There is no proof Homer wrote the Illiad

[comic boy]

Cant think of any single book that has remained unchanged and unaltered for 3000 years , post a link somebody please .

[Dukasaur]

Cant think of any single book that has remained unchanged and unaltered for 3000 years , post a link somebody please .

link

[comic boy]

Yep that work is truly inspired , I sense the guidance of Cod.

[BigBallinStalin]

If a scientist were somehow able to find an alternative to evolution that better explains the diversity of life and somehow sweeps away the multitude of evidence supporting evolution, they would undoubtedly win the Nobel Prize.

I'm sure that you would argue that these alternative explanations have been offered, but ultimately they have been found lacking by the collective scientific community. There are really only two ways you can look at that; one possibility is that the theories that you support are lacking in evidence. Alternatively, there is a colossal, worldwide conspiracy that has set out to hide the truth of God from the world. This conspiracy would include people from all walks of life and every major religion of the world. Their goals are unclear and their motivations are dubious. You are a member of the brave opposition, whose strongest arguments rest on metaphors, selective quoting, purposeful misunderstanding of scientific principles (the Second Law of Thermodynamics being a favorite), and false stories of deathbed conversions. Which of these sound more likely to you?

re: bold, TRUE.

On, but a conspiracy? How do you that this conspiracy is so broad? It could be very narrow! So narrow, you can't see it! But!! You can see it in the shadows.... the shadows.....

[aage]

Cant think of any single book that has remained unchanged and unaltered for 3000 years , post a link somebody please .

3000 years ago there were no books, so obviously no. There are unaltered manuscripts and other texts (stone tablets and such) but in most cases there are multiple versions. (Because copyists always "improved" the version they copied.)

[thegreekdog]

Whether the Earth was created in 7 days, or 7 actual eras, I’m not sure we’ll ever be able to answer that. It’s one of the great mysteries.

—US Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL), in a GQ interview (December 2012)

Don't you wish Senators passed US Law?

The full quote from Marco Rubio (who I despise):

I’m not a scientist, man. I can tell you what recorded history says, I can tell you what the Bible says, but I think that’s a dispute amongst theologians and I think it has nothing to do with the gross domestic product or economic growth of the United States. I think the age of the universe has zero to do with how our economy is going to grow. I’m not a scientist. I don’t think I’m qualified to answer a question like that. At the end of the day, I think there are multiple theories out there on how the universe was created and I think this is a country where people should have the opportunity to teach them all. I think parents should be able to teach their kids what their faith says, what science says. Whether the Earth was created in 7 days, or 7 actual eras, I’m not sure we’ll ever be able to answer that. It’s one of the great mysteries.

Meanwhile...

What I've said to them is that I believe that God created the universe and that six days in the Bible may not be six days as we unerstand it - it may not be 24-hour days. And that's what I believe.

- US president Barack Obama (D-IL), in the Compassion Forum (2008).

[Neoteny]

I totally wish he would stop with that believing stuff.

[DoomYoshi]

The full quote from Marco Rubio is even worse. What a tool. How can an economy grow if the people are not actively trying to be more knowledgable?

Playing Civilization only proves that research is important.

[thegreekdog]

The full quote from Marco Rubio is even worse. What a tool. How can an economy grow if the people are not actively trying to be more knowledgable?

-18 Saxbucks for hypocrisy.

Playing Civilization only proves that research is important.

+39 Saxbucks for Civlization concept usage.

[DoomYoshi]

What hypocrisy? You think that people becoming more knowledgable shrinks an economy?

[thegreekdog]

What hypocrisy? You think that people becoming more knowledgable shrinks an economy?

No. I think you (and Metsfanmax until recently), are picking on Rubio because he's a conservative Republican. The president of the United States basically said the same thing Rubio did.

[DoomYoshi]

What hypocrisy? You think that people becoming more knowledgable shrinks an economy?

No. I think you (and Metsfanmax until recently), are picking on Rubio because he's a conservative Republican. The president of the United States basically said the same thing Rubio did.

I am a card-carrying conservative, so your interpretation is poor.

Also, if I made a mafia game of Nobel Laureates, Obama would be in the mafia category because he didn't deserve his. It should be stripped just like the cancer parasite one.

[PLAYER57832]

Is this the greatest fraud ever thrusted upon mankind? What evidence exists to believe with reasonable certainty that he was the author of that work?

LOL.. actually, I believe the consensus is he did not. (might be wrong on that..., not going to bother even googling the info)

[notyou2]

What hypocrisy? You think that people becoming more knowledgable shrinks an economy?

No. I think you (and Metsfanmax until recently), are picking on Rubio because he's a conservative Republican. The president of the United States basically said the same thing Rubio did.

I am a card-carrying conservative, so your interpretation is poor.

Also, if I made a mafia game of Nobel Laureates, Obama would be in the mafia category because he didn't deserve his. It should be stripped just like the cancer parasite one.

A Canadian conservative is a liberal in the eyes of the US. You pale in comparison.

[betiko]

I win!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahabharata

[DoomYoshi]

What hypocrisy? You think that people becoming more knowledgable shrinks an economy?

No. I think you (and Metsfanmax until recently), are picking on Rubio because he's a conservative Republican. The president of the United States basically said the same thing Rubio did.

I am a card-carrying conservative, so your interpretation is poor.

Also, if I made a mafia game of Nobel Laureates, Obama would be in the mafia category because he didn't deserve his. It should be stripped just like the cancer parasite one.

A Canadian conservative is a liberal in the eyes of the US. You pale in comparison.

Ok, It's true that the Conservative Party of Canada is really just a socialist operation in disguise. I thought it was unusual when we renamed "Dominion Day" to "Sholokov Day" but the more I think about this accusation, the more it bothers me. What the hell is wrong with Americans? As soon as the Cold War ends, with it's neatly divided sides of good vs evil, us vs them, you have to generate this polarized government of good vs evil, us vs them, Rep vs Dem. Why? Don't you realize the world really is in 50 Shades of Grey? Why do you continue to frame the world in terms of stupid political lines?

[thegreekdog]

What hypocrisy? You think that people becoming more knowledgable shrinks an economy?

No. I think you (and Metsfanmax until recently), are picking on Rubio because he's a conservative Republican. The president of the United States basically said the same thing Rubio did.

I am a card-carrying conservative, so your interpretation is poor.

Also, if I made a mafia game of Nobel Laureates, Obama would be in the mafia category because he didn't deserve his. It should be stripped just like the cancer parasite one.

A Canadian conservative is a liberal in the eyes of the US. You pale in comparison.

Ok, It's true that the Conservative Party of Canada is really just a socialist operation in disguise. I thought it was unusual when we renamed "Dominion Day" to "Sholokov Day" but the more I think about this accusation, the more it bothers me. What the hell is wrong with Americans? As soon as the Cold War ends, with it's neatly divided sides of good vs evil, us vs them, you have to generate this polarized government of good vs evil, us vs them, Rep vs Dem. Why? Don't you realize the world really is in 50 Shades of Grey? Why do you continue to frame the world in terms of stupid political lines?

Yes, that's exactly my point! Most people, including media members and other politicians, concentrated on the Marco Rubio quote as evidence of why conservatives and Republicans are horrible people who hate science. When President Obama said basically the same thing, there was no such rigamarole. I think the two quotes should be treated the same way: either ridiculed or supported, depending on one's point of view. Actually, there is a third option: ignore the quotes. I did the third thing until the Marco Rubio quote got so much attention.

[AndyDufresne]

Yes, that's exactly my point! Most people, including media members and other politicians, concentrated on the Marco Rubio quote as evidence of why conservatives and Republicans are horrible people who hate science. When President Obama said basically the same thing, there was no such rigamarole. I think the two quotes should be treated the same way: either ridiculed or supported, depending on one's point of view. Actually, there is a third option: ignore the quotes. I did the third thing until the Marco Rubio quote got so much attention.

I think looking at two quotes in a vacuum tend to lead to these sorts of conclusions. I think Rubio has before said he isn't a believer in "man-made global warming", and that there isn't scientific evidence for it.


--Andy

[DoomYoshi]

Yes, that's exactly my point! Most people, including media members and other politicians, concentrated on the Marco Rubio quote as evidence of why conservatives and Republicans are horrible people who hate science. When President Obama said basically the same thing, there was no such rigamarole. I think the two quotes should be treated the same way: either ridiculed or supported, depending on one's point of view. Actually, there is a third option: ignore the quotes. I did the third thing until the Marco Rubio quote got so much attention.

I think looking at two quotes in a vacuum tend to lead to these sorts of conclusions. I think Rubio has before said he isn't a believer in "man-made global warming", and that there isn't scientific evidence for it.


--Andy

Ok, we are in agreement that there are idiots on both sides. Unfortunately for Presidents, I remember reading a poll where most Americans wouldn't elect an atheist President. So regardless of whether a Presidential candidate believes something, he has to at least pretend to.

[aage]

What hypocrisy? You think that people becoming more knowledgable shrinks an economy?

No. I think you (and Metsfanmax until recently), are picking on Rubio because he's a conservative Republican. The president of the United States basically said the same thing Rubio did.

I am a card-carrying conservative, so your interpretation is poor.

Also, if I made a mafia game of Nobel Laureates, Obama would be in the mafia category because he didn't deserve his. It should be stripped just like the cancer parasite one.

A Canadian conservative is a liberal in the eyes of the US. You pale in comparison.

Ok, It's true that the Conservative Party of Canada is really just a socialist operation in disguise. I thought it was unusual when we renamed "Dominion Day" to "Sholokov Day" but the more I think about this accusation, the more it bothers me. What the hell is wrong with Americans? As soon as the Cold War ends, with it's neatly divided sides of good vs evil, us vs them, you have to generate this polarized government of good vs evil, us vs them, Rep vs Dem. Why? Don't you realize the world really is in 50 Shades of Grey? Why do you continue to frame the world in terms of stupid political lines?

The problem with 50 shades of grey is that it can't properly make up a government. The UK is struggling with its first coalition government, whilst here in the Netherlands there have been numerous. Want to know how many actually served their full term in the past twelve years? I'll give you a clue: you can count it on exactly no hands.

[DoomYoshi]

Germany has had proportional representation for years. Are you going to say that the strongest economy in Europe is based on a non-functioning government?

aage: I misread you originally. You are saying one party needs a majority? Even if this is true, would you agree that a variety of parties make a healthy opposition? In the United States there are only 2 parties.

[thegreekdog]

Yes, that's exactly my point! Most people, including media members and other politicians, concentrated on the Marco Rubio quote as evidence of why conservatives and Republicans are horrible people who hate science. When President Obama said basically the same thing, there was no such rigamarole. I think the two quotes should be treated the same way: either ridiculed or supported, depending on one's point of view. Actually, there is a third option: ignore the quotes. I did the third thing until the Marco Rubio quote got so much attention.

I think looking at two quotes in a vacuum tend to lead to these sorts of conclusions. I think Rubio has before said he isn't a believer in "man-made global warming", and that there isn't scientific evidence for it.


--Andy

Then that should be the quote that is used to show that Marco Rubio is a moron, not the same creationist analysis that the liberal-beloved president uses.

[BigBallinStalin]

Yes, that's exactly my point! Most people, including media members and other politicians, concentrated on the Marco Rubio quote as evidence of why conservatives and Republicans are horrible people who hate science. When President Obama said basically the same thing, there was no such rigamarole. I think the two quotes should be treated the same way: either ridiculed or supported, depending on one's point of view. Actually, there is a third option: ignore the quotes. I did the third thing until the Marco Rubio quote got so much attention.

I think looking at two quotes in a vacuum tend to lead to these sorts of conclusions. I think Rubio has before said he isn't a believer in "man-made global warming", and that there isn't scientific evidence for it.


--Andy

Nevertheless, TGD's point still stands. The problem is selective perception, a cognitive bias which distorts the "identity-politics" of Americans. Many Americans inadvertently trample the statements of the despised politicians yet turn a blind or forgiving eye to similar statements made by their favored politicians.

This naive approach has diminished the democratic process of self-government, and unfortunately it has significantly contributed to the growth of authority in the National Government, thus complementing its capacity to collude with select business interests. Crony capitalism is the problem, yet its subtle consequences are hardly realized and often misinterpreted by uninformed voters with their unreal expectations of politicians and bureaucrats.

[aage]

Germany has had proportional representation for years. Are you going to say that the strongest economy in Europe is based on a non-functioning government?

aage: I misread you originally. You are saying one party needs a majority? Even if this is true, would you agree that a variety of parties make a healthy opposition? In the United States there are only 2 parties.

I'm not saying anything. Democracy dictates that only a majority can rule. The problem with 50 shades of grey-parties is that they stress differences, not similarities. This leads either to stagnation (since the governing parties disagree, no bills are passed) or re-election (because people will be fed up due to the first issue) which will loop infinitely. In the NL, for example, there's an anti-Islam party that nobody wants to cooperate with, but they do hold approximately 10% of the votes. Then there's an anti-EU party with nearly equally many friends that holds another 10% of the votes. Because of this "hyperpolarisation", other parties are forced to collaborate which does not work (whatever you may claim, liberals and socialists don't go well together).


If this were to happen in the US, which is an even bigger country, you'd firstly have the problem of having to appoint a president of a coalition, which means that the majority of the country probably does not favour their current leader. Then there have to be four years of government in which the two (or more) parties have to rule side by side and support bills their party does not support in order to make the other support bills théy don't support. This hypocricy is, then, not justified. Why would an opposition be excluded in this matter? What if party A wanted to propose a bill that party B does not support, but the opposition party does? Theoretically, this bill would pass because there is a majority. What, then, does it still mean to be a government?

I hope this gets across my point.


Funny how threads escalate here.

[thegreekdog]

Yes, that's exactly my point! Most people, including media members and other politicians, concentrated on the Marco Rubio quote as evidence of why conservatives and Republicans are horrible people who hate science. When President Obama said basically the same thing, there was no such rigamarole. I think the two quotes should be treated the same way: either ridiculed or supported, depending on one's point of view. Actually, there is a third option: ignore the quotes. I did the third thing until the Marco Rubio quote got so much attention.

I think looking at two quotes in a vacuum tend to lead to these sorts of conclusions. I think Rubio has before said he isn't a believer in "man-made global warming", and that there isn't scientific evidence for it.


--Andy

Nevertheless, TGD's point still stands. The problem is selective perception, a cognitive bias which distorts the "identity-politics" of Americans. Many Americans inadvertently trample the statements of the despised politicians yet turn a blind or forgiving eye to similar statements made by their favored politicians.

This naive approach has diminished the democratic process of self-government, and unfortunately it has significantly contributed to the growth of authority in the National Government, thus complementing its capacity to collude with select business interests. Crony capitalism is the problem, yet its subtle consequences are hardly realized and often misinterpreted by uninformed voters with their unreal expectations of politicians and bureaucrats.

Interestingly, when I was listening to conservative talk radio (that night when I was sick of the Chip Kelly news), while the conservative callers went on and on about the horrible constitution-trampling Obama administration, a liberal caller asked the great question about confirmation bias (although he put it in terms of conservatives only listening to conservative talk radio and watching Fox News). The talk show host (apparently a former Congressman) agreed with the liberal caller and then asked him what news organizations he frequented. The liberal caller replied "why does that matter," to which the talk show host laughed and said, "you cannot accuse one side of listening to reinforcing news organizations without also acknowledging that you likely listen to your own news organizations." The caller then hung up.

Moral of the story is what BBS said. If conservatives get their news from Fox and Drudge and conservative talk radio and ignore everything else, they are subject to confirmation bias. If liberals get their news from MSNBC and Drudge Retort and liberal talk radio, they are also subject to confirmation bias. It has made for a contentious population and a contentious Congress and it's definitely not helping. That being said, it's not like we didn't have contentiousness in prior periods of our history so I'm not sure how much more contentious we are now than in, say, the early to mid 19th century.