Crab Lungs Posted 14 December, 2009 Posted 14 December, 2009 Master Bates, I think I've just witnessed your wettest post ever. Very philosophical though.
Al de Man Posted 14 December, 2009 Posted 14 December, 2009 Whitey Grandad said: Why is the sky so beautifully blue if only mankind appreciates it? Rayleigh scattering. Seriously people, the sooner you all stop getting so philosophical and accept that science has already the answered 99.9% of the questions posed since the beginning of time you'll be able to get on with your lives.
Pancake Posted 14 December, 2009 Posted 14 December, 2009 Master Bates said: I must have been drunk when I wrote this. At the moment life sucks very much for me, however I must listen to what I say especially "always keep fighting". Funnily, I hadnt seen this thread before and reading it I assumed it was a new one. Chin up Bates me old mucker
Whitey Grandad Posted 14 December, 2009 Posted 14 December, 2009 Al de Man said: Rayleigh scattering. Seriously people, the sooner you all stop getting so philosophical and accept that science has already the answered 99.9% of the questions posed since the beginning of time you'll be able to get on with your lives. Ah, but that is my point! Only by asking questions can we get answers, grasshopper.
Whitey Grandad Posted 14 December, 2009 Posted 14 December, 2009 Master Bates said: I must have been drunk when I wrote this. At the moment life sucks very much for me, however I must listen to what I say especially "always keep fighting". I was onece told: 'Always remember that the Good Lord will not heap on your shoulders more than you can carry.'
Al de Man Posted 14 December, 2009 Posted 14 December, 2009 Whitey Grandad said: Only by asking questions can we get answers, grasshopper. That sounds a bit racist. If I was Chinese, I could take offence to that.
Whitey Grandad Posted 14 December, 2009 Posted 14 December, 2009 (edited) Al de Man said: That sounds a bit racist. If I was Chinese, I could take offence to that. I was only using grasshopper as an example, it could have been any other creature of the order orthoptera, or perhaps a follower of a football club in Zurich. Edited 14 December, 2009 by Whitey Grandad spelling, agian
Weston Super Saint Posted 14 December, 2009 Posted 14 December, 2009 Al de Man said: Rayleigh scattering. Seriously people, the sooner you all stop getting so philosophical and accept that science has already the answered 99.9% of the questions posed since the beginning of time you'll be able to get on with your lives. Whitey Grandad said: I was onece told: 'Always remember that the Good Lord will not heap on your shoulders more than you can carry.' You two should have a dinner party I'm wondering if it would end in a fight??
Doctoroncall Posted 14 December, 2009 Posted 14 December, 2009 Master Bates said: I must have been drunk when I wrote this. At the moment life sucks very much for me, however I must listen to what I say especially "always keep fighting". surely your porn sites can give you a bit of a lift?
Victor Posted 14 December, 2009 Posted 14 December, 2009 Al de Man said: Rayleigh scattering. Seriously people, the sooner you all stop getting so philosophical and accept that science has already the answered 99.9% of the questions posed since the beginning of time you'll be able to get on with your lives. So, tell me, when DID time begin? And what came before that? And were people asking questions as soon as time began? And were there scientists there to answer them? Correctly?
Big John Posted 14 December, 2009 Posted 14 December, 2009 Weston Super Saint said: How did / has a slug evolved to cope better? Did slugs not evolve into snails with tough shells that would protect them from things? Slugs are disgusting too meaning that they don get eaten by me, snails on the other hand are tasy (especially with garlic) and come in their own little cooking vessel (their shell), so poor old sluggy got it wrong imho.
Big John Posted 14 December, 2009 Posted 14 December, 2009 tombletomble said: Just what I was going to say. It may sound empty but the sole purpose of life for any organism on the planet is to reproduce and to pass our genes on to their next vehicle Sounds like a good explanation, also in the process we destroy as much and as many other species as possible. Is it just 'survival' or survival 'at all costs'? If the former then then we would be a lot more docile and if the latter then we would start messing with that DNA stuff that really could unravel it al, or perhaps the answer is so beyond our understanding that many can't cope with the truth, like God.
Whitey Grandad Posted 14 December, 2009 Posted 14 December, 2009 Victor said: So, tell me, when DID time begin? And what came before that? And were people asking questions as soon as time began? And were there scientists there to answer them? Correctly? The question has no meaning and therefore no answer. Before time began there was no time.
Ludwig Posted 14 December, 2009 Posted 14 December, 2009 Al de Man said: Rayleigh scattering. Seriously people, the sooner you all stop getting so philosophical and accept that science has already the answered 99.9% of the questions posed since the beginning of time you'll be able to get on with your lives. Utter tripe. From what sort of questioning did the natural sciences as we know them develop from? You tell me.
Whitey Grandad Posted 14 December, 2009 Posted 14 December, 2009 Quote Utter tripe. From what sort of questioning did the natural sciences as we know them develop from? You tell me. Which part? I think you'll find that Rayleigh scattering is the commonly accepted reason for the sky being blue and not that God is a Pompey fan, which is so preposterous that we can discount it without further discussion.
Ludwig Posted 14 December, 2009 Posted 14 December, 2009 Whitey Grandad said: Which part? I think you'll find that Rayleigh scattering is the commonly accepted reason for the sky being blue and not that God is a Pompey fan, which is so preposterous that we can discount it without further discussion. The claim that any philosophical inquiry is pointless and this so-called 'science' is the only thing able to claim knowledge of anything. (I'm not disputing Rayleigh scattering)
Robsk II Posted 14 December, 2009 Posted 14 December, 2009 There is no meaning, fools. The closest one there is is 'breeding', or Sartre-esque existentialism in making your own.
Ludwig Posted 14 December, 2009 Posted 14 December, 2009 Robsk II said: There is no meaning, fools. The closest one there is is 'breeding', or Sartre-esque existentialism in making your own. no no no. Existentialism can go away. Meaning is use.
Whitey Grandad Posted 14 December, 2009 Posted 14 December, 2009 Quote The claim that any philosophical inquiry is pointless and this so-called 'science' is the only thing able to claim knowledge of anything. (I'm not disputing Rayleigh scattering) But what is the point of rhetorical questions?
Ludwig Posted 14 December, 2009 Posted 14 December, 2009 Whitey Grandad said: But what is the point of rhetorical questions? If that's all you think Philosophy is, you are sorely mistaken. (And very funny, also)
Master Bates Posted 13 January, 2010 Author Posted 13 January, 2010 Either way, tis a sad life to go through
Verbal Posted 13 January, 2010 Posted 13 January, 2010 Ludwig said: The watchmaker analogy is awful in my opinion. That's what Dawkins says. Or worse: the idea of a watchmaker is wrong.
Verbal Posted 13 January, 2010 Posted 13 January, 2010 Master Bates said: Either way, tis a sad life to go through Even if, as someone quite rightly said, it's all about sex?
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now