Skip navigation
Sidebar -

Advanced search options →

Welcome

Welcome to CEMB forum.
Please login or register. Did you miss your activation email?

Donations

Help keep the Forum going!
Click on Kitty to donate:

Kitty is lost

Recent Posts


Iran uprising - is the en...
by zeca
Today at 12:23 AM

New PM incoming
by zeca
Yesterday at 09:22 PM

What music are you listen...
by zeca
Yesterday at 06:59 PM

Qur'anic studies today
Yesterday at 06:47 PM

Kashmir endgame
Yesterday at 02:55 PM

Anti-imperialism and the ...
by zeca
Yesterday at 02:40 PM

'Islamic State' a.k.a. IS...
by zeca
November 16, 2019, 11:39 PM

Painted pious ladies
November 16, 2019, 09:03 PM

Random Islamic History Po...
by zeca
November 16, 2019, 06:22 PM

Lebanon protests
by zeca
November 16, 2019, 01:21 PM

NayaPakistan...New Pakist...
November 16, 2019, 01:15 PM

Life extension
November 16, 2019, 09:53 AM

Theme Changer

 Topic: Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves

 (Read 80919 times)
  • Previous page 1 23 4 ... 37 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #30 - August 07, 2015, 11:56 PM

    No, but they can be just a little funnier than Saturday night TV sometimes.

    I not your monkey. nyanya

    `But I don't want to go among mad people,' Alice remarked.
     `Oh, you can't help that,' said the Cat: `we're all mad here. I'm mad.  You're mad.'
     `How do you know I'm mad?' said Alice.
     `You must be,' said the Cat, `or you wouldn't have come here.'
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #31 - August 07, 2015, 11:56 PM

    Going against the grain here a little. But Ted seems a little too bright to me to actually buy what he is selling. Just saying.

    Apologies if I'm wrong.


    Of course he can't buy what he's selling - why do you think he's here obsessing over what the fuck we think?
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #32 - August 07, 2015, 11:57 PM

    I not your monkey. nyanya


    Have a nut.
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #33 - August 07, 2015, 11:59 PM

    I'd prefer a banana.

    `But I don't want to go among mad people,' Alice remarked.
     `Oh, you can't help that,' said the Cat: `we're all mad here. I'm mad.  You're mad.'
     `How do you know I'm mad?' said Alice.
     `You must be,' said the Cat, `or you wouldn't have come here.'
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #34 - August 07, 2015, 11:59 PM

    As usual with those who come here to "prove" they are right - it's a case of "The gentleman doth protest too much, methinks"
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #35 - August 08, 2015, 12:03 AM

    Of course he can't buy what he's selling - why do you think he's here obsessing over what the fuck we think?

    That makes sense.

    Either that, or just trolling for kicks.

    Hi
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #36 - August 08, 2015, 12:07 AM

    I think deep down you guys just love being trolled. Just playing the hard to get kind of thing.
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #37 - August 08, 2015, 12:09 AM

    We don't. It breaks our heart. We're hoping you're different

    Hi
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #38 - August 08, 2015, 12:10 AM

    Thanks, you've proven my point.


    (Hey Teddy boy, I'll repeat my last post because you may have missed it?)

    Do elaborate.

    My mind runs, I can never catch it even if I get a head start.
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #39 - August 08, 2015, 12:25 AM

    Re: one on one.

    Are we in danger of obsessing over the foundations, at the expense of ever starting the building?

    Hi
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #40 - August 08, 2015, 12:30 AM

    (Hey Teddy boy, I'll repeat my last post because you may have missed it?)

    Do elaborate.


    I didn't miss it. I had thought you were intelligent enough to get my point. Oh well.
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #41 - August 08, 2015, 12:31 AM

    Re: one on one.

    Are we in danger of obsessing over the foundations, at the expense of ever starting the building?


    Yes. Don't want weak foundations now do we?
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #42 - August 08, 2015, 12:32 AM

    I wish Ishina were here.

    Her and Ted would get along really well, like anthrax and the nervous system.

    My mind runs, I can never catch it even if I get a head start.
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #43 - August 08, 2015, 12:33 AM

    I didn't miss it. I had thought you were intelligent enough to get my point. Oh well.


    Shh, it's ok Ted. Did the big bad article on Logic scare you?

    It's ok Ted, It won't be able to harm you anymore.

    Now be a good boy and offer a coherent counter-argument for once. If it's really good then I'll even give you a lollipop.

    My mind runs, I can never catch it even if I get a head start.
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #44 - August 08, 2015, 12:38 AM

    I gave it to my dog. When my dog explains it to me I'll call you.
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #45 - August 08, 2015, 12:42 AM

    Ok Teddy, good call. You must be tired after a hard day of pseudo-intellectualism.

    Anyways, because we're friends... you still want that lollipop?


    My mind runs, I can never catch it even if I get a head start.
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #46 - August 08, 2015, 12:58 AM

    Jesus you guys!

    Tell me - in all your experiences online have you EVER known such debates to change anyone's mind or produce anything useful?

    Be honest now!


    they do change people's minds. they make them more certain that they were correct all along. Apparently I have strengthened much iman. I don't mind. It's basically just a game. A sport.
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #47 - August 08, 2015, 01:04 AM

    debate hasn't even started. Still stalling. Why doesn't he just present whatever proof he has. I'd be satisfied with even a slight hint of evidence.
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #48 - August 08, 2015, 02:23 AM

    I wish Ishina were here.

    Her and Ted would get along really well, like anthrax and the nervous system.


    You said that just perfectly.

    Don't let Hitler have the street.
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #49 - August 08, 2015, 03:51 AM

    TED, you are spending more time reacting to what we say here, and in another thread, then producing your arguments in the debate thread. Focus!


  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #50 - August 08, 2015, 06:43 AM

    Jesus you guys!

    Tell me - in all your experiences online have you EVER known such debates to change anyone's mind or produce anything useful?

    Be honest now!

    Yes, many times. One you might be familiar with is an English lad from London who was born to middle eastern parents and raised muslim. He called into the Jinn&Tonic Show, tried to defend hell, claimed non muslims would only go there for a limited time to be purified according to islam, and got Hassaned. He's now an ex-muslim and out to at least some of his family. Though to be fair he told me Carl Sagan's Cosmos helped a lot as well. He was so embarrassed about the J&T episode. Grin

    Go on Hassan. Get 'em!



    Mods, add that icon.

    Edit: This is Hassan in every J&T Show I've ever seen him on.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pXhKzY0BKwY

    Edit two: Hassan vs iERA. Hamza, final opponent.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=W8pZdrPSt4c

    Yes I'm drunk. I'll stop now.

    Edit three: Hassan vs those who oppose both his ex-mulsim and agnostic muslim stance theme tune.

    Fuck you he won't do what you tell him!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Hf-B9Tqkss

    Okay, yes, I'm stopping now.

    `But I don't want to go among mad people,' Alice remarked.
     `Oh, you can't help that,' said the Cat: `we're all mad here. I'm mad.  You're mad.'
     `How do you know I'm mad?' said Alice.
     `You must be,' said the Cat, `or you wouldn't have come here.'
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #51 - August 08, 2015, 07:11 AM

    Lol Cheesy
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #52 - August 09, 2015, 03:57 AM

    Lame "god of the gaps" argument in reply 18 in the one on one thread

    "we stand firm calling to allah all the time,
    we let them know - bang! bang! - coz it's dawah time!"
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #53 - August 09, 2015, 06:38 AM

    Yup, just because we are not capable of doing something does not mean it is impossible. We can not make a star but that does not mean stars do not form. We can not make planets but that does not mean planets can not form. A human limit does not mean God did it.
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #54 - August 09, 2015, 10:08 AM

    Generally it is considered that life is a "naturally" occurring phenomena, especially by atheists. However there is a bit more to this which most people don't consider. Life is not a natural phenomena. When I say it is not a natural phenomena I mean it is not something replicated by humans using natural processes. For example we know that if we combine hydrogen and oxygen we get water. This is an example of a natural processes. We are also able form other more complex molecules by using our understanding of chemistry and physics. These complex molecules and structures are created using the natural laws of physics and chemistry that we know of.



    I disagree with your definition of life being non-replicating and/or chemically based (or are you saying it's not chemically based? I'm confused). Most forms of life we can observe obviously can and do self-replicate, and that includes humans, so humans do replicate life, through procreation. It's not like every time a baby is conceived, God can briefly be seen tinkering in a woman's vagina (or a petri dish, increasingly). If you believe God CAN be observed taking part in this action, do provide some evidence.

    As for life being chemically based, I don't think that's true. I believe an AI can be alive and a good case can be made that a computer virus is alive. And they're not biological machines in the way we are, despite being alive. And that is a product of the environment in which they were created and live being cybernetic instead of chemical. We live in a world with tons of chemicals that have come together over billions of years, with living beings existing in billions of combinations. Every second, billions of new organisms begin to exist--animal, vegetable, fungus, bacteria, etc--each one of them trying a slightly different combination of genes than the last generation to see if that combination is adaptable to the environment they find themselves in. And a whole lot of them fail. But some succeed, and they go on to make more copies of themselves, and the process continues.

    However the creation of life has proven to be extremely difficult. Numerous experiments show that forming the simplest known living organism is not possible using the current technology and understanding we have. Experiments show that certain structures are simply not stable or just don't behave the way we expect them to. Now if life was truly a naturally occurring phenomena then it should be straight forward to replicate it just as we can replicate complex molecules.

    Now I know some will say that we may be able to create life in the future from scratch and that is a valid point. However the fact still stands today that humans are not able to create life from scratch. This also needs to be taken a step further to investigate why it's not possible to create life.


    In addition to the aforementioned computer virus life and possibly other AI life, there is also this: http://www.jcvi.org/cms/press/press-releases/full-text/article/first-self-replicating-synthetic-bacterial-cell-constructed-by-j-craig-venter-institute-researcher/home/

    Scientists HAVE created synthetic biological life. Your ignorance does not make your point more accurate. As for "why it's not possible to create life", even if that were true, it would be a philosophical debate and not a scientific one.

    As it happens I know quite a bit about the human genome project and other projects involving those scientists and that material because it was done in my hometown, so it was always on the local news as I was growing up. In fact, the headquarters of the human genome project is right across the street from the hospital I was born in and has a parking lot that is right next to the parking lot of my uni (but theirs is closed off with a guarded gate and big fence because they constantly receive threats by creationists). Very pretty building.

    Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for I have a sonic screwdriver, a tricorder, and a Type 2 phaser.
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #55 - August 09, 2015, 10:13 AM

    "Yup, just because we are not capable of doing something does not mean it is impossible. We can not make a star but that does not mean stars do not form. We can not make planets but that does not mean planets can not form."

    Sorry but you're confused. It's about whether we can use our understanding of the universe to replicate the things and phenomena we observe in the universe. It's interesting that you mention the formation of stars and planets. As I understand it the current scientific understanding is that dust in the universe came together over millions of years and form bigger bodies. We know gravity exists, we know matter exists so it's a given that this is how stars and planets formed.

    But let's take a step back and let's see how much of this is true. When you get some dust and put them together do you observe bigger and bigger bodies forming? Please do enlighten me.
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #56 - August 09, 2015, 10:20 AM

    But let's take a step back and let's see how much of this is true. When you get some dust and put them together do you observe bigger and bigger bodies forming? Please do enlighten me.


    Yes we do. If you throw some rocks in the air, you will observe them falling to the ground. That is because the ground you are standing on is a planet, Earth, which is a very large body of rock, and that big rock is attracting those smaller rocks. Hope this helps!

    Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for I have a sonic screwdriver, a tricorder, and a Type 2 phaser.
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #57 - August 09, 2015, 10:30 AM

     whistling2
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #58 - August 09, 2015, 10:30 AM

    Oh and the Earth also attracts rocks from space that make it ever so slightly bigger. They land on earth sometimes. They're called "meteorites". You can watch a meteor fall sometimes, it's really fun! I'm sure if you google when the next meteor shower will be where you live, you can find a good time to look at them, and you can observe this phenomenon for yourself!

    Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for I have a sonic screwdriver, a tricorder, and a Type 2 phaser.
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #59 - August 09, 2015, 10:44 AM

    whistling2

    You don't agree that the gravity of a bigger thing draws in smaller things?

    `But I don't want to go among mad people,' Alice remarked.
     `Oh, you can't help that,' said the Cat: `we're all mad here. I'm mad.  You're mad.'
     `How do you know I'm mad?' said Alice.
     `You must be,' said the Cat, `or you wouldn't have come here.'
  • Previous page 1 23 4 ... 37 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »