warri0r45

Uni student, right? :P (if I remember correctly) Typical uni contact hours. Yeah, I've got rediculously oversized holidays as well. I can't complain. :lol: I'm currently half way through my semester, though. Right in the thick of it.

Several paragraphs? It's really that in depth to you? I could easily explain the logic behind a scientific concept that it's taken me 2 years of university education to learn in a few lines of text. I'd at least try instead of effectively saying "you're wrong" with no explanation at all. That's what annoys me. If you don't want to discuss it, then don't. Another reason why I don't buy your objection is that I've had some (note: few) believers willing to give me a simple run down of the logic behind some Bible passage. I don't buy that it's too complex so you can't explain it. Give us something simple and preface it with "this isn't the whole story" if you want. If we don't get it, then at least we'll have something to look into to see if you're right. Hell, just say "google X". I don't care. I want to understand you, and I can only do that if you give me some information. Using the fact that there's bad in the world in an attempt to destroy faith, then when a theist uses the fact that a lot worse could have happened, calling it a worthless argument. It wasn't me who called it a worthless argument. Cup_lion called it faulty logic. It's really up to the people reading whether they agree with me or not (stating the obvious). All I said was that reverting to "things could have been worse if it weren't for god" rationalises absolutely anything, no matter how hideous an act. Clearly, using that as a justification for any action of an "all loving" god doesn't sit well with people. The point that I've been making is simply this: I don't think the universe is indicative of an all loving god. Perhaps one who just doesn't care or is a closet sadist, but we can't know for sure. To be honest I still don't really understand what your gripe is.

[garden tool]-[garden tool]-hold on. You're criticizing (nearly) the exact same rationalization that has been used numerous times in this thread to "prove" God doesn't exist? "the exact same rationalization that has been used numerous times in this thread to "prove" God doesn't exist?" What rationalisation would that be? I've never said that nasty things prove god doesnt exist, either. I just tend to think most people who claim to know the nature of god are wrong because all loving beings don't create malaria. Maybe we're god's little cosmic experiment? Maybe there is no god yet only the devil? Not that I buy any of it but still, I have a mind to wonder about these questions so I do. Here's the thing, you can't debate with an atheist using scripture #-o . That's the reason most debates fail. The other side won't take into account that information they're excluding could actually clear things up. Internet debates= :wall: I always here this kind of stuff from believers. You only have yourserlf to blame for the failure of debates if you just complain without offering any actual constructive criticism. I should be the one banging my head against the wall considering how many times I hear "out of context" with absolutely no explanation as to how or why.

King for a Day, Fool for a Lifetime by Faith No More (album). The Last to Know, specifically.

No need to apologise, just offering a different point of view. As for how people can blame god for not doing anything about the ills of the world, it's actually pretty easy. I'm sure people who have doubted their faith before have at times blamed god for their troubles, especially those who believe god actually intervenes with humanity. But what I'm suggesting is more that god could have, perhaps, not created malaria in the first place? Shifting the onus back on humans is cute, but to me it smacks of apathy on behalf of the almighty. Or at least it smacks of us covering it up for him. If you accept evolution for the source of all the nasties of the world, then I could ask why god didn't jury-rig the process to make it a little less nasty. The answer to me is either he doesn't care too much or he can't change the course of evolution for whatever reason. All I'm saying is this: if I were an all loving, omnipotent being, I'd tend to make earth and life on it a little less nasty. If he's perfect, then he could have easily made it a better approximation of perfect for us. Ok, I feel I've got my point across so I'll not push it any more. Pretty much follows my thoughts on the concept of god. At least partly. God (in all its forms) to me is more accurately understood as a placeholder for human ignorance rather than any genuine entity. Whenever god is used as an answer to something, the answer is self-fulfilling because of the very properties of god as defined by us. But to me, that natural reversion to what we were taught as kids or what Abrahamic religion based societies understand of god doesn't help me understand anything. "Because he's god" doesn't help me, or appeal to my search for satisfying answers. I never seem to get the logic of "existence therefore god", "mind therefore god", etc. All it does for me is fuel more head scratching and make me ask more tough questions. As you say, not understanding something is as much evidence for something totally invented as it is for the concept of god. Imagination is a wonderful thing, but it doesn't give me satisfactory answers.

I understand where you're coming from, but I was just trying to point out that most 17 and 18 year old children do not drink beer for refreshment. I might have one if it's extremely cold, but most of the time they just want to get "hammered". Older people will do it for refreshment, but not younger ones. That was my point. I see now. Makes much more sense. Sorry, it was just the way you worded your post that I took issue with.

Name one good reason why suicide is a tragedy. It's so stupid, selfish, and pointless. Not one good thing comes from suicide. The people that commit suicide only create pain and sadness for their family and friends. There was a guy that just jumped off a freeway overpass in my town and was hit by 3 cars. The first that hit him was a pregnant lady. She lost her child because of him. I get REALLY pissed off when people try to say that suicide is justified/sad/an option. People who commit suicide are the most unintelligent halfwits in this world. You've never heard that many who commit suicide have mental illnesses? Please don't try and degrade them to the level of halfwits. They have problems and the failure of society to be able to deal with mental illness (resulting in suicides) is a sad thing. Having said that I don't think it should ever be an option or justified. These people should be helped. What an incredibly ignorant thing to say. I often have a beer (note: one) just for the taste and refreshment. Anyway, on the issue of legal drinking age, as assassin noted, it has everything to do with the culture surrounding drinking in the particular country. If lowering the drinking age from 21 to 18 is going to cause serious problems, then it's society with problems, not the rule. I'd argue 18 is a perfectly reasonable age physiologically speaking and any problems that result from a legal drinking age of 18 are the fault of society. Hell, we have problems here in Aus with binge drinking. We're some of the heaviest drinkers in the world as a matter of fact. As for whether serious problems will actually be caused by the lowering of legal drinking age in the US, I suppose that could happen. More kids start drinking and partying earlier and you get a few more DUI's and possibly deaths. Having said that, I doubt that any 18 year old who wants a drink at the moment couldn't get it somehow.

You do realise with that kind of rationalisation you can justify washing god's hands of absolutely anything, right? "He's quite fine with millions of people dieing of natural diseases every year? Well he could be saving us from millions more!" :lol: Sounds like a whopper of a cop out to me. This is just the thing about god - no one knows. I could just as well say he doesn't care at all or that he's a closet sadist who likes seeing kids with malaria or tuberculosis.

What companies are we talking about here? What commercials are we talking about? (I haven't seen them over here) Edit: I suppose another thing to ask is if they're actually using the money they get from these coins to help the victims. If so, then that's a noble thing to do. If not, then not so much.

Really? I can sum it up in one. Too bad this is a g-rated forum.

You didn't know that the pope controlled JFK? That's the scary thing about religion in politics for me. Politicians should be governing for the people, not according to their personal beliefs. Sure, let the churches lobby - they have just as much right to do so as anyone else. But at the end of the day, a politician needs to govern for the people. All people, even the ones who don't share his/her beliefs.

Nice story. I've heard a similar one before. Notice how it's always the preacher's fellow man that lends a helping hand and not god? Yeah, yeah, I understand your rationalisation, just offering a different one. My answer as a nonbeliever to why god lets bad things happen would be that he simply doesn't care. Think about it - we're a speck in an enormous universe, it took billions of years and millions of dead ends for us to eventuate on this speck, and we're stewing in a soup of pathogens that are all too willing to use our bodies as an agar plate. At least some of those bugs have learnt that we're better to them alive then dead, huh? :lol: If I were the believing type, I don't know I'd conceive of an all loving god. That doesn't make sense to me. Perhaps a god that's not anthropomorphic yet simply... well I don't know. It kind of crushes the allure of god as a figure humans can comprehend on a human level. I suppose god could simply be equivalent to nature. Some kind of pantheism.

the triky thing with this situation is we are trying to put a value on life as an example if you were forced to choose between shooting one person or letting 5 die almost everyone would agree its completely legitimate to take a life for 5. However, if your choice is either kill one person or 5 people will be paralyzed theres a lot more difficulty deciding. I still dont get why everyone is saying they use abortions for stem cell research I could have sworn they use spare embryos in fertility clinics. Meaning they take one fertilized egg from a freezer let it develop a little bit then do the modifying to make it grow whatever they want. I see nothing wrong with using something that isnt going to become a baby anyway, its when we start getting people to give up eggs and such to do this that we are going a bit too far. and to everyone saying how birth control does the same thing, sperm or egg cells cannot develop into life on their own so its completely different I was wondering the exact same thing on whether they used aborted fetuses or not, so I did a little reading around. Apparently it does happen. Here's an article which ties in with the topic nicely: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,31748,00.html You can see how they mention the use of aborted fetuses. By the way you're spot on with the point of placing value on human life (whatever form it takes). It's the issue of contention for most people and is ultimately the marker by which we hold the views that we do.

I was actually thinking about that when reading the original post. You have to keep in mind that wormholes, although theoretically possible by general relativity, haven't been observed yet. They're completely hypothetical. But if they do turn out to be an empirical reality, then i suppose you could bend space-time and quickly traverse a distance that would normally take years for light to travel. Anyone who knows more than about this than me? I know very little when it comes to this stuff, so feel free to add anything I missed.

One problem. You can't travel faster than light. Though it would be pretty fascinating to actually do that.

Wreath - Opeth

I'm not sure whether that's the case, but it's impossible to do this kind of research without first understanding embryonic stem cells. It's like trying to know how to get somewhere with no map or directions to get there. Either way, breakthoughs in both take us a step further towards treatments. By the way the video doesn't really have anything to do with adult stem cells, more normal skin cells that were reverted to an embryonic state. You can see how this kind of breakthough would be impossible if we didn't know which genes are expressed more in embryos.

[hide=]LsxBhBsLNg8 [/hide] Ken Miller certainly has a way of helping you really understand something. The video is to do with reprogramming adult cells to act like embryonic stem cells.

I don't know where people are getting the idea that they use abortions for this kind of research. Scientific research is a tad more controlled than that I would have thought. The very reason that they use spare IVF embryos, for example, is because they're snap frozen and sterile. I suppose that's where people ask themselves which they value more. Some people are obviously upset that embryos are used in this kind of research. I myself am upset looking at people suffering from serious diseases and disabilities when they could be helped.

I support it. The potential for cures is pretty awesome. People sometimes forget that stem cell research is just that - research. We're not going to know about stem cells without studying them, but the ultimate goal doesn't have to be harvesting embryos for cells. The ultimate goal would be to get cells from the patient, transform them into totipotent ("all-potent" - can turn into any cell type) cells and then use those cells to cure the patient. That's why this new research you hear about reverting adult stem cells into embryonic-like stem cells is really good news. I think that this method is the right way to go because it bypasses all issues of compatibility and rejection. On the other hand, some people don't have enough time to let a lab grow them up a new piece of liver because theirs just failed. I think what will happen is the production of organs derived from embryonic stem cells or donated and reverted adult stem cells to supplement organ donation. The same goes for blood donation. Actually just on the issue of blood, I recently heard of some exciting new research into making blood cells from embryonic stem cells. Providing they're the right blood type, the issue of compatability is erased. http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/ ... 341009.htm

I don't like the album cover, it always disturbs me thinking about that poor monk, horrific stuff. Seriously? Think of the context of the photo - This man willingly and clamly burnt himself to death in protest of religious inequality. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Th%C3%ADch ... %E1%BB%A9c http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/learni ... eacher.cfm Yeah, the act of self-immolation is horrific, but It's a damn powerful picture and sums up the vibe of RATM and their first album perfectly. There's more to it than just a man burning.

I still think that RATM's self titled is one of the best debut albums I've ever heard. Nice pick, Ragen.

Sounds like Wayne Carey all over again. I've been following this story a bit lately. I know it's still allegations but it's not looking good for Greg. I heard on sky news and double checked on the ABC that this kind of crime carries a max of 25 years in prison. This is a serious offence he's facing, so I can only applaud the Sharks for standing him down indefinitely. Glassing really is a hideous crime, especially against a girlfriend for Christ's sake. If there's ever a need to see society take a stand against this crime, it's with higher profile people like Greg Bird. I think I'll lose what little hope I have left for our justice system if he doesn't get jail time if found guilty.

http://www.myspace.com/biancamusicaus I heard her the other day on youtube. Not my usual taste in music but she sounds incredibly talented, and the songs aren't half bad. It's very impressive at 15, but she did co-write this music with someone else.

Erased - Sunk Loto. Very nice.