Satan and Science, His Creation to Mislead

Originally posted by spikey
reply to post by baddmove

 

I was gonna say that..until i saw the picture of the starving kid, and looked at my pint of bitter and discarded Starbar wrapper on my desk.

Put me right off comedy to be honest.

Poor sod.

I will never understand how some people can become jaded to this. It hurts to my soul every time I see these pictures. I feel the suffering of this human being. It grieves my spirit to no end.

.

Originally posted by spikey
reply to post by baddmove

 

Look, it's even killing that poor kid with starvation..don't you say that the lord provides? It's not providing much for that one is it!

The problem is that people expect someone else to fix things and make it right. People blame some invisible god when the point is WE human beings have always had the power to correct this.

Many people have given materially to help these causes. The problem lies with those who have been "in charge" of the distribution of those goods. They have used the money and materials as leverage on the underdogs to get them to join their various agendas. They have never given unconditionally of the supplies good hearted people have contributed. The high up Lards take the fat of the contributions for their own "administrative fees" and the poor are thrown a few crumbs and dregs from the "take". The Lard's work, indeed.

And further, those in charge have never tried to raise the intellect by teaching others how to overcome obstacles and make life joyous and better, giving them self confidence and self esteem. Instead they have used material goods to make the unfortunate poverty dwellers dependent on them and obligated to them and their religions or agendas.

They must keep these people in poverty in order to acclimate them to slavery...just as other nations are subtly indoctrinated into debt slavery that has been deceitfully leveraged on them.

reply to post by IAMIAM

Originally posted by IAMIAM
My friend,

I do not see how your link has proven the previous poster "wrong". If anything, your link proved the previous poster correct. Love and compassion drove the man to use science to feed those millions.

With Love,

Your Brother

But science is what allowed him to do it, not the love and compassion. The tools he used are the only thing that allowed him to do it. Without science he would have been a man with only love and compassion. Without love and compassion the discoveries he made could still have been made.

Of course, thank you for being a lot more kind towards myself than the person I was addressing.

reply to post by Yissachar1

Originally posted by Yissachar1
Really?

You are a moron

That's more than a bit uncalled for.

Look through history right to your mom and dad and you..

I suppose science fed us?

Well, without scientific advances in farming, my family wouldn't have had any access to food.

It had its part but it is love and compassion for each other that drove that.. Survival.. That of each other..

Your mom fed you.. Was that science?..

She got the food from people applying scientific techniques.

We gave to africa.. Was that science or compassion?

Because we had a surplus due to scientific techniques.

You have a lot to learn.. The fact you cannot see a simple truth is proof enough..

You seem to lack understanding of exactly how much food we'd be lacking if we took science out of farming.

Science did not feed the billions who went before us.. It was a tool.. But love and compassion was the driving force..

But without that tool the love and compassion would have been impotent wishes.

Prove me wrong..

In this case the tool is more important than the reasons for using it. You can have all the love and compassion you want, but it doesn't put any food on the table.

Science does.

Sure, love and compassion using science is a great thing, but the science is the most necessary part of the equation.

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
But science is what allowed him to do it, not the love and compassion. The tools he used are the only thing that allowed him to do it. Without science he would have been a man with only love and compassion. Without love and compassion the discoveries he made could still have been made.

My friend, if it was not for love and compassion, the man could have used science for something entirely different. Perhaps his knowledge could have made chemical weapons for example. But no, he was driven by love and compassion to use science for a more noble ambition.

When the two work together, greater things are accomplished was my point. Love and compassion alone does little, science alone does little, put the two together, and behold the wonders we achieve!

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
Of course, thank you for being a lot more kind towards myself than the person I was addressing.

Your welcome my friend. I try to put into practice, that which I preach. That's all.

With Love,

Your Brother

Did the irony of posting this thread on the INTERNET, using a COMPUTER you do not understand and could not reproduce and use without the dreaded evil of science escape you when you wrote this?

Try to seperate yourself from science - go into some uncharted woods and complain there. What would you do in those woods? Would you not interpret your surroundings and get your means of livelihood by applying your reason? If you truly would have thought this through you would see that the notion of a pre-scientific time is ficticious: It is mankind's inherent quality to apply reason to survive. "Science" in the way you use the word is just the institutionalizatuion of that individual process. You can't take the science out of man and you can take man out of science. Even making a fire or producing a spear is the product of applying ones reason to the outside world. Are you truly promoting a world where this kind of behavior is supressed? We'd all be dead by noon.

Happily the straw man that you make out of science in this thread does not correspond to what science actually represents in the real world.

reply to post by madnessinmysoul


Though I agree with you, I like arguing with you, so I'll play Devil's Advocate :-)

Improvements in farming allow us to feed more people. As a result, there are more people. So we produce more food. Which results in more people.

Dog chasing his tail.

Unfortunately, food and people are (mostly) renewable resources, but an ever increasing population begins to put strains on non-renewable resources, like land, minerals and water. Science can deal with some of this, but not all, and the result is conflict over the control of the resources.

An ever burgeoning population is unsustainable and the real problem that looms is that when the tipping point is reached, it will likely precipitate a crisis, the level of which has never before seen.

Originally posted by kinglizard

Bottom line is that Science is not of God and it serves the other. It makes humans believe in their own divinity and separates us from our source....from all that is good.

It is the Devils conspiracy to set us on this path, a path that leads to one thing...the death of God's creation.

Well said. There's still the outstanding issue of much of humanity's earliest knowledge, of the planets for example, that they could not have learned from observation alone.

reply to post by adjensen


There's actually a point where our population will stabilize. I don't have a way of getting to the chart at the moment and the data to back it up, but a population left unchecked by pressures such as disease and hunger will eventually stabilize at a sustainable point. There's an exponential growth curve that then comes to a holding period where there is something like a +/-8% change in population.

It was actually one of the things I found most interesting when we were studying ecosystems in biology class.

Originally posted by IAMIAM
My friend, if it was not for love and compassion, the man could have used science for something entirely different. Perhaps his knowledge could have made chemical weapons for example. But no, he was driven by love and compassion to use science for a more noble ambition.

Well, if he was driven by greed he could have used the knowledge of science to feed more people to make him more money. If he was driven by political ambition he could have used that knowledge to create more food to ensure that he has a political base to support him.

When the two work together, greater things are accomplished was my point. Love and compassion alone does little, science alone does little, put the two together, and behold the wonders we achieve!

Except that science without compassion gave us the device we're both using. The internet was made for selfish reasons, not altruistic ones.

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
Well, if he was driven by greed he could have used the knowledge of science to feed more people to make him more money. If he was driven by political ambition he could have used that knowledge to create more food to ensure that he has a political base to support him.

Would have, could have, should have, but none of your examples jive with the link you provided. The Man was clearly trying to feed people out of compassion, not personal gain. You can find another example, the electric chair is a good one.

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
Except that science without compassion gave us the device we're both using. The internet was made for selfish reasons, not altruistic ones.

Really? Compassion comes in many forms my friend. The internet began as a series of interconnected University mainframes. The purpose was to facilitate the sharing of information across long distances. From that humble beginning, more and more computers and mainframes connected. In my opinion, it is ver compassionate to wish to share knowledge and learn from each other.

With Love,

Your Brother

reply to post by IAMIAM


Actually, the underpinnings of what makes the Internet work, TCP/IP, was the result of a Department of Defense project to ensure that a computer network would continue to function if random nodes were offline (as in, "had blowed up, Sir!") ARPANet was the network that spawned what is now the Internet, which really burgeoned in the 1980s with the addition of significant networks (BITNET was one that I had worked on) and then the loosening (over the protests of many) of the commercial restrictions in the early 1990s.

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
reply to post by adjensen

 

There's actually a point where our population will stabilize.

In a closed environment that has renewable resources, yes. A forest that has deer and wolves has an optimum population of both and once things get out of balance, the imbalance grows and grows until the tipping point causes a collapse in that population.

We live on a world with finite resources. As I said, some are renewable, some are not. When you run out of the stuff that is non-renewable (guaranteed, 100% to happen, given enough time,) you either find a substitute or you lose whatever benefit that had. Once you lose something that is required for the current level of renewables, bam, that's the tipping point.

There is no longer a natural growth throttle for the human race -- either we do it ourselves, voluntarily, or it will continue to grow out of control until the crisis erupts.

Originally posted by adjensen
reply to post by IAMIAM

 

Actually, the underpinnings of what makes the Internet work, TCP/IP, was the result of a Department of Defense project to ensure that a computer network would continue to function if random nodes were offline (as in, "had blowed up, Sir!") ARPANet was the network that spawned what is now the Internet, which really burgeoned in the 1980s with the addition of significant networks (BITNET was one that I had worked on) and then the loosening (over the protests of many) of the commercial restrictions in the early 1990s.

edit on 11-10-2010 by adjensen because: which != with

I suppose it would all depend on what point in time was the Beginning of the internet. To be excessively technical, one could say the creation of the Abacus was the beginning of the internet for that is one of the earliest tools of calculation, which lead to future tools of calculation, which lead to , well never mind.

With Love,

Your Brother

reply to post by adjensen


The modernization of the developing nations will probably do it. The real population growth comes from the developing world. Introduce them to a culture in which their children don't readily die and they can actually sustain a life that is fulfilling through achievement as well as reproduction and birth rates will go down significantly.

I'm actually currently living in Malta where birth rates plummeted between my parent's generation and my own due to this force.

There was actually a scientist that wrote an interesting book on it that I have been meaning to remember the name of so I can purchase and read. He had been a guest on the Daily Show and showed that his findings were based more on actual findings than speculation.

Will have to go through their interview archives, it's only been a few months at most.

reply to post by kinglizard


1) Does knowledge and use of the sciences serve the Devil?- No, science cannot "serve" something that does not exist

2) Is it true that the more technological and "advanced" a society becomes the more likely they will turn from God to serve the other?- No, the more "advanced" a society becomes the more they step away from superstitious/ficticious dieties and help serve each other......your world viewpoint that humans are "advancing" could be a mistake IMHO

3) Has science and technology killed more people than any other single thing? No, Religion has killed more people than any other single thing in the currently accepted recorded history of humans.

Thank you for the questions, it was my pleasure to answer them.

Re Madnessinmysoul

As a northern european, I can confirm your observartion on a stabilized population statistics. It's even a bit on the minus side here.

And that is in spite of a rather generous political/economical authority support of having children.

I'm not aware of any official explanations of this rather stable situation, but most two-children parents I meet express the clearly educated-based attitude, that our planet isn't in need of more humans.

Sometimes education and knowledge actually lead to sensible practical conclusions, if left alone from holy doctrines.

God and Science do not have to be conflicting. If God exists, He obviously gave us the ability to use science. If God created us, everything we do is what He meant for us to do.

It's like saying that God hates gay people. God created them, He obviously meant for them to be that way. Same in this instance. Science is something humans have constantly been utilizing, from the first fire to our tiniest nano-technology. We have the capacity to use Science, and God created us. Therefore, God wanted us to be able to use science since he gave us that capacity.

Also, with the medicine: It's like that story where the guy is flooded and a boat, a helicopter, and something else comes by to try to save him, but he says, "No, God will save me!" then the guy dies. And asks God, "why didn't you save me?" And God said "Well I sent a whole bunch of stuff to you to save you and you didn't take it!"

Why can't science be a gift from God? Many great things have been created due to science, and you cherry pick and take the worst of science and say "Because science has created terrible things, it is terrible." But no, it's how unjust humans have USED science. Many good people have used science in a fantastic way to create longer and better lives for many people. If there were more good humans, we would be able to feed the entire world because of science. It's not science's fault. It's the fault of selfish people who will not work together to make everyone's lives better...

reply to post by kinglizard


Call him Satan or call him negative aliens. Do they, does he effect science? Absolutely! Science is a tool of control used by the negative entities in charge of the planet at the present time. All that you have been taught is a lie! Don't fall for the propaganda. Search within yourself for all of the answers.

reply to post by kinglizard


Hi kinglizard,

First of all, it's really a shame that not many people in this thread have the maturity to be civil about a topic like this. It seems like all they can do is throw insults at you, but you seem to have handled it very gracefully. You don't stoop to their level and I wanted to give you kudos for that.

Anyway, you raise a valid point. With technology at its current stage, we could easily feed everyone on earth. But every day people make the decision that a new ipod is more important than the life of another human being. It speaks volumes about human nature.

I will disagree with you on one point, which is that if we were more compassionate as a race, technology could be used for good. I don't believe it is inherently evil.

Thanks for the post. It was really thought provoking.

Originally posted by HUMBLEONE
reply to post by kinglizard

 

Call him Satan or call him negative aliens. Do they, does he effect science? Absolutely! Science is a tool of control used by the negative entities in charge of the planet at the present time. All that you have been taught is a lie! Don't fall for the propaganda. Search within yourself for all of the answers.

All beings are a part of us in Spirit....so is every sun, every tree, every thing of life thereof. Yes, any 'self' can make a choice in which way to use things....but there is no one in 'charge' of the planet except us as a whole. If you want to call the leaders 'negative entities' in control...OK. But ultimately, nothing happens without the Spirit letting it happen, for each self must test desires to the max, power to the max, anything that they feel the need to spend their energy on, they need to do....we all must go through many trials and testings to finally reach the point of being unsatisfied within us still...which will cause all beings to finally seek our the 'true self' within them, of the Spirit.

All we have been taught has its purpose, none of it was allowed without the allowance of the Spirit.

If your searching within, then surely you know, the god in you is also in all other beings and entities and all life.

Nothing exsists without the breath of the IAM within it.

I can't help but believe that this is all just a moot argument. If Adam and Eve had never taken it upon themselves to rebel against Father God, not one medical issue would ever have arisen. There would be no cancer, no starvation, no dreaded and terrible disease at all. Everyone would have a perfect, indestructible body, maybe completely unlike the one we have to wear for now!
It was that first sin of rebellion that caused everything that followed, right up until this very moment. And just look around you, that SAME CHOICE is still being made by mankind today. It shows, too. Just look at the increase in all diseases and famines, and all other terrible things. A direct case of cause and effect.

We never learn, no matter the misery brought about by our own rebellion.