It's more possible there is more life in the galaxy then not.
Printable View
It's more possible there is more life in the galaxy then not.
[QUOTE=JohnFreeman]It's more possible there is more life in the galaxy then not.[/QUOTE]
That's fine if you believe that and choose to speculate on the implications of probability. Just don't throw out ridiculous and supercilious "guarantees" about a topic that humans still have an extremely primitive collective understanding of, i.e. the genesis of life and the methods of the universe. Otherwise you'll sound like Rose City claiming our sun has produced gold and silver and the iron in our blood.
I guarantee there is life on another planet. Don't give me any God bullshit either
[QUOTE=JohnFreeman]I guarantee there is life on another planet. Don't give me any God bullshit either[/QUOTE]
I WANT YOU OFF tHE [COLOR="Black"]FU[/COLOR]CKING THREAD YOU [COLOR="Black"]P[/COLOR]RICK
People still believe in God and religion..lol. Religion was created purely for money and to scare people.
Boy. You try and do a Christian Bale bit with a guy. But you can't get no reciprocity.
Shame.
what happened to Scholar?
[QUOTE=TylerOO]what happened to Scholar?[/QUOTE]
Died of auto erotic asphyxiation like the guy from INXS.
[QUOTE=TylerOO]what happened to Scholar?[/QUOTE]
He made a thread announcing that he was leaving a few months ago.
[QUOTE=Josh][SIZE="5"]
Socrates and Sir Isaac Newton. Maybe even Einstein too since he was passionately open to the possibility of there being a Creator behind the universe's design. He referenced God, Creator, etc hundreds if not thousands of times in his work.
Einstein has a birthday coming up too - March 14th![/QUOTE]
Einstein rejected the idea of a personal God as 'child-like' and felt closer to being a Spinozean Pantheist than anything else.
The other two are also bad examples because, Socrates (at least the one you are referring to) = largely a creation of the hopelessly idealistic Plato, and Newton = plagiarising wannabe alchemist.
[QUOTE=Dresta]Einstein rejected the idea of a personal God as 'child-like' and felt closer to being a Spinozean Pantheist than anything else.
The other two are also bad examples because, Socrates (at least the one you are referring to) = largely a creation of the hopelessly idealistic Plato, and Newton = plagiarising wannabe alchemist.[/QUOTE]
Socrates may well have been a construct in terms of his historical legend. Still had some gems tho. Whether they were really 'his' or Play-dough's, and I agree Play-dough had some philosophical clunkers, but his Socrates stuff was pretty good IMO. The Apology of Socrates is a great read/listen.
Of course. I don't think it exists in this solar system or that Aliens have ever visited us but definitely somewhere in the universe there is life.
[QUOTE=RoundMoundOfReb]Of course. I don't think it exists in this solar system or that Aliens have ever visited us but definitely somewhere in the universe there is life.[/QUOTE]
Wow, ISH has a lot more members of the JV Science team than I realized.
Freshmen :oldlol:
give dis thread a BUMP :banana:
I love how when someone tells me they are religious they think it gives them more credibility. I'm likely to stop reading what you wrote if you write something like, "I'm religious but...":oldlol:
It's like saying, "I'm not that much of a thinker, but you should listen to me".