a bit of an
argument with some ol’ boys who had a powerful goddess and the
equivalent
of the Ministry of Truth airbrushed out most references to Yahweh’s
girlfriend...
Cain & Able never existed. Adam and Eve never existed. They’re
fables.
There is no evidence, other than Biblical accounts, that the
‘Israelites’
were slaves in Egypt. There is evidence, lots of it, that at the time
Joshua
marched outside the walls of Jericho, Jericho had no walls, as it had
been
conquered and the walls razed by someone else decades prior. And no, the
sun
did not stand still for a day; that would really have meant that the
Earth
stopped rotating, and people would have noticed the sudden stop... in
the
milliseconds before the released kinetic energy vaporized them all. And,
should they have survived by some miracle, there were astronomers in
places
line India and China and the Americas who would have noticed the long
twilights or the long night. Genesis is all fables. Exodus, Joshua, the
same.
Particularly the plagues in Egypt and the bits about wooden staffs
turning
into snakes.
<this is all Person/Wolffan>
Post by Wolffan
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Paul S Person
What an amazing colleciton of anti-religious propaganda.
facts are ‘anti-religious propaganda’? Pray elaborate.
I see no facts worth mentioning.
Then you wouldn’t know a fact if one bit you on the arse.
Just irrelevancies.
the facts are /not worth mentioning/ because they are /not relevant/
to anything
You are confusing scholarship with reality.
moving the goalposts, laddie.
No, you simply /missed/ the second part of my statement. The most
important part. I clearly stated that the facts you cited were
irrelevant; you just didn't notice it. And went right on writing.
Post by Wolffan
Post by Paul S Person
But what can be expected from the anti-religious fanatic crowd?
Laddie, I’m a deacon and an ex-altar boy. If that’s an anti-religious
fanatic...
That is how you are coming across.
nope.
Yep. The passages you wrote above can have no other interpretation.
They fit right into the Dawkins tradition.
Post by Wolffan
Post by Paul S Person
What, you thought something else?
you clearly can’t think.
Oh, and here's an important clue for the future:

/other people/ tell you how you are coming across

you don't tell them how you are coming across
Post by Wolffan
Post by Paul S Person
You are confusing scholarship with reality.
But just keep puffing yourself up and see what happens.
Post by Wolffan
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Paul S Person
Better watch out -- someone a bit unstable might read that and you
would find yourself responsible for a Terrorist Act.
Interesting. Where did _that_ come from?
It is unavoidable.
yeah, right.
Any strongly-held ideology will eventually inspire someone to action.
as you’re wrong about my being an anti-religious fanatic, you’re wrong
here too.
If it quacks like a duck ...
and now you’re trolling.
Merely referring to a traditional saying.

But perhaps you aren't aware of it.
Post by Wolffan
Post by Paul S Person
This is not an argument against belief; it is a caution on how belief
is expressed. But, be my guest. Better speech than action.
yep, you’re a nutbag.
Because I support freedom of speech?
_you_ would be the one trying to shut down _my_ speech, laddie.
I am not trying to shut down your speech.

Indeed, I would love to hear more of it -- in particular, just what
definition of "holy" you are using that makes this statement make
Post by Wolffan
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Paul S Person
CNN/FOX/whatever ain’t supposed to be holy books.
The normal senses don't seem to apply:
1. God's written Word.
2. The record of the Mighty Acts of God.
3. The revelation of God's nature, and Man's status.
4. A statement of Faith, which our Faith responds to.
others, no doubt exist -- and they are /not/ mutually exclusive.
Indeed, they tend, when fully develop, to overlap each other.

But /none/ of them allow a distinction between worldly evils reported
in the Bible and those reported by the news.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."
Titus G
2020-04-05 21:19:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Wolffan
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder, rape,
genocide,
atrocity, and more.
which is what triggered my "anti-religious fanatic alert".
Who else but an anti-religious fanatic would even /think/ that this
had anything to do with [The Bible].
Someone who had read it?
Robert Carnegie
2020-04-05 21:46:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Titus G
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Wolffan
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder, rape,
genocide,
atrocity, and more.
which is what triggered my "anti-religious fanatic alert".
Who else but an anti-religious fanatic would even /think/ that this
had anything to do with [The Bible].
Someone who had read it?
<https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-most-popular-comic-book>
I think that too many questions have been merged.
I was going to answer "Why did comic books become
popular?" and my answer is sex and violence.
Titles like “Shock SuspenStories”, “The Vault of
Horror”, “Young Romance”, and “Picture Stories
From the Bible” thrilled and disgusted readers
across the U.S. For various reasons there is less
of this sort of thing nowadays, in comics anyway.
But in their heyday, oh my.

Answered by
Robert Carnegie
86 views
0 upvotes

Who has not actually examined "Picture Stories
From the Bible". But has read the bible.

An evangelist arranges a meeting with a church
member who is making a donation. The evangelist
comes out to say that unfortunately the church
member died during the meeting. So the church
member's wife goes in to speak with the evangelist.
The evangelist comes out to say that unfortunately,
she has died, too.

ObSF: someone /must/ have written a novel in
which the church is founded by vampires.
I'm not sure a publisher would take it, though.
Kevrob
2020-04-05 23:26:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Carnegie
ObSF: someone /must/ have written a novel in
which the church is founded by vampires.
I'm not sure a publisher would take it, though.
Possible titles:

"Take and Drink" or "This Is My Blood,"
the second a bit more on the nose.

Have you seen this?

https://hubpages.com/religion-philosophy/Judas-Iscariot-Father-of-All-Vampires

Have you read Kurt Busiek's "Astro City" comics? {KBAC}
They include "The Confessor & Altar Boy."

https://astrocity.fandom.com/wiki/Confessor_(Jeremiah_Parrish)

Kevin R
Robert Carnegie
2020-04-06 01:14:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kevrob
Post by Robert Carnegie
ObSF: someone /must/ have written a novel in
which the church is founded by vampires.
I'm not sure a publisher would take it, though.
"Take and Drink" or "This Is My Blood,"
the second a bit more on the nose.
Have you seen this?
https://hubpages.com/religion-philosophy/Judas-Iscariot-Father-of-All-Vampires
Not till now. "I never drink... wine." Hmm. ;-)

I don't think that book is 1170 years old, though.

<https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/IDoNotDrinkWine>
: Count Dracula doesn't say it in the book, but he's
never seen by his guest eating or drinking (publicly).
Post by Kevrob
Have you read Kurt Busiek's "Astro City" comics? {KBAC}
They include "The Confessor & Altar Boy."
https://astrocity.fandom.com/wiki/Confessor_(Jeremiah_Parrish)
That, yes, with... relish. (Robert, stop it.)

It's not how it sounds in 2020 and may have sounded
in 1996 (running alongside _Father Ted_), it is
a Batman and Robin superhero team in clerical dress.
If Batman was... Catholic. [*] And yes Altar Boy
is in for a surprise... still not how it sounds.

[*]
<https://www.quora.com/What-religion-is-the-fictional-DC-Comics-male-character-Bruce-Wayne-Batman>
goes Episcopalian / Catholic / lapsed / atheist,
probably depending on who's in charge: one episode
has on display the type of cross with a little man
on it, which seems to be Bat-Chekhov Vampire Repellent.
That's a Catholic one, but maybe they just work best.
Dimensional Traveler
2020-04-05 22:04:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Titus G
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Wolffan
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of
murder, rape,
genocide,
atrocity, and more.
which is what triggered my "anti-religious fanatic alert".
Who else but an anti-religious fanatic would even /think/ that this
had anything to do with [The Bible].
Someone who had read it?
The rantings of a religious fanatic. *GD&R*
--
"You need to believe in things that aren't true. How else can they become?"
Wolffan
2020-04-06 00:33:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Titus G
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Wolffan
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of
murder, rape,
genocide,
atrocity, and more.
which is what triggered my "anti-religious fanatic alert".
Who else but an anti-religious fanatic would even /think/ that this
had anything to do with [The Bible].
Someone who had read it?
The rantings of a religious fanatic. *GD&R*
Not just a religious fanatic, but a religious fanatic who thinks that _his
particular version of a major religion is the *only* correct version._
Kevrob
2020-04-06 01:09:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wolffan
Not just a religious fanatic, but a religious fanatic who thinks that _his
particular version of a major religion is the *only* correct version._
That's just what a heretic would say...

[/sarc]

Kevin R
Dimensional Traveler
2020-04-06 03:05:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wolffan
Post by Titus G
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Wolffan
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of
murder, rape,
genocide,
atrocity, and more.
which is what triggered my "anti-religious fanatic alert".
Who else but an anti-religious fanatic would even /think/ that this
had anything to do with [The Bible].
Someone who had read it?
The rantings of a religious fanatic. *GD&R*
Not just a religious fanatic, but a religious fanatic who thinks that _his
particular version of a major religion is the *only* correct version._
But you repeat yourself.... ;)
--
"You need to believe in things that aren't true. How else can they become?"
Paul S Person
2020-04-06 16:46:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wolffan
Post by Titus G
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Wolffan
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of
murder, rape,
genocide,
atrocity, and more.
which is what triggered my "anti-religious fanatic alert".
Who else but an anti-religious fanatic would even /think/ that this
had anything to do with [The Bible].
Someone who had read it?
The rantings of a religious fanatic. *GD&R*
Not just a religious fanatic, but a religious fanatic who thinks that _his
particular version of a major religion is the *only* correct version._
I'm not entirely sure how a discussion of how someone came to go into
Violent Attack Mode when he saw "the Bible" on Usenet morphed into a
characterization of someone as an intolerant religious fanatic.
Indeed, I'm not even sure who is being referred to here.

But I /would/ like to point out that only one has claimed some measure
of religious authority (depending on what "Deacon" means in his
particular organization).

I merely call them as I see them.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."
Wolffan
2020-04-06 16:57:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Wolffan
Post by Titus G
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Wolffan
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of
murder, rape,
genocide,
atrocity, and more.
which is what triggered my "anti-religious fanatic alert".
Who else but an anti-religious fanatic would even /think/ that this
had anything to do with [The Bible].
Someone who had read it?
The rantings of a religious fanatic. *GD&R*
Not just a religious fanatic, but a religious fanatic who thinks that _his
particular version of a major religion is the *only* correct version._
I'm not entirely sure how a discussion of how someone came to go into
Violent Attack Mode when he saw "the Bible" on Usenet morphed into a
characterization of someone as an intolerant religious fanatic.
Indeed, I'm not even sure who is being referred to here.
Because, you ass, the only one who went into Violent Attack Mode is _you_

And yes, it’s _you_ who’s the intolerant religious fanatic... who lacks
basic knowledge of the Bible, usually revealed in Sunday school. Some of us
(me) had to _memorise_ large sections of the Old and the New Testaments. My
elementary school was on the grounds of my parish church, my high school was
next door to the _cathedral_. Church schools, of course, both of them. As was
the university I went to. And _you_ had the audacity to call _me_ an
anti-religious fanatic... You’re an ass. St Thomas Aquinas had something to
say about the overly pious who make false statements in what they wrongly
assume is the service of God. You might profit by reading some of his
writings. Assuming that you can actually comprehend the written word,
something unclear at this time.
Paul S Person
2020-04-07 16:51:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wolffan
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Wolffan
Post by Titus G
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Wolffan
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of
murder, rape,
genocide,
atrocity, and more.
which is what triggered my "anti-religious fanatic alert".
Who else but an anti-religious fanatic would even /think/ that this
had anything to do with [The Bible].
Someone who had read it?
The rantings of a religious fanatic. *GD&R*
Not just a religious fanatic, but a religious fanatic who thinks that _his
particular version of a major religion is the *only* correct version._
I'm not entirely sure how a discussion of how someone came to go into
Violent Attack Mode when he saw "the Bible" on Usenet morphed into a
characterization of someone as an intolerant religious fanatic.
Indeed, I'm not even sure who is being referred to here.
Because, you ass, the only one who went into Violent Attack Mode is _you_
Touched a nerve, did I?

Yet you have not yet even offered to explain why your citing of facts
established by authentic Biblical scholars had /anything to do/ with
someone claiming the Bible as a book that influenced her life.

Nor have you explained what definition of "holy" you are using in the
phrase "holy book", and also what your assertion that CNN etc is not a
"holy book" was intended to mean.

I, OTOH, have clearly indicated what set me off.
Post by Wolffan
And yes, it’s _you_ who’s the intolerant religious fanatic... who lacks
basic knowledge of the Bible, usually revealed in Sunday school. Some of us
(me) had to _memorise_ large sections of the Old and the New Testaments. My
elementary school was on the grounds of my parish church, my high school was
next door to the _cathedral_. Church schools, of course, both of them. As was
the university I went to. And _you_ had the audacity to call _me_ an
anti-religious fanatic... You’re an ass. St Thomas Aquinas had something to
say about the overly pious who make false statements in what they wrongly
assume is the service of God. You might profit by reading some of his
writings. Assuming that you can actually comprehend the written word,
something unclear at this time.
A rather limited education, I would say, since it was entirely
religious in nature. Very comprehensive, I am sure, in many ways, and
well done by dedicated persons, to be sure, but still ... limited.

Actually, I read Aquinas in the edition published as part of the
/Great Books of the Western World/ collection. Sadly, it omitted some
parts. But it was very interesting. Nothing I said was a "false
statement in the service of God". God can take care of Himself.

I merely reacted to what I saw -- a vicious attack on the very concept
of living a life influenced by the Bible.

Feel free to explain why it was nothing of the kind.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."
Wolffan
2020-04-07 17:47:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Wolffan
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Wolffan
Post by Titus G
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Wolffan
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of
murder, rape,
genocide,
atrocity, and more.
which is what triggered my "anti-religious fanatic alert".
Who else but an anti-religious fanatic would even /think/ that this
had anything to do with [The Bible].
Someone who had read it?
The rantings of a religious fanatic. *GD&R*
Not just a religious fanatic, but a religious fanatic who thinks that _his
particular version of a major religion is the *only* correct version._
I'm not entirely sure how a discussion of how someone came to go into
Violent Attack Mode when he saw "the Bible" on Usenet morphed into a
characterization of someone as an intolerant religious fanatic.
Indeed, I'm not even sure who is being referred to here.
Because, you ass, the only one who went into Violent Attack Mode is _you_
Touched a nerve, did I?
trolling, trolling, rest deleted unread.

Wolffan
2020-04-06 00:30:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Titus G
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Wolffan
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder,
rape,
genocide,
atrocity, and more.
which is what triggered my "anti-religious fanatic alert".
Who else but an anti-religious fanatic would even /think/ that this
had anything to do with [The Bible].
Someone who had read it?
Well, yes.
Paul S Person
2020-04-06 16:32:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Titus G
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Wolffan
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder, rape,
genocide,
atrocity, and more.
which is what triggered my "anti-religious fanatic alert".
Who else but an anti-religious fanatic would even /think/ that this
had anything to do with [The Bible].
Which was an answer to a question about books that influenced a
person's life.
Post by Titus G
Someone who had read it?
But what did it have to do with someone claiming it had influenced
their life?

Are you saying it made that person a murderer, rapist, genocidal,
atrocious, and more?

If not, what relevance did your statement have to the topic at hand?

It is the /random nature/ of the response which suggests that it is an
attack by an anti-religious fanatic who, like one of Pavlov's dogs,
always responds to the bell.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."
Wolffan
2020-04-06 16:46:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Titus G
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Wolffan
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder,
rape,
genocide,
atrocity, and more.
which is what triggered my "anti-religious fanatic alert".
Who else but an anti-religious fanatic would even /think/ that this
had anything to do with [The Bible].
Which was an answer to a question about books that influenced a
person's life.
Post by Titus G
Someone who had read it?
But what did it have to do with someone claiming it had influenced
their life?
Troll, troll troll your boat, gently down the stream...
Titus G
2020-04-07 04:10:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Titus G
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Wolffan
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder, rape,
genocide,
atrocity, and more.
which is what triggered my "anti-religious fanatic alert".
Who else but an anti-religious fanatic would even /think/ that this
had anything to do with [The Bible].
Which was an answer to a question about books that influenced a
person's life.
Post by Titus G
Someone who had read it?
But what did it have to do with someone claiming it had influenced
their life?
Are you saying it made that person a murderer, rapist, genocidal,
atrocious, and more?
If not, what relevance did your statement have to the topic at hand?
It is the /random nature/ of the response which suggests that it is an
attack by an anti-religious fanatic who, like one of Pavlov's dogs,
always responds to the bell.
My impression is that it is you, Paul, who initially responded to
Wolffan's facts with an attack as if from a religious fanatic who, like
one of Pavlov's dogs, always responds to the bell.
Paul S Person
2020-04-07 16:52:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Titus G
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Titus G
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Wolffan
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder, rape,
genocide,
atrocity, and more.
which is what triggered my "anti-religious fanatic alert".
Who else but an anti-religious fanatic would even /think/ that this
had anything to do with [The Bible].
Which was an answer to a question about books that influenced a
person's life.
Post by Titus G
Someone who had read it?
But what did it have to do with someone claiming it had influenced
their life?
Are you saying it made that person a murderer, rapist, genocidal,
atrocious, and more?
If not, what relevance did your statement have to the topic at hand?
It is the /random nature/ of the response which suggests that it is an
attack by an anti-religious fanatic who, like one of Pavlov's dogs,
always responds to the bell.
My impression is that it is you, Paul, who initially responded to
Wolffan's facts with an attack as if from a religious fanatic who, like
one of Pavlov's dogs, always responds to the bell.
Well put!

I am grieved to learn that I am coming across that way.

I wish I could say that that would change. It might, or it might not.
My record on such changes is spotty.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."
Wolffan
2020-04-06 00:29:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Wolffan
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder,
rape,
genocide,
atrocity, and more.
which is what triggered my "anti-religious fanatic alert".
Who else but an anti-religious fanatic would even /think/ that this
had anything to do with
The Bible _is_ full of murder, rape, genocide, atrocity, and more, from
Joshua rampaging through Canaan to assorted stonings and crucifixions, by way
of blindings (Samson comes to mind) and mass-murder of prisoners (Samuel)...
It’s a simple fact, evident to anyone who’s actually read it. I am
_required_ to read it to be a deacon.

You’re trolling.
Paul S Person
2020-04-06 16:40:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wolffan
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Wolffan
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder,
rape,
genocide,
atrocity, and more.
which is what triggered my "anti-religious fanatic alert".
Who else but an anti-religious fanatic would even /think/ that this
had anything to do with
The Bible _is_ full of murder, rape, genocide, atrocity, and more, from
Joshua rampaging through Canaan to assorted stonings and crucifixions, by way
of blindings (Samson comes to mind) and mass-murder of prisoners (Samuel)...
It’s a simple fact, evident to anyone who’s actually read it. I am
_required_ to read it to be a deacon.
Samson may come to mind but, IIRC, he mostly killed Philistines, who
were rulers, not prisoners. There would, no doubt, have been some
collateral damage.
Post by Wolffan
You’re trolling.
Nope.

And I'm /still/ waiting for a non-fanatical reason that set your
discourse off. Because it looks like you saw the words "The Bible" and
then responded as if you were conditioned by Pavlov himself to do so.

It is the /irrelevance/ of your response to the issue-at-hand that
tags you as an anti-religious fanatic.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."
Wolffan
2020-04-06 16:45:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Wolffan
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Wolffan
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder,
rape,
genocide,
atrocity, and more.
which is what triggered my "anti-religious fanatic alert".
Who else but an anti-religious fanatic would even /think/ that this
had anything to do with
The Bible _is_ full of murder, rape, genocide, atrocity, and more, from
Joshua rampaging through Canaan to assorted stonings and crucifixions, by way
of blindings (Samson comes to mind) and mass-murder of prisoners (Samuel)...
It’s a simple fact, evident to anyone who’s actually read it. I am
_required_ to read it to be a deacon.
Samson may come to mind but, IIRC, he mostly killed Philistines, who
were rulers, not prisoners. There would, no doubt, have been some
collateral damage.
Samson was _blinded_ you ass. That’s the atrocity... Samuel grabbed
Saul’s sword and killed prisoners. You really don’t know a bloody thing
about the Bible.

you’re trolling. rest deleted unread.
Paul S Person
2020-04-07 16:57:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Wolffan
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Wolffan
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder,
rape,
genocide,
atrocity, and more.
which is what triggered my "anti-religious fanatic alert".
Who else but an anti-religious fanatic would even /think/ that this
had anything to do with
The Bible _is_ full of murder, rape, genocide, atrocity, and more, from
Joshua rampaging through Canaan to assorted stonings and crucifixions, by way
of blindings (Samson comes to mind) and mass-murder of prisoners (Samuel)...
It’s a simple fact, evident to anyone who’s actually read it. I am
_required_ to read it to be a deacon.
Samson may come to mind but, IIRC, he mostly killed Philistines, who
were rulers, not prisoners. There would, no doubt, have been some
collateral damage.
Samson was _blinded_ you ass. That’s the atrocity... Samuel grabbed
Saul’s sword and killed prisoners. You really don’t know a bloody thing
about the Bible.
Yes: he was blinded, he powered a grindstone, his hair grew back, he
was chained to pillars, he pulled the building down and killed himself
and lot of Philistines.

Nothing there about "David's sword" or "killing prisoners".

But perhaps you have a different passage in mind.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."
h***@gmail.com
2020-04-06 17:03:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Wolffan
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Wolffan
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder,
rape,
genocide,
atrocity, and more.
which is what triggered my "anti-religious fanatic alert".
Who else but an anti-religious fanatic would even /think/ that this
had anything to do with
The Bible _is_ full of murder, rape, genocide, atrocity, and more, from
Joshua rampaging through Canaan to assorted stonings and crucifixions, by way
of blindings (Samson comes to mind) and mass-murder of prisoners (Samuel)...
It’s a simple fact, evident to anyone who’s actually read it. I am
_required_ to read it to be a deacon.
Samson may come to mind but, IIRC, he mostly killed Philistines, who
were rulers, not prisoners. There would, no doubt, have been some
collateral damage.
If that's your level of reading comprehension how do you enjoy books?
"blindings (Samson comes to mind)"

"and mass-murder of prisoners (Samuel)"

It's obvious that Samson is the blinding and Samuel is the mass murdering of prisoners.
Paul S Person
2020-04-07 17:03:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by h***@gmail.com
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Wolffan
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Wolffan
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder,
rape,
genocide,
atrocity, and more.
which is what triggered my "anti-religious fanatic alert".
Who else but an anti-religious fanatic would even /think/ that this
had anything to do with
The Bible _is_ full of murder, rape, genocide, atrocity, and more, from
Joshua rampaging through Canaan to assorted stonings and crucifixions, by way
of blindings (Samson comes to mind) and mass-murder of prisoners (Samuel)...
It’s a simple fact, evident to anyone who’s actually read it. I am
_required_ to read it to be a deacon.
Samson may come to mind but, IIRC, he mostly killed Philistines, who
were rulers, not prisoners. There would, no doubt, have been some
collateral damage.
If that's your level of reading comprehension how do you enjoy books?
"blindings (Samson comes to mind)"
"and mass-murder of prisoners (Samuel)"
It's obvious that Samson is the blinding and Samuel is the mass murdering of prisoners.
Well, that explains /that/.

Thanks for the clarification. It jars a memory, but not one matching
the characterization above.

Resarch finds this page
http://www.usefulbible.com/1samuel/samuel-king-agag.htm
which is probably the incident referred to.

Note: I'm not clear on how killing /one/ prisoner constitutes "mass
murder", but perhaps another passage applies.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."
Alan Baker
2020-04-02 04:47:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course they can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried to emulate
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why writers create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it on with his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in providing role
models.
Hey, there’s more incest in the Bible than in Game of Thrones.
Well, when you start with *two* humans, one of whom is a clone of
the other with one chromosome changed.....
And who did their kids marry XXXXX shack up with ?
Of course, that first person probably had perfect DNA, no bad stuff.
Lynn
multi-century-old Noah, his equally elderly wife, their three sons, and the
sons’ wives. Lots and lots of incest to be had... And Noah was well after
the ‘first person’ with the ‘perfect DNA’. I won’t go into the two
different Flood stories (one had just two of each animal, one had two of the
‘unclean’ animals and _seven_ od the ‘clean’ ones. As the
clean/unclean division wasn’t handed down until Moses, exactly how did Noah
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder, rape, genocide,
atrocity, and more.
Just like the news of today.
Lynn
CNN/FOX/whatever ain’t supposed to be holy books.
Oh don't worry, they are not.
Lynn
then why did you mention today’s news? Fact: the Bible is _full_ of murder,
rape, support for slavery, etc... and is supposed to be a guide. You said so
yourself. A guide to being a rapist, a murderer, a slave-holder? Comparing it
to ’the news of today’ makes zero sense.
So, par for Lynn's course, then?

:-)
Paul S Person
2020-04-02 17:27:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course they can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried to emulate
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why writers create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it on with his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in providing role
models.
Hey, there’s more incest in the Bible than in Game of Thrones.
Well, when you start with *two* humans, one of whom is a clone of
the other with one chromosome changed.....
And who did their kids marry XXXXX shack up with ?
Of course, that first person probably had perfect DNA, no bad stuff.
Lynn
multi-century-old Noah, his equally elderly wife, their three sons, and the
sons’ wives. Lots and lots of incest to be had... And Noah was well after
the ‘first person’ with the ‘perfect DNA’. I won’t go into the two
different Flood stories (one had just two of each animal, one had two of the
‘unclean’ animals and _seven_ od the ‘clean’ ones. As the
clean/unclean division wasn’t handed down until Moses, exactly how did
Noah
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder, rape, genocide,
atrocity, and more.
Just like the news of today.
Lynn
CNN/FOX/whatever ain’t supposed to be holy books.
I think you are confused about what "holy" means, when applied to a
book.

Here's a clue:

only God is holy
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."
o***@gmail.com
2020-04-02 19:27:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course they can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried to emulate
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why writers create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it on with his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in providing role
models.
Hey, there’s more incest in the Bible than in Game of Thrones.
Well, when you start with *two* humans, one of whom is a clone of
the other with one chromosome changed.....
And who did their kids marry XXXXX shack up with ?
Of course, that first person probably had perfect DNA, no bad stuff.
Lynn
multi-century-old Noah, his equally elderly wife, their three sons, and the
sons’ wives. Lots and lots of incest to be had... And Noah was well after
the ‘first person’ with the ‘perfect DNA’. I won’t go into the two
different Flood stories (one had just two of each animal, one had two of the
‘unclean’ animals and _seven_ od the ‘clean’ ones. As the
clean/unclean division wasn’t handed down until Moses, exactly how did Noah
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder, rape, genocide,
atrocity, and more.
Just like the news of today.
Lynn
CNN/FOX/whatever ain’t supposed to be holy books.
I think you are confused about what "holy" means, when applied to a
book.
only God is holy
....which one ?
Wolffan
2020-04-02 19:50:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course they can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried to
emulate
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why writers create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it on with his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in providing
role
models.
Hey, there’s more incest in the Bible than in Game of Thrones.
Well, when you start with *two* humans, one of whom is a clone of
the other with one chromosome changed.....
And who did their kids marry XXXXX shack up with ?
Of course, that first person probably had perfect DNA, no bad stuff.
Lynn
multi-century-old Noah, his equally elderly wife, their three sons, and the
sons’ wives. Lots and lots of incest to be had... And Noah was well after
the ‘first person’ with the ‘perfect DNA’. I won’t go into the
two
different Flood stories (one had just two of each animal, one had two of
the
‘unclean’ animals and _seven_ od the ‘clean’ ones. As the
clean/unclean division wasn’t handed down until Moses, exactly how did
Noah
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder, rape,
genocide,
atrocity, and more.
Just like the news of today.
Lynn
CNN/FOX/whatever ain’t supposed to be holy books.
I think you are confused about what "holy" means, when applied to a
book.
only God is holy
....which one ?
Crom.
Kevrob
2020-04-02 20:12:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Paul S Person
only God is holy
....which one ?
Crom.
Just don't piss him off by doing anything stupid,
like praying to him!

Kevin R
Chrysi Cat
2020-04-03 01:31:34 UTC
Permalink
<SNIP>
The Bible, the Q’ran, the Vedas, none of them holy, eh?
Nope, and neither is Harry Potter.
Has anyone *ever* suggested that was considered holy by anyone?

It's been considered UNholy by people who, ironically, probably agree
with more of the author's religious views than they /dis/agree with, as
Potter is as much a religious allegory as Middle Earth, but I haven't
seen anyone trying to use it as a _holy_ book.

(I've also seen a lot of people wishing they could support it without
supporting the author after the multiple times she's come out TERF, but
that's neither here nor there...)

<snip an irrelevant end>
--
Chrysi Cat
1/2 anthrocat, nearly 1/2 anthrofox, all magical
Transgoddess, quick to anger.
Call me Chrysi or call me Kat, I'll respond to either!
Dorothy J Heydt
2020-03-31 21:42:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by a***@gmail.com
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course they can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried
to emulate
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why writers create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it on with his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in providing role
models.
Hey, there’s more incest in the Bible than in Game of Thrones.
Well, when you start with *two* humans, one of whom is a clone of
the other with one chromosome changed.....
And who did their kids marry XXXXX shack up with ?
Of course, that first person probably had perfect DNA, no bad stuff.
Lynn
multi-century-old Noah, his equally elderly wife, their three sons, and the
sons’ wives. Lots and lots of incest to be had... And Noah was well after
the ‘first person’ with the ‘perfect DNA’. I won’t go into the two
different Flood stories (one had just two of each animal, one had two of the
‘unclean’ animals and _seven_ od the ‘clean’ ones. As the
clean/unclean division wasn’t handed down until Moses, exactly how did Noah
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder, rape, genocide,
atrocity, and more.
I'm inclined to think that "clean" and "unclean" in this context
means "edible" and "inedible."
--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
www.kithrup.com/~djheydt/
Paul S Person
2020-04-01 16:49:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by a***@gmail.com
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course they can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried
to emulate
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why writers create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it on with his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in providing role
models.
Hey, there’s more incest in the Bible than in Game of Thrones.
Well, when you start with *two* humans, one of whom is a clone of
the other with one chromosome changed.....
And who did their kids marry XXXXX shack up with ?
Of course, that first person probably had perfect DNA, no bad stuff.
Lynn
multi-century-old Noah, his equally elderly wife, their three sons, and the
sons’ wives. Lots and lots of incest to be had... And Noah was well after
the ‘first person’ with the ‘perfect DNA’. I won’t go into the two
different Flood stories (one had just two of each animal, one had two of the
‘unclean’ animals and _seven_ od the ‘clean’ ones. As the
clean/unclean division wasn’t handed down until Moses, exactly how did Noah
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder, rape, genocide,
atrocity, and more.
I'm inclined to think that "clean" and "unclean" in this context
means "edible" and "inedible."
"Clean" and "unclean" refer to more than just food.

A more likely explanation is pagan religious practices, that is,
separating Israel from the Nations to be holy as God is holy.

To be sure, some things may have to do with hygiene.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."
Scott Lurndal
2020-04-01 15:18:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course they can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried to emulate
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why writers create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it on with his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in providing role
models.
Hey, there’s more incest in the Bible than in Game of Thrones.
Well, when you start with *two* humans, one of whom is a clone of
the other with one chromosome changed.....
And who did their kids marry XXXXX shack up with ?
Of course, that first person probably had perfect DNA, no bad stuff.
Lynn
multi-century-old Noah, his equally elderly wife, their three sons, and the
sons’ wives. Lots and lots of incest to be had... And Noah was well after
the ‘first person’ with the ‘perfect DNA’. I won’t go into the two
different Flood stories (one had just two of each animal, one had two of the
‘unclean’ animals and _seven_ od the ‘clean’ ones. As the
clean/unclean division wasn’t handed down until Moses, exactly how did Noah
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder, rape, genocide,
atrocity, and more.
Leaving aside the fact that there isn't enough water on the planet to cover all land;
nor sufficient energy for a planetwide 40 day long rainstorm.
James Nicoll
2020-04-01 15:27:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Scott Lurndal
Leaving aside the fact that there isn't enough water on the planet to cover all land;
nor sufficient energy for a planetwide 40 day long rainstorm.
The Flood is of course a fairy tale but long before humans were around,
there was a period when it may have rained for a million years.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnian_Pluvial_Event
--
My reviews can be found at http://jamesdavisnicoll.com/
My tor pieces at https://www.tor.com/author/james-davis-nicoll/
My Dreamwidth at https://james-davis-nicoll.dreamwidth.org/
My patreon is at https://www.patreon.com/jamesdnicoll
Paul S Person
2020-04-01 16:52:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Scott Lurndal
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course they can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried to emulate
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why writers create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it on with his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in providing role
models.
Hey, there’s more incest in the Bible than in Game of Thrones.
Well, when you start with *two* humans, one of whom is a clone of
the other with one chromosome changed.....
And who did their kids marry XXXXX shack up with ?
Of course, that first person probably had perfect DNA, no bad stuff.
Lynn
multi-century-old Noah, his equally elderly wife, their three sons, and the
sons’ wives. Lots and lots of incest to be had... And Noah was well after
the ‘first person’ with the ‘perfect DNA’. I won’t go into the two
different Flood stories (one had just two of each animal, one had two of the
‘unclean’ animals and _seven_ od the ‘clean’ ones. As the
clean/unclean division wasn’t handed down until Moses, exactly how did Noah
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder, rape, genocide,
atrocity, and more.
Leaving aside the fact that there isn't enough water on the planet to cover all land;
nor sufficient energy for a planetwide 40 day long rainstorm.
Well, not enough water/energy so far as Science knows, anyway.

But then, Science didn't know about Plate Tectonics until sometime in
the last century.

There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."
o***@gmail.com
2020-04-01 17:09:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
Please elucidate........precisely HOW one would demonstrate that.
J. Clarke
2020-04-01 21:25:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
Please elucidate........precisely HOW one would demonstrate that.
Well, let's see, ET shows up with a starship powered by bicycle pedals
that go from here to the Andromeda galaxy before the pedaler becomes
exhausted. I'm pretty sure that there would be quite a lot in that
that Science (at least _our_ Science) doesn't know about.
Peter Trei
2020-04-01 23:54:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
Please elucidate........precisely HOW one would demonstrate that.
By letting time pass, and research and exploration bring us new knowledge.

All of our history, we've been finding things out about the universe we didn't know about.
It would be illogical to think that process has now ended.

Pt
o***@gmail.com
2020-04-02 19:14:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Trei
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
Please elucidate........precisely HOW one would demonstrate that.
By letting time pass, and research and exploration bring us new knowledge.
All of our history, we've been finding things out about the universe we didn't know about.
It would be illogical to think that process has now ended.
Pt
....whoooooosh.....

If we don't know about "it", no statements -- relating to truth or anything else -- can be made about "it".

It's just teens playing at philosophy.
J. Clarke
2020-04-02 21:40:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Peter Trei
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
Please elucidate........precisely HOW one would demonstrate that.
By letting time pass, and research and exploration bring us new knowledge.
All of our history, we've been finding things out about the universe we didn't know about.
It would be illogical to think that process has now ended.
Pt
....whoooooosh.....
If we don't know about "it", no statements -- relating to truth or anything else -- can be made about "it".
It's just teens playing at philosophy.
So if we don't know about atoms no statements can be made about them?
Then how did we ever figure out that they exist so that we could start
learning about them?
o***@gmail.com
2020-04-02 23:48:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Peter Trei
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
Please elucidate........precisely HOW one would demonstrate that.
By letting time pass, and research and exploration bring us new knowledge.
All of our history, we've been finding things out about the universe we didn't know about.
It would be illogical to think that process has now ended.
Pt
....whoooooosh.....
If we don't know about "it", no statements -- relating to truth or anything else -- can be made about "it".
It's just teens playing at philosophy.
So if we don't know about atoms no statements can be made about them?
Then how did we ever figure out that they exist so that we could start
learning about them?
Again........whooooosh......

You, religiously, miss the point.
J. Clarke
2020-04-03 00:47:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by J. Clarke
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Peter Trei
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
Please elucidate........precisely HOW one would demonstrate that.
By letting time pass, and research and exploration bring us new knowledge.
All of our history, we've been finding things out about the universe we didn't know about.
It would be illogical to think that process has now ended.
Pt
....whoooooosh.....
If we don't know about "it", no statements -- relating to truth or anything else -- can be made about "it".
It's just teens playing at philosophy.
So if we don't know about atoms no statements can be made about them?
Then how did we ever figure out that they exist so that we could start
learning about them?
Again........whooooosh......
You, religiously, miss the point.
You...........are boring.
Paul S Person
2020-04-03 17:38:54 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 02 Apr 2020 17:40:48 -0400, J. Clarke
Post by J. Clarke
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Peter Trei
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
Please elucidate........precisely HOW one would demonstrate that.
By letting time pass, and research and exploration bring us new knowledge.
All of our history, we've been finding things out about the universe we didn't know about.
It would be illogical to think that process has now ended.
Pt
....whoooooosh.....
If we don't know about "it", no statements -- relating to truth or anything else -- can be made about "it".
It's just teens playing at philosophy.
So if we don't know about atoms no statements can be made about them?
Then how did we ever figure out that they exist so that we could start
learning about them?
Sadly, atomic theory existed at least as early as Lucretius; for all I
know, it may even have pre-Socratic.

Of course, it was not quite the same "atomic theory" as the one we
have today. But it did propose that all matter is made up of
teeny-tiny indivisible parts.

Aristotle and others believed the opposite: they believed that, if you
subdivided something, you could subdivide it forever and it would
still be that something, without limit.

In some early philosophers, the idea that everything was continuous
and that Nature abhorred a vacuum led to the interesting question "how
is movement possible?". But I digress.

A fair part of the history of science could be written as the Search
for the Atom.

So this isn't really that great an example of finding something new
and unexpected. It does, however, suggest that "teen philosophy" can
sometimes be quite productive!
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."
Kevrob
2020-04-03 17:53:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul S Person
Sadly, atomic theory existed at least as early as Lucretius; for
all I know, it may even have pre-Socratic.
You remember correctly. Atomic theory dates at least to
Democritus, and to his mentor, Leucippus.
Post by Paul S Person
Of course, it was not quite the same "atomic theory" as the one we
have today. But it did propose that all matter is made up of
teeny-tiny indivisible parts.
As for "holy book," some religious folk consider that the
de facto worship of the scripture, rather than of the ghod,
is a particular heresy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bibliolatry

The Catholics sling this at the "sola scriptura" Protestants,
for example. I stay on the sidelines of such fights. Nor do
I have a "favorite" Pokemon.

Kevin R
Robert Carnegie
2020-04-03 23:40:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kevrob
Post by Paul S Person
Sadly, atomic theory existed at least as early as Lucretius; for
all I know, it may even have pre-Socratic.
You remember correctly. Atomic theory dates at least to
Democritus, and to his mentor, Leucippus.
Post by Paul S Person
Of course, it was not quite the same "atomic theory" as the one we
have today. But it did propose that all matter is made up of
teeny-tiny indivisible parts.
As for "holy book," some religious folk consider that the
de facto worship of the scripture, rather than of the ghod,
is a particular heresy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bibliolatry
The Catholics sling this at the "sola scriptura" Protestants,
for example. I stay on the sidelines of such fights. Nor do
I have a "favorite" Pokemon.
Kevin R
By the way, if no one's said, ancient Greek philosophical
"atoms" are indivisible particles. Our "atoms" aren't.
o***@gmail.com
2020-04-04 00:06:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Kevrob
Post by Paul S Person
Sadly, atomic theory existed at least as early as Lucretius; for
all I know, it may even have pre-Socratic.
You remember correctly. Atomic theory dates at least to
Democritus, and to his mentor, Leucippus.
Post by Paul S Person
Of course, it was not quite the same "atomic theory" as the one we
have today. But it did propose that all matter is made up of
teeny-tiny indivisible parts.
As for "holy book," some religious folk consider that the
de facto worship of the scripture, rather than of the ghod,
is a particular heresy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bibliolatry
The Catholics sling this at the "sola scriptura" Protestants,
for example. I stay on the sidelines of such fights. Nor do
I have a "favorite" Pokemon.
Kevin R
By the way, if no one's said, ancient Greek philosophical
"atoms" are indivisible particles. Our "atoms" aren't.
Paul S Person
2020-04-04 17:01:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Kevrob
Post by Paul S Person
Sadly, atomic theory existed at least as early as Lucretius; for
all I know, it may even have pre-Socratic.
You remember correctly. Atomic theory dates at least to
Democritus, and to his mentor, Leucippus.
Post by Paul S Person
Of course, it was not quite the same "atomic theory" as the one we
have today. But it did propose that all matter is made up of
teeny-tiny indivisible parts.
As for "holy book," some religious folk consider that the
de facto worship of the scripture, rather than of the ghod,
is a particular heresy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bibliolatry
The Catholics sling this at the "sola scriptura" Protestants,
for example. I stay on the sidelines of such fights. Nor do
I have a "favorite" Pokemon.
Kevin R
By the way, if no one's said, ancient Greek philosophical
"atoms" are indivisible particles. Our "atoms" aren't.
Yes. Well, almost: the ancient idea was that, if you divided a rock
(say) into smaller and smaller pieces, you would eventually get a
teeny-tiny bit of /rock/ that was indivisible -- that is, that could
no longer be broken up into even smaller bits of /rock/. Breaking the
final bit up into /our/ atoms, however, was (as I understand it) never
considered.

The Aristotelean belief was that, just as you could always find a
larger integer by adding "1" to the current largest integer, so also
you could always divide a rock into the largest integer equal parts,
regardless of how large the largest integer became. This is rather
reminiscent of the mathematical concept of "continuous".

As I understand it, "atom" was used first for cells; when it became
clear that those had parts, it was replaced. Then it was applied to
molecules; but many of those have parts, leading the distinction
between a molecule and an element. "Atom" was then applied to
"element".

Apparently, when sub-atomic particles were discovered/inferred, the
name "atom" was so firmly attached to "element" that no amount of
prying could remove it, so we now have an atomic theory with atoms
that have parts.

But the parts of, say, an oxygen atom are /not/ smaller oxygen atoms.
They are protons, neutrons, and electrons. And energy, of course.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."
o***@gmail.com
2020-04-04 00:08:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Kevrob
Post by Paul S Person
Sadly, atomic theory existed at least as early as Lucretius; for
all I know, it may even have pre-Socratic.
You remember correctly. Atomic theory dates at least to
Democritus, and to his mentor, Leucippus.
Post by Paul S Person
Of course, it was not quite the same "atomic theory" as the one we
have today. But it did propose that all matter is made up of
teeny-tiny indivisible parts.
As for "holy book," some religious folk consider that the
de facto worship of the scripture, rather than of the ghod,
is a particular heresy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bibliolatry
The Catholics sling this at the "sola scriptura" Protestants,
for example. I stay on the sidelines of such fights. Nor do
I have a "favorite" Pokemon.
Kevin R
By the way, if no one's said, ancient Greek philosophical
"atoms" are indivisible particles. Our "atoms" aren't.
"....philosophical "atoms" WERE ALLEGED TO BE indivisible...."

There........fixed it for you.
Paul S Person
2020-04-04 16:53:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Kevrob
Post by Paul S Person
Sadly, atomic theory existed at least as early as Lucretius; for
all I know, it may even have pre-Socratic.
You remember correctly. Atomic theory dates at least to
Democritus, and to his mentor, Leucippus.
Post by Paul S Person
Of course, it was not quite the same "atomic theory" as the one we
have today. But it did propose that all matter is made up of
teeny-tiny indivisible parts.
As for "holy book," some religious folk consider that the
de facto worship of the scripture, rather than of the ghod,
is a particular heresy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bibliolatry
The Catholics sling this at the "sola scriptura" Protestants,
for example. I stay on the sidelines of such fights. Nor do
I have a "favorite" Pokemon.
Kevin R
By the way, if no one's said, ancient Greek philosophical
"atoms" are indivisible particles. Our "atoms" aren't.
"....philosophical "atoms" WERE ALLEGED TO BE indivisible...."
And protons and neutrons WERE ALLEGED to be indivisible until quarks
were /hypothesized/.

That is how science works: first the hypothesis, then the testing.
Post by o***@gmail.com
There........fixed it for you.
Ditto.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."
Alan Baker
2020-04-04 16:58:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul S Person
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Kevrob
Post by Paul S Person
Sadly, atomic theory existed at least as early as Lucretius; for
all I know, it may even have pre-Socratic.
You remember correctly. Atomic theory dates at least to
Democritus, and to his mentor, Leucippus.
Post by Paul S Person
Of course, it was not quite the same "atomic theory" as the one we
have today. But it did propose that all matter is made up of
teeny-tiny indivisible parts.
As for "holy book," some religious folk consider that the
de facto worship of the scripture, rather than of the ghod,
is a particular heresy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bibliolatry
The Catholics sling this at the "sola scriptura" Protestants,
for example. I stay on the sidelines of such fights. Nor do
I have a "favorite" Pokemon.
Kevin R
By the way, if no one's said, ancient Greek philosophical
"atoms" are indivisible particles. Our "atoms" aren't.
"....philosophical "atoms" WERE ALLEGED TO BE indivisible...."
And protons and neutrons WERE ALLEGED to be indivisible until quarks
were /hypothesized/.
That is how science works: first the hypothesis, then the testing.
Actually, it's first the observations, then the formulation of rules to
explain the observations, then the hypothesis about why the rules are as
they are...

...with testing pretty much at every step.


:-)
Post by Paul S Person
Post by o***@gmail.com
There........fixed it for you.
Ditto.
o***@gmail.com
2020-04-04 23:38:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul S Person
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Kevrob
Post by Paul S Person
Sadly, atomic theory existed at least as early as Lucretius; for
all I know, it may even have pre-Socratic.
You remember correctly. Atomic theory dates at least to
Democritus, and to his mentor, Leucippus.
Post by Paul S Person
Of course, it was not quite the same "atomic theory" as the one we
have today. But it did propose that all matter is made up of
teeny-tiny indivisible parts.
As for "holy book," some religious folk consider that the
de facto worship of the scripture, rather than of the ghod,
is a particular heresy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bibliolatry
The Catholics sling this at the "sola scriptura" Protestants,
for example. I stay on the sidelines of such fights. Nor do
I have a "favorite" Pokemon.
Kevin R
By the way, if no one's said, ancient Greek philosophical
"atoms" are indivisible particles. Our "atoms" aren't.
"....philosophical "atoms" WERE ALLEGED TO BE indivisible...."
And protons and neutrons WERE ALLEGED to be indivisible until quarks
were /hypothesized/.
...nope

I am aghast at the attendees who do NOT understand the vocabularies of science.
Paul S Person
2020-04-05 17:26:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Paul S Person
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Kevrob
Post by Paul S Person
Sadly, atomic theory existed at least as early as Lucretius; for
all I know, it may even have pre-Socratic.
You remember correctly. Atomic theory dates at least to
Democritus, and to his mentor, Leucippus.
Post by Paul S Person
Of course, it was not quite the same "atomic theory" as the one we
have today. But it did propose that all matter is made up of
teeny-tiny indivisible parts.
As for "holy book," some religious folk consider that the
de facto worship of the scripture, rather than of the ghod,
is a particular heresy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bibliolatry
The Catholics sling this at the "sola scriptura" Protestants,
for example. I stay on the sidelines of such fights. Nor do
I have a "favorite" Pokemon.
Kevin R
By the way, if no one's said, ancient Greek philosophical
"atoms" are indivisible particles. Our "atoms" aren't.
"....philosophical "atoms" WERE ALLEGED TO BE indivisible...."
And protons and neutrons WERE ALLEGED to be indivisible until quarks
were /hypothesized/.
...nope
I am aghast at the attendees who do NOT understand the vocabularies of science.
You are under the delusion that protons and neutrons were not
considered to be indivisible originally? And then protons, when
neutrons were thought of as a proton plus an electron?

Perhaps you have forgotten why quark theory (and a few others, but the
quarks won the day) arose: physicists were faced with an ever-growing
zoo of allegedly fundamental (indivisible: if it can be divided, it
isn't fundamental) particles and were desperate for some way of
organizing them. That is what quarks provided: a way to reduce the zoo
to combinations of quarks.

Or are you merely objecting to the use of "hypothesis"?
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."
o***@gmail.com
2020-04-05 19:55:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul S Person
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Paul S Person
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Kevrob
Post by Paul S Person
Sadly, atomic theory existed at least as early as Lucretius; for
all I know, it may even have pre-Socratic.
You remember correctly. Atomic theory dates at least to
Democritus, and to his mentor, Leucippus.
Post by Paul S Person
Of course, it was not quite the same "atomic theory" as the one we
have today. But it did propose that all matter is made up of
teeny-tiny indivisible parts.
As for "holy book," some religious folk consider that the
de facto worship of the scripture, rather than of the ghod,
is a particular heresy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bibliolatry
The Catholics sling this at the "sola scriptura" Protestants,
for example. I stay on the sidelines of such fights. Nor do
I have a "favorite" Pokemon.
Kevin R
By the way, if no one's said, ancient Greek philosophical
"atoms" are indivisible particles. Our "atoms" aren't.
"....philosophical "atoms" WERE ALLEGED TO BE indivisible...."
And protons and neutrons WERE ALLEGED to be indivisible until quarks
were /hypothesized/.
...nope
I am aghast at the attendees who do NOT understand the vocabularies of science.
You are under the delusion that protons and neutrons were not
considered to be indivisible originally? And then protons, when
neutrons were thought of as a proton plus an electron?
Perhaps you have forgotten why quark theory (and a few others, but the
quarks won the day) arose: physicists were faced with an ever-growing
zoo of allegedly fundamental (indivisible: if it can be divided, it
isn't fundamental) particles and were desperate for some way of
organizing them. That is what quarks provided: a way to reduce the zoo
to combinations of quarks.
Or are you merely objecting to the use of "hypothesis"?
Nope.....just its misuse.
Alan Baker
2020-04-05 20:23:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Paul S Person
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Paul S Person
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Kevrob
Post by Paul S Person
Sadly, atomic theory existed at least as early as Lucretius; for
all I know, it may even have pre-Socratic.
You remember correctly. Atomic theory dates at least to
Democritus, and to his mentor, Leucippus.
Post by Paul S Person
Of course, it was not quite the same "atomic theory" as the one we
have today. But it did propose that all matter is made up of
teeny-tiny indivisible parts.
As for "holy book," some religious folk consider that the
de facto worship of the scripture, rather than of the ghod,
is a particular heresy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bibliolatry
The Catholics sling this at the "sola scriptura" Protestants,
for example. I stay on the sidelines of such fights. Nor do
I have a "favorite" Pokemon.
Kevin R
By the way, if no one's said, ancient Greek philosophical
"atoms" are indivisible particles. Our "atoms" aren't.
"....philosophical "atoms" WERE ALLEGED TO BE indivisible...."
And protons and neutrons WERE ALLEGED to be indivisible until quarks
were /hypothesized/.
...nope
I am aghast at the attendees who do NOT understand the vocabularies of science.
You are under the delusion that protons and neutrons were not
considered to be indivisible originally? And then protons, when
neutrons were thought of as a proton plus an electron?
Perhaps you have forgotten why quark theory (and a few others, but the
quarks won the day) arose: physicists were faced with an ever-growing
zoo of allegedly fundamental (indivisible: if it can be divided, it
isn't fundamental) particles and were desperate for some way of
organizing them. That is what quarks provided: a way to reduce the zoo
to combinations of quarks.
Or are you merely objecting to the use of "hypothesis"?
Nope.....just its misuse.
How was it misused precisely?
o***@gmail.com
2020-04-06 20:03:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alan Baker
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Paul S Person
Or are you merely objecting to the use of "hypothesis"?
Nope.....just its misuse.
How was it misused precisely?
We have used and abused......

Conecture

Hypothesis

Assumption

Allegation

Theory (as the xtian fundies use....evolution is "just a theory")

Speculation

etc.....

It makes for ...uh... imprecise conversation
Dimensional Traveler
2020-04-06 21:39:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Alan Baker
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Paul S Person
Or are you merely objecting to the use of "hypothesis"?
Nope.....just its misuse.
How was it misused precisely?
We have used and abused......
Conecture
Hypothesis
Assumption
Allegation
Theory (as the xtian fundies use....evolution is "just a theory")
Speculation
etc.....
It makes for ...uh... imprecise conversation
Welcome to the human race. :)
--
"You need to believe in things that aren't true. How else can they become?"
Robert Woodward
2020-04-07 04:59:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Alan Baker
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Paul S Person
Or are you merely objecting to the use of "hypothesis"?
Nope.....just its misuse.
How was it misused precisely?
We have used and abused......
Conecture
Is this supposed to be "Conjecture"?
Post by o***@gmail.com
Hypothesis
Assumption
Allegation
Theory (as the xtian fundies use....evolution is "just a theory")
Speculation
Just what is the difference between Conjecture, Speculation, and
Hypothesis? The only difference I can think of is that Hypothesis should
have more formality in the formulation. A Theory has withstood much more
testing than any of those 3.

Assumption and Allegation are each completely different from each other
and the other 4 items in your list.

The reply I have been sitting on for years for when a Creationist sneers
that Evolution is "just a theory" is:

"Newton's Theory of Gravitation has been disproved. So why don't you
shout that and jump off a rock?" (of course, the ground will raise up
and hit in the face anybody foolish enough to do that - the motion is
relative after all)
--
"We have advanced to new and surprising levels of bafflement."
Imperial Auditor Miles Vorkosigan describes progress in _Komarr_.
—-----------------------------------------------------
Robert Woodward ***@drizzle.com
Paul S Person
2020-04-07 17:06:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Alan Baker
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Paul S Person
Or are you merely objecting to the use of "hypothesis"?
Nope.....just its misuse.
How was it misused precisely?
We have used and abused......
Conecture
Hypothesis
Assumption
Allegation
Theory (as the xtian fundies use....evolution is "just a theory")
Speculation
etc.....
It makes for ...uh... imprecise conversation
Ah, yes ... the well-known semantic goo!

/Everything/ of any importance, sooner or later, dissolves into
semantic goo!

It is the one true universal constant!
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."
William Hyde
2020-04-04 16:39:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Kevrob
Post by Paul S Person
Sadly, atomic theory existed at least as early as Lucretius; for
all I know, it may even have pre-Socratic.
You remember correctly. Atomic theory dates at least to
Democritus, and to his mentor, Leucippus.
Post by Paul S Person
Of course, it was not quite the same "atomic theory" as the one we
have today. But it did propose that all matter is made up of
teeny-tiny indivisible parts.
As for "holy book," some religious folk consider that the
de facto worship of the scripture, rather than of the ghod,
is a particular heresy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bibliolatry
The Catholics sling this at the "sola scriptura" Protestants,
for example. I stay on the sidelines of such fights. Nor do
I have a "favorite" Pokemon.
Kevin R
By the way, if no one's said, ancient Greek philosophical
"atoms" are indivisible particles. Our "atoms" aren't.
Yes, it was a misnomer that became standard, like "Greenhouse effect".

At the moment, quarks and leptons seem to be "atoms" in the sense used by the Greek philosophers. At least until someone discovers their component parts.

But that would require the overthrow of the standard model, and another James Joyce.

William Hyde
Paul S Person
2020-04-04 16:51:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kevrob
Post by Paul S Person
Sadly, atomic theory existed at least as early as Lucretius; for
all I know, it may even have pre-Socratic.
You remember correctly. Atomic theory dates at least to
Democritus, and to his mentor, Leucippus.
Post by Paul S Person
Of course, it was not quite the same "atomic theory" as the one we
have today. But it did propose that all matter is made up of
teeny-tiny indivisible parts.
As for "holy book," some religious folk consider that the
de facto worship of the scripture, rather than of the ghod,
is a particular heresy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bibliolatry
The Catholics sling this at the "sola scriptura" Protestants,
for example. I stay on the sidelines of such fights. Nor do
I have a "favorite" Pokemon.
Indeed and indeed.

Another term used is "paper Pope".

But not all Protestants qualify, if that is the word, for these
appellations.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."
o***@gmail.com
2020-04-03 19:25:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul S Person
On Thu, 02 Apr 2020 17:40:48 -0400, J. Clarke
Post by J. Clarke
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Peter Trei
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
Please elucidate........precisely HOW one would demonstrate that.
By letting time pass, and research and exploration bring us new knowledge.
All of our history, we've been finding things out about the universe we didn't know about.
It would be illogical to think that process has now ended.
Pt
....whoooooosh.....
If we don't know about "it", no statements -- relating to truth or anything else -- can be made about "it".
It's just teens playing at philosophy.
So if we don't know about atoms no statements can be made about them?
Then how did we ever figure out that they exist so that we could start
learning about them?
Sadly, atomic theory existed at least as early as Lucretius; for all I
know, it may even have pre-Socratic.
Of course, it was not quite the same "atomic theory" as the one we
have today. But it did propose that all matter is made up of
teeny-tiny indivisible parts.
Aristotle and others believed the opposite: they believed that, if you
subdivided something, you could subdivide it forever and it would
still be that something, without limit.
In some early philosophers, the idea that everything was continuous
and that Nature abhorred a vacuum led to the interesting question "how
is movement possible?". But I digress.
A fair part of the history of science could be written as the Search
for the Atom.
So this isn't really that great an example of finding something new
and unexpected. It does, however, suggest that "teen philosophy" can
sometimes be quite productive!
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."
Are you really Ken Ham ?

....or Ray Comfort ?
Paul S Person
2020-04-04 16:49:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Paul S Person
On Thu, 02 Apr 2020 17:40:48 -0400, J. Clarke
Post by J. Clarke
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Peter Trei
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
Please elucidate........precisely HOW one would demonstrate that.
By letting time pass, and research and exploration bring us new knowledge.
All of our history, we've been finding things out about the universe we didn't know about.
It would be illogical to think that process has now ended.
Pt
....whoooooosh.....
If we don't know about "it", no statements -- relating to truth or anything else -- can be made about "it".
It's just teens playing at philosophy.
So if we don't know about atoms no statements can be made about them?
Then how did we ever figure out that they exist so that we could start
learning about them?
Sadly, atomic theory existed at least as early as Lucretius; for all I
know, it may even have pre-Socratic.
Of course, it was not quite the same "atomic theory" as the one we
have today. But it did propose that all matter is made up of
teeny-tiny indivisible parts.
Aristotle and others believed the opposite: they believed that, if you
subdivided something, you could subdivide it forever and it would
still be that something, without limit.
In some early philosophers, the idea that everything was continuous
and that Nature abhorred a vacuum led to the interesting question "how
is movement possible?". But I digress.
A fair part of the history of science could be written as the Search
for the Atom.
So this isn't really that great an example of finding something new
and unexpected. It does, however, suggest that "teen philosophy" can
sometimes be quite productive!
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."
Are you really Ken Ham ?
....or Ray Comfort ?
Please try again.

If you referring to my Sig, it is a quote from the film /Quo Vadis/.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."
o***@gmail.com
2020-04-04 23:35:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul S Person
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Paul S Person
On Thu, 02 Apr 2020 17:40:48 -0400, J. Clarke
Post by J. Clarke
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Peter Trei
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
Please elucidate........precisely HOW one would demonstrate that.
By letting time pass, and research and exploration bring us new knowledge.
All of our history, we've been finding things out about the universe we didn't know about.
It would be illogical to think that process has now ended.
Pt
....whoooooosh.....
If we don't know about "it", no statements -- relating to truth or anything else -- can be made about "it".
It's just teens playing at philosophy.
So if we don't know about atoms no statements can be made about them?
Then how did we ever figure out that they exist so that we could start
learning about them?
Sadly, atomic theory existed at least as early as Lucretius; for all I
know, it may even have pre-Socratic.
Of course, it was not quite the same "atomic theory" as the one we
have today. But it did propose that all matter is made up of
teeny-tiny indivisible parts.
Aristotle and others believed the opposite: they believed that, if you
subdivided something, you could subdivide it forever and it would
still be that something, without limit.
In some early philosophers, the idea that everything was continuous
and that Nature abhorred a vacuum led to the interesting question "how
is movement possible?". But I digress.
A fair part of the history of science could be written as the Search
for the Atom.
So this isn't really that great an example of finding something new
and unexpected. It does, however, suggest that "teen philosophy" can
sometimes be quite productive!
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."
Are you really Ken Ham ?
....or Ray Comfort ?
Please try again.
If you referring to my Sig,.....
Nah.......just your chain of (heh,heh) "logic".
Paul S Person
2020-04-05 17:29:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Paul S Person
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Paul S Person
On Thu, 02 Apr 2020 17:40:48 -0400, J. Clarke
Post by J. Clarke
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Peter Trei
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
Please elucidate........precisely HOW one would demonstrate that.
By letting time pass, and research and exploration bring us new knowledge.
All of our history, we've been finding things out about the universe we didn't know about.
It would be illogical to think that process has now ended.
Pt
....whoooooosh.....
If we don't know about "it", no statements -- relating to truth or anything else -- can be made about "it".
It's just teens playing at philosophy.
So if we don't know about atoms no statements can be made about them?
Then how did we ever figure out that they exist so that we could start
learning about them?
Sadly, atomic theory existed at least as early as Lucretius; for all I
know, it may even have pre-Socratic.
Of course, it was not quite the same "atomic theory" as the one we
have today. But it did propose that all matter is made up of
teeny-tiny indivisible parts.
Aristotle and others believed the opposite: they believed that, if you
subdivided something, you could subdivide it forever and it would
still be that something, without limit.
In some early philosophers, the idea that everything was continuous
and that Nature abhorred a vacuum led to the interesting question "how
is movement possible?". But I digress.
A fair part of the history of science could be written as the Search
for the Atom.
So this isn't really that great an example of finding something new
and unexpected. It does, however, suggest that "teen philosophy" can
sometimes be quite productive!
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."
Are you really Ken Ham ?
....or Ray Comfort ?
Please try again.
If you referring to my Sig,.....
Nah.......just your chain of (heh,heh) "logic".
And which part do you object to?

The idea that atomicists existed in ancient Greece?

The idea that a fair amount of scientific history involved searching
for "atoms"? Productive history, I might add, finding cells,
molecules, and elements along the way.

Or my pointing out that what was characterized as "teen philosophy"
could be productive?
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."
J. Clarke
2020-04-03 21:01:32 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 03 Apr 2020 10:38:54 -0700, Paul S Person
Post by Paul S Person
On Thu, 02 Apr 2020 17:40:48 -0400, J. Clarke
Post by J. Clarke
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Peter Trei
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
Please elucidate........precisely HOW one would demonstrate that.
By letting time pass, and research and exploration bring us new knowledge.
All of our history, we've been finding things out about the universe we didn't know about.
It would be illogical to think that process has now ended.
Pt
....whoooooosh.....
If we don't know about "it", no statements -- relating to truth or anything else -- can be made about "it".
It's just teens playing at philosophy.
So if we don't know about atoms no statements can be made about them?
Then how did we ever figure out that they exist so that we could start
learning about them?
Sadly, atomic theory existed at least as early as Lucretius; for all I
know, it may even have pre-Socratic.
The notion existed that there might be atoms. That is not _knowing_,
that is speculating.
Post by Paul S Person
Of course, it was not quite the same "atomic theory" as the one we
have today. But it did propose that all matter is made up of
teeny-tiny indivisible parts.
It _proposed_. It did not _know_.
Post by Paul S Person
Aristotle and others believed the opposite: they believed that, if you
subdivided something, you could subdivide it forever and it would
still be that something, without limit.
They _believed_, they did not _know_.
Post by Paul S Person
In some early philosophers, the idea that everything was continuous
and that Nature abhorred a vacuum led to the interesting question "how
is movement possible?". But I digress.
A fair part of the history of science could be written as the Search
for the Atom.
And after a while it was found. And after it was found the _knowing_
started.
Post by Paul S Person
So this isn't really that great an example of finding something new
and unexpected. It does, however, suggest that "teen philosophy" can
sometimes be quite productive!
Who said anything about "new and unexpected"? The statement was made
that if we do not _know_ then no statements can be made. You have
demonstrated that a great many statements can be made with no actual
knowledge.
Alan Baker
2020-04-02 04:44:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
Please elucidate........precisely HOW one would demonstrate that.
If one assumes that there are no things that science does not know today...

...then one can argue that at any point in history you are to name,
people could have made the same argument.

Except, they would have been wrong to argue it every single day of
history up to and including today.
o***@gmail.com
2020-04-02 19:17:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alan Baker
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
Please elucidate........precisely HOW one would demonstrate that.
If one assumes that there are no things that science does not know today...
....then one can postulate outrageous bullshit.

(that's what happens when one changes both the quote and the context)

[ snip coffeehouse crap ]
David Johnston
2020-04-02 05:16:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
Please elucidate........precisely HOW one would demonstrate that.
It's demonstrated with every unanswered question about the universe.
o***@gmail.com
2020-04-02 19:19:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Johnston
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
Please elucidate........precisely HOW one would demonstrate that.
It's demonstrated with every unanswered question about the universe.
Please look up "demonstrate"
David Johnston
2020-04-03 02:52:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by David Johnston
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
Please elucidate........precisely HOW one would demonstrate that.
It's demonstrated with every unanswered question about the universe.
Please look up "demonstrate"
No. All one has to do is establish that there are unanswered questions
and one has established that there are things that scientists don't know
that are true. Quibbling about the definition of demonstrate doesn't
change that.
Dimensional Traveler
2020-04-03 03:21:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by David Johnston
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
Please elucidate........precisely HOW one would demonstrate that.
It's demonstrated with every unanswered question about the universe.
Please look up "demonstrate"
No.  All one has to do is establish that there are unanswered questions
and one has established that there are things that scientists don't know
that are true.  Quibbling about the definition of demonstrate doesn't
change that.
Please name something that Science does not KNOW about which is
"nonetheless" true.
--
"You need to believe in things that aren't true. How else can they become?"
David Johnston
2020-04-03 03:26:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by David Johnston
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
Please elucidate........precisely HOW one would demonstrate that.
It's demonstrated with every unanswered question about the universe.
Please look up "demonstrate"
No.  All one has to do is establish that there are unanswered
questions and one has established that there are things that
scientists don't know that are true.  Quibbling about the definition
of demonstrate doesn't change that.
Please name something that Science does not KNOW about which is
"nonetheless" true.
No. Your request is inane and beside the point.
Dimensional Traveler
2020-04-03 05:59:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by David Johnston
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
Please elucidate........precisely HOW one would demonstrate that.
It's demonstrated with every unanswered question about the universe.
Please look up "demonstrate"
No.  All one has to do is establish that there are unanswered
questions and one has established that there are things that
scientists don't know that are true.  Quibbling about the definition
of demonstrate doesn't change that.
Please name something that Science does not KNOW about which is
"nonetheless" true.
No.  Your request is inane and beside the point.
In other words, you can't.
--
"You need to believe in things that aren't true. How else can they become?"
David Johnston
2020-04-03 18:03:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by David Johnston
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
Please elucidate........precisely HOW one would demonstrate that.
It's demonstrated with every unanswered question about the universe.
Please look up "demonstrate"
No.  All one has to do is establish that there are unanswered
questions and one has established that there are things that
scientists don't know that are true.  Quibbling about the definition
of demonstrate doesn't change that.
Please name something that Science does not KNOW about which is
"nonetheless" true.
No.  Your request is inane and beside the point.
In other words, you can't.
So what? At no point in history could anyone name any of hte myriad
that were not known and yet were true. That didn't make them not true.
Dimensional Traveler
2020-04-04 05:06:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Johnston
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by David Johnston
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
Please elucidate........precisely HOW one would demonstrate that.
It's demonstrated with every unanswered question about the universe.
Please look up "demonstrate"
No.  All one has to do is establish that there are unanswered
questions and one has established that there are things that
scientists don't know that are true.  Quibbling about the
definition of demonstrate doesn't change that.
Please name something that Science does not KNOW about which is
"nonetheless" true.
No.  Your request is inane and beside the point.
In other words, you can't.
So what?
So, the proposition is that there are true things that "Science" does
not know of. Yet you can't provide any evidence to support that
proposition while expecting others to accept that it is so simply
because it was said.

It also ignores that science is a process of finding out about what we
don't know about. In that sense the original proposition is inane and
nonsensical.
--
"You need to believe in things that aren't true. How else can they become?"
David Johnston
2020-04-04 05:17:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by David Johnston
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by David Johnston
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
Please elucidate........precisely HOW one would demonstrate that.
It's demonstrated with every unanswered question about the universe.
Please look up "demonstrate"
No.  All one has to do is establish that there are unanswered
questions and one has established that there are things that
scientists don't know that are true.  Quibbling about the
definition of demonstrate doesn't change that.
Please name something that Science does not KNOW about which is
"nonetheless" true.
No.  Your request is inane and beside the point.
In other words, you can't.
So what?
So, the proposition is that there are true things that "Science" does
not know of.  Yet you can't provide any evidence to support that
proposition
Sure I can. All the still open questions that you demanded I provide
the as yet undiscovered answer for.


while expecting others to accept that it is so simply
Post by Dimensional Traveler
because it was said.
It also ignores that science is a process of finding out about what we
don't know about.
It really doesn't.


In that sense the original proposition is inane and
Post by Dimensional Traveler
nonsensical.
To be specific, it's so obviously true that it didn't need to be said.
o***@gmail.com
2020-04-04 23:27:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Johnston
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by David Johnston
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by David Johnston
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
Please elucidate........precisely HOW one would demonstrate that.
It's demonstrated with every unanswered question about the universe.
Please look up "demonstrate"
No.  All one has to do is establish that there are unanswered
questions and one has established that there are things that
scientists don't know that are true.  Quibbling about the
definition of demonstrate doesn't change that.
Please name something that Science does not KNOW about which is
"nonetheless" true.
No.  Your request is inane and beside the point.
In other words, you can't.
So what?
So, the proposition is that there are true things that "Science" does
not know of.  Yet you can't provide any evidence to support that
proposition
Sure I can. All the still open questions that you demanded I provide
the as yet undiscovered answer for.
while expecting others to accept that it is so simply
Post by Dimensional Traveler
because it was said.
It also ignores that science is a process of finding out about what we
don't know about.
It really doesn't.
In that sense the original proposition is inane and
Post by Dimensional Traveler
nonsensical.
To be specific, it's so obviously true that it didn't need to be said.
Are you a fundamentalist ?
Chris Buckley
2020-04-04 13:09:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by David Johnston
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by David Johnston
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
Please elucidate........precisely HOW one would demonstrate that.
It's demonstrated with every unanswered question about the universe.
Please look up "demonstrate"
No.  All one has to do is establish that there are unanswered
questions and one has established that there are things that
scientists don't know that are true.  Quibbling about the
definition of demonstrate doesn't change that.
Please name something that Science does not KNOW about which is
"nonetheless" true.
No.  Your request is inane and beside the point.
In other words, you can't.
So what?
So, the proposition is that there are true things that "Science" does
not know of. Yet you can't provide any evidence to support that
proposition while expecting others to accept that it is so simply
because it was said.
It all depends on your definitions.

There are lots of true statements about arithmetic that scientists
cannot list and cannot prove (consequence of Godel's Incompleteness Theorem).

Chris
Paul S Person
2020-04-04 17:16:47 UTC
Permalink
On 4 Apr 2020 13:09:08 GMT, Chris Buckley <***@sabir.com> wrote:

<snipping>
Post by Chris Buckley
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
And this is what has resulted so far -- with what I /hope/ is the
Post by Chris Buckley
Post by Dimensional Traveler
So, the proposition is that there are true things that "Science" does
not know of. Yet you can't provide any evidence to support that
proposition while expecting others to accept that it is so simply
because it was said.
What was /said/ was that there are a lot things that Science does not
know but which are nonetheless true.

What was /not/ said was that I know (or anybody else knows) what any
of them are.

Do you /really/ think that something can be "true" only if we know
what it is? Because that appears to be what my statement's being wrong
would mean.

Did the continents not move on tectonic plates until we /knew/ that
they did so?

Did light move through the luminiferous aether until we /knew/ that it
did no such thing?

And why is my pointing out that, if there is /nothing/ science does
not know that is true, then neither the GUT nor the TOE can ever be
found being ignored?
Post by Chris Buckley
It all depends on your definitions.
There are lots of true statements about arithmetic that scientists
cannot list and cannot prove (consequence of Godel's Incompleteness Theorem).
The problem here, of course, is that Science is not Mathematics.

Nonetheless, the example of a realm (so to speak) in which we /know/
that there are undiscovered true statements is a good one.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."
o***@gmail.com
2020-04-04 23:48:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul S Person
<snipping>
Post by Chris Buckley
Post by Dimensional Traveler
On Wednesday, April 1, 2020 at 11:52:11 AM UTC-5, Paul S Person
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
And this is what has resulted so far -- with what I /hope/ is the
Post by Chris Buckley
Post by Dimensional Traveler
So, the proposition is that there are true things that "Science" does
not know of. Yet you can't provide any evidence to support that
proposition while expecting others to accept that it is so simply
because it was said.
What was /said/ was that there are a lot things that Science does not
know but which are nonetheless true.
What was /not/ said was that I know (or anybody else knows) what any
of them are.
Do you /really/ think that something can be "true" only if we know
what it is? Because that appears to be what my statement's being wrong
would mean.
Did the continents not move on tectonic plates until we /knew/ that
they did so?
Did light move through the luminiferous aether until we /knew/ that it
did no such thing?
And why is my pointing out that, if there is /nothing/ science does
not know that is true, then neither the GUT nor the TOE can ever be
found being ignored?
Post by Chris Buckley
It all depends on your definitions.
There are lots of true statements about arithmetic that scientists
cannot list and cannot prove (consequence of Godel's Incompleteness Theorem).
The problem here, of course, is that Science is not Mathematics.
Nonetheless, the example of a realm (so to speak) in which we /know/
that there are undiscovered true statements is a good one.
After gaining my breath....I have decided to abandon any responses to this poster.

It would take extensive education to relieve him of his woo-woo.

(start with a freshman logic class and any Jesuit high school)
o***@gmail.com
2020-04-04 23:32:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chris Buckley
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by David Johnston
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by David Johnston
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
Please elucidate........precisely HOW one would demonstrate that.
It's demonstrated with every unanswered question about the universe.
Please look up "demonstrate"
No.  All one has to do is establish that there are unanswered
questions and one has established that there are things that
scientists don't know that are true.  Quibbling about the
definition of demonstrate doesn't change that.
Please name something that Science does not KNOW about which is
"nonetheless" true.
No.  Your request is inane and beside the point.
In other words, you can't.
So what?
So, the proposition is that there are true things that "Science" does
not know of. Yet you can't provide any evidence to support that
proposition while expecting others to accept that it is so simply
because it was said.
It all depends on your definitions.
There are lots of true statements about arithmetic that scientists
cannot list and cannot prove (consequence of Godel's Incompleteness Theorem).
Arithmetic is not science. It is a set of observations ONLY, codified as a set of axioms.

Math, however, is.....um.....different.
Dimensional Traveler
2020-04-05 02:34:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Chris Buckley
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by David Johnston
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by David Johnston
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
Please elucidate........precisely HOW one would demonstrate that.
It's demonstrated with every unanswered question about the universe.
Please look up "demonstrate"
No.  All one has to do is establish that there are unanswered
questions and one has established that there are things that
scientists don't know that are true.  Quibbling about the
definition of demonstrate doesn't change that.
Please name something that Science does not KNOW about which is
"nonetheless" true.
No.  Your request is inane and beside the point.
In other words, you can't.
So what?
So, the proposition is that there are true things that "Science" does
not know of. Yet you can't provide any evidence to support that
proposition while expecting others to accept that it is so simply
because it was said.
It all depends on your definitions.
There are lots of true statements about arithmetic that scientists
cannot list and cannot prove (consequence of Godel's Incompleteness Theorem).
Arithmetic is not science. It is a set of observations ONLY, codified as a set of axioms.
Math, however, is.....um.....different.
Math is a language and tool used to help us understand the universe.
--
"You need to believe in things that aren't true. How else can they become?"
h***@gmail.com
2020-04-05 08:10:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by o***@gmail.com
Math, however, is.....um.....different.
Math is a language and tool used to help us understand the universe.
Maths sneers at your idea that it's limited to this universe
Dimensional Traveler
2020-04-05 09:07:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by h***@gmail.com
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by o***@gmail.com
Math, however, is.....um.....different.
Math is a language and tool used to help us understand the universe.
Maths sneers at your idea that it's limited to this universe
:)
--
"You need to believe in things that aren't true. How else can they become?"
o***@gmail.com
2020-04-05 19:50:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Chris Buckley
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by David Johnston
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by David Johnston
On Wednesday, April 1, 2020 at 11:52:11 AM UTC-5, Paul S Person
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
Please elucidate........precisely HOW one would demonstrate that.
It's demonstrated with every unanswered question about the universe.
Please look up "demonstrate"
No.  All one has to do is establish that there are unanswered
questions and one has established that there are things that
scientists don't know that are true.  Quibbling about the
definition of demonstrate doesn't change that.
Please name something that Science does not KNOW about which is
"nonetheless" true.
No.  Your request is inane and beside the point.
In other words, you can't.
So what?
So, the proposition is that there are true things that "Science" does
not know of. Yet you can't provide any evidence to support that
proposition while expecting others to accept that it is so simply
because it was said.
It all depends on your definitions.
There are lots of true statements about arithmetic that scientists
cannot list and cannot prove (consequence of Godel's Incompleteness Theorem).
Arithmetic is not science. It is a set of observations ONLY, codified as a set of axioms.
Math, however, is.....um.....different.
Math is a language and tool used to help us understand the universe.
Good description.........

I was alluding to the fact that it is not, itself, science.
Paul S Person
2020-04-05 17:40:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Chris Buckley
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by David Johnston
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by David Johnston
On Wednesday, April 1, 2020 at 11:52:11 AM UTC-5, Paul S Person
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
Please elucidate........precisely HOW one would demonstrate that.
It's demonstrated with every unanswered question about the universe.
Please look up "demonstrate"
No.  All one has to do is establish that there are unanswered
questions and one has established that there are things that
scientists don't know that are true.  Quibbling about the
definition of demonstrate doesn't change that.
Please name something that Science does not KNOW about which is
"nonetheless" true.
No.  Your request is inane and beside the point.
In other words, you can't.
So what?
So, the proposition is that there are true things that "Science" does
not know of. Yet you can't provide any evidence to support that
proposition while expecting others to accept that it is so simply
because it was said.
It all depends on your definitions.
There are lots of true statements about arithmetic that scientists
cannot list and cannot prove (consequence of Godel's Incompleteness Theorem).
Arithmetic is not science. It is a set of observations ONLY, codified as a set of axioms.
Math, however, is.....um.....different.
How is it different?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_incompleteness_theorems
discusses Gödel:

"Gödel's incompleteness theorems are two theorems of mathematical
logic that demonstrate the inherent limitations of every formal
axiomatic system capable of modelling basic arithmetic."

It then descends into technical stuff. But the point here is that, as
I understand it, /all/ of mathematics begins with arithmetic. To say
that Gödel applies to arithmetic is to say that it applies to
mathematics.

So I am interested in what alternative point of view there is that
differentiates the two.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."
o***@gmail.com
2020-04-05 20:05:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul S Person
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Chris Buckley
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by David Johnston
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
On Thursday, April 2, 2020 at 12:16:25 AM UTC-5, David Johnston
Post by David Johnston
On Wednesday, April 1, 2020 at 11:52:11 AM UTC-5, Paul S Person
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
Please elucidate........precisely HOW one would demonstrate that.
It's demonstrated with every unanswered question about the universe.
Please look up "demonstrate"
No.  All one has to do is establish that there are unanswered
questions and one has established that there are things that
scientists don't know that are true.  Quibbling about the
definition of demonstrate doesn't change that.
Please name something that Science does not KNOW about which is
"nonetheless" true.
No.  Your request is inane and beside the point.
In other words, you can't.
So what?
So, the proposition is that there are true things that "Science" does
not know of. Yet you can't provide any evidence to support that
proposition while expecting others to accept that it is so simply
because it was said.
It all depends on your definitions.
There are lots of true statements about arithmetic that scientists
cannot list and cannot prove (consequence of Godel's Incompleteness Theorem).
Arithmetic is not science. It is a set of observations ONLY, codified as a set of axioms.
Math, however, is.....um.....different.
How is it different?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_incompleteness_theorems
"Gödel's incompleteness theorems are two theorems of mathematical
logic that demonstrate the inherent limitations of every formal
axiomatic system capable of modelling basic arithmetic."
It then descends into technical stuff. But the point here is that, as
I understand it, /all/ of mathematics begins with arithmetic. To say
that Gödel applies to arithmetic is to say that it applies to
mathematics.
So I am interested in what alternative point of view there is that
differentiates the two.
My apologies.

My general use of "arithmetic", in this discussion, has been that of a four-function calculator.

Other uses mean other things.......as high school algebra differs from linear algebra.

Please excuse my adding to confusion.
Paul S Person
2020-04-06 16:49:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Paul S Person
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Chris Buckley
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by David Johnston
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
On Thursday, April 2, 2020 at 12:16:25 AM UTC-5, David Johnston
Post by David Johnston
On Wednesday, April 1, 2020 at 11:52:11 AM UTC-5, Paul S Person
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
Please elucidate........precisely HOW one would demonstrate that.
It's demonstrated with every unanswered question about the universe.
Please look up "demonstrate"
No.  All one has to do is establish that there are unanswered
questions and one has established that there are things that
scientists don't know that are true.  Quibbling about the
definition of demonstrate doesn't change that.
Please name something that Science does not KNOW about which is
"nonetheless" true.
No.  Your request is inane and beside the point.
In other words, you can't.
So what?
So, the proposition is that there are true things that "Science" does
not know of. Yet you can't provide any evidence to support that
proposition while expecting others to accept that it is so simply
because it was said.
It all depends on your definitions.
There are lots of true statements about arithmetic that scientists
cannot list and cannot prove (consequence of Godel's Incompleteness Theorem).
Arithmetic is not science. It is a set of observations ONLY, codified as a set of axioms.
Math, however, is.....um.....different.
How is it different?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_incompleteness_theorems
"Gödel's incompleteness theorems are two theorems of mathematical
logic that demonstrate the inherent limitations of every formal
axiomatic system capable of modelling basic arithmetic."
It then descends into technical stuff. But the point here is that, as
I understand it, /all/ of mathematics begins with arithmetic. To say
that Gödel applies to arithmetic is to say that it applies to
mathematics.
So I am interested in what alternative point of view there is that
differentiates the two.
My apologies.
My general use of "arithmetic", in this discussion, has been that of a four-function calculator.
Other uses mean other things.......as high school algebra differs from linear algebra.
Please excuse my adding to confusion.
No problem.

And I was /amazed/ when I took the relevant courses and found out, in
college, what "algebra" was /really/ about.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."
J. Clarke
2020-04-06 01:36:31 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 05 Apr 2020 10:40:41 -0700, Paul S Person
Post by Paul S Person
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Chris Buckley
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by David Johnston
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by David Johnston
On Wednesday, April 1, 2020 at 11:52:11 AM UTC-5, Paul S Person
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
Please elucidate........precisely HOW one would demonstrate that.
It's demonstrated with every unanswered question about the universe.
Please look up "demonstrate"
No.  All one has to do is establish that there are unanswered
questions and one has established that there are things that
scientists don't know that are true.  Quibbling about the
definition of demonstrate doesn't change that.
Please name something that Science does not KNOW about which is
"nonetheless" true.
No.  Your request is inane and beside the point.
In other words, you can't.
So what?
So, the proposition is that there are true things that "Science" does
not know of. Yet you can't provide any evidence to support that
proposition while expecting others to accept that it is so simply
because it was said.
It all depends on your definitions.
There are lots of true statements about arithmetic that scientists
cannot list and cannot prove (consequence of Godel's Incompleteness Theorem).
Arithmetic is not science. It is a set of observations ONLY, codified as a set of axioms.
Math, however, is.....um.....different.
How is it different?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_incompleteness_theorems
"Gödel's incompleteness theorems are two theorems of mathematical
logic that demonstrate the inherent limitations of every formal
axiomatic system capable of modelling basic arithmetic."
It then descends into technical stuff. But the point here is that, as
I understand it, /all/ of mathematics begins with arithmetic. To say
that Gödel applies to arithmetic is to say that it applies to
mathematics.
So I am interested in what alternative point of view there is that
differentiates the two.
(a) Have you ever taken an abstract algebra course? You'll design
mathematical entities that have an arithmetic defined on them but
bears little resemblance to 2+2=4 (note--I took that course nearly
half a century ago so don't ask me for details--but the fact that you
could do that and have it be a valid mathematical construct was a huge
eye-opener.

(b) Physics is tested against objective reality. Mathematics creates
consistent logical systems which may by coincidence bear some
relationship to objective reality--such systems are very useful to
physicists, but there is is no requirement that any mathematical
system or construct bear such relationship.
Paul S Person
2020-04-06 16:54:44 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 05 Apr 2020 21:36:31 -0400, J. Clarke
Post by J. Clarke
On Sun, 05 Apr 2020 10:40:41 -0700, Paul S Person
Post by Paul S Person
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Chris Buckley
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by David Johnston
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
On Thursday, April 2, 2020 at 12:16:25 AM UTC-5, David Johnston
Post by David Johnston
On Wednesday, April 1, 2020 at 11:52:11 AM UTC-5, Paul S Person
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
Please elucidate........precisely HOW one would demonstrate that.
It's demonstrated with every unanswered question about the universe.
Please look up "demonstrate"
No.  All one has to do is establish that there are unanswered
questions and one has established that there are things that
scientists don't know that are true.  Quibbling about the
definition of demonstrate doesn't change that.
Please name something that Science does not KNOW about which is
"nonetheless" true.
No.  Your request is inane and beside the point.
In other words, you can't.
So what?
So, the proposition is that there are true things that "Science" does
not know of. Yet you can't provide any evidence to support that
proposition while expecting others to accept that it is so simply
because it was said.
It all depends on your definitions.
There are lots of true statements about arithmetic that scientists
cannot list and cannot prove (consequence of Godel's Incompleteness Theorem).
Arithmetic is not science. It is a set of observations ONLY, codified as a set of axioms.
Math, however, is.....um.....different.
How is it different?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_incompleteness_theorems
"Gödel's incompleteness theorems are two theorems of mathematical
logic that demonstrate the inherent limitations of every formal
axiomatic system capable of modelling basic arithmetic."
It then descends into technical stuff. But the point here is that, as
I understand it, /all/ of mathematics begins with arithmetic. To say
that Gödel applies to arithmetic is to say that it applies to
mathematics.
So I am interested in what alternative point of view there is that
differentiates the two.
(a) Have you ever taken an abstract algebra course? You'll design
mathematical entities that have an arithmetic defined on them but
bears little resemblance to 2+2=4 (note--I took that course nearly
half a century ago so don't ask me for details--but the fact that you
could do that and have it be a valid mathematical construct was a huge
eye-opener.
Yes, indeed. My takeaway was different, however: I saw the arithmetic
I had learned in grade school as a /group/ of (I, +, 0). And,
eventually, a /ring/ of (R, +, 0, x, 1). With linear algebra as a
slightly different system (AB != BA). I did not conclude that they
were two different things, just two different levels of abstraction.
Post by J. Clarke
(b) Physics is tested against objective reality. Mathematics creates
consistent logical systems which may by coincidence bear some
relationship to objective reality--such systems are very useful to
physicists, but there is is no requirement that any mathematical
system or construct bear such relationship.
Indeed. That's part of the problem, as I understand it: some of the
math works better if there are multiple universes, but how the heck do
we test /that/?
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."
Dimensional Traveler
2020-04-06 21:38:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul S Person
On Sun, 05 Apr 2020 21:36:31 -0400, J. Clarke
Post by J. Clarke
On Sun, 05 Apr 2020 10:40:41 -0700, Paul S Person
Post by Paul S Person
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Chris Buckley
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by David Johnston
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
On Thursday, April 2, 2020 at 12:16:25 AM UTC-5, David Johnston
Post by David Johnston
On Wednesday, April 1, 2020 at 11:52:11 AM UTC-5, Paul S Person
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
Please elucidate........precisely HOW one would demonstrate that.
It's demonstrated with every unanswered question about the universe.
Please look up "demonstrate"
No.  All one has to do is establish that there are unanswered
questions and one has established that there are things that
scientists don't know that are true.  Quibbling about the
definition of demonstrate doesn't change that.
Please name something that Science does not KNOW about which is
"nonetheless" true.
No.  Your request is inane and beside the point.
In other words, you can't.
So what?
So, the proposition is that there are true things that "Science" does
not know of. Yet you can't provide any evidence to support that
proposition while expecting others to accept that it is so simply
because it was said.
It all depends on your definitions.
There are lots of true statements about arithmetic that scientists
cannot list and cannot prove (consequence of Godel's Incompleteness Theorem).
Arithmetic is not science. It is a set of observations ONLY, codified as a set of axioms.
Math, however, is.....um.....different.
How is it different?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_incompleteness_theorems
"Gödel's incompleteness theorems are two theorems of mathematical
logic that demonstrate the inherent limitations of every formal
axiomatic system capable of modelling basic arithmetic."
It then descends into technical stuff. But the point here is that, as
I understand it, /all/ of mathematics begins with arithmetic. To say
that Gödel applies to arithmetic is to say that it applies to
mathematics.
So I am interested in what alternative point of view there is that
differentiates the two.
(a) Have you ever taken an abstract algebra course? You'll design
mathematical entities that have an arithmetic defined on them but
bears little resemblance to 2+2=4 (note--I took that course nearly
half a century ago so don't ask me for details--but the fact that you
could do that and have it be a valid mathematical construct was a huge
eye-opener.
Yes, indeed. My takeaway was different, however: I saw the arithmetic
I had learned in grade school as a /group/ of (I, +, 0). And,
eventually, a /ring/ of (R, +, 0, x, 1). With linear algebra as a
slightly different system (AB != BA). I did not conclude that they
were two different things, just two different levels of abstraction.
Post by J. Clarke
(b) Physics is tested against objective reality. Mathematics creates
consistent logical systems which may by coincidence bear some
relationship to objective reality--such systems are very useful to
physicists, but there is is no requirement that any mathematical
system or construct bear such relationship.
Indeed. That's part of the problem, as I understand it: some of the
math works better if there are multiple universes, but how the heck do
we test /that/?
Get much, _MUCH_ better at physics. :P
--
"You need to believe in things that aren't true. How else can they become?"
Chris Buckley
2020-04-05 21:46:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Chris Buckley
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by David Johnston
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by David Johnston
On Wednesday, April 1, 2020 at 11:52:11 AM UTC-5, Paul S Person
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
Please elucidate........precisely HOW one would demonstrate that.
It's demonstrated with every unanswered question about the universe.
Please look up "demonstrate"
No.  All one has to do is establish that there are unanswered
questions and one has established that there are things that
scientists don't know that are true.  Quibbling about the
definition of demonstrate doesn't change that.
Please name something that Science does not KNOW about which is
"nonetheless" true.
No.  Your request is inane and beside the point.
In other words, you can't.
So what?
So, the proposition is that there are true things that "Science" does
not know of. Yet you can't provide any evidence to support that
proposition while expecting others to accept that it is so simply
because it was said.
It all depends on your definitions.
There are lots of true statements about arithmetic that scientists
cannot list and cannot prove (consequence of Godel's Incompleteness Theorem).
Arithmetic is not science. It is a set of observations ONLY, codified as a set of axioms.
Math, however, is.....um.....different.
As I said: It all depends on your definitions. There are very
reasonable differing definitions of "arithmetic" and "mathematics" and
"science" and "true" and "know", and it's not worth arguing about them.

But it is almost undeniable, due to Godel, that there are true things
that "Science" does not know of. I suppose you can argue what the
definition of "thing" is.

Chris
J. Clarke
2020-04-06 01:39:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chris Buckley
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Chris Buckley
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by David Johnston
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by David Johnston
On Wednesday, April 1, 2020 at 11:52:11 AM UTC-5, Paul S Person
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
Please elucidate........precisely HOW one would demonstrate that.
It's demonstrated with every unanswered question about the universe.
Please look up "demonstrate"
No.  All one has to do is establish that there are unanswered
questions and one has established that there are things that
scientists don't know that are true.  Quibbling about the
definition of demonstrate doesn't change that.
Please name something that Science does not KNOW about which is
"nonetheless" true.
No.  Your request is inane and beside the point.
In other words, you can't.
So what?
So, the proposition is that there are true things that "Science" does
not know of. Yet you can't provide any evidence to support that
proposition while expecting others to accept that it is so simply
because it was said.
It all depends on your definitions.
There are lots of true statements about arithmetic that scientists
cannot list and cannot prove (consequence of Godel's Incompleteness Theorem).
Arithmetic is not science. It is a set of observations ONLY, codified as a set of axioms.
Math, however, is.....um.....different.
As I said: It all depends on your definitions. There are very
reasonable differing definitions of "arithmetic" and "mathematics" and
"science" and "true" and "know", and it's not worth arguing about them.
But it is almost undeniable, due to Godel, that there are true things
that "Science" does not know of. I suppose you can argue what the
definition of "thing" is.
Whoa. Godel was talking about mathematics, not science. Mathematics
is a tool of science but it is not the whole of it. Science can know
things that are not contained in a mathematical system. For example
it knows that the mathematical systems constituting General Relativity
and Quantum Theory can't be reconciled under certain conditions which
we have strong evidence exist in the real universe. Hence the so far
unsatisfactory search for some kind of unifying model.
Post by Chris Buckley
Chris
Chris Buckley
2020-04-06 03:20:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Chris Buckley
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Chris Buckley
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by David Johnston
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Please name something that Science does not KNOW about which is
"nonetheless" true.
No.  Your request is inane and beside the point.
In other words, you can't.
So what?
So, the proposition is that there are true things that "Science" does
not know of. Yet you can't provide any evidence to support that
proposition while expecting others to accept that it is so simply
because it was said.
It all depends on your definitions.
There are lots of true statements about arithmetic that scientists
cannot list and cannot prove (consequence of Godel's Incompleteness Theorem).
Arithmetic is not science. It is a set of observations ONLY, codified as a set of axioms.
Math, however, is.....um.....different.
As I said: It all depends on your definitions. There are very
reasonable differing definitions of "arithmetic" and "mathematics" and
"science" and "true" and "know", and it's not worth arguing about them.
But it is almost undeniable, due to Godel, that there are true things
that "Science" does not know of. I suppose you can argue what the
definition of "thing" is.
Whoa. Godel was talking about mathematics, not science. Mathematics
is a tool of science but it is not the whole of it. Science can know
things that are not contained in a mathematical system.
Absolutely. Read my claim again. All I'm saying is that because of
Godel's theorem, we know there are mathematical statements that are
true that Science does not know of. There may be (and I firmly
believe) lots of other true things that Science does not know of, but
the original question just asked for proof of existence of one.

Chris
Paul S Person
2020-04-06 16:56:36 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 05 Apr 2020 21:39:48 -0400, J. Clarke
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Chris Buckley
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Chris Buckley
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by David Johnston
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
On Thursday, April 2, 2020 at 12:16:25 AM UTC-5, David Johnston
Post by David Johnston
On Wednesday, April 1, 2020 at 11:52:11 AM UTC-5, Paul S Person
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
Please elucidate........precisely HOW one would demonstrate that.
It's demonstrated with every unanswered question about the universe.
Please look up "demonstrate"
No.  All one has to do is establish that there are unanswered
questions and one has established that there are things that
scientists don't know that are true.  Quibbling about the
definition of demonstrate doesn't change that.
Please name something that Science does not KNOW about which is
"nonetheless" true.
No.  Your request is inane and beside the point.
In other words, you can't.
So what?
So, the proposition is that there are true things that "Science" does
not know of. Yet you can't provide any evidence to support that
proposition while expecting others to accept that it is so simply
because it was said.
It all depends on your definitions.
There are lots of true statements about arithmetic that scientists
cannot list and cannot prove (consequence of Godel's Incompleteness Theorem).
Arithmetic is not science. It is a set of observations ONLY, codified as a set of axioms.
Math, however, is.....um.....different.
As I said: It all depends on your definitions. There are very
reasonable differing definitions of "arithmetic" and "mathematics" and
"science" and "true" and "know", and it's not worth arguing about them.
But it is almost undeniable, due to Godel, that there are true things
that "Science" does not know of. I suppose you can argue what the
definition of "thing" is.
Whoa. Godel was talking about mathematics, not science. Mathematics
is a tool of science but it is not the whole of it. Science can know
things that are not contained in a mathematical system. For example
it knows that the mathematical systems constituting General Relativity
and Quantum Theory can't be reconciled under certain conditions which
we have strong evidence exist in the real universe. Hence the so far
unsatisfactory search for some kind of unifying model.
Which would seem to suggest that there is /something/ out there that
we have yet to discover that will produce the unifying model.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."
o***@gmail.com
2020-04-06 20:27:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul S Person
On Sun, 05 Apr 2020 21:39:48 -0400, J. Clarke
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Chris Buckley
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Chris Buckley
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by David Johnston
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
On Thursday, April 2, 2020 at 12:16:25 AM UTC-5, David Johnston
Post by David Johnston
On Wednesday, April 1, 2020 at 11:52:11 AM UTC-5, Paul S Person
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
Please elucidate........precisely HOW one would demonstrate that.
It's demonstrated with every unanswered question about the universe.
Please look up "demonstrate"
No.  All one has to do is establish that there are unanswered
questions and one has established that there are things that
scientists don't know that are true.  Quibbling about the
definition of demonstrate doesn't change that.
Please name something that Science does not KNOW about which is
"nonetheless" true.
No.  Your request is inane and beside the point.
In other words, you can't.
So what?
So, the proposition is that there are true things that "Science" does
not know of. Yet you can't provide any evidence to support that
proposition while expecting others to accept that it is so simply
because it was said.
It all depends on your definitions.
There are lots of true statements about arithmetic that scientists
cannot list and cannot prove (consequence of Godel's Incompleteness Theorem).
Arithmetic is not science. It is a set of observations ONLY, codified as a set of axioms.
Math, however, is.....um.....different.
As I said: It all depends on your definitions. There are very
reasonable differing definitions of "arithmetic" and "mathematics" and
"science" and "true" and "know", and it's not worth arguing about them.
But it is almost undeniable, due to Godel, that there are true things
that "Science" does not know of. I suppose you can argue what the
definition of "thing" is.
Whoa. Godel was talking about mathematics, not science. Mathematics
is a tool of science but it is not the whole of it. Science can know
things that are not contained in a mathematical system. For example
it knows that the mathematical systems constituting General Relativity
and Quantum Theory can't be reconciled under certain conditions which
we have strong evidence exist in the real universe. Hence the so far
unsatisfactory search for some kind of unifying model.
Which would seem to suggest that there is /something/ out there that
we have yet to discover that will produce the unifying model.
Maybe......perhaps.....kinda.....I guess.....

I don't, however get the (self proclaimed) triumphalism in the statement that WTF it is, science can't understand it.

When you discover "it".....let us know.
J. Clarke
2020-04-06 22:14:18 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 06 Apr 2020 09:56:36 -0700, Paul S Person
Post by Paul S Person
On Sun, 05 Apr 2020 21:39:48 -0400, J. Clarke
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Chris Buckley
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Chris Buckley
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by David Johnston
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
On Thursday, April 2, 2020 at 12:16:25 AM UTC-5, David Johnston
Post by David Johnston
On Wednesday, April 1, 2020 at 11:52:11 AM UTC-5, Paul S Person
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
Please elucidate........precisely HOW one would demonstrate that.
It's demonstrated with every unanswered question about the universe.
Please look up "demonstrate"
No.  All one has to do is establish that there are unanswered
questions and one has established that there are things that
scientists don't know that are true.  Quibbling about the
definition of demonstrate doesn't change that.
Please name something that Science does not KNOW about which is
"nonetheless" true.
No.  Your request is inane and beside the point.
In other words, you can't.
So what?
So, the proposition is that there are true things that "Science" does
not know of. Yet you can't provide any evidence to support that
proposition while expecting others to accept that it is so simply
because it was said.
It all depends on your definitions.
There are lots of true statements about arithmetic that scientists
cannot list and cannot prove (consequence of Godel's Incompleteness Theorem).
Arithmetic is not science. It is a set of observations ONLY, codified as a set of axioms.
Math, however, is.....um.....different.
As I said: It all depends on your definitions. There are very
reasonable differing definitions of "arithmetic" and "mathematics" and
"science" and "true" and "know", and it's not worth arguing about them.
But it is almost undeniable, due to Godel, that there are true things
that "Science" does not know of. I suppose you can argue what the
definition of "thing" is.
Whoa. Godel was talking about mathematics, not science. Mathematics
is a tool of science but it is not the whole of it. Science can know
things that are not contained in a mathematical system. For example
it knows that the mathematical systems constituting General Relativity
and Quantum Theory can't be reconciled under certain conditions which
we have strong evidence exist in the real universe. Hence the so far
unsatisfactory search for some kind of unifying model.
Which would seem to suggest that there is /something/ out there that
we have yet to discover that will produce the unifying model.
Unless the universe is a video game whose designers decided "Oh, Hell,
nobody's ever going to dig down _that_ far into the game physics".
Titus G
2020-04-07 03:25:48 UTC
Permalink
On 7/04/20 10:14 am, J. Clarke wrote:
snip
Post by J. Clarke
Unless the universe is a video game whose designers decided "Oh, Hell,
nobody's ever going to dig down _that_ far into the game physics".
Didn't Red Dwarf do that?
Paul S Person
2020-04-07 17:12:49 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 06 Apr 2020 18:14:18 -0400, J. Clarke
Post by J. Clarke
On Mon, 06 Apr 2020 09:56:36 -0700, Paul S Person
Post by Paul S Person
On Sun, 05 Apr 2020 21:39:48 -0400, J. Clarke
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Chris Buckley
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Chris Buckley
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by David Johnston
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
On Thursday, April 2, 2020 at 12:16:25 AM UTC-5, David Johnston
Post by David Johnston
On Wednesday, April 1, 2020 at 11:52:11 AM UTC-5, Paul S Person
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
Please elucidate........precisely HOW one would demonstrate that.
It's demonstrated with every unanswered question about the universe.
Please look up "demonstrate"
No.  All one has to do is establish that there are unanswered
questions and one has established that there are things that
scientists don't know that are true.  Quibbling about the
definition of demonstrate doesn't change that.
Please name something that Science does not KNOW about which is
"nonetheless" true.
No.  Your request is inane and beside the point.
In other words, you can't.
So what?
So, the proposition is that there are true things that "Science" does
not know of. Yet you can't provide any evidence to support that
proposition while expecting others to accept that it is so simply
because it was said.
It all depends on your definitions.
There are lots of true statements about arithmetic that scientists
cannot list and cannot prove (consequence of Godel's Incompleteness Theorem).
Arithmetic is not science. It is a set of observations ONLY, codified as a set of axioms.
Math, however, is.....um.....different.
As I said: It all depends on your definitions. There are very
reasonable differing definitions of "arithmetic" and "mathematics" and
"science" and "true" and "know", and it's not worth arguing about them.
But it is almost undeniable, due to Godel, that there are true things
that "Science" does not know of. I suppose you can argue what the
definition of "thing" is.
Whoa. Godel was talking about mathematics, not science. Mathematics
is a tool of science but it is not the whole of it. Science can know
things that are not contained in a mathematical system. For example
it knows that the mathematical systems constituting General Relativity
and Quantum Theory can't be reconciled under certain conditions which
we have strong evidence exist in the real universe. Hence the so far
unsatisfactory search for some kind of unifying model.
Which would seem to suggest that there is /something/ out there that
we have yet to discover that will produce the unifying model.
Unless the universe is a video game whose designers decided "Oh, Hell,
nobody's ever going to dig down _that_ far into the game physics".
Yes, well, that's the dilemma, isn't it?

If we are in a simulation, we would expect there to be a "lowest
turtle". Otherwise the simulation would still be in an infinite
regress in startup. This would be nice to know because, if we /are/ in
a simulation, the obvious course of action is to /find the source
code/ and so find out /exactly/ how things work. Hacking, not science,
is the optimal tool in that case.

If we are not in a simulation, does that not raise the possibility
that it really /is/ "turtles all the way down"? Which, of course,
means that we can /never/ figure it all out because it would take
infinite time to do so, and the Universe has a shelf-life.

Science, meanwhile, just keeps plugging away, paying as little
attention as possible to such ... esoteric ... concerns.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."
o***@gmail.com
2020-04-06 20:13:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chris Buckley
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Chris Buckley
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by David Johnston
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
On Thursday, April 2, 2020 at 12:16:25 AM UTC-5, David Johnston
Post by David Johnston
On Wednesday, April 1, 2020 at 11:52:11 AM UTC-5, Paul S Person
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
Please elucidate........precisely HOW one would demonstrate that.
It's demonstrated with every unanswered question about the universe.
Please look up "demonstrate"
No.  All one has to do is establish that there are unanswered
questions and one has established that there are things that
scientists don't know that are true.  Quibbling about the
definition of demonstrate doesn't change that.
Please name something that Science does not KNOW about which is
"nonetheless" true.
No.  Your request is inane and beside the point.
In other words, you can't.
So what?
So, the proposition is that there are true things that "Science" does
not know of. Yet you can't provide any evidence to support that
proposition while expecting others to accept that it is so simply
because it was said.
It all depends on your definitions.
There are lots of true statements about arithmetic that scientists
cannot list and cannot prove (consequence of Godel's Incompleteness Theorem).
Arithmetic is not science. It is a set of observations ONLY, codified as a set of axioms.
Math, however, is.....um.....different.
As I said: It all depends on your definitions. There are very
reasonable differing definitions of "arithmetic" and "mathematics" and
"science" and "true" and "know", and it's not worth arguing about them.
But it is almost undeniable, due to Godel, that there are true things
that "Science" does not know of. I suppose you can argue what the
definition of "thing" is.
....I suppose....

Re: Godel....

I have unpopular views regarding his stuff......unsuited to discussion herein.

Over beer, perhaps........
o***@gmail.com
2020-04-03 19:14:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Please name something that Science does not KNOW about which is
"nonetheless" true.
No.  Your request is inane and beside the point.
In other words, you can't.
Ever hear an evangelical apologist ??

It's funny stuff.

His responses mimic their babble.
J. Clarke
2020-04-03 10:48:33 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 2 Apr 2020 20:21:25 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by David Johnston
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
Please elucidate........precisely HOW one would demonstrate that.
It's demonstrated with every unanswered question about the universe.
Please look up "demonstrate"
No.  All one has to do is establish that there are unanswered questions
and one has established that there are things that scientists don't know
that are true.  Quibbling about the definition of demonstrate doesn't
change that.
Please name something that Science does not KNOW about which is
"nonetheless" true.
Science is well aware of quite a lot of human behavior but it does not
KNOW why that behavior occurs.
o***@gmail.com
2020-04-03 19:15:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
On Thu, 2 Apr 2020 20:21:25 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by David Johnston
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
Please elucidate........precisely HOW one would demonstrate that.
It's demonstrated with every unanswered question about the universe.
Please look up "demonstrate"
No.  All one has to do is establish that there are unanswered questions
and one has established that there are things that scientists don't know
that are true.  Quibbling about the definition of demonstrate doesn't
change that.
Please name something that Science does not KNOW about which is
"nonetheless" true.
Science is well aware of quite a lot of human behavior but it does not
KNOW why that behavior occurs.
The study of human behavior, while often valuable, is NOT science.
David Johnston
2020-04-03 21:27:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by J. Clarke
On Thu, 2 Apr 2020 20:21:25 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by David Johnston
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
Please elucidate........precisely HOW one would demonstrate that.
It's demonstrated with every unanswered question about the universe.
Please look up "demonstrate"
No.  All one has to do is establish that there are unanswered questions
and one has established that there are things that scientists don't know
that are true.  Quibbling about the definition of demonstrate doesn't
change that.
Please name something that Science does not KNOW about which is
"nonetheless" true.
Science is well aware of quite a lot of human behavior but it does not
KNOW why that behavior occurs.
The study of human behavior, while often valuable, is NOT science.
Why not? It's an observable and repeatable phenomenon.
Alan Baker
2020-04-03 21:37:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by J. Clarke
On Thu, 2 Apr 2020 20:21:25 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by David Johnston
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
Please elucidate........precisely HOW one would demonstrate that.
It's demonstrated with every unanswered question about the universe.
Please look up "demonstrate"
No.  All one has to do is establish that there are unanswered questions
and one has established that there are things that scientists don't know
that are true.  Quibbling about the definition of demonstrate doesn't
change that.
Please name something that Science does not KNOW about which is
"nonetheless" true.
Science is well aware of quite a lot of human behavior but it does not
KNOW why that behavior occurs.
The study of human behavior, while often valuable, is NOT science.
Why not?  It's an observable and repeatable phenomenon.
Obligatory SF reference:

Asimov's Foundation books.
Kevrob
2020-04-03 21:50:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alan Baker
Post by o***@gmail.com
The study of human behavior, while often valuable, is
NOT science.
Why not?  It's an observable and repeatable phenomenon.
Asimov's Foundation books.
As someone with a history B.A., who read the trilogy while in
high school, I can't express strongly enough how I grew to
loathe "psychohistory" as the giant vat of woo it was, just
as other versions of historical determinism are.

Then "Big Data" emerged, and I thought, "maybe the Good
Doctor had got ahold of some kind of something..." at
least in the short term?

Kevin R
a.a #2310
o***@gmail.com
2020-04-04 00:13:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kevrob
Post by Alan Baker
Post by o***@gmail.com
The study of human behavior, while often valuable, is
NOT science.
Why not?  It's an observable and repeatable phenomenon.
Asimov's Foundation books.
As someone with a history B.A., who read the trilogy while in
high school, I can't express strongly enough how I grew to
loathe "psychohistory" as the giant vat of woo it was, just
as other versions of historical determinism are.
...IIRC ( and no, research nazi's, I have no clue where I read it, 50 years ago) Azimov, hisownself, admitted his woo-ness.
Post by Kevrob
Then "Big Data" emerged, and I thought, "maybe the Good
Doctor had got ahold of some kind of something..." at
least in the short term?
And part of his admission was that it was simple to dazzle folks with regression of the mean.
Kevrob
2020-04-04 01:43:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Kevrob
Post by Alan Baker
Post by o***@gmail.com
The study of human behavior, while often valuable, is
NOT science.
Why not?  It's an observable and repeatable phenomenon.
Asimov's Foundation books.
As someone with a history B.A., who read the trilogy while in
high school, I can't express strongly enough how I grew to
loathe "psychohistory" as the giant vat of woo it was, just
as other versions of historical determinism are.
...IIRC ( and no, research nazi's, I have no clue where I read it,
50 years ago) Azimov, hisownself, admitted his woo-ness.
Post by Kevrob
Then "Big Data" emerged, and I thought, "maybe the Good
Doctor had got ahold of some kind of something..." at
least in the short term?
And part of his admission was that it was simple to dazzle
folks with regression of the mean.
I remember reading in some column or biographical chapter of
Asimov's, that the math in Seldon's discipline wasn't the
science explored in Foundation. History was. The Galactic
Empire was "Rome In Spaaaaace" and Asimov was its Gibbon.

There is a "psychohistory" IRL, but it doesn't match up
to what the Foundation used.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychohistory

What Asimov's psychohistory is closer to is called
"Cliodynamics."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cliodynamics

Kevin R
Kevrob
2020-04-03 21:40:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Johnston
Post by o***@gmail.com
The study of human behavior, while often valuable, is NOT science.
Why not? It's an observable and repeatable phenomenon.
There's "hard science" and "soft science," though people
may debate where on the "Mohs scale" a certain discipline is.
Ethics precludes putting humans through destructive testing,
just to pick one difference.

This has been referenced before, IMS.

https://xkcd.com/435/

Kevin R
J. Clarke
2020-04-03 22:01:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kevrob
Post by David Johnston
Post by o***@gmail.com
The study of human behavior, while often valuable, is NOT science.
Why not? It's an observable and repeatable phenomenon.
There's "hard science" and "soft science," though people
may debate where on the "Mohs scale" a certain discipline is.
Ethics precludes putting humans through destructive testing,
just to pick one difference.
We don't have the means to put stars through destructive testing. Does
that mean that astronomy is not science?
Post by Kevrob
This has been referenced before, IMS.
https://xkcd.com/435/
Kevin R
Kevrob
2020-04-03 22:29:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Kevrob
Post by David Johnston
Post by o***@gmail.com
The study of human behavior, while often valuable, is NOT science.
Why not? It's an observable and repeatable phenomenon.
There's "hard science" and "soft science," though people
may debate where on the "Mohs scale" a certain discipline is.
Ethics precludes putting humans through destructive testing,
just to pick one difference.
We don't have the means to put stars through destructive testing.
Does that mean that astronomy is not science?
We don't have a "Sam Carter" IRL. :)
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Kevrob
This has been referenced before, IMS.
https://xkcd.com/435/
--
Kevin R
a.a #2310
Robert Woodward
2020-04-04 05:04:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Kevrob
Post by David Johnston
Post by o***@gmail.com
The study of human behavior, while often valuable, is NOT science.
Why not? It's an observable and repeatable phenomenon.
There's "hard science" and "soft science," though people
may debate where on the "Mohs scale" a certain discipline is.
Ethics precludes putting humans through destructive testing,
just to pick one difference.
We don't have the means to put stars through destructive testing. Does
that mean that astronomy is not science?
But we can OBSERVE the ones that undergo destructive testing.
--
"We have advanced to new and surprising levels of bafflement."
Imperial Auditor Miles Vorkosigan describes progress in _Komarr_.
-------------------------------------------------------
Robert Woodward ***@drizzle.com
p***@hotmail.com
2020-04-04 17:18:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Woodward
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Kevrob
Post by David Johnston
Post by o***@gmail.com
The study of human behavior, while often valuable, is NOT science.
Why not? It's an observable and repeatable phenomenon.
There's "hard science" and "soft science," though people
may debate where on the "Mohs scale" a certain discipline is.
Ethics precludes putting humans through destructive testing,
just to pick one difference.
We don't have the means to put stars through destructive testing. Does
that mean that astronomy is not science?
But we can OBSERVE the ones that undergo destructive testing.
For stars and humans, of course. That's a big part of epidemiology.

Peter Wezeman
anti-social Darwinist
o***@gmail.com
2020-04-04 00:10:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Johnston
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by J. Clarke
On Thu, 2 Apr 2020 20:21:25 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by David Johnston
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
Please elucidate........precisely HOW one would demonstrate that.
It's demonstrated with every unanswered question about the universe.
Please look up "demonstrate"
No.  All one has to do is establish that there are unanswered questions
and one has established that there are things that scientists don't know
that are true.  Quibbling about the definition of demonstrate doesn't
change that.
Please name something that Science does not KNOW about which is
"nonetheless" true.
Science is well aware of quite a lot of human behavior but it does not
KNOW why that behavior occurs.
The study of human behavior, while often valuable, is NOT science.
Why not? It's an observable and repeatable phenomenon.
Repeatable is NOT replicable.

And a math foundation is required.

(I used to watch child psychologists plug "pull-it-out-of-your-ass "measurements" into into canned stat programs.....and call it science")
Dimensional Traveler
2020-04-04 05:09:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by J. Clarke
On Thu, 2 Apr 2020 20:21:25 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by David Johnston
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
Please elucidate........precisely HOW one would demonstrate that.
It's demonstrated with every unanswered question about the universe.
Please look up "demonstrate"
No.  All one has to do is establish that there are unanswered questions
and one has established that there are things that scientists don't know
that are true.  Quibbling about the definition of demonstrate doesn't
change that.
Please name something that Science does not KNOW about which is
"nonetheless" true.
Science is well aware of quite a lot of human behavior but it does not
KNOW why that behavior occurs.
The study of human behavior, while often valuable, is NOT science.
Are you saying that the study of _ANIMAL_ behavior is not science? Or
that humans are not animals?
--
"You need to believe in things that aren't true. How else can they become?"
o***@gmail.com
2020-04-04 23:25:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by J. Clarke
On Thu, 2 Apr 2020 20:21:25 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by David Johnston
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
Please elucidate........precisely HOW one would demonstrate that.
It's demonstrated with every unanswered question about the universe.
Please look up "demonstrate"
No.  All one has to do is establish that there are unanswered questions
and one has established that there are things that scientists don't know
that are true.  Quibbling about the definition of demonstrate doesn't
change that.
Please name something that Science does not KNOW about which is
"nonetheless" true.
Science is well aware of quite a lot of human behavior but it does not
KNOW why that behavior occurs.
The study of human behavior, while often valuable, is NOT science.
Are you saying that the study of _ANIMAL_ behavior is not science? Or
that humans are not animals?
yes
Dimensional Traveler
2020-04-05 02:33:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by J. Clarke
On Thu, 2 Apr 2020 20:21:25 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by David Johnston
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
Please elucidate........precisely HOW one would demonstrate that.
It's demonstrated with every unanswered question about the universe.
Please look up "demonstrate"
No.  All one has to do is establish that there are unanswered questions
and one has established that there are things that scientists don't know
that are true.  Quibbling about the definition of demonstrate doesn't
change that.
Please name something that Science does not KNOW about which is
"nonetheless" true.
Science is well aware of quite a lot of human behavior but it does not
KNOW why that behavior occurs.
The study of human behavior, while often valuable, is NOT science.
Are you saying that the study of _ANIMAL_ behavior is not science? Or
that humans are not animals?
yes
o_O
--
"You need to believe in things that aren't true. How else can they become?"
Paul S Person
2020-04-04 17:17:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by J. Clarke
On Thu, 2 Apr 2020 20:21:25 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by David Johnston
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
Please elucidate........precisely HOW one would demonstrate that.
It's demonstrated with every unanswered question about the universe.
Please look up "demonstrate"
No.  All one has to do is establish that there are unanswered questions
and one has established that there are things that scientists don't know
that are true.  Quibbling about the definition of demonstrate doesn't
change that.
Please name something that Science does not KNOW about which is
"nonetheless" true.
Science is well aware of quite a lot of human behavior but it does not
KNOW why that behavior occurs.
The study of human behavior, while often valuable, is NOT science.
I would say, rather, that it is still in the fact-finding stage.

And having a lot of trouble with even that as well.

In 500 years, though, things might be different.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."
Thomas Koenig
2020-04-05 09:22:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by o***@gmail.com
The study of human behavior, while often valuable, is NOT science.
It can be done scientifically, using Popper's definition.

Of course, the theories would have to be set up as to be falsifiable -
you think of a theory, you set up an experiment to test it, you see
if the data you get contradicts you theory. If it doesn't, you can
have a higher confidence in your theory, but it will not be "proven" -
the next set of data can disprove your theory.

Newton and Einstein is probably the canonical example. Newton's
theory of gravity could not be disproveen by the experimental data
that he had. Einstein's theories, however, are very successful
because continue not to be disproven for quite some time now.

That is no assurance, of course, that there never will be new
observations which may require an extension or modification or a
different theory.

Mathematics is different, there positive proof is required.
Paul S Person
2020-04-05 17:45:52 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 5 Apr 2020 09:22:13 -0000 (UTC), Thomas Koenig
Post by Thomas Koenig
Post by o***@gmail.com
The study of human behavior, while often valuable, is NOT science.
It can be done scientifically, using Popper's definition.
Of course, the theories would have to be set up as to be falsifiable -
you think of a theory, you set up an experiment to test it, you see
if the data you get contradicts you theory. If it doesn't, you can
have a higher confidence in your theory, but it will not be "proven" -
the next set of data can disprove your theory.
One of the problems that appears to afflict the social sciences is the
misuse of "levels of confidence". Another is a distinctd lack of
reproducibility.

This is an excellent statement of science vs mathematics (logic), BTW.
Post by Thomas Koenig
Newton and Einstein is probably the canonical example. Newton's
theory of gravity could not be disproveen by the experimental data
that he had. Einstein's theories, however, are very successful
because continue not to be disproven for quite some time now.
That is no assurance, of course, that there never will be new
observations which may require an extension or modification or a
different theory.
Mathematics is different, there positive proof is required.
Well, yes, in that the statements must be proven.

They can, however, be proven by contradiction. Or by (mathematical)
inference. Neither of which is particularly "positive", if you catch
my drift.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."
o***@gmail.com
2020-04-03 19:09:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by David Johnston
Post by o***@gmail.com
Post by Paul S Person
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
Please elucidate........precisely HOW one would demonstrate that.
It's demonstrated with every unanswered question about the universe.
Please look up "demonstrate"
No.  All one has to do is establish that there are unanswered questions
and one has established that there are things that scientists don't know
that are true.  Quibbling about the definition of demonstrate doesn't
change that.
Please name something that Science does not KNOW about which is
"nonetheless" true.
--
"You need to believe in things that aren't true. How else can they become?"
Heady......authoritative in the masturbatory sense.....

But lacking in logic.
Robert Carnegie
2020-04-03 15:20:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Scott Lurndal
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course they can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried to emulate
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why writers create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it on with his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in providing role
models.
Hey, there’s more incest in the Bible than in Game of Thrones.
Well, when you start with *two* humans, one of whom is a clone of
the other with one chromosome changed.....
And who did their kids marry XXXXX shack up with ?
Of course, that first person probably had perfect DNA, no bad stuff.
Lynn
multi-century-old Noah, his equally elderly wife, their three sons, and the
sons’ wives. Lots and lots of incest to be had... And Noah was well after
the ‘first person’ with the ‘perfect DNA’. I won’t go into the two
different Flood stories (one had just two of each animal, one had two of the
‘unclean’ animals and _seven_ od the ‘clean’ ones. As the
clean/unclean division wasn’t handed down until Moses, exactly how did Noah
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder, rape, genocide,
atrocity, and more.
I suppose Noah might have known which animals
were clean or not. God brought the animals anyway,
Noah didn't go round collecting them - in the story.
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Scott Lurndal
Leaving aside the fact that there isn't enough water on the planet to cover all land;
nor sufficient energy for a planetwide 40 day long rainstorm.
Well, not enough water/energy so far as Science knows, anyway.
But then, Science didn't know about Plate Tectonics until sometime in
the last century.
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
...but that is not a good argument for Noah's flood
to be historical fact.
Paul S Person
2020-04-03 17:46:03 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 3 Apr 2020 08:20:27 -0700 (PDT), Robert Carnegie
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Scott Lurndal
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course they can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried to emulate
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why writers create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it on with his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in providing role
models.
Hey, there’s more incest in the Bible than in Game of Thrones.
Well, when you start with *two* humans, one of whom is a clone of
the other with one chromosome changed.....
And who did their kids marry XXXXX shack up with ?
Of course, that first person probably had perfect DNA, no bad stuff.
Lynn
multi-century-old Noah, his equally elderly wife, their three sons, and the
sons’ wives. Lots and lots of incest to be had... And Noah was well after
the ‘first person’ with the ‘perfect DNA’. I won’t go into the two
different Flood stories (one had just two of each animal, one had two of the
‘unclean’ animals and _seven_ od the ‘clean’ ones. As the
clean/unclean division wasn’t handed down until Moses, exactly how did Noah
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder, rape, genocide,
atrocity, and more.
I suppose Noah might have known which animals
were clean or not. God brought the animals anyway,
Noah didn't go round collecting them - in the story.
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Scott Lurndal
Leaving aside the fact that there isn't enough water on the planet to cover all land;
nor sufficient energy for a planetwide 40 day long rainstorm.
Well, not enough water/energy so far as Science knows, anyway.
But then, Science didn't know about Plate Tectonics until sometime in
the last century.
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
...but that is not a good argument for Noah's flood
to be historical fact.
I'm not arguing whether the various Floods were historical fact (in
any sense).

I am arguing that what Science knows is not relevant to the issue
because it has "known" things in the past that turned out to be /just
plain wrong/.

Such as Plate Tectonics, which Science not only did not know about but
actually "knew" could not possibly be correct, to the point that the
discoverer was persecuted by his fellow scientists for daring to
assert the facts.

Or phlogiston.

Or the luminiferous aether.

And, no doubt, many others.

The question isn't just "what doesn't Science know that is,
nonetheless, true", the question is also "how much of what Science
'knows' is, in fact, false?".
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."
Dimensional Traveler
2020-04-04 04:54:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul S Person
On Fri, 3 Apr 2020 08:20:27 -0700 (PDT), Robert Carnegie
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Scott Lurndal
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course they can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried to emulate
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why writers create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it on with his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in providing role
models.
Hey, there’s more incest in the Bible than in Game of Thrones.
Well, when you start with *two* humans, one of whom is a clone of
the other with one chromosome changed.....
And who did their kids marry XXXXX shack up with ?
Of course, that first person probably had perfect DNA, no bad stuff.
Lynn
multi-century-old Noah, his equally elderly wife, their three sons, and the
sons’ wives. Lots and lots of incest to be had... And Noah was well after
the ‘first person’ with the ‘perfect DNA’. I won’t go into the two
different Flood stories (one had just two of each animal, one had two of the
‘unclean’ animals and _seven_ od the ‘clean’ ones. As the
clean/unclean division wasn’t handed down until Moses, exactly how did Noah
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder, rape, genocide,
atrocity, and more.
I suppose Noah might have known which animals
were clean or not. God brought the animals anyway,
Noah didn't go round collecting them - in the story.
Post by Paul S Person
Post by Scott Lurndal
Leaving aside the fact that there isn't enough water on the planet to cover all land;
nor sufficient energy for a planetwide 40 day long rainstorm.
Well, not enough water/energy so far as Science knows, anyway.
But then, Science didn't know about Plate Tectonics until sometime in
the last century.
There are a /lot/ of things, no doubt, that Science doens't know
about, but which are nonetheless true.
...but that is not a good argument for Noah's flood
to be historical fact.
I'm not arguing whether the various Floods were historical fact (in
any sense).
I am arguing that what Science knows is not relevant to the issue
because it has "known" things in the past that turned out to be /just
plain wrong/.
Such as Plate Tectonics, which Science not only did not know about but
actually "knew" could not possibly be correct, to the point that the
discoverer was persecuted by his fellow scientists for daring to
assert the facts.
Or phlogiston.
Or the luminiferous aether.
And, no doubt, many others.
The question isn't just "what doesn't Science know that is,
nonetheless, true", the question is also "how much of what Science
'knows' is, in fact, false?".
Honest scientists don't claim that what we know now is the final word.
Science is an on-going process, not a final, unchanging dictate.

Basically the problem with your argument is that you appear to be
assuming "Science" is a religion.
--
"You need to believe in things that aren't true. How else can they become?"
Robert Woodward
2020-04-04 05:13:36 UTC
Permalink
In article <***@4ax.com>,
Paul S Person <***@ix.netcom.invalid> wrote:

<SNIP of stuff, since I only want to comment on the digression>
Post by Paul S Person
Such as Plate Tectonics, which Science not only did not know about but
actually "knew" could not possibly be correct, to the point that the
discoverer was persecuted by his fellow scientists for daring to
assert the facts.
If you are referring to Wegener, you are wrong. Continental Drift is not
Plate Tectonics. The continents aren't drifting, they are being pushed
around by ocean floor spreading.
--
"We have advanced to new and surprising levels of bafflement."
Imperial Auditor Miles Vorkosigan describes progress in _Komarr_.
‹-----------------------------------------------------
Robert Woodward ***@drizzle.com
Paul S Person
2020-04-04 17:26:00 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 03 Apr 2020 22:13:36 -0700, Robert Woodward
Post by Robert Woodward
<SNIP of stuff, since I only want to comment on the digression>
Post by Paul S Person
Such as Plate Tectonics, which Science not only did not know about but
actually "knew" could not possibly be correct, to the point that the
discoverer was persecuted by his fellow scientists for daring to
assert the facts.
If you are referring to Wegener, you are wrong. Continental Drift is not
Plate Tectonics. The continents aren't drifting, they are being pushed
around by ocean floor spreading.
Yes, I am referring to Wegener.

And the very first paragraph of
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plate_tectonics
links the two.

However, you are correct that Wegener proposed Continental Drift, and
that Plate Techtonics is not the same thing.

Thanks for the clarification.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."
Lynn McGuire
2020-04-01 18:42:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Scott Lurndal
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course they can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried to emulate
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why writers create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it on with his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in providing role
models.
Hey, there’s more incest in the Bible than in Game of Thrones.
Well, when you start with *two* humans, one of whom is a clone of
the other with one chromosome changed.....
And who did their kids marry XXXXX shack up with ?
Of course, that first person probably had perfect DNA, no bad stuff.
Lynn
multi-century-old Noah, his equally elderly wife, their three sons, and the
sons’ wives. Lots and lots of incest to be had... And Noah was well after
the ‘first person’ with the ‘perfect DNA’. I won’t go into the two
different Flood stories (one had just two of each animal, one had two of the
‘unclean’ animals and _seven_ od the ‘clean’ ones. As the
clean/unclean division wasn’t handed down until Moses, exactly how did Noah
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder, rape, genocide,
atrocity, and more.
Leaving aside the fact that there isn't enough water on the planet to cover all land;
nor sufficient energy for a planetwide 40 day long rainstorm.
Funny that you used the word ON. Most of the water contained in the
planet is in the outer mantle.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_mantle

Lynn
Wolffan
2020-04-01 21:08:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Scott Lurndal
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course they can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried to emulate
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why writers create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it on with his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in providing role
models.
Hey, there’s more incest in the Bible than in Game of
Thrones.
Well, when you start with *two* humans, one of whom is a clone of
the other with one chromosome changed.....
And who did their kids marry XXXXX shack up with ?
Of course, that first person probably had perfect DNA, no bad stuff.
Lynn
multi-century-old Noah, his equally elderly wife, their three sons, and the
sons’ wives. Lots and lots of incest to be had... And Noah was well after
the ‘first person’ with the ‘perfect DNA’. I
won’t go into the two
different Flood stories (one had just two of each animal, one had two of the
‘unclean’ animals and _seven_ od the ‘clean’ ones. As the
clean/unclean division wasn’t handed down until Moses, exactly how did Noah
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder, rape, genocide,
atrocity, and more.
Leaving aside the fact that there isn't enough water on the planet to cover all land;
nor sufficient energy for a planetwide 40 day long rainstorm.
Funny that you used the word ON. Most of the water contained in the
planet is in the outer mantle.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_mantle
Lynn
still not enough to do the job. run the numbers.
Lynn McGuire
2020-04-01 21:28:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wolffan
Post by Scott Lurndal
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course they can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried to emulate
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why writers create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it on with his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in providing role
models.
Hey, there’s more incest in the Bible than in Game of Thrones.
Well, when you start with *two* humans, one of whom is a clone of
the other with one chromosome changed.....
And who did their kids marry XXXXX shack up with ?
Of course, that first person probably had perfect DNA, no bad stuff.
Lynn
multi-century-old Noah, his equally elderly wife, their three sons, and the
sons’ wives. Lots and lots of incest to be had... And Noah was well after
the ‘first person’ with the ‘perfect DNA’. I
won’t go into the two
different Flood stories (one had just two of each animal, one had two of the
‘unclean’ animals and _seven_ od the ‘clean’ ones. As the
clean/unclean division wasn’t handed down until Moses, exactly how did Noah
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder, rape, genocide,
atrocity, and more.
Leaving aside the fact that there isn't enough water on the planet to cover all land;
nor sufficient energy for a planetwide 40 day long rainstorm.
Funny that you used the word ON. Most of the water contained in the
planet is in the outer mantle.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_mantle
Lynn
still not enough to do the job. run the numbers.
You first.

Lynn
Wolffan
2020-04-01 22:15:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Scott Lurndal
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course they can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried to
emulate
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why writers create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it on with his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in providing
role
models.
Hey, there’s more incest in the Bible than in Game of
Thrones.
Well, when you start with *two* humans, one of whom is a clone of
the other with one chromosome changed.....
And who did their kids marry XXXXX shack up with ?
Of course, that first person probably had perfect DNA, no bad stuff.
Lynn
multi-century-old Noah, his equally elderly wife, their three sons, and the
sons’ wives. Lots and lots of incest to be had... And Noah was
well
after
the ‘first person’ with the ‘perfect DNA’. I
won’t go into the two
different Flood stories (one had just two of each animal, one had two of
the
‘unclean’ animals and _seven_ od the ‘clean’
ones. As the
clean/unclean division wasn’t handed down until Moses, exactly how
did Noah
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder, rape,
genocide,
atrocity, and more.
Leaving aside the fact that there isn't enough water on the planet to
cover
all land;
nor sufficient energy for a planetwide 40 day long rainstorm.
Funny that you used the word ON. Most of the water contained in the
planet is in the outer mantle.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_mantle
Lynn
still not enough to do the job. run the numbers.
You first.
Lynn
I already have. there ain’t enough water.
Alan Baker
2020-04-02 04:47:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Wolffan
Post by Scott Lurndal
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course they can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried to emulate
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why writers create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it on with his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in providing role
models.
Hey, there’s more incest in the Bible than in Game of
Thrones.
Well, when you start with *two* humans, one of whom is a clone of
the other with one chromosome changed.....
And who did their kids marry XXXXX shack up with ?
Of course, that first person probably had perfect DNA, no bad stuff.
Lynn
multi-century-old Noah, his equally elderly wife, their three sons, and the
sons’ wives. Lots and lots of incest to be had... And Noah was well after
the ‘first person’ with the ‘perfect DNA’. I
won’t go into the two
different Flood stories (one had just two of each animal, one had
two of
the
‘unclean’ animals and _seven_ od the ‘clean’ ones. As the
clean/unclean division wasn’t handed down until Moses, exactly how did Noah
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder, rape, genocide,
atrocity, and more.
Leaving aside the fact that there isn't enough water on the planet
to cover
all land;
nor sufficient energy for a planetwide 40 day long rainstorm.
Funny that you used the word ON. Most of the water contained in the
planet is in the outer mantle.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_mantle
Lynn
still not enough to do the job. run the numbers.
You first.
Lynn
You made the claim.

Do you even know WHAT the hypothesis in that article claims?

I doubt it.
Alan Baker
2020-04-02 04:45:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Scott Lurndal
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course they can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried to emulate
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why writers create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it on with his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in providing role
models.
Hey, there’s more incest in the Bible than in Game of Thrones.
Well, when you start with *two* humans, one of whom is a clone of
the other with one chromosome changed.....
And who did their kids marry XXXXX shack up with ?
Of course, that first person probably had perfect DNA, no bad stuff.
Lynn
multi-century-old Noah, his equally elderly wife, their three sons, and the
sons’ wives. Lots and lots of incest to be had... And Noah was well after
the ‘first person’ with the ‘perfect DNA’. I won’t go into
the two
different Flood stories (one had just two of each animal, one had two of the
‘unclean’ animals and _seven_ od the ‘clean’ ones. As the
clean/unclean division wasn’t handed down until Moses, exactly how did Noah
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder, rape, genocide,
atrocity, and more.
Leaving aside the fact that there isn't enough water on the planet to cover all land;
nor sufficient energy for a planetwide 40 day long rainstorm.
Funny that you used the word ON.  Most of the water contained in the
planet is in the outer mantle.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_mantle
Lynn
You need to learn what "hypothesis" means.
Wolffan
2020-04-01 21:08:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Scott Lurndal
Post by Wolffan
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Dorothy J Heydt
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course they can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried to emulate
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why writers create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it on with his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in providing role
models.
Hey, there’s more incest in the Bible than in Game of Thrones.
Well, when you start with *two* humans, one of whom is a clone of
the other with one chromosome changed.....
And who did their kids marry XXXXX shack up with ?
Of course, that first person probably had perfect DNA, no bad stuff.
Lynn
multi-century-old Noah, his equally elderly wife, their three sons, and the
sons’ wives. Lots and lots of incest to be had... And Noah was well after
the ‘first person’ with the ‘perfect DNA’. I won’t go into the two
different Flood stories (one had just two of each animal, one had two of the
‘unclean’ animals and _seven_ od the ‘clean’ ones. As the
clean/unclean division wasn’t handed down until Moses, exactly how did Noah
know?) Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Samuel are _full_ of murder, rape, genocide,
atrocity, and more.
Leaving aside the fact that there isn't enough water on the planet to cover all land;
nor sufficient energy for a planetwide 40 day long rainstorm.
now you’re just being naughty, citing actual facts. Bad boy.
D B Davis
2020-04-06 23:14:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Johnston
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course they can.
Whether consciously or subconsciously.? Have you ever tried to emulate
the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books.? Books inspire life.? That is why writers create
characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
I rigged a situation so a guy would die so I could get it on with his
wife. Then I drowned a bunch of people because they were annoying.
That's because I deeply believe in the Bible's value in providing role
models.
"Father, forgive them for they know not what they do."
https://www.theforgivenessproject.com/victoria-ruvolo



Thank you,
--
Don.......My cat's )\._.,--....,'``.
telltale tall tail /, _.. \ _\ (`._ ,.
tells tall tales.. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
h***@gmail.com
2020-03-31 00:12:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course they can. Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried to emulate the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why writers create characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
The Bible.
Specifically the bits that say "Ignore facts if they're inconvenient"
m***@sky.com
2020-03-31 04:23:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course they can. Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried to emulate the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why writers create characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
In general, I think people over-estimate the role of inspiration and persuasion. I think we should learn from the Harvard Law of Animal Behavior that under controlled experimental conditions of temperature, time, lighting, feeding, and training, the organism will behave as it damn well pleases.

On the other hand, textbooks and the education system can do a very good job of teaching skills, and we should concentrate on that, so that people can put their inspirations (from wherever they come) into practice.
o***@gmail.com
2020-03-31 21:38:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by m***@sky.com
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course they can. Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried to emulate the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why writers create characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
In general, I think people over-estimate the role of inspiration and persuasion. I think we should learn from the Harvard Law of Animal Behavior that under controlled experimental conditions of temperature, time, lighting, feeding, and training, the organism will behave as it damn well pleases.
Which is THE reason that "studies" involving humans and human behavior can NOT be considered to be "science".
o***@gmail.com
2020-03-31 21:52:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by a***@gmail.com
Can books make a difference to your behaviour? Of course they can. Whether consciously or subconsciously. Have you ever tried to emulate the actions of the protagonist?
Life inspires books. Books inspire life. That is why writers create characters who are moral role models.
But in the end, each individual makes his own choice.
Abhinav Lal
"Choose wisely"
Heinlein's _Number of the Beast_ , which I consider his worst work (but still better than 90% of the rest), kinda inspired me in an obscure way.

My life after mid-40's paralleled the character Zebbie. I was a divorced campus rat, teaching math, physics, and engineering...kinda drifting along. Then decided on the cheapest, dirtiest, easiest way to be called "doctor"....a PhD in Education.

IT WORKED, far beyond my expectations.

And.....was GREAT fun, as virtually none of the profs (but two) had any concept of logic and reason, choosing instead, to glorify authority-based knowledge.

Shortly after my "consecration", however, I decided "work" was a four letter word, and avoided it for the rest of my life (other than a 2+ year tour in the Peace Corps).

....Schwab made it possible
Joy Beeson
2020-04-01 02:46:40 UTC
Permalink
In the "inspiring real-life action" department, the most exciting book
I ever read was _Knitting From the Top_ by Barbara Walker.
--
Joy Beeson
joy beeson at comcast dot net
http://wlweather.net/PAGEJOY/
Loading...