Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Greg or e who wrote (18153)	7/14/2001 10:39:47 AM
From: thames_sider	Respond to of 82486

Oh, puh-lease. Yes, of course I've heard of Pasteur, and at least some of his work. The hypothesis of 'spontaneous generation' has nothing to do with evolution, and never had - except in your attempt to attribute it as a 'theory' of evolution. Nor had or has it anything to do with cosmology, which we were discussing. I can't be blamed for failing to connect your fallacious wanderings. Yes, I have heard of Jerusalem, too... but a little stone building near there does not prove the existence of a mighty king ruling a wide land, does it. Maybe, as I said, the lord of a small city-state existed. Nor does it prove who built it, or why (unless there's some inscription there from the builders?) Nor does it prove that some biblical sacrifice took place there hundreds or thousands of years before - at best, if there are contemporaneous inscriptions, that the builder believed it had... Incidentally, I can't find any web mention of this Marriah - have you a link? Again, I believe that the Jews existed... I just don't believe that their myths are an accurate protrayal of their history, any more than the Greek myths 'prove' the existence of Zeus, Heracles or Jason, or the existence of Japanese Emperors now 'proves' that they descended from a sun-god. Is that too complicated? Yes, I do not believe in gods as causing, designing and actively intervening in our lives. People's imaginations are NOT proof of the divine, no matter how ancient, new, well-written or opaque they may be. And I've never seen any valid evidence for the supernatural, nor anything which science cannot - or will one day not be able to - explain. Science has rigid, cohesive rules, building one on another, producing predictable and reproducible results; and it changes as new discoveries are made, although changes to the foundations grow fewer and fewer as we discover more. With the mathematical underpinnings, there is no change - only additions of knowledge. This is not a 'belief system', and if you truly cannot see the difference - then please jump off a cliff, and see if 'belief in god' saves you before the gravity you disbelieve acts as science says it will... <edit> and again I ask... what do you believe fossils are? What are the things that the scientific world says are dinosaur bones, the remains of vast creatures who roamed a world without flowers sixty million years and more before man existed? What, indeed, are the fossils of less-evolved races of hominids, that grow more and more manlike as the ages pass, until they are the same as the skeletons we have today?