|
Post by cupcakes on Jan 31, 2018 0:17:02 GMT
tpfkar After his extended rant against Muhammad and then myself, Cody appears to have conveniently forgotten that thing about 'love the sinner not the sin', lol I have no respect for pedophiles like your Muhammad, nor sad little creeps who make excuses for them like you. He's no better and no worse than your Wez and His Golden Youth. And he's not even a "god". Does a banana have a brain and organs too? Yet it shares roughly the same % of DNA to us as a Fruit Fly. The evidence discredits itself.
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Jan 31, 2018 5:09:37 GMT
At this point you're pretty much ignoring the bulk of my points, so I don't know if there's a point to responding, but we'll see. [assorted and sundry things] You still refuse to accept the truth that it is faith. No, I already acquiesced to calling me believing scientific consensuses "faith;" what you haven't demonstrated is where I have too much faith. It's the "too much" I'm objecting to. "Too much" implies my faith isn't warranted, that science is wrong and I'm wrong for believing it. You haven't given any examples of this. Your best try was saying we can't attribute the decline in cancer death rates to modern medicine, but that neither shows that medical science isn't responsible, nor that people have all that much faith in medicine. Everyone I know who has/had medical problems has very little faith in medicine, despite using it. If many people could do it, that is. Obviously many people cannot. I audited a professor (attended his class without being a student) who believed that "many people" could preform extraordinary things by combining their wills. No, even if only one person could do it it would be ridiculously easy to prove as long as that person was willing to submit to scientific experiments. Science has studied all kinds of rare abilities. That wasn't advice.
One reason many internet sources are not allowed on college papers is that they have not met standards of truth. The website is not the reference; the website contains the references. I take it you're not going to dispute any of their claims/references? Yes, but the "emergence" must be "statistically significant." In your surveys two percent is not. Where are you getting two percent from?
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Jan 31, 2018 10:03:20 GMT
1) No, I already acquiesced to calling me believing scientific consensuses "faith;" what you haven't demonstrated is where I have too much faith. It's the "too much" I'm objecting to. "Too much" implies my faith isn't warranted, that science is wrong and I'm wrong for believing it. You haven't given any examples of this. Your best try was saying we can't attribute the decline in cancer death rates to modern medicine, but that neither shows that medical science isn't responsible, nor that people have all that much faith in medicine. Everyone I know who has/had medical problems has very little faith in medicine, despite using it. 2) Where are you getting two percent from? 1) One of the most glaring problems in the United States today is that health care costs are insanely high. The very difficult to explain victory of Donald Trump can be interpreted as an attempt to discipline the medical profession. It isn't working as well as hoped quite yet. Why not yet? The price is too high because people still believe it is worth the price. 2) In order to be significant a factor needs to rise above the combined effects of all the other factors.
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Jan 31, 2018 10:06:14 GMT
Oh look! It's another member of the amateurs' club! Are you paid to perform scientific experiments or write scientific papers? Are you paid to write anything?
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jan 31, 2018 11:48:50 GMT
After his extended rant against Muhammad and then myself, Cody appears to have conveniently forgotten that thing about 'love the sinner not the sin', lol I have no respect for pedophiles like your Muhammad, nor sad little creeps who make excuses for them like you. QED then LOL
|
|
|
Post by faustus5 on Jan 31, 2018 11:51:05 GMT
Once again firmly establishing yourself as scientifically illiterate beyond belief. Oh look! It's another member of the amateurs' club! I'm not the one making a fool of himself in a public space saying blatantly false bullshit. You are so fundamentally stupid and uneducated that you have no idea how completely out of touch with reality you actually are. And you are so arrogant on top of it that you'll never have enough self consciousness to worry enough about being factually incorrect to actually do the homework required to really find out. Pathetic.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jan 31, 2018 11:51:59 GMT
Are you paid to perform scientific experiments or write scientific papers? Are you paid to write anything? I see Arlon is doing his not-answering-direct-questions thang again lol
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jan 31, 2018 11:58:58 GMT
Einsteinian physics has been checked, and proven, not least through mathematics and observation, by a host of researchers...... What we have done is train the amateurs to mindlessly repeat that so that we can quickly identify them as amateurs. Thank you for identifying yourself. Proving relativity involves speeds and energies well beyond practical resources. Repeating what is widely known and accepted within science is not amateurish, Arlon. Arguing with dictionaries and then claiming victory, though, is probably something else entirely.
I note that you have not suggested anything to replace Einsteinian physics as suggested. Is that a problem?
|
|
|
Post by Cody™ on Jan 31, 2018 12:11:06 GMT
I have no respect for pedophiles like your Muhammad, nor sad little creeps who make excuses for them like you. QED then LOL
Do you condemn Muhammad's marriage to 6 year old Aisha? Yes or no, FilmFlan?
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jan 31, 2018 12:23:19 GMT
Do you condemn Muhammad's marriage to 6 year old Aisha? Yes or no, FilmFlan? Yes I would condemn any child marriage, if it actually happens, although the caveat always remains in judging ancient people by modern standards. We saw, though, that the jury is out on whether this bride was actually as young as you claim, for various reasons - while we both agree that under-age marriage was common in biblical times, and, as quoted, Hebrew law had some equally questionable things to say about it. But even if we accept your version of events this does not mean that an entire religion is therefore necessarily corrupt or evil, which you imply. That's Islamophobic talk. I hope this helps.
Do you condemn your God's instruction, on occasion in the Bible. that women should be raped, young and old, as an act of revenge or war? Yes or no?
|
|
|
Post by Cody™ on Jan 31, 2018 12:30:10 GMT
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jan 31, 2018 12:34:55 GMT
A personal insult is still not an answer or an argument. It may also be added that, in connection to the previous exchange, that your god was known to speak to, or through, unworthy vessels - such as Balaam etc - too.
That wasn't a yes or no, Cody.
** like in some of modern-day America, it seems.
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Jan 31, 2018 15:08:30 GMT
1) No, I already acquiesced to calling me believing scientific consensuses "faith;" what you haven't demonstrated is where I have too much faith. It's the "too much" I'm objecting to. "Too much" implies my faith isn't warranted, that science is wrong and I'm wrong for believing it. You haven't given any examples of this. Your best try was saying we can't attribute the decline in cancer death rates to modern medicine, but that neither shows that medical science isn't responsible, nor that people have all that much faith in medicine. Everyone I know who has/had medical problems has very little faith in medicine, despite using it. 2) Where are you getting two percent from? 1) One of the most glaring problems in the United States today is that health care costs are insanely high. The very difficult to explain victory of Donald Trump can be interpreted as an attempt to discipline the medical profession. It isn't working as well as hoped quite yet. Why not yet? The price is too high because people still believe it is worth the price. 2) In order to be significant a factor needs to rise above the combined effects of all the other factors. 1. Yes, I agree health care costs are outrageous and many things need to be done to fix the problem; but you're still ignoring my question about my having "too much" faith in science. You thinking health care costs aren't worth it isn't evidence that I (or anyone) has too much faith in science; it's just as much evidence that they have no faith in anything else. Answer this one question with honesty and integrity, Arlon: if you happen to get cancer, are you going to seek treatment from medical professionals? How about if you have a heart attack: what would you do? 2. You haven't shown those other factors are a factor at all. You also seem to be pretending as if clinical trials aren't a thing, as if doctors randomly decided to start dosing people with radiation for shits and giggles even though there wasn't any evidence it did anything. You're the one suggesting that all or at least some medical treatments are no better than witch doctors; I'd say the burden is on you to prove that.
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Jan 31, 2018 17:32:21 GMT
Are you paid to perform scientific experiments or write scientific papers? Are you paid to write anything? Missing the point as usual, you just called someone out for being an amateur scientist, but, given you are not paid to indulge in any science, you also are an amateur scientist. And yes I get paid to write things.
|
|
|
Post by Larcen26 on Jan 31, 2018 22:27:30 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Cody™ on Jan 31, 2018 23:04:02 GMT
Did you even go over what you linked? Here it is. Deut 21:10-14 "When you go out to war against your enemies, and the Lord your God hands them over to you and you take them captive, suppose you see among the captives a beautiful woman whom you desire and want to marry, and so you bring her home to your house: she shall shave her head, pare her nails, discard her captive’s garb, and shall remain in your house for a full month, mourning for her father and mother; after that you may go in to her and be her husband, and she shall be your wife. But if you are not satisfied with her, you shall let her go free and not sell her for money. You must not treat her as a slave, since you have dishonoured her." First off where in the passage does it mention or even imply rape? Second of all the only way an Israelite could have sexual intercouse with a female captive is if he married her.
|
|
|
Post by Larcen26 on Feb 1, 2018 13:49:24 GMT
Did you even go over what you linked? Here it is. Deut 21:10-14 "When you go out to war against your enemies, and the Lord your God hands them over to you and you take them captive, suppose you see among the captives a beautiful woman whom you desire and want to marry, and so you bring her home to your house: she shall shave her head, pare her nails, discard her captive’s garb, and shall remain in your house for a full month, mourning for her father and mother; after that you may go in to her and be her husband, and she shall be your wife. But if you are not satisfied with her, you shall let her go free and not sell her for money. You must not treat her as a slave, since you have dishonoured her." First off where in the passage does it mention or even imply rape? Second of all the only way an Israelite could have sexual intercourse with a female captive is if he married her. ....... Seriously?
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Feb 1, 2018 14:25:08 GMT
Did you even go over what you linked? Here it is. Deut 21:10-14 "When you go out to war against your enemies, and the Lord your God hands them over to you and you take them captive, suppose you see among the captives a beautiful woman whom you desire and want to marry, and so you bring her home to your house: she shall shave her head, pare her nails, discard her captive’s garb, and shall remain in your house for a full month, mourning for her father and mother; after that you may go in to her and be her husband, and she shall be your wife. But if you are not satisfied with her, you shall let her go free and not sell her for money. You must not treat her as a slave, since you have dishonoured her." First off where in the passage does it mention or even imply rape? Second of all the only way an Israelite could have sexual intercourse with a female captive is if he married her. ....... Seriously? Then there is Judges 5:30 "They must be dividing the spoils they took: there must be a damsel or two for each man .." or Zech 14 1:2 "Lo, a day shall come for the Lord when the spoils shall be divided in your midst. And I will gather all the nations against Jerusalem for battle: the city shall be taken, houses plundered, women ravished"? Or Num 31 7-18: "Only the young girls who are virgins may live; you may keep them for yourselves." or Judges 21 10-24 , and so on.
Whether demanded by your god or by devout followers inspired by Him, it all reads a bit rapey to me, Cody.
|
|
|
Post by Cody™ on Feb 1, 2018 15:35:23 GMT
Then there is Judges 5:30 "They must be dividing the spoils they took: there must be a damsel or two for each man .." or Zech 14 1:2 "Lo, a day shall come for the Lord when the spoils shall be divided in your midst. And I will gather all the nations against Jerusalem for battle: the city shall be taken, houses plundered, women ravished"? Or Num 31 7-18: "Only the young girls who are virgins may live; you may keep them for yourselves." or Judges 21 10-24 , and so on.
Whether demanded by your god or by devout followers inspired by Him, it all reads a bit rapey to me, Cody.
It reads that way to people like because that's what you want to read into it to support your smear campaign. You should more concerned about your prophet molesting little Aisha and stop quoting passages you don't know the first thing about, Mr 'Anybody who critiques Islam is a nasty Islamophobe'.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Feb 1, 2018 15:41:02 GMT
Then there is Judges 5:30 "They must be dividing the spoils they took: there must be a damsel or two for each man .." or Zech 14 1:2 "Lo, a day shall come for the Lord when the spoils shall be divided in your midst. And I will gather all the nations against Jerusalem for battle: the city shall be taken, houses plundered, women ravished"? Or Num 31 7-18: "Only the young girls who are virgins may live; you may keep them for yourselves." or Judges 21 10-24 , and so on.
Whether demanded by your god or by devout followers inspired by Him, it all reads a bit rapey to me, Cody.
It reads that way to people like because that's what you want to read into it to support your smear campaign. You should more concerned about your prophet molesting little Aisha and stop quoting passages you don't know the first thing about, Mr 'Anybody who critiques Islam is a nasty Islamophobe'. How else can such passages as "women ravished" or 'keep the virgins for yourselves' or "dividing the spoils... there must be a damsel or two for each man" be read, Cody?
And, please quote where I have said "anybody who critiques Islam is a nasty Islamophobe" . After my helpfully listing two or three definitions of the word lately it seems you still think a strawman is an argument lol
|
|