I don't understand why you still bother replying to him.

I wasn't aware of that, actually. And thanks mate :)

.. It's all I have left here :(

You obviously need the love of Jesus. Jesus gives the best BJs.

But I'm not sexually attracted to Mexicans :(

I feel inclined to point out the Egyptians couldn't have had a model exactly like ours, in fact it would have been largely incomplete. I'm an amateur Astronomer so I know some about this. Neptune, Pluto, Cheron, and Eris are not visible without a telescope. And good luck finding Uranus without knowing EXACTLY what to look for, and where, because it looks exactly like a very faint star. Saying the other planets were known and modeled is hardly noteworthy, because even young children notice the motion of the other planets if they look up enough.

I think earlier arguments about knowledge always being proven wrong is valid mostly in regards to things like.. motion, time dilation(So me an ancient society with that knowledge and I'll be impressed), quantum physics, et cetera.. The Ancients had little or no functional knowledge of these things, and their explanations for the natural order of things proved to be wrong.(Spontaneous generation and things along those lines).

No. I'm not saying everyone that the scientific community discredits is wrong, but saying that looking at the laughing stock of communities is DEFINITELY NOT a good way to find the future of fact. For example:

I could attempt to publish a paper detailing how a nudist pixie colony exists on my desk, and that they are in fact, the pixies that created the universe, because they travel backwards in time instead of forwards! They're invisible in all forms of the electromagnetic spectrum, have near-zero mass ( 10^-31 kg), and only chose to make the truth known to me because of my remarkable ability to SEE them. If I tried to publish that kind of paper, I'd get laughed out. And for good reason.


and on the subject of this "First of the planets were lined up you can go on Google Sky and punch in that date."

Planets never all line up. Ever. Not in the lifetime of the universe at least. Sometimes a couple of them do, but its nothing of consequence.

Face,

I wanted to come in here and say that I must have been completely wrong in everything I had to say to you about God and Evolution. The person I love the most looked over everything very carefully and she concluded that she was on your side of the argument. So if the person who has my very soul in the palm of her hands is against me then I must be very wrong in my stance and in how I treated you.
I sincerely apologize for my statements and my aggressive reaction toward you sir. Because I was obviously wrong. The sleepyjenkins crack and the 'you need to read up on the basics' were all valid comments by you.
I don't have the background in biology/evolution to make statements and I should not until I educate myself on these matters. Which I will do.
I *was* trying to have a sincere conversation with Tuna on how I felt about God.
I guess all I should say is I'm sorry for arguing with you and I should have not because you are clearly much more advanced and intelligent than I am.
Thank you for all the correct information you had to share versus my very incorrect statements.

I won't make this mistake again.

---
EDIT: Be careful what you say on the internet. I took a stance on creationism because I knew no one else would. I reacted badly to a member that was calling me names and being very confrontational.

You never know how your words haunt you, even ones on the internet that you think no one sees. Protect yourself and be careful about posting your thoughts. We like to believe that we live in a free world where we can say and think and express anything we want.

But we don't. This conversation has caused me more pain and suffering than I can ever express. And all I was trying to do was lend a helping hand.

Please be careful what you post.

I...just looked back....I didn't realise I called you sleepyjenkins instead of slappy, I thought that was your name.

That's such a sincere apology for the internet it even set off my sarcasm alarm, but I'll ignore it (the alarm that is). Don't worry I didn't take anything personally and I did find your views on God and spirituality well thought out. I'd just read up a bit more on evolution is all, nothing to do with intelligence.


Anyway, you sound like a lucky guy to have someone devoted enough to read through a whole thread for you, AND intelligent (ha!) enough to agree with me!;) Hang on to that one! :)

---

Totally. I don't even wanna read through the whole thing myself.

I don't take more comfort in anything. Life is not the same for everyone, it's far too personal for me to conform to any titles like atheist, theist, Christian, etc...

Why rush into something like that? As if you've already figured it out. And I'm not directing this towards atheists, It goes for everyone. Live, experience, figure life out on your own. I'm far too young to come to a verdict on such a serious subject. I've invested too much into the whole intellectual debate of "atheist vs theist".

One thing I'm certain of is that life is a very powerful and personal journey and the experiences that shape your inner being are what will determine who you are and what you stand for. I strongly support self-searching rather than following others traditions and logic.

interesting why you would capitalize that 'g', and, which is not exactly grammatically correct in the derivision of the term, according to the 2010 douglas-harper version of the online etymology dictionary. which has a disclaimer, i would imagine, stating that they are not responsible for the accuracy of the information, as does the oxford english dictionary. all those definitions are 'as is'. caveat emptor?:yikes:

everything you quoted tuna is viable, just as all are. the one thing that one would hope for disappearance is the irritation.

John 6:62 if then ye may behold the Son of Man going up where he was before?

63 the spirit it is that is giving life; the flesh doth not profit anything; the sayings that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life;

'the spirit (pneuma) it is that is giving life'. spirit in the sense of the greek pneuma, meaning 'breath, wind', or as to breathe, or blow, as in breath or wind. and, every word always takes one on a trip, and, is resolved to the root of its own nature, and with this we arrive at eros', which the romans equated with cupid. the god of love. however, it was Psyche who Eros loved. so, research it if you like, and, view the end of the story. a masterpiece of reel to reel cinematography, and, i don't think it would be a remake or sequel, which is the cruxt of the film industry today.

1600–10; < Greek agápē ‘love’. this applies to all, not limited to christians. and, it was not blasting gas when it is written, 'ye worship what ye know not'. because, love is a true verb. it has no opposite; only an absence of. Just as plain as black and white. an absence of color. illusion.

64 but there are certain of you who do not believe;' for -esus had known from the beginning who they are who are not believing, and who is he who will deliver him up,

65 and he said, `Because of this I have said to you -- No one is able to come unto me, if it may not have been given him from my Father.'

6:66 From this [time] many of his disciples went away backward, and were no more walking with him,

this is interesting, but, i won't dwell on it, because, i don't think it matters or 'profits the flesh' to concern. the numbers don't mean anything, but, an interesting observation i supposed. in a couple verses, it went from 'many' to twelve, and, the many 'went away backward'.

what has went away backward these days. love. what has come forward. hate. fear. irritation/anxiety. obstinant, narrow-minded intolerance, and bigotry. not for lack of knowledge, but, for not laboring under correct knowledge. an acronym. luck. fate. destiny? this is what my Mother wrote on her deed to her burial plot in the little green box she left explicitly for me. 'you kids can change anything you want'. if everything is programmed into the mind by a microorgasmic nudist colony of pixies, which in the fantastic view of the one called insuldor is represented, and, a fairly accurate allegory/metaphor(phosis) in the context of thought manipulating propaganda.

nature can teach you how faith in things invisible can be found in the visible realm. if one of the scientists on this forum would be so kind as to explain how the neurological process we call 'sight' works, then we could possibly learn why you or anyone should (or should not) probably publish that kind of paper. although, i would find it very interesting. which begs the question; is everything we view as fact, factual? but, you did publish a paper of sorts, and, the one concern i would have is the feelings generated by what these perceptions create. the bible quote is used only as a reference to the inner experience, and, not an attempt to push religious notions onto anyone who may or may not believe the books. but, to visualize your story would make for a great movie! it is a new idea, and, man has seemed to plum run out of new ideas. and, the quotes suggest that if he/she constantly refers to the 'Son of Man', then who would then be 'my Father? it may be significant from 'the father who sent him/her/me/you'

this is not blasting gas. this is the most important lesson that took a long time to realize. and, rather than write on here, it will come to an understanding through every participant that has posted things that in the past we chose not to address, because, it appeared to be only good news for those who like bad news. i would not buy all that dialogue doubling back on me, and, now just as then, i will not sell, or even suggest that these fingers type anything but information as i have painstakingly gathered, and a doomsday of biblical proportion, that played out, and one that could not be discussed until i was taught (no remarkable abilities of my own, we all have abilities), it is a matter of acting according to those abilites, with the intention of attempting to benefit one and all. i could not change until i learned how to change the 'mood' from doom. but, it is only by non-action, and, non-intent that may be most effective.

if anything appears to be inane, incoherent rambling; please reply with questions, and, someone will come up with an explanation. as for being titled this or that, or someone is going here or there for not believing this or that, get those notions out of the discussions, please. and, please post applicable music to each post. the music, and, the dissonance created as a divisive tool will be hopefully used as a unifying tool to address the proper 'they' who is unseen as the enemy. it is indeed a story of the 'Science of Myth'. and, bluegrass style, because, i prefer it over screaming weasels.

tore once wrote that we all come with a unique blueprint; change the blueprint, and, you change the person. and, i think tore will agree that the genetic code is nothing, if not redundant. is it unambiguous? degenerate? surely someone knows the central 'dogma' of molecular biology. it is, they say, 'nearly' universal. maybe the key lies in the underestimation of mitochondria. what do you think tore? it might be that memetics needs a discussion. i don't know, but, thank you all and if you can't make peace in your inner universe, take comfort in the knowledge that you all did in one.

[YOUTUBE]

Hey, you're that one guy. I don't recall your original name but I recognize your comment style.

Steven something from Denmark I believe.

Is three years a necro-bump?

Without thinking it through in detail, these are some of the things I like about being an atheist:-

1. I can subscribe whole-heartedly to the Scientific Method, and be proud of how it has consistantly led humanity from one achievement to another. I feel unreservedly good about two of humankind's greatest accomplishments; going to the moon, and observing the universe from the Hubble telescope. We didn't pray our way to the moon - it was science, yeh!

2. One of the fundamental precepts of the Scientific Method is the idea of the Minimum Working Hypothesis, i.e., that the simplest hypothesis to explain the evidence is the one to adopt until it is proven false. Another is that extraordinary claims require extraordinarily good evidence or proof. This gives me the confidence, or is that complaisancy, to dismiss religious claims, yetis and UFOs.

3. The atheist doesn't have to "doublethink" all the time.(Doublethink is about accommodating two conflicting ideas in your head at the same time.) For example, many religious people talk about how their prayers get answered, but when they have a toothache, do they pray it away, or do they go to the dentist? If the latter, then they are doublethinking; relying on the Scientific Method to solve their problem, but simultaneously believing in the efficacy of prayer.

4. Today, the atheist doesn't have to spend precious time and money in and on some self-appointed religious institution. Once I've fulfilled my social and legal obligations, I'm a free man.

5. The atheist doesn't have to worry about being embarrassed by his church. One example of this embarrassment was with the Jehovah's Witnesses. They predicted that The Apocalypse would happen in 1975, so red faces all round when nothing happened. As an atheist, I can laugh at their folly and discomfort.

6. If I want I can indulge the pleasures of the flesh without agonising unnecessarily. I don't have to sacrifice the here-and-now in hopes of getting a better deal in the hereafter. I don't have to revere or strive for celibacy, which (Aldous Huxley) "is the most unnatural of all the sexual perversions."


7. Should be number one really, but I can think what I like, without having to conform to a system of belief that is decided by someone else. For example, I worked out the size of my family to my own convenience; the only opinion I had to consult was my wife's.

I'm sure I'm missing stuff. Anybody else want to continue the list or write their own?

Having no good reason to chop part of your kid's dick off is a good one.

There is one good reason, it makes it look a little less ugly.

Like putting lipstick on a pig.

Whatever makes your mother happy.

I don't particularly want to know how my mother thinks my penis looks.

She probably has a rough idea considering she's the one who decided whether it was chopped or not.

I like to think my mom has good taste when it comes to dicks.

Clearly she doesn't or she wouldn't have mated with your father.

Idk man I'm a pretty big dick, where do you think I get it from?

Your mom.

Behind probably.

^Both acceptable responses.

I was chopped and had my son chopped purely for health reasons. Plus my older sister and her boyfriend use to live on the floor above us. He ended up with a bad infection that resulted in him having to get circumcised at the age of 20.

Hearing his painful moans and groans for a couple of weeks after the procedure every time he took a piss was enough to make me not wanna take any chances with my son.

Lol nah that's not how it works mate.

Mayo Clinic says yes it does. Not a huge difference but I'm on the side of "why not do it".

Circumcision (male) Why it's done - Mayo Clinic

So do you get afraid of being struck by lightning every time you see a cloud?

Absolutely outstanding post.

Cause it's not your dick?

This.

You can stretch it out too, so it's not even like it's a permanent solution.

Yup, great analogy bucky.

It kinda was at the time since I helped create it.

Not exactly sure what you mean.

Like I said, I heard what a guy had to endure when he had to get one as an adult because of health issues. Why not have it done to my kids while he so young he'll never remember anything about it.

But you guys go ahead and enjoy your floppy ass foreskins.

^ Thank you very much, Paul!

To most other recent posters: the topic here is atheism, if you really want to rework all the arguments and jokes about circumcision, perhaps you'd do me the favor of doing it in the appropriate thread:-

http://www.musicbanter.com/current-e...cumcision.html

Sorry. I was skimming this thread and I assumed the discussion was specifically about infant circumscion done explicitly for religious reasons.

I don't have a problem with getting cut in other instances, but I'm not a fan of infant circumcision––for lots of reasons.

Same probability mate. So long as you or your son didn't die, it's not worth fretting about, but let's not pretend like there's any legitimate medical reason to do it.

Yeah, it was a pretty good analogy.

Let's not pretend that there's not. Even though the odds are small. It's still better for you to get one that not get one. If you deny that I'd suggest you get your head out of your foreskin.