Wouldn't it suck if the people that spent time and money on religion found out the atheists were right?
So I crashed a church bbq yesterday...
- Thread starter WritingSolution
- Start date
- Status
Wouldn't it suck if the people that spent time and money on religion found out the atheists were right?
lol thats like the 5th time i've heard something about vbs today.. no need to argue with these cats.. churches 'brainwash' yet most kids watch like 9 hours of television a day.. ya i'm sure its the churches that are doing the brainwashing..
Sorry but when it comes to debating on whether sunday school brainwashes kids i have to agree with the athiest members for at least many christian denominations.
They teach the kids songs like "Jesus loves me yes I know for the bible tells me so" for fuck sake. What kid of looped ass logic is that? Think about it.
IMO Sunday school needs to be nothing more than daycare so the parents can attend the sermon with maybe a few bible stories thrown in for entertainment and education, and the youth groups should be able to do what they want.
Sorry to encourage the retarded off topic debate WritingSolution. All you said was the word church and every athiest on the board had to pounce on it like a retarded cat hoping to push their beliefs on a few people crazed jehovah witness stalker style. Then complain when they see the word God on anything that isn't a church because of course in their brains that just isn't fair. Then of course every religious person has to take it personally and defend their beliefs by googling every quote they can find and interpreting it for everyone within an unfitting context just to cast doubt on what the other side said. Then all sides starts defending their, what no one will admit is FAITH not fact, by saying the word Science in nearly every sentence till we have over 500+ threads of everyone arguing with what little physics knowledge we managed to scrape from the discovery channel.
Welcome to a wickedfire debate
I try to start one at least once a month.
They teach the kids songs like "Jesus loves me yes I know for the bible tells me so" for fuck sake. What kid of looped ass logic is that? Think about it.
IMO Sunday school needs to be nothing more than daycare so the parents can attend the sermon with maybe a few bible stories thrown in for entertainment and education, and the youth groups should be able to do what they want.
Sorry to encourage the retarded off topic debate WritingSolution. All you said was the word church and every athiest on the board had to pounce on it like a retarded cat hoping to push their beliefs on a few people crazed jehovah witness stalker style. Then complain when they see the word God on anything that isn't a church because of course in their brains that just isn't fair. Then of course every religious person has to take it personally and defend their beliefs by googling every quote they can find and interpreting it for everyone within an unfitting context just to cast doubt on what the other side said. Then all sides starts defending their, what no one will admit is FAITH not fact, by saying the word Science in nearly every sentence till we have over 500+ threads of everyone arguing with what little physics knowledge we managed to scrape from the discovery channel.
Welcome to a wickedfire debate
I try to start one at least once a month.
Enter Writing Solution Carrying a 30 Pack of Miller Lite....
"WHERE'S THE FUCKING PARTY!!!!!!"
Oh....ummm, go get you some food kids.
Lol
btw I showed a good friend of mine the other thread where everyone was debating religion and physics and the universe stuff. He's got an advanced degree in physics and was a physist for awhile in his career. I figured he might get some entertainment out of it cus he loves that kind of discussion. His thoughts on it were, and he said it in an ever so polite way that made me laugh, "If I had questions about marketing and making a website your online friends would be the first people I'd talk to. They'd definitely be a big help and be good people to talk to. If I had questions about the universe and physics and stuff...umm...not so much." hehe idk that kinda shut me up.
I'm sure your friend is a nice, engaging fellow but unfortunately, there are flaws in his logic, premise and a priori assumption.
I say that based on my premises which I site here:
1) There is a big difference between physics (objective science based on theories and evidence supported by the scientific method)
and
2) Internet business. If we assume that business is a "cousin" of economics, your friend will know that business, like economics is a social science. Dealing with people hence is is intrinsically subjective in nature.
In other words, facts are facts (physics) whether the person stating them is a high school drop out (2+2=4) or getting a PHD in physics from Cambridge University with his or her specialization being in theory or experimentation......
In other words, if in the course of a lively WF debate, you make an argument that, for instance "it takes more work to travel farther" and you cite as "proof" of your argument's Newton's Law, namely:
Newton's Second Law
Your argument is as valid as any other person's on the planet. In fact, your friend could come along and say "hey that's not right, I'm getting my PHD in physics from Caltech I know more than you!".
Unfortunately, 9 out of 10 would believe HIM over YOU. Sadly, that's what happens far too often in the media especially.....
As demonstrated above, you were "right" and "he was wrong" even though you don't have the PHD in Physics (I am assuming) and he DOES.
The validity of objective facts are not contingent upon the "validity" in terms of credentials, life experience, etc. of the person who is stating them.
That said, I would be more inclined to investigate arguments the validity of arguments about physics made on an Internet Marketing board than I would on say PhysicsForums.com.
That is why it is important (IMHO) when discussing scientific matters to site actual sources - preferably peer-reviewed work that meets the criteria of scientific validity used in mainstream science.
Lastly, your friend is probably also assuming that there aren't any people formally trained in physics on this board - another false assumption. Funnily, I've spoken with at least one person getting a PHD in physics now and doing IM on the side...
Tell your friend not to forget the scientists' creed "Interroga Omnia" - Question Everything!
Q.E.D
a QUICK PS.
I'd encourage him to check out Rosemblum's work (former head of the UC San Diego physics dept) recently published by the prestigious Oxford University Press.
(http://physics.ucsc.edu/people/faculty/rosenblum.html)
He makes a good point when he talks about the need for people with difference perspectives and lacking some of the biases of the traditional scientist, when investigating matters.
Specifically he says:
"Might someone unemcumbered by year of training in the USE of quantum theory have a new insight? After all, it was a child who pointed out that the emperor wore no clothes...."
I'd add that it was the lowly mail clerk (Einstein) not the high brow physicists at Imperial or Oxford at the time who forever changed the course of modern physics as we know it.
What if someone said "no offense but when I want advice about mail, I'll talk to mail clerks...when I want advice about physics and the universe and stuff, I'd talk to Cambridge/Imperial/Oxford/MIT/Harvard/<insert name of top tier school here> graduates...."
^riddar
I think you took it in the wrong way. I don't think he disputed some of the laws of physics that were stated. I think it was more of the interpretation.
A better analogy might be, say you're talking to someone who doesn't know very much about computers. They state, "Computers can do over a billion math problems in a second. Computers are much more intelligent than humans." Any person with a fair amount of computer knowledge would see the flaw in that. Their problem wouldn't be that they said computers can do over a billion math problems in a second because that is correct. We'd be more likely to facepalm at their lack of understanding the difference between programming and a machine's ability to be efficient.
See what i'm saying?
nonphysicists like us can quote newtons second law all we want and even understand it. It doesn't mean we truly understand how planets orbit the sun or have any business talkin shit like we know what we're talking about. It's just like we go over to warriorforum and laugh at them. Sure they're saying stuff like backlinks help you rank and having the keywords on your landing page helps with quality score which may be all true. It doesn't mean they know what they're talking about or even have a fuckin clue what they're doing. So yeah we have a right to laugh at their ignorance. It's the same thing when we go out of our field and try to be all expert like. You think they shouldn't laugh at us? lol
I think you took it in the wrong way. I don't think he disputed some of the laws of physics that were stated. I think it was more of the interpretation.
A better analogy might be, say you're talking to someone who doesn't know very much about computers. They state, "Computers can do over a billion math problems in a second. Computers are much more intelligent than humans." Any person with a fair amount of computer knowledge would see the flaw in that. Their problem wouldn't be that they said computers can do over a billion math problems in a second because that is correct. We'd be more likely to facepalm at their lack of understanding the difference between programming and a machine's ability to be efficient.
See what i'm saying?
nonphysicists like us can quote newtons second law all we want and even understand it. It doesn't mean we truly understand how planets orbit the sun or have any business talkin shit like we know what we're talking about. It's just like we go over to warriorforum and laugh at them. Sure they're saying stuff like backlinks help you rank and having the keywords on your landing page helps with quality score which may be all true. It doesn't mean they know what they're talking about or even have a fuckin clue what they're doing. So yeah we have a right to laugh at their ignorance. It's the same thing when we go out of our field and try to be all expert like. You think they shouldn't laugh at us? lol
LOL. Nice analogy. You are witty, haha...
I guess I take issue with the whole idea around being an "expert" and whether or not we have the right to "question". I think everyone who has taken the time to investigate the facts can give an educated opinion on it. I mean I know people who really think if you didn't go to HBS or Wharton, you are a "non" business person. Seriously, the fact that you may or I or anyone else might make 10x more than them, doesn't mean anything to them......
That's why I like one of my favorite physicist's quotes (Brian Josephson, who by the way won that Nobel at 33 not at 27 as I thought....correction):
"He has said that one of his guiding principles has been nullius in verba (take nobody's word), saying that ' if scientists as a whole denounce an idea, this should not necessarily be taken as proof that the said idea is absurd; rather, one should examine carefully the alleged grounds for such opinions and judge how well these stand up to detailed scrutiny.' "
In my reality - I don't accept anything as "fact" so to speak on important matters, until I've taken the time to PERSONALLY investigate a variety of opinions. So to use your analogy, I thought all your SEO-Empire posts were fantastic. But I'd never rush out and invest thousands of dollars into implementing it -UNTIL I HAD INVESTIGATED IT FURTHER AND SEE WHAT OTHER PEOPLE HAD TO SAY!!
I'd also look to see if you had some kind of bias (ex. you are selling hosting so you obviously are promoting the idea to go out and build sites...).
The same thing happens in science - THE SAME THING!
People think scientists are robots, vulcans. Everyone who has their "theory" they are motivated by the desire to get that Nobel, to have that prestigious professorship. Seriously, if you talk to enough people on the inside you'll see why John Hagelin (BA Dartmouth, PHD in Theoretic Physics from Harvard, worked at Cern doing particle acceleration) said,
"never make the mistake of assuming the scientific community is SCIENTIFIC"
Seriously, there is ALOT of politics in science. That's why I get frustrated sometimes with the whole "science vs. religion" debate. It's clear to see how religion is used politically but people have no idea how science is politicized as well. Presently, there are so many known phenomena at work in sciene that could be used to do well, but because of geopolitical interests, they just don't see the light of day....
But, in my slightly supercilious opinion, I have to admit that most people are just too intellectually lazy to investigate this stuff.
To use that analogy again, they won't go out and say read a post by you, a post by Jon and maybe go to the library and pic up a book on psychological marketing. Then after comparing different "interpretations" try them all to see what works for them....
The same thing with science. The difference between what you or I might say and the difference between someone discussing physical laws is that they are OBJECTIVE.
If you say 2+2=4 and a Harvard Trained math professor jumps on here and says "you don't know shit I am the Math expert I have the degree" - who is right?! Who should you believe?
The fact is, if both have opinions with some logical and intellectual legitimacy, the smart person would go out and INVESTIGATE FURTHER.....
The average person would discount what you had to say over the Math professor thugh. They'd figure "deliguy can quote all the math books he wants be he's no expert, he didn't take the time to spend 8 years at MIT to learn calculus, differential equations, etc.".
Does your personal resume have anything to do with 2+2=4?
Facts are facts. If you studied math on your own and got every single problem right, who says your opinion isn't as valid as the guy who went to MIT?
Further more, because you didn't learn those fundamentally objective concepts as the same old stuffy people who went to MIT (I'm being a bit biased here, lol) perhaps you'd get some insight into things in a way that someone with a traditional background wouldn't...
If a person was smart, they'd go and read what other people had to say about the two opinions "one says two apples plus two apples EQUALS 4 and the other says it equals 5".....then and only THEN would they draw their own conclusions after evaluating the different opinions.
I remember when I was a n00b I can't tell you how much money I saved myself from investigating some of those so-called internet expert. After evaluating the different interpretations I didn't care what the corporate types had to say about what worked. They weren't getting the results that people who hadn't gone to get their MA's in interactive media at NYU did, so that helped me to decide what I'd pay attention to and what I wouldn't...
But anyway, this is just my way of seeing the world. You know in terms of my own personal history, my parents who happened to be scientists taught me to question everything even what science says because it's only through questioning can you arrive at the truth.
And lastly, to come clean a little, I actually did go out and build some databases sites after reading the badass thread about the Oregon Dating/Madlib site, lol :love-smiley-013:
- Status