• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

An open challenge to evolutionists.

TagliatelliMonster

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
mikkel_the_dane said:
Because there is no "we" in the human species
Click to expand...

"We" as in the human collective, obviously.

It seems you're gearing up to play games again.


That is not the "we", you used. You used a cooperative, cultural, social and sort of contractual "we"
Click to expand...

No. I used "we" as in the collective of humans. Such answers in science don't come from a single individual. It comes from the scientific enterprise, which is a human undertaking. Most of us contribute to it one way or another - even if only by our economic contribution being one wheel in the enormous machine known as "society" that makes scientific research even only possible in the first place.

That "we". Humans in general.

but I won't be a part of your "we" and agree to your world-view, because mine works for me.
Click to expand...

Neither of our subjective world views are relevant when it comes to the objective method of science.

There is more if you want to know. :)
Click to expand...

No thanks... It doesn't sound like it will be incredibly interesting, or even relevant.
 
TagliatelliMonster

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
mikkel_the_dane said:
Yes, I accept that you don't do that. You rely on in effect science and philosophy.
Click to expand...

Totally depends on the topic, on what I rely on.
You keep making generalized statements about this, while the reality is that one has to look at it on a case by case basis.

When all you know is a hammer, everything will indeed look like a nail. For some reason, you seem to assume that some of us know only hammers.

I add religion. :)
Click to expand...

Why?
 
Revoltingest

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
oldbadger said:
Oh yeah?
So did they evolve or were they created?
Well?
Click to expand...
Thread forms evolved from non-standard threads. In 1841, Joseph Whitworth,
created a standard which became the still used BSW (British Standard Whitworth).
In 1864, what became SAE (Society of Automotive Engineers) Standard was
introduced. Metric (IS0) threads became standardized in 1947.

I'd cover more of the history, but it's so fascinating that it would derail the thread.
 
Last edited:
mikkel_the_dane

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
TagliatelliMonster said:
Why?
Click to expand...

Because it works for me. I tried without and I found out that I works better with religion for me.
I am still an ethical subjectivist, anti-realist and relativist. I believe in democracy, human rights, a secular and humanistic society and I am religious.
I don't believe in souls, Heaven/Hell, supernatural magic, woo and what not. I am skeptic after all, but I am religious. I just don't demand that everybody must believe like me.
It is psychology and I know that and I will admit that.

Want to know more? :)
 
ChristineM

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
mikkel_the_dane said:
You don't know if I have nightmares. You are projecting your thinking onto to me.
Click to expand...

True, i am making a humerous assumption based on the nightmarish content of your posts.

The fact that its chemical seems to frighten you

And that the universe operates to logical principles has you in a complete tizzy
 
mikkel_the_dane

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
ChristineM said:
True, i am making a humerous assumption based on the nightmarish content of your posts.

The fact that its chemical seems to frighten you

And that the universe operates to logical principles has you in a complete tizzy
Click to expand...

No, I am a naturalist and have been a skeptic for many years. I am okay with a natural world without Heaven/Hell and souls and what not.
As for the logic, I like your logic. All is logical and yet you accept the illogical, because you constructed contradictions to mock me.
All is the same as chemical and logical and yet you keep point out differences. You are not me and I am not you. It doesn't matter, don't you get?!!! All is the same as chemical and logical. :D
 
mikkel_the_dane

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
ChristineM said:
Where did i say it is all logical?

I said the universe operates by logical principles.
Click to expand...

And I am a part of the universe and operate on logical principles, yet I can say: No!.

Now explain that and don't explain it away as irrelevant. Because it is not irrelevant as a part of the universe. It is irrelevant to you, but that is not the same.
 
ChristineM

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
Revoltingest said:
Thread forms evolved from non-standard threads. In 1841, Joseph Whitworth,
created a standard which became the still used BSW (British Standar Whitworth).
In 1864, what became SAE (Society of Automotive Engineers) Standard was
introduced.
Click to expand...

BSW has mostly been superseded by the AF standard which in turn is superseded by the metric standard.

My dad needs 3 spanner (wrench) sets for his farm equipment.

Ain't standardisation great?
 
ChristineM

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
mikkel_the_dane said:
And I am a part of the universe and operate on logical principles, yet I can say: No!.

Now explain that and don't explain it away as irrelevant. Because it is not irrelevant as a part of the universe. It is irrelevant to you, but that is not the same.
Click to expand...


You may say whatever you want

And i too am part of the universe your speech is irrelevant to. Ask the universe whether it cares?
 
mikkel_the_dane

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
ChristineM said:
You may say whatever you want

And i too am part of the universe your speech is irrelevant to. Ask the universe whether it cares?
Click to expand...

Well, I can't because the universe as such is not alive.
But I can ask other humans for their views and then form my own.
We as humans are individuals, who in part relies on groups, but some things we can do as individuals.

We are not herd animals, not solitaire nor communal like ants. We are individuals, who rely on groups in part.
So I don't need your individuality as for your world-view and you don't need mine.
 
exchemist

exchemist

Veteran Member
ChristineM said:
It is all chemical from the very first atoms. The universe in general, suns, planets, moons, rocks, soil, plants, trees, life... All chemical

Even thought is a chemical processes in your nurones.

99% of your body comprises of oxygen, carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, calcium, and phosphorus.

A further 0.85% comprises of potassium, sulfur, sodium, chlorine, and magnesium

The remaining 0.15% is trace elements amounting to less than 10gms

All chemical.

Chemicals are ubiquitous
Click to expand...
Ahem, I'm not so sure. You don't get chemistry until you have chemical bonds. And you don't get those if the temperature is above about 5000K, because atoms have enough thermal energy to break them the moment they form.

So there isn't really any chemistry in stars, which is where most of the (non-dark) matter of the universe finds itself. After the Big Bang there were not even any atoms until the Recombination Epoch, about 370,000 year after the Big Bang itself. And after that, the formation of molecules, giant structures and metals (i.e. chemistry) required still more cooling.

But below about 5000K, you are right that you start to get chemistry, and by the time you get to 500K or below it is running rampant. However when you get down to about 100K it becomes so slow that not much chemical change takes place, though matter is by that time in the form of chemical compounds.

P.S. There is a huge number of expressions in statistical thermodynamics and physical chemistry that contain variants of exp(-ε/kT), in which ε is the energy difference between two states, T is temperature and k is Boltzmann's constant. If ε >> kT atoms and molecules have enough energy to move freely between the states, if ε <<kT they can't move between them at all, and if ε ~ kT they can a bit but not freely.
 
Last edited:
Revoltingest

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
ChristineM said:
BSW has mostly been superseded by the AF standard which in turn is superseded by the metric standard.

My dad needs 3 spanner (wrench) sets for his farm equipment.

Ain't standardisation great?
Click to expand...
I have 4 standards of wrenches....
SAE
BS...British Standard (similar enuf to Whitworth to be considered the same).
BA...British Association (common on instruments)
Metric

BS is still common on motorcycles up thru the early 70s.
I had a Triumph once that required'm all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top