| Author | Thread |
|
|
04/09/2005 02:26:43 AM · #176 |
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction."
-Blaise Pascal |
|
|
|
04/09/2005 01:05:09 PM · #177 |
"Men despise religion. They hate it and are afraid it may be true"
Blaise Pascal
"There are only three types of people; those who have found God and serve him; those who have not found God and seek him, and those who live not seeking, or finding him. The first are rational and happy; the second unhappy and rational, and the third foolish and unhappy."
Blaise Pascal
"The gospel to me is simply irresistible."
Blaise Pascal
|
|
|
|
04/09/2005 01:41:21 PM · #178 |
I have made this letter long because I have not the time to make it shorter.
--Blaise Pascal (1623 - 1662), Lettres Proviciales (1657) |
|
|
|
04/09/2005 02:15:45 PM · #179 |
Originally posted by MadMordegon:
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction."
-Blaise Pascal |
I don't think anybody would argue with that. Blaise Pascal was very wise.
|
|
|
|
04/09/2005 02:21:24 PM · #180 |
LOL, good one General.
A few relevant quotes from Albert Einstein...
"The further the spiritual evolution of mankind advances, the more certain it seems to me that the path to genuine religiosity does not lie through the fear of life, and the fear of death, and blind faith, but through striving after rational knowledge."
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."
"From the viewpoint of a Jesuit priest I am, of course, and have always been an atheist.... I have repeatedly said that in my opinion the idea of a personal God is a childlike one. You may call me an agnostic, but I do not share the crusading spirit of the professional atheist whose fervor is mostly due to a painful act of liberation from the fetters of religious indoctrination received in youth. I prefer an attitude of humility corresponding to the weakness of our intellectual understanding of nature and of our being."
...and most important of all:
"A photograph never grows old. You and I change, people change all through the months and years but a photograph always remains the same. How nice to look at a photograph of mother or father taken many years ago. You see them as you remember them. But as people live on, they change completely. That is why I think a photograph can be kind." :-)
|
|
|
|
04/09/2005 03:02:32 PM · #181 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
"A photograph never grows old. You and I change, people change all through the months and years but a photograph always remains the same. How nice to look at a photograph of mother or father taken many years ago. You see them as you remember them. But as people live on, they change completely. That is why I think a photograph can be kind." :-) |
Thank you for that...it was a kind quote to share and it shows your attitude of family despite differences.
With that, I remove myself from the debate...great discussion everyone, I love learning in this manner and you've been great teachers!
|
|
|
|
04/09/2005 03:09:55 PM · #182 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
"From the viewpoint of a Jesuit priest I am, of course, and have always been an atheist.... I have repeatedly said that in my opinion the idea of a personal God is a childlike one. You may call me an agnostic, but I do not share the crusading spirit of the professional atheist whose fervor is mostly due to a painful act of liberation from the fetters of religious indoctrination received in youth. I prefer an attitude of humility corresponding to the weakness of our intellectual understanding of nature and of our being."
|
That is a damn good quote.
I love Einstien's wisdom and perspective, I have a quote on a poster on my wall in my office with his face that says:
"Where the world ceases to be the scene of our personal hopes and wishes, where we face it as free beings, admiring, asking and observing, there we endter the realm of Art and Science."
So true. Another of my favorites:
"A human being is part of a whole, called by us the Universe, a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings, as something separated from the rest--a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest us. Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circles of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty."
-Albert Einstein |
|
|
|
04/09/2005 03:31:17 PM · #183 |
Originally posted by RonB:
"There are only three types of people; those who have found God and serve him; those who have not found God and seek him, and those who live not seeking, or finding him. The first are rational and happy; the second unhappy and rational, and the third foolish and unhappy."
Blaise Pascal |
"The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one."
- George Bernard Shaw |
|
|
|
04/09/2005 03:37:05 PM · #184 |
"My sense of God is my sense of wonder"
Albert Einstein |
|
|
|
04/09/2005 03:47:53 PM · #185 |
Originally posted by kpriest:
"My sense of God is my sense of wonder"
Albert Einstein |
Good quote. I don't think it means what you appear to think it means. |
|
|
|
04/09/2005 04:07:57 PM · #186 |
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
Originally posted by MadMordegon:
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction."
-Blaise Pascal |
I don't think anybody would argue with that. Blaise Pascal was very wise. |
In my opinion, this reason alone should be enough to make "civilized" people wean themselves from mystical and anti science (and therefore anti-reality) thinking, no matter how comforting it can be. |
|
|
|
04/09/2005 05:11:05 PM · #187 |
"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."
-Albert Einstein |
|
|
|
04/09/2005 05:43:01 PM · #188 |
This quote game is ultimately pointless, but I have to admit it's fun.
"A Man needs Religion like a fish needs a bicycle"
- Viques |
|
|
|
04/09/2005 06:05:34 PM · #189 |
Originally posted by milo655321:
Originally posted by RonB:
"There are only three types of people; those who have found God and serve him; those who have not found God and seek him, and those who live not seeking, or finding him. The first are rational and happy; the second unhappy and rational, and the third foolish and unhappy."
Blaise Pascal |
"The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one."
- George Bernard Shaw |
"Religion gives us certainty, stability, peace. It gives us absolutes which we long for. Science is always wrong and never solves a problem without raising ten more problems."
-George Bernard Shaw |
|
|
|
04/09/2005 08:37:24 PM · #190 |
Wow - this has been an interesting thread, although now it seems to be stuck in "Battle of the Quotes" mode.
"Kill it! Kill this thread before it eats us all alive!!"
-me, just now :) |
|
|
|
04/10/2005 02:00:21 AM · #191 |
Originally posted by RonB:
"Religion gives us certainty, stability, peace. It gives us absolutes which we long for. Science is always wrong and never solves a problem without raising ten more problems."
-George Bernard Shaw |
Sorry it took so long to reply. Social life and all that …
I am an atheist and I thank God for it.
- George Bernard Shaw
There is only one religion, though there are a hundred versions of it.
- George Bernard Shaw
When you are asked, ‘Where is God? Who is God?’ stand up and say, ‘I am God and here is God, not as yet completed, but sill advancing towards completion, just in so much as I am working for the purpose of the universe, working for the good of the whole society and the whole world, instead of merely looking after my personal ends.’
- George Bernard Shaw
Arguing on the internet is like running in the Special Olympic. Even if you win, you’re still retarded.
- Anonymous
I'll concede. You win the quote war, RonB. Care to get back to the issue at hand?
Message edited by author 2005-04-10 02:11:26. |
|
|
|
04/10/2005 02:39:56 AM · #192 |
Not before we hear from the Quotemeister:
There is something fascinating about science. One gets such wholesale returns of conjecture out of such a trifling investment of fact.
Mark Twain (1835 - 1910)
In the first place, God made idiots. That was for practice. Then he made school boards.
Mark Twain (1835 - 1910)
In religion and politics, people's beliefs and convictions are in almost every case gotten at second hand, and without examination.
Mark Twain (1835 - 1910)
I cannot call to mind a single instance where I have ever been irreverent, except toward the things which were sacred to other people.
Mark Twain (1835 - 1910), "Is Shakespeare Dead?"
Most people are bothered by those passages of Scripture they do not understand, but the passages that bother me are those I do understand.
Mark Twain (1835 - 1910)
Let us so live that when we come to die even the undertaker will be sorry.
Mark Twain (1835 - 1910)
I have done some indiscreet things in my day, but this thing of playing myself for a prophet was the worst. Still, it had its ameliorations. A prophet doesn't have to have any brains. They are good to have, of course, for the ordinary exigencies of life, but they are no use in professional work. It is the restfulest vocation there is. When the spirit of prophecy comes upon you, you merely take your intellect and lay it off somewhere in a cool place for a rest, and unship your jaw and leave it alone; it will work itself. The result is prophecy.
Mark Twain (1835 - 1910), from A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court
When I think of the number of disagreeable people that I know who have gone to a better world, I am sure hell won't be so bad at all.
Mark Twain (1835 - 1910)
I admire the serene assurance of those who have religious faith. It is wonderful to observe the calm confidence of a Christian with four aces.
Mark Twain (1835 - 1910)
If Christ were here now there is one thing he would not be - a Christian.
Mark Twain (1835 - 1910)
Of the delights of this world, man cares most for sexual intercourse, yet he has left it out of his heaven.
Mark Twain (1835 - 1910) |
|
|
|
04/10/2005 11:22:02 AM · #193 |
Religion is the costliest, most widespread, and most destructive untreated mental illness in the history of human civilization.
John Vlcek(1948 - ) |
|
|
|
04/10/2005 01:40:35 PM · #194 |
This article showed up in todays NY TIMES:
April 10, 2005
OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR
Goodbye Mars, Hello Earth
By PAUL DAVIES
Sydney
WHEN I was a student in the 1960's, anyone who believed that there might be life on other planets was considered a crackpot. Now all that has changed. To claim that life is widespread in the universe is not only respectable, it also underpins NASA's ambitious astrobiology program. Find another Earth-like planet, astrobiologists say, and life should have happened there too.
NASA is spending billions of dollars to search for life on Mars, the most Earth-like of our sister planets. But we may not need to go all the way to Mars to find another sample of life. It could be lurking under our very noses. No planet is more Earth-like than Earth itself, so if life started here once, it could actually have started many times over.
Geologists believe life established itself on Earth about four billion years ago. Australian rocks dated at 3.5 billion years contain fossilized traces suggesting that microbes were already well ensconced by then. But the ancient Earth was no Garden of Eden. Huge asteroids and comets mercilessly pounded the planet, creating conditions more reminiscent of hell. The biggest impacts would have swathed our globe in incandescent rock vapor, boiling the oceans dry and sterilizing the surface worldwide.
How did life emerge amid this mayhem? Quite probably it was a stop-and-go affair, with life first forming during a lull in the bombardment, only to be annihilated by the next big impact. Then the process was repeated, over and over. As the bombardment began to abate and the impacts diminished in severity, so isolated colonies of primitive microbes sheltering deep underground managed to cling on. One of these colonies was destined to become life as we know it.
What about the preceding life forms? Were they all completely destroyed? It's possible that pockets of microbes could have survived in obscure niches until the next genesis, opening up the tantalizing prospect of two or more different forms of life co-existing on the same planet. Although they would compete for resources, one type of life is not necessarily bound to eliminate the rest. After all, within the microbial realm of "life as we know it," many different species make a living side by side.
Thus, microbes from another genesis - alien bugs, if you will - could conceivably have survived on Earth until today. The chances are that we wouldn't have noticed. Under a microscope, many microbes appear similar even if they are as genetically distinct as humans are from starfish. So you probably couldn't tell just by looking whether a micro-organism is "our" life or alien life. Genetic sequencing is used to position unknown microbes on the tree of life, but this technique employs known biochemistry. It wouldn't work for organisms on a different tree using different biochemical machinery. If such organisms exist, they would be eliminated from the analysis and ignored. Our planet could be seething with alien bugs without anyone suspecting it.
How could we go about identifying "life as we don't know it"? One idea is to look in exotic environments. The range of conditions in which life can thrive has been enormously extended in recent years, with the discovery of microbes dwelling near scalding volcanic vents, in radioactive pools and in pitch darkness far underground. Yet there will be limits beyond which our form of life cannot survive; for example, temperatures above about 270 degrees Fahrenheit. If anything is found living in even harsher environments, we could scrutinize its innards to see whether what makes it tick is so novel that it cannot have evolved from known life.
Identifying alien organisms in more equable settings would be a much harder challenge, especially if they use the same basic molecules as familiar life - nucleic acids and proteins. But there is one sure-fire giveaway. The building blocks of proteins, called amino acids, are all lopsided in the same distinctive way. Viewed in a mirror, these "left-handed" amino acids would appear right-handed. Such mirror-image molecules exist, but the life forms we are familiar with don't use them. Most biochemists think it is just an accident that "life as we know it" selected the left-handed version. If this supposition is correct, then there is a 50-50 chance that alien life would have picked the opposite handedness. Such "anti-life" would eat "anti-food": right-handed amino acids and other mirror molecules. This offers a simple way to filter out known life from anything alien. Prepare a culture medium of anti-food and see if anything flourishes. Of course it's a long shot, but it is easy to try, and scientists at the Marshall Space Flight Center are now testing the response of microbes from various extreme environments to a bowl of anti-soup.
Even if alien life has not endured to the present day, it may still have left its mark. Geochemists have identified organic detritus from ancient microbes in rocks as old as 2.7 billion years. Alien organisms might have left remnants containing peculiar suites of molecules or produced distinctive geochemical alterations like unusual mineral deposits.
These remnants would still give us a genuine second sample, a form of biology that is unrelated to familiar life. By comparing the way evolution works in both cases, we could identify which features of life follow from general principles and which are just accidents of history.
But there is a more profound dimension to this research. Nobody knows how life began. Somehow a mixture of lifeless chemicals assembled itself into a primitive organism, presumably through a long and complex sequence of chemical reactions. Our ignorance of this process is so great that scientists can't even agree on whether it was a gigantic, one-time fluke, or the expected and frequent outcome of intrinsically bio-friendly natural laws, as the astrobiologists hope. Jacques Monod, a Nobel Prize-winning biologist, was adamant that life is a bizarre accident confined to Earth. On the other hand Christian de Duve, another Nobel laureate, declares life to be "a cosmic imperative," bound to occur wherever Earth-like conditions prevail.
The discovery of a second sample of life on Earth would confirm that bio-genesis was not a unique event and bolster the belief that life is written into the laws of the cosmos. It is hard to imagine a more significant scientific discovery. Our view of the universe and our place within it would be forever transformed, and we would at last have the answer to the biggest of the big questions of existence: Are we alone?
Paul Davies, a professor at the Australian Center for Astrobiology at Macquarie University, is the author of "The Fifth Miracle: The Search for the Origin and Meaning of Life." |
|
|
|
04/10/2005 03:14:41 PM · #195 |
| I think we have a breakthrough! GeneralElectric = We Bring Good Things to Life. Ergo... all life originated with Paul Marcus. |
|
|
|
04/10/2005 03:21:15 PM · #196 |
Don't confuse me with the company descended from Thomas Edison .... : (
Although if a company was going to invent life, his would probably have been it ... : ) |
|
|
|
04/10/2005 06:47:48 PM · #197 |
| How would a proponent of macro-evolution explain that birds have working wings, given that there could be NO reason at all for any or all "ancestors" or "intermediate forms" to BEGIN developing wings, or to CONTINUE to develop wings ( over a relatively long period of time ), when such intermediate appendages would remain completely non-functional until an ENTIRE set of wings had developed? And, even if it were TRUE, why haven't ANY fossils of animals with wing "stubs" or "semi-wings" been found? |
|
|
|
04/10/2005 07:10:25 PM · #198 |
I already did that to an extent in an earlier post on gliding flaps (I had flying squirrels in mind, but the same principles apply to wings). Intermediate appendages can indeed be functional- flying fish glide on extended flippers. Aren't flippers functional? Many creatures have developed extended appendages and flaps for regulating heat (like an elephants ears). It's not a big step from flaps to wings, and you can readily observe vultures spreading their wings to warm up in the morning). There are even snakes that glide from tree to tree by flattening their bodies. Soft tissues such as non-bony flaps don't fossilize well, but examples DO exist in the fossil record. The transition from soft flaps to bony, structured flight wings could be very short as I explained earlier.
Message edited by author 2005-04-10 19:15:10. |
|
|
|
04/10/2005 08:10:33 PM · #199 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
I already did that to an extent in an earlier post on gliding flaps (I had flying squirrels in mind, but the same principles apply to wings). Intermediate appendages can indeed be functional- flying fish glide on extended flippers. Aren't flippers functional? Many creatures have developed extended appendages and flaps for regulating heat (like an elephants ears). It's not a big step from flaps to wings, and you can readily observe vultures spreading their wings to warm up in the morning). There are even snakes that glide from tree to tree by flattening their bodies. Soft tissues such as non-bony flaps don't fossilize well, but examples DO exist in the fossil record. The transition from soft flaps to bony, structured flight wings could be very short as I explained earlier. |
So where is the fossil record do we find the occurence of flap 'stubs' or 'semi-flaps'? Again, there are no intermediate fossil records of any of the itermediate steps. And if wings developed from flaps, why don't we find flaps with feathers or wings without feathers. If you propose bats as an example, then why aren't there any birds with bat-like mouths, or bats with bird-like beaks or any intermediate species, like egg-bearing bats or live-bearing birds, or birds with fur instead of feathers or bats with feathers instead of fur, or birds with external ears, or..., or...? |
|
|
|
04/10/2005 08:11:53 PM · #200 |
Originally posted by RonB:
How would a proponent of macro-evolution explain that birds have working wings, given that there could be NO reason at all for any or all "ancestors" or "intermediate forms" to BEGIN developing wings, or to CONTINUE to develop wings ( over a relatively long period of time ), when such intermediate appendages would remain completely non-functional until an ENTIRE set of wings had developed? And, even if it were TRUE, why haven't ANY fossils of animals with wing "stubs" or "semi-wings" been found? |
That is an interesting question. I’m curious which books you have read to find out what the scientific community has to say on the subject? I have Pat Shipman’s Taking Wing: Archaeopteryx and the Evolution of Bird Flight on my shelf, but I haven’t gotten around to reading it yet. Did you pick some other professional or layman’s text for your investigation? Could you give me a recommendation for a layman’s science book on the development of flight?
While I’m not a biologist or hold any scientific degrees, I don’t believe any evolutionary biologists have proposed wing “stubs.” The necessity of wing stubs is a creationist claim that is not found in any biology textbook or the peer-reviewed literature. As for “semi-wings,” what would you say about the modern numerous examples of gliding creatures that are found, namely flying squirrels, some lemurs, some breeds of snakes, some gliding frogs, gliding lizards, flying fish, and sugar gliders, etc.? While obviously none of these are intermediates for birds, which you would, no doubt, have pointed out, they demonstrate that limited flight is possible in nature without the development of a “full wing.” If you were to dig up the skeleton of a flying squirrel today, hypothetically not knowing of the existence of flying squirrels, would you be able to determine that flying squirrels could glide given that there would be no soft tissue to examine?
I, on the other hand, would be interested in the creationist explanation of the numerous examples of flightless birds and their distribution, especially those found on remote islands: examples include kiwis, the extinct dodos, emus, flightless cormorants, and penguins. This question is particularly interesting when you take into account the biblical flood story. How these did flightless birds get to New Zealand (kiwis), Australia (emus) Antarctica (penguins), the Galapagos Islands (flightless cormorants) and Mauritius (dodos) from Mount Ararat in Asia Minor? If you propose microevolution for the change from flight to non-flight, you are proposing an evolutionary speed much faster than any evolutionary biologist would.
|
|
