Why do theists associate with non-theists?

[Gandalf]

Is there?
:shrug:


Er, science is a search for the "truth of spirituality"?
How does that work?

Eh... not everyone is looking for it, but a lot of people are. My first statement was too general.

Awkward phrasing by me. How about... searching for existential meaning? I think all of us search for meaning for ourselves, despite it taking a multitude of forms.

so I conclude that I will commune with theists one way or the other, either shrinking back in horror by the desecration of what is sacred, done in the name of god, or else I would approach fearlessly into that zone you seem to occupy. I think yours is the comfort zone. thanks for putting me there.

I wish you well on your journey. I believe there are some folk on this forum who are open to exploring and discussing these things in an honest, respectful fashion. Of course, a good headbutting argument is fun sometimes too! :argue:

 

[Pincho Paxton]

Assumption.


Nope. But feel free to persist in making claims with no support.


Considering that you don't know quantum physics, I doubt it.


Word salad.


Bullshit.


Incorrect. I read something that doesn't make sense FULL STOP.

To you. It makes sense to me.

 

[Dywyddyr]

It makes sense to me.

Because you're clueless and have no knowledge of physics.

 

[Dywyddyr]

Eh... not everyone is looking for it, but a lot of people are. My first statement was too general.
Awkward phrasing by me. How about... searching for existential meaning? I think all of us search for meaning for ourselves, despite it taking a multitude of forms.

Hmm, possibly.
Still doesn't answer the second question of mine though.
Is science looking for existential meaning?

 

[Pincho Paxton]

Because you're clueless and have no knowledge of physics.

I know that the heart, and veins, and blood are a pressure system. I know that biological physics are quite limited to the physics that can be used as a biological propagator. It makes sense to scale down to another level of pressure propagation.. especially if you allow the possibility of an Aether. All you have in physics is a vacuum that science allows to have physical properties. You are delusional.. science is trying to peep between its fingers into a vacuum, and yet allow bow shocks, and space warping.

Science knows nothing about physics. And you follow the delusion.

 

[Dywyddyr]

I know that the heart, and veins, and blood are a pressure system. I know that biological physics are quite limited to the physics that can be used as a biological propagator. It makes sense to scale down to another level of pressure propagation.

Unsupported nonsense.

especially if you allow the possibility of an Aether.

Aether has been discredited.

Science knows nothing about physics. And you follow the delusion.

Wrong. You don't much about science.
Provide one single shred of evidence that you have anything worth listening to.
Oh wait, you can't.
You've posted tons of sheer nonsense, not one word of which has any factual basis.

 

[Pincho Paxton]

Unsupported nonsense.


Aether has been discredited.


Wrong. You don't much about science.
Provide one single shred of evidence that you have anything worth listening to.
Oh wait, you can't.
You've posted tons of sheer nonsense, not one word of which has any factual basis.

Unsupported isn't actually an argument in Quantum Physics. My Quantum Physics are the only version that work as physics. So of course they are unsupported.. they actually work.

Aether has not been discredited, it has been replaced. I still use it, lots of other people still use it.

Again.. failure to argue. Just a part of another quote that says wrong... you can keep doing that if it makes you happy, but it only works in your head.

 

[Dywyddyr]

Unsupported isn't actually an argument in Quantum Physics.

Wrong.

My Quantum Physics are the only version that work as physics.

Also wrong.

they actually work.

And again.

Aether has not been discredited, it has been replaced.

Wrong and wrong.

I still use it, lots of other people still use it.

Yes, my mistake. Aether has been discredited as far as science is concerned. Crackpots, however, are free to continue dribbling into their pillows.

Again.. failure to argue. Just a part of another quote that says wrong... you can keep doing that if it makes you happy, but it only works in your head.

Please provide evidence.
YOU haven't supported a single one of your contentions, therefore I fail to see why I should provide anything more than the simple fact: you're a deluded idiot, with no grasp of science but a large ego that lets you think you're somehow contributing to actual knowledge.

 

[Pincho Paxton]

Wrong.


Also wrong.


And again.


Wrong and wrong.


Yes, my mistake. Aether has been discredited as far as science is concerned. Crackpots, however, are free to continue dribbling into their pillows.


Please provide evidence.
YOU haven't supported a single one of your contentions, therefore I fail to see why I should provide anything more than the simple fact: you're a deluded idiot, with no grasp of science but a large ego that lets you think you're somehow contributing to actual knowledge.

Even science didn't discredit it. Science discredited that there is no Aether wind.. is all.

My posts are supported by science, but a mishmash of old, and new science. Not the standard model.

 

[Pineal]

Hmm, possibly.
Still doesn't answer the second question of mine though.
Is science looking for existential meaning?

I think one could argue that behind the urges to investigate scientifically one would find the urge to find existential meaning (along with other sub-urges).

 

[Dywyddyr]

Even science didn't discredit it. Science discredited that there is no Aether wind.. is all.

Incorrect.

My posts are supported by science, but a mishmash of old, and new science. Not the standard model.

Also wrong.
There is no "new science", and no "old science" in your claims.

 

[Dywyddyr]

I think one could argue that behind the urges to investigate scientifically one would find the urge to find existential meaning (along with other sub-urges).

Science investigates particular phenomena. To explain those.
Not an over-arching "existential meaning".
The motivation of individual scientists though...

 

[Pincho Paxton]

Incorrect.


Also wrong.
There is no "new science", and no "old science" in your claims.

The Michael Morley experiment was based on a presumption, and the presumption was that the Aether can't travel with the Earth, the Sun, and the Galaxy all at the same time. That presumption is wrong. The test was based on a mistake. If space-time can bend with the Earth, and travel with the Earth, then it proves that the Aether can also do that. You can load a revolving barrel when it is moving, you can fill a bucket moving under a waterfall without dragging the water. You can freeze water into chained particles, and now you have drag. So photons can both chain particles, and yet the Aether can still be free from the Earth. I know physics very well.. it's science that doesn't know physics.

New science is what you have today, old science is what you had when the Aether was around. I'm really hate spoon feeding you information. This was simple.

 

[Dywyddyr]

The Michael Morley experiment was based on a presumption, and the presumption was that the Aether can't travel with the Earth, the Sun, and the Galaxy all at the same time. That presumption is wrong. The test was based on a mistake.

Wrong.

If space-time can bend with the Earth, and travel with the Earth, then it proves that the Aether can also do that.

Bull. Shit.

I know physics very well.

Outright lie.

New science is what you have today, old science is what you had when the Aether was around.

Also incorrect.

I'm really hate spoon feeding you information. This was simple.

Not as simple as you.

 

[Pincho Paxton]

Wrong.


Bull. Shit.


Outright lie.


Also incorrect.


Not as simple as you.

I see you have lost again. I remember from last time, this is the way that you post when you have lost. So don't get into another losing streak.

 

[Pineal]

So Pincho Paxton & Dywyddyr
how does your exchange relate to the reasons theists might associate with non-theists?

 

[Pincho Paxton]

So Pincho Paxton & Dywyddyr
how does your exchange relate to the reasons theists might associate with non-theists?

Well I'm a science Athiest, and Dywyddyr is a science theist.. so that's how.

 

[Dywyddyr]

So Pincho Paxton & Dywyddyr
how does your exchange relate to the reasons theists might associate with non-theists?

I dunno, it might be worth getting a mod to delete Pincho's crap (which is all of his posts), and my replies, from this thread.

Well I'm a science Athiest, and Dywyddyr is a science theist.. so that's how.

Please don't compound your errors.

 

[Pincho Paxton]

I dunno, it might be worth getting a mod to delete Pincho's crap (which is all of his posts), and my replies, from this thread.


Please don't compound your errors.

Yeah, and then get a mod to delete every off topic post you have posted for the last 4 years. You are never on topic.

 

[Dywyddyr]

You are never on topic.

That would be because I'm replying to your posts.
And "never" is a falsehood.