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

Re: [Death To Religion] theory

Expand Messages
  • Richard Godwin
    Well, I can t think that helps. This is several definitions which reflect different ways theory is used. My use was specific to just the first one, and
    Message 1 of 90 , Oct 18, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      Well, I can't think that helps. This is several definitions which reflect
      different ways "theory" is used. My use was specific to just the first one,
      and that is drastically incomplete. Theories are what science ends up with,
      and they are not conjectural, not math necessarily, not a branch of science
      or art, not rules or principles, not contemplation or speculation, not a
      guess or conjecture.

      Come on guy, surely you're smarter than this.

      Richard.


      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "praesto12" <Praesto12@...>
      To: <deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 1:35 PM
      Subject: Re: [Death To Religion] theory


      This is what I got for the definition.
      the·o·ry   /ˈθiəri, ˈθɪəri/ Show Spelled
      [thee-uh-ree, theer-ee] Show IPA
      –noun, plural -ries.
      1.
      a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation
      for a
      class of phenomena: Einstein's theory of relativity.

      2.
      a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural, in contrast to
      well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of
      actual
      fact.

      3.
      Mathematics . a body of principles, theorems, or the like, belonging to one
      subject: number theory.

      4.
      the branch of a science or art that deals with its principles or methods, as
      distinguished from its practice: music theory.

      5.
      a particular conception or view of something to be done or of the method of
      doing it; a system of rules or principles.

      6.
      contemplation or speculation.
      7.
      guess or conjecture.
      Richard




      ________________________________
      From: Richard Godwin <meta@...>
      To: deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Sun, October 17, 2010 6:00:03 PM
      Subject: Re: [Death To Religion] NIce little video about the Truth of
      Evolution.
      Please enjoy.


      We need to understand what "theory" means. All it means is a formulation of
      collated and organized information to give and support one or more
      conclusions supported by sufficient and accurate evidence (not from anywhere
      just my offhanded one of the present). In a real sense all conclusions are
      theories. It is important to realize there is no certainty with theories,
      but just variable degrees of probabilities. Gravity is a theorized
      phenomenon based on a theory of gravity, and there is more than one theory.
      Empirically, its effects are realized experientially, as you pointed out.
      The galaxy theory of earth is solar-based with earth traversing its sun, not
      vice versa as we sense in our experience. When a theory becomes so
      overwhelmingly probably (very high probability) it is called a fact.
      Gravity is a fact, but not really understood. Evolution of everything is a
      fact, and sufficient evidence shows the Darwinian theory of evolution is
      factual, to which are added some important elements such as genetics the
      source of inheritance. All beliefs are theories of variable plausibility
      and rational support. All religions doctrines are theories, even the ones
      that claim certainty. Classical, commonsense, physics in a closed system is
      based on certainty, the source of determinism. Quantum physics concerns
      physical ultimates and their activities and is based on probabilities.

      Whatever any of you believe is a theory, whether good, bad, or indifferent,
      and to whatever degree of probability or lack thereof. What else could it
      be?

      Richard.
    • Clint
      ... Lie. ... I belong to and believe whole-heartedly in one of the most hate-filled, violent religions ever... yet I m not like that. Almost like saying I m
      Message 90 of 90 , Nov 5, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        praesto12 wrote:
        > I don't despise anyone in this group.I don't think I've presented that, and if
        > I have it's not true.

        Lie.

        > I think you need to believe that I am a facist and that I am "narrow-minded."
        > You need to believe that I am not open to talking to homosexuals,atheist,
        > muslims extc. You have to believe something like that because it makes it easier
        > for you to reject the Christian message you don't want to hear.

        "I belong to and believe whole-heartedly in one of the most hate-filled,
        violent religions ever... yet I'm not like that."

        Almost like saying "I'm a Nazi and burn Jews but I don't believe in the
        what it says nor do I hate Jews."

        Ok, that is a bit of an extreme comparison but you get the point
        (probably not). You can pick and choose what you want out of your
        religion but it is full of hatred, chauvinism, violence, genocide,
        intolerance, racism, slavery, infanticide, and so forth. I do reject
        it's message and I'd rather not hear it for those very obvious reasons.
        Anyone with half a brain would do so as well.

        > The scope of email is limited, so "arguing" is limited. But let me say that
        > I owe nothing to any of you in the context of presenting or not presenting a
        > fact or argument for anything. I am not on your clock buddy. I owe you nothing.
        > Likewise you do not have to present an argument to me for why you reject Jesus.
        > That's between you and him.

        What jesus? Can I talk him? Where is he? I got something I'd like to say
        to him.

        Oh right. No one has ever seen him nor is there any evidence he ever
        existed. This could be harder than I thought.

        > I do not preach.

        Lie.

        > I did not give up on the DH discussion. I'm interested in
        > learning more on the subject. And, I'm not sure why you are saying that I am
        > against rational discussion.

        I'm not sure what DH stands for but most of this is nonsense. And I'm
        not sure what you define as rational, but I haven't seen much of it.

        > You claim that I "despise" everyone. You call
        > me "narrow-minded." You are very much as ad homenium as you say that I am. I do
        > admit that I dislike "educators" that spend their lives trying to pull
        > people away from God. I also feel sorry for them as well.

        Aw. Poor, other-Richard. I'm getting a mixed message here in that you
        want us to feel sorry for you but you're the bigger man feeling sorry
        for others. Either way, this is just more rambling nonsense.
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.