[misterX]

Originally posted by Stingy Jack
The quote by Socrates ... you don't think it's true? You don't think that people, in general, are ignorant to a certain extent? Do you even KNOW what ignorant means? Ignorant simply means "lacking knowledge." It is OBVIOUS that people are ignorant. Socrates merely states that he is wise because he REALIZES he is ignorant, as opposed to everyone he spoke with who thought they were not. It is TRUE. It's happening right now. I realize that I am ignorant ... about MANY things. YOU, on the other hand, stated that you know it all. I would test you on this by asking you questions, but you would just run to the internet and look up the answers. But, we both know that you CAN'T know it all. If you did, you would be pretty fucking famous.
There are things you DO NOT KNOW, hence you are IGNORANT ... just like everybody else. Capice?


As far as the moon thing goes, you know .... I gave you the theory from an ASTRONOMY text written by ASTRONOMERS. And still you think it is bullshit. The Earth would not have been destroyed because it was in it's magma state. A liquid state. Getting hit, or receiving "a glancing blow" as the source stated, would not destroy it. And as far as the moon escaping the Earth's pull ... they tested this theory with computers ... and if you go back and read the source, you will see where I mention computer simulations (Fig. 8.27). I would post the images from the simulation, but my scanner is missing it's cable. Anyway, the moon is held in place not just by the gravitational pull of the Earth, but by that of every other nearby object in the solar system. Particularly the sun. The piece, according to the pictures, begins more like a spray as it is ripped from the side of the Earth. This spray floats off, and forms into a small sphere itself. I will type the caption for Figure 8.27: "This sequence shows a simulated collision between the Earth and an object the size of Mars. The sequence proceeds top to bottom, and zooms out dramatically. The arrow in the final frame shows the newly formed moon." DID it happen this way? I don't know. It seems reasonable, and I trust that the scientists know what they're doing.

Then you say: "Don't you think that animals as intelligent as elephants or dolphins don't know that they will die? And not by accident or some predator?" No, I don't think they do know. I mean, dolphins sure do spend a lot of time tangling themselves up in fishermen's nets. But really ... you tell me to think for myself. Well, I could sit around and make up what I know about elephants and dolphins ... but I would rather someone teach me. That way, I won't be wrong.

I don't KNOW that god doesn't exist ... just like I don't KNOW that in some other dimension lives the giant, flubbering shit-hill of Aldretch. I just don't believe they do.

The Constantine thing ... that wasn't even my argument. I had nothing to do with any of that. I wasn't even online at the time! Why should I give that point to you when I never argued with you about it in the first place? You say you descredited me with your Constantine thing ... What the hell? Are you confused?

I never stated any theories, myths, or assumptions as fact. If you are referring to the god's "omniscience" thing, go back to my previous thread. I was working from what YOU claimed to be fact: "God is omniscient". Even though I believe that is not true, I worked from that point to show that IF that was true, THEN you cannot have free will. I said IF it was true. Not that it WAS true.

I never called you names. I said you were ignorant. This is a fact. Just as I and everyone else in the world are ignorant. You're just one of those people who refuse to believe it. And I didn't say you were stupid. I said you are making yourself sound stupid. There is a difference. It's not like I said: "You stupid Christian", like you did to me in your last reply. I also said you were arrogant. This, too, is a fact. You say I insulted you as a last resort? What? I have made valid points this whole time which you have yet to refute. I can't help it that you are unable to comprehend my argument about no free will with an omniscient being. I tried and tried to make it as simple as possible. I am not ON my last resort. I am not even past my FIRST resort, since you have yet to refute it or challenge it adequately.

Then you wonder why I don't go out and experiment all this stuff myself and resort to books for my knowledge. Did I get this right? Why do I use books to get my knowledge?





Do I really have to answer this?

yes, they tested it with computers. and where do computers get their infomation from? last i heard they didnt have free thikning or rational thinking computers. a computer can only work on what a programer tells it too.
well you don't think a animal knows it can will die? well then why does a wilderbeast run from the lion? even a calf that isa few hours old will either hide or failingthat run from a predator. why? would it if it had no concept of death?