Colorado sees 97% fewer flu hospitalizations this year

[pgardn]

Don't get off track with the same old stupid . Either you have the answer or you don't. Turn to religion if you don't since you think are are basically science turned man.

You are such a fkn hypocrite old man.

You either have THE ANSWER or you dont. Binary boy.
I dont know if there is or is not a sky god. You know there is not.
Because you see a picture of white Jesus as the sky god.
I think we are puny thinkers, thats also what I think. WE dont know about the real fundamentals. WE CANT.
We dont have the capability. We never will. I feel pretty certain on this.

So you have shown absolutely nothing about lefties not wanting to take on certain SCIENCE questions.

[pgardn]

I never made the claim that you didn't understand why people believe in fairytale . I said they do, and Democrats do, and that's not compatible with science.

Now you've gone on and on about how much science you know and yet you cannot figure out how to get back to the point.

It is compatible with science because they both attempt to answer very fundamental questions that we will ultimately not be able to understand.
Religion and Philosophy are not compatible with science because science uses very limited techniques, religion and philosophy try to answer questions science cannot. (and yes, you call it making up because we HAVE science; and science has disproven some very wild religious claims of major religions that exist TODAY)

Now go keep claiming you dont get.

When you think religion, you think the big 3 in the west. Its bigger. 30,000 years bigger and still changing even though Christians will claim it does not. Religion does give advice into some very prevalent human behavior that has existed for a very long time. So I think it has some very worthwhile attributes. From the West: Dont kill other people. Not bad, Im not going to disagree. Does it happen, yes. Jealousy... Getting joy out of others pain... lets see is that physics? I will try evolutionary biology.

Self absorbed... you need to read some on this. "No, no, no the world is a cruel place, if I dont kill you, you will kill me"
End discussion.

[pgardn]

The incredibly ironic thing:

Red and turned orange DMC, the conservative Righty, is exactly who the conservative party is scared to death of.
People who dont have religion and therefore cant have any moral values. Atheists cannot possibly be ethical and caring says Ted and the rest.
So here we have DMC, kill or be killed guy, exhibiting exactly what his party is petrified of? Holy .
The psuedo Darwinian; "I take your stuff or you take mine. I want to survive so I must defeat you. There is no useful place for empathy or sympathy and there damn sure is no sacrifice on my part to help you out. fck that pathological altruism of those lefties."

Strange hubris exhibited by an old fart...

[ElNono]

I have degrees

snake with the usual low key throwing gas into the fire goods

[Winehole23]

Keep swinging wildly. Maybe you can find a tweet to say what you cannot seem to muster - something more interesting than the typical mutterings of an alcoholic.

I made you hop!

[Adam Lambert]

Don't move the goalposts to church and state. Believing in an invisible overlord is patently anti-science and it's taboo to mention it (as illustrated by your response in defense of theist democrats)

I haven't touched the goalposts. Belief is not an issue, we're talking about legislation. Republicans are the only party who use the Bible to craft legislation. Period.

[Adam Lambert]

Adam only has time when he has what he thinks is a clever retort. Religion is taboo to him "muh science".

Me: Some people have activities outside of Spurstalk.com between 5pm and 10pm

dmc: INCONCEIVABLE!!!!

loser

[DMC]

You are such a fkn hypocrite old man.

You either have THE ANSWER or you dont. Binary boy.
I dont know if there is or is not a sky god. You know there is not.
Because you see a picture of white Jesus as the sky god.
I think we are puny thinkers, thats also what I think. WE dont know about the real fundamentals. WE CANT.
We dont have the capability. We never will. I feel pretty certain on this.

So you have shown absolutely nothing about lefties not wanting to take on certain SCIENCE questions.

This is the argument from ignorance approach. We are unable to understand the complexities of god yet somehow thousands of years ago we could.

It is compatible with science because they both attempt to answer very fundamental questions that we will ultimately not be able to understand.
Religion and Philosophy are not compatible with science because science uses very limited techniques, religion and philosophy try to answer questions science cannot. (and yes, you call it making up because we HAVE science; and science has disproven some very wild religious claims of major religions that exist TODAY)

What questions would that be exactly?

Ah so you admit that science and religion are not compatible. I see you keep putting philosophy in there as a rider.

I reject your claim that we will ultimately not be able to understand things. We might not accept the answers but we will find answers without the need to invoke a god or a god of gods.

Now go keep claiming you dont get.

When you think religion, you think the big 3 in the west. Its bigger. 30,000 years bigger and still changing even though Christians will claim it does not. Religion does give advice into some very prevalent human behavior that has existed for a very long time. So I think it has some very worthwhile attributes. From the West: Dont kill other people. Not bad, Im not going to disagree. Does it happen, yes. Jealousy... Getting joy out of others pain... lets see is that physics? I will try evolutionary biology.

Self absorbed... you need to read some on this. "No, no, no the world is a cruel place, if I dont kill you, you will kill me"
End discussion.

I have no idea where you went on that LSD trip you just took. First you tell me that there are answers that we cannot understand, then you tell me in the next paragraph what I think, then you call me self absorbed. You really are full of . You've done absolutely nothing but ramble on about meaningless and not even remotely attempted to address the questions I asked.

The incredibly ironic thing:

Red and turned orange DMC, the conservative Righty, is exactly who the conservative party is scared to death of.
People who dont have religion and therefore cant have any moral values. Atheists cannot possibly be ethical and caring says Ted and the rest.
So here we have DMC, kill or be killed guy, exhibiting exactly what his party is petrified of? Holy .
The psuedo Darwinian; "I take your stuff or you take mine. I want to survive so I must defeat you. There is no useful place for empathy or sympathy and there damn sure is no sacrifice on my part to help you out. fck that pathological altruism of those lefties."

Strange hubris exhibited by an old fart...

What's wrong, you don't know how to deal with non cookie-cutter style posters? I don't fit neatly into your worldview?

Too ing bad.

Now explain what religion answers and how exactly it answers anything. You've been hedging away from the claims you made, slowly but surely, and eventually you'll simply say religion offers no answers. So why did you even start?

[DMC]

I haven't touched the goalposts. Belief is not an issue, we're talking about legislation. Republicans are the only party who use the Bible to craft legislation. Period.

So acting on your belief is bad but the belief itself is good?

[DMC]

Sure.

So you think being religious is anti science?
Lets start with that.

It is compatible with science because they both attempt to answer very fundamental questions that we will ultimately not be able to understand.
Religion and Philosophy are not compatible with science because science uses very limited techniques, religion and philosophy try to answer questions science cannot. (and yes, you call it making up because we HAVE science; and science has disproven some very wild religious claims of major religions that exist TODAY)

Holy

(no pun)

[pgardn]

This is the argument from ignorance approach. We are unable to understand the complexities of god yet somehow thousands of years ago we could.


What questions would that be exactly?

Ah so you admit that science and religion are not compatible. I see you keep putting philosophy in there as a rider.

I reject your claim that we will ultimately not be able to understand things. We might not accept the answers but we will find answers without the need to invoke a god or a god of gods.


I have no idea where you went on that LSD trip you just took. First you tell me that there are answers that we cannot understand, then you tell me in the next paragraph what I think, then you call me self absorbed. You really are full of . You've done absolutely nothing but ramble on about meaningless and not even remotely attempted to address the questions I asked.



What's wrong, you don't know how to deal with non cookie-cutter style posters? I don't fit neatly into your worldview?

Too ing bad.

Now explain what religion answers and how exactly it answers anything. You've been hedging away from the claims you made, slowly but surely, and eventually you'll simply say religion offers no answers. So why did you even start?

again it is very clear you refuse to read.
I told you religion gives answers on ethical and moral questions that science cannot even begin to approach. Because you don’t consider ethical and moral questions even questions, this has made the discussion beyond your abilities. you basically don’t like the questions or the answers. you have no understanding how philosophy religion and science are alike and how they are different because the only questions you consider questions, are questions that only Science can give answers to because those questions only involve the limited approach of science.

I am saying if you look at science very closely it is also flawed because it is a human activity. Humans can only directly sense certain things. And even those senses are flawed by the way the brain reworks information based on our past experience. Because science has made much more reasonable explanations for phenomena than current religion, science has made religion oversteps seem silly.

You think science will figure out everything because you don’t understand science. Science cannot answer whether there are phenomena we cannot possibly sense that do affect the way things work around us. That would be called supernatural. In order to approach these problems we make models. These models have been flawed consistently because they are constantly reworked. Science does not stop re-explaining very fundamental phenomena it keeps going on. You think there is an end game and science will figure out everything. I think this opinion is dead wrong. In fact I know you can’t back up your opinion.

listen to the podcast I gave you because there are many more discussions with fundamental physics people, people that use science much more than you are I, Who knows science is fundamentally flawed but still no it’s the only way to go when trying to answer questions that involve the limited techniques of science.
some of them say there is a sky God of some sort, they are convinced exactly because we can find or begin to approach some very difficult questions. Others would say a sky God or sky gods are very improbable but that other supernatural phenomena absolutely exist and cannot be approached at this time or probably ever.

You think you are some sort of prophet by telling the board the world in the universe or a big bad unforgiving place? Hey guys I’m DMC, and I’m here with the bad news! Yet you can’t even explain basic human behavior like altruism. Why should it even exist. This is why you waiver back-and-forth between blowing people up, and acting like you care about other people. Maybe I am still too young and I’ve not experienced everything that old crotchety DMC has. “ let me tell you young man, to be soundly cynical is the only way to go“ . interactions amongst human beings bring up many questions so we invent laws. And you can’t see how science might do the same thing with physical phenomena? We invent with science as well, and it is flawed. But it is also very powerful because it can make fairly accurate predictions. Because of this we get types like you that have this very human hubris about the power of science.

[pgardn]

Holy

(no pun)

So comparisons cant involve similarities and differences?

You are a fkn idiot.
Read.
Science, religion, and philosophy are ways of trying to know the human experience.
In this way they are SIMILAR.
The techniques they use to try to answer questions and wait for it,.... the complete human experience, are very different.
This is how they are DISIMILAR.

Try to read you old re (sound familiar?)

[DMC]

So comparisons cant involve similarities and differences?

You are a fkn idiot.
Read.
Science, religion, and philosophy are ways of trying to know the human experience.
In this way they are SIMILAR.
The techniques they use to try to answer questions and wait for it,.... the complete human experience, are very different.
This is how they are DISIMILAR.

Try to read you old re (sound familiar?)

Either compatible or not compatible. Can't be both.

I see you lack the ability to set religion apart from philosophy, at least for the sake of your argument attempts.

Things don't need to be similar to be compatible.

Religion is not compatible with science. Special pleading on your part illustrates it. Democrats believe in the invisible sky daddy too. Maybe stop trying to pretend only one side believes in fairy tales and comfort based bull .

[DMC]

again it is very clear you refuse to read.
I told you religion gives answers on ethical and moral questions that science cannot even begin to approach. Because you don’t consider ethical and moral questions even questions, this has made the discussion beyond your abilities. you basically don’t like the questions or the answers. you have no understanding how philosophy religion and science are alike and how they are different because the only questions you consider questions, are questions that only Science can give answers to because those questions only involve the limited approach of science.

I am saying if you look at science very closely it is also flawed because it is a human activity. Humans can only directly sense certain things. And even those senses are flawed by the way the brain reworks information based on our past experience. Because science has made much more reasonable explanations for phenomena than current religion, science has made religion oversteps seem silly.

You think science will figure out everything because you don’t understand science. Science cannot answer whether there are phenomena we cannot possibly sense that do affect the way things work around us. That would be called supernatural. In order to approach these problems we make models. These models have been flawed consistently because they are constantly reworked. Science does not stop re-explaining very fundamental phenomena it keeps going on. You think there is an end game and science will figure out everything. I think this opinion is dead wrong. In fact I know you can’t back up your opinion.

listen to the podcast I gave you because there are many more discussions with fundamental physics people, people that use science much more than you are I, Who knows science is fundamentally flawed but still no it’s the only way to go when trying to answer questions that involve the limited techniques of science.
some of them say there is a sky God of some sort, they are convinced exactly because we can find or begin to approach some very difficult questions. Others would say a sky God or sky gods are very improbable but that other supernatural phenomena absolutely exist and cannot be approached at this time or probably ever.

You think you are some sort of prophet by telling the board the world in the universe or a big bad unforgiving place? Hey guys I’m DMC, and I’m here with the bad news! Yet you can’t even explain basic human behavior like altruism. Why should it even exist. This is why you waiver back-and-forth between blowing people up, and acting like you care about other people. Maybe I am still too young and I’ve not experienced everything that old crotchety DMC has. “ let me tell you young man, to be soundly cynical is the only way to go“ . interactions amongst human beings bring up many questions so we invent laws. And you can’t see how science might do the same thing with physical phenomena? We invent with science as well, and it is flawed. But it is also very powerful because it can make fairly accurate predictions. Because of this we get types like you that have this very human hubris about the power of science.

Supernatural phenomena? lol..

[Th'Pusher]

Supernatural phenomena? lol..

DMC has to broaden his argument to most politicians claim to subscribe to a religion in order to claim Democrats are as bad as Republicans when it comes to denying science.

The pretzels he bends himself into just to both sides an argument

What a ing clown.

[DMC]

DMC has to broaden his argument to most politicians claim to subscribe to a religion in order to claim Democrats are as bad as Republicans when it comes to denying science.

The pretzels he bends himself into just to both sides an argument

What a ing clown.

That's the best you came up with? You can't challenge the assertion only lampoon it?

Kind of makes you a clown doesn't it?

[Winehole23]

(i am rubber you are glue)

[Th'Pusher]

That's the best you came up with? You can't challenge the assertion only lampoon it?

Kind of makes you a clown doesn't it?

What is your assertion...that anybody who associates themselves with a religion is incapable accepting science?

[Winehole23]

hurr durr, there are religious nuts on both sides

[Adam Lambert]

So acting on your belief is bad but the belief itself is good?

Whether belief in religion is "good" or not is a completely separate discussion and another goalpost move on your part.

There's no scriptural call for Christians to govern or craft legislate based on Christian principles. The biggest Biblical examples of religious leaders are the Pharisees, who adhered to strict Old Testament laws in their governing and are presented accordingly as bad leaders.

So "acting on your belief" does not mean, and has never meant, forcing your beliefs on others. As far as I'm aware, the Amish don't lobby Pennsylvania State legislators to ban electricity.

Republicans are the only party that actively rejects science as part of its core agenda. Religious Democrats aren't the ones pushing for Intelligent Design and Creation to be taught in science classrooms. Those are Republicans. Religious Democrats don't cite the Ten Commandments to oppose abortion. Those are Republicans.

This is not difficult.

[Adam Lambert]

The left is cool with science as long as it doesn't explore their taboo subjects, things that might cause them discomfort to talk about.

Why don't we circle back to the comment that launched this whole part of the conversation. What are some examples of this?

I seriously doubt the post above is code for "Some Democrats go to church too!" So you must have had something else in mind.

[Leetonidas]

snake with the usual low key throwing gas into the fire goods

too bad it elicited no response tbh

[DMC]

What is your assertion...that anybody who associates themselves with a religion is incapable accepting science?

That religion and science are incompatible and that the elephant in the room for America is the belief or belief claim of a supernatural god. That it affects both parties, and that pretending science denial by some is somehow a worse form of cognitive dissonance than god belief is disingenuous and cowardly.

[DMC]

Why don't we circle back to the comment that launched this whole part of the conversation. What are some examples of this?

I seriously doubt the post above is code for "Some Democrats go to church too!" So you must have had something else in mind.

Strawman attempts this early just sets the tone for the rest of the discussion. The mental gymnastics some of you engage in just to try to reconcile your god belief with your disdain for science deniers is hilarious.

[DMC]

Whether belief in religion is "good" or not is a completely separate discussion and another goalpost move on your part.

I disagree. It's central to your argument. If good and bad don't matter, legislation based on belief doesn't matter. Professing belief in the supernatural, regardless how eloquently expressed, is admitting to being supers ious, which flies in the face of science because despite what you may know about scientific method, you forego it for the mental comfort of having the "answer" that pgardn mentioned. In reality you don't have the answer. You just have the comfort. This isn't any different than someone having the same comfort for believing that global warming is false, that evolution isn't happening and that god created Eve from the rib of Adam.

There's no scriptural call for Christians to govern or craft legislate based on Christian principles. The biggest Biblical examples of religious leaders are the Pharisees, who adhered to strict Old Testament laws in their governing and are presented accordingly as bad leaders.

Now you're using the Bible as a defense for your own religion. The issue isn't the characters in the book. The issue is the god that the characters believe exists, and how that belief has no basis in science. The same is true today. However your "good/bad" usage seems now to be an acceptable measuring stick suddenly.

So "acting on your belief" does not mean, and has never meant, forcing your beliefs on others. As far as I'm aware, the Amish don't lobby Pennsylvania State legislators to ban electricity.

So you're now saying that legislating based on your beliefs is bad. I'm just trying to get it straight because initially you said good or bad doesn't matter, which I agree with only for the sake of discussion. The issue is the belief, not what you do with it. If you hold the belief, you're supers ious. Supers ion is counter to science.

Republicans are the only party that actively rejects science as part of its core agenda. Religious Democrats aren't the ones pushing for Intelligent Design and Creation to be taught in science classrooms. Those are Republicans. Religious Democrats don't cite the Ten Commandments to oppose abortion. Those are Republicans.

I showed you how many democrats profess a belief in a god. Professing a belief in a god is professing to be supers ious, and claiming that a supernatural being exists and acts upon the world we live in. Where is science in that?

This is not difficult.

It's absolutely not difficult. Your god belief is in fact more silly than someone disbelieving science, because scientists have the daunting task of proving each other wrong and have done so time and again whereas theists meditate on an ancient story for decades to try to muster up some semblance of belief in it, then they swear up and down it's flawless to the letter. You can prove global warming to a dip anti-science person. You cannot get a theist to even consider disproving their make believe god. , they have an entire bubble lifestyle dedicated to that pretend deity, they build huge buildings and do all sorts of . Anti science idiots are just annoying, mostly.