| Something else to be concerned about... 09:35 - Oct 9 with 21680 views | perchrockjack |
PLAYERS CROSSING THEMSELVES.
Is it because they re Catholics but then not all do it.
It seems like a fashion thing to me as the Brazilians,Argies,Italians,Spaniards all seem keen to cross themselves pick up some grass and kiss it.
Some cross themselves after the game but not all .
Ive noted Dyer doing it and other players who ve had crap games so it obviously doesn't work.
It might also be offensive to MUSLIMS
This post has been edited by an administrator |  |
| |  |
| Something else to be concerned about... on 21:54 - Oct 13 with 1807 views | swanjackal |
| Something else to be concerned about... on 21:49 - Oct 13 by Davillin |
You can never win against someone who either can't read, or won't understand.
Here's my example of that from our earlier exchange, pointed out by Spratty [thanks].
He wrote, "I read it clearly as not to mock religion or gods? Why just those?" in response to what I had written viz. "No-one has a right of any kind to mock or insult anyone else who believes something different about either god or religion." [Post edited 13 Oct 2013 21:49]
|
And to claim I did not read that correctly is dishonest. I said how I read it a few posts above. Why I asked the leading questions before, was to see if it was only religion/god (neither of which were in my initial post by the way) that could not be mocked in your view point or was there nothing allowed to be mocked? I notice that you did not answer those questions. |  |
|
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hypocritically hypocritical ! |
| |
| Something else to be concerned about... on 22:05 - Oct 13 with 1777 views | Captain_Sham |
either way Galileo was vilified for his beliefs because they were not the beliefs of the mainstream. yes he had evidence but that evidence was not accepted. its frustrating when people reject what you say, but then YOU reject what everyone says.
How do I provide evidence that I love someone? Its insane to even think about doing stuff like that but this is what the scientific world now demands. It is, frankly, bonkers. |  |
| |
| Something else to be concerned about... on 22:24 - Oct 13 with 1765 views | swanjackal |
| Something else to be concerned about... on 22:05 - Oct 13 by Captain_Sham |
either way Galileo was vilified for his beliefs because they were not the beliefs of the mainstream. yes he had evidence but that evidence was not accepted. its frustrating when people reject what you say, but then YOU reject what everyone says.
How do I provide evidence that I love someone? Its insane to even think about doing stuff like that but this is what the scientific world now demands. It is, frankly, bonkers. |
But there is a difference between "word of mouth" and physically observable evidence as Galileo did have, and showed. So rejection would not have taken place as there was evidence for it.
I don't reject what everyone says, and to say that is just being dishonest. I just go with the idea that I have seen the evidence to back it up, or use common logic from either experience or justified logic( I have never physically been to Australia, but I know it's there as I have enough evidence that is peer reviewed to suggest it is there).
Love is a difficult one, but there is biological evidence for it that boils down to synaptic response and hormonal release. So there are physical factors that can be measured for response there. But love has a problem with classification (just like god), every persons interpretation of it is different. The concept of love differs between people and groups. You would first have to explain what you mean by "love" (just like "god") before anyone could really answer that question. [Post edited 13 Oct 2013 22:29]
| |
|
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hypocritically hypocritical ! |
| |
| Something else to be concerned about... on 22:33 - Oct 13 with 1745 views | Captain_Sham |
Errr, thats what I have been saying all along. God is purely subjective. You have been saying that I should be mocked for a having a conception of god that has no evidential backing. Make your mind up. | |
| |
| Something else to be concerned about... on 22:51 - Oct 13 with 1727 views | swanjackal |
| Something else to be concerned about... on 22:33 - Oct 13 by Captain_Sham |
Errr, thats what I have been saying all along. God is purely subjective. You have been saying that I should be mocked for a having a conception of god that has no evidential backing. Make your mind up. |
Can you point out where i have mentioned god apart fromthe post above as a discussion point, or to find out if god and religion were the only things davillin believes we cannot mock. All this was over some claim of afterlife was needed to be disproved, the mocking was about ideas that have been disproven numerous times and still believed.
I have agreed with your stance on Galileo, but disagreed on you claiming I was the unfair oppressor, because I was seeking evidence for an argument and explaining that Galileo provided the proof to justify the claim, and it was the catholic church's refusal to see the evidence that was the actual problem. You had falsely placed me in a group that wasn't my viewpoint.
Also, you tried to mock my grasp of the Englishlanguage, when I was trying to point out the mistakes. | |
|
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hypocritically hypocritical ! |
| |
| Something else to be concerned about... on 22:56 - Oct 13 with 1715 views | Captain_Sham |
I made a joke about scientists being oppressed in the medieval years, and how that may explain why they are so precious today. If you knew what the NAACP was you might have understood the joke. Dear me this is hard work. | |
| |
| Something else to be concerned about... on 22:59 - Oct 13 with 1704 views | swanjackal |
| Something else to be concerned about... on 22:56 - Oct 13 by Captain_Sham |
I made a joke about scientists being oppressed in the medieval years, and how that may explain why they are so precious today. If you knew what the NAACP was you might have understood the joke. Dear me this is hard work. |
Ah right I see, jokes are usually meant to be humorous though. | |
|
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hypocritically hypocritical ! |
| |
| Something else to be concerned about... on 23:00 - Oct 13 with 1701 views | Captain_Sham |
So it was the lack of humour that lead you to miss the point altogether? [Post edited 13 Oct 2013 23:01]
| |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Something else to be concerned about... on 23:04 - Oct 13 with 1686 views | swanjackal |
| Something else to be concerned about... on 23:00 - Oct 13 by Captain_Sham |
So it was the lack of humour that lead you to miss the point altogether? [Post edited 13 Oct 2013 23:01]
|
Still no idea what was meant to be funny though. Think it may have been down to the delivery. | |
|
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hypocritically hypocritical ! |
| |
| Something else to be concerned about... on 23:11 - Oct 13 with 1673 views | Captain_Sham |
Whats funny is that people like you get all stuffy about people who believe things they cant prove. | |
| |
| Something else to be concerned about... on 23:20 - Oct 13 with 1662 views | swanjackal |
| Something else to be concerned about... on 23:11 - Oct 13 by Captain_Sham |
Whats funny is that people like you get all stuffy about people who believe things they cant prove. |
Again you misrepresent an argument. Not stuffy about something a person cannot prove, personally if they keep it personal that is fine. As soon as its in the public domain then it's only fair that person should then be able to justify it and defend it with a coherent answer. You are being awfully judgemental of me. | |
|
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hypocritically hypocritical ! |
| |
| Something else to be concerned about... on 23:29 - Oct 13 with 1655 views | Captain_Sham |
So people shouldn't be allowed to talk on forums about god because its a public domain and you cant prove god exists? Wow. | |
| |
| Something else to be concerned about... on 23:34 - Oct 13 with 1647 views | swanjackal |
| Something else to be concerned about... on 23:29 - Oct 13 by Captain_Sham |
So people shouldn't be allowed to talk on forums about god because its a public domain and you cant prove god exists? Wow. |
Errrrmm have to explain to me where I said that. By all means they can talk about what they want, but should really be able to answer questions on it when asked. Why is god being brought up? This goes for anything. Football down to cake making and beyond. | |
|
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hypocritically hypocritical ! |
| |
| Something else to be concerned about... on 23:52 - Oct 13 with 1633 views | KingBony |
Bloody he'll... Warwick I'm sorry I called you a knobber of the highest order. Truly I am I take it back along with anything else nasty I've said. |  |
| Daddy Daddy cool, Daddy Daddy cool |
| |
| Something else to be concerned about... on 23:59 - Oct 13 with 1626 views | Spratty |
| Something else to be concerned about... on 21:35 - Oct 13 by swanjackal |
I agree with your first paragraph entirely, if someone believes in something personal they are allowed to do so. But then they should be able to walk away from asking someone to try and disprove their belief is not real. The whole crux of my first post to you. You asked for someone to disprove a claim, without any evidence to back up the initial claim. The burden of proof does not lie with the person representing the null hypothesis, but with the person who posits X. That is all.
And I agree with your second statement, but evidence cannot be given to disprove something before the initial claim is ratified. In fact he did give evidence by suggesting that there is no meaningful empirical evidence of any form of afterlife. How can you present evidence of nothing apart from peer reviewed journals using the strongest known framework for analysis (Scientific Method).
There lies the contradiction. He has given evidence that there is no meaningful evidence in the field looked at, but you want more without actually presenting new evidence for the argument. He actually has done the step you have claimed he hasn't
I don't see how something physical like a WMD can be likened to a hypothesis of the supernatural. |
You are applying scientific priorities to a moral question. Also your 2nd sentence does not make sense to me.
It does not matter if the critical person has to prove the null hypothesis that is a problem they have brought upon themselves. I already pointed out earlier in the thread that it is much harder to prove a negative. However if someone is willing to publicly insult people then they better be prepared to back it up with hard fact. That is not the responsibility of the person quietly getting on with their own beliefs.
If they cannot prove what they say, then they should not present it as hard fact and publicly impugn the mental capacity of groups they think disagree (given if it cannot be proved it is only an opinion). Fair enough to present it as an opinion without the insults.
Of course there is a matter of degree and generally accepted belief. If I go to my doctor complaining of a headache because of purple elephants clomping round my room he might possibly question my mental capacity. Or possibly check my ears and eyes.
Remember this is not a case of anyone pushing the existence of the afterlife but someone mocking anyone that may believe in it.
Just to reiterate being told there is no evidence that something exists is not the same as there being no evidence. More importantly no evidence of something is not evidence of it not existing. Science itself is full of examples of things that exist of which there was previously no evidence (quarks and dark matter as examples). Unless you are of the belief that we now know all there is to know!!!
WMD already covered it was an (obviously feeble) attempt at humour |  | | |
| Something else to be concerned about... on 00:21 - Oct 14 with 1615 views | swanjackal |
| Something else to be concerned about... on 23:59 - Oct 13 by Spratty |
You are applying scientific priorities to a moral question. Also your 2nd sentence does not make sense to me.
It does not matter if the critical person has to prove the null hypothesis that is a problem they have brought upon themselves. I already pointed out earlier in the thread that it is much harder to prove a negative. However if someone is willing to publicly insult people then they better be prepared to back it up with hard fact. That is not the responsibility of the person quietly getting on with their own beliefs.
If they cannot prove what they say, then they should not present it as hard fact and publicly impugn the mental capacity of groups they think disagree (given if it cannot be proved it is only an opinion). Fair enough to present it as an opinion without the insults.
Of course there is a matter of degree and generally accepted belief. If I go to my doctor complaining of a headache because of purple elephants clomping round my room he might possibly question my mental capacity. Or possibly check my ears and eyes.
Remember this is not a case of anyone pushing the existence of the afterlife but someone mocking anyone that may believe in it.
Just to reiterate being told there is no evidence that something exists is not the same as there being no evidence. More importantly no evidence of something is not evidence of it not existing. Science itself is full of examples of things that exist of which there was previously no evidence (quarks and dark matter as examples). Unless you are of the belief that we now know all there is to know!!!
WMD already covered it was an (obviously feeble) attempt at humour |
I agree with a lot of what you have written. Nobody should be mocked going on with their normal routine, but I disagree that no evidence supporting a claim is actually good evidence for the null hypothesis. If someone continues to make a claim with a lack of evidence then it is possible to mock someone for this, mainly because the person is wasting others time. As said it is a dick thing to do, but to allow mocking of some facetswithout evidence as being fine, but others are off limit is just hypocritical. I prefer reasoned debate, as I think it is a better tool than belittling someone. I don't agree with the posters strident words when it comes to his argument about religion, but I am more in with his idea than that of a lack of afterlife.
Absence of evidence does not mean that there will be none, but it is the yardstick for understanding. And I am glad you have brought up scientific terms here (quarks and dark matter), because this brings the beauty of science over any religious beliefs, it is self evaluating, it evolves, it totally relies on best evidence, it does not claim to be true, but the best answer we have at the current moment, and if that changes due to the scientific method, then the new science takes its place. There is no arrogance f certainty, no absolutes, it is just a descriptive self evaluating means to come to the best explanation. Anyone who links science to a philosophy is sadly mistaken on what it actually is. It is a method for discovery. [Post edited 14 Oct 2013 0:35]
| |
|
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hypocritically hypocritical ! |
| |
| Something else to be concerned about... on 06:55 - Oct 14 with 1558 views | WarwickHunt |
| Something else to be concerned about... on 23:59 - Oct 13 by Spratty |
You are applying scientific priorities to a moral question. Also your 2nd sentence does not make sense to me.
It does not matter if the critical person has to prove the null hypothesis that is a problem they have brought upon themselves. I already pointed out earlier in the thread that it is much harder to prove a negative. However if someone is willing to publicly insult people then they better be prepared to back it up with hard fact. That is not the responsibility of the person quietly getting on with their own beliefs.
If they cannot prove what they say, then they should not present it as hard fact and publicly impugn the mental capacity of groups they think disagree (given if it cannot be proved it is only an opinion). Fair enough to present it as an opinion without the insults.
Of course there is a matter of degree and generally accepted belief. If I go to my doctor complaining of a headache because of purple elephants clomping round my room he might possibly question my mental capacity. Or possibly check my ears and eyes.
Remember this is not a case of anyone pushing the existence of the afterlife but someone mocking anyone that may believe in it.
Just to reiterate being told there is no evidence that something exists is not the same as there being no evidence. More importantly no evidence of something is not evidence of it not existing. Science itself is full of examples of things that exist of which there was previously no evidence (quarks and dark matter as examples). Unless you are of the belief that we now know all there is to know!!!
WMD already covered it was an (obviously feeble) attempt at humour |
"Of course there is a matter of degree and generally accepted belief. If I go to my doctor complaining of a headache because of purple elephants clomping round my room he might possibly question my mental capacity. Or possibly check my ears and eyes."
Whereas he wouldn't if you said your deceased loved ones had somehow been magically reconstituted from a pile of ash and were somewhere in the ether waiting for a wave from you after you'd scored the equaliser at Ashleigh Road... |  | | |
| Something else to be concerned about... on 07:03 - Oct 14 with 1556 views | WarwickHunt |
| Something else to be concerned about... on 23:52 - Oct 13 by KingBony |
Bloody he'll... Warwick I'm sorry I called you a knobber of the highest order. Truly I am I take it back along with anything else nasty I've said. |
No worries mate - it's the internet, innit.
ps three Hail Marys and you're sorted. ;-) | | | |
| Something else to be concerned about... on 10:21 - Oct 14 with 1527 views | shingle |
| Something else to be concerned about... on 20:35 - Oct 13 by Spratty |
Absolutely you got the idea - even though you do not believe it yourself.
Does not necessarily make it likely though.
Why stick to boring shapes be bold - hyberbolic parabola? |
Two reply`s on the trot, took a while but i got my fiver, and you did not have a clue what was going on, quite a few were in on the wind up and you bit like a giant monster. what a sucker you are  | | | |
| Something else to be concerned about... on 10:23 - Oct 14 with 1517 views | swanjackal |
| Something else to be concerned about... on 06:55 - Oct 14 by WarwickHunt |
"Of course there is a matter of degree and generally accepted belief. If I go to my doctor complaining of a headache because of purple elephants clomping round my room he might possibly question my mental capacity. Or possibly check my ears and eyes."
Whereas he wouldn't if you said your deceased loved ones had somehow been magically reconstituted from a pile of ash and were somewhere in the ether waiting for a wave from you after you'd scored the equaliser at Ashleigh Road... |
A post "lol" was invented for. | |
|
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hypocritically hypocritical ! |
| |
| Something else to be concerned about... on 10:28 - Oct 14 with 1477 views | shingle |
Poor old Spratty`s post`s are getting longer and longer.  | | | |
| Something else to be concerned about... on 10:59 - Oct 14 with 1459 views | Catullus |
Ok, on the assumption that there is no god, there is still power in faith in god.
I know someone who had an experience. he saw this experience as proof of gods existence and became a born again christian.
he had been severely ill, uncurable. Modern medicine had tried and tried and tried.....and failed. Then one day he took a punt and went to a church. I'm not sure which church but believe it to be one of the more modern thinking "outlets" He started to feel better. In fact he got better. He had a complete recovery and is now a happy, healthy person. he works for the church that cured him, he has 3 kids and is very physically active.
He sees that as evidence of god. The more cynical will deny it. As said, I am firmly in the don't know camp.
I cannot deny the existence of something because I cannot see or touch it. But faith is obviously a very powerful thing.
On the other side, my mother had an illness which took her just over two years ago. She was a regular church goer. I guess that balances the argument out. Why would god choose, was Mr H a better person, a better christian. Was my mother just hedging her bets and didn't really believe, or was it just that god decided her time had come to be with him whereas Mr H had not yet reached his time?
I live by a certain set of rules. I sometimes break them. Those rules when reduced to the lowest denominator could be said to be basically the ten commandments. But I do not do organised religion.
I hope for something better. I do not think that someone of faith who attends church is mad, it's their life and their choice. I won't make the verbally insulting comments and assumptions that some do. I don't have the right to tell someone else what to believe, but I can question it.
Eg, is it right to believe that because we spent a record amount on one player, that we will challenge the top 6 six this season? I don't think so, some do. | |
| |
| Something else to be concerned about... on 11:13 - Oct 14 with 1443 views | swanjackal |
| Something else to be concerned about... on 10:59 - Oct 14 by Catullus |
Ok, on the assumption that there is no god, there is still power in faith in god.
I know someone who had an experience. he saw this experience as proof of gods existence and became a born again christian.
he had been severely ill, uncurable. Modern medicine had tried and tried and tried.....and failed. Then one day he took a punt and went to a church. I'm not sure which church but believe it to be one of the more modern thinking "outlets" He started to feel better. In fact he got better. He had a complete recovery and is now a happy, healthy person. he works for the church that cured him, he has 3 kids and is very physically active.
He sees that as evidence of god. The more cynical will deny it. As said, I am firmly in the don't know camp.
I cannot deny the existence of something because I cannot see or touch it. But faith is obviously a very powerful thing.
On the other side, my mother had an illness which took her just over two years ago. She was a regular church goer. I guess that balances the argument out. Why would god choose, was Mr H a better person, a better christian. Was my mother just hedging her bets and didn't really believe, or was it just that god decided her time had come to be with him whereas Mr H had not yet reached his time?
I live by a certain set of rules. I sometimes break them. Those rules when reduced to the lowest denominator could be said to be basically the ten commandments. But I do not do organised religion.
I hope for something better. I do not think that someone of faith who attends church is mad, it's their life and their choice. I won't make the verbally insulting comments and assumptions that some do. I don't have the right to tell someone else what to believe, but I can question it.
Eg, is it right to believe that because we spent a record amount on one player, that we will challenge the top 6 six this season? I don't think so, some do. |
So you follow the first four of the ten commandments? And also the 10th with coveting?
You do realise there were laws in civilizations pre ten commandments that also punished murder and theft.
Also what you have described of the person with the illness is a classical case of a placebo effect. It's great they have felt better, but is he cured of his ailment? May I ask what the disease/illness was? | |
|
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hypocritically hypocritical ! |
| |
| Something else to be concerned about... on 11:17 - Oct 14 with 1439 views | Captain_Sham |
| Something else to be concerned about... on 11:13 - Oct 14 by swanjackal |
So you follow the first four of the ten commandments? And also the 10th with coveting?
You do realise there were laws in civilizations pre ten commandments that also punished murder and theft.
Also what you have described of the person with the illness is a classical case of a placebo effect. It's great they have felt better, but is he cured of his ailment? May I ask what the disease/illness was? |
You dont even know what his disease was, yet you have classified it as a placeboic cure, without any shred of evidence. tut tut ( a classic case of placebo effect no less, tell us are we in the presence of a venerable expert on the subject of placebo's?) [Post edited 14 Oct 2013 11:48]
| |
| |
| Something else to be concerned about... on 11:21 - Oct 14 with 1427 views | Captain_Sham |
I have a condition called dystonia. when I am at peace, I barely notice I have it. When I am at dis-ease it is an awful condition to live with. I find that meditation makes me alot calmer and reduces my symptoms significantly. Is that ok with you or are am I just lying to myself? If it works, it works whether you believe in it or not. You dont need to take chemicals to change the physiology of your body. If some walks up to you and calls you an ignorant dullard, you get angry. You are influenced by your environment, Yet you come on here and tell catullus that his friend couldnt have had the experience hes said he had simply because it doesn't fit with your belief system. You have none of the evidence you demand from others yet dimiss his story as pish with no hesitation. [Post edited 14 Oct 2013 11:30]
| |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
