dimreepr

What's wrong with butterscotch flavour?

I think you may be missing some context.

😣 In this context it's just a phrase, like saying "jesus christ" when we hit our thumb with a hammer; it's cultural bc we're in a such a society. Perhaps you can come up with an example that clearly shows "god did it" can't possible be true...

Maybe it's god saying "let's not kill the messenger"...

No it's not, it's a parallax of the same view; something @studiot tried to teach you, that you've ignored...

That's not a very good summary, materialism for instance, is that really any part of an axiom in this context?

I think it's time to conclude that @Luc Turpin doesn't want to be educated to the point where he can see his folly, he prefers the bliss of ignorance; a valid choice, science can't solve everything and belief is a great salve, wrong forum though...

No it's not, (read the thread) I'm equating "I don't know" with "god did it", not that god has done anything... Frustrating, isn't it? 😣

Good luck to you...

Mostly it's cultural, if you want a dangerous dog, there's a motive...

You're clutching at straw's, to what end? No, the arrow of time can end in one of two way's and it didn't happen yesterday... 😉

What extraordinary claim am I making? Dawkins is human and humans are capable of being deluded, or does he/you know everything?

That only goes so far, you can be content with only having what you need to live, but this rich %£$" wants to tax that which I need, in order to chase what they think they want; it's nothing more than a gambling addiction, but somehow it's the fault of an alcoholic... 😉

Science doesn't really care about subjectivity, it seeks only to understand the aquired knowledge; it's people that think that's a smart thing to do, and display as a means to judge...

You've entirely missed @studiot point, it depends on your definition of perfect, philosophically "this fit's me perfectly" is both correct and incorrect; scientifically, perfect doesn't exist bc we can only just see an atom and things get much smaller than that and perfect would demand that we can observe all the way down; all of which is irrelevant, in the question of the supernateral v superscience...

You can only be objective with an object that exists in time and space, everything else is a matter of interpretation, for instance, what am I thinking about now? You can put me in an MRI, however sophisticated, and all you can ever say is, you're probably enjoying that thought, or not... That reads as the latest version of the bible, which, I think was designed to help control our emotions; the difference is the lack of a political understanding, science can't fix that...

Nor me, but there's a lot you can learn here, if you're smart enough to listen...

And missing the point...

You're stuttering...

Indeed, that's why I said "I take your point" and why I edited my typo. I have no idea what inspired me to post that in the first place, just a thought out of place here, sorry.

Not at all, I just haven't seen it yet. Only to you. 🙄

I take your point, I did a thumbnail calculation and it seems it would take a very big impact on a very small plain plane.

New history is made every single day, sometimes good and sometimes bad, but this too will pass; whatever the volume. I met a traveller from an antique land Who said: Two vast and trunkless legs of stone Stand in the desart.[d] Near them, on the sand, Half sunk, a shattered visage lies, whose frown, And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command, Tell that its sculptor well those passions read Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things, The hand that mocked them and the heart that fed: And on the pedestal these words appear: "My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings: Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!" No thing beside remains. Round the decay Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare The lone and level sands stretch far away. — Percy Shelley, "Ozymandias", 1819 edition[17]

Not your mind, a tree can communicate with other tree's but they have yet to rise up against their human oppressor's. 😉

It's not just about penetration, the plane has to absorb the energy without a catastrophic change of moment...