Viewing details of messages, sorted by time of last reply ("sticky messages" first)
Are We God??
Someone once said that a grain of "faith" can move a mountain. Jesus said he could walk on water because of his "faith". Are we missing the message here? Are we failing to use our minds to their fullest advantage? Maybe it's not God that makes things happen. Maybe it's merely a belief in a god that does the trick.
It has been shown that when someone under hypnosis believes they have been burned, they sometimes show physical reactions like someone who has actually been burned.
That tells me that there is a direct link between what is imagined in the mind, and the physical world. Perhaps a belief in an external God or gods is our link to the inner mind. If the mind can burn you, why couldn't it heal you? Levitate you? Are what we call "Miracles", "Prophecies", "Visions" actually products of the 80-some percent of the mind we don't understand? What are the possibilities??
It has been shown that when someone under hypnosis believes they have been burned, they sometimes show physical reactions like someone who has actually been burned.
That tells me that there is a direct link between what is imagined in the mind, and the physical world. Perhaps a belief in an external God or gods is our link to the inner mind. If the mind can burn you, why couldn't it heal you? Levitate you? Are what we call "Miracles", "Prophecies", "Visions" actually products of the 80-some percent of the mind we don't understand? What are the possibilities??
posted
by Baxtor 
Darwin vs Genesis
Next week will mark one of the greatest anniversaries in the history of ideas – 150 years since the publication of Charles Darwin's The Origin of Species. Often such classics – particularly classics overwhelmed by their controversy – are lost over time in the miasma of their own reputations. The question for anyone thinking of picking up a copy becomes: How good is it really?
view link
Genesis sells more copy, but Darwin was spot on. Thoughts?
view link
Genesis sells more copy, but Darwin was spot on. Thoughts?
sayings by chairman wot
i added it as mu erpy to the stupid questin how old is th earth and then felt I did not do it justice that it needed its own post:each ;ine chairmanwot wrote and i scribed knowing its importance felt it needed to be shared:
Anything else is purely conjecture only to be debated ad nauseum to no conclusion. Bob
*********
That was my point Bob. Some who claim to be scientific hold on... to the death that the earth is only 10,000 years old so that it fits in with other out of date ideas.
So those who try to fit a flood story (10,000 yrs. ago or less) into an explanation or into the dating of earths early origins...are not true scientists? cough!
Maybe we could call them creation "scientists" or ID followers....
For me it matters. Those with simplistic answers have alot of time to explain if the earth is 4.5 Billion years old.
The evolution of this planet, the movement of Pangea, beginnings of life,extinctions and continued evolution of life...can best be explained in Millions of years not in a recent flood or a special creation.
For Eon's members it may not matter in a few years but what we teach our children and grandchildren about science in general...it does matter.
Didn't want to forget my insight ...(in case the other god(s) message is cancelled...)
*********
Have I stumbled on a silver bullet in dealing with faith based science?
Ask them about the approxiamate age of the earth...then listen to the sounds of silence.
Come to think about it, I have never had a faith based "scientist"...even answer the question.
There is a VAST difference between 4.5 billion and 10,000>.
Consider evolution...in the US there is no majority or minority.
Half believe in a divine creation and half believe in a natural evolution. For the last 150 yrs. evolution has been the minority...but now it seems its who you ask.
Ask those with advanced degrees in astronomy,geology,biology,chemistry ect...not bible science degrees...and the vast majority will say the evidence leads to an evolutionary world view.
Believe what you will personally or religiously...its just not science Scott.
Many current polls of the US population put it at 50/50. I guess for wot 50 50 is a minority if your point is to present honrst info.
In the history of ideas...supernatural world views have dominated among the general population. evidence please check out darwins first visit to America book banquet at demonico. he country went gaga over him. so many people came out for his talks he became unerved. but for wot that is negative(P.S. one of the books i strongly recommended that you read
Influences that increased evolutions appeal might be: mandatory education, text books that address it, and the numbers attending colleges and universities.
don't mind any of your questions.
Do you believe in a recent special creation by a diety?
You always seem to despise evolution
now check any thing I have ever written about evolution I have always stated that it was sciencee I di not despise evoution just little people like you who keepepeating things to put others down I am a person of faith who sees no conflict with evolution daewin anf just this line: “You always seem to despise evolution” once more tells me your litlr smug sob.
P.S. How many bookds on darwin & evolution that I once thought ypu might be intestined did I PO.M you two or three tat I can ecall. But that was when I thought you were honest now I know better
Anything else is purely conjecture only to be debated ad nauseum to no conclusion. Bob
*********
That was my point Bob. Some who claim to be scientific hold on... to the death that the earth is only 10,000 years old so that it fits in with other out of date ideas.
So those who try to fit a flood story (10,000 yrs. ago or less) into an explanation or into the dating of earths early origins...are not true scientists? cough!
Maybe we could call them creation "scientists" or ID followers....
For me it matters. Those with simplistic answers have alot of time to explain if the earth is 4.5 Billion years old.
The evolution of this planet, the movement of Pangea, beginnings of life,extinctions and continued evolution of life...can best be explained in Millions of years not in a recent flood or a special creation.
For Eon's members it may not matter in a few years but what we teach our children and grandchildren about science in general...it does matter.
Didn't want to forget my insight ...(in case the other god(s) message is cancelled...)
*********
Have I stumbled on a silver bullet in dealing with faith based science?
Ask them about the approxiamate age of the earth...then listen to the sounds of silence.
Come to think about it, I have never had a faith based "scientist"...even answer the question.
There is a VAST difference between 4.5 billion and 10,000>.
Consider evolution...in the US there is no majority or minority.
Half believe in a divine creation and half believe in a natural evolution. For the last 150 yrs. evolution has been the minority...but now it seems its who you ask.
Ask those with advanced degrees in astronomy,geology,biology,chemistry ect...not bible science degrees...and the vast majority will say the evidence leads to an evolutionary world view.
Believe what you will personally or religiously...its just not science Scott.
Many current polls of the US population put it at 50/50. I guess for wot 50 50 is a minority if your point is to present honrst info.
In the history of ideas...supernatural world views have dominated among the general population. evidence please check out darwins first visit to America book banquet at demonico. he country went gaga over him. so many people came out for his talks he became unerved. but for wot that is negative(P.S. one of the books i strongly recommended that you read
Influences that increased evolutions appeal might be: mandatory education, text books that address it, and the numbers attending colleges and universities.
don't mind any of your questions.
Do you believe in a recent special creation by a diety?
You always seem to despise evolution
now check any thing I have ever written about evolution I have always stated that it was sciencee I di not despise evoution just little people like you who keepepeating things to put others down I am a person of faith who sees no conflict with evolution daewin anf just this line: “You always seem to despise evolution” once more tells me your litlr smug sob.
P.S. How many bookds on darwin & evolution that I once thought ypu might be intestined did I PO.M you two or three tat I can ecall. But that was when I thought you were honest now I know better
This message has been closed to further replies by an administrator
Morality Statements
Statement A:
Morality is an evolved repertoire of cognitive and emotional mechanisms with distinct biological underpinnings, as modified by experience acquired throughout the human lifespan.
Statement B:
Morality is not the exclusive domain of Homo sapiens-there is significant cross-species evidence in the scientific literature that animals exhibit "pre-morality" or basic moral behaviors (i.e. those patterns of behavior that parallel central elements of human moral behavior).
Statement C:
Morality is a "human universal" (i.e. exists across all cultures worldwide), a part of human nature acquired during evolution.
Statement D:
Young children and infants demonstrate some aspects of moral cognition and behavior (which precede specific learning experiences and worldview development).
********
Stmbled on these statements....
How would you add to, take away or clarify these statements?
Source coming soon.
Morality is an evolved repertoire of cognitive and emotional mechanisms with distinct biological underpinnings, as modified by experience acquired throughout the human lifespan.
Statement B:
Morality is not the exclusive domain of Homo sapiens-there is significant cross-species evidence in the scientific literature that animals exhibit "pre-morality" or basic moral behaviors (i.e. those patterns of behavior that parallel central elements of human moral behavior).
Statement C:
Morality is a "human universal" (i.e. exists across all cultures worldwide), a part of human nature acquired during evolution.
Statement D:
Young children and infants demonstrate some aspects of moral cognition and behavior (which precede specific learning experiences and worldview development).
********
Stmbled on these statements....
How would you add to, take away or clarify these statements?
Source coming soon.
Filet of Soul
A recent comment by my friend Wot referred to our concept of the soul, and though we've been down this road before, it made me wonder...
What exactly are the components of a soul?
Is there a standard recipe? Some with extra ingredients? Or even a home-brewed definition? I'm dying to know.
What exactly are the components of a soul?
Is there a standard recipe? Some with extra ingredients? Or even a home-brewed definition? I'm dying to know.
Lists and Infinity
Umberto Eco says:
The list is the origin of culture. It's part of the history of art and literature. What does culture want? To make infinity comprehensible. It also wants to create order -- not always, but often. And how, as a human being, does one face infinity? How does one attempt to grasp the incomprehensible? Through lists, through catalogs, through collections in museums and through encyclopedias and dictionaries. There is an allure to enumerating how many women Don Giovanni slept with: It was 2,063, at least according to Mozart's librettist, Lorenzo da Ponte. We also have completely practical lists -- the shopping list, the will, the menu -- that are also cultural achievements in their own right.
The list doesn't destroy culture; it creates it. Wherever you look in cultural history, you will find lists. In fact, there is a dizzying array: lists of saints, armies and medicinal plants, or of treasures and book titles. Think of the nature collections of the 16th century.
Isn't this a fascinating way of looking at lists and cataloging? Lists as a means of keeping the abyss at bay, of distrating us from having to contemplate infinity.
The list is the origin of culture. It's part of the history of art and literature. What does culture want? To make infinity comprehensible. It also wants to create order -- not always, but often. And how, as a human being, does one face infinity? How does one attempt to grasp the incomprehensible? Through lists, through catalogs, through collections in museums and through encyclopedias and dictionaries. There is an allure to enumerating how many women Don Giovanni slept with: It was 2,063, at least according to Mozart's librettist, Lorenzo da Ponte. We also have completely practical lists -- the shopping list, the will, the menu -- that are also cultural achievements in their own right.
The list doesn't destroy culture; it creates it. Wherever you look in cultural history, you will find lists. In fact, there is a dizzying array: lists of saints, armies and medicinal plants, or of treasures and book titles. Think of the nature collections of the 16th century.
Isn't this a fascinating way of looking at lists and cataloging? Lists as a means of keeping the abyss at bay, of distrating us from having to contemplate infinity.
Looted Art
Should historic art be repatriated to its land of origin? If it all went back to its original place, Europe and much of the US would be denuded.
Mother Earth
We tend to think of Earth as a very hospitable planet that is extremely supportive of life and especially of human life . A study of geology informs us that such has absolutely not been the case over much of its history .
Far Right and Far Left Both Suck
The far right and the far left both suck. That is especially true about the issue of global warming. Each side insists that it knows all there is to know and the other side lies in its teeth. A brief look at both sides finds lies all over the place.
What is the truth. Yes, there is global warming and its mostly (but not entirely) due to the industrial revolution. However, as has been the fact of life since the Industrial Revolution began in England in the late 18th Century, technology will solve the problems created by technology.
In other words, both sides miss the important point. The 21st Century will be everything the 20th Century failed to be.
What is the truth. Yes, there is global warming and its mostly (but not entirely) due to the industrial revolution. However, as has been the fact of life since the Industrial Revolution began in England in the late 18th Century, technology will solve the problems created by technology.
In other words, both sides miss the important point. The 21st Century will be everything the 20th Century failed to be.
