Nasa confirms possibility of sun rising from the West

@browntwn

It's a crazy World! It's not just Muslims who say crazy things either.

There is no doubt there are many explainable things in this World, there is also a lot of bull in many religions or religious doctrines.

The Catholics claim to be the one true Church, the Muslims claim the same, heck Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons do the same to. Seems like a precursor to obtaining followers is the "One True" thing.

There seems to be this same recurring theme of "Blind Faith" and blind faith being used as the defence and argument happening over and over again.

It's a pity people are so blinkered they cannot learn - but it seems to be the way of things with many from many religions. All claiming their version of things is right.

It's all to do with Babble/Babel from what I can see! Well at least that story explains some of the craziness and divisions so perhaps, as I said, not everything is bull, but it is merely the interpretation and differences that are the problem and they may not even be our fault.

Atheists will disagree there and yet all religions and all non religious people only need evidence and all doubts can be put aside.

I think the evolution of things including the evolution of the spirit and the soul make some sense here if understood rather than just looking at evolution as merely a survival of the fittest evolution.

One day perhaps an enlightenment of some kind will reveal all so everyone knows the truths.

Until then we will get statements like those vebtools made and just have to try and make light of such, as worrying and dangerous as such thinking could well be.

 

True Revelations-Decoder.
It is perhaps arrogant or not nice or not respectful, but its true:
The people who resort to blind belief in any religious dogma are simply people who are not smart enough to understand fundamental science - or more accurately: people who do not know how do think critically, logically, and rationally. That do not understand what role consistency play in inquiring the natural world, and that argument from authority is hardly evidence.
In most cases, it is not their fault: the state-funded religious teaching and those of their own parents are responsible for not allowing those parts of the brain that are used by modern-science and philosophy to mature. As a result they remain infantile and scared of the own existence.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistemology (see: Distinguishing knowing that from knowing how - circles diagram)
And a very interesting reading in philosophy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gettier_problem

 

Is it Jesus Christ who says he is the son of God? - - I wonder if Christians may not be a little west of the sun on that one as well. - Though within the religion / s I believe there is a meaning to both statements just that they are not rightfully interpreted and the interpretations is where they both fall short of their goals.....throughout.

Science and religion are not interchangeable and the atheist who relies soley on science is as infantile and illiterate at death as at birth.

 

All the religions are full of shit. However, there seems to be one group still desperately trying convince the rest of us that every word in their book is true. Then they throw up crap like this and instead of causing people to gain respect for Islam and its traditions, the OP makes a mockery of Islam by trying seriously to convince the rest us what they themselves know is false but so desperately want to believe.

 

Next time when you go to see a doctor, make sure he prescribes to you a medication that is not solely based on science.
Perhaps that its effectiveness is subject to faith or words of gospels and demon-busters.
Good luck.

 

Science / philosophy are two different fields that are not necessarily exclusionary however abortion is an example where the process is refined but the performance has parameters not associated with empirical evidence. The empiricist atheist is a void no different than an Islamist empirically believing the sun will rise to the west which for their true scholars I am sure is interpritive - life is combing both that some day will reach a single conclusion.

 

The convenient interpretive agrument like the convenient blind faith defence argument ....

 

Your comment about Catholics isn't completely accurate.

Rather, Catholicism teaches that anyone who has lived a moral life, and was honest, and kept to the spirit of Christ's teachings would go to heaven. I even remember being taught that primitive people that never heard of Christ would still go to heaven. "Forgiveness" has always been a crucial concept in Catholicism when it came to heaven.

I was taught in Catholic catechism classes that it was not necessary to go out and aggressively "recruit" people to join the Catholic Church. Instead, I was taught to tell the truth, be honest, and set an example.

"My Church comforts the sick and dying. My Church feeds the hungry. What does your Church do?"
- Angels and Demons

Catholicism, and certain other Christian sects, are the only religion that I know of that actively goes out to feed the hungry and comfort the oppressed.

To borrow from Winston Churchill, Christianity as it is practiced may not be a perfect form of religion, but it sure beats out whatever is second best.

I've had the opportunity to council Muslims in the past, and I've been shocked at how little emphasis the teachings of Islam places on telling the truth. Don't get me wrong - the Muslims I've spoken to were for the most part good people, and not taught it's O.K. to lie, it's just that the discussion of honesty never came up. And history has proven that when a people are not grounded in honesty or Truth, they become ungrounded and confused and are therefore easily manipulated.

The OP an excellent example. NO, NASA has never confirmed any possibility of the sun ever rising in the west. Vebtools knows this. So, why did he make a deliberate choice to lie? Because he feels that the truth is not on his side - that his faith is lacking.

Liars are cowards. They are afraid of the truth. What is Vebtools afraid of?

 

I think Vebtools has a few problems Corwin. He says some ridiculous things, though the 1st post in this thread is one of his classics.

I think I only said that the Catholic Church like Islam makes claims to be the one true Church.

I lived amongst Catholics for 3 and a half years in Galway and one hears this regularly. I had no problem with any Catholics at any time though and even though there is a lot of controversy within the church and dodgy priests and child abuse there are Catholic institutions like St Peter & St Paul (I think that was the name) that indeed spend all their time helping the poor. I beleive within Islam the same thing occurs.

Much of the info and ideas in the Quran are from the Bible or the Old Testament and that to has a lot of it's own background in the Egyptian book of the dead. The Quarn like the Bible then has things in that are added by people within their own particular religions.

The thing with all of these books is though that people use blind faith and quote from stories or beliefs that we know are not possible.

Take Noahs ark for example. We know it is not possible that Noah spent 40 days and 40 nights with two of each animal and Shem Ham Japheth and their wives who I believe all had names that had something to do with the word Olive (or at least two of them did).

There is no evidence that this flood occured in the time frame mentioned in the Bible and we know it is not possible 2 of each animal species on earth could possibly have fitted on an ark the dimensions of which are given in the bible. It is also not possible that 2 of each animal could possibly have survived as 40 days and 40 nights would have meant extinction for many animal types, lions, tigers, dogs, cats etc etc can't live on nothing for 40 days.

It would have been completely impossible for Noah to have traveled around the whole world collecting these animals.

We then get told by those who follow the religions that believe in this story that it is representative and not to be taken literally. We get told the same about the Adam & Eve story and many others.

Now I am not denying any possibilities and I will PM you something that may quite suprise you, but it's a good thing religions can teach morals and other good things, it is just a pity all te other bad things thta have come with it over the years also occur alongside the better points of religions.

Personally I feel sorry for Vebtools. He hassaid he was educated in one of these Madrasas we here so much about. He has very obviously been brainwashed and I would go as far as saying he has been brainwashed in a way that could be dangerous to both himself and others if he is so badly mislead and damged as to make statements like those in the first post.

PM on the way

 

@RD, interesting perspective. Remember, Christ taught with parables. As my Jewish friends have told me so often, whether the stories in the Old Testament are true or not is not important. What IS important is the lessons we choose to learn from them.

The Catholic perspective on the Gospels is very enlightening. It goes like this:
1. The Gospels have proven themselves to be completely accurate with respect to historical facts (the Romans, Herod, traditions, Caesar Augustus, etc)
2. The Gospels depict a person named Jesus of Nazareth, and the formation of a Christian Church
3. Ergo, the story of Jesus is completely accurate, as is the establishment of the Christian Church

Notice that, unlike other religions or even branches of Christianity, Catholicism is grounded upon the scientific basis that the Gospels are historical documents first, and therefore are religiously accurate.

BTW, I do not believe that there are any secret word code games in the Bible. But I have found that, as I have lived my life, I can look at certain passages in the Bible in the light of my experiences and see more there than I had originally thought. Hey, that's life - I first watched with fascination the movie Casablanca when I was only in high school. But as I got older and more experienced, I was amazed at how much more I saw - the complexities of the friendships and the relationships, how each character had a different perspective on events, the personal effect that Victor Laszlo and the Nazis had, etc. The Bible is like that, too - the Gospels describe emotional and spiritual concepts with nuances that can only be properly understood by living them.

 

I know exactly wht you mean RE the Casablanca and Bible references Corwin.

I have to beg to differ on some of the scientific foundations of Catholosisim and the only fairly recent change in stance of the Round Earth and Flat Earth debate though.

Don't get me wrong I have never had any problems with any Catholics, my best friend at School from 12 through to 15 was Catholic.

Back to the Codes and the changes in uderstanding one gleans from the Bible, I agree to some extent (not RE the hidden meanings that can be paired up via the Book of Genesis, Daniel and Revelation if one gets the experience) there is definately an evolving in understanding and ones personal journey interwoven within the texts, hence why I won't deny many possiblities until I have the facts in front of me.

 

Such as? Please explain to me anything in the Gospels regarding the history at the time that you consider to be historically inaccurate. Please, explain.

"Round Earth and Flat Earth debate"? Where did that crap come from? What in blazes are you rambling about??

Well, based on your writing, you are bordering on anti-Catholicism, and Christian blasphemy.

I'm not sure I understand - is your above paragraph intentionally vague? Catholicism is a religion of specifics. What experience? What are you referring to? Because you are so completely vague that it appears that you doubt what you are writing.

What facts do you want in front of you? How are you going about obtaining those facts?

 

Quite Frankly Corwin you are a nutjob matey!

The Pope only fairly recently admitted the catholic church now accepts the Earth if not flat and is round.

The history time frames - well they speak for their selves without too much tit for tat explaining on my part as as I said there is no scientific evidence to back up the Noah's ask story and I think anyone with half a functioning brain can work that one out for themself.

As for the rest of it.

Do you know I really can't be bothered to explain nor argues with you as to me you are a brainwashed religious nutjob of a zealot.

Quoting Dan Brown's novels in a previous post is hardly making your case any either.

Facts are facts stories are stories at the end of the day so present a fact rather than story and it matters not what I was referring to, I will take it in and seek to understand, present second stories and Yes I will always be more than a little skeptical.

 

Pot. Kettle. Black.

Really? Do you have a cite? Please show me a cite where the Catholic Church only recently accepted the Earth as being round. Please, show us a cite. From an authentic news source, please.

Written like a true conspiracy nut.

I suspect that if I were to look into your mouth I would find lies, wriggling there like maggots waiting to grow wings.

And, I'm repeating my question to you: Please explain to me anything in the Gospels regarding the history at the time that you consider to be historically inaccurate. Please, explain.

Tell the truth and shame the devil.

 

Pope JP 2 admitted World is round not flat http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1P2-1032707.html (Just Google other citations - there are many references to the Popes admission)

Lies like maggots etc - just proves what I said about you being a bit of a zealous religious nutjob matey. If you are so sure I am lieing about the story of Noah or owt else prove it matey and stop resorting to spouting or reguritating well known words written by others hundreds of years ago and translated into the language you have been taught to understand.

As for the "Gospels"

Who said ought about the "Gospels"?

I was talking scientific proof the story of Noah's ark has any scientific proof - what's not to get? The dating does not add up to anything that can be proved to back up the story (story being the operative word) in any way shape or form.

 

Yup. but the story is a legend which is based on a real event. A massive flood which did occur in the black sea region (where human civilization originated) some 7,000 years ago by a fast collapse of a barrier that made a huge local flood in a matter of days.
Therefore each and every ancient culture had its own version of it.

I found this:
http://www.nationalgeographic.com/blacksea/ax/frame.html


Puzzling though that such an absurd fairy-tale (= global flood and an ark) whose existence violates so many basic principles in every field of modern science still lives in the 21th century... alongside with other, even more bizarre legends...

 

Now that's an interesting thing Chaos trivia!

Someone flooding a region of perhaps rebillious peoples by opening some sort of damn or by breaching it to curb an annoying populance sounds more like the sort of thing that is plausable when it comes to rulers and those who have powers in my experience!

Have you got any links to those references please?

I have Corwin on "ignore" now as presently can't be dealing with such strongly brainwashed weird talk tbh.

I get the way such a thing could "possibly"have happened locally in regards to Noahs ark though and how such "stories" could have been perpetuated from the regions in such a circumstance.

 

.
No. Read your own link again - this is the Pope apologizing for condemning Galileo. This was NOT about a round or flat Earth, it was an apology for mistreating Galileo because of his statements regarding the Earth revolving around the Sun.

I know, I know - you Google'd "pope earth round" and looked at one of the first results. But the Pope apologized for their treatment of Galileo.

This had nothing to do with the Earth being round or flat. And it was most definitely NOT an "admission" by the Vatican that the Earth revolved around the Sun. It was an apology for how Galileo was treated. (BTW, legend has it that Galileo was shown the instruments of torture, but there exists no evidence that this ever happened).

The "scientific consensus" (ha!) in 1653 was that the Sun revolved around the Earth. And, in 1653, it was accepted that the Earth was as round as the Sun (how else could the Sun "revolve" around it?) If people really believed that the Earth was flat then navigating the ocean would have been impossible and Columbus would have never found America 300 years earlier!

Score: Corwin: 1, RD: 0

Um, didn't I already write that the Old Testament wasn't based on true stories? Please, try to keep up.

Score: Corwin: 2, RD: 0

No. You wrote "scientific foundations of Catholosisim and the only fairly recent change in stance of the Round Earth and Flat Earth debate though."

The "scientific foundations of Catholicism" are based upon the GOSPELS and not Noah's Ark This is why Judaism doesn't celebrate Christmas. I don't think you'll find anyone who claims that the "scientific foundations of Catholicism" are based upon Noah's Ark, will you?

Score: Corwin: 3, RD: 0

HA! You can't handle the Truth!

Game Over, Corwin WINS!

 

I put one link there. I can't find the original work due to LOADS of creationist vs. evolutionist web propaganda that governs all good keywords...

The theory that I subscribe to is that a massive wall of land collapsed due to pressure from the sea. That wall caused a huge flood and by thus creating the black-sea some 7,000 years ago. Our ancestors who witnessed it interpret it, as they interpreted everything, as the work of god. Since then this fairy tale spread to all ancient societies and you can find tons of flood versions in lots of them.
I watched a discovery or National geographic show once with the relevant evidence. I buy it.

http://www.pbs.org/saf/1207/features/noah.htm (didn't read it)


but here you can see how the mass of all of the earth's waters could have broken the few km of land between two valleys and fill the 2nd valey: the black sea of today.