A Si Fi watchmaker.

[Brian37]

Nothing, as long as you are not merely uttering it. Otherwise religious people are right because they point to the depictions in their books and find inspiration in those as well.

You seriously seem to have a fundamental lack of understanding about what fiction is and isn't.

What fiction is:
A made up story for the sake of entertainment.

What fiction is not:
Any kind of claim about reality.

Do you think fictional stories need a disclaimer at every point where the tale describes something?
"...and he turned into a 7-foot tall, black coated werewolf (the author would like to point out that werewolves are not real and should in no way be taken as actual living creatures) and attacked..."
Do you really think that is necessary?!?

Do you understand what is meant by the phrase "suspension of dis-belief?" It's something that's required to enjoy fiction, but it is not the casual acceptance that all the claims in the story are real. It is an acceptance of the claims within, and only within, the framework of the story. Or, to put it another way, it's the acceptance of a claim or set of claims for the sake of argument.

From the above link (emphasis is mine):

Suspension of disbelief or willing suspension of disbelief is a term coined in 1817 by the poet and aesthetic philosopher Samuel Taylor Coleridge, who suggested that if a writer could infuse a "human interest and a semblance of truth" into a fantastic tale, the reader would suspend judgement concerning the implausibility of the narrative. Suspension of disbelief often applies to fictional works of the action, comedy, fantasy, and horror genres. Cognitive estrangement in fiction involves using a person's ignorance or lack of knowledge to promote suspension of disbelief.

The phrase "suspension of disbelief" came to be used more loosely in the later 20th century, often used to imply that the burden was on the reader, rather than the writer, to achieve it. This might be used to refer to the willingness of the audience to overlook the limitations of a medium, so that these do not interfere with the acceptance of those premises. These fictional premises may also lend to the engagement of the mind and perhaps proposition of thoughts, ideas, art and theories.

All that being said, authors of fiction (science or not) are going to "merely utter" some pretty fantastic (in all senses of the word) ideas. It's up to the reader/viewer to understand that waving a stick and chanting the words "wingardium leviosa" won't actually make an object fly nor can we "beam up" to a starship and "engage a warp drive" to go to another star system. It is not the author's job to footnote every little thing that doesn't conform to reality because he's not claiming they do!

Why do you have a problem with "nobody gets a pass"?

I'm not giving sci-fi a pass, chucklefuck.

And why do you stupidly think Si fi is the only fiction people get their ideas from?

This is not the first time you've accused me of this, but it is the last time I'll respond to it. I have never claimed that sci-fi is the only place fucktards get bad ideas. After all, you keep getting the idea that I've claimed that and I have no fucking idea where you get the idea that I have.

Do you even read the responses to you or do you, like the typical theist, simply argue your straw man points because you are so certain of your beliefs that anything else simply isn't an option.

---

Not claiming anyone is a prophet but lots of si fi fans claim Roddenberry was a prophet, not tell me how a non scientist who merely created a tv show had scientific predictive abilities? He didn't invent anything and si fi fans like to claim he did. That to me is no different than claiming the bible or Koran have predictive powers.

Like I tell all the other theists, evidence or shut the fuck up.

---

Ok, so you agree he was not a prophet, awesome, then you can understand why science fiction is not a lab. And if you accept the bible and Koran as fiction, and non of them have predictive powers, then you should not be claiming science fiction is any better than any other type of fiction.

But you obviously don't spend that much time arguing si fi on the net because I have run into people in the past who do treat Roddenberry as an inventor and prophet.

Go find a Star Trek fan website and join. I bet if you made the same argument to them there as i have made to you now, someone will jump all over your ass. Maybe not everyone, but you are likely to find a nut or few claiming he is some sort of patent holder without using the word "patent".

For fucks sake, Brian. Quit painting with such a broad brush. No one here has made the types of claims that you are claiming. So, you've run into a few nuts on a message board. Happens on every message board. There are Bronco fans on football message boards that claim the better team lost Superbowl XXIV. So the fuck what. Should we paint all football fans as nuts because of a few?

---

If you point out someone who thinks Roddenberry was a prophet I'll show you a nut job. The reason that sometimes star trek seems predictive is because gene Roddenberry wanted to show us a world where everyone's right were respected, everyone had a opportunity to be educated and no body went hungry.
That is a world that the better among us work towards everyday, so yes sometimes it appears to coincide with star trek.

Roddenberry also looked at the technology available at the time and simply extrapolated much of the future tech in Star Trek and some of what came to pass looks uncannily like what Gene proposed. He speculated, others did the science and figured out how to "make it so." That must burn Brian's ass.

No, you just admitted he took what science said. The only thing you can claim is he popularized ideas science was already working on, but he was no scientist nor did he have any predictive powers.

Cant have it both ways, it is either fiction or it is not. If it is not then don't take the fact that people are inspired by it as special, otherwise religious people who find inspiration from their works of fiction would be right too.

[Ravenshire]

Now I remember why I had you on ignore, but I'm seriously beginning to question why I took you off.

No, you just admitted he took what science said. The only thing you can claim is he popularized ideas science was already working on, but he was no scientist nor did he have any predictive powers.

Cant have it both ways, it is either fiction or it is not. If it is not then don't take the fact that people are inspired by it as special, otherwise religious people who find inspiration from their works of fiction would be right too.

I'M NOT CLAIMING THAT GENE RODDENBERRY DID ANYTHING OTHER THAN SPECULATE! I AM NOT CLAIMING HE IS A SCIENTIST! PEOPLE WHO WANT TO MAKE RELIGIONS FROM HIS WORK ARE EVEN BIGGER MORONS THAN YOU!

Am I making myself crystal fucking clear enough yet? Or, will you skip over it all to post yet another stupid claim that I didn't make

[Brian37]

Lay off Futurama. That's fiction, y'know.

There you go again. No one is saying don't enjoy fiction. I am saying fiction is fiction. Stop doing that.

You are the one that would be stupid to say "Don't question that Futurama fan" and act shocked that they managed to turn a mere show into a religion. You underestimate the ability of con artists and the deluded.

Treating fiction as fact because it may contain axioms or motifs you like is exactly how fiction gets turned into religions.

[Ravenshire]

Lay off Futurama. That's fiction, y'know.

There you go again. No one is saying don't enjoy fiction. I am saying fiction is fiction. Stop doing that.

You are the one that would be stupid to say "Don't question that Futurama fan" and act shocked that they managed to turn a mere show into a religion. You underestimate the ability of con artists and the deluded.

Treating fiction as fact because it may contain axioms or motifs you like is exactly how fiction gets turned into religions.

Wow. Welcome back to ignore.

[Lemonvariable72]

Lay off Futurama. That's fiction, y'know.

There you go again. No one is saying don't enjoy fiction. I am saying fiction is fiction. Stop doing that.

You are the one that would be stupid to say "Don't question that Futurama fan" and act shocked that they managed to turn a mere show into a religion. You underestimate the ability of con artists and the deluded.

Treating fiction as fact because it may contain axioms or motifs you like is exactly how fiction gets turned into religions.

Brian let me be blunt here, the most dangerous think here is your fanaticism. You don't even seem to be debating her so much and repeating yourself and then bemoaning that we don't understand you.

[Ravenshire]

Brian let me be blunt here, the most dangerous think here is your fanaticism. You don't even seem to be debating her so much and repeating yourself and then bemoaning that we don't understand you.

He can't even recognize a tongue in cheek comment when it's blatantly obvious.

[One Above All]

Brian let me be blunt here, the most dangerous think here is your fanaticism. You don't even seem to be debating her so much and repeating yourself and then bemoaning that we don't understand you.

He can't even recognize a tongue in cheek comment when it's blatantly obvious.

Fundies aren't exactly renowned for their smarts. That's why they're fundies.

[Ravenshire]

He can't even recognize a tongue in cheek comment when it's blatantly obvious.

Fundies aren't exactly renowned for their smarts. That's why they're fundies.

[Brian37]

There you go again. No one is saying don't enjoy fiction. I am saying fiction is fiction. Stop doing that.

You are the one that would be stupid to say "Don't question that Futurama fan" and act shocked that they managed to turn a mere show into a religion. You underestimate the ability of con artists and the deluded.

Treating fiction as fact because it may contain axioms or motifs you like is exactly how fiction gets turned into religions.

Brian let me be blunt here, the most dangerous think here is your fanaticism. You don't even seem to be debating her so much and repeating yourself and then bemoaning that we don't understand you.

I didn't say you didn't understand me. You merely don't like my responses. But calling me a fanatic is absurd. When I start having you arrested or sticking you in ovens then you can call me a "fanatic". Yes I am repeating myself.

The earth is not flat, the New York Yankees don't play ice hockey, and fiction is still fiction. The bible has names of real cities and real people in it too. People find inspiration in it too. But you rightfully call it fiction. And you rightfully would say the bible has no predictive powers.

Si fi is still fiction.

[Lemonvariable72]

Brian let me be blunt here, the most dangerous think here is your fanaticism. You don't even seem to be debating her so much and repeating yourself and then bemoaning that we don't understand you.

I didn't say you didn't understand me. You merely don't like my responses. But calling me a fanatic is absurd. When I start having you arrested or sticking you in ovens then you can call me a "fanatic". Yes I am repeating myself.

The earth is not flat, the New York Yankees don't play ice hockey, and fiction is still fiction. The bible has names of real cities and real people in it too. People find inspiration in it too. But you rightfully call it fiction. And you rightfully would say the bible has no predictive powers.

Si fi is still fiction.

Spoken like a true fanatic