Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Go Back   Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community > Main Forums > The Off Topic Forum
Register Forum Rules FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 11-18-2006, 01:45 PM   #381
Cheese
Franchise Player
 
Cheese's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hakan View Post
OT:

I just finished watching the movie 'Jesus Camp'

Has anyone else seen it? It scared the **** out of me.
Found some clips...
Watch what is happening to children...this is my fight CP...this is why you hear me bitch about theism...
This is a scary movie...

a review....that will make you feel very uncomfortable

Jesus Camp trailer


More Camp...

Becky Fisher...a true bigot




Last edited by Cheese; 11-18-2006 at 02:05 PM.
Cheese is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2006, 01:48 PM   #382
FireFly
Franchise Player
 
FireFly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheese View Post
Found some clips...
Watch what is happening to children...this is my fight CP...this is why you hear me bitch about theism...
This is a scary movie...

Jesus Camp trailer


More Camp...

Becky Fisher...a true bigot

Absolutely. Because every Christian is just like that. I don't know why I didn't see it before.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grimbl420 View Post
I can wash my penis without taking my pants off.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moneyhands23 View Post
If edmonton wins the cup in the next decade I will buy everyone on CP a bottle of vodka.
FireFly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2006, 01:56 PM   #383
Cheese
Franchise Player
 
Cheese's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FireFly View Post
Absolutely. Because every Christian is just like that. I don't know why I didn't see it before.
LOL @ the Fly...no my dear...its because children are impressionable...the film shows it perfectly. Let people decide if they want religion at age 18...until that time let their brains grow without chains.
Cheese is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2006, 01:58 PM   #384
jolinar of malkshor
#1 Goaltender
 
jolinar of malkshor's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheese View Post
LOL @ the Fly...no my dear...its because children are impressionable...the film shows it perfectly. Let people decide if they want religion at age 18...until that time let their brains grow without chains.
I agree...it has got to be the stupidest thing to have children communed at such a young age. Absolutly stupid. Having said that, I have met a few priests that also think it is very stupid.
jolinar of malkshor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2006, 02:29 PM   #385
Calgaryborn
Lifetime Suspension
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Creston
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheese View Post
LOL @ the Fly...no my dear...its because children are impressionable...the film shows it perfectly. Let people decide if they want religion at age 18...until that time let their brains grow without chains.
They're not your children. It isn't your decision. Now if it is the public school system and they are indoctrinating my children with an atheistic world view; than I should have something to say about it.
Calgaryborn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2006, 02:42 PM   #386
Flames in 07
#1 Goaltender
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Calgaryborn View Post
They're not your children. It isn't your decision. Now if it is the public school system and they are indoctrinating my children with an atheistic world view; than I should have something to say about it.
Plus the strategy makes tons of sense. Religion doesn't want to compete with Science and critical thought. The best strategy then is get people when they are little kids and can't think critically yet.
Flames in 07 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2006, 02:51 PM   #387
jolinar of malkshor
#1 Goaltender
 
jolinar of malkshor's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flames in 07 View Post
Plus the strategy makes tons of sense. Religion doesn't want to compete with Science and critical thought. The best strategy then is get people when they are little kids and can't think critically yet.
I think religion and science can co-exist.
jolinar of malkshor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2006, 02:58 PM   #388
Cheese
Franchise Player
 
Cheese's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor View Post
I think religion and science can co-exist.
Id like you to explain how both can exist together?
Cheese is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2006, 03:02 PM   #389
JimmytheT
Powerplay Quarterback
 
JimmytheT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Bentley, Alberta
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Calgaryborn View Post
They're not your children. It isn't your decision. Now if it is the public school system and they are indoctrinating my children with an atheistic world view; than I should have something to say about it.
I never had "Atheism" taught to me in class. School equipped me with the faculties to make my own decisions based on evidence and critical thinking.

Schools (public that is) still need to be religiously neutral. Science classes should teach 1st, the scientific method, 2nd discoveries in science, and 3rd how to evalute results of science, and 4th when to disregard or retool a theory because the evidence does not fit it. Science classes should focus on creative thinking to come up with new ideas as to why things occurs, but simultaneously focus equally on good skepticism that gives science its self-correcting mechanism; that is, when new evidence arises that contradicts a mainstream theory, a new theory may have to be formulated to explain the phenonen (see the transition from Newtonian gravitational theory to Einsteinian gravitional theory (relativity).


Mathematics should be taught in much the same way.


There also needs to be more emphasis on the arts IMO.
JimmytheT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2006, 03:09 PM   #390
Flames in 07
#1 Goaltender
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor View Post
I think religion and science can co-exist.
I agree, but tell that to the kids who went to brainwashing camp.
Flames in 07 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2006, 03:17 PM   #391
Calgaryborn
Lifetime Suspension
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Creston
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheese View Post
Id like you to explain how both can exist together?
You have to realize that the Scientific Method was developed by a Christian. The problem science has is when it leaves the method and makes conclusions that it can't back up with more than a "it seems to fit" answer. That is the problem with evolution. Science has accepted it as the only answer to the question and just keeps reworking new hypothesis on how. What's worse is Science has closed its ears to alternate theories and takes a stance of mocking and ridicule rather than rational evaluation. Of course that is most scientists, not all:

http://www.discovery.org/scripts/vie...=discoMainPage
Calgaryborn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2006, 03:48 PM   #392
JimmytheT
Powerplay Quarterback
 
JimmytheT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Bentley, Alberta
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Calgaryborn View Post
You have to realize that the Scientific Method was developed by a Christian. The problem science has is when it leaves the method and makes conclusions that it can't back up with more than a "it seems to fit" answer. That is the problem with evolution. Science has accepted it as the only answer to the question and just keeps reworking new hypothesis on how. What's worse is Science has closed its ears to alternate theories and takes a stance of mocking and ridicule rather than rational evaluation. Of course that is most scientists, not all:

http://www.discovery.org/scripts/vie...=discoMainPage
Your complete lack of knowledge on the subject of evolutionary biology is funny. Please show these alternate theories that you have failed to name here that fit the multitudes of evidence we have now.

If the evidence backs up these theories you are speaking of more comprehensively than modern natural selection theory and sexual selection theory, then I imagine, most evolutionary biologists would support it.

Edit: nice Discovery Institute Link btw. Citing a fundamentalist religious institution as a credible source on the scientific method
JimmytheT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2006, 03:53 PM   #393
JimmytheT
Powerplay Quarterback
 
JimmytheT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Bentley, Alberta
Exp:
Default

Oh and the scientific method pre-dates Christianity. It was first used in the Ancient Aegean Islands of Greece, before Pythagoras and his followers felt that it needed to be quashed.
JimmytheT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2006, 04:12 PM   #394
photon
The new goggles also do nothing.
 
photon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

I thought modern scientific method had its foundations in early Muslim philosophy... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History...entific_method

Or at least that's what I remember from school.
__________________
Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position.
But certainty is an absurd one.
photon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2006, 04:25 PM   #395
FireFly
Franchise Player
 
FireFly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheese View Post
LOL @ the Fly...no my dear...its because children are impressionable...the film shows it perfectly. Let people decide if they want religion at age 18...until that time let their brains grow without chains.
Too funny. I love how you insert insults when you respond to me, no matter how thinly they are veiled. the fly? That's not a slip. Do I ever call you "the moldy bacteria"?

I'm not even going to respond to that. You're like a Nazi that hates all religions and blames all evil on them. Funny how appropriate that comparison actually is since the Nazis really did blame the Jews for all the problems in the world. Different fingers...
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grimbl420 View Post
I can wash my penis without taking my pants off.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moneyhands23 View Post
If edmonton wins the cup in the next decade I will buy everyone on CP a bottle of vodka.
FireFly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2006, 04:32 PM   #396
Calgaryborn
Lifetime Suspension
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Creston
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by photon View Post
I thought modern scientific method had its foundations in early Muslim philosophy... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History...entific_method

Or at least that's what I remember from school.
Thanks for the information and correction. I guess one could at least say that the scientific method was introduced to the western by a christian; That being Rodger Bacon.
Calgaryborn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2006, 04:55 PM   #397
photon
The new goggles also do nothing.
 
photon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Yes Bacon definately contributed as well, though modern scientific method is quite different than what Bacon described.

Interesting though... Bacon's method puts experimentation first and a hypothesis is supposed to follow out of observations of the experimentation all the while getting independant verification of experiments. While Creationism gives the hypothesis with no experimentation (it makes no predictions), only observation is allowed.
__________________
Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position.
But certainty is an absurd one.
photon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2006, 05:00 PM   #398
Calgaryborn
Lifetime Suspension
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Creston
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmytheT View Post
Your complete lack of knowledge on the subject of evolutionary biology is funny.
I wasn't aware that evolutionary biology has been observed beyond random changes which occur naturally within every species. Nothing new has evolved since Darwin introduced his theory. Science has only observed changes within a species.

Anthony Flew who is an Atheist has come to the conclusion that there must have been some Intelligent design because the world and particularly life is far too complexed to have happened by chance. There's a hypothesis for you. One that can be observed in Nature.

Quote:
Edit: nice Discovery Institute Link btw. Citing a fundamentalist religious institution as a credible source on the scientific method
Yes I see. It has religious affiliation so must be disregarded. Nice open mind. Perhaps that is why Darwins theory is even regarded today. The idea that our existence was by design and really we are watching the winding down or erosion of that masterpiece has religious overtones and therefore must be disregarded at all cost. You would embrace something less logical and that can't be observed rather than seeing the obvious.
Calgaryborn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2006, 05:07 PM   #399
Cheese
Franchise Player
 
Cheese's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FireFly View Post
Too funny. I love how you insert insults when you respond to me, no matter how thinly they are veiled. the fly? That's not a slip. Do I ever call you "the moldy bacteria"?

I'm not even going to respond to that. You're like a Nazi that hates all religions and blames all evil on them. Funny how appropriate that comparison actually is since the Nazis really did blame the Jews for all the problems in the world. Different fingers...
sorry Ms Fly...my tongue is always firmly embedded in my cheek when posting to ewe...LOL. Thanks for the Nazi reference...its always nice to see the Christians back up their theories with profound references. One day you and Mr BornAgain have to move into the next century.
By the way...Moldy Bacteria wouldnt bother me...I understand the need to let it loose sometimes.
Cheese is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2006, 05:11 PM   #400
Cheese
Franchise Player
 
Cheese's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Calgaryborn View Post
Thanks for the information and correction. I guess one could at least say that the scientific method was introduced to the western by a christian; That being Rodger Bacon.
Roger Bacon
1214 - 1294
English philosopher and scientist.
He was interested in alchemy, the biological and physical sciences and magic. Many discoveries have been credited to him, including the magnifying lens. He foresaw the extensive use of gunpowder and mechanical cars, boats, and planes.

In 1266, at the invitation of his friend Pope Clement IV, he began his Opus majus / Great Work, a compendium of all branches of knowledge. In 1268 he sent this with his Opus minus / Lesser Work and other writings to the pope. In 1277 Bacon was condemned and imprisoned by the Christian church for `certain novelties´ (heresy) and not released until 1292.

Bacon wrote in Latin and his works include On Mirrors, Metaphysical and On the Multiplication of Species. He followed the maxim ` Cease to be ruled by dogmas and authorities; look at the world!´

A paradigm example is the treatment of John Philopon in the 6th century, the only experimental scientist in the whole of Christian history before the 13th century: he was branded a heretic and everything he did in the sciences was effectively ignored. Though he wasn't condemned for being a scientist, he was condemned for thinking for himself in matters of theology, precisely in his effort to make science and religion compatible. But by opposing exactly that process, the Church killed any prospect for science under its watch for nearly ten whole centuries. You can call it collateral damage, but it's damage all the same. An accidentally dead Iraqi is still a victim of war, and so was medieval science a victim of Christianity.

Aquinas and Roger Bacon have been wheeled out here, but they are also paradigm examples: both post 1200 AD (hence again a thousand years too late), and both responding to the revival of ancient (pagan) scientific and philosophical literature and ways of thinking. At that point, that meant only some Aristotle--whose work was already largely obsolete even in antiquity. The real discoveries of what the ancients had achieved after him would take another century or more. But again, the new ideas under Aquinas and Bacon were not inspired by Christianity but in spite of it. They were inspired, instead, by the ideas of ancient pagans, and the challenges they posed to Christian ways of thinking.

Without Authority


and this bit which doubts his scientific notions....

Roger Bacon has been a popular martyr for science since the nineteenth century. He was a scholastic theologian who was keen to claim Aristotle for the Christian faith. He was not a scientist in any way we would recognise and his ideas are not nearly so revolutionary as they are often painted. In chapter 12 of his book, White writes of Roger “the charges on which St. Bonaventura silenced him, and Jerome of Ascoli imprisoned him, and successive popes kept him in prison for fourteen years, were "dangerous novelties" and suspected sorcery.” This is untrue. As Lindberg says “his imprisonment, if it occurred at all (which I doubt) probably resulted with his sympathies for the radical “poverty” wing of the Franciscans (a wholly theological matter) rather than from any scientific novelties which he may have proposed.”

More BornAgain myth exploded

Last edited by Cheese; 11-18-2006 at 05:19 PM.
Cheese is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:16 PM.

Calgary Flames
2024-25




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Calgarypuck 2021 | See Our Privacy Policy