Originally posted by BadzMaro:Those are just examples on the gravity, 1+1 = 2 all that stuff are just examples. If Mr Sean gets it, good for him. You , reservist, deadstroke, whoever that dont get it, u guys are just stupid. There is nothing more i can say. I am serious. Really.. because, u are just playing with my examples. What i sateted is very clear.
What riddles ? It is a truth that there are stupid people. Yes No ? Who are they, i dont know. The evidence suggest that u are one of the stupid people. So, I assume u could be one of them. Very likey true, but may not be the truth. U see now ? Am i talking in riddles ?
Yes, for ur nouns and adjectives with sex and sexy , dark and darkness. Sure, i got nothing against that. So.. whats the problem ? See, once again you are having problems thinking beyond the word. We have philosophers and scholars, trying to theorerize what is truth is. And all u can say is that its a word. Do u know how limited your imagination is ? Please once again refer to WIKI ARTICLE - TRUTH and see what it means, and hopefully u will be able to understand.
What do u mean that article is not relevant ? It is very relevant. Because it shows that, truth can have alot of meanings. We have theories hypothesizing the meaning of truth.
Refer to the article, 1 + 1 = 2 is a mathematical truth. I got no problem with that.AGAIN. Are u stuipid ? Please refer to posts. 1Ovum + 1Sperm = 1 Fertilised Egg. yes no ? That is reality but does not conform to mathematical truth. Correct ? Can your mind handle this ?
What Theologians are looking for is the TRUTH regarding the existence of God, they work in a different discipline than science. While science is based on logical deductions of the physical world, theologians on the other hand, deal mainly with the matter of the faith. Well, at times,science and theology do intersect, but they are still very different discipline. There are two totally different thing. Like total cure from sickness and there are no scientific explaination to it. They have been documented evidence. So its still on going. THEY ARE TWO DIFFERENT DISCIPLINE.
Yes, sometimes science is able to support certain beliefs in theology and sometimes it doesnt. Thats how it is. Science doesnt discriminate. Its what it is, on whatever information they can garner.
Don't say so much to these pewny freaks lah. Anything that proves the Bible's accuracy is false, anything that contradicts the bible is true to them. In other words, you christians are wrong in everyway. And they spoke with so much ego as though evolution had evidence to BACK UP ITS OWN CLAIMS. HAH! Even the naturalists and scientists don't even dare to say in those public universities and schools that evolution is PROVEN(they only have PROOF, NOT EVIDENCE, to back up their theories), so i am pretty amazed that the people here who barely even have a uni certificate or a PHd can say so. Wow. But I am not a creationist either anyway, I don't know who to choose yet :P
And surprisingly, Darwin mentioned God is the creator an amazing 7 times in his book Origin Of The Species
Originally posted by Larryteo:Don't say so much to these pewny freaks lah. Anything that proves the Bible's accuracy is false, anything that contradicts the bible is true to them. In other words, you christians are wrong in everyway. And they spoke with so much ego as though evolution had evidence to BACK UP ITS OWN CLAIMS. HAH! Even the naturalists and scientists don't even dare to say in those public universities and schools that evolution is PROVEN(they only have PROOF, NOT EVIDENCE, to back up their theories), so i am pretty amazed that the people here who barely even have a uni certificate or a PHd can say so. Wow. But I am not a creationist either anyway, I don't know who to choose yet :P
What in the world is the difference between proof and evidence? You're just playing with words here.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_publi.htm
95% of US scientists seemed to be believe in evolution, where exactly do you pull the number that it's not proven?
Ah, you feel that a university degree or PHD is neccessary to prove evolution but you don't need one to say evolution is not true?
Originally posted by Stevenson101:
What in the world is the difference between proof and evidence? You're just playing with words here.http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_publi.htm
95% of US scientists seemed to be believe in evolution, where exactly do you pull the number that it's not proven?
Ah, you feel that a university degree or PHD is neccessary to prove evolution but you don't need one to say evolution is not true?
You need to have better qualifications if you want to have a say in the grand scheme and prove things true or false. And in what way am I playing with words? Proof is not concrete, Evidence is. Evidence would be fossile records, proof would be those experiments made only to back up theories. Am I right, Mr Hybrid?
Originally posted by Larryteo:Don't say so much to these pewny freaks lah. Anything that proves the Bible's accuracy is false, anything that contradicts the bible is true to them. In other words, you christians are wrong in everyway. And they spoke with so much ego as though evolution had evidence to BACK UP ITS OWN CLAIMS. HAH! Even the naturalists and scientists don't even dare to say in those public universities and schools that evolution is PROVEN(they only have PROOF, NOT EVIDENCE, to back up their theories), so i am pretty amazed that the people here who barely even have a uni certificate or a PHd can say so. Wow. But I am not a creationist either anyway, I don't know who to choose yet :P
On the other hand the chrisitians are doing the same. Anything that proves the bible they will believe, any thing against they regard as rubbish. That said, there is hardly any evidence that the bible is the "word of god". While evolution is not proven, there remains strong evidence to prove it. The same cannot be said of the bible.
"Science has proof without any certainty. Creationists have certainty without any proof."
Ashley Montague
Originally posted by dadeadman1337:On the other hand the chrisitians are doing the same. Anything that proves the bible they will believe, any thing against they regard as rubbish. That said, there is hardly any evidence that the bible is the "word of god". While evolution is not proven, there remains strong evidence to prove it. The same cannot be said of the bible.
"Science has proof without any certainty. Creationists have certainty without any proof."
Ashley Montague
Then the both of you are on par then.
Creationism is stupid in the sense it's theories are from the bible literally,unproven, and childish while the theory of evolution is stupid in the sense that life can come from non-life and the whole theory relies on the backs of Earth's estimated age.
Originally posted by Larryteo:Then the both of you are on par then.
I don't think anyone can be completely impartial. However the fact remains that while evolution remains a theory, it is by far strongly supported with evidence, while creationism has none whatsoever, only a claim that since it cannot be explained (ignoring evolution), it must be creation
Originally posted by Larryteo:Creationism is stupid in the sense it's theories are from the bible literally,unproven, and childish while the theory of evolution is stupid in the sense that life can come from non-life and the whole theory relies on the backs of Earth's estimated age.
Maybe we should wait and see if any new theories arise
Originally posted by Larryteo:Don't say so much to these pewny freaks lah. Anything that proves the Bible's accuracy is false, anything that contradicts the bible is true to them. In other words, you christians are wrong in everyway. And they spoke with so much ego as though evolution had evidence to BACK UP ITS OWN CLAIMS. HAH! Even the naturalists and scientists don't even dare to say in those public universities and schools that evolution is PROVEN(they only have PROOF, NOT EVIDENCE, to back up their theories), so i am pretty amazed that the people here who barely even have a uni certificate or a PHd can say so. Wow. But I am not a creationist either anyway, I don't know who to choose yet :P
So just keep an open mind in the possibilities lo.
Originally posted by BadzMaro:So just keep an open mind in the possibilities lo.
I have no problems with adopting a wait and see attitude.To me it has little bearing on everyday life and the answer means little to the running of society.
But the issue is that one side is willing to wait for more evidence while the other that already decided what the Truth is, wants the laws of society to suit their religious belief which has even less concrete evidence to stand on.
Abortion and stem cell research are examples and the recent AWARE affair is another.
The debate on homosexuality are a whole new different can of worms.
It's disconcerting to see such groups growing with more radical beliefs and recruiting so much youths - the leaders of the future into their churches.
Relying on faith is all fine and good but it's something extremely dangerous when your head are filled with the wrong ideas
Originally posted by dadeadman1337:I don't think anyone can be completely impartial. However the fact remains that while evolution remains a theory, it is by far strongly supported with evidence, while creationism has none whatsoever, only a claim that since it cannot be explained (ignoring evolution), it must be creation
What If I am living in fragments of my own imagination, and none of you here actually exists, which explains it all? D:
Originally posted by Stevenson101:I have no problems with adopting a wait and see attitude.To me it has little bearing on everyday life and the answer means little to the running of society.
But the issue is that one side is willing to wait for more evidence while the other that already decided what the Truth is, wants the laws of society to suit their religious belief which has even less concrete evidence to stand on.
Abortion and stem cell research are examples and the recent AWARE affair is another.
It's disconcerting to see such groups growing with more radical beliefs and recruiting so much youths - the leaders of the future into their churches.
Relying on faith is all fine and good but it's something extremely dangerous when your head are filled with the wrong ideas
Agreed.
However, for stem cell research , its still a long way to discuss the ethical issues that may arise in the future. Like the potential divide of the human race.
Like i am more liberal , that why i accept science and my faith, but there are those that oppose my ideas. So its an on going battle within the churches itself, i actually dont blame them for determining the Truth upon themselves, they have thier reasons regarding their faith. But God gave us a brain, so hopefully, there will be leaders within who are strong in thier faith, n also have a brain.
Originally posted by Larryteo:What If I am living in fragments of my own imagination, and none of you here actually exists, which explains it all? D:
Listen to me and do as i tell you,
Proceed to your window.
Stand upon the railing.
Feel the wind... and embrace the earth...
To truly feel alive, one must feel such emotions.
Now JUMP...
You will realise, micro seconds before you kiss the earth, and u will know whether u are living in fragments of your own imaginations or not. But i doubt u will be in any position to tell any of us.
Originally posted by BadzMaro:Listen to me and do as i tell you,
Proceed to your window.
Stand upon the railing.
Feel the wind... and embrace the earth...
To truly feel alive, one must feel such emotions.
Now JUMP...
You will realise, micro seconds before you kiss the earth, and u will know whether u are living in fragments of your own imaginations or not. But i doubt u will be in any position to tell any of us.
Jump from a typical HDB flat from the second story sure can.
Originally posted by Larryteo:What If I am living in fragments of my own imagination, and none of you here actually exists, which explains it all? D:
That is the idealism philosophy if im not wrong.
Originally posted by dadeadman1337:That is the idealism philosophy if im not wrong.
This type of philosophy is IMO total crap, I don't see that it rains when I want it to rain. LOL. If that were so Singapore could just snow if i put in willpower.
Originally posted by Larryteo:Jump from a typical HDB flat from the second story sure can.
crap.. i thought u will be living in higher floors..
THEN..
u shall proceed to the top floor...
Those are just examples on the gravity, 1+1 = 2 all that stuff are just examples. If Mr Sean gets it, good for him. You , reservist, deadstroke, whoever that dont get it, u guys are just stupid. There is nothing more i can say. I am serious. Really.. because, u are just playing with my examples. What i sateted is very clear.
Despite repeated calls from me saying tat Mr Sean did not get wat u had said, u just keep using him as an example. And tat is basically all u r talking about now. Tat is really just rubbish and trying to delude people
Yes, for ur nouns and adjectives with sex and sexy , dark and darkness. Sure, i got nothing against that. So.. whats the problem ? See, once again you are having problems thinking beyond the word. We have philosophers and scholars, trying to theorerize what is truth is. And all u can say is that its a word. Do u know how limited your imagination is ? Please once again refer to WIKI ARTICLE - TRUTH and see what it means, and hopefully u will be able to understand.
Then again the word truth is derived from true, and all the article stated doesn't say tat the rubbish conclusion of the true is not the truth which u repeated, and write with error yourself.
Refer to the article, 1 + 1 = 2 is a mathematical truth. I got no problem with that.AGAIN. Are u stuipid ? Please refer to posts. 1Ovum + 1Sperm = 1 Fertilised Egg. yes no ? That is reality but does not conform to mathematical truth. Correct ? Can your mind handle this ?
Again u have made another stupid statement. The answer of 2 depends on wat u r talking about. If u r talking about how many things r there, 1 thing (egg) + 1 thing (sperm) = 2 things (egg and sperm). If u talk about ovum, then there is only 1 ovum. If u talk about sperm, in your example there is only one sperm. U do not add different things together and play with language again. And the timing u ask is ob course important and not 9 months later and how many cells it become. Do u even understand basic maths ? When u add things up, u need to specify the classification ?
What Theologians are looking for is the TRUTH regarding the existence of God, they work in a different discipline than science. While science is based on logical deductions of the physical world, theologians on the other hand, deal mainly with the matter of the faith. Well, at times,science and theology do intersect, but they are still very different discipline. There are two totally different thing. Like total cure from sickness and there are no scientific explaination to it. They have been documented evidence. So its still on going. THEY ARE TWO DIFFERENT DISCIPLINE.
Why thelogian look for the truth ? God, if they exist, is the truth. Theologist just try to answer wat happen and wat should be done by men. They just answer WAT. They did not look for the truth. Is not even in their field. Only scientist can look for truth.
Tis is exactly the same answer u give for science. Lets see how u play with your double standard
nything that proves the Bible's accuracy is false, anything that contradicts the bible is true to them. In other words, you christians are wrong in everyway. And they spoke with so much ego as though evolution had evidence to BACK UP ITS OWN CLAIMS. HAH! Even the naturalists and scientists don't even dare to say in those public universities and schools that evolution is PROVEN
The problem with evolution is because christians thought if evolution is true, then the bible is wrong in certain sections. And tat is why tis thread talks about evolution and why surprisingly christians can accept controversial theory but die die refuse to believe in evolution even thought there r many evidences for evolution.
U do not believe there is evidence ? Why don't u read the following
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_common_descent
The wide range of evidence of common descent of living things strongly indicates the occurrence of evolution and provides a wealth of information on the natural processes by which the variety of life on Earth developed.
They wrote the following categories
hah !
Originally posted by stupidissmart:Despite repeated calls from me saying tat Mr Sean did not get wat u had said, u just keep using him as an example. And tat is basically all u r talking about now. Tat is really just rubbish and trying to delude people
Then again the word truth is derived from true, and all the article stated doesn't say tat the rubbish conclusion of the true is not the truth which u repeated, and write with error yourself.
Again u have made another stupid statement. The answer of 2 depends on wat u r talking about. If u r talking about how many things r there, 1 thing (egg) + 1 thing (sperm) = 2 things (egg and sperm). If u talk about ovum, then there is only 1 ovum. If u talk about sperm, in your example there is only one sperm. U do not add different things together and play with language again. And the timing u ask is ob course important and not 9 months later and how many cells it become. Do u even understand basic maths ? When u add things up, u need to specify the classification ?
Why thelogian look for the truth ? God, if they exist, is the truth. Theologist just try to answer wat happen and wat should be done by men. They just answer WAT. They did not look for the truth. Is not even in their field. Only scientist can look for truth.
Tis is exactly the same answer u give for science. Lets see how u play with your double standard
Good, i see u have corrected your mistake of Mr Sean. That wasnt so hard now was it.
Its not rubbish trying to delude people. You are just stupid. All u gotta admit, is that u misunderstood , and stop being so stupid. I am serious. What Mr Sean said is the basic, the simple concept. The most basic of what i am trying to convey.
No, once again u misunderstood me. I am not saying anything, the word TRUTH HAS A LOT OF MEANINGS. MANY DONT EVEN KNOW WHAT IT MEANS. AND YOU ARE HERE TRYING TO LIMIT TRUTH TO A WORD. These people are trying to define the definition of truth. You are the one limiting it. I am jsut showing u the article, why TRUTH the word is not as limited as u THINK it is. If u have a problem understanding it, u are just too stupid. There is no other explaination.
"Again u have made another stupid statement. The answer of 2 depends on wat u r talking about. If u r talking about how many things r there, 1 thing (egg) + 1 thing (sperm) = 2 things (egg and sperm). If u talk about ovum, then there is only 1 ovum. If u talk about sperm, in your example there is only one sperm. U do not add different things together and play with language again. And the timing u ask is ob course important and not 9 months later and how many cells it become. Do u even understand basic maths ? When u add things up, u need to specify the classification ?"
BRAVO ! U GOT IT ! U finally understand. U notice u are often answering ur own questions ? How many times have i said.. BRAVO to u.. u understand, because u explained it to yourself, and suddenly, u seem to become stupid again. I dont understand. See now do u understand WHY 1 + 1 does not equal 2 under the circumstances ! 1 + 1 = 2 is a mathematical truth. U dont not need classification, because it is a number.Now else, 1 Ovum also equal the Quantity 1, and 1 Sperm also equals the quantity 1 , and 1 fertilised eqq also equals the quantity 1. This proves that , 1 + 1 = 1 fertilised egg an is a proof of actual reality. And its the truth under the circumstances.
No problem, u want me to explain to you, here goes, i believe Theologians are searching for the truth regarding the existence of God. U misunderstand, i said, the TRUTH of the EXISTENCE of GOD. NOT the TRUTH of GOD. Please REAAAAD CAREFULLY AND UNDERSTAND> Or u will just look more stupid.
Once again i believe Science is to unravel the mysteries of the universe, the Why and the HOW and the WHAT sometimes.
So, please READ CAREFULLY, before nitpicking, or i will just regurgitate the same thing, for ur feeble mind to comprehend such simple logic.
What Mr Sean said is the basic, the simple concept. The most basic of what i am trying to convey
nobody has any problem with wat Mr Sean said. Everybody just has a problem with the things u said
No, once again u misunderstood me. I am not saying anything, the word TRUTH HAS A LOT OF MEANINGS. MANY DONT EVEN KNOW WHAT IT MEANS. AND YOU ARE HERE TRYING TO LIMIT TRUTH TO A WORD. T
Isn't it u who says tat truth=actual existence ? The context of truth which u r using is simply the derivative of the word true. U define it as actual existence repeatedly. U say tat science cannot determine truth, they only explain WHy and HOW. And all those explanation or discovering gravity etc r all not truth. Even discovering gravity, or the existence of gravity is not truth to u. Look at the bolded line which u said and the answer u gave
Isn't discovering gravity and giving values again the search for truth ? Isn't discovering how the earth comes about or how life comes about a search for truth ? Isn't discovering how land eroded, how trees are thicker in the equator or why there r seasons all the search for truth ? Science searches for truth and discer wat is true or false. NO
Then on the theologist side, u say they r finding the truth of existence of god and tat is truth. Isn't tat already double standard ?
WHY 1 + 1 does not equal 2 under the circumstances ! 1 + 1 = 2 is a mathematical truth. U dont not need classification, because it is a number.Now else, 1 Ovum also equal the Quantity 1, and 1 Sperm also equals the quantity 1 , and 1 fertilised eqq also equals the quantity 1. This proves that , 1 + 1 = 1 fertilised egg an is a proof of actual reality. And its the truth under the circumstances.
Tis is another rubbish statement made by u. When we use the equation 1+1=2, we have to use in the right context, which luckily most people know except u. U use it in the wrong context, adding different things of different context together and then proclaim 1+1=2 is not the truth. Why don't u try to be a kid and say 1+1 = wang (king in chinese) ? If u wanna use the equation 1+1=2, use it in the right context. Add things tat are in the same context, countable and obviously discounting the chemical effects etc since the objective is to find out the total number of a certain item. The one taught by primary schools.
Once again i believe Science is to unravel the mysteries of the universe, the Why and the HOW and the WHAT sometimes.
As said many times before, all these answers r truths. Unravelling the mysteries of the universe is finding the truth.
So, please READ CAREFULLY, before nitpicking, or i will just regurgitate the same thing, for ur feeble mind to comprehend such simple logic.
Actually u have been doing tat for the past ten posts. And tis is probably the last reply I will made on tis matter. U r now just trying to find ways and excuse to explain your nonsensical stand tat science cannot find any truth and only superstitious shamen (yes superstitious shamens could find the truth of the existence of god ) could.
Originally posted by stupidissmart:nobody has any problem with wat Mr Sean said. Everybody just has a problem with the things u said
Isn't it u who says tat truth=actual existence ? The context of truth which u r using is simply the derivative of the word true. U define it as actual existence repeatedly. U say tat science cannot determine truth, they only explain WHy and HOW. And all those explanation or discovering gravity etc r all not truth. Even discovering gravity, or the existence of gravity is not truth to u. Look at the bolded line which u said and the answer u gave
Then on the theologist side, u say they r finding the truth of existence of god and tat is truth. Isn't tat already double standard ?
Tis is another rubbish statement made by u. When we use the equation 1+1=2, we have to use in the right context, which luckily most people know except u. U use it in the wrong context, adding different things of different context together and then proclaim 1+1=2 is not the truth. Why don't u try to be a kid and say 1+1 = wang (king in chinese) ? If u wanna use the equation 1+1=2, use it in the right context. Add things tat are in the same context, countable and obviously discounting the chemical effects etc since the objective is to find out the total number of a certain item. The one taught by primary schools.
As said many times before, all these answers r truths. Unravelling the mysteries of the universe is finding the truth.
Actually u have been doing tat for the past ten posts. And tis is probably the last reply I will made on tis matter. U r now just trying to find ways and excuse to explain your nonsensical stand tat science cannot find any truth and only superstitious shamen (yes superstitious shamens could find the truth of the existence of god ) could.
First of all.. who is everybody. I dont see them coming out here denouncing my statements. ONLY YOU HAVE A PROBLEM. Mr Sean got it, so what the hell are u talking about ? If he gets it and u guys dont, wtf are u talking about ? If u guys get what he is talking about why cant u get mine ? I obviously got yours. Or am i just too deep for you guys to understand.
U know , humility is one thing, all u gotta say is admit u misunderstand. N just piece together those that u self=asnwered yourself and the ones i said BRAVO , add them up and u will hopefully understand.
Like i said, GRAVITY EXISTED, SCIENCE DESCRIBES THE PHENOMENAN AS GRAVITY. You are limited by the word GRAVITY. AGAIN u cant even go beyond it. Gravity HAS EXISTED BEFORE ANYONE CALLED IT GRAVITY. DO U UNDERSTAND ? U DO NOT NEED SCIENCE TO TELL U IT EXISTS.
What does it have to do with double standard ? I have already said i view Science n Theologian is TWO DIFFERENT FIELD. DO U EVEN KNOW THE MEANING OF DOUBLE STANDARD?
Wei, u again put words into peoples mouth. I SAID 1+1 =2 DOES NOT ALWAYS EQUAL 2 and not always the TRUTH even thought it is TRUE. IT IS A MATHEMATICAL TRUTH. I have already LONG told u . Why are continuingly being so ridiculously stupid ? I already said it depends on situation. U ARE THE ONE THAT KEEP INSISTING 1+1 = 2 no matter what. U urself answered under different context. I ONCE AGAIN said, YES , ITS a MATHEMATICAL TRUTH.
UNFORTUNATELY, U ARE NOT IN PRIMARY SCHOOL.. AND I AM NOT, WE THINK BEYOND THAT. ARE U REALLY STUPID ? If U ARE IN PRIMARY SCHOOL.. i accept that.. BUT U ARE NOT. OR ARE U ?
AGAIN, Unravelling the Mysteries of the universe IS NOT THE TRUTH, the TRUTH is alread THERE, it just NEEDS to EXPLAIN the phenomenon. The TRUTH.. is OUT THERE ALREADY. Once again this is MY personal belief.
IF u believe that Truth is confied to a word, in ur context, i am perfectly able to understand, but u are just too too STUPID to understand other theories and context. Not just too stupid.. u are EXTREMELY STUPID.
Oh.. HELLO.. when did i say , ONLY superstituous shamans can find truth ? i NEVER said anythinf CLOSE to that. Once again, u are misunderstanding and putting words into my mouth. Anyone who reads this post, carefully digesting my statement and analyse my respone, is as consistent as the different theories and meanings of truth.
Once again, i make my statement again and again, that Science's purpose is NOT to find the truth, its to discover WHY and HOW , and IN THE PROCESS of the WHY and HOW, they DISCOVER THE TRUTH, well.. GOOD FOR THEM. I did not say they CANT find the truth . You AGAIN.. are just too stupid. U just cant think OUTSIDE the box. U are trapped in your one meanig of truth from the word true from the dictionary, and stuck in primary school maths. NO wonder u cannot comprehend anything that is a level above primary school.
You are just extremely, stupid. There is just no word to describe.
Do u actually think by just saying u end ur statement here, and u say that i think Superstitious Shamans can find the truth ? AGAIN.. u are putting words into my mouth. PLS refer to the posts AGAIN.
Finally, its good that u do not bring this matter up again, you will just allow poeple to realise just exactly how stupid you are. There is just no words to describe. U are like rock.. there is no other explaination on how dense u are.
Save urself some face , and read properly before even replying, ever again.
Maybe let me just do a fraction of your summary of the truth. Which i have NO PROBLEM with. o.k
First of all, TRUTH, has a multitude of meanings. DICTIONARY.COM is trying to explain. Then u got the THEORIES of TRUTH by intellectuals, philosophers and the likes desperately trying to theorarize the meaning and definition of TRUTH.
And here is YOUR primary school level definition of truth.
U equate true = truth. Which i again i have no problem, but its ur insistence that YOUR theory is THE TRUTH is what astounds me. Your inability to see past the word itself, the verb the noun... of it. You think those intellectuals and philosophers did not know that ? They have already seen BEYOND that and are on a higher level of understanding, while u are still stuck at its infancy level of comprehension.
Next, we have a simple concept of 1 + 1 = 2. I said, its true, its a mathematical truth, hence i say, its true, but may not be the truth. I totally understand your simple understanding of the primary level of maths, but YOU however cant understand anything BEYOND that, ONLY after i TEDIOUSLY EXPLAINED to you then u understood and start blaming me on the different context n trying to riddle you. How hard is it to understand ? DO i have to POINT OUT.. n EXPLAIN... that WHY i said it is because it can be refered to in a different context ? Again, shows just how stupid u are to not even able to see beyond my simple language used. It is VERY obvious tat i meant other 1 + 1 = 2 context. Because, its the truth. 1 +1 doesnt always equal 2. Its a mathematical truth YES, but not the TRUTH in a sense, as an overall 1+ 1 = 2.
Then we come to the issue of Theologians and Scientists. I already said, TWO DIFFERENT FIELDS . How hard is it to understand thier different domain ? U say double standard.. OF COURSE> They are BOTH different FIELDS.
I have already explained to you the meaning of TRUTH in my context is ACTUAL EXISTENCE. And i APPLIED it consistently in all my statements, and u just dont understand. That again, just shows how stupid you are.
Your version of the truth is extremely easy to comprehend, its baby's level, using only simple linguistics direct from the dictionary to justify, i again have NOproblem with that. And u are here claiming i am not making sense when u are just too stupid to understand. You stupidity knows no end. I TOTALLY understand your concept, and i accept it. I UNDERSTAND.
Have some humility and accept that u have misunderstood. I admit my mistakes and accept your simple understanding of the truth, but u refuse to understand mine, and instead, force ur compliance upon me.
Please, read carefully. And open ur mind, think outside the box, instead of inside the box, stuck in ur dictionary defined meanig of the truth from the word true. Or else u are no different then those conservatice religious fanatics that worships the simple worded meaning in the dictionary like the bible. And please advance from primary school level maths to have better understanding, if u believe that Science is the search for TRUTH, SO BE IT. I ACCEPT YOUR SIMPLE MINDEDNESS.
I wonder who is the one being arrogant, stubborn and extremely stupid.
Originally posted by stupidissmart:The problem with evolution is because christians thought if evolution is true, then the bible is wrong in certain sections. And tat is why tis thread talks about evolution and why surprisingly christians can accept controversial theory but die die refuse to believe in evolution even thought there r many evidences for evolution.
U do not believe there is evidence ? Why don't u read the following
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_common_descent
The wide range of evidence of common descent of living things strongly indicates the occurrence of evolution and provides a wealth of information on the natural processes by which the variety of life on Earth developed.
They wrote the following categories
Evidence from genetics
Evidence from paleontology
Evidence from comparative anatomy
Evidence from geographical distribution
Evidence from comparative physiology and biochemistry
Evidence from antibiotic and pesticide resistance
Evidence from studies of complex iteration
Evidence from speciation
Evidence from interspecies fertility and modifications
hah !
Hah what hah? You copied it from Wiki and you called that evidence? Hello? I can also say creation is a fact and then put it on wiki, flooding it with ''evidence'' and ''proof'' just to show it to the public. And even IF evolution were a fact, it does not disproof a God. I don't believe in the Christian God, but if you believe that NOTHING can CREATE this VAST UNIVERSE itself, you are pretty stupid and dumb in the sense.
The story of Sir Isaac Newton and his atheist friend
Sir Newton had an accomplished artisan fashion for him a small scale model of our solar system which was to be put in a room in Newton's home when completed. The assignment was finished and installed on a large table. The workman had done a very commendable job, simulating not only the various sizes of the planets and their relative proximities, but also so constructing the model that everything rotated and orbited when a crank was turned. It was an interesting, even fascinating work, as you can imagine, particularly to anyone schooled in the sciences. Newton's atheist-scientist friend came by for a visit. Seeing the model he was naturally intrigued, and proceeded to examine it with undisguised admiration for the high quality of the workmanship. "My what an exquisite thing this is!" he exclaimed. "Who made it?" Paying little attention to him, Sir Isaac answered, "Nobody." Stopping his inspection the visitor turned and said, "Evidently you did not understand my question. I asked who made this." Newton, enjoying himself immensely no doubt, replied in a still more serious tone, "Nobody. What you see just happened to assume the form it now has." "You must think I am a fool!" the visitor retorted heatedly, "Of course somebody made it, and he is a genius, and I would like to know who he is!" Newton then spoke to his friend in a polite yet firm way: "This thing is but a puny imitation of a much grander system whose laws you know, and I am not able to convince you that this mere toy is without a designer or maker; yet you profess to believe that the great original from which the design is taken has come into being without either designer or maker! Now tell me by what sort of reasoning do you reach such an incongruous conclusion?"