Merry Christmas,

Steve, I don't read that, but you are familiar with it. What is that the Watchtower is that your source of information? You should read the Bible instead.
David Nebenzahl wrote: > snipped-for-privacy@aim.com spake thus: > > > It is you who are mentally handicapped. I love the people who are > > brain washed like you who think the New York Times is somehow to be > > used as a source of information. Of course they are a biased source > > of 'news' and it that is all you read you are ignorant of half the > > world. > > You're right; I think /The Watchtower/ is a *much* more believable, > unbiased source of news. > > > -- > Just as McDonald's is where you go when you're hungry but don't really > care about the quality of your food, Wikipedia is where you go when > you're curious but don't really care about the quality of your knowledge. > > - Matthew White's WikiWatch
formatting link
Reply to
curtmchere
Loading thread data ...
I didn't say it is attributed to Stephen Hawking. He simply recounted what he called an "old tale" of an elderly woman telling Bertrand Russell about the tower of turtles after Russell had given a lecture on astronomy. Actually, if I recall correctly, Hawking said "some say" it was Bertrand Russell who was giving the lecture.
Whether or not Bertrand Russell was the lecturer in Hawking's recounting of the tale, or whether that particular incident actually took place is anyone's guess. But Hawking's attribution of the tale to Bertrand Russell almost certainly stems from Russell's 1927 essay "Why I'm Not a Christian" in which Russell recounted a variation on the tale.
"That very simple sentence showed me, as I still think, the fallacy in the argument of the First Cause. If everything must have a cause, then God must have a cause. If there can be anything without a cause, it may just as well be the world as God, so that there cannot be any validity in that argument. It is exactly of the same nature as the Hindu's view, that the world rested upon an elephant and the elephant rested upon a tortoise; and when they said, "How about the tortoise?" the Indian said, "Suppose we change the subject."
Pratchett was born in 1948, so it seems his idea was inspiration, not invention. The idea seems to originate in Hindu mythology.
I haven't read any of Pratchett's novels, BTW. I'm currently on a Robert A. Heinlein streak.
Reply to
Spender
You have nicely summed up my opinion of the bible and those who take it seriously. Thank you!
Reply to
Spender
I'm partial to Frank J. Tipler's argument that God can be explained by the current understanding, and possible implications, of quantum physics. Who created man? God. Who created God? Man. That is, God doesn't exist. Not yet. He will not exist until man, or rather life, continues, grows, and gains in intelligence until shortly before the death of the universe at which point life will have gained so much knowledge that it will be able to transcend time and space. Life will become God, which Tipler refers to as The Omega Point in reference to the ideas of Thomas Aquinas.
This produces a paradox since once God is outside of time and space, he will be able to exist at any point in time and space. So he exists now, even though he hasn't been created yet.
Tipler is a physicist and insists that no known law of physics can discount the possibility, even the idea of an effect influencing it's own cause.
BTW, the book is The Physics of Immortality. Tipler also addresses the idea that since information is never lost in the space/time continuum (which happens to be Stephen Hawking's current quest - to correct the mistake he made by claiming that information can be lost), the Omega Point will have no problem resurrecting every life form that has ever existed.
Interesting reading. But I don't thump the book or carry it door to door trying to tell people about it. ;)
Reply to
Spender
I almost did a spit take when I first heard The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy and he referred to Oolon Colluphid's trilogy of philosophical blockbusters "Where God Went Wrong", "Some More of God's Greatest Mistakes" and "Who is this God Person Anyway?"
Where are they now? M-Theory, with an 11 dimensional multiverse in which our universe is simply a bubble caused by the collision of two membranes.
Not at all as simple as some sky God shouting "If I hear one more Me-damned question about anything I have said, you are going to roast for eternity!"
But the former is far more interesting. Being an agnostic, in the colloquial sense, I have no problem with the possibility that there is a God. In fact it ultimately seems like an elegant idea. Or is that just my human need for the possibility of some final answer talking?
But given a choice, I'd rather never know and simply cease to exist rather than spend eternity as some narcissistic God's little pet.
Reply to
Spender
Certainly. But the research is constantly being undermined by the major prosthetic head corporations.
Come to think of it, I wonder what brand of prosthetic head Curt has. There have been some recalls lately. I hope he has kept on top of them. His religious fervor could very well be a manufacturer's defect.
Reply to
Spender
Kinda makes ya wonder if this Oolon Colluphid person knew curt.
Reply to
Steve Caple
Ya don't wanna get one of those in your undies.
Reply to
Steve Caple
I are the world?
Reply to
Steve Caple
Which it is, no?
Forgive my skepticism - care to cite a news report or other confirmation of this claim?
Chalk it up to "curt" being deranged...
Reply to
Mark Newton
You make it their problem by prosletyzing.
About as much as you do for theirs.
Maybe they're just sick of your special pleading.
Reply to
Mark Newton
No, I don't see it as pushing Christianity into the schools. They are simply naming traditional national holidays as they should be and referring to the breaks given around them in that light.
Next people will complain that recognizing Martlin Luther King with a national holiday amounts to pushing Christianity into the schools.
An atheist setting himself on fire to protest Christmas? Yes, something does seem bass-ackwards about that scenario.
Reply to
Spender
How many tabs of acid Steve did you need to come up with 11 dimensions? And you wonder why nobody listens to you?
And you being an agnostic is not surprising, but sad.
Please come down off your high and write clearly.
Spender wrote:
Reply to
curtmchere
"Mark" (fake name of Steve)
First off, you and Steve your other name always post at the same time. If you are trying to fool anyone it is not working.
And you always insult people. That is all you do. You have nothing to add to anything other than an insult or some nonsensical rant which is either acid driven, or worse, something you think makes you seem intelligent.
I am still praying for you though. Hate the sin, love the sinner. You make it hard but that is the trial God puts us through. Someday you will see the light .
Mark Newt>
Reply to
curtmchere
Steve, more sin from you. You should seek help and stop. Forgiveness is possible with prayer.
Steve the Spender wrote:
Reply to
curtmchere
More insults Steve, why are you such a bitter person?
Steve the Spender wrote:
Reply to
curtmchere
snipped-for-privacy@aim.com wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@a75g2000cwd.googlegroups.com:
What the heck - add "Stein" to the many names of the _one_ person you imagine is thinking that American mental asylums are way too careless about letting mentally disburbed patients out on the Internet without adult supervision :-)
Grin, Stein
Reply to
Stein R
So "Stein" is another rage filled social outcast who likes trains and posts on train boards. There are alot of names you use but they all are the same thing. Why are you so angry "Stein"? I will be praying for that name too. Funny you only post when your other names do, on the same subject. Hmmmmm why would that be
Ste>
Reply to
curtmchere
Brad
I will decline your offer of future discussion of this issue. I was quite serious in my original apology about furthering the discussion of non-model railroading topics. No human can can make definative promises about future behavior, but, I shall try to refrain from re-entering this fray.
Thank you for pointing out where I may have been unclear in stating that Merry Christmas was *a greeting showing a hope for (seasonal) joy*. I should have added TO ME someplace in the sentence. I would guess that between my innocuous usage of the term and your testimony there also exists a myriad of other meanings. I really don't know what the *original and traditional* one was, or even if they are one in the same.
I still beleve it unfortunate that curt has taken what (mostly) was a simple benign thread and turned it into what has become a theological-cosmological debate. Admittedly, however, we've given him lots of help. Thank you.
Jerry
Jerry
Reply to
trainjer
Yeah, you and Ted Haggard, eh? Or did you go to Rev. Billy Sol Hargis' Bisexual Bible Institute?
Reply to
Steve Caple

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.