tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-226103369043606765.post2067590191686901699..comments2024-03-29T05:22:27.348-07:00Comments on Banned by HWA! News and Observations About Armstrongism and the Church of God Movement: Dear Cartoon Bob: Call me. Sincerely-Lawrence M. KraussNO2HWAhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02018654662518613623noreply@blogger.comBlogger48125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-226103369043606765.post-13309098445222607252018-05-20T19:31:03.727-07:002018-05-20T19:31:03.727-07:00Could you enumerate all 25 possible explanations f...Could you enumerate all 25 possible explanations for us here? Unlike the scientists, we seem to have all manner of time here, and I for one find this fascinating. If you know more than the basic Doppler theory, by all means, please share! There’s also blue.<br /><br />BBByker Bobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15602697337552385535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-226103369043606765.post-25657544663895289212018-05-20T19:22:38.140-07:002018-05-20T19:22:38.140-07:00"The bandwagon fallacy applies to those who t..."The bandwagon fallacy applies to those who think that something is true because most scientists believe it. There are often other scientists, lesser known, with different views."<br /><br />Here's one:<br /><br />http://geraldschroeder.com/wordpress/?page_id=211Ronconoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-226103369043606765.post-77957044204857355742018-05-20T17:47:44.149-07:002018-05-20T17:47:44.149-07:00The typical cosmologist does not have time to inve...The typical cosmologist does not have time to investigate all 25 possible explanations for the red shift, so he just "goes with the flow" and hopes that the majority opinion is correct. <br /><br />This kind of thing happens a lot. Nobody really seems to know how much of what scientists think is true is really accurate. In fact, it might be unknowable, since there seems to be no objective process for finding out. <br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-226103369043606765.post-14238748974744929382018-05-20T17:43:54.172-07:002018-05-20T17:43:54.172-07:00The bandwagon fallacy applies to those who think t...The bandwagon fallacy applies to those who think that something is true because most scientists believe it. There are often other scientists, lesser known, with different views. <br /> <br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-226103369043606765.post-78899347481723517482018-05-20T14:57:16.670-07:002018-05-20T14:57:16.670-07:00Ha! True. Its corn based instead of wheat, so if y...Ha! True. Its corn based instead of wheat, so if you go for a preColumbian diet, you've got it made!RSKhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06427255805476848046noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-226103369043606765.post-30955596011395532032018-05-20T12:04:14.771-07:002018-05-20T12:04:14.771-07:00Hey, I was just thinking. If everyone ate Mexica...Hey, I was just thinking. If everyone ate Mexican food, you wouldn’t have to do the Rye Krisp and Matzo thingie if you happened to keep a certain Old Covenant festival. Tortillas taste so much better! Flan is also a delicious desert, and isn’t puffed. <br /><br />BBByker Bobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15602697337552385535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-226103369043606765.post-5809321942397284682018-05-19T19:09:15.312-07:002018-05-19T19:09:15.312-07:00I don’t sell out, I share. And, I relish the powe...I don’t sell out, I share. And, I relish the power that I have over you to really piss you off in reminding you that I was married into the Mexican community, and really got to imbibe of the culture. In the early stages of recovery from Armstrongism, friends from different cultures are very important. They don’t see you as being weird or a pariah like people from your own race do. <br /><br />Besides, if you need a birthright to have a sense of value as a human being, what good are you in the first place? That’s like Dave Pack, where he’s got to trace his ancestry through kingly, priestly lines to establish credibility. My work every day for my customers establishes mine.<br /><br />Mark Armstrong, Steve Bannon, and President Trump can’t rob me of the ways in which I’ve been enriched by multi-culturalism. So glad I got to live during the best era of history!<br /><br />BBByker Bobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15602697337552385535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-226103369043606765.post-52552994527906322542018-05-19T18:54:42.783-07:002018-05-19T18:54:42.783-07:00According to Krauss, if God is not needed, then Go...According to Krauss, if God is not needed, then God does not exist. <br /><br />Well, I say, what do I need Krauss for? Nothing! Stephen Hawking said it all already! So Krauss does not exist! Dennis just made him up. <br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-226103369043606765.post-57015295365419843572018-05-19T18:54:28.520-07:002018-05-19T18:54:28.520-07:00Man, you are really missing out, Bubba! I enjoyed...Man, you are really missing out, Bubba! I enjoyed hearing the Mexican ladies at the restaurant speak Spanish, and loved their smiles. Really sent my day in a positive direction. <br /><br />BBByker Bobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15602697337552385535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-226103369043606765.post-40232143217037730492018-05-19T18:06:05.006-07:002018-05-19T18:06:05.006-07:00Selling out your race for Mexican food is like sel...Selling out your race for Mexican food is like selling your birthright for a bowl of red soup. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-226103369043606765.post-84388409168871440082018-05-19T17:38:47.623-07:002018-05-19T17:38:47.623-07:00You don't need a mexican to make mexican food....You don't need a mexican to make mexican food. Anybody can follow a recipe. Diversity is useless, or actually, destructive. <br /><br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-226103369043606765.post-17915552762645394492018-05-19T17:37:24.945-07:002018-05-19T17:37:24.945-07:00You seem to spend a lot of time "proving"...<i>You seem to spend a lot of time "proving" science is wrong about so many things perhaps you could study rather on how we can prove your "God" exists which would completely overpower the scientists and their "ideas"!!!</i><br /><br />Perhaps you are caught in the fallacy of the false dichotomy, i.e. forcing a choice between two options, when both options could be wrong. I don't think I said whether I even believe in God, or which God I might believe in. My main point is that, just as religion is full of error, so is a lot of "science", so we have to take both with a huge grain of salt and a healthy dose of skepticism. Both are a long way from having the answers and neither side will ever get there until they realize that first. <br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-226103369043606765.post-75216065748785716082018-05-19T14:39:26.735-07:002018-05-19T14:39:26.735-07:00Right on 12:21! We’re here, and for the most part...Right on 12:21! We’re here, and for the most part, it doesn’t matter how we got here, except to demonstrate that we could not possibly be here as a result of the teachings which were used to scam and manipulate us.<br /><br />Right now, having worked very hard all week, my primary concerns are the huge burrito setting in front of me (I just doused it with Diablo sauce) and the ice cold 24 can of Budweiser I just took a swig from!<br /><br />Thank God for the diversity that gives us such awesome foods! I think I still have a signed poster from Charlton Heston, i got to see his Corvette years ago, the one that he had had upgraded from a 427 to a 454. <br /><br />BBByker Bobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15602697337552385535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-226103369043606765.post-41386160781963513782018-05-19T12:21:37.899-07:002018-05-19T12:21:37.899-07:00Toby
Asking NEO or any other poster to jump and ke...Toby<br />Asking NEO or any other poster to jump and keep jumping through your esoteric loops is intellectually dishonest, and harassment as far as I'm concerned. It's a ploy taught by Alinskys 'Rules for radicals.' It's a favourite of Michael Moore. I recall him using it against Charlton Heston.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-226103369043606765.post-32719581390681041062018-05-19T07:42:23.243-07:002018-05-19T07:42:23.243-07:00NEO said ---The fact that his book bears the impri...<br />NEO said ---The fact that his book bears the imprimatur of Richard Dawkins, who primitively believes that god is a demiurge, like an Armstrongite, makes the book suspect.<br />In COG teaching Jesus was the Demiurge, he created at the Father's behest. <br />Is this what you are refering to? Or what "GOD" do you think created the universe?<br />I'm inclined to Mr. Dawkins opinion, "If there is a god it's certainly not the God of the Hebrew Bible"<br />toby <br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />i <br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-226103369043606765.post-86645741414023607292018-05-19T07:27:40.729-07:002018-05-19T07:27:40.729-07:00Anonymous said...May 18, 2018 at 9:09 PM
Claiming ...Anonymous said...May 18, 2018 at 9:09 PM<br />Claiming the laws of physics came into existence after the big bang is the ultimate excuse! It is the ultimate rationalization. It rejects all the laws of physics (the basis of all of science) and throws it in the garbage just so they can keep their FAITH in the big bang. Nothing could be more unscientific. Nothing.<br /><br />You seem to spend a lot of time "proving" science is wrong about so many things perhaps you could study rather on how we can prove your "God" exists which would completely overpower the scientists and their "ideas"!!!<br />toby <br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-226103369043606765.post-86864200016646855172018-05-19T07:17:08.561-07:002018-05-19T07:17:08.561-07:00... men and women like Dr. Krause, Dr Neil DeGrass...<i>... men and women like Dr. Krause, Dr Neil DeGrasse Tyson, Brian Green or Brian Cox.</i><br /><br />Which ones of those mentioned are women? Larry? Neil? Brian? Or the other Brian? <br /><br />Oh, I see. We have to be inclusive so we give credit to those who did nothing or next to nothing. <br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-226103369043606765.post-73970318532839029362018-05-19T06:58:09.673-07:002018-05-19T06:58:09.673-07:00"Neo, perhaps explain to Dr. Krause what you ..."Neo, perhaps explain to Dr. Krause what you think Dr Krause is doing or believes and let me know how that goes," Dennis wrote.<br /><br />I don't think what Krauss wrote is so abstruse that we cannot understand its fundamental error. There is a philosophical divide between evidence and speculation. Krauss is one of the many who seek to bridge the divide by projecting their personal authority and asserting speculation as fact. But authority does not transmute speculation into evidence. So I do not believe I have made a mistake about Mr. Krauss. I probably did make a mistake in responding to this smartass comment as if it were serious. <br /><br />God may have chosen the weak during this epoch for his purposes. Dwarves instead of men or elves. And this fact was used by the Armstrongist ministry, who apparently excluded themselves from the weak, to justify despising the lay membership, oppressing them and using them as a resource for their own personal gain. <br /><br />I think RCM's well known statement is canonical. He referred to church members as "the cream of the crud." A statement that reverberates through the Armstrongist fragments and to some extent in GCI. I have always wondered how RCM regarded himself. <br /><br />"Changing by what we mean by things is called learning. It doesn't happen in theology but it does happen in scholarship."<br /><br />Krauss' statement above is baloney. Science can be narrow minded and stubborn about accepted theories. Think of "Clovis First." And many Protestant denominations now accept evolution. I, too, align with scientific research which often puts me in the opposite camp from mighty speculators like Dawkins, Dennett and Krauss. <br /><br />So Krauss' statement does not tell us anything about the real world. It only tells us where Krauss is on the political spectrum. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08487906691943831671noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-226103369043606765.post-78062770445862773342018-05-19T04:07:38.017-07:002018-05-19T04:07:38.017-07:00Anon 6:49 So, why isn't energy or matter emerg...Anon 6:49 <i>So, why isn't energy or matter emerging from nothingness all around us all the time?</i><br /><br />Yeah, and why isn't life & DNA emerging all the time on this 'Goldilocks' planet where conditions are now more favorable than hostile early earth, but what-do-ya-know, no more DNA/life in the last 3 billion years!<br /><br />The way the popular media tells it, DNA is bound to be assembling itself throughout the universe, just like that! <i>It's so easy</i>: "all you need is pond scum and a little lightning", "it probably even occured on Mars", "in fact we found Mars life in a meteorite" - oops, that one was another Piltdown Meltdown. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-226103369043606765.post-74807102847336405512018-05-18T21:17:06.982-07:002018-05-18T21:17:06.982-07:00How many people know that to believe in today'...<i>How many people know that to believe in today's "quantum mechanics" you need to reject the law of cause and effect? No, they don't tell you that in any of the popular physics books, but every physicist knows it...</i><br /><br />They know it at some level, though I wonder if they fully get it. They are all familiar with the terms in-determinism and a-causality. Do they get what that really means? Those terms mean just what they say, and at some level they all know it, though they seem to only half-believe it, because to fully believe it is nuts, so they rationalize by half-believing it. <br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-226103369043606765.post-58862986606940479432018-05-18T21:09:44.778-07:002018-05-18T21:09:44.778-07:00Claiming the laws of physics came into existence a...Claiming the laws of physics came into existence after the big bang is the ultimate excuse! It is the ultimate rationalization. It rejects all the laws of physics (the basis of all of science) and throws it in the garbage just so they can keep their FAITH in the big bang. Nothing could be more unscientific. Nothing. <br /><br />The big bang is nonsense anyway. There are about 25 different explanations for the red shift. The expanding universe is only one of them. Why don't you hear about the others? Even Hubble wasn't convinced and tried to warn us. It fell on deaf ears. <br /> <br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-226103369043606765.post-35780034864435273182018-05-18T20:45:31.845-07:002018-05-18T20:45:31.845-07:00According to current thinking, the laws of physics...According to current thinking, the laws of physics came into existence AFTER the big bang. So, quantum mechanics did not exist before the big bang, and so cannot be responsible for the big bang. So, Mr Krauss is wrong again. <br /> <br />Now, why is it that physicists claim the laws of physics came into existence AFTER the big bang? Because they know the big bang defies the laws of physics (e.g. such as the law of conservation of energy). If the laws of physics already existed, there would be no big bang, and they know it. <br /><br />Can they actually prove that the laws of physics came into existence after the big bang? No. Can they explain how laws of physics can be spontaneously created or destroyed? No. It's just something they CLAIM so that they can make the big bang theory work. Simple as that. <br /><br />Nobody has ever observed any law of physics come into or go out of existence. The idea that such a thing could happen is purely speculative, and is not science, and has no scientific basis. It is not testable since it has never been observed to happen, and nobody knows how to try it out in a test tube, laboratory, particle collider, or any such thing. <br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-226103369043606765.post-24422177389154841692018-05-18T20:28:53.519-07:002018-05-18T20:28:53.519-07:00Dawkins book "The God Delusion" is not a...<i>Dawkins book "The God Delusion" is not against God but against the concept of <br />organised religion...</i> <br /> <br />So why didn't he call it "The Organized Religion Delusion"? <br /> Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-226103369043606765.post-13787883223546345362018-05-18T20:07:53.039-07:002018-05-18T20:07:53.039-07:00Ronda Vous:
I actually thought his name was Knau...Ronda Vous:<br /> <br />I actually thought his name was Knauss. The n and r resemble each other closely in my font. <br /><br />Krauss and Dawkins both believe that Theists, in particular, Christian Theists believe that a Being created the universe. In particular, they erroneously believe that Christians believe that a demiurge created the universe. The demiurge comes into the picture only as their characterization of what others believe. In fact, Christians do not believe in a demiurge as Dawkins and Krauss mistakenly believe. <br /><br />That also addresses your statement "So you're saying he believes in something that isn't even needed?" You need to read this more carefully.<br /><br />The Being that Christians believe created the Universe is not a demiurge. If you actually understood how a demiurge is defined you would understand this. And Nothingness can be defined philosophically. You instead are toying with various materialists definitions.<br /><br />I am sorry you so badly misunderstood what I wrote.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08487906691943831671noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-226103369043606765.post-76575792230659232372018-05-18T19:59:16.775-07:002018-05-18T19:59:16.775-07:00"... I am sure sometime in the future a good ..."... I am sure sometime in the future a good explanation ... " <br /> <br />Translation: there is no good explanation now, but Dennis has FAITH that some day they will come up with one. <br /> <br />Well, science has been looking for the answer since the Greeks. We are still waiting. There are some things science cannot answer and never will, which is why, like it or not, religion will never go away. <br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com