Well, of course...
 

On Monday, February 17, 2014 6:55:47 PM UTC-6, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 2/17/14, 7:25 PM, Tim wrote:

On Monday, February 17, 2014 5:50:19 PM UTC-6, F*O*A*D wrote:





Your attempts to deny the outright superstition that underpins religious



beliefs are laughable. How many millions of self-described Christians



believe in creationism and believe the earth is less than 10,000 years old?



Harry, you come on here to make some boastful statement about the views of a select few then you want to put me on trial for my thoughts?



Wow!





BTW-Ever hear of this guy? I figured a link would be sufficient.



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







By select few, are you referring to the several Greeks I mentioned,

considered for thousands of years the greatest thinkers of their era?



Tell me you are not.

No, I am not. If I may make myself clear, you posted an article about people who believe the sun travels around the earth.I added the flat-earthers and the island-flipers. Those are the 'select few' I was regarding.



I don't want to put you on trial for anything. We were talking about

superstitions that underpin religion. Well, believing in creationism and

believing the earth is less than 10,000 years old is believing in

superstition.

To you it is. To many it's truth. I believe in science. But science is only limited to mans knowledge and understanding. Consider the flat-earther's plight. It was considered the truthful science of the day until Columbus (actually before him) proved that science different with newer science.Same with the earth-orbiters. The standard is held until adequately evidence has been found to prove the old school though as defective.

Pliney the Elder was a great philsophic naturalist and scholar- and he even believed in a singular "Universal Creator" . Science hasn't proven him wrong to this day. Now when Science does prove differently, I'll believe that science. Believe it or not, I am an objectionable person, but until science proves different, I'll hold to what I believe is true.


Thank goodness for Edwards v. Aguillard. :)

Thank goodness for the 1st. Amendment!

Well, of course...
 

In article , says...


The point, which seems lost here, is that the belief that the sun
revolves around the earth is an ancient religious belief that was
carried forward by more modern religions, and that the people who still
believe it do so out of ignorance and religious belief and superstition.
And what is superstition if not the belief in supernatural causes or in
trying to explain the natural world in religious terms, such as taking
literally "biblical" history that claims to indicate the age of this
planet.

Where are these people who believe the sun moves around the earth
because religion tells them that?
If I hadn't been schooled I'd think the same.
It's the apparent way of thinking.
Sun comes up, sun goes down.
Can't feel the earth turning.
You don't need religion to tell you that.
Besides. Copernicus was a clergyman supported by the church, as were
most "scientists."
Resistance to science has been political. Sometimes church politics.

Well, of course...
 

On 2/17/14, 8:39 PM, Tim wrote:
On Monday, February 17, 2014 6:55:47 PM UTC-6, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 2/17/14, 7:25 PM, Tim wrote:

On Monday, February 17, 2014 5:50:19 PM UTC-6, F*O*A*D wrote:





Your attempts to deny the outright superstition that underpins religious



beliefs are laughable. How many millions of self-described Christians



believe in creationism and believe the earth is less than 10,000 years old?



Harry, you come on here to make some boastful statement about the views of a select few then you want to put me on trial for my thoughts?



Wow!





BTW-Ever hear of this guy? I figured a link would be sufficient.



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







By select few, are you referring to the several Greeks I mentioned,

considered for thousands of years the greatest thinkers of their era?



Tell me you are not.

No, I am not. If I may make myself clear, you posted an article about people who believe the sun travels around the earth.I added the flat-earthers and the island-flipers. Those are the 'select few' I was regarding.



I don't want to put you on trial for anything. We were talking about

superstitions that underpin religion. Well, believing in creationism and

believing the earth is less than 10,000 years old is believing in

superstition.

To you it is. To many it's truth. I believe in science. But science is only limited to mans knowledge and understanding. Consider the flat-earther's plight. It was considered the truthful science of the day until Columbus (actually before him) proved that science different with newer science.Same with the earth-orbiters. The standard is held until adequately evidence has been found to prove the old school though as defective.

Pliney the Elder was a great philsophic naturalist and scholar- and he even believed in a singular "Universal Creator" . Science hasn't proven him wrong to this day. Now when Science does prove differently, I'll believe that science. Believe it or not, I am an objectionable person, but until science proves different, I'll hold to what I believe is true.


Thank goodness for Edwards v. Aguillard. :)

Thank goodness for the 1st. Amendment!




That the earth is more than 10,000 years old is scientifically provable,
and evolution is science, too. You are asking science to prove
superstition in the existence of a creator. ;

Well, of course...
 

On 2/17/14, 9:19 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 17 Feb 2014 18:29:20 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

I am not sure of any wide spread religious belief that the earth is at
the center of the solar system.
I think you are just calling out the wide spread ignorance that is
coming out of our school system.

They may have heard something about astronomy in elementary or middle
school but they quickly forgot it.



You think such foolishness springs *spontaneously* from the minds of the
badly educated? I don't. I think it is taught...at home and among those
with fundamentalist beliefs.

Of course you do but do you actually have any basis in fact beyond
your prejudice?

I know a few people who believe in creation and that the earth is 8000
years old but they still agree the solar system revolves around the
sun.


So, they got one out of three right. Great.

Well, of course...
 

On Mon, 17 Feb 2014 21:22:44 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 2/17/14, 9:19 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 17 Feb 2014 18:29:20 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

I am not sure of any wide spread religious belief that the earth is at
the center of the solar system.
I think you are just calling out the wide spread ignorance that is
coming out of our school system.

They may have heard something about astronomy in elementary or middle
school but they quickly forgot it.



You think such foolishness springs *spontaneously* from the minds of the
badly educated? I don't. I think it is taught...at home and among those
with fundamentalist beliefs.

Of course you do but do you actually have any basis in fact beyond
your prejudice?

I know a few people who believe in creation and that the earth is 8000
years old but they still agree the solar system revolves around the
sun.


So, they got one out of three right. Great.

Hey, FOAD, what's with all the asterisks now? Are you trying to emphasize the *O*, and the *A*, or
what?

Hey John???
 

On Mon, 17 Feb 2014 15:32:39 -0500, KC wrote:

It doesn't take a PhD in Psychiatry or Psychotherapy to recognized that

...Dick has little man disease...:) Gotta' be the boss, gotta' mock and
rub it in when someone makes a mistake, has to be the first to answer,
has to be right... Has to go back and pat himself on the back for months
when he gets a little internet victory... Like beating a dead horse....
sick dude. Look at yourself first Dick, ask youself why you have to
"win" in an internet forum, why you have to go back over and over it
again and agan?....

===

Scott, with all due respect, you are totally out of line. Back off,
take a few deep breaths and put your keyboard down for awhile.

Well, of course...
 

On Monday, February 17, 2014 8:13:29 PM UTC-6, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 2/17/14, 8:39 PM, Tim wrote:

On Monday, February 17, 2014 6:55:47 PM UTC-6, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 2/17/14, 7:25 PM, Tim wrote:



On Monday, February 17, 2014 5:50:19 PM UTC-6, F*O*A*D wrote:











Your attempts to deny the outright superstition that underpins religious







beliefs are laughable. How many millions of self-described Christians







believe in creationism and believe the earth is less than 10,000 years old?







Harry, you come on here to make some boastful statement about the views of a select few then you want to put me on trial for my thoughts?







Wow!











BTW-Ever hear of this guy? I figured a link would be sufficient.







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















By select few, are you referring to the several Greeks I mentioned,



considered for thousands of years the greatest thinkers of their era?







Tell me you are not.



No, I am not. If I may make myself clear, you posted an article about people who believe the sun travels around the earth.I added the flat-earthers and the island-flipers. Those are the 'select few' I was regarding.







I don't want to put you on trial for anything. We were talking about



superstitions that underpin religion. Well, believing in creationism and



believing the earth is less than 10,000 years old is believing in



superstition.



To you it is. To many it's truth. I believe in science. But science is only limited to mans knowledge and understanding. Consider the flat-earther's plight. It was considered the truthful science of the day until Columbus (actually before him) proved that science different with newer science.Same with the earth-orbiters. The standard is held until adequately evidence has been found to prove the old school though as defective.



Pliney the Elder was a great philsophic naturalist and scholar- and he even believed in a singular "Universal Creator" . Science hasn't proven him wrong to this day. Now when Science does prove differently, I'll believe that science. Believe it or not, I am an objectionable person, but until science proves different, I'll hold to what I believe is true.





Thank goodness for Edwards v. Aguillard. :)



Thank goodness for the 1st. Amendment!









That the earth is more than 10,000 years old is scientifically provable,

and evolution is science, too.

Oh, I know the earth is much older than that. But is mankind? Carbon 14 *IS* the accepted science for research, but its not infallible...

http://www.nytimes.com/1990/05/31/us...on-dating.html

And I admire Albert Einstein's genius when he developed his theory of relativity. Amazing that a hundred years ago, being armed with a brain, an imagination and a chalk board he was dead on! But in the last few years, though his theory is still a standard, his calculations are being scrutinized due to modern scientific techniques.

http://gajitz.com/was-einstein-wrong...t-be-constant/

Another thing. His theory is light travels 186000 mi. per second. why not 186,243.94 MPS? Why is accuracy only limited to 'thousands?" When you consider 'millions' of years at stake, at least Albert was more accurate with relativity theories than carbon 14 dating can be.

You are asking science to prove

superstition in the existence of a creator. ;


Why not? You are stating that because science *cannot* provide evidence of a 'creator' then a creator doesn't exist. When science *CAN* prove there *IS NOT* a Divine Creator- I'll believe that science. Until then I'm absolutely satisfied in my beliefs.

Pretty simple really....

Well, of course...
 

On 2/17/2014 8:17 AM, KC wrote:

Well, the the 20 mph part might make things easier to compare I must
admit.. Tell him to also ask his teacher about using weight shift
instead of the bars to make the same maneuvers...

I missed your reply on whether you throw your torso side to side to
avoid a slight handlebar nudge or if you ride a custom bike without
those needless handlebars?
;)

Hey John???
 

On 2/17/2014 1:06 PM, KC wrote:

Dick took a shot based on a conversation about ammo we had last year.
But I am sure you all will run with that anyway... Listen John. Here's
the way I see it.. You know about some stuff, pretty good guy, but not
really mechanical, harry, here cause he has a nasty inferior complex and
needs to feel like he's beating folks up, dick the same, but doesn't
have to lie cause he has plenty to flash around... the rest I am not
getting into but the fact is, there is just nothing here for me anymore
and even though I tried for 4 months to not be "that guy" anymore, it's
obvious "that guy" is all you poor suckers are here for... Later....

Just because we have differing opinions doesn't mean it's personal. I
might think you're half bat-**** delusional but it's based on what
you've written, not what others say about you. That said we'd probably
get along fine as neighbors. Don't sweat the small stuff.

Well, of course...
 

On 2/17/2014 11:07 PM, Tim wrote:
On Monday, February 17, 2014 8:13:29 PM UTC-6, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 2/17/14, 8:39 PM, Tim wrote:

On Monday, February 17, 2014 6:55:47 PM UTC-6, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 2/17/14, 7:25 PM, Tim wrote:



On Monday, February 17, 2014 5:50:19 PM UTC-6, F*O*A*D wrote:











Your attempts to deny the outright superstition that underpins religious







beliefs are laughable. How many millions of self-described Christians







believe in creationism and believe the earth is less than 10,000 years old?







Harry, you come on here to make some boastful statement about the views of a select few then you want to put me on trial for my thoughts?







Wow!











BTW-Ever hear of this guy? I figured a link would be sufficient.







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















By select few, are you referring to the several Greeks I mentioned,



considered for thousands of years the greatest thinkers of their era?







Tell me you are not.



No, I am not. If I may make myself clear, you posted an article about people who believe the sun travels around the earth.I added the flat-earthers and the island-flipers. Those are the 'select few' I was regarding.







I don't want to put you on trial for anything. We were talking about



superstitions that underpin religion. Well, believing in creationism and



believing the earth is less than 10,000 years old is believing in



superstition.



To you it is. To many it's truth. I believe in science. But science is only limited to mans knowledge and understanding. Consider the flat-earther's plight. It was considered the truthful science of the day until Columbus (actually before him) proved that science different with newer science.Same with the earth-orbiters. The standard is held until adequately evidence has been found to prove the old school though as defective.



Pliney the Elder was a great philsophic naturalist and scholar- and he even believed in a singular "Universal Creator" . Science hasn't proven him wrong to this day. Now when Science does prove differently, I'll believe that science. Believe it or not, I am an objectionable person, but until science proves different, I'll hold to what I believe is true.





Thank goodness for Edwards v. Aguillard. :)



Thank goodness for the 1st. Amendment!









That the earth is more than 10,000 years old is scientifically provable,

and evolution is science, too.

Oh, I know the earth is much older than that. But is mankind? Carbon 14 *IS* the accepted science for research, but its not infallible...

http://www.nytimes.com/1990/05/31/us...on-dating.html

And I admire Albert Einstein's genius when he developed his theory of relativity. Amazing that a hundred years ago, being armed with a brain, an imagination and a chalk board he was dead on! But in the last few years, though his theory is still a standard, his calculations are being scrutinized due to modern scientific techniques.

http://gajitz.com/was-einstein-wrong...t-be-constant/

Another thing. His theory is light travels 186000 mi. per second. why not 186,243.94 MPS? Why is accuracy only limited to 'thousands?" When you consider 'millions' of years at stake, at least Albert was more accurate with relativity theories than carbon 14 dating can be.

You are asking science to prove

superstition in the existence of a creator. ;


Why not? You are stating that because science *cannot* provide evidence of a 'creator' then a creator doesn't exist. When science *CAN* prove there *IS NOT* a Divine Creator- I'll believe that science. Until then I'm absolutely satisfied in my beliefs.

Pretty simple really....



Science often unearths more questions than it answers.