Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Gulags

Expand Messages
  • Doug Pensinger
    ... I would argue that a need to explain the unexplainable _is_ human nature and that religion provides those explanations. The more we are able to understand
    Message 1 of 76 , Aug 2, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      William wrote:

      > Eradicating religion isn't an easy project, but it is easier than
      > changing human nature or one of the other hard to eradicate causes of
      > evil.

      I would argue that a need to explain the unexplainable _is_ human nature
      and that religion provides those explanations. The more we are able to
      understand our universe, the less we will need the imaginary explanations
      provided by religion. Indeed, outside of the U.S. and less developed
      nations, the need for religion seems to be waning.

      The degree to which the people of U.S. cling to religion baffles me.

      --
      Doug
      _______________________________________________
      http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
    • Gary Denton
      ... There are many different designs for eyes in the living world showing that optical sight is a big advantage in surviving to reproduce. The branch humans
      Message 76 of 76 , Aug 4, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        On 8/4/05, Warren Ockrassa <warren@...> wrote:
        > On Aug 4, 2005, at 10:40 AM, Gary Denton wrote:
        >
        > > There have been several recent articles about how it is obvious that
        > > humans are obviously not the object of Intelligent Design. Human
        > > heads are too big for a significant proportion of mothers and many
        > > other things.
        >
        > One obvious case in point is eyes. They're extremely poorly engineered;
        > actually only an incompetent moron could come up with a worse optical
        > design. (And actually, *untrained* but reasonably intelligent high
        > school students could come up with BETTER designs.) This suggests the
        > "intelligent designer" is a complete cretin.

        There are many different designs for eyes in the living world showing
        that optical sight is a big advantage in surviving to reproduce. The
        branch humans developed on was not the optimal design but like most
        things was good enough.

        >
        > Teeth are another one. There are many many other ways to develop
        > choppers that are *not* prone to cavities.

        Can't help you there at this time though someone might like to examine
        my genes - I am immune to cavities. Can I auction my genetic makeup,
        teeth design and biochemical balance in my mouth off I wonder?

        >
        > And cancer? Guess what: it develops *spontaneously*. That's shoddy
        > workmanship in the DNA itself. Designed? Riiiiiiiiiiiight.

        Cancer has triggers and different likelihoods of response.

        >
        > Only idiots like Bush but into this crap.

        Bush contradicted his own science adviser.

        >
        > --
        > Warren Ockrassa, Publisher/Editor, nightwares Books
        > http://books.nightwares.com/
        > Current work in progress "The Seven-Year Mirror"
        > http://www.nightwares.com/books/ockrassa/Flat_Out.pdf
        \--
        Gary Denton
        http://www.apollocon.org June 23-25, 2006

        Easter Lemming Blogs
        http://elemming.blogspot.com
        http://elemming2.blogspot.com
        _______________________________________________
        http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.