assassin_696

Teh rulz in 1337 sp34k!!!111

Lvl 6 Champion Ozymandor if anyone is interested. I like this game, I don't really fancy getting into WoW at the moment, and i've always liked LOTR, so this appeals to me.

Told you I was ill.

Why the Christian God then? Why not Allah, or Zeus, or Vishnu?

Read up on cloning.

Yes, your bed rocks therefore the supernatural exists. :roll: I don't know what it is because it isn't my house, but wouldn't spirits have better things to do than rock your bed a bit each night?

Simply a recursive fractal. Nothing but repetition. Exactly, and look at the beauty of it. It's nothing compared to the beauty of a changed heart. In your opinion. Beauty is subjective. I, like assassin I suppose, find beauty in many simple things. I find beauty in a four letter code (Adenine, Guanine, Cytosine, Thymine) that produces every living entity on this planet. I absolutely agree with you. I don't quite know what insane meant by a changed heart, since that could be anything to do with anything, but beauty is subjective, and I personally find far more beauty in science and nature than in religion. It's not a "defense," as you suggest - it's the very point I am making. Science can and will provide explanations to the physical causes of the universe - but no discovery will ever prove anything about a potential existence beyond this physical world. Compare, once again (but in more detail) a physicist and an anthropologist. The anthropologist, no matter how much he studies in his field, will never be able to explain the physics in the universe. He can explain why most societies on earth discriminated against women for thousands of years, but he can't explain (in his field of study) why when a man 1,000 years ago pushed his wife and she lost balance - she fell to the ground. No matter what discovery in the field of anthropology that is made, the anthropologist will never be able to explain gravity because gravity is outside of the realm of the study of anthropology. No matter how many discoveries are made in this physical universe by science, it will never be able to explain, prove, or disprove the existence of something beyond this physical existence. It just can't happen. Your analogy isn't perfect though, it's not quite like that. I do agree that science cannot conceivably yet explain what lies outside our universe. But your agrument that that something lying outside the universe is God, which has a direct impact on our universe means that his existence is a scientific question. To argue that because we cannot conclusively disprove what lies outside our universe as a scientist doesn't mean that a philosopher has any more expertise in the matter (in a non-scientific way). To argue that even though the vast majority of evidence now points to the fact that we don't need a creator to exist or live, yet still think that there must be one because it lies outside science is ignorance, if you'll excuse the word.

Yes, fair enough. But I suppose I just lack that faith in that "something greater" that cannot be explained by science. God supposedly created all this, therefore I believe the question of his existence is a scientific one. I know a lot of people would disagree with me, but that's what I believe. I'm not saying scientists are actively trying to prove/disprove God (at least, I hope they're not) but it might be a consequence of some scientific discovery. Just like the discovery of evolution lead to a lot of people losing their faith, some scientific principle might answer some greater question at some point. I don't know when and I don't know how, but it might.

Simply a recursive fractal. Nothing but repetition. Exactly, and look at the beauty of it.

The point of science is not to discover a purpose for mankind - it is to discover how the universe works. As soon as you start talking about the purpose of mankind, you have moved off of science by definition. Maybe there isn't a purpose for mankind, but as long as people desire to believe in a purpose, religion will exist. Not all religions have attempted to "explain" things that science has discovered as you suggest. Nor will any scientist tell you that the purpose of science is to understand the purpose of mankind. It's just not what science is. I didn't say that science tried to find a purpose for mankind, unless you revert to the old Darwinian example of simply furthering the chances of survival of our species. But I don't really believe that that's what we're all about. In the same vein, I don't think a purpose should come from religion, I think it should come from within you personally. I suppose a lot of people regard science as cold, unemotional and boringly rational. To those who do, please reconsider. Science is beautiful, natural, pure and elegant. My signature is but one example of thousands. I have found much more comfort and satisfaction in the wonders of science than religion has ever given me. Does that make me cold, unemotional, heartless? Of course not, I still have a passion for life, for love and for learning that equals any spriritual person's.

We don't allow discussion of bypassing school filters, for obvious reasons. Locked

We can just share what we've done today, have a bit of a chat. Harmless fun. Slowchat topics are. (Y) Fair enough :)

Care to explain the point of this?

I doubt it, nothing like God can really be conclusively disproved. But I have faith in science offering a lot more answers to some of the big questions than we might have first imagined.

Well, what do you enjoy doing? Is there any music that picks you up and makes you feel better, are there any comedians you like? Any films you want to see? Have you been hankering after something for a while? Splash out any buy yourself it. The thing is, you're 13 and a lot of us go through rough stages in our teenage lives. I suppose perversely I've been lucky enough to go through my really rough patch this year when i've been old enough to cope with it better. But it was the little things that got me through most days. I threw myself into my school work, I made sure I spent time with my family, I just did what made me happy. I think it's early days to diagnose someone of your age with depression over the internet, and if I or anyone else was to you might spiral into a vicious circle of depression. I'm sure what you're going through now isn't easy, but there are things you can do to make you feel better. Spend time with your auntie, I don't know what kind of cancer it is, but i'm sure she's got a good chance. Talk to your father about your problems, stand up to your brother. Whatever you do, remember how lucky you are to be alive, no matter how hard life is. You're only 13, you've got so much of your life ahead of you that you're far too young to be thinking suicidal thoughts, so many great people have had rough upbringings but have overcome them to have great lives. What you are and what you have now will not be the man who you grow up to be.

No, but we're working on it. I'd actually argue that that is incorrect. Science is attempting to figure out the physical "why's" of the universe, but not metaphysical "why's." There is no concern in science over the "something greater" that religion offers. And i'd argue that religion has always attempted to answer questions that science is unable to. A lot of those questions have been answered nowadays, a lot haven't, and although we might be a long way off, I won't restrict science to not being able to answer all the questions just yet.

How about an actual student of music? Like me. Trust me, reggae has lots of roots in ska but The Police and I Shot The Sheriff are both reggae.

Peaches En Regalia, Frank Zappa

Yeah, I think that makes sense. Personally, even though i'm an atheist I wouldn't expect or want people to abandon religion and to not believe in anything. That's not what I think it should be about. I think there will be a definite trend in the future away from the indoctrination of children and organised religion, to a society where people are taught the cultural and historic significance of all religions, much like we do with Romans and Greeks, but are not pressured into any one religion. I hope that everyone in the future will be able to make up their own mind in their own time, and that spirituality becomes a personal thing, not organised like it is now. I'd like to see more rationality and reasoning behind our spirituality, not just blindly accepting the dogma because our parents do. No, but we're working on it.

Essentially none, except the difference in time.

I quite like the Stone Roses, come to think of it.

Crikey that took some reading. Okay, I will concede that I didn't fully understand the historical context of the incident. I misinterpreted it, sorry. However, my point stands that the God of the Old Testament is one that frequently ordered acts that by today's standards would be deemed cruel and unncessary, and these were particularly well carried out by people who we consider pillars of faith in modern society.

In terms of calculations that sounds fine to me, I did it roughly in my head and it works out about that. From an engineer's point of view, I have no idea :P

I'm curious, for all those who say that the Bible is the word of God, but some is only symbolic, what's the message behind this passage? The book of Numbers tells how God incited Moses to attack the Midianites. His army made short work of slaying all the men, and they burned all the Midianite cities, but they didn't kill the women or children. One would have thought this restraint might have been approved by Moses, but it actually infuriated him, giving orders for all boys to be killed, and all the women who were not virgins. Lovely.

That squiggly bit on the right, it the squiggles are the same on either side wouldn't they average out to be simply half the area of the rectangle that would extend 54ft out. Your 10ft and 27ft on either side look a little out of proportion, are you sure they're right? For those circle segments, extend a line down centre of the curve to an unspecified point as long as it's behind the straight line of the segment. For example extend a straight line parallel to the sides past the 22ft line, make sure it's measurable. Then draw two lines from that point to either end of the 22ft line. If you can measure the angle between these two lines that you've just drawn, (using a protractor on paper should do the trick), then you can find out the area of the segment using: ((angle you've just measured)/360)*pi*(distance of one the lines to either side, i.e. the radius of the imaginary circle)^2 Now that you've (hopefully found the area of that sector, work out the area of the triange that you can see using 1/2(ab)sinC. Then subtract the area of your triange from the sector area to leave you with the segment area. Hopefully that should all be possible.