ROSIE ODONELL MUST DIE - FKN Newz 04 06 07

[Singebuggercat]

You have got to be one of the funniest motherfuckers on spewtube.

[retrocareermelted]

the theme song is so rad

[alienevolvedpart3]

the earth would be round if it wasnt for the fascist extremist sun and its abuse of gravitational power

which leaves it at its mercy/oh and elliptiod!

i say nuke it"its the only way to be sure!"

[simonodell]

sid & vid, I can see both sides of your disagreement;

Sid; have you looked at everettian many-worlds?

Vid, there are respected mainstream theories which dont currently coincide with darwinism, as a scientific thinker I think you will find a better set of results from your enquireys if you expand your dataset.

At least recognise there is an ambiguity there.

[sidsixpoint7]

I agree with 95% of what he says.

The other 5 % is when he suggests anyone not taken in by religous dogma is supposed to embrace Darwnistic dogma.

[vidmanx0]

There's no such thing as Darwinistic dogma. It's called the theory of evolution and it's improving all of the time as our knowledge advances. Darwin didn't know jack compared to what we know now - he didn't even know what the hell a gene was.

All religions are 100% superstitious dogma with no evidence to support them at all. I know that's tough to deal with if you've been fed religion your whole life but it's reality.

[jeremiahsineiii]

Not quite 100% dogma. Generally, Religious belief stems from experience. Everyone has a different take. Reason is temporary, no matter which side of the coin your on: Science/Superstition. There is an argument that Science is Superstition as well. One day's Law is moot the next day.

[vidmanx0]

That's why Science changes and dogma doesn't.

[jeremiahsineiii]

But people's dogma DOES change. A brush with death, an illness, SOMETHING knocks people out of Spiritual stasis, causing growth. Now, if we define a dogma as an idea set that is unchanging so be it. The people move on. A set of rules serves a purpose for a while.

[fknnewz]

there is no argument science knows things.

go to theastronomers....org

[jeremiahsineiii]

Not really. We truly know nothing about anything. Understanding matter has escaped us. The more we know about the workings of Nature, the more we know we don't know.  We ACCEPT an Idea for a while, but it always changes. Once the world was flat, you know!

[fknnewz]

what bollocks, i know the world is round, it goes round the sun , matter is made in stars, energy cannot be created or destroyed. your ignorant of these things or chose to believe they are not knowledge. Newtons laws of motion regurlary predict the motion of matter , irrefutably, accurately, repeatedly. join me at theastronomers.....org where we will know together

[RichieCarvaliho]

- the world is ellipsoid, not round

- matter is not made in stars; stars are made of matter; mainly hydrogen and helium. the heavier elements are made in stars

- the planets go round the sun in elliptical orbits. when Newton's laws of motion are applied to the orbits of planets, they are not completely accurate and are refutable in some cases. It is only when Einstein's relativity is applied to planetary orbits that the elliptical orbits are fully explained.

[fknnewz]

the discovery that the world is "round" was made using knowledge of maths and observation.Further discussion of the more accurate knowledge that it is elliptical only proves that you are arguing from the point of view of "knowing". We know things, if not how did any of us use our computers. Post modernist deconstructionism is bollocks, we know lots of things.

[RichieCarvaliho]

- another thing, is theastronomers.....org not just an elaborate pyramid style scheme?

[fknnewz]

Multi level marketing , no different from amazon or the avon lady

[jeremiahsineiii]

Can you spell? YOU'RE, not YOUR. How do you KNOW matter is made in the stars? Is an electron matter? Can we predict where it will be in any given moment (or predict BOTH places it will be)? Am I matter? Where will I be in any given moment? My point is EVERYTHING is speculation. To think otherwise is a crock, and only limits us. I'm know religion buff, either, believe me. Both Science and Religion are crocks.

[enoche1974]

can YOU spell?

it's NO not KNOW

lololol

[fknnewz]

I can spell dick.

Nucleosynthesis, look it up , educate yourself , what am i your teacher. I speculate that you lack intellect and cannot differentiate between dialectic and apologist. I f you know nothing how did you write your comment. How did they build your computer, how did the satellites get into space. your a fkn moron.faith hasnt launched any spaceships or produced any principals of mathematics or laws of physics.

[jeremiahsineiii]

I can spell Shill. Does humanity deserve to go foul a new planet? Humanity can't even take care of its own planet. Who cares about your techie stuff? It's only needed because Humanity can't live with itself. As far as I'm concerned, your last response falls under the "Hate Speech" category. You showed me your true colors today. Farewell.

[fknnewz]

riddles and bluff, close the door quietly as you leave

[jeremiahsineiii]

There is no argument? Or no one is arguing Science knows things?

[sidsixpoint7]

I didnt mean any particular thing ie; evolution.

I meant dogma by the fact that most people (yeah I generalized) you will hear quoting or supporting Darwin also suggest they have the answers.

But they dont. It's that overt type atheism I dont like. Like die, then come back, then claim to know about god. I agree fully the religions are dogma, but to state there is def no god and we know whats up is also dogma imho

[vidmanx0]

You will very rarely hear an atheist say that there definitely is no god. There is no evidence for a god. All religions are based on wild guesses and myths. Religions are too arrogant to admit that they don't know something. Most atheists are very aware that there's a lot that we don't know.

[jeremiahsineiii]

The athiests I know say there is no god. The agnostics say there probably is.

[fknnewz]

Im an Astronomer, I say mysteries are solved by study not faith

[jdavz1803]

I tend to agree, but, study of faith has yielded relativity, algebra, and a number of other odds and ends. I think its dangerous to discount faith in its entirety, just because of the number of a-holes who've used G-d as a reason to push their own violent tendencies. All in all, though Deek, if the Jews are right, you seem to have a pretty good handle on the 7 Noachide commandments which we are believed by them to be accountable to. A lot easier than the 613 they hold themselves to, anyway.

[vidmanx0]

Well then they need to use a dictionary. An agnostic is someone who believes that we can't know whether or not there is a 'god' so they don't waste their time thinking about it.

An atheist is someone that believes, based on the available evidence, that there is no god. Should new evidence be provided, an atheist would have no problem changing their view.

Do you believe in pink unicorns? Are you agnostic about them?

[sidsixpoint7]

Hey I hear you. That rational explanation you just gave is seriously not what I normally hear. Good stuff then.

[Boxcutter7]

May be semantics, but an atheist does not have a belief that there is no god, rather they have a lack of a belief in a god.

[rblwoaclu]

every body dies....someday....