Random Question Thread.

[foopy]

Random question: why can't I find a reference showing the positive feedback effect of water vapor as a greenhouse gas, so I can stop feeling insane for not agreeing with climate modelers?

just finished reading Super Freakonomics. there's a portion where the authors quote Lowell Wood:
"Because carbon dioxide is not the major greenhouse gas. The major greenhouse gas is water vapor." But current climate models "do not know how to handle water vapor and various types of clouds."

i checked the notes in the back, but it doesn't elaborate.

[zoobernut]

Is it our mitochondria is what allows us to burn energy to keep warm?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_homeostasis

It is rather complicated but the short of it is that us being "warm blooded" has just as much to do with our ability to cool ourselves down as it does with our ability to warm up. The complete process has systems in place to deal with both situations to maintain that constant body temperature. The rest is in the wiki.

Warm blooded and cold blooded are really misnomers, as the actual blood temperature being high or low has nothing to do with it, it is more about how constant the bloods temperature is. Lizards and other cold blooded animals can store a lot of body heat and have very warm blood when they sun themselves.

[HadesWeaponx]

I'm just now starting to get into Football. What would be the best approach to really get into it? A bit vague, I know, but I don't know where to start really.

[Omnipotent]

I'm just now starting to get into Football. What would be the best approach to really get into it? A bit vague, I know, but I don't know where to start really.

Video games / Fantasy league gets you the best perspective on who is good and getting to know alot of the names, concepts. Other than that, just watch for it and don't like the NYG.

[pogejr]

Could atheism be considered a religion.
I lost a formal debate about allowing schools to have courses on religion as an option because I said that. I was winning in every other sense but that one statement, I guess, confused people.
Bonus points for personal definition of "religion."

[Sylvrdragon]

Could atheism be considered a religion.
I lost a formal debate about allowing schools to have courses on religion as an option because I said that. I was winning in every other sense but that one statement, I guess, confused people.
Bonus points for personal definition of "religion."

That depends very much on several different definitions and from several different angles.

The word Atheism means very close to "Against Religion". As such, how can it be a religion?

From a rationalist point of view, however, an absolute statement indicates absolute belief. In a subject such as Theism where there is no "proof", an absolute belief in any direction can only be attributed to "faith" (and/or fallacy), which many will agree is the defining quality of a religion. In other words, if you assign 0% probability to the possibility of theism, as the word atheism suggests, then you are making a statement of faith, and so, are imitating a religion.

Technically, a rationalist could only ever call themselves an Agnostic due to the implications of Faith associated with the word Atheist. However, the word Agnostic has it's problems as well. Namely, the term suggests a variable degree, but with the subject of religion, where no proof exists, it is impossible to define this variable. Sure, you could call yourself an "Agnostic of an undefined degree" and be right, but that doesn't describe a person very well at all. You can't draw any conclusions from that statement, and so it's pointless to even mention. Titles are assigned to people as an indication of what they are likely to do. When you ask someone what they classify themselves as, you are asking how they are going to make their decisions. In such a case, the title Atheist may only mean "A person who will make decisions as though there is no god/religion" whereas "Agnostic of an undefined degree" (which is the only proper answer a truly rational person may give), doesn't say anything at all.

You may be able to call Atheism a religion rationally, but it's the only word that can mean anything when describing a person who will make decisions as though there is no god/religion. In other words, you're stuck between practicality and technicality.

[Zoolander]

I'm just now starting to get into Football. What would be the best approach to really get into it? A bit vague, I know, but I don't know where to start really.

Generally there are college football games (like one or two) on Thursdays or maybe Fridays, shit ton of college games all day Saturday from noon till like 1am, Sunday NFL games (you should get at least one at 1pm and one at 4:15pm, if not two at both times, and the Sunday night game everyone sees) and Monday Night Football.

So many opportunities to catch games, pick whatever floats your boat. College games tend to have more emotion and are generally a lot of fun. Playing football video games and watching a bunch of games is the best way to learn. Seeing football games live will do almost nothing to help you understand what is going on, TV is where its at.

[zoobernut]

That depends very much on several different definitions and from several different angles.

The word Atheism means very close to "Against Religion". As such, how can it be a religion?

From a rationalist point of view, however, an absolute statement indicates absolute belief. In a subject such as Theism where there is no "proof", an absolute belief in any direction can only be attributed to "faith" (and/or fallacy), which many will agree is the defining quality of a religion. In other words, if you assign 0% probability to the possibility of theism, as the word atheism suggests, then you are making a statement of faith, and so, are imitating a religion.

Technically, a rationalist could only ever call themselves an Agnostic due to the implications of Faith associated with the word Atheist. However, the word Agnostic has it's problems as well. Namely, the term suggests a variable degree, but with the subject of religion, where no proof exists, it is impossible to define this variable. Sure, you could call yourself an "Agnostic of an undefined degree" and be right, but that doesn't describe a person very well at all. You can't draw any conclusions from that statement, and so it's pointless to even mention. Titles are assigned to people as an indication of what they are likely to do. When you ask someone what they classify themselves as, you are asking how they are going to make their decisions. In such a case, the title Atheist may only mean "A person who will make decisions as though there is no god/religion" whereas "Agnostic of an undefined degree" (which is the only proper answer a truly rational person may give), doesn't say anything at all.

You may be able to call Atheism a religion rationally, but it's the only word that can mean anything when describing a person who will make decisions as though there is no god/religion. In other words, you're stuck between practicality and technicality.

It seems to me, and this mistake is made in every religion thread we have on BG that you are confusing the belief in a god or gods with the belief of following of an organized religion. Atheism and theism are all about your belief or disbelief in a god or higher being not any specific god.

I think in order to really break down and discuss what Poge is asking we would have to have more information about what he means by religion. Do you mean organized religion or something else?

It is generally accepted that a religion has some sort of public aspect to it and has a well defined set of beliefs and actions involved. If you are just quietly thinking in your head then it is usually called faith or a belief system.

[Sylvrdragon]

It seems to me, and this mistake is made in every religion thread we have on BG that you are confusing the belief in a god or gods with the belief of following of an organized religion. Atheism and theism are all about your belief or disbelief in a god or higher being not any specific god.

I think in order to really break down and discuss what Poge is asking we would have to have more information about what he means by religion. Do you mean organized religion or something else?

It is generally accepted that a religion has some sort of public aspect to it and has a well defined set of beliefs and actions involved. If you are just quietly thinking in your head then it is usually called faith or a belief system.

After some quick google-fu, it appears that you are right about the actual definition of Atheism/Atheist. As an Agnostic of an undefined degree and a person who makes decisions as though there is no God/religion, I tend to lump religion, god(s), and every other belief in something which cannot be quantified into the category of superstition. Since they seem to share the same flaws, I concluded that if you disbelieve one, then, logically, the others should follow. Even so, it was indeed fallacious of me to assume that the terms are interchangeable, as you could be an Atheist but still have a religion.

[pogejr]

I don't mean organized religion. Atheism is anything but organized. But as a belief system, Atheism is based on the belief of disbelief.

This is pissing the piss out of me because that kid I lost to sucked.

[zoobernut]

But that right there is the distinction. A belief system is different from a religion and atheism is not a religion. Also I think it is very dangerous to lump in religion with belief/disbelief in god sylvr. I actually personally know several people who believe in a higher being/god but do not follow any religions. I know... anecdotal evidence but you can't say it doesn't exist.

[pogejr]

Please explain the difference between a belief system and a religion. This is what the argument eventually boiled down to religion vs. belief system.

[zoobernut]

A belief system is something internal it has less structure. It doesn't have a written or oral tradition. A religion has some form of public aspect to it and includes a written and oral tradition. Religions include other people while belief systems are not based on including anyone else.

Just my thoughts on the distinctions.

[pogejr]

But isn't the "tradition" of Atheism an inherit belief in no Intelligent Design, err Omniscient Being.
A display of public belief on the effort on Atheists is clearly defined by Internet bashings and musings. The internet, although a rather unconventional gathering, is a large collection of atheists who are free to discuss on their beliefs. I don't understand the difference between this and a religion, except for organization.

[Sylvrdragon]

Also I think it is very dangerous to lump in religion with belief/disbelief in god sylvr. I actually personally know several people who believe in a higher being/god but do not follow any religions. I know... anecdotal evidence but you can't say it doesn't exist.

Yeah, I noted that Atheist can still have a religion in my follow-up, but I neglected to note that the other way around is also possible. I believe the latter is called a Deist though.

To me, the only shades of gray in Rationality are semantics and paradoxes, so I tend to lump everything together. Probably not a good trait to have when it comes to Formal Debate, lol.

[Salodin]

I agree with that. The difference is in the tradition and public image. You can believe in a god and not religion, but can't have faith in a religion and not believe in god.

Should have gone with something along the lines of how religion is the tradition and practices of a group of people, and how they worship their god. Just because you believe in a god doesn't mean you have to have a religion. In the same line of thinking, atheism is the tradition and practices of a group of people who don't believe in a god, or intellectual design, etc. It's not a religion, but the definition of religion can also be used to describe atheism.

edit: then again, looking up the definition of religion, I could very well see why atheism could be considered a religion. But I think it's less confusing the way I said it.

[zoobernut]

But isn't the "tradition" of Atheism an inherit belief in no Intelligent Design, err Omniscient Being.
A display of public belief on the effort on Atheists is clearly defined by Internet bashings and musings. The internet, although a rather unconventional gathering, is a large collection of atheists who are free to discuss on their beliefs. I don't understand the difference between this and a religion, except for organization.

There is no tradition of atheism. Being an atheist doesn't automatically make you part of some group or tradition. There may be a religion of atheism forming but being an atheist does not mean you are part of that. If I was an Amish Atheist, and had no knowledge of any other atheists existing and I never used the Internet I would be an atheist that had never been exposed to any sort of hodge podge Internet musings or gathering around the atheist ideas. The only thing you need to be an atheist is to not believe in a god or higher power.

[Zalius]

good links for vehicle repair/restoration/customization for a total beginner? i dont know dickshit about dickshit about cars and im looking to change that

[Salodin]

There is no tradition of atheism. Being an atheist doesn't automatically make you part of some group or tradition. There may be a religion of atheism forming but being an atheist does not mean you are part of that. If I was an Amish Atheist, and had no knowledge of any other atheists existing and I never used the Internet I would be an atheist that had never been exposed to any sort of hodge podge Internet musings or gathering around the atheist ideas. The only thing you need to be an atheist is to not believe in a god or higher power.

You make a point. But could you then say that when people examine why they don't believe in a god, they come around to the same notion for the same reason? For instance, if an atheist uses science and physics in explaining to himself how life began, and because of that comes his reason to deny the existence of god, can't that in itself be the tradition or practice of atheism? I think the problem is atheism is too broad a term, but I think if he went along this route then might have been able to at least win that debate.

[zoobernut]

You make a point. But could you then say that when people examine why they don't believe in a god, they come around to the same notion for the same reason? For instance, if an atheist uses science and physics in explaining to himself how life began, and because of that comes his reason to deny the existence of god, can't that in itself be the tradition or practice of atheism? I think the problem is atheism is too broad a term, but I think if he went along this route then might have been able to at least win that debate.

I think you answered your question when you stated that atheism is too brood a term. It is the whole all squares are rectangles but not all rectangles are squares conundrum. There might be a subset of atheists that have turned their beliefs into a religion of sorts but not all atheists built up a religion around their one simple belief. I don't think how you come to that belief is as important as what you do with it after you have realized it. Religions aren't as much about what you do before you join them or what leads you to believe in them they are more about how you conduct yourself and what you do after you choose to subscribe to a religion.