Ask an American, agnostic and atheist man pretty much anything

[RevolutionThroughReason]

oh, so fawning means saying something once?

You've had a bitter angst about science for quite some time.


Do us a favor since science does so much harm, stop using any technology developed through Modern science ..including your pace maker.

[faye]

That doesn't answer my question; when have Aboriginals modified things when new information was aavailable?
Nope; Pashtuns and Taliban think they FIGURED it out, and hence don't modify themselves.
That's just your inferiority complex speaking.
Lies, . Australian Aboriginals suffered mass famines and had expended many of the resources of their habitat. So much for that.
Kids not dying from malaria , polio, our life expectancy is better, we don't have to worry (as much) of women dying in child birth.
YOU get the privilege to live past 60 instead of dying like a pruneAll the negative stuff you speak of has existed LONG before Modern Science started becoming in use. Science is not responsible for those. Your laziness and lack of responsibility is.
And we're learning from them and we're cleaning it up and making the world better.
Better than dying from famine like your Aboriginals did.

good to see you are being attentive to an old prunes posts.

well, aboriginals and other native peoples of colonised lands probably modified as they lived and learned. they had it sorted before the whiteys got here, with their oppressive religion, science, the industrial lifestyle, and their specific diseases.

lol, expended the resources. then how come australia was worth invading and colonising and is a fairly well off country if the resources were used up already?

dying from famine and natural disasters still happens today, so what is your point there as science hasn't been able to stop those.

quantity of life does not necessarily equate to quality. i have a quality life but i have seen many who don't know how to utilise their longevity in a positive way, or are ill for decades before their life ends.

how is it better? it is different but not necessarily better.
if you go to live amongst people who don't even have electricity, you can see some really healthy and very happy people. that is why you need to take that gap year from school and go out into the world, so you can see some things, first hand.
scimitar, you have been mentally colonised by your education, without actual first hand knowledge of anything much.

[faye]

You've had a bitter angst about science for quite some time.
Do us a favor since science does so much harm, stop using any technology developed through Modern science ..including your pace maker.

why would i do you a favour?
BTW, what IS a pacemaker?

[RevolutionThroughReason]

good to see you are being attentive to an old prunes posts.

well, aboriginals and other native peoples of colonised lands probably modified as they lived and learned. they had it sorted before the whiteys got here, with their oppressive religion, science, the industrial lifestyle, and their specific diseases.

lol, expended the resources. then how come australia was worth invading and colonising and is a fairly well off country if the resources were used up already?

Because they had the know how to extract the resources the Aboriginals were too backwards and ignorant to get. And they were able to remediate the land.

They didnt have it sorted, this is a much exaggerated myth. They were killing each other to extinction fighting for land and pastures and what not.

dying from famine and natural disasters still happens today, so what is your point there as science hasn't been able to stop those.

But they greatly GREATLY reduced that where it's not even a secondary cause of death anymore, where as that's the main reason why people were dying before.

quantity of life does not necessarily equate to quality. i have a quality life but i have seen many who don't know how to utilise their longevity in a positive way, or are ill for decades before their life ends.

But quantity OFTEN helps determine the quality of the method, For example greater yields stem from better quality resources.

if you had a quality life you wouldn't be returning to modern civilization; spending your life on a forum with people you have no historical or cultural connection to trying to prove yourself to them.

how is it better? it is different but not necessarily better.
if you go to live amongst people who don't even have electricity, you can see some really healthy and very happy people. that is why you need to take that gap year from school and go out into the world, so you can see some things, first hand.

Because it improves the quality of life; people able to live the full extent of their lives, that is always better.

scimitar, you have been mentally colonised by your education, without actual first hand knowledge of anything much.

To be mentally colonized would mean believing falsehoods because they're popular; there's no better example of mental colonization than the fallacies you project.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

why would i do you a favour?
BTW, what IS a pacemaker?

So when are you going to abandon that evil environmentally polluting computer of yours?

[ozymandias]

where do i dismiss science? by stating this over and over does not make it true.

i think science has some amazing aspects but scientific creations are also the cause of many dangerous and toxic pollutants on our planet. many medicines are shown to be defective,

BY SCIENCE! Without science, we would not even know what pollution is, or what it means if something is toxic!

with bad side effects that just create new illnesses.

do you believe that science and scientists are beyond criticism, because you identify as one?

I think I am going to start ignoring you, if you continue to ignore what I say, and then pretend I said something different. I have clearly stated, over and over, criticizing scientists and theories *is part of the scientific method*.

[/quote]

does the belief that humans are merely meat who just so happened to 'evolve' a thinking mind, make it easier for people like yourself, to approve of genocide?[/QUOTE]

Of course not. Does the belief that non-Muslims are evil infidels that deserve death make it easier for people like you to approve of genocide? We already know that belief in an afterlife makes it easier for someone to commit evil acts.

[ozymandias]

no. never said it harmed science to change conclusions, but i say it dents the egos of those who bank on scientific conclusions to promote their own egotistical agenda of having superior knowledge to others and being the only ones who are right.


.

How would science improving dent the egos of people that use science? If you believe science is right, and science changes, you are still right...

[faye]

[QUOTE=ozymandias;657050]BY SCIENCE! Without science, we would not even know what pollution is, or what it means if something is toxic!


EXACTLY!!! because without science, there would be no toxic pollution to be named. they invented it, maestro.

[faye]

Of course not. Does the belief that non-Muslims are evil infidels that deserve death make it easier for people like you to approve of genocide? We already know that belief in an afterlife makes it easier for someone to commit evil acts.

i don't believe that humans are just lumps of meat, that 'just happened' to
evolve a thinking mind, which queries the reason for creation. human beings are created by a higher consciousness, in my reality. murder and killing of others is off my 'to do' list.

you are an agnostic atheist and you believe in evil? that is obviously a hangover from your childhood conditioning, as are your ethics and morals.

but i would imagine that if you have a belief in the meaninglessness of creation, it would make it even easier than those with a religious bent.

[faye]

How would science improving dent the egos of people that use science? If you believe science is right, and science changes, you are still right...

but if you are spouting the rightness of your scientific conclusion and being all up yourself as a knowall and PROUD as punch about your cleverness, then the conclusion gets whipped out from under you, ego indentations, would more than likely occur.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

Of course not. Does the belief that non-Muslims are evil infidels that deserve death make it easier for people like you to approve of genocide? We already know that belief in an afterlife makes it easier for someone to commit evil acts.

No offense but I have clarified that she isn't a Muslim, ask her yourself.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

[QUOTE=faye;657231]

BY SCIENCE! Without science, we would not even know what pollution is, or what it means if something is toxic!


EXACTLY!!! because without science, there would be no toxic pollution to be named. they invented it, maestro.

Not true; there were pollutions caused by aborigines burning wood, and by their poor sanitation habits, pollution caused by humans pre-dated modern science

[faye]

lol.

scimitar, do you believe that the prophet mohammad, was a channeller of information from god via, gabriel?
don't be embarassed to admit it in from of ozy, if you do.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

That's not relevant for this discussion

[faye]

hahaha...don't want ozy to think you are illogical and into 'hocus pocus'.....