17 of 26
17
Is Atheism doomed to extinction?
Posted: 16 November 2012 05:46 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 241 ]
Moderator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7593
Joined  2007-03-02
arielmessenger - 15 November 2012 01:23 PM

This is getting to be a bother. I compose my usual posts only to see them disappear
when I hit the submit button to never appear on the forum. Suspiciously like censorship
but unevenly applied…so far.

I note in the responses posted that none of you atheists are really comprehending your
philosophy is dead now. I destroyed it by merely pointing out it’s irrational foundation,
namely believing human knowledge stands still at the atheist’s era and never progresses
further. In our universe the concept of infinite numbers exists as does the concept of
infinite time and space. There are several competing cosmological theories about how
the universe operates since the Big Bang beginning. For many years the Steady State
theory was most popular. Then the Big Bang theory eclipsed that one and now there’s
several ideas on how the expanding universe “ends”, expands to nothingness or
collapses back on itself. I see because my posting suggests a recycled universe atheists
here are claiming the endless expansion model in true ego-defending modality that
doesn’t want to face what I present: The End Times of Atheism.

I’ll take you through the logical steps again. Baby steps for you: 1. In our universe infinity
is a mathematical conception where mathematical formulations are foundational to the
coherent organization of time and space. No human being knows for certain how the universe
began or how it will end if it does end. What is known is that we are following an arrow of time
that has a beginning but an unknown end. What is also known is that in our human time frame
we humans have made astonishing advances over the rest of the animal kingdom as we have
evolved to become the ruling species on the planet. In the last 200 years rather fantastic
scientific progress has occurred that has given human beings powers and abilities that any
human being coming from the ancient past would consider the powers of gods or God.

The logic of history then points to humankind progressing in knowledge and powers through
time and thus things that were considered mysteries of God only a century ago by most people
are routinely explained to school children in our times. Recently brain science has revealed that
the human brain is hardwired to experience spiritual events. Nature has evolved in the human
brain the ability to register some sort of invisible force that is identifiable by its signature results
in human beings—they report spiritual contact and some come away with products from that
contact, visions and revelations that also identify the Source by common themes appearing in
different people’s revelations. Atheists want to say that this spiritual reception ability is bogus,
doesn’t exist but there’s no proof of this and on contrary, there are thousands of reports of
spiritual experiences by people in the written record and even a set of physical manifestations
showing a common human experience regardless of time or location. I was an atheist, science-
explains all-type of guy up until age 35 when I went through my own three day Road to Damascus
spiritual awakening so I’m familiar with the atheist mindset as God has sent a thief to catch a
thief so to speak. I have experienced spiritual contact with God and have seen spiritual reality
that underpins the whole material universe. I have felt the waves of spiritual energy come through
my body and brain producing characteristic shaking which is where Shakers and Quakers got their
names. I have sweated profusely like Muhammad did when spiritual visions came to me with
their astonishing revelations of an unseen world of Archetypes being played out in our lives. I
have seen what Hindus call “maya” the world as illusion, and us merely actors acting out archetypal
dramas in a grand Play we call existence. In short, I have spiritual experience and know that end of
my argument for the logic of human history and the progress of knowledge eventually propelling
humankind into gods or God for all intents and purposes. And this is what is predicted in my Gnostic
Christian religion. A return to our roots in the Godhead. In the Biblical tradition this happens at the
“End of Days” or the end of time and space.

Has it registered yet? The death of atheist philosophy? The logic of infinity and the logic of history
killed it by exposing its fundamental irrationality that “believes” without any proof and against all
logic that human science, human knowledge is frozen at the time of the atheist and nothing new
ever gets discovered. We’ve already created a model for how gods can be created. Anyone who’s seen
the 1956(?) movie Forbidden Planet, the proto-type for the later Star Treks series, saw how the ancient
Krell had tapped the power of their planet’s nuclear reaction core to create the “Krell Machine” which
could transform thought into matter. And that is the definition of a god and the actual theology found
in Gnosticism that posits Creation as the materialization of thought of God.

Now will this post or disappear?

Humm…  Sounds to me, if it were possible, you need to talk to Einstein.  However, living scientists, such a Neil de Grasse Tyson, would work well too.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6oxTMUTOz0w

And one of my favourites by him:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6RjW5-4IiSc

 Signature 

Mriana
“Sometimes in order to see the light, you have to risk the dark.” ~ Iris Hineman (Lois Smith) The Minority Report

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 November 2012 05:58 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 242 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4843
Joined  2007-10-05

Arielmessenger,

You are mistaken in everything you say. You are ignorant of science and form conclusions based on your ignorance, then act haughty when proclaiming atheism is dead. You ignore us when we point out where you have your facts wrong. Further debate with you is pointless.

Also, quit whining about the forum software deleting your posts. We all have problems like that occasionally. Some of us are smart enough to copy our posts to the clipboard before submitting them, just in case something goes wrong. Some of us even compose longer posts in a text editor outside the forum software then copy and paste them to submit.

Thirdly, your reference to Forbidden Planet as proof mankind will keep advancing until we can transform thought into matter is beyond ridiculous, it is idiotic. I can refer to any number of science fiction movies or books as proof that mankind will destroy society and barely scratch out an existence on a wasted planet.

Your posts reveal you as a textbook example of the Dunning-Kruger Effect.

[ Edited: 16 November 2012 06:01 AM by DarronS ]
 Signature 

You cannot have a rational conversation with someone who holds irrational beliefs.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 November 2012 06:00 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 243 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2698
Joined  2011-04-24
sobpatrick - 14 November 2012 05:07 PM
Equal Opportunity Curmudgeon - 14 November 2012 04:34 PM

Good points.

No, they’re not.

I’ve never understood the atheist mindset

Atheism is a blank slate. Null program. A lack of belief. A baby is an atheist in that a baby is a blank slate with a lack of belief.

We’ve explained all of this to you before. What element in the above sequence escapes you?

Do you really think all atheist share your definition of atheism? I know 4 people who call themselves atheist - none of whom define it as you do - most just dislike religion and repeat - “there’s no God” when asked about what they believe.  And of course a non-belief is a belief in itself - what is it that you don’t believe?

Any intelligent atheist will share that definition, because that is the definition of atheism.

Why don’t you accept that you don’t know what you’re talking about;  you are essentially a person of faith - not reason.

 Signature 

Raise your glass if you’re wrong…. in all the right ways.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 November 2012 06:08 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 244 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2698
Joined  2011-04-24
dansmith62 - 15 November 2012 09:06 AM

Where do you see a contradiction between modern theism and science? I’m not talking about dark ages theism based on superstition.

Theism is about faith and science is about reason. Two fundamentally different things.

A rationalist knows that there may be some type of “higher being”, but there is no evidence for it. Our existence can be explained physically

Therefore, it’s not necessary to speculate that deities are in control.

 Signature 

Raise your glass if you’re wrong…. in all the right ways.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 November 2012 06:14 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 245 ]
Moderator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7593
Joined  2007-03-02
DarronS - 16 November 2012 05:58 AM

Arielmessenger,

Thirdly, your reference to Forbidden Planet as proof mankind will keep advancing until we can transform thought into matter is beyond ridiculous, it is idiotic. I can refer to any number of science fiction movies or books as proof that mankind will destroy society and barely scratch out an existence on a wasted planet.

Your posts reveal you as a textbook example of the Dunning-Kruger Effect.

I should have caught that one too.  The thing about Gene Roddenberry is that he, at one time, worked for NASA and was in the military, so he knew some of the real science and created science fiction around it- thus the communicators—> cell phones.  Such things were already in the works.  Although, he did make up transporters and some scientists/engineers/technology people are working on such a thing, but that is rare for it to go the other way.

That is talking about technology though and not the ridiculous storyline that arielmessenger mentions.  S/he really needs to separate science fiction from science fact.  A storyline is a storyline, but the science fiction technology MIGHT have SOME bases in reality.  This writing technique is a means to make the storyline more believable to the reader/viewer, which is something else arielmessenger needs to learn about too.

 Signature 

Mriana
“Sometimes in order to see the light, you have to risk the dark.” ~ Iris Hineman (Lois Smith) The Minority Report

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 November 2012 06:19 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 246 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2698
Joined  2011-04-24
arielmessenger - 15 November 2012 01:23 PM

This is getting to be a bother. I compose my usual posts only to see them disappear
when I hit the submit button to never appear on the forum. Suspiciously like censorship
but unevenly applied…so far.

I note in the responses posted that none of you atheists are really comprehending your
philosophy is dead now. I destroyed it by merely pointing out it’s irrational foundation,
namely believing human knowledge stands still at the atheist’s era and never progresses
further. In our universe the concept of infinite numbers exists as does the concept of
infinite time and space. There are several competing cosmological theories about how
the universe operates since the Big Bang beginning. For many years the Steady State
theory was most popular. Then the Big Bang theory eclipsed that one and now there’s
several ideas on how the expanding universe “ends”, expands to nothingness or
collapses back on itself. I see because my posting suggests a recycled universe atheists
here are claiming the endless expansion model in true ego-defending modality that
doesn’t want to face what I present: The End Times of Atheism.

I’ll take you through the logical steps again. Baby steps for you: 1. In our universe infinity
is a mathematical conception where mathematical formulations are foundational to the
coherent organization of time and space. No human being knows for certain how the universe
began or how it will end if it does end. What is known is that we are following an arrow of time
that has a beginning but an unknown end. What is also known is that in our human time frame
we humans have made astonishing advances over the rest of the animal kingdom as we have
evolved to become the ruling species on the planet. In the last 200 years rather fantastic
scientific progress has occurred that has given human beings powers and abilities that any
human being coming from the ancient past would consider the powers of gods or God.

The logic of history then points to humankind progressing in knowledge and powers through
time and thus things that were considered mysteries of God only a century ago by most people
are routinely explained to school children in our times. Recently brain science has revealed that
the human brain is hardwired to experience spiritual events. Nature has evolved in the human
brain the ability to register some sort of invisible force that is identifiable by its signature results
in human beings—they report spiritual contact and some come away with products from that
contact, visions and revelations that also identify the Source by common themes appearing in
different people’s revelations. Atheists want to say that this spiritual reception ability is bogus,
doesn’t exist but there’s no proof of this and on contrary, there are thousands of reports of
spiritual experiences by people in the written record and even a set of physical manifestations
showing a common human experience regardless of time or location. I was an atheist, science-
explains all-type of guy up until age 35 when I went through my own three day Road to Damascus
spiritual awakening so I’m familiar with the atheist mindset as God has sent a thief to catch a
thief so to speak. I have experienced spiritual contact with God and have seen spiritual reality
that underpins the whole material universe. I have felt the waves of spiritual energy come through
my body and brain producing characteristic shaking which is where Shakers and Quakers got their
names. I have sweated profusely like Muhammad did when spiritual visions came to me with
their astonishing revelations of an unseen world of Archetypes being played out in our lives. I
have seen what Hindus call “maya” the world as illusion, and us merely actors acting out archetypal
dramas in a grand Play we call existence. In short, I have spiritual experience and know that end of
my argument for the logic of human history and the progress of knowledge eventually propelling
humankind into gods or God for all intents and purposes. And this is what is predicted in my Gnostic
Christian religion. A return to our roots in the Godhead. In the Biblical tradition this happens at the
“End of Days” or the end of time and space.

Has it registered yet? The death of atheist philosophy? The logic of infinity and the logic of history
killed it by exposing its fundamental irrationality that “believes” without any proof and against all
logic that human science, human knowledge is frozen at the time of the atheist and nothing new
ever gets discovered. We’ve already created a model for how gods can be created. Anyone who’s seen
the 1956(?) movie Forbidden Planet, the proto-type for the later Star Treks series, saw how the ancient
Krell had tapped the power of their planet’s nuclear reaction core to create the “Krell Machine” which
could transform thought into matter. And that is the definition of a god and the actual theology found
in Gnosticism that posits Creation as the materialization of thought of God.

Now will this post or disappear?

It will disappear because we hate you for exposing our evil atheistic cabal. We will go to any lengths to deny the truth of a spiritual realm.

The reason???  We atheists are sore losers. smirk


To be serious, the fact that you think you’re being censored, shows a sense of paranoia with you.  And the movies and folk tales you cite as proof are not helping your case.

 Signature 

Raise your glass if you’re wrong…. in all the right ways.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 November 2012 07:47 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 247 ]
Member
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  101
Joined  2010-12-02
Thevillageatheist - 15 November 2012 07:43 PM

I don’t think I mentioned God - just the supernatural.  Take what you want from it.  Maybe you’ll be lucky enough to experience something similar one day.


Already have. Want to hear it?

 

Cap’t Jacj

cool - love to hear it.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 November 2012 07:58 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 248 ]
Member
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  101
Joined  2010-12-02
mid atlantic - 16 November 2012 06:00 AM
sobpatrick - 14 November 2012 05:07 PM
Equal Opportunity Curmudgeon - 14 November 2012 04:34 PM

Good points.

No, they’re not.

I’ve never understood the atheist mindset

Atheism is a blank slate. Null program. A lack of belief. A baby is an atheist in that a baby is a blank slate with a lack of belief.

We’ve explained all of this to you before. What element in the above sequence escapes you?

Do you really think all atheist share your definition of atheism? I know 4 people who call themselves atheist - none of whom define it as you do - most just dislike religion and repeat - “there’s no God” when asked about what they believe.  And of course a non-belief is a belief in itself - what is it that you don’t believe?

Any intelligent atheist will share that definition, because that is the definition of atheism.

Why don’t you accept that you don’t know what you’re talking about;  you are essentially a person of faith - not reason.

Seriously? You actually think that all intelligent people who call themselves atheist share this definition? (wikipedia has a slightly different one) - whatever.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 November 2012 07:59 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 249 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3058
Joined  2010-04-26
sobpatrick - 15 November 2012 10:59 AM

Don’t you think every person is the centre of their own universe?

rolleyes

 Signature 

“In the end nature is horrific and teaches us nothing.” -Mutual of Omicron

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 November 2012 09:08 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 250 ]
Jr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  71
Joined  2012-11-13
Mriana - 16 November 2012 06:14 AM
DarronS - 16 November 2012 05:58 AM

Arielmessenger,

Thirdly, your reference to Forbidden Planet as proof mankind will keep advancing until we can transform thought into matter is beyond ridiculous, it is idiotic. I can refer to any number of science fiction movies or books as proof that mankind will destroy society and barely scratch out an existence on a wasted planet.

Your posts reveal you as a textbook example of the Dunning-Kruger Effect.

I should have caught that one too.  The thing about Gene Roddenberry is that he, at one time, worked for NASA and was in the military, so he knew some of the real science and created science fiction around it- thus the communicators—> cell phones.  Such things were already in the works.  Although, he did make up transporters and some scientists/engineers/technology people are working on such a thing, but that is rare for it to go the other way.

That is talking about technology though and not the ridiculous storyline that arielmessenger mentions.  S/he really needs to separate science fiction from science fact.  A storyline is a storyline, but the science fiction technology MIGHT have SOME bases in reality.  This writing technique is a means to make the storyline more believable to the reader/viewer, which is something else arielmessenger needs to learn about too.

This is getting hilarious! Now we have atheists saying science fiction is bad technology! Do you guys know what you’re saying? I mean you’re really thrashing around
for excuses for avoiding looking rationally at my conclusive judgment of atheism. Please, if we are to continue this discussion some of you have got to start thinking
rationally. For starters; science fiction has often been predictive of science facts for decades as any intelligent person knows and to try to say this isn’t so just to attack
my use of a predictive concept in a film more than a half century old now is only your fundamentalist mindset in operation out to block your ears from hearing anything
that counters the Belief System held exactly like a Mormon fundie. I mean even Star Trek which is glorified because it had “real” science guy writing it owes its debt to
Forbidden Planet which first modeled the Enterprise type of plot line. Science fiction is the way humans prevision their future now. What was science fiction yesterday is science fact today but here because that reality counters the atheist argument it is tossed in the garbage can and out come “you’re science facts are all wrong” as if you people were astro-physicists yourselves and knew the future of science discoveries before they happen so you can say decisively now in 2012 that the ability to turn thought into matter is “silly”, a “ridiculous storyline”, etc, etc,. And in 1812 asking anyone if men could fly in the sky like birds would receive the same answer, “silly”, absurd idea”, “like saying men could walk on the moon..”...

I await for logic to strike your consciousness and see that you really cannot avoid the logic of my argument that destroys atheism as a rational philosophy. The future does in all your attempts to stop human knowledge from advancing. This forever wipes out the foundation of atheist belief because atheism cannot use science as it tries so hard to do to back up its position because the only truly scientific approach to spiritual phenomena is the agnostic position which follows the scientific method while atheism does not and is held as a fundamentalist belief system. And please note here that I am addressing the core ideological foundation of the atheist philosophy as logically deduced from the definition of the word itself: “without God”, i.e., no fuzziness in definition trying to slide atheism into agnosticism with “weak” “hard”, etc, I’m not interested in the nuances but in the core concept “there is no god” which is a conclusion that can only be held by a fundamentalist mindset for the reasons I been giving all along, the logic of infinity and the logic of history.

[ Edited: 16 November 2012 09:13 AM by arielmessenger ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 November 2012 07:38 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 251 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4843
Joined  2007-10-05
arielmessenger - 16 November 2012 09:08 AM

This is getting hilarious! Now we have atheists saying science fiction is bad technology!

I find it amazing someone can be so wrong about everything. I never said SciFi is bad technology. Have you ever read The Postman?

Did you bother to read the links I provided about the accelerating universe?

You are an amazing example of the Dunning-Kruger effect.

 Signature 

You cannot have a rational conversation with someone who holds irrational beliefs.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 November 2012 08:22 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 252 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1283
Joined  2011-03-12

Seriously? You actually think that all intelligent people who call themselves atheist share this definition? (wikipedia has a slightly different one) - whatever.

So what? Just because Wikipedia sez it, doesn’t mean it’s so.

This is getting hilarious! Now we have atheists saying science fiction is bad technology! Do you guys know what you’re saying? I mean you’re really thrashing around
for excuses for avoiding looking rationally at my conclusive judgment of atheism.

You’re confusing fiction for real science, which is conclusive proof that you have no grasp of reality.

 Signature 

Question authority and think for yourself. Big Brother does not know best and never has.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 November 2012 08:49 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 253 ]
Moderator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7593
Joined  2007-03-02
arielmessenger - 16 November 2012 09:08 AM
Mriana - 16 November 2012 06:14 AM
DarronS - 16 November 2012 05:58 AM

Arielmessenger,

Thirdly, your reference to Forbidden Planet as proof mankind will keep advancing until we can transform thought into matter is beyond ridiculous, it is idiotic. I can refer to any number of science fiction movies or books as proof that mankind will destroy society and barely scratch out an existence on a wasted planet.

Your posts reveal you as a textbook example of the Dunning-Kruger Effect.

I should have caught that one too.  The thing about Gene Roddenberry is that he, at one time, worked for NASA and was in the military, so he knew some of the real science and created science fiction around it- thus the communicators—> cell phones.  Such things were already in the works.  Although, he did make up transporters and some scientists/engineers/technology people are working on such a thing, but that is rare for it to go the other way.

That is talking about technology though and not the ridiculous storyline that arielmessenger mentions.  S/he really needs to separate science fiction from science fact.  A storyline is a storyline, but the science fiction technology MIGHT have SOME bases in reality.  This writing technique is a means to make the storyline more believable to the reader/viewer, which is something else arielmessenger needs to learn about too.

This is getting hilarious! Now we have atheists saying science fiction is bad technology!

I did not say it was “bad technology”, I said it was science fiction and not science fact.  There is a big difference and you’re putting words in people’s mouths.

For starters; science fiction has often been predictive of science facts for decades as any intelligent person knows

No, it’s not predictive.  As I said, Gene Roddenberry worked with NASA and was in the military.  There was no prediction.  He had an idea of what they were working on and fictionalized what they were doing.  Again, you put words in people mouths.

Science fiction is the way humans prevision their future now. What was science fiction yesterday is science fact today

Only for the common people who can’t tell what was fiction and what was fact.  The communicator of TOS was not prediction, but a fictional version of what technology was working one at the time.  It seems to me you’re not understanding what people are saying, as well as the difference between sci-fi and science fact.

 Signature 

Mriana
“Sometimes in order to see the light, you have to risk the dark.” ~ Iris Hineman (Lois Smith) The Minority Report

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 November 2012 09:41 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 254 ]
Jr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  71
Joined  2012-11-13
Mriana - 16 November 2012 06:14 AM
DarronS - 16 November 2012 05:58 AM

Arielmessenger,

Thirdly, your reference to Forbidden Planet as proof mankind will keep advancing until we can transform thought into matter is beyond ridiculous, it is idiotic. I can refer to any number of science fiction movies or books as proof that mankind will destroy society and barely scratch out an existence on a wasted planet.

Your posts reveal you as a textbook example of the Dunning-Kruger Effect.

I should have caught that one too.  The thing about Gene Roddenberry is that he, at one time, worked for NASA and was in the military, so he knew some of the real science and created science fiction around it- thus the communicators—> cell phones.  Such things were already in the works.  Although, he did make up transporters and some scientists/engineers/technology people are working on such a thing, but that is rare for it to go the other way.

That is talking about technology though and not the ridiculous storyline that arielmessenger mentions.  S/he really needs to separate science fiction from science fact.  A storyline is a storyline, but the science fiction technology MIGHT have SOME bases in reality.  This writing technique is a means to make the storyline more believable to the reader/viewer, which is something else arielmessenger needs to learn about too.

The biography of Gene Roddenberry, Star Trek Creator, notes that Forbidden Planet was one of the inspirations for the series Star Trek.[18] The Doctor Who story Planet of Evil was consciously based partly on Forbidden Planet.[19]...A scene from the science fiction television series Babylon 5, set on the Epsilon III Great Machine bridge, strongly resembles the Krell Great Machine. While this was not the intent of the show’s producer, the special effects crew tasked with creating the imagery stated that the Krell Great Machine was a deliberate reference to their Epsilon III homage.[22]—Wikipedia

So much for your big NASA Star Trek creator with his “real science”. Really, you guys and gal are scrapping the barrel trying to slander me, even slander the inspiration of your own “real science” guy in order to not answer my destruction of atheist philosophy. Slander is not a reasoned defense of your ideology. You’ve
got to prove that science stands still, human knowledge never advances beyond today’s date, science knows all about everything right now, and prophetic voices don’t exist, Leonardo never made any helicopter plans, the Wreck of the Titan was never written and the Titanic was mothballed after 70 years of faithful service.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 November 2012 09:49 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 255 ]
Moderator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7593
Joined  2007-03-02
arielmessenger - 16 November 2012 09:41 PM
Mriana - 16 November 2012 06:14 AM
DarronS - 16 November 2012 05:58 AM

Arielmessenger,

Thirdly, your reference to Forbidden Planet as proof mankind will keep advancing until we can transform thought into matter is beyond ridiculous, it is idiotic. I can refer to any number of science fiction movies or books as proof that mankind will destroy society and barely scratch out an existence on a wasted planet.

Your posts reveal you as a textbook example of the Dunning-Kruger Effect.

I should have caught that one too.  The thing about Gene Roddenberry is that he, at one time, worked for NASA and was in the military, so he knew some of the real science and created science fiction around it- thus the communicators—> cell phones.  Such things were already in the works.  Although, he did make up transporters and some scientists/engineers/technology people are working on such a thing, but that is rare for it to go the other way.

That is talking about technology though and not the ridiculous storyline that arielmessenger mentions.  S/he really needs to separate science fiction from science fact.  A storyline is a storyline, but the science fiction technology MIGHT have SOME bases in reality.  This writing technique is a means to make the storyline more believable to the reader/viewer, which is something else arielmessenger needs to learn about too.

The biography of Gene Roddenberry, Star Trek Creator, notes that Forbidden Planet was one of the inspirations for the series Star Trek.[18] The Doctor Who story Planet of Evil was consciously based partly on Forbidden Planet.[19]...A scene from the science fiction television series Babylon 5, set on the Epsilon III Great Machine bridge, strongly resembles the Krell Great Machine. While this was not the intent of the show’s producer, the special effects crew tasked with creating the imagery stated that the Krell Great Machine was a deliberate reference to their Epsilon III homage.[22]—Wikipedia

So much for your big NASA Star Trek creator with his “real science”. Really, you guys and gal are scrapping the barrel trying to slander me, even slander the inspiration of your own “real science” guy in order to not answer my destruction of atheist philosophy. Slander is not a reasoned defense of your ideology. You’ve
got to prove that science stands still, human knowledge never advances beyond today’s date, science knows all about everything right now, and prophetic voices don’t exist, Leonardo never made any helicopter plans, the Wreck of the Titan was never written and the Titanic was mothballed after 70 years of faithful service.

Wickedpedia is not always right and sometimes written by people who think they know.  Tried reading his authorized biography, instead of reading Wickedpedia.

 Signature 

Mriana
“Sometimes in order to see the light, you have to risk the dark.” ~ Iris Hineman (Lois Smith) The Minority Report

Profile
 
 
   
17 of 26
17