How did that happen?

[Exception Collection]

Personally, I find any Holy book to be nothing more than a series of stories to help set your moral compass (akin to Aesops Fables) as well as "wives tales" to help teach the population about proper diet and survival for the time in which they originated. Alot of these diet and survival stories are severely outdated and provide incomplete or inaccurate information, like using a 19th century industrial manufacturing processes for work today (can you say mercury, lead, and asbestos?). Shellfish are seen as an abomination (Leviticus) and pork is seen as "dirty" because at the times these were introduced to their respective holy books, the population did not have the safe and clean harvesting, preparation, and storage capabilities we have today, and because it was easier to write them off as "dirty" because they didn't have the understanding of bacteria, fungus, disease, and why people would get sick and die from eating them. They wrote their "policies" and stories based on the limited information they had, and unlike the manufacturing manuals and policies we have generated over the last hundred or so years, the "policies" became hard centuries old, unquestioned and unchanged.
I also agree with Highway in that these stories originated 2000 years ago and were passed on by word of mouth for centuries before they were ever written. Then they were re-written by their respective religious figures who have been proven time and time again to be very politically biased. Additionally, how many Kings, Lords, Sultans, etc had sections of the Bible possibly re-written to "allow" their actions to be ok (Can you say King Henry VIII?)? These revisions were to allow these heads of state to avoid religious fall-outs, not to update them like the manual example I referred to above.

Combine all of that with the language translations. Has anyone seen an American movie translated to Mandarin, then have re-translated english subtitles across the bottom (lookup Mandarin Return of the Jedi on youtube sometime)? Even the original intent of what was said is oftentimes butchered.

I have no issues with people using them as a moral compass. There are alot of great life lessons to be learned on how to be a good person and productive member of society (kindness, love, trust, friendship, honor, humility, etc). It's when they start using the Bible as fact is when I start having issues. I like to use the current internet cliche: Pics or it didn't happen.

[/rant]

<puts on fire-resistant suit>

Sounds reasonable. And yeah, I agree, I think a lot of translation errors are in the bible, both old and new testament.

 

[Dexman PE PMP]

I'm with you Dexman on everything except the moral part. There are far too many examples of religion being downright immoral for me to accept that. That being said, atheists are not always moral either, no matter what Dawkins or Hitchens tries to suggest. You either are or aren't moral, whether it is because you are christian, muslim, or any other religion or non-religion.

I said "help" with the moral part. It obviously implies alot more other influences necessary to make a truly good person.

 

[Exception Collection]

I'm with you Dexman on everything except the moral part. There are far too many examples of religion being downright immoral for me to accept that. That being said, atheists are not always moral either, no matter what Dawkins or Hitchens tries to suggest. You either are or aren't moral, whether it is because you are christian, muslim, or any other religion or non-religion.

Oh yes, so much this. Though one could argue that if you are absolutely true to Christianity in every way, shape or form, you cannot be immoral - it's just that nobody actually is.

 

[Exception Collection]

Dexman - fair enough
Karen - I totally disagree, if you are actually true to Christianity, you will be more immoral.

OK, let me rephrase. True to the Christ-like ideal. Willing to stand up (generally) non-violently for what you believe, unwilling to throw stones at others, but willing to defend your faith with words and give aid to those around you.

That's the ideal I strive for. I don't care if other Christians look down upon me or judge me - and that happens, believe me - but I try to live what I consider a "Christ-like" life. I fail, frequently, but I try.

 

[csb]

The age of the earth is verifiable - roughly - through scientific means. The expansion of the universe is now "visible" to us; based on the rate of said expansion, the age of the universe itself is calculable. Those are not theories. They are as close to fact as it is possible to obtain.

Many people (scientists) state this. But is it really so? If this "sphere" of a universe is constantly expanding (and it's a really dark sphere), how in the hell do we determine where the edge is? So galaxies and stars are moving away from each other at XYZ lightyears / year. Where's the edge of the universe?

I can't accept that the speed of light is as fast as we can go, either. I just can't mentally accept a physical top speed.

What about ludicrous speed?

 

[Exception Collection]

I think God must be trying to smite me, we just had an earthquake in Richmond.

I was just talking to a friend in CA about that, she said one of her coworkers was on camera in a videoconference.

 

[Wolverine]

People died because of so called "weapons of mass destruction", is there any evidence that such things existed? It's debatable just like God is.

oking: Just briefly weighing in on the subject, I say the question is disingenuous and has become an oversimplified point of polarization. Iraq had WMD - chemical, biological, and pre-nuclear. This is fact. Did the state of readiness of Iraqi WMD warrant an invasion? This is the subjectively debatable question. Many people believed based on what they had seen that it was so. Many people were skeptical and unconvinced. I propose that this is metaphorical to the present discussion.

There is no doubt that the universe does exist and it certainly does seem to have a lot of mathematical order to it, eh?

The age of the earth is verifiable - roughly - through scientific means. The expansion of the universe is now "visible" to us; based on the rate of said expansion, the age of the universe itself is calculable. Those are not theories. They are as close to fact as it is possible to obtain.

Many people (scientists) state this. But is it really so? If this "sphere" of a universe is constantly expanding (and it's a really dark sphere), how in the hell do we determine where the edge is? So galaxies and stars are moving away from each other at XYZ lightyears / year. Where's the edge of the universe?

Back to the original question, How Does It Happen:
Scientists often foolishly ignore variables and hold as constants that which they should not.

As the universe is expanding, so according to quantum mechano-physics, time is stretching right along with it.

As we stand here from a terrestrial perspective, earth is clearly 5 billion years old. Has anyone stepped off the treadmill to observe if the plane is really flying though?

There ya go DK! Gave you one good answer

EDIT: Felt earthquake in Atlanta. I just announced to the office I felt an earthquake, they laughed at me, and bingo, it comes over the wire.

 

[Capt Worley PE]

I think God must be trying to smite me, we just had an earthquake in Richmond.

I heard there was a 5.3 in Colorado this morning.

 

[Dark Knight]

I think God must be trying to smite me, we just had an earthquake in Richmond.

I heard there was a 5.3 in Colorado this morning.

I was going to post about that too.

 

[wilheldp_PE]

It's the apocalypse...REPENT!

 

[Capt Worley PE]

The epicenter was about 40 miles or so from where I am, a place called Mineral, VA. The guy in the office next to me lives there, hope his house is okay.

i thought that area was fairly stable, seismically.

 

[RIP - VTEnviro]

I had pizza for lunch, and my hands smell like cheese.

 

[Dexman PE PMP]

I think God must be trying to smite me, we just had an earthquake in Richmond.

I heard there was a 5.3 in Colorado this morning.

I was going to post about that too.

Yep in Southern Colorado, just north of the NM border. It was reported that this area is also seismically "stable" too...

 

[Capt Worley PE]

I think God must be trying to smite me, we just had an earthquake in Richmond.

I heard there was a 5.3 in Colorado this morning.

I was going to post about that too.

Yep in Southern Colorado, just north of the NM border. It was reported that this area is also seismically "stable" too...

That was my first thought when I read about it this morning.

 

[mrt406]

There is no doubt that the universe does exist

Or maybe it's all just in my head.

 

[envirotex]

I had pizza for lunch, and my hands smell like cheese.

Provolone or mozzarella?

 

[envirotex]

I think God must be trying to smite me, we just had an earthquake in Richmond.

I heard there was a 5.3 in Colorado this morning.

I was going to post about that too.

Yep in Southern Colorado, just north of the NM border. It was reported that this area is also seismically "stable" too...

That was my first thought when I read about it this morning.

That's where the volcanoes are...

 

[Exception Collection]

People died because of so called "weapons of mass destruction", is there any evidence that such things existed? It's debatable just like God is.

oking: Just briefly weighing in on the subject, I say the question is disingenuous and has become an oversimplified point of polarization. Iraq had WMD - chemical, biological, and pre-nuclear. This is fact. Did the state of readiness of Iraqi WMD warrant an invasion? This is the subjectively debatable question. Many people believed based on what they had seen that it was so. Many people were skeptical and unconvinced. I propose that this is metaphorical to the present discussion.

Actually, they didn't have WMD at the time we invaded. They didn't have WMD at the time we won. The only evidence of WMDs - is from WMDs they had before Gulf War 1. They were working on developing new ones, but had not developed them at the time of invasion - in fact, they were very far behind North Korea and Iran in their work towards getting them.

There is no doubt that the universe does exist and it certainly does seem to have a lot of mathematical order to it, eh?

The age of the earth is verifiable - roughly - through scientific means. The expansion of the universe is now "visible" to us; based on the rate of said expansion, the age of the universe itself is calculable. Those are not theories. They are as close to fact as it is possible to obtain.

Many people (scientists) state this. But is it really so? If this "sphere" of a universe is constantly expanding (and it's a really dark sphere), how in the hell do we determine where the edge is? So galaxies and stars are moving away from each other at XYZ lightyears / year. Where's the edge of the universe?

Back to the original question, How Does It Happen:
Scientists often foolishly ignore variables and hold as constants that which they should not.

As the universe is expanding, so according to quantum mechano-physics, time is stretching right along with it.

As we stand here from a terrestrial perspective, earth is clearly 5 billion years old. Has anyone stepped off the treadmill to observe if the plane is really flying though?

There ya go DK! Gave you one good answer

Interesting idea. As I said, I'm not a physicist, so I'll have to think about the implications of this.

Here's my first thought: If your perspective shifts as reality shifts around you, does it matter if the measurement is relative to a non-constant?

Draw a 3" line of infinitely small width on a 12" long sheet. Then pull the sheet in such a way that the sheet becomes 24" long, and the line becomes 6". From the perspective of the line, does it matter if the reality of the length is different than the original? It's still 1/4 the length of the sheet.

 

[Wolverine]

Actually, they didn't have WMD at the time we invaded. They didn't have WMD at the time we won. The only evidence of WMDs - is from WMDs they had before Gulf War 1. They were working on developing new ones, but had not developed them at the time of invasion - in fact, they were very far behind North Korea and Iran in their work towards getting them.

Ahh, I see - they didn't have the WMD's that they did have, but they were working on the ones they didn't have, and now they don't have any. Got it. That clarifies a lot.
Can we get back to discussing the mathematical tendencies of the Almighty? What about pi? Where does that come from?

BTW, it's been documented that even Saddam believed he had them. Click here to see proof: PROOF!

 

[RIP - VTEnviro]

I had pizza for lunch, and my hands smell like cheese.

Provolone or mozzarella?

Parmesan.