Random Christianity Discussion

[Greatguardian]

I disagree, and frankly i'm not sure what could possibly be so amazing about the universe doing silly things like pulling matter together via gravity to form stars. Damn near everything that happens in the universe is basically guaranteed. I mean, sure the exact configuration of a particular galaxy would be up to chance, but it's all the same in the end anyway. The same cannot be said about life. Our galaxy, solar system, sun, etc may all be average, but earth is different than 99.99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999%+ of other planets.

No words.

Addendum for Kaylia,

[hey]

No words.

Well ok then, was nice discussing it with you.

[Demosthenes11]

I disagree, and frankly i'm not sure what could possibly be so amazing about the universe doing silly things like pulling matter together via gravity to form stars. Damn near everything that happens in the universe is basically guaranteed. I mean, sure the exact configuration of a particular galaxy would be up to chance, but it's all the same in the end anyway. The same cannot be said about life. Our galaxy, solar system, sun, etc may all be average, but earth is different than 99.99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999%+ of other planets.

Says someone looking at things through human goggles. For everything that is unique about the earth, there are as many unique things about every other planet.

The only thing that makes you say this is time period. 4 billion years ago you would have looked at the earth and said "wow what an average planet"

[Greatguardian]

Well ok then, was nice discussing it with you.

There's not much discussion to be had when fundamental facts are missing or just wrong. I'll address a few bad assumptions if you really want me to, though.

1) You're generalizing about the nature of planets in our galaxy. This is a problem, as there are relatively very, very few extra-solar planets that we've had the opportunity to study in any depth. It's very difficult to study planets, you know. It's hard enough just figuring out that they exist around any given star. You have the Kepler space telescope tracking them down, and various other methods of planet-hunting, but the information we're able to glean from said planets is often less than what we'd want. You're saying Earth is different from all the other planets when we barely know anything about a small chunk of the planets that are in our immediate vicinity. We can get the composition of gas giants through spectral analysis and the rotational period (and thus distance from star) of planets via wobbling/eclipsing, but we can't use our long range scanners to check for life signs, Captain.

2) You're making false assumptions about the requirements for life. Life does not necessarily need to metabolize oxygen or water. It can exist in environments completely ill-suited to life on Earth. There is no reason why there cannot be life on gas giants, or inside icy moons. Why, we're already looking at Mars containing bacterial life forms and believe there's a possibility that Titan may as well.

Life ain't that special.

[Kaylia]

I disagree, and frankly i'm not sure what could possibly be so amazing about the universe doing silly things like pulling matter together via gravity to form stars. Damn near everything that happens in the universe is basically guaranteed. I mean, sure the exact configuration of a particular galaxy would be up to chance, but it's all the same in the end anyway. The same cannot be said about life. Our galaxy, solar system, sun, etc may all be average, but earth is different than 99.99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999%+ of other planets.

Uh? Everything indicates that Earth-like planets are very common, and there is little reason to believe that life itself is rare (if that's what you mean). And you dropped way too many "9" after that dot. It's not a reasonable figure considering that odd you posted is much lower than the amount of planets existing in the visible universe.

Your implication is fatuous. Government is a control mechanism, too. So are gold stars on pop quizzes. Whether or not it's malicious in its intent is a separate issue. A religious, spiritual, numinous, whatever, form of existentialism is inherent to human nature. Organized religion is only ever a tool of the elite. Given that organized religion is based on superstitions at best, and outright lies at worst, it's hard to argue that it's anything else.

If your definition of control is that broad, I can agree.

However, your post still implies some sort of generalized dishonesty from organized religions that isn't entirely justified. I don't like them either, and I do believe they offer a dangerous environment that can easily be manipulated, but it's not the only thing that come out.

[hey]

you're saying Earth is different from all the other planets

No, i specifically did not say that.

4 billion years ago you would have looked at the earth and said "wow what an average planet"

Correct. It was.

For everything that is unique about the earth, there are as many unique things about every other planet.

There's only one thing even remotely unique about earth.


Not saying humans are the most amazing things in the universe. Obviously there is other life elsewhere, and i'd be quite surprised if there was no other intelligent life, at least as smart/advanced as us. But if you don't consider us amazing, then what do you? Giant balls of gas/rocks? idgi

[Greatguardian]

No, i specifically did not say that.

but earth is different than 99.99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999%+ of other planets.

Holy shit, what?

Correct. It was.

There's only one thing even remotely unique about earth.

Not saying humans are the most amazing things in the universe. Obviously there is other life elsewhere, and i'd be quite surprised if there was no other intelligent life, at least as smart/advanced as us. But if you don't consider us amazing, then what do you? Giant balls of gas/rocks? idgi

Astrophysics is positively fascinating. I am not very good at translating that fascination to others, but there are plenty of people out there who are. Carl Sagan, Neil DeGrasse Tyson, Brian Greene, Stephen Hawking, and plenty more. If you want to know what we find so amazing about gas and rocks, just take a look.

[Greatguardian]

Double post, separate topic. Just to bring things into perspective, I don't consider Humanity very advanced personally. At best, I would classify it as an adolescent or pubescent society undergoing growing pains. Up until the 1920's, even the most visionary science fiction writers did not imagine a world where man would not have to labor in order to survive. Even H.G. Wells, who tried to address the cultural ramifications of a lack of need for labor in The Time Machine, still made it all possible because of an enslaved labor caste. The Computer is less than a century old, and it's the bloody game-changer.

Computers and advanced autonomous (not to be confused with sentient) machines will make it possible, for the first time in human history, for mankind to be able to sustain itself without a dedicated labor force. The fundamental motivation for human progress will have to shift. When people no longer have to work in order to live, what do they work for? What do they live for? Depending on how we as a species answer that question, our civilization will either die off or flourish like it never has before. You think you've seen advanced? I don't think we've seen anything yet.

[Demosthenes11]

No, i specifically did not say that.

Correct. It was.
There's only one thing even remotely unique about earth.


Not saying humans are the most amazing things in the universe. Obviously there is other life elsewhere, and i'd be quite surprised if there was no other intelligent life, at least as smart/advanced as us. But if you don't consider us amazing, then what do you? Giant balls of gas/rocks? idgi

entirely dependent on what "amazing" means. "amazing" as in rare? probably not. "amazing" as in cool? I guess so, but from our perspective probably not as cool as some other things out there.

[Sera]

The Computer is less than a century old, and it's the bloody game-changer.

Computers and advanced autonomous (not to be confused with sentient) machines will make it possible, for the first time in human history, for mankind to be able to sustain itself without a dedicated labor force.

Oh sure, until the Singularity, then we're fucked.

*Mentok The Mindtaker style ooooweeeeeoooooooo noises*

[Kaylia]

Double post, separate topic. Just to bring things into perspective, I don't consider Humanity very advanced personally. At best, I would classify it as an adolescent or pubescent society undergoing growing pains. Up until the 1920's, even the most visionary science fiction writers did not imagine a world where man would not have to labor in order to survive. Even H.G. Wells, who tried to address the cultural ramifications of a lack of need for labor in The Time Machine, still made it all possible because of an enslaved labor caste. The Computer is less than a century old, and it's the bloody game-changer.

Computers and advanced autonomous (not to be confused with sentient) machines will make it possible, for the first time in human history, for mankind to be able to sustain itself without a dedicated labor force. The fundamental motivation for human progress will have to shift. When people no longer have to work in order to live, what do they work for? What do they live for? Depending on how we as a species answer that question, our civilization will either die off or flourish like it never has before. You think you've seen advanced? I don't think we've seen anything yet.

I wish I could be as optimist as you are, but the future of sciences look grim to me. It's definitively possible that we go through one more paradigm shifts or two, but the limitation imposed by the Universe itself are going to catch up on us eventually.

When building a new "LHC" is going to requires the energy of star, and the size of a solar system, it's going to be game over pretty much.


Of course, I'm not the first one to say that, and hopefully, I will be as wrong as people before me, but this exponential scaling of energy isn't something previous generation of physicist had to deal with. It's not impossible that we find a game changing solution eventually, but it's more wishful thinking than anything.

[Demosthenes11]

I wish I could be as optimist as you are, but the future of sciences look grim to me. It's definitively possible that we go through one paradigm shifts or two, but the limitation imposed by the Universe itself are going to catch up on us eventually.

When building a new "LHC" is going to requires the energy of star, and the size of a solar system, it's going to be game over pretty much.


Of course, I'm not the first one who say that, but this exponential scaling of energy isn't something previous generation of physicist had to deal with.

thankfully we have big oil and coal to help us find these new energy sources that would make that obsolete...

oh wait now, I meant "help us destroy our hopes to find," not "help us find"

[Greatguardian]

I wish I could be as optimist as you are, but the future of sciences look grim to me. It's definitively possible that we go through one paradigm shifts or two, but the limitation imposed by the Universe itself are going to catch up on us eventually.

When building a new "LHC" is going to requires the energy of star, and the size of a solar system, it's going to be game over pretty much.

Of course, I'm not the first one who say that, but this exponential scaling of energy isn't something previous generation of physicist had to deal with.

The Universe did give us a pretty solid "Fuck you" in quite a few regards over the past 50 years, yeah. It's so damned interesting, though. Applying even a portion of the collective energy we'll be saving on labor toward these problems could go on a long way. I am a hopeless optimist with regards to man's potential.

[Kaylia]

The Universe did give us a pretty solid "Fuck you" in quite a few regards over the past 50 years, yeah. It's so damned interesting, though. Applying even a portion of the collective energy we'll be saving on labor toward these problems could go on a long way. I am a hopeless optimist with regards to man's potential.

To clarify, I'm not saying we shouldn't try. I would rather waste energy trying to find a solution that may not exist than sit on my ass until the end, but I don't see where the "in your face" solution to space travel could be hiding when it's strictly forbidden by the current laws.

I really hope the next revolution in science is coming soon since it's been 100 years already, and we're due for one. That one should seal the deal on what we can hope to do in the future.

thankfully we have big oil and coal to help us find these new energy sources that would make that obsolete...

oh wait now, I meant "help us destroy our hopes to find," not "help us find"

Environment friendly energy is another topic, but this one at least has many potential solutions that can be realized on Earth. It's not the LHC that will help us here.

[Kaelan?]

I'm not saying anything... I'm asking why you think religion exists.

[mactabilis]

It's really the only reason I clicked on this thread, tbh. If there is a distinction between religious persecution and the attitudes of the Athiests towards religious people that I've met and that post in these religious threads, I fail to see it. Who gives a fuck what another person believes? I honestly think that if you have ever criticized somebody for their belief system, whichever it may be, you should be ashamed.

Well... you know. Except if it was a scientologist you were making fun of. That stuff is just bat-shit crazy.

Why is it shameful to make fun of a chosen belief that has no shred of evidence to support it? This is in no way similar, however, to for example if you had a gay co-worker who was legally fired or had to hide it, thanks in no small part to catholicism. That doesn't mean I personally care about the underlying psychosis either though, at least not to the extent of wanting to persecute (as you say) them. I'm only going to laugh at them in my head, or tell them STFU if they get too overbearing. There is no way that thinking you are drinking the blood of a 2000 year old god is less bat-shit than scientology, but that's the christian's problem, not mine.

It just so happens that christians tend to exert their influence in ways such as fear-mongering and oppressing minorities and birth control, while atheists have no such inherent desire. They show intolerance of intolerance at worst, a reaction to a preexisting status quo. Now let's compare that to my approach to Deists. I think they're deluded too, most likely, yet I've never had any inclination to lampoon them for it. I've never met any "non affiliated" theist who drove me up the wall the way christians do routinely.

As for the OP, I don't normally question another's career choice or passion, but really you should aim for something that's not so predicated on hate, not to mention provably wrong. Maybe you should ask some questions yourself, and no, citing the bible doesn't make you an expert on religion as it's a decidedly biased and laughable source. Atheists tend to have a deeper understanding of religion because they bother reading up on its sordid history, and they put some thought into why it's so prevalent to this day. They wonder what possible good it can do to cling to these fables like noah's ark long after they're invalidated.

Why does some annoying asshole who spends his time at the campus library, preaching hellfire about crap i can look up or dismiss on my own, get charitable donation status and tax free land? This is what you seem to want to aspire to. It's a sheer, utter waste of time and resources, and that you get to pressure if not terrorize the masses into shitting on others' rights in the process, that's why you see objections to christianity. Based on other comments you've made, I'm guessing that's what you'll do. I think in this sense you'll see some push back, not just on the internet, in the near future as atheism becomes more common.

[Byrthnoth]

GG, I would like to refer you to a great philosophical work that attempts to address what humanity will do when "work" is no longer necessary.

[Kerberoz]

[ronin sparthos]

Double post, separate topic. Just to bring things into perspective, I don't consider Humanity very advanced personally. At best, I would classify it as an adolescent or pubescent society undergoing growing pains. Up until the 1920's, even the most visionary science fiction writers did not imagine a world where man would not have to labor in order to survive. Even H.G. Wells, who tried to address the cultural ramifications of a lack of need for labor in The Time Machine, still made it all possible because of an enslaved labor caste. The Computer is less than a century old, and it's the bloody game-changer.

Computers and advanced autonomous (not to be confused with sentient) machines will make it possible, for the first time in human history, for mankind to be able to sustain itself without a dedicated labor force. The fundamental motivation for human progress will have to shift. When people no longer have to work in order to live, what do they work for? What do they live for? Depending on how we as a species answer that question, our civilization will either die off or flourish like it never has before. You think you've seen advanced? I don't think we've seen anything yet.

I'm actually quite worried about the future given our increasing move towards eliminating labor via autonomous machines. Our population is increasing, the need for human labor is decreasing and we're going to have a surplus of people who simply aren't doing anything productive with their lives.

Perhaps we'll stick those people all in a virtual realm or something.

If we eliminate human labor then the paradigm shifts to more intelligent human beings that focus on specific specialized fields but that would still require a population that controls its growth. As it stands we refuse to do based on cultural, personal and religious means.

Further, toss in the potential for sentient machines and things get really frightening. We can't even agree with each other as humans with our varied cultural and visual differences and now we want to throw in a manufactured race of inorganic beings stronger, faster and more intelligent than us? Potential for planting the seeds of our own self-destruction? Likely.

[Thunder]

I'm actually quite worried about the future given our increasing move towards eliminating labor via autonomous machines. Our population is increasing, the need for human labor is decreasing and we're going to have a surplus of people who simply aren't doing anything productive with their lives.

Perhaps we'll stick those people all in a virtual realm or something.

If we eliminate human labor then the paradigm shifts to more intelligent human beings that focus on specific specialized fields but that would still require a population that controls its growth. As it stands we refuse to do based on cultural, personal and religious means.

Further, toss in the potential for sentient machines and things get really frightening. We can't even agree with each other as humans with our varied cultural and visual differences and now we want to throw in a manufactured race of inorganic beings stronger, faster and more intelligent than us? Potential for planting the seeds of our own self-destruction? Likely.

Education needs to keep up with the development of machines to replace jobs that uneducated(relative to the standard) humans get.

If it doesn't then unemployment will logically go up and people will be upset. We'll need more religion to keep those guys happy and not rioting because their lives will suck.

The population doesn't need to control its growth if we're not limited by the resources and space of earth. And we wont be limited by the resources of earth if our education goes up, therefore more people are in specialized fields, therefore we will be able to eventually develop ourselves enough to use all of the resources of our planet(earthquakes,hurricanes,tsunamis; controlling earth, basically), therefore we will be able to eventually use the resources of our sun, therefore we will eventually be able to use the resources of stars around us and our civilization becomes immortal! sans reapers, of course.

Singularity isn't so scary if you consider how far away it is, let alone if it should be feared or not. We're still a civilization using dead things for energy lol