beecee

So you essentially agreed ( in a philosophical round about way)with what I said. Why not just say so? The one you have been pushing for around 820 posts, rather then answering questions directly. The following sounds an awful lot like claiming science is evil, an immoral value...and which I pulled you up on. Yes, science/knowledge is a method...a method that enables us to know and understand...to use it for evil is a human decision. You are drawing an extremely long bow by claiming it (science) is leading to world destruction. It in fact is showing the method to obtain the opposite. Yet most western nations still class themselves as god fearing, at least in name. The changes that occur are of course in most cases, lead by scientific and technological advancements. As an old time Catholic, there are many miracles (magic) that the church still cling to. Reasonable corporal punishment is still in vogue, as it is an effective means of correcting children and as discussed a while back. And I'll repeat again...of course they did! The Egyptians had Ra, the Sun God...and ancient history is full of mythical beings used to explain the universe. Just as you describe in the following..... To a large extent, yes it did and does...pandemics is one example, and the silly superstitions behind them. Now you may see the need to once again be pedantic and use some deep dark New Guinea or African tribe to show different, but very largely, the myth behind pedamics have been replace by science. Please don't make me dig up other examples! So you agree with me again? I'm really not sure what you are arguing about, other then an excuse for your philosophy.

You have it arse about face. All those were from basic advancements in science and technology for the good of mankind. It is how they were then propagated and used by humans for anything other then good. But that fails to support your philosophy. Humans using science for evil does not make science evil. sheesh! That's nice. Imagination/hypotheticals are part and parcel of science and the scientific methodology...I have never said anything differently. True magic as defined though, along with supernatural and paranormal concepts are unscientific, and of course (that again you have not denied or supported) as science progresses, much that was once called magic, is now explained by science without any silly magic, as magic is defined. I addressed that...It's called convention... you know, follow Mummy and Dad's beliefs ad-infinitum. Plus of course the need for many humans to be fearful of the finality of death, and instead maintaining that warm fuzzy, inner glow feeling. Beating children is evil, cruel and inhumane...correcting children, and reasonable corporal punsishment, is part and parcel of raising a family. They did at one time to a very large extent, when magic, the supernatural and paranormal had free reign, without developing scientific explanations..... Superstition , supernatural though are still strong for the reasons given. The hard, cold, facts about the finality of death is hard for some to come to terms with.

+1

Not really, as I have made plenty of mistakes myself. Just a bit of sarcasm. *shrug* I have made a few valid points as I see it, including my abhorance to being labeled. I'm also finished as per the link in the other thread. Wrong...that's not science...that's the choices being made by humans, and the rejection of science to right the mistakes made. Good. Again then we cannot do without science. Of course he has. Are you playing your philosophical games? While science has not yet explained everything, (as I have said many, many times) it has given us an evidenced backed picture at least back to 10-35th seconds, post BB, and we are able to make reasonable speculation beyond that. So yes, for all intents and purposes, man has certainly explained most of the wonders of the universe around him. And if that (the BB) is shown to be in error in the future, we will improve that picture, based on the evidence available. And science is what we know; philosophy (and religion) is what we don't know (or invent). 🥱

That aint any excuse: take responsibility for your actions, rather then making excuses. No more qualified then you, sure, and while less qualified then our psychologists and the other soft sciences, we always need to err on the side of caution. ie; making sure no monster, guilty of horrific and cruel crimes, mentally ill or otherwise, is ever let out in society again. Satan is just another of your mythical beliefs, and its appropriate punishment and protection of society that counts. I've given you plenty of reasons over a couple of threads, with at least half a dozen examples. Stop hiding behind your religion. Thankfully, at least I have finally dragged that out of you...you could have saved both of us many pages of tooing and froing. but I do agree on one thing....https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PkgItG7dF28

And I'm talking about facts...facts that ancient man not having the knowledge to understand what caused certain events, and why the universe is the way it is, had them fabricating deities in many forms, in place of that lack of knowledge, and as a result also of ...... Yes it is...It's a number of things, including instantaneous news and access, along with reasons you have put. I'm rather surprised you are unable to recognise that fact. Science explains the world around us, I have never claimed it governs man's morals, if that is what you are saying. That's also convention, along with tolerance and thought for your fellow man... Yes, so? I'm not aware of me saying anything different. All I would add is that imagination is/should be in line with the science and scientific knowledge and principals.

That changes nothing re ancient stone age man, having limited knowledge. Another of the major reasons why we perceive our world to be very sick, is the WWW and Internet, and having all types of sensationalistic news at our finger tips, and broadcasted with the relevant bias of the broadcaster, and as I said, the rejection of science by many because of greed and that old "f&$% you, I'm alright Jack" attitude.

Ahhh, so beautifully put, all three statements! it brings a tear to my eye and a lump to my throat! 😉 Thanks Marcus.

I'm free to make my own decisions in life, and those decsions along with my family, always take in the consequence of what I do. In essence it seems to me at least, that again, instead of publicly confirming that evil people exist, and that jails will always be necessary as a consequence, you are simply playing a game, pushing your philosophical, political stance and one-upmanship. I've even given a case that supports an "evil unjust" travesty of justice with... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalief_Browder#Arrest which you failed to comment on. Instead you would rather keep trying to paint me as a hard nose, unsympathetic person when my position is clearly summed up with "I'm all for rehabilitation after punishment, and protection of the victim and society, but some crimes are so animalistic, so violent, so horrific, so utterly evil, that rehabilitation is out of the question. In other words, I would rather err on the side of caution, and chance not giving a criminal a second chance that may well deserve it, to giving some (unknown) incorridgilble bastard a second chance ( as in my "ad naeseum" example) that will go out and commit another horrific deed. ( as per the ad nauseum example) which of course has been shown to be more common than what you are trying to pretend it is not". and you answer that with this doozy...... Which completely ignores what I have said....again, the guts of what I'm saying, and in a shorter form to help you understand...."but some crimes are so animalistic, so violent, so horrific, so utterly evil, that rehabilitation is out of the question. In other words, I would rather err on the side of caution, and chance not giving a criminal a second chance that may well deserve it, to giving some (unknown) incorridgilble bastard a second chance ( as in my "ad naeseum" example) that will go out and commit another horrific deed" That essentially means that I would rather err on the side of caution, and sadly, mistakenly, accidently fail to give a deserved criminal a second chance, rather then giving another criminal a second chance, that will go out again, to rape, murder, torture again. You seem to (correct me of course if I am wrong) rather give a second chance ( that perhaps does not deserve it because essentially he is evil or maybe mentally ill) to a criminal like the second chance given in my ad nauseum example, that then went out to ruin a little girl's life, and adding to your political, philosophical, religious stance, then say that "emotion"should not ever be entered into. My position is clear...your's at best is wishy washy.

Your opinion is noted and rejected. You sound like an anti-vaxxer. 😄 You obviously of course! Or is this just another "my bad"scenario? Life of course is far more (for most of us) then just surviving. Is your case (for what it is worth) so tenuous that you need to resort to the times before we crawled out of the sea and became human? I agree. So what has this to do with Atheism? It's because of the doubts about the science that we find ourselves in the position we are in. You pushing your philosophy won't help things one iota. Intelligence perhaps, but Intelligence with vastly limited knowledge also, and of course over the ages, convention. Many many people say they are chrisitian or whatever, but are only chrisitian by name only. In actual fact unless the Pope has excommunicated me, I'm still a chrisitian by name and label.

Nothing incredulious about it at all, despite your efforts at trolling...I agree, but also add to the "too ill to be cured", just plain ordinary evil. No more a judge then you matey. We each have an opinion, difference being my opinion has plenty supporting it every day. Criminologists, Psychiatrists And Psychologists are not always right, and that is why they are labeled "soft sciences" And of course I know more dismiss your video, then you have seemingly dismissed the many examples I have given. Again, your view has been shown exclusively to be unrealistic and a dream. Jails will sadly always exist and always be required.

It's your unworkable world view that I won't accept, and is continually shown to be unworkable... You have said plenty in your posts that others beside myself have found, well at best cryptic, at worst obtuse. Delusions? poor memory? double talk? No they don't, and never have. Even stone age man needed rudimentary to understand that once he climbed down out of the trees, he could walk on two feet as a bipedal, and understanding fire etc. Then later of course, as he gradually progressed out of the need for supernatural deities and myth to explain other wonders around him. Most certainly It is a system we cannot live without and without it the world stagnates.

And your delusions are exceptional and your apparent fanatical efforts in pushing the unworkable. But hey! you keep your security blanket! 🤭 Again which strangely you have found too hard to address..... Let me get straight to the point again...I'm all for rehabilitation after punishment, and protection of the victim and society, but some crimes are so animalistic, so violent, so horrific, so utterly evil, that rehabilitation is out of the question. In other words, I would rather err on the side of caution, and chance not giving a criminal a second chance that may well deserve it, to giving some (unknown) incorridgilble bastard a second chance ( as in my "ad naeseum" example) that will go out and commit another horrific deed. ( as per the ad nauseum example) which of course has been shown to be more common than what you are trying to pretend it is not. At least and until we find some "floaty" people that can see the future.

No, it says that space and time are relative, and we make many allowances for that fact. GPS Satellites, muon arrival times, synchronised atomic clocks, particle accelerators.........https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/einsteins-time-dilation-prediction-verified/ "Experiments at a particle accelerator have confirmed the "time dilation" effect predicted by Albert Einstein's special theory of relativity" "Physicists have verified a key prediction of Albert Einstein’s special theory of relativity with unprecedented accuracy. Experiments at a particle accelerator in Germany confirm that time moves slower for a moving clock than for a stationary one. The work is the most stringent test yet of this ‘time-dilation’ effect, which Einstein predicted. One of the consequences of this effect is that a person travelling in a high-speed rocket would age more slowly than people back on Earth. Few scientists doubt that Einstein was right. But the mathematics describing the time-dilation effect are “fundamental to all physical theories”, says Thomas Udem, a physicist at the Max Planck Institute for Quantum Optics in Garching, Germany, who was not involved in the research. “It is of utmost importance to verify it with the best possible accuracy.” The paper was published on September 16 in Physical Review Letters. It is the culmination of 15 years of work by an international group of collaborators including Nobel laureate Theodor Hänsch, director of the Max Planck optics institute" more...............

No, we have relativity. Why it isn't an issue, is that it is supported by scientific evidence. Problems in individual frames. all have their different equivelent solutions. Other then where acceleration is involved.

While I have addressed that misnomer earlier, A better term of phrase, that I have just pinched off another in another thread, and which aptly applies is a "logical absurdity", and further more an aspect often occurring with your posts, in your attempts to spread your gospel.

Let me get straight to the point again...I'm all for rehabilitation after punishment, and protection of the victim and society, but some crimes are so animalistic, so violent, so horrific, so utterly evil, that rehabilitation is out of the question. In other words, I would rather err on the side of caution, and chance not giving a criminal a second chance that may well deserve it, to giving some (unknown) incorridgilble bastard a second chance ( as in my "ad naeseum" example) that will go out and commit another horrific deed. ( as per the ad nauseum example) which of course has been shown to be more common than what you are trying to pretend it is. At least and until we find some "floaty" people that can see the future. The following photo that I was unaware of, but at the same time, is an example of improvements that should/must be made within some prison systems. I am certainly not immune to such examples of injustices within the justice systems. This is a terrible example of a particular prison system gone wrong. It's obviously sad that such occurences can happen with either side of this debate, and while certainly as in this case, it may have been responsible for a person taking his own life, I still see the prioity being with the vicitm and society in general, and avoidance of any incorridgible animal ( that we all admit exist) ever being released from prison, and obviously the fact that prisons are always needed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalief_Browder#Arrest

You are entitled to imagine whatever you like. But the mythical "Noah's flood" in the first instant, was only within the recognised "world" at that time (not the whole Earth the majority of which was unknown to Noah and his gang), and that recognised world was around 5000 years ago? while Pangea was around 300 million years ago? give or take.... What was Pangea? From about 280-230 million years ago (Late Paleozoic Era until the Late Triassic), the continent we now know as North America was continuous with Africa, South America, and Europe. They all existed as a single continent called Pangea. https://www.usgs.gov/faqs/what-was-pangea-0?qt-news_science_products=0#qt-news_science_products 300 million years, give or take.....🥱

You mean I'm not falling for your propaganda. Actually, its the reverse. Your using your santised version of society and beliefs for your own feel good warm and cozy feeling. And of course science shows that as irrelevant. Perhaps that's your problem? 😏 Perhaps its your own honesty that needs to be bought into question. I have nerver said science is a thing. And it isn't just a way to explain things, as you put it. It is a intellectual study of the world around us and the universe, formulating theories based on the knowledge gained via observational and experimental data. It is a system we cannot live without and without it the world stagnates. That dear friend is what you need to contemplate. Again while science cannot and does not explain everything, it is something that we cannot live without. A personal philosophy of life such as yours, may give you that warm inner glow, but it remains a personal issue and unscientific to boot. Irrespective you are entitled to those beliefs, if they give you the peace and happiness as Freddy just quoted and which you kindly linked to, just please, don't shove them down my throat. Science effectively isn't really interested in your supposed truth and/or reality, if it at all even exists. It (science) does though give us provisional truths, that may gain in validity and stature over time, but never really any final truth. Stay warm and cozy in your security blanket; I really don't need one.

I said nothing about your invalid analogy. It's just that silly and invalid, fabricated to support your santised society, that just won't happen. Try something workable then. As you have been shown, some are simply incorridgible and in actual fact, condemn themselves.

And it never is...it keeps her happy, and she is actually near full time, acting out the good side of humanity...love, kindness and tolerance.

After near 43 years of married bliss, she only ever really confronts me around Chrissy, and asks (nicely) if I could attend church with her. Mostly I manage to avoid it, but on a couple of occasions I have weakened. She certainly does not see any of my critique on this forum, and sometimes gets slightly miffed when she has her choir/prayer group over every couple of months or so. I adjourn to my mancave until their praying and singing has finished, then invite myself in when they start mixing the yaqona (kava) ( a Fijian custom) But generally she is tolerant of my general stance. ps: She also often prays for me! 😉

Thanks for that. Off with me head, on with a pumkin!🥴

Firstly string theory and its derivites are still not validated, as beautiful as it may appear. Secondly we do have verifiable evidence for length contraction, as well as time dilation.