May 21, 2011. The date of the Rapture.

How on earth can you make such a claim. I thought you said that "According to quantum mechanics, an unperformed experiment has no results." So how then can you possibly claim a result of "lies about science" for a video lecture you have never seen/heard?
Do you believe in The Principal of Uniformity. If that is true, some would argue that the cosmos is not uniform, but clustered. Clusters of galaxies, suns clustered within galaxies and clusters of planets around those clusters of suns in clusters called galaxies. I will submit that whether the universe is evenly distributed is subject to opinion, but I personally do not see equal and uniform distribution of matter through out the cosmos. But there is also another problem with the big bang theory. Every thing in the cosmos is spinning. Galaxies are spinning, planets are spinning, etc. So, according to the Law of Conservation of Angular Momentum, the dot that exploded at the beginning of the big bang was spinning. Fair enough, but that raises and even bigger problem. While every thing is spinning, different parts are spinning in opposite directions, in direct violation of the Law of Conservation of Angular Momentum. In our own solar system, some planets spin clockwise, other counter clockwise. In fact some planets even have moons traveling in opposite directions around them. Galaxies are spinning in opposite directions. I believe this is a serious problem.
Oh, that's right, it's not a problem because you've already pointed out to me that the video you refuse to watch is "someone tells(ing) lies about science".
What was that old saying, "you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink". At least I conceder myself willing to continually explore both sides of the issue, because unless I know the other side, how can I possibly make an informed decision for or against.
I honestly grieve for folks that complain about it being dark, while they refuse to open their eyes. Even after opening your eyes, if you choose not to believe what you have seen, fair enough, at least you can argue you have seen it and are no longer in the dark.

 

The rapture is May of this year? Great! I'm gonna max out all my credit cards, take out the maximum home equity loan, party like no tomorrow (Ba-da-boom!) and drink heavily

 

What's new dude?

 

Just because I have not watched the video, does not make it an unperformed experiment. It's only an experiment that I have not bothered to look at.

The cosmos is clearly not uniform, and there is no "Principle of Uniformity" in QM. If the video claims there is such a principle, it is lying.

If one galaxy is spinning one direction, and another is spinning the other direction, then the conservation of angular momentum is conserved. Our solar system is far too small to make a measurable contribution to the total angular momentum of the universe.

Your claim that it is a violation of conservation for one thing to be spinning one way and another to be spinning the other way, demonstrates that you do not understand angular momentum. It is in fact precisely by making something spin one way that you make something else spin the other way. Just as you make a rocket go forward by having it spit something out the back.

There's a lot we don't know yet. I am not aware whether there are yet explanations for the non-uniformity of the cosmos (though as mentioned, there is no "Principle of Uniformity," and in fact, the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle probably makes perfect uniformity impossible). But the fact that something is not yet known, is not a valid argument for a random fairy-tale explanation.

There's actually a bigger mystery at present than non-uniformity in the distribution of matter, and that is the imbalance between matter and anti-matter. But again, the fact that we've not yet figured that one out, is not a valid argument for a random fairy-tale explanation.

Before you do that consider this: The rapture is a Christian concept. May 12, 2011, allegedly comes from the Mayan calendar. Anybody see a problem here? If the Mayans are right, there is no rapture, and if the Christians are right then there's no reason to put any significance on this particular date.

 

Christianity has a long record of glomming onto things that weren't originally Christian and putting a spin on them to suit their own agenda.. Christmas and Easter are originally from pagan celebrations, some the the US founding Fathers were diests but are now claimed by the fundies as their own. That a splinter Christian cult would use the Mayan calendar to advance their agenda is no surprise.

 

The credit cards and home equity loan I assume. The other is standard practice for him. lol

 

No surprise at all, but a person would have to have a screw loose to take it seriously. But then, I'm already on record as believing that a person has to have a screw loose to take any religion seriously.

Now, I can understand (even while I disagree with) someone who says, "It's all just so incomprehensible... there really must be something out there." But it's a mighty big leap from "I don't see how this could have happened by itself" to thinking they know all the specific details about creation, god, and the afterlife, that religions claim to know. Especially where there are hundreds of religions to pick from, and most of those are incompatible with any of the others. Again, most believers say something like "God spoke to me and told me the truth but all those other folks are listening to the devil." Or "God wrote the book I read, but everyone else is reading books written by the devil." So I'm back to thinking you have to have a screw loose to believe any of that stuff.

 

A lot of people are born with no Loctite on their neurological connections.

 

On its face Daniel's rejection of the 90 minute "deal" may seem to appear "closed minded", but I think a look at the "deal" from an analagous situation will clarify why rejection of it was correct:

You in effect wanted Daniel to spend 90 minutes listening/reading to an explanation of flying by someone who is neither pilot nor aeronautical engineer and has devoted all his intellectual energy to denying that flight is even possible without divine intervention. You would then spend 90 minutes listening/reading about flight from someone actually qualified to talk about it.

I agree that your spending 90 minutes (or anyone spending 90 minutes, or more) listening/reading about a topic from people qualified to discuss the topic is always worthwhile, and shouldn't require any "deals" from "opposers". But spending even 9 seconds, let alone 90 minutes listening/reading ignorant opinion from someone with no knowledge behind the opinion is a complete waste of time for anyone, and it's too bad we want so desperately to hear what we want to hear that we embrace the opinions of ignoramuses for no reason other than that they match our beliefs.

 

Thank you Airportkid. I couldn't have said it better myself!

 

Could it be, after centuries of religious dominance, that the pendulum is finally beginning to swing the other way? It's becoming almost acceptable in some places to discuss atheism openly, without fear of persecution. Authors like Dawkins and Hitchens are well known and appear regularly on talk shows. The average citizen can discuss issues and ideas on the internet - even subtleties like the distinctions between atheism and agnosticism - without fear of a lynch mob showing up at the door, rope in hand. Mind you, this is not true in much of the world, where such blasphemy will get you jailed for life, or shot on sight. Still, evolution of thought has advanced enough that so-called 'freedom of religion' may yet truly include freedom *from* religion. Dare we dream of the day when divine delusions are declared a mental illness, and all of humanity can fully engage in the task of learning who we are, where we came from, where we're going, and how the universe unfolds?

 

I think I will settle for heavy drinking

And stripped threads too

I'd settle for us just all learning to get along

Perhaps the solution involves heavy drinking

 

Heavy drinking makes people belligerent more often than it makes them get along. My first step-father was a kind man when sober, but a mean drunk. I really don't think the solution to people not getting along is heavy drinking. Maybe drinking helps some people when they're unhappy. In my case, it did just the opposite. And it usually makes you feel like shit the next morning, which is not surprising, since it is actually a poison, as demonstrated by the fact that it is metabolized by the liver, which is the organ that removes toxins from the blood.

 

Which is why I always take milk thistle liberally when I'm going to be drinking.
It is my experience that if I take several capsules before, during, and after heavy drinking (with plenty of water), I wake up the next morning without a headache, and feeling fine. :thumb:

 

You mean we need an excuse?

 

It will still eliminate your possibility of winning significant public office in the US.

 

Well, see, if everyone would just follow the one, true religion....

Which means, effectively, that freedom of religion does not yet exist.

 

Would that also be true for an all-theist -- I made that up -- someone
who recognizes that there is some social value in all of the major
religions, and finds no valid reason to consider any one better than the
rest.

 

ok i ask my dad then.

get back to you soon:cheer2:

 

So would being Muslim. Or being a sincere and vocal proponent of the FSM. It isn't just belief in a god that's enough but belief in the "right" god. An "all-theist" might scrape by virtue of the "right" god not being excluded in his/her belief, but would always lose to any candidate with no such ambivalence.

Hyo is correct: true freedom of religion is still a chimera.