Volconvo is a debate forum for the discussion of political, religious, and news-based topics.

tman_ndsu08 · Feb 27, 2004, 10:43 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by
God does NOT exist, and since there is NO proof to the contrary, that is the truth of it.
<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

God does exist...but there is no proof to this either.

tman_ndsu08 · Feb 27, 2004, 10:46 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Spyder Jerusalem,)
<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (tman_ndsu08,)
Boolean algebra has no advantages at proving theories that regular algebra does.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
I direct you to this page concerning this school of logic.....
Basic Boolean algebra and logic

In other words, almost all critical thought, and especially that simulated with the logic circuits of most computers, as well as simple solipsistic expressions and truth tables can be expressed with Boolean equations.
All critical thought can be broken down into these categories.
True.
False.
Either.
Or.
And.
Not And.
Nor.
Not Or.

I invite you to read, and possibly acquire some understanding.
Then again, maybe not!<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

I know how Boolean works.

What i said was not that boolean algebra is not good for proving theories but that regular math is just as good for proving theories.

**Pooeypants** · Feb 28, 2004, 05:51 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (james?,)
Fuck logic. I hate practicality. You can recite any law of critical thinking you know, but the truth of the matter is that nothing is proven until it's experienced and that proof is subjective. You can say the big bang is proven and show me all the calculations you want, but I still may not be swayed because for me scientific proof isn't proof. I can say creationism is aboslute truth and show you God and whatever spiritual proof I may have, and I'm sure you will still stand unmoved, because that kind of proof doesn't do it for you.
<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
Thank gawd throughout history not everyone was like you, otherwise we wouldn't have progressed past the medieval times. Ironic that you're using a computer and the internet, direct products of science to post your views.

i_am_a_n00bie · Feb 28, 2004, 06:11 am

Is this forum run by lawyers or something? You keep claiming that the default position of God's existance es "no", and that everyone else has to prove that God does exist. Legally (as in, if we were proving the existance of God in a court of law), this is correct. Scientifically speaking, however, this is wrong. If you come up with some crackpot theory, but that no one can disprove, then the theory stands, whether people like it or not.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Spyder Jerusalem,)
No.
I'm saying that I don't have to prove that "god" doesn't exist, any more than I have to prove that "fairies" don't exist.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
The difference between proving that God exists and proving that Fairies exist, is that no one refutes the claim that fairies don't exist. People do, on the other hand, refute the claim that God doesn't exist, therefore creating some kind of debate.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Spyder Jerusalem,)
No proof, no truth.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

This ties in to what I was saying above. It is scientifically IMPOSSIBLE to prove anything. In order to do so, you would need to go through all of the data in the universe, in every form, and fail to find a single flaw in your theory to prove it is correct. In short, you would need the mind of God. How real scientists work is by disproving theories. As I said before, a theory stands unless it is disproven. If what you say above is correct, and you do not believe in God, then the continuation of your argument is that you do not believe anything is true (a form of Nihilism). I don't mean to contort your words, or take them out of context, but clearly part of your argument must change.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Spyder Jerusalem,)
You're fuckin' joking, right?
You're not really denying the superiority of logical deduction, are you?
What the fuck?
Without deductive reasoning, we'd still be livin in the dark ages!
But then, that's what christers seem to want.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

One: Swearing does not make you sound more intelligent.
Two: That is what our society tells us. The only way to conclusively prove logic is with logic, meaning that it is inherently axiomatic. And, like it or not, an axiomatic system probably has significant flaws.
Three: I think this discussion proves that "christers" are well out of the dark ages.

tman_ndsu08 · Feb 28, 2004, 12:15 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Pooeypants,)
<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (james?,)
Fuck logic. I hate practicality. You can recite any law of critical thinking you know, but the truth of the matter is that nothing is proven until it's experienced and that proof is subjective. You can say the big bang is proven and show me all the calculations you want, but I still may not be swayed because for me scientific proof isn't proof. I can say creationism is aboslute truth and show you God and whatever spiritual proof I may have, and I'm sure you will still stand unmoved, because that kind of proof doesn't do it for you.
<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
Thank gawd throughout history not everyone was like you, otherwise we wouldn't have progressed past the medieval times. Ironic that you're using a computer and the internet, direct products of science to post your views.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

why do you think medieval times are so bad?

**Pooeypants** · Feb 28, 2004, 12:43 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (tman_ndsu08,)

why do you think medieval times are so bad?<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
For a start I wouldn't have a computer nor the network to reply that question. :rolleyes:

tman_ndsu08 · Feb 28, 2004, 02:15 pm

that's it? so if you had a computer and the internet it would be a fine time to live in?

i_am_a_n00bie · Feb 29, 2004, 04:14 am

I think that's twisting Pooeypants's words a little bit. There were significant problems with the middle ages, such as ill health, lack of education.

Anyway, back on topic.

**Pooeypants** · Feb 29, 2004, 05:53 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (tman_ndsu08,)
that's it? so if you had a computer and the internet it would be a fine time to live in?<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
Notice I said for a start, and then as mentioned above, we wouldn't have the medical care that is available for us, I'd probably not be rich enough to be fully literate and unlike the ancient Romans, the Brits didn't have very good sanitation facilities so I'd have a good time smelling other ppl's crap. Nice and healthy for yer isn't it?

tman_ndsu08 · Feb 29, 2004, 12:23 pm

so that's it?

**Pooeypants** · Feb 29, 2004, 12:31 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (tman_ndsu08,)
so that's it?<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
I've got better things to do than type out an entire list of why the 21st century is better than the middle ages. Why don't you grow up and post something more productive.

thrillofitall · Feb 29, 2004, 04:00 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (tman_ndsu08,)
so that's it?<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

the crusades? disease? starvation on much more mass scale?

Paavo · Feb 29, 2004, 04:03 pm

tman_ndsu08, I'm sure you've read some history in your life. At least enough to see that people are better off now than we were back then. Lots of shitty stuff have come up after the middle ages, but come on.

tman_ndsu08 · Feb 29, 2004, 05:18 pm

From a technology point of view...yes, they were far less advanced.

But as far as quality of life...it's hardly the apocolyptic hell-hole that you make it out to be.

Just remember that history books have authors...and those authors read a lot of books...etc.

**Pooeypants** · Feb 29, 2004, 06:17 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (tman_ndsu08,)
From a technology point of view...yes, they were far less advanced.

But as far as quality of life...it's hardly the apocolyptic hell-hole that you make it out to be.

Just remember that history books have authors...and those authors read a lot of books...etc.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
I'm sure you can tell me what the average live expectancy of a man in the middle ages vs that of modern age.

nalex · Mar 3, 2004, 03:22 pm

========================================================

A fictional analysis (please consider this pure opinion rather than facticity or proof, who knows, it may be difficult to decide this).

Does God Exist? Yes. The proof is this: God does NOT exist. God did NOT create mankind. Mankind woke up one morning and said, hey I can do an awful lot more if I give my lazy cousins a reason to do things, and He printed the Dollar bill with its words "in GOD we TRUST". Sure I believe. God is a conspiracy. God sends us all to work every day.

Does one believe in God? Yes. One or two certainly do "believe" and their "belief" is as real as the Red Sox winning a game. I do not know who the Red Sox are, or why they are going to win a game, but I know that they do that sort of thing, there is an absolute certain inevitability about that, so I believe in it. Of course the Red Socks may be the actual NAME that I am considering as I do this believing activity. So now I can not be sure as the NAME is screwing me into a corner like a lightbulb into a bathplug hole.

God is the NAME. What does that mean? God is that thing that it makes no sense to prove or disprove, yes it is convenient. There is a certain convenience too about that inevitability that makes us walk from a place of danger to higher ground. We provide NAMES for all those things that concern us as we drag these relatively fragile bags of bones around with all their aches and pains, we have to be going somewhere. We have to believe in something, and it helps when we all believe in the same thing or we have each other for dinner.

Until a technology comes along that helps us to survive without that guiding force that takes us past. Then God would indeed be dead. But then again, so would we. Fiction about machines end up concluding that Humans are the problem. We no longer worship God, we fear our own God like creations. Perhaps God is frightened of what we appear to have become, and is just a big happy guy like Santa or Peter Jackson. Probably not.

Now I say again, does God exist? Yes, because without that emotional/physical force, there would be no Oprah.

Does God exist?

It depends on what you NAME God.

Does God exist in Fact?

No. God exists in what you NAME God. God is no more in Fact than you are. If I say you are wrong, that does not make you wrong. But it helps me to believe it, and each time I say it I believe it just a little more. By the time I am ready to die, I believe it absolutely, my last words prove this.

After I die, I just hope God helps pay any outstanding parking tickets.

"DO YOU BELIEVE?"

Sometimes the question scares the crap out of me, and other times its just the Dollar and all it means that scares the crap out of me.

================================================================

Please consider this post as fiction, or perhaps from the realm of poetry...

tman_ndsu08 · Mar 3, 2004, 03:52 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Pooeypants,)
<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (tman_ndsu08,)
From a technology point of view...yes, they were far less advanced.

But as far as quality of life...it's hardly the apocolyptic hell-hole that you make it out to be.

Just remember that history books have authors...and those authors read a lot of books...etc.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
I'm sure you can tell me what the average live expectancy of a man in the middle ages vs that of modern age.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

No..they didn't bother to keep many records on life expecancy.

However, assuming you didn't die of a disease or something else, then you could probably expect to live into the 60's.

Now, it's more or less the same medicine helps but cancer is more or less unstopable.

nalex · Mar 3, 2004, 04:04 pm

Life in the middle ages was short brutal and harsh according to Hobbes. That is still true for a large number of humans today.

In order to Love and Work without killing each other we share a common morality. If we all believe in the same God we could have world peace. If God exists or not matters less than we share in common belief.

Our belief in God became culturally divided, and therefore we no longer believe in the One God, but we (humanity) have lots of beliefs. But most of us do believe in God because we have no proof.

Spyder Jerusalem · Mar 4, 2004, 03:27 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (nalex,)
Life in the middle ages was short brutal and harsh according to Hobbes. That is still true for a large number of humans today.

In order to Love and Work without killing each other we share a common morality. If we all believe in the same God we could have world peace. If God exists or not matters less than we share in common belief.

Our belief in God became culturally divided, and therefore we no longer believe in the One God, but we (humanity) have lots of beliefs. But most of us do believe in God because we have no proof.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

Why couldn't we share a common belief in no "god".
The concepts of "god" and "morality" are mutually exclusive.
One does not justify the other, though christers would like to THINK they do.
As if one cannot be moral with the influence of a deity!
How limited!

Besides, a common "religious" belief would entail a samenes that I, personally find repugnant, and I know that many others would feel the same way.

I just wonder at the audacity and self-importance of christers, among other religious nuts, to claim that THEY ALONE possess the truth, and that all others are condemned for refusing it.
Smacks of fascism and fear-mongering propaganda to me...

Mar 4, 2004, 09:16 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by
But most of us do believe in God because we have no proof.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

This is the best and most honest statement of Xnty I have ever seen. While I do not understand how anyone can accept the absence of proof as proof, I do respect those who can and do acknowledge that this is upon what their faith is based.

View Poll Results: Do you believe that a god exists?
Yes	72	45.86%
No	58	36.94%
I don't know	27	17.20%
Voters: 157. You may not vote

Feb 27, 2004, 10:43 pm	#281 (permalink) (top)
tman_ndsu08 BANNED Posts: 5,021	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by God does NOT exist, and since there is NO proof to the contrary, that is the truth of it. <hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> God does exist...but there is no proof to this either.

Feb 27, 2004, 10:46 pm	#282 (permalink) (top)
tman_ndsu08 BANNED Posts: 5,021	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Spyder Jerusalem,) </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (tman_ndsu08,) Boolean algebra has no advantages at proving theories that regular algebra does.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> I direct you to this page concerning this school of logic..... Basic Boolean algebra and logic In other words, almost all critical thought, and especially that simulated with the logic circuits of most computers, as well as simple solipsistic expressions and truth tables can be expressed with Boolean equations. All critical thought can be broken down into these categories. True. False. Either. Or. And. Not And. Nor. Not Or. I invite you to read, and possibly acquire some understanding. Then again, maybe not!<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> I know how Boolean works. What i said was not that boolean algebra is not good for proving theories but that regular math is just as good for proving theories.

Feb 28, 2004, 05:51 am	#283 (permalink) (top)
Pooeypants Neo Moderator Location: England Posts: 5,609	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (james?,) Fuck logic. I hate practicality. You can recite any law of critical thinking you know, but the truth of the matter is that nothing is proven until it's experienced and that proof is subjective. You can say the big bang is proven and show me all the calculations you want, but I still may not be swayed because for me scientific proof isn't proof. I can say creationism is aboslute truth and show you God and whatever spiritual proof I may have, and I'm sure you will still stand unmoved, because that kind of proof doesn't do it for you. <hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> Thank gawd throughout history not everyone was like you, otherwise we wouldn't have progressed past the medieval times. Ironic that you're using a computer and the internet, direct products of science to post your views. War is Peace Freedom is Slavery Ignorance is strength Harness the power of Ingsoc, then you can capture someone killed the year before

Feb 28, 2004, 06:11 am	#284 (permalink) (top)
i_am_a_n00bie Sedimentary Rock Posts: 23	Is this forum run by lawyers or something? You keep claiming that the default position of God's existance es "no", and that everyone else has to prove that God does exist. Legally (as in, if we were proving the existance of God in a court of law), this is correct. Scientifically speaking, however, this is wrong. If you come up with some crackpot theory, but that no one can disprove, then the theory stands, whether people like it or not. </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Spyder Jerusalem,) No. I'm saying that I don't have to prove that "god" doesn't exist, any more than I have to prove that "fairies" don't exist.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> The difference between proving that God exists and proving that Fairies exist, is that no one refutes the claim that fairies don't exist. People do, on the other hand, refute the claim that God doesn't exist, therefore creating some kind of debate. </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Spyder Jerusalem,) No proof, no truth.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> This ties in to what I was saying above. It is scientifically IMPOSSIBLE to prove anything. In order to do so, you would need to go through all of the data in the universe, in every form, and fail to find a single flaw in your theory to prove it is correct. In short, you would need the mind of God. How real scientists work is by disproving theories. As I said before, a theory stands unless it is disproven. If what you say above is correct, and you do not believe in God, then the continuation of your argument is that you do not believe anything is true (a form of Nihilism). I don't mean to contort your words, or take them out of context, but clearly part of your argument must change. </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Spyder Jerusalem,) You're fuckin' joking, right? You're not really denying the superiority of logical deduction, are you? What the fuck? Without deductive reasoning, we'd still be livin in the dark ages! But then, that's what christers seem to want.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> One: Swearing does not make you sound more intelligent. Two: That is what our society tells us. The only way to conclusively prove logic is with logic, meaning that it is inherently axiomatic. And, like it or not, an axiomatic system probably has significant flaws. Three: I think this discussion proves that "christers" are well out of the dark ages.

Feb 28, 2004, 12:15 pm	#285 (permalink) (top)
tman_ndsu08 BANNED Posts: 5,021	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Pooeypants,) </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (james?,) Fuck logic. I hate practicality. You can recite any law of critical thinking you know, but the truth of the matter is that nothing is proven until it's experienced and that proof is subjective. You can say the big bang is proven and show me all the calculations you want, but I still may not be swayed because for me scientific proof isn't proof. I can say creationism is aboslute truth and show you God and whatever spiritual proof I may have, and I'm sure you will still stand unmoved, because that kind of proof doesn't do it for you. <hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> Thank gawd throughout history not everyone was like you, otherwise we wouldn't have progressed past the medieval times. Ironic that you're using a computer and the internet, direct products of science to post your views.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> why do you think medieval times are so bad?

Feb 28, 2004, 12:43 pm	#286 (permalink) (top)
Pooeypants Neo Moderator Location: England Posts: 5,609	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (tman_ndsu08,) why do you think medieval times are so bad?<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> For a start I wouldn't have a computer nor the network to reply that question. :rolleyes: War is Peace Freedom is Slavery Ignorance is strength Harness the power of Ingsoc, then you can capture someone killed the year before

Feb 28, 2004, 02:15 pm	#287 (permalink) (top)
tman_ndsu08 BANNED Posts: 5,021	that's it? so if you had a computer and the internet it would be a fine time to live in?

Feb 29, 2004, 04:14 am	#288 (permalink) (top)
i_am_a_n00bie Sedimentary Rock Posts: 23	I think that's twisting Pooeypants's words a little bit. There were significant problems with the middle ages, such as ill health, lack of education. Anyway, back on topic.

Feb 29, 2004, 05:53 am	#289 (permalink) (top)
Pooeypants Neo Moderator Location: England Posts: 5,609	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (tman_ndsu08,) that's it? so if you had a computer and the internet it would be a fine time to live in?<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> Notice I said for a start, and then as mentioned above, we wouldn't have the medical care that is available for us, I'd probably not be rich enough to be fully literate and unlike the ancient Romans, the Brits didn't have very good sanitation facilities so I'd have a good time smelling other ppl's crap. Nice and healthy for yer isn't it? War is Peace Freedom is Slavery Ignorance is strength Harness the power of Ingsoc, then you can capture someone killed the year before

Feb 29, 2004, 12:23 pm	#290 (permalink) (top)
tman_ndsu08 BANNED Posts: 5,021	so that's it?

Feb 29, 2004, 12:31 pm	#291 (permalink) (top)
Pooeypants Neo Moderator Location: England Posts: 5,609	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (tman_ndsu08,) so that's it?<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> I've got better things to do than type out an entire list of why the 21st century is better than the middle ages. Why don't you grow up and post something more productive. War is Peace Freedom is Slavery Ignorance is strength Harness the power of Ingsoc, then you can capture someone killed the year before

Feb 29, 2004, 04:00 pm	#292 (permalink) (top)
thrillofitall Sedimentary Rock Location: Massachusetts, USA Posts: 20	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (tman_ndsu08,) so that's it?<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> the crusades? disease? starvation on much more mass scale?

Feb 29, 2004, 04:03 pm	#293 (permalink) (top)
Paavo Location: Finland Posts: 712	tman_ndsu08, I'm sure you've read some history in your life. At least enough to see that people are better off now than we were back then. Lots of shitty stuff have come up after the middle ages, but come on.

Feb 29, 2004, 05:18 pm	#294 (permalink) (top)
tman_ndsu08 BANNED Posts: 5,021	From a technology point of view...yes, they were far less advanced. But as far as quality of life...it's hardly the apocolyptic hell-hole that you make it out to be. Just remember that history books have authors...and those authors read a lot of books...etc.

Feb 29, 2004, 06:17 pm	#295 (permalink) (top)
Pooeypants Neo Moderator Location: England Posts: 5,609	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (tman_ndsu08,) From a technology point of view...yes, they were far less advanced. But as far as quality of life...it's hardly the apocolyptic hell-hole that you make it out to be. Just remember that history books have authors...and those authors read a lot of books...etc.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> I'm sure you can tell me what the average live expectancy of a man in the middle ages vs that of modern age. War is Peace Freedom is Slavery Ignorance is strength Harness the power of Ingsoc, then you can capture someone killed the year before

Mar 3, 2004, 03:22 pm	#296 (permalink) (top)
nalex Sedimentary Rock Posts: 24	======================================================== A fictional analysis (please consider this pure opinion rather than facticity or proof, who knows, it may be difficult to decide this). Does God Exist? Yes. The proof is this: God does NOT exist. God did NOT create mankind. Mankind woke up one morning and said, hey I can do an awful lot more if I give my lazy cousins a reason to do things, and He printed the Dollar bill with its words "in GOD we TRUST". Sure I believe. God is a conspiracy. God sends us all to work every day. Does one believe in God? Yes. One or two certainly do "believe" and their "belief" is as real as the Red Sox winning a game. I do not know who the Red Sox are, or why they are going to win a game, but I know that they do that sort of thing, there is an absolute certain inevitability about that, so I believe in it. Of course the Red Socks may be the actual NAME that I am considering as I do this believing activity. So now I can not be sure as the NAME is screwing me into a corner like a lightbulb into a bathplug hole. God is the NAME. What does that mean? God is that thing that it makes no sense to prove or disprove, yes it is convenient. There is a certain convenience too about that inevitability that makes us walk from a place of danger to higher ground. We provide NAMES for all those things that concern us as we drag these relatively fragile bags of bones around with all their aches and pains, we have to be going somewhere. We have to believe in something, and it helps when we all believe in the same thing or we have each other for dinner. Until a technology comes along that helps us to survive without that guiding force that takes us past. Then God would indeed be dead. But then again, so would we. Fiction about machines end up concluding that Humans are the problem. We no longer worship God, we fear our own God like creations. Perhaps God is frightened of what we appear to have become, and is just a big happy guy like Santa or Peter Jackson. Probably not. Now I say again, does God exist? Yes, because without that emotional/physical force, there would be no Oprah. Does God exist? It depends on what you NAME God. Does God exist in Fact? No. God exists in what you NAME God. God is no more in Fact than you are. If I say you are wrong, that does not make you wrong. But it helps me to believe it, and each time I say it I believe it just a little more. By the time I am ready to die, I believe it absolutely, my last words prove this. After I die, I just hope God helps pay any outstanding parking tickets. "DO YOU BELIEVE?" Sometimes the question scares the crap out of me, and other times its just the Dollar and all it means that scares the crap out of me. ================================================================ Please consider this post as fiction, or perhaps from the realm of poetry...

Mar 3, 2004, 03:52 pm	#297 (permalink) (top)
tman_ndsu08 BANNED Posts: 5,021	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Pooeypants,) </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (tman_ndsu08,) From a technology point of view...yes, they were far less advanced. But as far as quality of life...it's hardly the apocolyptic hell-hole that you make it out to be. Just remember that history books have authors...and those authors read a lot of books...etc.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> I'm sure you can tell me what the average live expectancy of a man in the middle ages vs that of modern age.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> No..they didn't bother to keep many records on life expecancy. However, assuming you didn't die of a disease or something else, then you could probably expect to live into the 60's. Now, it's more or less the same medicine helps but cancer is more or less unstopable.

Mar 3, 2004, 04:04 pm	#298 (permalink) (top)
nalex Sedimentary Rock Posts: 24	Life in the middle ages was short brutal and harsh according to Hobbes. That is still true for a large number of humans today. In order to Love and Work without killing each other we share a common morality. If we all believe in the same God we could have world peace. If God exists or not matters less than we share in common belief. Our belief in God became culturally divided, and therefore we no longer believe in the One God, but we (humanity) have lots of beliefs. But most of us do believe in God because we have no proof.

Mar 4, 2004, 03:27 pm	#299 (permalink) (top)
Spyder Jerusalem Molten Ash Location: The City, scoring dope. Posts: 31	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (nalex,) Life in the middle ages was short brutal and harsh according to Hobbes. That is still true for a large number of humans today. In order to Love and Work without killing each other we share a common morality. If we all believe in the same God we could have world peace. If God exists or not matters less than we share in common belief. Our belief in God became culturally divided, and therefore we no longer believe in the One God, but we (humanity) have lots of beliefs. But most of us do believe in God because we have no proof.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> Why couldn't we share a common belief in no "god". The concepts of "god" and "morality" are mutually exclusive. One does not justify the other, though christers would like to THINK they do. As if one cannot be moral with the influence of a deity! How limited! Besides, a common "religious" belief would entail a samenes that I, personally find repugnant, and I know that many others would feel the same way. I just wonder at the audacity and self-importance of christers, among other religious nuts, to claim that THEY ALONE possess the truth, and that all others are condemned for refusing it. Smacks of fascism and fear-mongering propaganda to me... "A Kenyan man once said to me, 'You can get used to anything when money's involved.' He used to stick mice up his ass for twenty bucks a time."

Mar 4, 2004, 09:16 pm	#300 (permalink) (top)
Lightbearer Guest Posts: n/a	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by But most of us do believe in God because we have no proof.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> This is the best and most honest statement of Xnty I have ever seen. While I do not understand how anyone can accept the absence of proof as proof, I do respect those who can and do acknowledge that this is upon what their faith is based.