Posts: 269
Threads: 7
Joined: April 4, 2012
Reputation:
3
RE: Introduction!
April 5, 2012 at 7:46 pm
(This post was last modified: April 5, 2012 at 7:47 pm by Adjusted Sanity.)
(April 5, 2012 at 7:44 pm)Stimbo Wrote: (April 5, 2012 at 7:41 pm)Adjusted Sanity Wrote: (April 5, 2012 at 7:19 pm)Minimalist Wrote: They believe in horseshit. How smart can they be?
Quite smart. Issac Newton was a christian and he was quite intelligent, though he did have a few issues.
Thankfully he didn't let his religious views interfere with his work.
Of course. If he did we wouldn't even know who he was and I couldn't use him to make my point. A smart man keeps his beliefs away from his work. Unless his belief is his work.
This is stupid
Posts: 69248
Threads: 3759
Joined: August 2, 2009
Reputation:
259
RE: Introduction!
April 5, 2012 at 8:01 pm
(This post was last modified: April 5, 2012 at 8:02 pm by Minimalist.)
Give me a fucking break.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_Newto...ious_views
Quote:In addition to stepping in to re-form the solar system, Newton invoked God's active intervention to prevent the stars falling in on each other, and perhaps in preventing the amount of motion in the universe from decaying due to viscosity and friction.[32] In private correspondence Newton sometimes hinted that the force of Gravity was due to an immaterial influence:
Tis inconceivable that inanimate brute matter should (without the mediation of something else which is not material) operate upon & affect other matter without mutual contact.[33]
He was a typically superstitious 17th century twit.
When all else fails, "goddidit." Fuck him. The answersingenesis crew is still singing the same silly song.
Posts: 269
Threads: 7
Joined: April 4, 2012
Reputation:
3
RE: Introduction!
April 5, 2012 at 8:05 pm
(April 5, 2012 at 8:01 pm)Minimalist Wrote: Give me a fucking break.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_Newto...ious_views
Quote:In addition to stepping in to re-form the solar system, Newton invoked God's active intervention to prevent the stars falling in on each other, and perhaps in preventing the amount of motion in the universe from decaying due to viscosity and friction.[32] In private correspondence Newton sometimes hinted that the force of Gravity was due to an immaterial influence:
Tis inconceivable that inanimate brute matter should (without the mediation of something else which is not material) operate upon & affect other matter without mutual contact.[33]
He was a typically superstitious 17th century twit.
When all else fails, "goddidit." Fuck him. The answersingenesis crew is still singing the same silly song.
But STILL a smart man. He possessed intelligence.
This is stupid
Posts: 69248
Threads: 3759
Joined: August 2, 2009
Reputation:
259
RE: Introduction!
April 5, 2012 at 8:07 pm
By that standard so did the ignorant cunts who burned witches at the stake.
Posts: 25314
Threads: 239
Joined: August 26, 2010
Reputation:
156
RE: Introduction!
April 5, 2012 at 8:11 pm
(This post was last modified: April 5, 2012 at 8:12 pm by Cyberman.)
Which peg are you going to hang your argument from, Sanity? So far you have invoked Newton's religious views and his intelligence, as though one was a function of the other (was he religious because he was smart or did his religiosity make him smart?). Now you seem to have dropped the religious shoe in favour of emphasising his intelligence, on which we all agree. I fail to see the point you're trying to make.
I apologise for the tangle of metaphors.
At the age of five, Skagra decided emphatically that God did not exist. This revelation tends to make most people in the universe who have it react in one of two ways - with relief or with despair. Only Skagra responded to it by thinking, 'Wait a second. That means there's a situation vacant.'
Posts: 12586
Threads: 397
Joined: September 17, 2010
Reputation:
96
RE: Introduction!
April 5, 2012 at 8:13 pm
Jesus fucking Christ Min.
A "twit".
Posts: 269
Threads: 7
Joined: April 4, 2012
Reputation:
3
RE: Introduction!
April 5, 2012 at 8:17 pm
(This post was last modified: April 5, 2012 at 8:18 pm by Adjusted Sanity.)
(April 5, 2012 at 8:11 pm)Stimbo Wrote: Which peg are you going to hang your argument from, Sanity? So far you have invoked Newton's religious views and his intelligence, as though one was a function of the other (was he religious because he was smart or did his religiosity make him smart?). Now you seem to have dropped the religious shoe in favour of emphasising his intelligence, on which we all agree. I fail to see the point you're trying to make.
I apologise for the tangle of metaphors.
I'm trying to say intelligence and religion are not directly connected.
This is stupid
Posts: 1327
Threads: 37
Joined: January 15, 2012
Reputation:
15
RE: Introduction!
April 5, 2012 at 8:21 pm
(April 5, 2012 at 8:17 pm)Adjusted Sanity Wrote: (April 5, 2012 at 8:11 pm)Stimbo Wrote: Which peg are you going to hang your argument from, Sanity? So far you have invoked Newton's religious views and his intelligence, as though one was a function of the other (was he religious because he was smart or did his religiosity make him smart?). Now you seem to have dropped the religious shoe in favour of emphasising his intelligence, on which we all agree. I fail to see the point you're trying to make.
I apologise for the tangle of metaphors.
I'm trying to say intelligence and religion are not directly connected.
Sure they are. An inverse relation has been demonstrated but you are free to dispute the results if you want to.
Posts: 269
Threads: 7
Joined: April 4, 2012
Reputation:
3
RE: Introduction!
April 5, 2012 at 8:24 pm
(April 5, 2012 at 8:21 pm)Phil Wrote: (April 5, 2012 at 8:17 pm)Adjusted Sanity Wrote: (April 5, 2012 at 8:11 pm)Stimbo Wrote: Which peg are you going to hang your argument from, Sanity? So far you have invoked Newton's religious views and his intelligence, as though one was a function of the other (was he religious because he was smart or did his religiosity make him smart?). Now you seem to have dropped the religious shoe in favour of emphasising his intelligence, on which we all agree. I fail to see the point you're trying to make.
I apologise for the tangle of metaphors.
I'm trying to say intelligence and religion are not directly connected.
Sure they are. An inverse relation has been demonstrated but you are free to dispute the results if you want to.
Might look that up later. I'd definitely have to see a valid study or two.
This is stupid
Posts: 1327
Threads: 37
Joined: January 15, 2012
Reputation:
15
RE: Introduction!
April 5, 2012 at 8:31 pm
(April 5, 2012 at 8:24 pm)Adjusted Sanity Wrote: (April 5, 2012 at 8:21 pm)Phil Wrote: (April 5, 2012 at 8:17 pm)Adjusted Sanity Wrote: (April 5, 2012 at 8:11 pm)Stimbo Wrote: Which peg are you going to hang your argument from, Sanity? So far you have invoked Newton's religious views and his intelligence, as though one was a function of the other (was he religious because he was smart or did his religiosity make him smart?). Now you seem to have dropped the religious shoe in favour of emphasising his intelligence, on which we all agree. I fail to see the point you're trying to make.
I apologise for the tangle of metaphors.
I'm trying to say intelligence and religion are not directly connected.
Sure they are. An inverse relation has been demonstrated but you are free to dispute the results if you want to.
Might look that up later. I'd definitely have to see a valid study or two.
You might? As I thought, you "might" choose to remain ignorant.
|
![[Image: Untitled2_zpswaosccbr.png]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=i1140.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fn569%2Fthesummerqueen%2FUntitled2_zpswaosccbr.png)
