The Passion...

[Quicksilver]

or another theory.

New topic what's the best color?

[J-Proof]

blue.... but is the blue I see the same as the blue YOU see???

[Tyrant]

blue.... but is the blue I see the same as the blue YOU see???

   What if you're colorblind? 
 

[J-Proof]

then I'd make a poor designer

You like how our website is all nice and green?

[Tarantulas]

just cuz science explains something doesn't mean God didn't make that science happen

That's the cop out of creation.

It's funny that god only creates things when science explains away how it was possible.

I reference my earlier "why Jimmy died/lived" statement.

Why is the sky blue?

Science: Because light from the sun hits out atmophere in such a way that our eyes interpret it as the color blue.

Religious Answer: What the science guy said plus god made it that way.

bro - i'm not saying God rules out science or that he takes science's place. Just that science is a branch off of God's wonders =)
There is no cop out, just an understanding

If that's the stance you want to take, just remember that god also created lung cancer and all anal gang bang tapes.

[torgosPizza]

If that's the stance you want to take, just remember that god also created lung cancer and all anal gang bang tapes.

Well that guy was named "Jesus" but he was a shady looking Hispanic dude with a beard and a weird looking mole on his back.

[Tarantulas]

If that's the stance you want to take, just remember that god also created lung cancer and all anal gang bang tapes.

Well that guy was named "Jesus" but he was a shady looking Hispanic dude with a beard and a weird looking mole on his back.

He sold the best reefer out of his van.  It had an awesome dias los muertos mural on the side.

Speaking of which, anyway you guys could hook me up with the old dude from the reefer madness disc?  He seems like a cool cat.

[mrthejazz]

*Grabs pitchfork and moltav cocktails*

Alright, FLAME WAR!!!!!!!

Although for the record, saying the scientific explanation for why the sky is blue is "because light from the sun hits out atmosphere in such a way that our eyes interpret it as the color blue" is terribly unspecific. In fact, a scientist could probably spend hours and days explaining exactly why the sky is blue. Not that has anything to do with anything. Just a harmful-(FLAME)-observation.

Anyway, science and rationalism don't provide all the answers either, and lets honestly hope they never do. I think Dostoevsky said it best:
"What do I care about the laws of nature and arithmetic when for some reason I dislike all these laws and I dislike the fact that two times two makes four?"

Also, this has absolutely nothing to do with the original thread topic. Haha.

[Tarantulas]

*Grabs pitchfork and moltav cocktails*

Alright, FLAME WAR!!!!!!!

Although for the record, saying the scientific explanation for why the sky is blue is "because light from the sun hits out atmosphere in such a way that our eyes interpret it as the color blue" is terribly unspecific. In fact, a scientist could probably spend hours and days explaining exactly why the sky is blue. Not that has anything to do with anything. Just a harmful-(FLAME)-observation.

Anyway, science and rationalism don't provide all the answers either, and lets honestly hope they never do. I think Dostoevsky said it best:
"What do I care about the laws of nature and arithmetic when for some reason I dislike all these laws and I dislike the fact that two times two makes four?"

Also, this has absolutely nothing to do with the original thread topic. Haha.

Indeed, I was clearly trying to get info on where to find the Grandfather of Ganj'

[msmpls]

oh man, this thread grew legs!

now let's all agree to disagree and be done with all this

[J-Proof]

But we're only on page 19...... =(

[torgosPizza]

oh man, this thread grew legs!

Well, they didn't just "grow." You see, as a result of subtle changes of the thread's environment, appendages eventually grew (they were very primitive at first) - and a new species was created. Because these new "legs" were able to aide in the survival of that species, the next mutation of that thread's DNA also carried those newly-developed appendages. And so it went, slowly and incrementally for thousands of posts, before we came to the thread we know and love today - with fully-formed legs and all.

[Tyrant]

oh man, this thread grew legs!

Well, they didn't just "grow." You see, as a result of subtle changes of the thread's environment, appendages eventually grew (they were very primitive at first) - and a new species was created. Because these new "legs" were able to aide in the survival of that species, the next mutation of that thread's DNA also carried those newly-developed appendages. And so it went, slowly and incrementally for thousands of posts, before we came to the thread we know and love today - with fully-formed legs and all.

   LOL!!!! You rock, Torgo.   

  Yeah, I'm pretty spent. Plus it's hard to debate when I get interrupted every two seconds here at work for something else. Hard to stay on track.

  As a sidenote, I hope Platypus isn't going to leave. I don't know if this forum can survive without his unique brand of insanity and humor. Maybe if I wave a fried a banana in the wind, he'll follow the scent back.

[Conor]

That crocodile that Jesus is carrying is just begging to be replaced with Indomitus' fine work from earlier today:

http://www.rifftrax.com/smf/index.php/topic,3275.0.html

One nation, under Schnappi...

[BathTub]

Item 3: Prove God doesn't exist. Do it. Now. Don't present evidence. Evidence is not the same thing as solid proof. PROVE it. Without a shadow of a doubt. 100%.

No. It is not the unbelievers job to prove that nothing exists. The person who claims something has to prove it exists.

Nothing is a something. It's a factor in our reality. Bits of our mathmatics system is based on this. I think my challenge stands.

No. It's the same reason a jury does not declare Innocence, only Guilty or Not Guilty Beyond a Reasonable Doubt. It's the prosecution, who brings the charges,  job to show guilt, the defences job is to show the evidence doesn't hold up to scrutiny.

  I would say in fairness, since believing in nothing is a far newer concept than believing in something, that proof for nothing should be presented first. The majority of the population of the world believes in a higher power. You've got a larger group to convince than the other way around.

  Because the physical world represents the hand of God (or a God/Goddess), I challenge you to find the equivelent for nothing. An area of reality and a representing mathmatical equation that proves the existance of NOTHING. No molecules, no atoms, nothing. Not even a vaccum. Literally nothing.

Sorry, all you are doing here is latching on to the fact that I chose the word nothing in a previous sentence and then using it as though it were an object, which is completely irrelevant and not the point I was making, which I suspect you know quite well, but this is the best you can come back with. If I had said...

No. It is not the unbelievers job to prove that no gods exist. The person who claims something has to prove it exists.

You wouldn't run around saying

"No gods is a something."

Because that would be moronic, even though you tried to do that above.

Because again I am not the one making the assertion. Lets turn this around, if I was to make an absolutely ridiculous assertion, lets say..

There are twelve Gods, one for each month of the year, all of them are named Bruce.

Your inability to disprove this, in no way makes it true.

   I can prove to you a physical world.

Yes, which would be our point entirely.