Geno

gj

You clearly asserted that the biggest thing science had given us was the atom bomb. I think that statement shows a lack of perspective. In tandem with the enourmous leap forward in technology there has been a great increase in social awareness, equality and acceptance. Sporting achievements have also reached new hights, in this information age, as more people than ever are inspired to challenge themselves with the rapid sharing of information and records, that previously only a small minority of well connected people were privvy to. These facts seem to naturally refute your unsupported assertion that people have got lazier with technology. In fact, it seems that we are getting more innovative. As for the premature judgement on my character, I can only say that you are plain wrong.

Lol, legit made me laugh at parm. Keep em up, it's a nice thing to have in the community.

Oh man, I cannot believe you just said that LOL. You are using a computer, with the Internet, in a home that is heated on an electronic grid system probably with a TV plugged in, with Sky or a different satellite channel, when you go out to do your shopping in your car, which uses petrol or electricity and use your card to check out at the till and then go home and unwrap a shrink wrapped pizza or warm up a meal in the microwave you are using scientific inventions of the last 150 years. Please never, ever say that the biggest thing science gave us was the bomb. It makes you look cauliflower. Legit reminded me of the "what have the Romans ever done for us scene" in monty python's life or Brian

I think that mid understanding (and difference in definition) is precisely why attempting to understand the universe is so worthwhile.

Cool, looking forward to ur reply.

*human change, sorry should have made that clearer

I agree, I think we really do see faith differently. For me, going to the most extreme absence of faith, I would find science. I think you find both religion and science to have an equal value stake in faith.

I reject the statement of the need for these laws. The laws exist to better understand and explain in greater detail, the universe in which we live. Faith is taking as red that the universe will exist in the same state that it is now, tomorrow. Science, leaves the possibility of change.

Nono, faith is blind. Faith is taking something as true, with no evidence. That isn't what The scientific method advocates. More often times than not scientists have trouble fitting laws to their observational data, to establish models for phenomena that exist by implication or observtion. The including of implication is a reference to things that cannot be seen, but only implied. The existance of the Higgs boson, for example. Science is precisely the opposite to faith because it requires evidence beyond doubt, where faith requires doubt to establish a flimsy paradigm of "truth".

Without faith, then, what do you have? Answer: The realisation that everything in life does not simply work itself out the way it "should" be. This simple premace makes it necessary to work, to strive to understand and better yourself. That is true selfishness, however the results of this selfishness can often be used for very unselfish ends. Newton was an arrogant and bombastic man. He was hard to work with and very temperamental, however his laws have been used for 300 years to better understand the universe in which we live and to advance mankind. I doubt, sincerely that he simply sat back and presumed the laws he worked out would write themselves.

If you really think that this universe is incomprehensible then you are thoroughly deluded. Again, the cop out that most religionists tout, comes to the fore in your assessment of the universe; that it is simply too large to understand. This is patently untrue. In 1687 Isaac Newton published Principia Mathematica. In this document was included his first two laws of motion, from which the basics of modern mechanics are built on. These laws were found to hold true anywhere in the universe, apart from at a sub-atomic level, where quantum mechanics comes into play, and at an event horizon, where the known laws of physics do not seem to apply. You are [bold]atleast[/bold] 300 years behind modernity if you still think the universe cannot be explained my mathematics, physics and philosophy.

This pretty much underlines the difference in rhetoric between "the god side" and Atheists. Atheists havn't declared war on anything. They simply think the idea of god is degrading to the human race and over the years cost many more human lives than it has saved. "The god side", on the other hand, does declare war on people, atheists, for one are a constant target of the modern, active "warriors of god" - the jihadists, but throughout history, the people who have suffered most to the hands of these warriors, have usually been those of different faiths. As faith has proliferated less and less, violence due to faith has also gone down, from the warlike civilization of medieval western europe crusading (because the pope, a mere man, ordered them to) against the muslims in the levant, to the ethnic cleansings in Africa by the christian colonialists, and then later by the new african christians against the moorish muslims, we see that violence in certain areas has decreased in proportion to religion easing its grip. Europe is far less christian - and far less violent. Africa, however, is very religious, very intollerent against homosexuality, and right now is locked in bitter civil war, where boku haram is seeking to spread jihad over a large area. Aside from the human argument against the existance of a mighty, omniscient, all forgiving and very vengeful, sky man who favours only the people who follow him, there is the philosophical one. In short, science has gotten us to a stage where we can show things and predict phenomina exceptionally accurately using instruments and frameworks invented by man. Numbers, algebra, the LHC, are all examples of thing that humans have invented to better understand the universe we live in. Slowly questions are being answered, 100 years ago we didn't know what happened inside an atom. Now we know the inside of the atom is far more complex than we could have ever dreamed. Science pushes forward, however, to find theories that fit their data, and to simply cop out and say "oh its all the vengeful sky man, do not attempt to understand his mystery", isn't good enough. Putting our lives and this universe simply down to faith, isn't good enough. That, as an atheist, is what I have against god.

Idk why this was posted given that we left after 2 rounds because 8 people were hit offline over two rounds. Gf, ty for prep.

gj both sides, shame about the h8.

rip

youz know i mean it

really nice vid

nice hits o.O gz

I'm giggling now m8, at your attempts to seem relevant. (22:31:11) <`3at> go defend (22:31:13) <`3at> And I'll rush you (22:31:17) <`3at> I'm right ontop of you guys. (22:31:43) <`3at> hello (22:31:43) <`3at> ? (22:31:46) <`3at> are you defending (22:31:50) <Yuzaname> sec (22:32:29) <Yuzaname> u def (22:32:30) <Yuzaname> u have more (22:40:34) <Yuzaname> `3at r u still out (22:44:41) <`3at> just fought foe (22:44:42) <`3at> ending now

Standard response when you have nothing relevant to say. Stay irrelevant.

Following the horrendous example of your broccolied relatives, I see; posting fake logs, refusing to fight us matched (or even up 5). Next you will be running around p2p multi with the ZU scout unit walking you to edgy, or maybe you will be pulling 20s after losing a rivalry with us.....who knows, you might start hitting off our ranks if you ever nut up and prep us (god forbid you would ever fight us matched). You are pretty clueless, and are showing your ineptitude very well with topics like these.

Rekt everything today

unless your MMR is an entire League (atleast) above where you were at season end, you will, most likely, go down ranks in placements.