eightyknots

For those who are interesting in going , here is an article published today by a fellow Australian:

http://billmuehlenberg.com/2014/12/08/atheists-and-the-afterlife/

Maybe we could afford a better health system here in Australia if we got the registered religions to pay their fair share of taxes ?

But then, how do we make the Atheists pay their fair share?

I agree but on the other hand, try getting Labour or Liberal out of power and see how far you get.As I just said, you don't have a free vote in Australia, the country is controlled by Labour and Liberal and we all suffer because of it.

Great Wall? Are you serious?? I didn't know goats pee'd red. Not that I drink a lot but I can and do buy Johnny Walker and Jacobs Creek locally.

Did you know Jacobs Creek is a real creek? Got a picture of a Mate somewhere standing next to a typical Oz minor Hwy road bridge complete with "Jacobs Creek" sign peeing into the creek!

I have been to Jacobs Creek: it is a lovely place and they make a lovely drop too. At the winery they assured me that JACOBS CREEK is the most frequently stolen sign in Australia. Apparently, quite a number of people want to hang it in their bar at home.

Dazza, I remember you telling us about your amazing health before. That's fantastic for you and yes if you don't use the health system it may look unfair. Until you need it that is. Just like single people look at family allowance, child care benefit, the education system and say "but I don't have kids so why am I supporting all these other people." Like people who don't own cars wondering why their taxes go to roads. Even, dare I say it, people who don't own or travel by plane wondering why we waste taxpayer dollars on CASA.

It's called society.

As the oft-repeated quotation says: Taxation is the price of Civilisation

Tax rates are very low in Somalia, Zimbabwe, etc. ...but I am not in a hurry to move there.

你们 是 本 但 但是 我 非 唐 同名.

我们 所 外国 花 很 多, 老 半 便 不 高 新!

 

Are you this, but the same name, but I am not Don.

 

We spend a lot of foreign countries, it is not the old semi-tech!

 

WTF?!

I hope you're not getting too pedantic here, Bikky!

I have only ever seen Cool Iris used on a Microsoft - based computer.

Kijk uit! Ik kan ook Nederlands spreken.

Eu posso falar português também.

 

Now your it!

Ik kan ook Nederlands verstaan.

Nederlands is eigenlijk een makkelijke taal om the spellen, maar de grammatica is moeilijker.

One Abbott, 2 Bishops, 3/4 of the way to a real church.

If Peter had not resigned from politics in 2007 we could have had Abbott & Costello at the helm of Australia.

...now we're getting somewhere. This thread might just make it to 2000 after all.

Fourteen years too late: it's already 2014 and there are only four weeks left of that too.

What's really funny is when both teams at a sporting event call on god's support.

Yes, and this is done in wars as well: very sad indeed.

I don't feel any more need to explore Scientology than I do Mormonism or any other religious doctrine. Why would I when you have the religion of science - and that ain't Scientology.

Yes, and therein lies the problem. Speciation is observable but macro evolution is not. It is simply a theory based on speciation extrapolated. Because macro evolution has not been observed, it is simply a belief, a faith or, as you term it, "the religion of science". In the end, it is the religion of science ...which (pardon the pun) is always evolving. This means your beliefs need to be adjusted and at times re-assigned considerably. On the other hand, a belief in God is straightforward, the KISS principle faith, if you like. If God made the world, and you believe this, then it simply a different religion from the "religion of science".

In summary, some may "have the religion of science" (not Scientology) and others have a religion based on an amazing designer and creator who made the universe, the laws of the universe, the mega items such as stars and the micro items such as sub-atomic particles ...and everything in between. The stupendous complexity is difficult to comprehend with the human mind and, no doubt, would be far more difficult to design than to comprehend. Yet many claim that everything came together without a designer through the process of evolution.

My belief system is that, having fairly examined the theory of evolution, I cannot believe it to be valid because it is simply too improbable that exceedingly complex organisms have evolved from pond scum into what they are now, especially when there is the h-u-g-e problem of irreducible complexity. Many components of a complex organism simply cannot work in part, for instance the eye. It is extremely improbable that the eye components evolved in their various parts and somehow came together to work as a unit, all without a designer. Such a concept stretches entirely beyond my thinking and therefore I cannot accept the "religion of science" for myself. It is far less improbable for me to accept that God designed and created it all. As a result, after thinking this through, I have rejected evolution (or "the religion of science") as improbable and I have become a believer in God.

I've noticed you can talk complete rubbish and people don't notice if you include one of these

Surely we're all barking up the wrong tree: I think this is none other than Mrs FT!

{EDIT} Appropriate smiley face added.

Totally Agree. Gets to the point where you can't even ask a question without some smart**** saying ignore him he should read more. I thought forums were places for people to share information, this seems to be more a place for snobs and egomaniacs to convince the mere plebs how bloody good they are. The bonus is there are some decent folk on here.Cheers Geoff13

In fact, there are many decent people on this forum. We can't allow a few to put of the majority.

It IS a bit intimidating at times. One should not be put off expressing a view, however. IF you haven't read previous posts on a thread don't expect to get away with that. Nothing is something simply because someone says it is . Be prepared to come up with some evidence. We do get some trolls, but they go after a while. I don't know a better site though. Nev

I don't know a better site either. In fact, some of the North American based forum sites are so snobbish that, unless you're an aeronautical engineer with a degree from Embry-Riddle university, you are denigrated as scum.

I think we should be thankful for Ian's and Corinne's generosity that keeps this site going. ALSO, for many people who have worthwhile things to share from which we can all learn.

Suggest that to a few victims of child abuse committed at the hands of members of the clergy and see if they agree with you. I'm sure even God would think twice about whether it was `so imperative in the scheme of things' that they should be forgiven their sins.rgmwa

I agree with you rgmwa, that the behaviour by the child abusing clergy is absolutely gross and needs to be pursued to the full extent of the law. They are a despicable lot who have given the life of many young people a very miserable start by robbing them of their innocence.

GG, I'm impressed by your ability to find a biblical quotation to support every situation and circumstance, but I'm really at a loss to understand the world you live in. For example, Marty mentioned Original Sin, and having been brought up Catholic that's a familiar concept. However, some six decades later the idea that I somehow inevitably share in Adam and Eve's guilt just seems like superstitious nonsense, and I'm sure any God worth his/her salt would see the basic injustice in that notion. So does your black and white view that we can't enter heaven (wherever and whatever that may be) unless we are free of sin, and that we are all sinners and inevitably doomed unless we repent (and what does that mean exactly?). And let's not even start on the question of the origin of our species and all the other life forms on the planet, the planet itself and the universe(s?) in general. Fortunately we are all free to make up our own minds on these subjects, and while you would probably see me as an incorrigible and unrepentant sinner, I'm sorry to say that nothing that you have said makes any sense to me.rgmwa

Hello Jaba, when I see remarks like this and Bex's I can't tell if you are both goofing off (fair enough, it is the funny section) or are actually serious and really haven't looked into basic Christian theology at all. For the past 6000 odd years mankind has been living under the curse of sin and death so thus we can expect to see disease, death, suffering, sickness and the like. I'm sitting here right now looking at one of the natural wonders of the world, it is an absolutely fabulous view - but it is certainly not perfect as a closer inspection reveals. Something happened; what was designed perfect has been marred. Same with the human body, terrific design but with flaws.... read about it in books like Genesis and Romans eg 5v12 "For this cause, even as by one man sin entered into the world, and by sin death; and thus death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned"

We can see the effect of sin in everyone, in varying levels people can be greedy, they can lie, cheat, steal.... all sorts of bad things happen daily. Of course it is always easy for us to see this in other people, not so easy to recognize that it is the same problem in oneself! By definition the only place without sin is heaven which is why we cannot be accepted there with our sin.

...and that is why the forgiveness of sins is so imperative in the whole scheme of things.

I don't know where I got it, but I thought it was a low bridge or archway somewhere. Hence "easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle" meant it'd have to pretty much have to shuffle forward on its knees.

It's a small gate in the walls of Jerusalem. This could be kept open because it is hard for an army to invade through there in a hurry. Because it is narrow and low, it is more difficult a for a camel to get through it.

Sorry GG, but I think you're a little misguided there. The symbol is known as the Rod of Asclepius. Asclepias was the ancient Greek god of medicine - son of Apollo and a mortal woman. The fact that this symbol was mentioned in Acts does not signify it's Christian.By the way, as a keen bible student, you have no doubt noted that Acts also states Christ was crucified on a tree.

 

Ever wondered why we still symbolise Easter (more accurately named Eostre) with rabbits and eggs? Wouldn't happen to be an ancient pagan festival would it?

 

Coincidental that Christmas and the solstice (a major pagan festival) are so close together?

 

I don't think so!

 

A clever strategy isn't it? Absorb and conquer ...

Some Christians have recognised that and do not celebrate Christmas and Easter because of their pagan origin.

...

I was on the lookout for references to this continent but can't recall him saying the fleet actually got here. He seemed to be saying they knew of this place and traded with people who came here regularly. If he is right about the extent of Chinese exploration that may give Beijing added leverage in future dealings... Perhaps reason enough for the west to downplay his theories.

 

Their map of ice-free Northern Greenland sure got my attention; it deserves more study.

When the Vikings "discovered" Greenland they called it Greenland for a reason: it was lush and green. They decided to settle this area. Slowly but surely, due to global cooling, Greenland is increasingly becoming white. I have flown over it and I think by now it should be renamed Whiteland. Oh for a bit more global warming to bring Greenland back to the green land it once was.

Sorry for the thread drift but I think it is significant that a number of ancient sources all say the same thing, that the world was a much warmer place ...and that the people who want to "combat" global warming are trying to stop the world from going back to an earlier equilibrium when the planet was a bit warmer.

History is full of "invaders" from the dawn of time (Sunday, October 23, 4004 B.C), that's what we do, conquer in order to expand our race be it Romans, Mongolians, Vikings, Anglosaxons, Spanish, etc, etc....

I would appreciate the title "Conqueror" in future as it's more heroic and manly, thanks.

Bex The Conqueror : I hope you will conquer the recreational aviation market with your proposed donk!

And now here's some local news: http://www.astronomy.pomona.edu/archeo/aborigines/flood.htm

The concept of the Great Flood has come up in nearly all civilisations in some way or other. Because many of them have been passed from generation to generation verbally some details have been added or lost.

However the theme of a great flood is still there. This is likely to equate to the so-called Noah's flood recorded in the bible. I am sure that explains why there are shells imbedded in the highest reaches of Mount Everest.

ahhh what absolute horsehockey.

How you guys can argue against something, without the faintest understanding of the mechanisms behind evolution, gives me pause to wonder about what critical thinking process (if any) you guys bring to bear in all other aspects of your life.

 

Like I (and many others) have said, go read a scientific explanation of evolution with your eyes and mind open.'

 

....Random chance SEEMS far too unbelievable.... sheesh - don't believe in it, go read evolutionary theory, then you don't have to believe it, you can read evidence.

 

There are probably more pages published per month just about aspects of evolution, than are contained the entire bible. Go read a few articles, and for god's sake try to get out from behind a few well-worn, intellectually dishonest phrases.

 

And by the way, do you BELIEVE in the theory of Quantum Electrodynamics?? No? Neither do I. We both accept that it is a valid description of the phenomena involving electrically charged particles interacting by means of exchange of photons and represents the quantum counterpart of classical electromagnetism giving a complete account of matter and light interaction. We don't BELIEVE the theory, but it currently os the best description of natural behaviour ( and a bloody accurate description at that).

 

Same for the theory of Evolution. Just suck it up, accept it and get over your goat herder ramblings.

Thanks for your post, horsefeathers.

You wrote about the mechanism of evolution. I have read a number of books trying to explain this but the more I read it the more I became convinced that all these complex things found in every creature (even basic creatures such as bacteria) are very unlikely to have come together by pure chance. After a great deal of critical thinking, ultimately, I have come to the conclusion that it is virtually impossible for all that to have happened in the way described in these publications. I am also sceptical of all the cover ups that have taken place to give evolutions more credence. These cover ups have been exposed over time but they were deliberate because scientist were so desperate to prove Darwinism that they falsified things to get published.

The problem is that evolution books 'clutch at straws' and quote observations within a species and then expect the reader to believe that complete species changes took place which are widely different ...despite the fact that millions of years have been given. Can anyone really believe that horses will one day grow feathers?

That's fine 80kts. If you feel that God is a better theory than evolution as a way of explaining the natural world, then feel free to believe that. It doesn't mean that you're right and more that it means Darwin was wrong.rgmwa

By the same token, rgmwa, you can continue to believe that everthing came into being through the processes of Darwinism/evolution without any designer. It all comes down to one thing: what does one believe -what is ultimately more plausible.

In my opinion, the main reason why people do not wish to acknowledge that God created everything is simple. If God designed everything, we must be accountable to him in some way. Our consciences tell us that somewhere in our life we have said something nasty, taken something we shouldn't have, hurt someone unjustly, etc, ...we may have to face the music for this. This is so abhorrent that people cling to the illogical explanation of Darwin (no designer) rather than believing what is pretty obvious, that there must be a divine designer, God.

Out of curiosity I had a look at that article which talks about the impossibility of a complex organ like a flagellum evolving by eveolutionary processes. It concludes by saying:"The example of the bacterial flagellum shows that the existence of complex biological structures that require for their operation the simultaneous functioning of their multiple parts cannot be accounted for by the Darwinian theory of evolution. In fact, according to this theory, such structures should not really exist at all.

 

This means the theory is less than inadequate. Not only does it fail to account for what we see, it implies that what we see should not even exist in the first place. Any theory that is so at odds with observable reality is quite obviously false.

 

So how did the superbly-designed motor of the bacterial flagellum come into existence? The only reasonable inference is that it was fashioned by a transcendent intelligence.

 

The term that is usually used to refer to such intelligence is God."

 

All he is doing is replacing one theory (evolution) with another theory (God) because he hasn't got a clue how else to explain it. I'd hardly call that progress, and it certainly isn't very convincing.

 

rgmwa

I find it pretty convincing RgMwa. It is, in fact more believable that a designer framed the universe, the stars, the planets and -in the case of observable Earth- the various living things that populate our planet; similarly, the laws of physics, genetics and chemical bonds. Random chance seems far too unbelievable, certainly less believable that such complex things such as the bacterial flagellum, an insect's multi-faceted eye or a mammal's reproductive system came into being without any design. Frequently we hear "evolution designed it this way" or similar words. Evolution simply cannot design but I believe God can (and has).

Science, by observation, can record these stupendous designs ...and marvel at it. Ultimately, it reflects on God as the wonderful designer.

The problem for you Octave is that you are arguing about a theory that was never proved, and Darwin was honest enough to admit that, however, aside from what we've already seen on this thread, here's another interesting link for you http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/higher-things/2011/sep/6/darwins-error-disproving-theory-evolution/, and if you google "Darwin Theory Disproved, you will see quite a number of discussions

Probably because everyone else was over it after the first few posts. If you want to spend time on this, I'd recommend sites which focus on the battle between "Evolutionists", "Creativists" and "Catastrophists" and I'm sure you will find hours of information.

That is a great article Turbz. It touches on the issue of irreducible complexity.