RE: Quick Poll - Do you believe in God?
July 17, 2015 at 8:57 am
(This post was last modified: July 17, 2015 at 9:04 am by Little Rik.)
(July 16, 2015 at 7:46 am)Tonus Wrote: [quote='Little Rik' pid='993818' dateline='1437036414']
Religions on the other hand do not practice spirituality.
Quote:This will come as a shock to most religions, for whom spirituality is a primary and critical component. You keep claiming that they're different, yet your explanations simply show how they are the same.
Do me a favor Ton.
Talk to a Christian and ask whether God is to be found inside or outside
and how to find Him.
You see Ton a lot of people believe a lot of things but when you confront them they come up with the old dogmas.
One thing is to say something.
A different thing is to prove that what they say make sense.
Little Rik Wrote:If you born under a corrupted dictatorship you either put up with the sewer or you die in the effort to get rid of the rotten dictator.
You have no choices.
Quote:They DO have choices, especially today. People have overthrown oppressive governments in the past, and people have escaped oppressive governments in the past. Most people make the choice to not only remain under such a regime, but to work to support it. This is where religion can be at its worst, in that it either supports such regimes, is used by such regimes to maintain control, or is used by the people as a way to tolerate their oppressors.
Attitudes like yours are why so many dictatorships still thrive in the modern age.
You are hilarious Ton.
It seems like you never watch the news.
Doesn't the Arab spring ring any bell in your ears?
Was any thing achieved?
Let me know Ton.
Little Rik Wrote:You think that by getting in one place at the end of the day you have accomplished something.
I got bad news for you Ton.
Someone is playing with you.
Quote:Wow. How miserable and bitter must your life be, that you never feel as if you are making progress? If scientists had your approach to things, we would still be living in caves and thinking that rain was caused by the gods weeping. More likely, this is another case where you redefine a term in order to suit a point you are trying to make. At this point it's clear that you're being dishonest just to avoid conceding a point.
Open your eyes and your ears Ton.
First i never said that researchers in the physical-material arena are rubbish.
On the contrary i always said that it is important to continue all the time in order to solve the problems of the day.
As you say without it we would be down in the sewer.
But what all this has got to do with real progress?
Does a lifejacket represent progress?
All it does is to put you back on your feet on the ground as you were before you got into trouble.
Secondly i do not feel miserable at all.
Real progress is possible but not in the physical-material arena so don't tell me that i don't believe in progress.
Little Rik Wrote:Let us see who is dishonest.
Quote:You are. And this part is a clear example. You deleted the part of my post that you are responding to, before you quote the sources that you claim support what you said. This is something you haven't done in any of your previous posts during this discussion. Lets bring back those quotes and compare them directly:
YOU SAID: Ages ago
YOUR QUOTED SOURCE SAID: Recent malaria history is fraught with grand pronouncements that turned out to be baseless.
LIE NUMBER 1: "Ages ago" is not "recent."
The report goes back to the 1984 and the late 90.
What is not ages ago for you can be for different people.
One day of torture can be long long like ages while a day of happiness can be an instant for different people.
A disease can make you feel like hell on earth with the time that never goes.
The same time can be felt as eternal for some and very very fast for other.
So, wrong again Ton.
Quote:YOU SAID: they say that they got rid of malaria.
YOUR QUOTED SOURCE SAID: "MALARIA VACCINE IS NEAR," announced a New York Times headline in 1984. "This is the last major hurdle," said one U.S. scientist quoted in the article. "There is no question now that we will have a vaccine.
LIE NUMBER 2: They did not say "they got rid of malaria." They said they were certain they would have a vaccine soon.
Here Ton i show you the report again.
Recent malaria history is fraught with grand pronouncements that turned out to be baseless. "MALARIA VACCINE IS NEAR," announced a New York Times headline in 1984. "This is the last major hurdle," said one U.S. scientist quoted in the article. "There is no question now that we will have a vaccine. The rest is fine-tuning." Seven years of fine-tuning later, anotherTimes headline summarized the result: "EFFORT TO FIGHT MALARIA APPEARS TO HAVE FAILED." In the late 1990s, Colombian immunologist Manuel Patarroyo claimed, with much media fanfare, that he had found the answer to malaria with his vaccine, SPf-66. Early results were tantalizing, but follow-up studies in Thailand showed it worked no better than a placebo.
1) It say...........Colombian immunologist Manuel Patarroyo claimed, with much media fanfare, that he had found the answer to malaria with his vaccine
What this means other than saying that he solved the problem?
And if he said that he solved the problem doesn't this means that according to him malaria can be eradicated?
And what about the other guy that said that NOW we will have a vaccine?
2) I said that their statements say that they got rid of malaria not that the malaria has been eradicated.
In fact it all turned wrong just as i try to explained you in order to show you how science can not get rid of
problems in a permanent way but you mix all around in order to show that you are correct and i am wrong.
Failed again Ton.
Quote:YOU SAID: malaria is still the No1 killer globally speaking.
YOUR QUOTED SOURCE SAID: It is a leading cause of death and disease in many developing countries.
LIE NUMBER 3: Being ONE OF the leading causes of death in SOME parts of the world is not "the number 1 killer globally speaking."
So not only were you dishonest in your initial claims, you were dishonest in your interpretation of your sources, and you dishonestly tried changing your claims several times in order to try and cover for your initial dishonesty. Now you deleted the portion of my post from your quote in order to make another attempt to cover for your dishonesty with MORE dishonesty! Did I NOT explain to you that your posts are still visible and your lies quite plain for all to see? Your lack of character is shocking, in light of the persona that you pretend to aspire to in your posts.
Open your eyes and your ears Ton.
The statistics that we have in the developed countries can not possibly take into account what happen in less developed countries where people have no access to hospitals and medical centres because they are too poor to afford doctors or there are no doctors around.
Million of people every year die in the streets, in the jungles or in many different places.
How would you now about it.
And how those who make statistics in the developed countries would know?
Would you bother to go in India or Lesotho or Borneo and check the statistics?
Don't be ridiculous Ton.
For every person known who die of malaria there got to be at least 20 times more that go unreported that is why i don't believe in
the official statistics.
Little Rik Wrote:It is a reality that a step forward always go hand in hand with a step backwards.
The monitor that you are watching right now deliver you radiations and by sitting down you also get weaker plus plus all the rest.
Quote:Errr... no. The monitor represents considerable progress on a number of levels. Your "step back" regarding radiation is so minimal that we can't even find a health risk in spite of ongoing research. Second, that monitor allows me to find information on the internet on how to eat better, exercise better, and live better, so that I can counteract the "sitting down and getting weaker" part as well. Like I said, lots and lots of steps forward for every step backwards.
You can show me the progress of sitting in front of the monitor and i can show you the bad side of it.
Do you really want to bet that the progress is bigger than the bad side?
How much you want to bet Ton?
You say that the radiations are minimal.
All depend on how long you sit in front of the monitor.
In any case even minimal radiations cause some damage.
What about getting your body weaker by sitting down?
Don't forget that sitting down long time affect also your little uncle dick not just your muscles.
What about your partner that will complain about it?
And what about your family that will get less attention from you because you are spending hours on the computer?
And what about your kids that because they haven't got your attention and care spend more time on the computer become therefore addicted?
And what about the power bill that will cost you more?
And the cost of your computer?
It all add up Ton and believe me the bill will not be cheap.
Little Rik Wrote:But of course you are free to believe otherwise Ton.
Quote:This condescension in light of how wrong you've been so far is just... bizarre.
If you think i am wrong let us be judged by an independent panel and see who is wrong.
Little Rik Wrote:What about you Ton.
How can you make any progress if you..........cling to wrong ideas.......such as believe in untested guessing that the mind is a function of the brain?
Quote:Two things:
Science progresses because it does not cling to wrong ideas. Even when it comes to a conclusion that appears correct, people keep testing and working and researching, and often we overturn old theories and replace them with better ones.
That's ok. Ton.
So if science overturn old theories that means that science did and keep on doing mistakes.
Doesn't it Ton?
That is exactly what i am saying.
The point however is............if coming up with a new and better theory that in the future will be discarded in the rubbish bin of history
to be replaced by a new theory can this be called real progress or just a temporary patch up?
Quote:Second, the fact that the mind is a function of the brain is not an untested guess. The beliefs and claims that you keep making about gods and spirits and souls? THOSE are untested guesses. I think it's very telling that you place more trust in your own beliefs based on untested guesses than you do on scientific research that must produce testable claims and verifiable results. You have it all backwards, and you appear willing to lie to both yourself and to others to maintain your delusion. The world is going to pass you by, Rik.
For Christ sake Ton stop dreaming.
The idea that the mind is a function of the brain IS an untested guess.
The only way to say for sure whether this idea is right or wrong is for someone to die and then come back to life as in the NDEs experiences.
All the rest is just guessing.