h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Happy New Year to you too, Effers.

Mikey2

Micheal

Could you please give me a reply on the subject matter in Post 14071.

Here's a little New Year's gift from 'Nature':

'Fifteen Evolutionary Gems' http://www.nature.com/nature/newspdf/evolutiongems.pdf

It would be a handy gift for people passing out Chick tracts.

Happy New Year to all!

3Dotsplus1,

I'm not answering for michae1, but I recommend looking at the story of 'Job' from the scriptures.

Now, the law of natural selectiont being superceded by the law of natural selection. Ah!
I'm afraid that's again, imo, a spiritual matter.
I accept both as equally valid.

That's what's happening in western society, today. Many people seem to think that science and
evidence and proof etc. has superceded mankind's centuries of research of philosophy and use this to
try and ""prove"" there is no God.

To be Continued ...

Important message to anyone in the London area. We seem to be having the longest period of sustained really cold weather, (night temperatures well below freezing), for here, for some years. When I went out in my garden earlier I thought a new race of eagles had suddenly evolved....but no it was just sparrows and tits wearing giant duvets.... Anyway more to the point, if you are in the mood, stick out some nibbles for them. I made a funny thing out of kneaded bread, cheese and butter, and hung chunks of it outside.

Survival of the fittest?

Pah. Not in this neck of the woods.

Oops

Of course, that should have read:

Now, the teleological argument being superceded by the law of natural selection. Ah!
I'm afraid that's again, imo, a spiritual matter.
I accept both as equally valid.

This is just muddled thinking. Firstly, "proving" that there is no god is neither possible, nor required for disbelief. The absence of any positive evidence for a deity is sufficient for that.

And it's the centuries of philosophical research that lead to this conclusion.

Noggin

Mmm Noggin,

>> "proving" that there is no god is neither possible, nor required for disbelief. <<

Absolutely agree!

>> The absence of any positive evidence for a deity <<

I would agree there might be no 'material' evidence.

>> And it's the centuries of philosophical research that lead to this conclusion. <<

If you include theology alongside, I don't agree.

In what sense is theology 'research'?

I would have put it more under the categories of 'feeble excuses' and 'making stuff up'.

Yes, and whilst they are busy with their theologising, and spreading the word, some of us are out there playing Mary Poppins to poor cold shivering, feathered friends.

But hey what do real world materialist atheists types know about deciding how to spend their time on this freezing cold winter's day?

flying ants,
A lot can be learnt from watching them, I'm sure.

I've kept bees in the past. Fascinating!
And the honey ... mmm

I wonder if anybody is playing devil's advocate in this thread?

We shall see ...

Isn't feeding the birds rather rash, in these days of bank collapses?

Twopence, twopence, twopence a bag...

>> And it's the centuries of philosophical research that lead to this conclusion. <<

>>If you include theology alongside, I don't agree.


I would say that onceuponatime, theology and philosophy were more-or-less synonymous. But various advances - the scientific method; Materialism - revealed that theology was a dead end, concerned with unnecessary and meaningless transcendent entities. Gods should go the way of phlostigen and aether.

Depends on the bird, Ed.

Yes warner. What are the flying ants habits like where you live? I live fairly inner city and naturally there is a lot of concrete around so the ants get really heated up, come July/August.

And of course once the mating flight has finished the males die, and it is interesting to watch the females biting off their wings once copulation is over after they return to ground level, and then they scurry about looking for a nest site. But naturally most get eaten by birds.

What was fascinating about bees?

In short,
Bees, as ants, are colonial insects. It's very interesting to see
their social structure. Male bees are only 'useful' for mating, and only one, at that!
Females are the workers, collecting nectar & pollen, building honeycomb nest,
guarding, and also only one Queen per colony. Swarming, little dances to show where the nectar is ...
It goes on ...

Apparently if you give them cocaine, they dance faster.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2008/dec/23/cocaine-bees-australia-drug-research

4.s

You obviously feel passionately about human suffering.

The fact that your friend trusted God through his suffering makes you angry.

Your theology seems to be as follows: God is omnipotent...therefore because there is suffering, God must be cruel. Not an unreasonable conclusion...I see the logic.

I do not have an answer to all of life's mysteries but when I look at Jesus Christ I see demonstrated in his life what God is like. My conclusion is that God is not cruel. The Bible teaches me that 'Christ is the image of the invisible God and the exact representation of his being'.

I doubt this clears up your valid objection, but I hope it starts to explain why I still believe in a God if love.

Mikey2

The effect of drugs on spiders webs.

http://www.trinity.edu/jdunn/spiderdrugs.htm

And the very famous footage of spider behaviour affected by drugs.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sHzdsFiBbFc