Just stop the useless complaining.
POSTED BY: LostInTheVerse
UPDATED: Thursday, November 25, 2004 04:27
VIEWED: 24069
PAGE 11 of 17
...double posted earlier... but I could sell this place for advertisement if you like...
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
...Which means???
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
@Jasonzzz
I don't know which posts you're reading but you "observations" are just plain wrong.
I am no fundamentalist. I am involved in scientific endevours and can provide insight into that culture.
I can tell you that I, and every other scientist, know that science is not a religion. I don't understand why you can't accept this fact.
I never said that religious people are non-intellects. This will be the third time I make this statement. Religion requires faith not necessarily intellegence. This is an if statment. NOT an if and only if. It does NOT go both ways! People can be intellegent and be religious.
Science on the other hand, requires you to be intellegent to understand it. Intellegence is a pre-requisite. The non-intellegent cannot be scientists. The intellegence level of the person just dictates how far one can go in this field.
Is that spelled out enough for you now?
I'll say this statment for the second time. I am not saying that scientists are better people. I'm only stating facts (see above).
The fact of the matter is that science is a very complicated area. It takes years of hard study to do anything in it. So, can most of the population contibute to science? The sheer fact of the matter is that they can't. Can they learn and talk about it? Why not. They just must understand there limitations to what they can do and listen to those "in the know" when they speak. ie We say that science is not a religion. Accept it!
So, by your opinion I am no scientist and/or I don't think like one. Actually I do. And my wife (who has a PhD in Physics by the way) is the one that told me that, it's just not my opinion.
The fact of the matter is that someone posted something that was clearly untrue. I made a post stating that along with a list of reasons why it was untrue. So, how is that not acting like a scientist?
I also find it amusing that you seem to think (having not even met me) that you presume to know where my heart and mind are.
These are *not* new ideas. People have come up with them time and time again. People like me state that they are false time and time again. So, if I must impologize for have a canned response to a conversation that I've had many times with many people that has seemed to intimidated you and put you on the defensive. I'm sorry. But this doesn't change the facts.
I've also learned a lot about the worlds religions (among other things). It's been a serious hobby of mine for some time (read: > 5 years) and a interest for much longer. So, as you can see, I have some other knowledge that makes me more knowledgable that you thought when it comes to this topic.
And this wasn't a scientific idea. I was a sociological one. One that is quite incorrect. As someone who lives in the realm of science, I found it necessary to correct the situation.
But, if you have any scientific ideas that you would like to discuss I'd be happy to. I am competent in Physics and Mathematics (varying levels) and know a smattering of some others. If it is indeed a scientific idea, you'll find that I am quite ready to discuss. And if the topic isn't scientific and I know something about it, I'd be happy to join in (as the case is here).
Also, if someone is wants to know about such things, I'd be happy to explain some stuff or direct them to where they can find it (I've done this here before). Spreading knowledge is always a good thing. Misinformation on the otherhand is not. Which is what this discussion started off as and what you are currently doing. I would dare say that the obvious lies that you are saying about me here would border on slander.
I also in closing must mention one thing. You and I have been involved in a discussion on this topic before. In fact it was during just this past summer. When I was reading your current posts (Jasonzzz has been missing for a little while) something seemed off. You aren't posting as you have in th
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Since I need to say this somewhere, and we're kinda talking religion...
Just found out that my cousin Bond passed away late Wednesday. He was what many of you would consider the quintessential Republican. A farmer in rural Georgia. A committed Christian. A pillar of his church and community. Conservative to the core.
Yet totally accepting and supportive of a niece and cousin who are gay. Able to interact with people of all classes and cultures. One of the most comfortable people to be around that I have ever know. A man who's company I will really miss.
I hope that his faith is true for him, and that he is in his heaven now, with his God and his loved ones that have gone before him.
"Keep the Shiny side up"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
WOW, the topic digressed, didn't it?
The part about complaining over what is going is very simply this:
The U.S.A was fonded by a bunch of complainers.....go figure. Complaining is our God-given right, to express our opinions and feelings over things that we disagree with.
As far as Iraq and Bush and WMD's go, my opinion stems from numerours reasons, so I'll get to the reasons first:
1) I am a veteran Non-Commisioned Officer in the Army, Scout Sniper was my job there. And guess what GreyJedi: I HAVE NO POLITiCAL AFFILIATION. There goes THAT theory!!!!
2) Iraq didn't have any WMD's, as have been proven by both the UN and the 9/11 Commission NUMEROUS times.
3) People's opinions are opinions. They should be grounded in fact, and truth. However those two items have been considered subversive as of late, so opinions have a way of being distorted.
LiV, if you don't like the complaining, don't read/watch/listen to it. People like that are why the 1st Ammendment has become cumbersome the last 20 years or so. And Canada, if ya don't like the ppl that say they're splitting, then why care? A true patriot questions what is wrong, and stands up for what he believes to be right.
FACT: The people do NOT elect the president, the ELECTORAL COLLEGE does, which is a body of APPOINTED officails, not people that run for the office. So guess what: unlesss you are a member of that group, you have NO SAY.
FACT: This country is not fascist, the only form of government that qualifies is an Oligarchy, which is rule by a select few. The select few happen to be the Rich, (frequently) White, Baptist, Politicans/Lawyers in this country. The term Democracy means "Rule by the People". Since I don't rule, and neither do any of us, that kind of scratches things out, doesn't it?
The only effective positions that the people's vote can influence is the local Sherriff, Alderman, and City/County Council Members. If you do not believe or refuse to believe this, go crack open your kids (or library) civics book. I NEVER registered to vote simply because I can READ how the governenment ACTUALLY works. Then again, that is how thing sit FOR ME. Truth is a funny thing, people. The truth is good enough for me; pure, clean, based on fact, and unbiased. You may choose to believe otherwise, it is your choice (which people tend to forget the freedom to make up omne's own mind!!!)
There people go again, making me show off my education.....damn you all....j/k
"Patriotism is the fine act of complaining loudly"
--UnNamed
"If a Government, by it's nature, has become corrupt, it is the Citizen's responsibility to overthrow said Government to restore Freedoms and Liberties"
--Thomas Jefferson, The Constitution of the United States of America
p.s. if you don't like someone's opinion, bugger off they don't like yours either. I don't and you probably don't like mine. The difference is: I don't care
"Your mouth is talking. Might wanna see to that"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I forgot to add this:
WHY ARE WE SULLYING OUR FAVORITE SHOW AND JOSS HIMSELF BY POSTING/STARTING THIS WHOLE MESS HERE TO BEGIN WITH????
FILMING IS DONE ON SERENITY.....WHY NOT TALK ABOUT THAT?????
"Your mouth is talking. Might wanna see to that"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I know exactly the statements that you have typed and that you are attempting to defend. If you have only said those two statements, then it's fine. I understandly exactly what you've said. However, all of your other statements provide shades of other meanings. That unless "you" are SigmaNunki a PHD in Physics, "you" will never understand science and don't even bother to talk anything about it. Simply because "you" will never understand it *and* more importantly all of *your* conclusions will be wrong.
In fact, what I bring to you is not theology, nor simple worship of dieties. I want to let you know that in the field of anthropology and sociology, people consider these ideas of science and religion as a way to explain their world around them. No one is attacking that you don't know a lepton from a quark. No one is attacking that you don't understand fundamental science or research.
Yet you lash out that they are completely wrong within their field of study. hmmmm...
No, you never directly made the statement that religious people are non-intellects - but your logic, which requires that all scientists are intellegent somehow dictates that scientists can not be religious people too since religious people are capable of non-intelligent thought and scientists are intelligent; and somehow if you are a non-scientist, then you will never achieve the type of intellectual thought that a trained scientist such as yourself is capable of - in fact, don't bother trying. I think if you tie all of this together with the rest of your smug arrogance tone, then it's fairly perfectly clear that you regard the rest of the populace with far less than distaste.
You make one set of statements but your attitude and your words are far different.
I am a scientist as well, and my understanding and belief is that science as a field and as a concept serves to define and explain the world around us. That in itself serves as a form of religion - not one that you have to wear robes, burn incense, and worship, but one that bridges humanity and the reality.
I am sorry if that contradicts with your scientific fact that all scientist understands the "fact" that science is not a religion. But that's not how it works. I don't know of any provable scientific "fact" that science is not a religion.
Here's what I want to leave you with: In the field of anthropology and many other fields, as I have briefly outlined here and in other posts, science is considered a form of religion. It's fine that you yourself do not believe this or cannot understand this. But since I don't know of any Laws of Physics that dictate this, please don't push this as coming from the field of Physics or that all scientists think and believe this, let alone a "fact". There are at least some of us who don't take this view.
And no, there is any conclusive scientific proof that I am who I am six months ago or from last year - non that I would be willing to provide here anyways. But if you could supply some sort of reasoning outside of "gut-feel", I might take it on faith as something to consider.
Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
[B]@Jasonzzz
I don't know which posts you're reading but you "observations" are just plain wrong.
I am no fundamentalist. I am involved in scientific endevours and can provide insight into that culture.
I can tell you that I, and every other scientist, know that science is not a religion. I don't understand why you can't accept this fact.
I never said that religious people are non-intellects. This will be the third time I make this statement. Religion requires faith not necessarily intellegence. This is an if statment. NOT an if and only if. It does NOT go both ways! People can be intellegent and be religious.
Science on the other hand, requires you to be intellegent to understand it. Intellegence is a pre-requisite. The non-intellegent cannot be scientists. The intellegence level of the person just dictates how fNOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Not reading the whole thing (read about half way though, yay me!) So about the whole freedom of speech thing 'quit your damn complaining' thing:
On thrusday after the election, I wore a shirt to school saying "I'm the child Bush left behind." Many people supported me, a lot didn't get it, a few didn't like it, and one teacher refused to call on me all period.
Yes, I am complaining. Yes, I am moining. Yes, I probably am a little anoining. A lot of Bush supporters told me it was useless because its all over. So that means we should all just shut up, huh? We need to all follow blindly because the majority voted for Bush and-by god-the majority is always right! I think it was Mark Twian who said "Whenever I find myself standing on the side of the majority its time to take a step back and re-think my standing."
Now, the world is not coming to an end. An uncomfortable middle perhaps but not an end. I'm not moving to Canada. (Who in their right mind wants to live in Canada? Move to Australia I say, and put a whole ocean between yourself and Bush!) This is not apocolipse now. But I am not giving up my right to freedom of speach just because your tired of hearing about it. This is America, just as I have a freedom to talk untill I'm blue in the face about whatever I want, you have the freedom to not listen.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
@Jasonzzz
You know what. I read the first 2 paragraphes of your post and came to the conclusion that I believe that you aren't really reading my posts. You are only interpreting them and thus impressing you version of what I said instead of read what I said. This is the last post that I will reply to unless you become civilized enough to actually read my posts.
You make the assumption that I don't have a PhD when all I have done is state that someone else that is clearly "in the know" has told me I think that way. Do I have one? No. Does anyone without years of study? No. I am still studying. Does this mean that I am not capable of it (like you imply)? No.
And anthropology and sociology are *NOT* science. They are social science. There is a large difference there.
I never lashed out. I defended my postition. If you would actually read my posts then you would realize this.
You are the one that has interpreted that my statements have stated that scientists cannot be religious. I'll state it again for this one. It is not an if and only if. It is an if, period. It does not go both ways. Go back and read, I mean actually read my statments and read what they say. Don't push onto what you think they imply but read what they say. They were very carefully constructed to avoid these situations for those that actually read. To put it clearly, scientists can be religious, I never said that they couldn't be.
And you are the one that has read "smugness" in my posts. To be certain it was not there by my hand, you put it there yourself. I'll let those that are open-minded enough to read what is there and not push there own thoughts on them to read my posts and at least to them, I will be validated.
Science doesn't explain the world around us. I explains how it works. Science never says where it comes from, that is religion. There is no creation myth in science (no Big Bang isn't one, that is another argument though).
You still haven't told me what field you are in. This leads me to beleive that you aren't really who you say you are.
I can understand how someone might come to the misguided conclusion that science is a religion, but that doesn't make it right or correct.
Basically, science answers the questions of how the world works. Religion answers the questions why. These are mutually exclusive questions and answers and the division between them is a fuzzy mess. But that is only because of peoples perceptions, not reality. To "someone in the know" these lines are quite clear.
Lastly,
Question: Why do people die?
Religion: It is the way God intended or [insert other religious answer here]
Science: In what way of dying are you speaking of? The answer will most certainly be biological. Note: Biology isn't religion, far from it in fact.
----
"Canada being mad at you is like Mr. Rogers throwing a brick through your window." -Jon Stewart, The Daily Show
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Sigmanuki,
Yes, I do believe it's true about those commutative properties. Only I read the article something like 5 or more years ago and didn't keep it. Sigh. It was all very interesting. And I tried to look it up on the internet, but really, it seems like anything obscure that's more than 1 year old is lost in the river's vast flow.
My observation about the science/religion debate is that the frustration stems from having sociological explanations of what science does and how it functions made by non-scientists who don't actually know the process. It's like having someone explain to an auto mechanic how an IC engine works by starting out 'first you turn the key, and then it makes a noise ...'
I agree. The biggest difference between science and religion is that science IS the process of constant 'testing to destruction'. Every theory is repeatedly tested .... and tested, and tested some more. And it is revised or replaced if it fails any test. That process IS science.
As for religion, in its very process it is antithetical to science. It's not so much that it requires belief even in the face of lack of evidence, it's that it requires belief in the face of contradiction. God is good. God is all powerful. But God kills little children in horrible ways. And trying to explain that away gets even knottier. You mean God would make little babies suffer to teach bad people a lesson? Or, God is all powerful, just not in control? And so on.
From Slate, a more critical view of religion, and ignorance (from a much longer article http://slate.msn.com/id/2109218/
I know of a petrologist who would look down a microscope and describe rocks as being from a formation so many million years old, then go to church with complete faith in the teachings that the world was only a few thousand years old. I guess you CAN be both religious and scientific, but if you can manage both where they completely contradict each other - that's not normal.
OpenBSD !!! The people I know who know about these things say - way cool.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME