Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: April 24, 2024, 11:44 am

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Spooky coincidences.
#21
RE: Spooky coincidences.
Nope, i'll have a look.
.
Reply
#22
RE: Spooky coincidences.
So...is this thread about the planet or an argument with fr0do?
Quote:"An individual has not started living until he can rise above the narrow confines of his individualistic concerns to the broader concerns of all humanity. "
Martin Luther King, Jr.
Reply
#23
RE: Spooky coincidences.
(October 2, 2010 at 7:48 am)HeyItsZeus Wrote: So...is this thread about the planet or an argument with fr0do?

Is it me or does Frodo seem more bitter than usual?

He always was a bit touchy but now.......



You can fix ignorance, you can't fix stupid.

Tinkety Tonk and down with the Nazis.




 








Reply
#24
RE: Spooky coincidences.
Fun ain't it? Big Grin

Reply
#25
RE: Spooky coincidences.
(October 2, 2010 at 7:48 am)HeyItsZeus Wrote: So...is this thread about the planet or an argument with fr0do?

Tongue I'm not sure anymore.

Anyway, there should be a fair bit more data about this planet by the end of next year. It's looking like this one will get a fair bit of attention. Hopefully we can establish the basic composition of the planet and see if there is any liquid water.
.
Reply
#26
RE: Spooky coincidences.
Of course, it could be a totally different form of life that doesn't need water to live. But I suppose scientists have got to start somewhere...
'We must respect the other fellow's religion, but only in the sense and to the extent that we respect his theory that his wife is beautiful and his children smart.' H.L. Mencken

'False religion' is the ultimate tautology.

'It is just like man's vanity and impertinence to call an animal dumb because it is dumb to his dull perceptions.' Mark Twain

'I care not much for a man's religion whose dog and cat are not the better for it.' Abraham Lincoln
Reply
#27
RE: Spooky coincidences.
(October 2, 2010 at 12:41 am)theVOID Wrote:

And this is your derailment of the subject into one of your own interest. I explained that historicity was of very little interest to me yet you try to force me into discussing it with you. As I briefly demonstrated, all of your supposed inconsistencies are no more than wild fabrication and exaggeration of fact. I'm not interested in examining that to the n'th degree, and I told you this clearly.

You're demonstrating clearly what I said above was your issue here.

Reply
#28
RE: Spooky coincidences.
(October 1, 2010 at 4:27 am)Ace Wrote: Where's AngelTheMan? I wonder how he will take this new discovery?

Would be lovely to find sentient beings wouldn't it. If they happen to be behind us in advancement then we could just observe how they develop as we have. If they happen to be more advanced, they'll have something to teach us.

Would be interesting to see what religious beliefs they have or use to have.

I think the correct term you tried to say was Sapient, most animals on earth are sentient already, we are too but sentience does not define intelligence
Reply
#29
RE: Spooky coincidences.
After checking, it appears that you are right. I stand corrected.
I'm still waiting to see what AngelThMan has to say about this. If I recall, he has some very serious doubts over life on other worlds. To find life forms on another world (potentially sapient) I wonder how that would affect religion as a whole here?
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence - Carl Sagan

Mankind's intelligence walks hand in hand with it's stupidity.

Being an atheist says nothing about your overall intelligence, it just means you don't believe in god. Atheists can be as bright as any scientist and as stupid as any creationist.

You never really know just how stupid someone is, until you've argued with them.
Reply
#30
RE: Spooky coincidences.
(October 2, 2010 at 1:54 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: And this is your derailment of the subject into one of your own interest. I explained that historicity was of very little interest to me yet you try to force me into discussing it with you. As I briefly demonstrated, all of your supposed inconsistencies are no more than wild fabrication and exaggeration of fact. I'm not interested in examining that to the n'th degree, and I told you this clearly.

You're demonstrating clearly what I said above was your issue here.

Historicity is of little interest to you because you don't actually care whether or not what you believe is true, or even representative of the actual beliefs of the early Christians. You don't see a problem what believing a whole bunch of shit that Jesus never said?

Exaggeration is it? Congratulations on yet another bare assertion.
.
Reply





Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)