| Tenchiboard: Anime and More http://bbs.noneedfortenchi.com/ |
|
| science VS faith http://bbs.noneedfortenchi.com/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=1680 |
Page 4 of 6 |
| Author: | rolfwind [ Thu Oct 30, 2003 10:59 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: You're Dodging. |
<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Take a A Plus Certifide Computer Programmer skilled not only in software development, but hardware construction as well, and the computer he is going to make is the univerce we live in.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>Well, if god is Microsoft A Plus certified, that would certainly explain a few things bout our world! <!--EZCODE EMOTICON START :rollin --><img src=http://www.ezboard.com/intl/aenglish/images/emoticons/roll.gif ALT=":rollin"><!--EZCODE EMOTICON END--> <!--EZCODE EMOTICON START :rollin --><img src=http://www.ezboard.com/intl/aenglish/images/emoticons/roll.gif ALT=":rollin"><!--EZCODE EMOTICON END--> <!--EZCODE EMOTICON START :rollin --><img src=http://www.ezboard.com/intl/aenglish/images/emoticons/roll.gif ALT=":rollin"><!--EZCODE EMOTICON END--> <p><!--EZCODE CENTER START--><div style="text-align:center">I'm a Ayeka/Ryoko fan for good reasons.....<br><!--EZCODE IMAGE START--><img src="http://www.ewulf.com/images/kiss_ts.JPG"/><!--EZCODE IMAGE END--></div><!--EZCODE CENTER END--></p><i></i> |
|
| Author: | JadenStriker2ndGen [ Thu Oct 30, 2003 2:15 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: You're Dodging. |
If what you mean by broken logic is missing data then yes. Addressing ever single thing would take a long time, so data left out is data with undeffind variables that a person has many ways that person can interpit it. Information such as what you just brought up about the creater setting serton rules and breaking them leads to death, and wether there will be a life after that death. And your right, I was sorta dodging it, and I was doing so first because I didn't want to spend a long time explaining every thing that I can recall. I know that I have limits, and today inclass, I could not focus on the class work because I was distracted by other things, primarily thing about how I would answer this quetions while not getting into a long discution that would take an unknow amount of time, and has the potental to last for months. After thinking about that and seeing how I was distracted in class trying to address this, I know now that I will have to deside what I will have to address. Those choices are to continue addressing this here, or focus on my class work. Then I have to concider the pros and conns.<br><br>If I stay here to discuss every thing that comes up, I can answer many of the quetions that, if unanswered leaves the broken logic, but at the same time I have to put in a lot of effort and my class work is going to suffer, my teacher is going to ask me why I haven't been doing well in his class all the sudden, my parents are going to get worried and well, the rest can be assumed.<br><br>If I choose to address my class work, I pass the class, learn the info from that class, my teacher is pleased with how well I have been doing, my parents happy with my grades, but on the other hand, you don't get your answer, and some of the people on this board in up interpiting that act as if I am copping out, and some people who would wish to make it look like that would blow the whole secomstance out of proportion.<br><br>So yes I am sort of dodging a bit, but I have my reasons. Beside the first reasons I came to this thread was to address the story a little and overt a flame war., and when I visit this websites message board, I usually come just to chat with other people and talk about anime, and tenchi muyo. If thats the reason I come to this board the most, and I have school work to be done that will effect the rest of my life, what would you think I determain more importaint at this time? <br><br>Truthfully, I would like to countinue talking about this, I would like to answer every thing you bring up, but all I really wanted from this thread was to keep it civil, and sence I have work to do, I have to choose and do it.<br><br>And to answer your last quetion, yes trust is being sought, as well as a realtionship with god. And my god would want me to seek truth, so in seeking truth have have to study it, test in against other things, and measure the reasults, which happens to be the scientific method of thinking. With out the scientific method of thinking, I would have never been able to generate the pros and cons to my perdicament, and would have likely made a rash desition based on emotions. I wouldn't have answered you honistly if I didn't think logicly, I wouldn't even know why I would be dodging, nor would I want to admit it to myself, thus I would not have seeked thruth, and if my god wants me to seek truth, I would have done just the oppiset of his will if I had not admitted to the dodging, or know why. <p></p><i></i> |
|
| Author: | True Sheol [ Sun Nov 02, 2003 10:40 am ] |
| Post subject: | House Built Upon Sand. |
Your explanation was fundamentally flawed because it ignores continuing themes from the books that you base your beliefs upon. So, irrespective of your intention, you did not address the issues.<br><br>When you take it on faith that those books are fundamentally accurate (minus *known* mistranslations and alterations), the conflict of "what is" vs. "what is written" must inevitably lead one to understand that much within the books is allegorical, not literal. ...Unless one's faith is in the <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>interpretations</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> of the books by those supposedly teaching from them. This is where the pursuit of truth comes into play.<br><br>Philosophically, the "Scriptures" are very canny. There is a passage, I believe, instructing Christians to test their own beliefs, to ensure that they have not strayed from the truth. It is the reminder of human error. So, if the books are truthful and the reality different from interpreted beliefs, the interpretations are wrong... if a person's faith is in the truth contained in the books, rather than the teachings by man.<br><br>This fundamental philosophy exists in science. If the observed facts do not match the theory, the theory is at fault, not the underlying truths (logic and reality). Theories are constantly tested, revised, expanded, and discarded. They are not impervious to the scientific process, just because they were taught by Newton, Einstein, or your college professor.<br><br>This is where organized religion falls short. Its structure encourages faith in the "theories", the beliefs supposedly founded upon the philosophical writings with the "Holy Scriptures". That is dogma, doctrine founded by authority. Authority that supposedly comes from God... but actually lies in the appointment of men, by men, over other men. Imperfect men, all of them. <p></p><i></i> |
|
| Author: | JadenStriker2ndGen [ Sun Nov 02, 2003 6:17 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: House Built Upon Sand. |
That is good that you understand that, but don't use just one belife, make sure you address that atheisuim and polytheisums is subject to this as well. MonoTheisum, polytheisums, and evolution are all unproven and all not disproven. The faith part dopes come in where you belive that the words are true and belive that adam and eve existed created by a god, just like you would trust that atheisum is real and all humans came from monkeys. You can't prove it just like I can't prove my belife, you can interpit that monkeys became humans from comparing like bone structers, but cannont prove it. <br><br>Just as you said theories are made, tested, revised, explanded, and discarded, and the problem with evolution is that sevral diffrent theories have come, and have been discarded. And sense you can't prove or disprove Monotheisum, polytheisum, or evolution, you are left to make a choice of what to belive in, if you choose to belive in any thing. Sense every one has a nagging feeling that they need a perpose, they are very likely to choose something.<br><br>Now remember, I do have a bit of classwork, and homework to deal with as well as other people, and can't really address every thing that pops up in this board. So sorry if I don't address a bunch of stuff, but I do need to get other things done, so it is sort of feels antaginizing to not see your last post reconize parts of my last post that addressed this, and makes me feel like you think I lied. And sense I don't have a way to prove that I do have other things that I need to do, that make it increasingly difficalt to find time to reaspond to this thread, you simply have to take it on faith! So you have the choice to belive me or have the choice to think I am lying. <p></p><i></i> |
|
| Author: | rolfwind [ Sun Nov 02, 2003 10:19 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: House Built Upon Sand. |
<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>The faith part dopes come in where you belive that the words are true and belive that adam and eve existed created by a god, just like you would trust that atheisum is real and all humans came from monkeys. You can't prove it just like I can't prove my belife, you can interpit that monkeys became humans from comparing like bone structers, but cannont prove it.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>Atheism has nothing to do with believing humans come from monkeys. An atheist simply is someone doesn't believe in a god(s). An agnostic is a person that doesn't believe in god(s) specifically because of the lack of evidence.<br><br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Just as you said theories are made, tested, revised, explanded, and discarded, and the problem with evolution is that sevral diffrent theories have come, and have been discarded.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>Because of later evaluations, as it is based on evidence, not the other way other, where facts have to adhere to theories.<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>And sense you can't prove or disprove Monotheisum, polytheisum, or evolution, you are left to make a choice of what to belive in, if you choose to belive in any thing. Sense every one has a nagging feeling that they need a perpose, they are very likely to choose something.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>And monotheism nor polytheism are scientific theories with any scientific value, they don't predict anything that I'm aware of and can measure (perhaps some vague armageddon). I think the various evolution theories are scientific, if it's predicting something (I'm not well versed in it to tell.)<br><br>If you read the post in it's entirety, you would have noticed that T_S is talking about creationism as a valid scientific theory regarding our origins and questioning your literal interpretation versus an allegorical one (as a fictional story to prove a certain point or emphasize certain values). Scientific theories cannot rest on blind faith.<br><br>And I have no such nagging feelings you ascribe to all......^_^<br><br>But again, you are equating that a random guess is as good as educated guess based in evidence.<br><br>To put it another way, I could say flying pink unicorns are floating above me at all times and are my gods, but you can't see them and they are ethereal, hence you can't touch them. And since there is no way to prove a negative, you can't prove me wrong. So because of that, my assertion has the same material value as someone who believes otherwise?<br><br>I know it's a materialistic view that I subscribe to, so you may disagree....... but I also suggest you look into Occam's razor, it's an interesting concept. <p><!--EZCODE CENTER START--><div style="text-align:center">The real harem.....<br><!--EZCODE IMAGE START--><img src="http://www.ewulf.com/images/the_real_harem.jpg"/><!--EZCODE IMAGE END--></div><!--EZCODE CENTER END--></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub19.ezboard.com/btenchimuyo79943.showUserPublicProfile?gid=rolfwind>rolfwind</A> at: 11/2/03 10:42 pm<br></i> |
|
| Author: | DeathBeforeDishonor [ Mon Nov 03, 2003 4:58 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: House Built Upon Sand. |
The point I made earlier remains still:<br>Just because both are possible doesn't mean they are at all credible or reliable. <p><!--EZCODE CENTER START--><div style="text-align:center">blut krieg sieg</div><!--EZCODE CENTER END--></p><i></i> |
|
| Author: | JadenStriker2ndGen [ Sat Nov 08, 2003 12:58 am ] |
| Post subject: | The Matrix |
Ya know Rolfwind, you remind me of Agent Smith, you are right about a few things, but your interpi9tation of them is very one sidedly baised, and oftent involves a shallow surface like understanding and refrences. Take for instance a quote from your self<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr><br>But again, you are equating that a random guess is as good as educated guess based in evidence.<br><br>To put it another way, I could say flying pink unicorns are floating above me at all times and are my gods, but you can't see them and they are ethereal, hence you can't touch them. And since there is no way to prove a negative, you can't prove me wrong. So because of that, my assertion has the same material value as someone who believes otherwise?<br><hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>Your right to address how stupid it is to just belivwe something like that, but the problem with your example is that it is based on one premis, blind faith. OFCORCE YOU DON'T GO OF BELIVING SOMETHING LIKE THAT WITHOUT ANY SUPPORT OF ANY KIND! And I know that no one is going to care at all if that was all there was to it. Your annilses of me has to be so shallow if you think that would belive something like flying pink unicorns are going to fly over our heads and because we can't measure it that it can't be proven or disproven. Your not even trying to understand where I am coming from if your jumping to BS like that. Their is way more to a belife then that BS example, and it is not easy to explain. To even start to explain it would require tuning this message board into a labortory.<br><br>To ferther credit your shallow understanding of belife you state your own belife that Monotheism and Polytheism have no scientfic value, yet your evolution does. Did you even take into acount that there are more forms to Monotheism and Polytheism then one and their many variables to concider? If you did, thats great, what lead you to totally disregared those variables?<br><br>Don't get me wrong, I don't expect any one to, there are to many, I can't even do it. What distubes me is that you don't even seem to try to get at least some of them with in reason.<br><br>You seem to be like agent smith, you seem to pick out the parts that suit your agenda that seems to be bent on winning an arguement by any means and discredit someone else who has any diffrence of opintion.<br><br>If this is not true, why then do you use such a baised and deminingly shallow example and seemingly assume that I think a random guess is as good as an educated guess? And where did you get the idea that I did do that, make a statement that says a random guess is as good as an educated guess?<br><br>It is very insulting that you seem like you didn't even take time to try and understand what I was saying, or concider many possibilities my statements could exist under. You seem to be jumping to conclutions baied on a surface understanding than bais.<br><br>Here is an example to use, Circle logic, Programming loops, Repeating systems that haver a function that keeps a repeating process. What are those to you rolfwind? Arn't they surface detail, genralized statements, statements that require ferther explaining.<br><br>Program loops are the easist for me to explain so here it goes. There are 2 types of programming loops, benifical and not. The best example of benifical programming loops are computer games cause they are packed full or them. The counting of reasorce points RTS games and some FPS games is a clear example. In an FPS the plainest example is your rapid fire range weapons. If you where to print out the script to run these program loops that cause a simple graphical reaction, you would get a freaking book twice the size of "Shumaker/Madsen Goodheart-Willcox 12th Release of AutoCAD and its applications" by Terence M. Shumaker and David A. Madsen Copyright 1993. And sense making that much code is painstaking enough as is, they end up forgoing doing that over and over again so they make gaming engains to greatly simplify that task, and later on when a lot of that programming is require to make books that thick they will find a way to make it even more simplified.<br><br>Because of that complexity it would take to understand a game, and concider what part of the human will is required to try to understand it, and what parts can become misinterpited, and compared the possibile reasponces in that instance to your responce, I have come tpo the conclution that you seem to have been baised throughout this thread, but I don't discredit the possibility that other sercomstances may have legitamitly prevwnt you from understanding, though "EXTREAMLY" unlikely.<br><br>Main refrances concidered to final conclution<br>Information and basic understand of programming loops, but not programming it self from a freind who is studying C++ and has already had C<br>Agent Smith from all 3 "Matrix Movies" and understanding of this spicific dynamic charactor.<br>Basic Phycoligy and the understand that the human mind is much more complexe and has a tendincy to belive what it wants to.<br>Understanding that no one is perfect, but some use this as an excuss to not being perfect while others try to due there best to become better than what they are though reasonable enough not to aim to high knowing there limits and doing there best to get the most out of it.<br>Rolfwinds replies to this thread, though stating that is redundant and makes me feel stupid.<br>Understanding that emitions shouldn't be used to guide your judgement unless no other option is avalible. <p></p><i></i> |
|
| Author: | True Sheol [ Sat Nov 08, 2003 2:31 am ] |
| Post subject: | Smoke and Mirrors |
Irrespective of how you take rolf's comments, there is a fundamental aspect of reality that you must come grips with. What do you base your perception of reality upon? If it is only what you can percieve, then you are restricted to the limits of your senses, whether personal or through devices. If it is faith, then you are restricted to the limits of your beliefs... and whoever created them, then taught them to you.<br><br>Whatever model you espouse, be it by intelligent design or natural order, there are rules by which reality exists. If there are rules, there are knowable truths. If there is truth, then there are constants. By determining the constants, the structure of reality becomes apparent... even if we cannot ascertain all of its aspects. When there is conflict, either within knowledge derived from science or philosophy from religion, with observable reality, our views must yield. If they do not, we are merely creating a fantasy world inside of our minds, embracing the lie when it is convenient and rejecting the truth when it is not.<br><br>So, once more, when observable reality shows us that new beneficial genes are not being created within gene pools, is it reasonable to continue espousing classical evolutionary theory (which holds that new genes will come into being within a gene pool) or classical creationist theory (which holds that mankind originated from a single pair of humans)? Both are fantasy when put under the light of reality. One is justified as an abstract scientific theory that is currently unsupportable through scientific analysis. The other is justified as religious belief that is currently unsupportable through philosophical analysis.<br><br>One is either dealing in truth or fiction, whatever the intention. If your religion espouses truth above all other things, then the answer must be clear. If your religion espouses man-made tradition over all other things, then the answer must likewise be clear. I would simply like to know where you stand. If you can clearly answer this, then we can move on. Otherwise, we are just spinning our wheels. <p></p><i></i> |
|
| Author: | rolfwind [ Sat Nov 08, 2003 9:42 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Matrix |
<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Your right to address how stupid it is to just belivwe something like that, but the problem with your example is that it is based on one premis, blind faith. OFCORCE YOU DON'T GO OF BELIVING SOMETHING LIKE THAT WITHOUT ANY SUPPORT OF ANY KIND!<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>How DARE you question my beliefs! These unicorns are my friends and they take me on many wondrous and fascinating journeys throughout the cosmos. Just because you are so narrow minded and cannot begin to grasp the many various dimensions they exist in doesn't mean they don't traverse our reality!<br><br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>To ferther credit your shallow understanding of belife you state your own belife that Monotheism and Polytheism have no scientfic value, yet your evolution does.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>IFF evolution predicts something testable and it seems that classic evolution could be wrong, as TS pointed out. A scientific theory has to be falsifiable. In order to be falsifiable, it has to predict. If it meets neither of these, it's not a valid or worthwhile scientific theory.<br><br>Show me a specific prediction that can be tested Jaden.<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Did you even take into acount that there are more forms to Monotheism and Polytheism then one and their many variables to concider? If you did, thats great, what lead you to totally disregared those variables?<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>I have encountered no forms of traditional monotheism or polytheism that predicts anything specific or has held up to testing. They are not meant to be scientific anyway, they are generally a collection of stories, tales, traditions, etc.<br><br>But please, show me a religion that passes scrutiny.<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Don't get me wrong, I don't expect any one to, there are to many, I can't even do it. What distubes me is that you don't even seem to try to get at least some of them with in reason.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>The reason I don't try to reach out is that I have never encountered anything that specifically requires my belief in god, gods, or supernatural. So I make use of occam's razor and look for simpler explanations when someone comes up with things.<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>You seem to be like agent smith, you seem to pick out the parts that suit your agenda that seems to be bent on winning an arguement by any means and discredit someone else who has any diffrence of opintion.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>This argument doesn't fit my paremeters of logic :P<br><br>And sir, could you explain the Matrix to me, I fail to get anything deep or meaningful out of it..... other than a great review someone wrote on Amazon.com:<br><br><!--EZCODE FONT START--><span style="font-size:x-small;"><!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>But, then I got it. Weeks after seeing it, it finally clicked.<br><br>They symbolism of these films is much deeper than the average action-movie viewer is usually given. Yes -- the entire "The One-Saves the world" storyline is meaningless, and that's the point. While paying too much attention to events within the computer-generated fantasy world of the Matrix, the real world, and Zion, fall into greater danger.<br><br>We are introduced to two 'french' characters, programs, which exist simply to experience life. While they are among the long list of villians in this piece, they are also the key to the story. They describe the situation in as much in the film, seeing our heroes as mere puppets in a meaningless plot, which, in fact, they are.<br><br>While are main characters are engaged in a meaningless task, struggling to achieve goal after goal in a virtual world, events of the real world are dire, and, just perhaps, if more attention were paid to the real-world events, perhaps the situation would not be so dire.<br><br>It is not until Neo discovers that his existance as 'the one' is simply another level of control set in place by the machines, that the entire struggle within the virtual world of the Matrix has no real meaning, only then does the truth come to light, just in time for this second chapter to come to a close.<br><br>Think about it, how many people do you know who obsess on politics, or sports, or their favorite television show, or even the Matrix itself? We engage in meaningless struggles to achieve goals that, in the end, really have no meaning but to feed our own ego.</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--></span><!--EZCODE FONT END--><br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Here is an example to use, Circle logic, Programming loops, Repeating systems that haver a function that keeps a repeating process. What are those to you rolfwind? Arn't they surface detail, genralized statements, statements that require ferther explaining.<br><br>Program loops are the easist for me to explain so here it goes. There are 2 types of programming loops, benifical and not. The best example of benifical programming loops are computer games cause they are packed full or them.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>I never heard of benifical loops, can I have a resource? I don't know what you're getting at. Most computer programs I have encountered have three basic stages:<br><br>1. Initialization - initialize data, acquire resources, etc<br>2. Main Loop - the main work, usually the biggest part<br>3. Termination - memory clean-up, graceful exit, may invoke another program<br><br>Even the BIOS can be thought of this way, AFAIK.<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>The counting of reasorce points RTS games and some FPS games is a clear example.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>Wouldn't that just be a counter?<br><br>resource++;<br>or <br>resource += 10<br>or whatever?<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>In an FPS the plainest example is your rapid fire range weapons.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>I don't see the loop with the weapons in it, other than if you are talking about an input loop.....<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>And sense making that much code is painstaking enough as is, they end up forgoing doing that over and over again so they make gaming engains to greatly simplify that task, and later on when a lot of that programming is require to make books that thick they will find a way to make it even more simplified.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>I'm a programmer too, so what you are saying is that I try to simplify your ideas too much when it could take entire book to explain away them away.<br><br>Even programming doesn't work like that. Usually the beginning idea is simple and the implementation can be sloppy, either out of inexperience or need. But please name something specific, I hate these charges when I don't have specifics.<br><br>And you are also implying that one simple idea makes the entirety of the program. It doesn't work that way, usually it's a bunch of simple ideas coming together to make something complex.<br><br>But that doesn't mean you can't extract the simple idea and test it. It's possible to take an entire physics book, read it, and attempt to prove a theory false through testing. If a certain theory proves false, it wouldn't mean that it invalidates every single theory in the book, merely the ones built on top of the wrong theory/idea.<br><br>If I'm wrong and don't get what you are saying, that's because you are confusing like hell.<br><br>-rolf (feeding his own ego) <p><!--EZCODE CENTER START--><div style="text-align:center">The real harem.....<br><!--EZCODE IMAGE START--><img src="http://www.ewulf.com/images/the_real_harem.jpg"/><!--EZCODE IMAGE END--></div><!--EZCODE CENTER END--></p><i></i> |
|
| Author: | Cerebrate Araq [ Sat Nov 08, 2003 7:37 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Matrix |
Dance, my puppits. Dance! <p><!--EZCODE CENTER START--><div style="text-align:center"><!--EZCODE IMAGE START--><img src="http://ls.caffeineanime.com/images/forums/doit.gif"/><!--EZCODE IMAGE END--></div><!--EZCODE CENTER END--></p><i></i> |
|
| Author: | JadenStriker2ndGen [ Sat Nov 15, 2003 10:51 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Matrix |
Well hello Agent Rolfwind Smith<br><br>Before science can predict something, it must have a refrance to start at, a point called zero, or ground. And the major diffrence between my monotheistic religion and your unicorns, is that my religion addresses everyday life issues your going to face. It addresses War, addresses Family, addresses Trust vs. Deseption, addresses issue of team work, addresses the issue of love, addresses the issue of choice, it addresses the issue of drinking and substance use, addresses the issue of killing and the diffrence between murdure and justifable, and a whole lot more. That is how my belife has value scientific, it addresses the things your going to face, and predicts that you are going to have to make a choice to understand them, or show bais aginst them.<br><br>The above should be good enough to answer your quetion TS<br><br>And Agent Rolfwind Smith you showed your bais by not seeing what I was saying earlier when I was talking about Loops, when it is smack in front of your face.<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr><br>I never heard of benifical loops, can I have a resource? I don't know what you're getting at. Most computer programs I have encountered have three basic stages:<br><br>1. Initialization - initialize data, acquire resources, etc<br>2. Main Loop - the main work, usually the biggest part<br>3. Termination - memory clean-up, graceful exit, may invoke another program<br><br>Even the BIOS can be thought of this way, AFAIK.<br><hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>You just said the the things that made me say there was a benifical loop<br><br>1. Initialization - the thing that starts the loop<br>2. Main loop - The loop itself<br>3. Termination - The ending cause of a loop<br><br>and you got the benifical part down<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr><br>1. Initialization - initialize data, acquire resources, <br>2. Main Loop - the main work, usually the biggest part<br>3. Termination - memory clean-up, graceful exit, may invoke another program<br><hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>but didn't get the infentat error loop down<br><br>1. Initialization - Error in the scripting<br>2. Main Loop - The repating error code that freezes up your computer<br>3. Termination - Either pushing the power or reset button, or letting the error code site there looping till it currupts enough of your hard drives data that you have to reformat, and simpily stops all together.<br><br>This sort of example can be refitted to reflect life itself, wether it is being born, living then dying, or be an action like work,<br><br>1. You go to work<br>2. You work at work<br>3. You leave work<br><br>and even that is in a repeating loop<br><br>1. You apply for work<br>2. You work<br>3. Your Fired from work, or Retire from work<br><br>So now you have a benefical loop<br><br>1. Initialization - You apply for work<br>2. Main loop - You go to work, you work at work, you leave work<br>3. Termination - Your fired from work or retire from work<br><br>I know your not an idiot, you could have realised that if you wanted to, so the fact that you didn't figure it out leads me to belive that your baised.<br><br>And this is how it applies to an RTS<br><br>1. Initialization - You order an object to mine that reasorce<br>2. Main Loop - The object uses it's scripting to mine that reasorce resulting in your simple addition that repeates itself as that unit stays there<br>3. Termination - You give the unit new orders, the reasource is depleted, the unit is destroyed, or your computer crashes, either to desktop or all the way freezes up.<br><br>The loop in the weapon is the same way<br><br>1. Press the fire button<br>2. The weappon fires, and countinues to fire<br>3.the weapon runs out of ammo, you stop holding the mouse button, you die, you loose your connection if your on the inter net, or you game or computer crashes.<br><br><br>Come on, if you can't see that, taking into account that your so smart, you got to be bais. And I know there is a lot of scripting that goes along with it, other wise I wouldn't have said that printing out TCP/IP code results in a book twice the size of that AutoCAD book I talked about. <p></p><i></i> |
|
| Author: | rolfwind [ Sat Nov 15, 2003 1:04 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: science VS faith |
You are correct, young Christian warrior. I am humbled, I am indeed an agent of the dark side, and very impressed with your skills! I bow in respect to your mental acuteness! Now let me counter your points.<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>And the major diffrence between my monotheistic religion and your unicorns, is that my religion addresses everyday life issues your going to face.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>That's not fair! You don't know that! The unicorns talk to me about many things when they visit, before they take me on spaceflights! Mostly they wondered about how easy earthling horse chicks were, and next time I'll refer them to you, since you probably know.<br><br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>It addresses War, addresses Family, addresses Trust vs. Deseption, addresses issue of team work, addresses the issue of love, addresses the issue of choice, it addresses the issue of drinking and substance use, addresses the issue of killing and the diffrence between murdure and justifable, and a whole lot more.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>I hear the bible has many contradictory ideas. Eye for an eye but 'thou shalt not kill' is a commandment, yet Samson was favored by God and thus great strength and allowed to kill many, many people.<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>That is how my belife has value scientific, it addresses the things your going to face, and predicts that you are going to have to make a choice to understand them, or show bais aginst them.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>Were you ever faced with a choice whether or not to smoke crack? I'm don't know how 'baised' I am, but personally, I'm starting to predict that you have and that temptation led you astray, my son.<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>but didn't get the infentat error loop down<br><br>1. Initialization - Error in the scripting<br>2. Main Loop - The repating error code that freezes up your computer<br>3. Termination - Either pushing the power or reset button, or letting the error code site there looping till it currupts enough of your hard drives data that you have to reformat, and simpily stops all together.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>That's interesting but it's not a loop different from the first one, other than it never reaches the termination stage. Code that loops infinitely is usually a result of recieving a variable that is outside the parameters of the code and the programmer forgot to accomodate for it.<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>So now you have a benefical loop.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>I searched on google, no one heard of a 'benefical' loop. I think you really created something very new and exciting here! You are correct, my mind can't grasp your entire concept, because it's so mindbending, it's sure to change the paradigm of the software world as we know it. The computer world is ready for this revolution! I urge, no beg you to call up several professors of Computer Science and share your ideas so that a dissertation can be formalized as soon as possible! It would be a travesty of time if your genius wasn't recognized early enough, it'd be like letting a Donald Knuth slip through our fingers! <p><!--EZCODE CENTER START--><div style="text-align:center">The real harem.....<br><!--EZCODE IMAGE START--><img src="http://www.ewulf.com/images/the_real_harem.jpg"/><!--EZCODE IMAGE END--></div><!--EZCODE CENTER END--></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub19.ezboard.com/btenchimuyo79943.showUserPublicProfile?gid=rolfwind>rolfwind</A> at: 11/15/03 12:06 pm<br></i> |
|
| Author: | DeathBeforeDishonor [ Sat Nov 15, 2003 1:38 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: science VS faith |
1. Initialization - Error in the scripting<br>2. Main Loop - The repating error code that freezes up your computer<br>3. Termination - Either pushing the power or reset button, or letting the error code site there looping till it currupts enough of your hard drives data that you have to reformat, and simpily stops all together.<br><br><br>WTF is that?<br>Have you ever programmed before? Or used a dictionary? <p><!--EZCODE CENTER START--><div style="text-align:center">blut krieg sieg</div><!--EZCODE CENTER END--></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub19.ezboard.com/btenchimuyo79943.showUserPublicProfile?gid=deathbeforedishonor>DeathBeforeDishonor</A> at: 11/15/03 12:41 pm<br></i> |
|
| Author: | JadenStriker2ndGen [ Sat Nov 15, 2003 3:53 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: science vs. faith |
<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr><br>I hear the bible has many contradictory ideas. Eye for an eye but 'thou shalt not kill' is a commandment, yet Samson was favored by God and thus great strength and allowed to kill many, many people.<br><hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>And this is why I accuse you of bais, you here only want you want to and address only what you want to. The exact word in the command ment isn't kill plain and simple, it is murder. Though shall not murder, and murder is done out of hatered/mallis/prejudic, greed/wealth/lust, Fun/pleasure/entertainment or suicide/cowardness/irresponsability. The oppiset of the act murder is to do it out of protection, either self defence or protecting someone or many people.<br><br>Yes I was, quite often by a friend who smokes it, and every time he ask, my answer is, and always has been, and always will be, NO!<br><br>And a benefical loop is nothing new in the least. Look around you, every thing around us repeates it self, some of them are construtive, others are destrutive. The onlyh thing new here is they way it has been explained, parapharesed into an example where people can understand. But to understand it must meat one requirement, the person must choose to be imparil, and you have not.<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr><br>That's interesting but it's not a loop different from the first one, other than it never reaches the termination stage. Code that loops infinitely is usually a result of recieving a variable that is outside the parameters of the code and the programmer forgot to accomodate for it.<br><br>I searched on google, no one heard of a 'benefical' loop. I think you really created something very new and exciting here! You are correct, my mind can't grasp your entire concept, because it's so mindbending, it's sure to change the paradigm of the software world as we know it. The computer world is ready for this revolution! I urge, no beg you to call up several professors of Computer Science and share your ideas so that a dissertation can be formalized as soon as possible! It would be a travesty of time if your genius wasn't recognized early enough, it'd be like letting a Donald Knuth slip through our fingers! <br><hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>And you prove that bais once again when you fail to take into account<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr><br>1. Termination - Either pushing the power or reset button, or letting the error code site there looping till it currupts enough of your hard drives data that you have to reformat, and simpily stops all together.<br><hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>if you had, you would not have said<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr><br>You are correct, my mind can't grasp your entire concept, because it's so mindbending, it's sure to change the paradigm of the software world as we know it. <br><hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>You would have also relised, I had took the following into account<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr><br>Code that loops infinitely is usually a result of recieving a variable that is outside the parameters of the code and the programmer forgot to accomodate for it.<br><hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>You are a fool who truely is baised. <p></p><i></i> |
|
| Author: | rolfwind [ Sat Nov 15, 2003 4:19 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: science vs. faith |
<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>And this is why I accuse you of bais,<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>Yes, I'm bais, but what is bais?<br><br>Perhaps it's an acronym:<br><br>Acronym Definition @Amazon.com <br>BAIS Backward Alarm Indication Signal <br>BAIS Battlefield Airborne Instrumentation System <br>BAIS Battlefield Automation Interoperability System <br>BAIS Bell Atlantic Internet Solutions <br>BAIS Blind Adaptive Interference Suppression <br><br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>you here only want you want to and address only what you want to. The exact word in the command ment isn't kill plain and simple, it is murder.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>Actually, no. The original word used in hebrew is ratsach, which can be literally translated to kill. In fact, here is an analysis of the sixth commandment:<br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_10c9.htm">www.religioustolerance.org/chr_10c9.htm</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>The oppiset of the act murder is to do it out of protection, either self defence or protecting someone or many people.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>And oppisets attract.<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Yes I was, quite often by a friend who smokes it, and every time he ask, my answer is, and always has been, and always will be, NO!<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>Ah, but I'm afraid you underestimate the effects of second hand smoke.... I heard it impairs spelling skills as well as normal logic, but I think thats the "oppiset" of your situation. Unless you type like you do to be leet. <p><!--EZCODE CENTER START--><div style="text-align:center">The real harem.....<br><!--EZCODE IMAGE START--><img src="http://www.ewulf.com/images/the_real_harem.jpg"/><!--EZCODE IMAGE END--></div><!--EZCODE CENTER END--></p><i></i> |
|
| Page 4 of 6 | All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|