Zeus 1 - Jesus 0

[Karjalan]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_lightning ... sus_statue

[Cartollomew]

Nooo, not touchdown Jesus!

How cool does the framework look though?

It's like a giant bug or something.

[Lellybaby]

I love the response by one of the comment:

HOW MANT MORE SIGN'S DO WE NEED
THE END IS NEAR !!

[jacob]

I love the response by one of the comment:

HOW MANT MORE SIGN'S DO WE NEED
THE END IS NEAR !!

I love people that assume things about religion lol.
I never read a thing about a statue being destroyed being a sign of the end,
but i did read something about not making images of jesus...

[Mitra]

do you refer to Exodus 20:3-5?

cause that means don't worship any thing but god. Not, "Don't make a statue of me 'cause you could never capture my awesome, you being all fallible and shit. As I would have no recourse but to reign fiery vengeance on the spoils of your toils fo- realz. You diggit?"

[Karjalan]

do you refer to Exodus 20:3-5?

cause that means don't worship any thing but god. Not, "Don't make a statue of me 'cause you could never capture my awesome, you being all fallible and shit. As I would have no recourse but to reign fiery vengeance on the spoils of your toils fo- realz. You diggit?"

Not to mention, touchdown Jesus was around for 6 years before he got struck by lightning, and there is still that massive south American Jesus that's been up for ~80 years.

Simple fact of the matter is... tallest lightning rod in the vicinity + flammable materials = inevitable.fiery death. But from what I've seen, America's religious right are notorious for not trusting science (creationism etc.)

[Cartollomew]

But from what I've seen, America's religious right are notorious for not trusting science (creationism etc.)

That's not entirely fair - they trust science up until the point where it makes them feel uncomfortable in their faith (evolution is at odds with a literal interpretation of creation), which is pretty much the same for everyone in the world.

But fundamentalists tend to have a lot more to be uncomfortable about.

Re: "Images of Jesus"

As pointed out by Mitra, there are directions in the Torah forbidding graven images - depending on your reading it could apply to God or just about anyone - but the Christian offshoot of Judaism largely ignores many of the Old Testament directions (as do a fair few Jewish denominations these days).

Arguably, the main concern about idolatry is that people don't start worshiping the idol instead of the deity (seeing the finger instead of the moon etc) and idol worship, at least in the literal sense, is pretty rare these days.

[Karjalan]

That's not entirely fair - they trust science up until the point where it makes them feel uncomfortable in their faith

No, see that's where it's completely wrong imo. The scientific method is the same more or less for every field. The science that gives you those anti-biotics, that cure for polio/small pox etc. is using the exact same methods for proving evolution/disproving countless bible stories. For example, the DNA evidence supporting evolution is the same DNA evidence that they use to convict murderers/rapists and for paternity tests. You can't use the benefits of a system, then turn around and call it lies and slander it. It's so horribly disingenuous, it serves no purpose other than to slow down progression.

I guess you haven't seen the video's, but there are people talking in an auditorium of 100's-1000s of children telling them all scientists are liars, telling them "you can't trust science, never trust science, only trust god/the bible"... (Ironically using an electronic slide show and PA system founded by science) That's not "trusting science up to a point". I also find it ironic that some creationists/evolution deniers happily accept flu vaccines which have to be constantly updated to catch up with evolving virus/bacteria, those people honestly do not deserve the vaccines.

I think I know what you mean though, there are plenty of moderate religious people who have no qualms with any of it, happily believe evolution/the big bang etc. and obviously there are many MANY different interpretations of the book.

But yeah, science is pretty much all or none... It's insanely childish to enjoy the fruits of it, then stab it in the back because you don't agree with something, especially to the point where you think you know more than almost every scientist on earth.

[Mitra]

yes but everybody has a line somewhere.

It's just a matter of being pushed till you find yours

[Karjalan]

yes but everybody has a line somewhere.

It's just a matter of being pushed till you find yours

I FOUND IT. It goes from my left nostril to my lip. That'll teach me to try play catch with my friends dog at the age of 6

[Cartollomew]

I'm not defending them particularly - the method fundamentalists apply to interpreting their holy writings is flawed and illogical.

I was pointing out that their beef isn't with science as a whole - just the bits they don't like. Sure, you can get a handful of extra crazies who say that "all science is lies", but as you said, they'll happily engage in the fruits of science without a second thought - they're just afraid of the parts that make them uncomfortable.

And this isn't unique to fundamentalists, or theists at all - science has no ethical framework beyond that which ensures the integrity of the scientific method - so there's going to be something that makes people uncomfortable, no matter what their faith alignment.

I've found people tend to get antsy when forced to considered the ethics surrounding advanced AI (which doesn't exist yet, and may never) - in particular the concept that such AI should receive some or all of the rights of normal human beings. It's illogical to disagree with that concept, but it doesn't sit well with them.

[Karjalan]

Yeah I understand that. I'm pretty sure there isn't a single thing that the entire world can agree on, even basic principles like murder or stealing.

I still have issues with people accepting science in a part, and then completely denouncing the other part. Like even if you agree with all of it but evolution (and I guess the "big bang" too) it still feels far too disingenuous.

In regards to AI, I personally hope we don't have AI any time soon. We have SOOO many other problems with ourselves that need dealing with as a species and in particular our society. Technology has grown rapidly in a very brief space of time and I don't think we are anywhere near ready to deal with the complications of new technologies and day to day discoveries. I take Nukes as a key example. Common sense would say that such a technology should be globally illegal, especially considering single nations have enough to destroy the ENTIRE earth multiple times over. But beyond that, things like researching deadly virus', smashing atoms/subatomic particles together at near the speed of light, creating life (which was only done recently), genetic engineering...
We're discovering new things so fast we aren't really getting enough time to scrutinize their possible negative (short and long term) consequences. Take Thomas Midgley for example... A man who was a engineer, and decided at some stage in his life to become a chemist. This one man was both responsible for lead being put into gasoline (to solve an issue with noisy engines) and contributing to MASSIVE amounts of burnt up lead getting into the atmosphere (and our lungs). He is also directly responsible CFC's which were later found to be rapidly depleting the Ozone layer and screwing with the earth's atmosphere. Lead was found to be "not toxic" because stool/urine samples of people digesting/inhaling lead found little traces... which was a poor test because it was actually ABSORBED by the body which is worse.
We discover new "wonderful" things so fast, and we have such a desire to reap profits that we don't have enough time to properly test/scrutinize new findings. CFC's only finally got outlawed in third world countries THIS YEAR. They were outlawed in developed countries long ago, but of course in the interest of not wanting to lose money, companies just sold their CFC products to poorer countries...

Anyway, longish ramble short... I am not quite comfortable with the idea of AI, because I don't think we are ready for it (among other things)... We really need to sort out our environment and work on cleaner energy/renewables before we go there imo.