dimreepr

Utopia is the clue here, sure take steps towards zero but who cares, as long as it's not the final countdown, bc tomorrow we'll be faced with an even bigger stick and it doesn't matter who wields it, good or evil it's all the same in the end... 😉 For instance, are you sure Utopia is a good guy with a perfect defence system?

If anything it's the other way round, if for pop-science we say philosophy; science just wants to get on with it, without all those peskie journos asking personal question's, it only gets heated when god is used as an excuse to not try and understand (edit, gods, something else Dawkins was confused by 🙄); if you make an honest mistake the scientists are quite tolerant and happy to explain why. You, my friend is treading a fine line, as did I when I joined this forum and sometimes continue to do so, the difference between now and then is, I learned to listen to these fine people, before I argued with them. I'd hate to see you banned.

The 'only time' it was an effective weapon was in Japan; now, it's just a weapon of revenge, whomsoever pulled the trigger first; it's built into the contract, no one can afford to be seen too flinch. If you're facing who you think is a psycho, would you put down your gun? The best we can achieve is for all side's to take out one bullet at a time, the entropy of collateral damage, we'll just be left with one (probably a secret 10) each.

Such is the meaning of life...

Indeed, the answer is a bigger stick is difficult to define if enough of you continue to wield it...

They had a go with Dune and the children of dune, but it seems Marvel is more conducive to the screen...

What are you trying to prove here? That 'we' don't fully understand is trivially demonstrable, that you think you do is trivially denied; if you think that equal's a stalemate, you need to learn chess...

Again you're being to literal, at a certain level of complexity even science becomes a sort of mythology for most of us, as in a famous example from Richard Feynman, he explains why a mirror reflects us the way it does. The poker reference I made earlier, is analogous also; every player gets their card's equally, it's the card's themselves that are not equal, the player's choice is whether or not to play the hand dealt, or wait for the next and learn about the other player's, those with little experience play every hand; the aggressive player will go all in on the first hand and win, bc the experienced player knows to fold unfavorable card's. That player think's he's learned something valuable, every hand can win; what he doesn't understand is, why he never wins a tournament. We 'all' start our learning journey with a little mythology, bc we need it as base on which to build our understanding. No one wins every hand, even the tournament champ...

Way to miss the point, I don't need a book/teacher is essentially a blnd faith; or did you spontaneously learn everything?

I talked about belief in general and the varying degrees of belief, specifically our need for some sort of bible to bolster our ideology; blind faith is a different conversation. In poker, the nuts represent a winning hand, it doesn't matter what you believe... 😉

We will eat until the food runs out, the planet doesn't need to eat, so it will survive us; the end of the world will happen much later than we are late... 😉

Yes, it literally does mean that, in this 'rapist bible' context and the in the context of my post. My point exactly! What exactly is your point? Please elaborate. The way I view that passage is that he's (someone) simply pointing out that we're all human beings and as such we're all capable of human behaviours, good and bad; "there but for the grace of god go I"

OK, so you don't believe in any book or teaching? Let's toss this out to the crowd: I'd rather have one and not need it, than need one and not have it

I'm a poker player, with the nuts, so I'm all in...

I'm a realist, it doesn't matter who you vote for, the government always win... But let's get this lot out... 😉