Darwin biopic "too controversial" for American release

Originally posted by dadudemon
Here's something on topic.

Here's an alternative perspective from "second in command" of the LDS church, Henry B Eyring. He is discussing evolution and creationism.(Before you guys close of your minds, actually read what he has to say. It has little to do with his beliefs, and more about people ignoring science.

My opinion: If everyone thought a little more like this and a lot less close minded, we'd get along better as humans and scientific and social progress would...I would say, increase.

If anything, absolute faith in scripture over your own experiences in life requires more of a close mind than an open one.

Open mindedness/free thinking is the natural destroyer of religion.

Which brings us neatly back to Galileo and the heresy accusations/punishment.

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
If anything, absolute faith in scripture over your own experiences in life requires more of a close mind than an open one.

I agree. And, a more open mind into the interpretation of a sacred text like scripture is a much better option, if one must have a faith, imo.

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
Open mindedness/free thinking is the natural destroyer of religion.

But, it doesn't have to be. If you form a religion around God and how important science is, and free thinking, etc. then it functions the exact opposite of your theory. I'd like to say Mormonism encourages that 100%, but it doesn't. But it comes closer than other mainstream religions.

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
Which brings us neatly back to Galileo and the heresy accusations/punishment.

That's the fault/problem of one church. A political church, at that. 😄

It was just another example of such repression of info that could threaten a religious institution, by the institution that would be threatened by the revealing of such info.
Politics and religion are so fused that you cant tell where Politics nose begins, and religion's ass starts..

It still comes down to "Man saying what god thinks" which is the ultimate in presumptuousness, is it not?

Anytime we start assuming that a God (as depicted by religion) exists in the face of such overwhelming contrary evidence, we have already surrendered a good deal of the scientific processes of rationisation/logic.
Regardless of the deity in question.

Here is a shit song made in 5 minutes. You can tell that he has made this particular song, or a similar song to it, before, however ,some parts look like he's trying stuff out. Yes, it's this easy.

YouTube video

Here's another vid. Tutorial. It's for Reason, a more powerful tool than Fruity Loops. This is what my coworker uses.
YouTube video

Does this take away from the mystery of music for you? Does it demystify techno a little? It should. Good techno is complicated and unique. That's one of the reason's I like Aphex Twin. Richard D. James makes complicated, unique, techno. Good stuff. Someone like me can't just bust out a track and make it sound like Aphex Twin. He's a talented artist, and a talented sound software user. Neither of which I am. See what I mean?

lol

FUUUUUUUUUU!

I posted in the wrong place and I couldn't figure out where I posted....now I know.

AHA!

Damn it! That's what I get for trying to analyze network traffic while making a post on KMC.

Hahahaha 😛

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
Hahahaha 😛

DAMN YOU! Don't laugh at my stupidity! 🙁

😆 😆

😛 Its easily done, man. No sweat.

Scanned the thread, couldn't find a response to this, can't let it go. Can't be bothered to explain in sentences.

Originally posted by dadudemon
"Faith was never about discovery of the truth.
Faith by definition is only ever required in abscence of information or in the face of all proof contradicting said belief."

Clearly, Mormonism is very adamant about discovering truth.

Am I missing the point? It seems like being honest and rational in most areas does nothing to alleviate an error in another.

(Assuming, of course, that there is an error.)

Your point stands. imo 🙂

Whose point?

Yours.

Mine too still, also.

Originally posted by Red Nemesis
Scanned the thread, couldn't find a response to this, can't let it go. Can't be bothered to explain in sentences.

This seems like such a non-sequitur that I'm surprised nobody called you on it. You note that Mormonism encourages its adherents to seek truth about the universe through formal education. This is commendable. To claim that this position nullifies the irrational foundation of faith is silly though. Seeking truth about the world is all well and good, but it does not erase the "absence of information" that is the fundamental objection to faith raised in the post you responded to.

Am I missing the point? It seems like being honest and rational in most areas does nothing to alleviate an error in another.

(Assuming, of course, that there is an error.)

My argument was VERY strawman, at best. I mistook his word "faith" to mean things like "The Catholic faith" or "The Jewish faith." Not "hope for things which aren't seen but are held as true."

Forgive me?

Originally posted by Darth Jello
But still, the question must be asked, what percentage of the US population is completely retarded?

Originally posted by botankus
I don't know. The amount of people that still use the word "retarded," perhaps?

That sounds about right.

😂

You cant blame them entiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiirely recently,I guess.

How else could they talk about their then-president, otherwise..? 😛

"You don't call retarded people retards. It's bad taste. You call your friends retards when they are acting retarded. And I consider Oscar a friend."

😂

"Completely retarded" means going Full Retard, which I learned last year is a Hollywood sin.