Very simple math proves the existance of God

a reply to: Cogito, Ergo Sum

Krauss also seemed to define quite clearly and scientifically what he was describing as "nothing".

Have you read his book? Yes, he admits that he's not talking about "something from nothing", but he does so at the end of the text, and in an almost "oh, by the way" manner. I read an interview with him where he admitted that the book was titled "A Universe from Nothing" not because that's what he was showing, but because it was provocative -- it would sell more books. A far better book on the subject is Jim Holt's Why Does the World Exist?, and after looking at various approaches to the question, it becomes obvious that the most honest answer is "I dunno."

My real beef with Krause is not his science, but his arrogance, his belittlement of philosophy and his overt promotion of scientism, which I think is both dangerous and foolish. I have little doubt that he and people of his ilk would have no problem with a technocracy, and even as a scientist, I think that would be a huge mistake. It was good to see Albert take a little wind out of his sails, and to have Krauss show his true side in his "moronic philosopher" response to valid criticism.

What a waste of time this thread (and others like) is as none of this provable. Debating it with even semi-intelligent people is a waste of time. No matter what side you're on you'll offend the opposing side with your opinion and be offended by theirs since basically both sides are saying "It's very obvious I'm right, therefore you must be stupid" ... and have been since forever.

Eject! Eject! Revisit topic when humanity is more enlightened/advanced

a reply to: RedParrotHead

What is provable. That we came from monkeys? So your whole life is based on the assumption that you should be throwing your own # at other people because of some paper that was written at a fancy school? What a great life to lead.

Let me guess. You don't want to have kids because it would just add to world overpopulation. You are so evolved that you actually think that the very basic and first instinct of any species, procreation, is just for lesser species, not smart guys like you. Way to get rid of yourself stupid. Anyone that chooses to bring a child into this world is miles behind you intellectually because God doesn't exist and it makes me sound smarter to be an atheist.

The funny thing is that because you 'supersmart' people think you're so smart, you're gonna breed yourself out of existence. Animals are smarter than you because they know to breed to continue their species.

a reply to: wtf2008

Howdy,

Again, I know I'm not the person you are addressing, so please forgive me for again pushing my way into your conversation. I really do hope that I'm not overstepping by posting here...

You certainly do like to bring up monkeys throwing number signs in a lot of threads. Monkeys have societies you know... They don't all fling feces at each other constantly. I feel like you are really insulting monkeys unfairly here.

That said, perhaps you have a point about reproducing. I've seen some shocking claims (sorry, don't have any actual cited info, so take this with a grain of salt) that suggest intelligence is negatively correlated with number of children. Certainly, this would be a worrying trend if true. At least some portion of intelligence is genetic (although I cannot say with certainty or cited material how much), so it may be true that average intelligence may be driven downward.

And yet, overpopulation of the Earth is almost a reality. Sure, there is a lot of Earth left to populate, at the cost of destroying natural ecosystems, driving many species to extinction. But do we not currently enjoy our quality of life in industrialized and post-industrialized nations? Do we not enjoy consuming at our current levels? Well, we cannot do so indefinitely, and adding more people to the world certainly decreases available resources and thus our standards of living.

Consider this, though. There are other ways to benefit mankind than to reproduce and spread the genes of intelligent people. By merely contributing to mankind's knowledge, a smart man/woman might do more good (helping many people grow intellectually or indirectly benefiting them through technological advances) than can be done by passing on his/her genes.

To lay my cards on the table, I certainly do not want to have children (and no, I don't consider myself "supersmart"). Not because of overpopulation, but because as a child I experienced many things (not as much as many people in less industrialized nations, and certainly there were many less fortunate than me in my own nation) that I would not wish upon another human. I do not want to choose to make another human suffer, and although not directly a cause, overpopulation would definitely decrease the resources available to any of my potential children. I would not knowingly place anyone into a lower standard of living then what I had as a child, and I would certainly not wish it upon anyone. As it is though, it looks like we don't have enough to ensure American's can all live decently now, let alone in the future. Then consider that this is a global issue.

In essence, no, evolution is not a bad thing, and it certainly does not imply that we should throw feces at each other. You can be considerate and still believe in evolution, but I ask you to please be considerate regardless of what you believe.

Regards,
Hydeman

1+1= F*ck You

a reply to: hydeman11

Wow. Sorry it took so long to get back to this post. I am going to refer to you from now on as the MEDIATOR.
I did it in capitals because you are so good at it. I was Internet angry (which isn't really angry) when I posted what I did but after reading what you wrote I'm just impressed at how you come across and also want to apologize for the number signs (they were curse words) since they seemed to offend you.

I really do appreciate your position and very much sympathize with what you may have gone through in your life to never want to have children. I just have a different opinion unfortunately. I do get the overpopulation thing. There are a lot of people on this planet and science tells us that it may be too many.

This line you said though just had me wondering why you think any people should even be alive other than to contribute to some arbitrary set of "knowledge" or "technological advances":

Consider this, though. There are other ways to benefit mankind than to reproduce and spread the genes of intelligent people. By merely contributing to mankind's knowledge, a smart man/woman might do more good (helping many people grow intellectually or indirectly benefiting them through technological advances) than can be done by passing on his/her genes.

People are animals. There is no disputing that whether you're an atheist or theist. It's not about evolution. It's about every biological being on this planet having the same basic goal. Our instinct which is admittedly suppressed in current western society is to reproduce (unless you take some hormone frenzying birth control pill or don't want to pay child support) or take some other ridiculous drug that can somehow make women crazier than they already are (good job drug guys, you did the impossible).

The basic goal of life, the instinct of man or any other animal, is to continue the species. We're just better at making PowerPoint presentations about it.
Not wanting to continue it because you had a bad childhood is a modern and fake invention from talk shows and bad news programs. If we turned off the news and threw you onto an island with some woman you didn't know, you'd be balls deep right after you forgot Dr. Phil was a real person.

We're an invasive species. We've already taken over the world, but from your post it sounds like we should turn into self-hating humans and just walk into active volcanoes and throw number signs at each other. We've figured things out so far, why not have a little faith or die with the rest of us since you don't seem to care about carrying on any legacy of yours?