Controversial General Political Discussion

[Logiko]

and used that video as some sort of proof.

It's just proof that Hollywood is as cringe as it's always been.

Oh ok. No. I didn't use that as a proof, I used that as a support to understand the problem. If you want proof, I'm sure there is enough sociological work about the subject in modern days.

But the "nice guy" is not just a simple hollywood trope, its also a toxic masculine behavior that a lot of men arbor.

 

[Zenos7]

If it's impossible, then there is no "when" lol. Devil fruits are impossible, so I can't talk about when someone eats one, y'know? I don't say what any number of people believe but you can be certain that some people believe there is positively no god

What i initially responded to was a view about human superiority. That has nothing to do with atheism
[automerge]1699374843[/automerge]

I’m pretty sure they do, some ants take in slaves from other colonies

Or take over other colonies by taking their scent.

Yup
[automerge]1699374940[/automerge]

is like a deterrent; like USA nuked Japan or how countries have nuclear weapons.

And I despise that just as much
[automerge]1699377125[/automerge]

We understand erosion, sediment, tectonics, and gravity. Rock formations don't just appear spontaneously. They're not mysteries

Gravity is kinda a mystery

Also, pointing to a small planet as an ant colony and then mentioning that those ants find other ants, where we don't, is again why I don't think the analogy holds.

Your point before was about searching other ants, so this seems like moving the goalpost

 

[Fn Lucci]

Eh, his point was about our insignificance in the galaxy, not that we are literally ants

Your point before was about searching other ants, so this seems like moving the goalpost

Right. His point was not literally about ants, so it's not really moving the goalposts to say how we're not like ants, unless the point was to say we are. My point was that the analogy doesn't give us enough credit as living beings. The size of the galaxy doesn't change what we are but sure, Earth is tiny.

Gravity is kinda a mystery

There are things we don't know but that doesn't favor an argument on random/spontaneous design. So far nothing we know just *happens* so to say that everything just happened is a little weird.

 

[Logiko]

Right. His point was not literally about ants, so it's not really moving the goalposts to say how we're not like ants, unless the point was to say we are. My point was that the analogy doesn't give us enough credit as living beings. The size of the galaxy doesn't change what we are but sure, Earth is tiny.


There are things we don't know but that doesn't favor an argument on random/spontaneous design. So far nothing we know just *happens* so to say that everything just happened is a little weird.

I'm not a scientist but the theories about the beginning of the universe. Some of them if I'm not mistaken explain that we are simply the result of an accidental process. We are simply lucky to exist because the way the universe is formed (the constants) would simply be the best way for life to appear.

But this has nothing to do with politic, I'll create a thread about science too.

 

[Fn Lucci]

I'm not a scientist but the theories about the beginning of the universe. Some of them if I'm not mistaken explain that we are simply the result of an accidental process. We are simply lucky to exist because the way the universe is formed (the constants) would simply be the best way for life to appear.

But this has nothing to do with politic, I'll create a thread about science too.

I don't think I've seen an irrefutable statistic but then I don't think the most modest calculation I've seen has an equivalent. "Lucky" seems pretty inadequate in that case even if I completely understand why no one would buy a religious explanation.

 

[Zenos7]

There are things we don't know but that doesn't favor an argument on random/spontaneous design. So far nothing we know just *happens* so to say that everything just happened is a little weird.

It also doesnt favor an argument about a supernatural being

 

[Fn Lucci]

It also doesnt favor an argument about a supernatural being

Created and creation both imply creator(s). My very first response on this tangent was that something doesn't come from nothing. You can't point to a rock formation and say "oh it just happened" when it took years of weather and shit. And there's a reason for that weather to do what it did and so on. I'm not saying humans have irrefutable knowledge but the onus is on proving something that doesn't follow the scheme that everything else does.

 

[Zenos7]

something doesn't come from nothing.

Based on? Are there experiments on nothing to see if anything can come from it?
Obviously no, because we cant grasp nothing. So this isnt based in anything and just personal incredulity.

Also everything spontaneously forming out of nothing isnt what scientists necessarily believe anyway. The universe could be eternal the same way theists make the case for the god of their choice.


Contrary to popular belief, the big bang isnt the beginning of the universe

 

[Logiko]

My very first response on this tangent was that something doesn't come from nothing.

What if "something" was always there ? There is a theory called the Big Crunch that explains that the universe is bound to Expand and be crushed under its own mass (?) to revert back to the plank state and recreate a big bang again.

 

[Mathias]

What if "something" was always there ? There is a theory called the Big Crunch that explains that the universe is bound to Expand and be crushed under its own mass (?) to revert back to the plank state and recreate a big bang again.

Theory was cancelled by a recent Nobel prize

 

[Logiko]

Theory was cancelled by a recent Nobel prize

Really ? I'm unaware of this. Which theory cancelled it ?

 

[Mathias]

Really ? I'm unaware of this. Which theory cancelled it ?

I think it's the 2011 Nobel prize in physics.

"for the discovery of the accelerating expansion of the Universe through observations of distant supernovae"

If I'm not wrong, it cancels the Big Crunch theory. I may have misunderstood these theories though.

 

[Logiko]

I think it's the 2011 Nobel prize in physics.

"for the discovery of the accelerating expansion of the Universe through observations of distant supernovae"

If I'm not wrong, it cancels the Big Crunch theory. I may have misunderstood these theories though.

Oh maybe. I thought they were compatible. But it make sence. Well neither of them is really fun when you think about it..
Its slow death VS paintfull death.

 

[Gaimon The Pirate]

Palestinian are not entitled to live in their houses because another nation has told them to leave.
If this is not genocide or ethnic cleansing, I don't really know what to say.

 

[Logiko]

Palestinian are not entitled to live in their houses because another nation has told them to leave.
If this is not genocide or ethnic cleansing, I don't really know what to say.

 

[Fn Lucci]

*especially* if we have casualties

Based on? Are there experiments on nothing to see if anything can come from it?
Obviously no, because we cant grasp nothing. So this isnt based in anything and just personal incredulity.

Also everything spontaneously forming out of nothing isnt what scientists necessarily believe anyway. The universe could be eternal the same way theists make the case for the god of their choice.


Contrary to popular belief, the big bang isnt the beginning of the universe

Got any good reads on the 15-30 billion years ago range?

 

[Logiko]

*especially* if we have casualties


Got any good reads on the 15-30 billion years ago range?

Search everything that talks about the plank state. I think Books from Stephen Hawkings are good reads too. at least in term of vulgarization.

 

[Zenos7]

Got any good reads on the 15-30 billion years ago range?

13.8 billion years*

But no i dont. Its an estimate based on the expansion rate that mathias mentioned above.

 

[Fn Lucci]

13.8 billion years*

But no i dont. Its an estimate based on the expansion rate that mathias mentioned above.

I'm saying before the big bang, and one blurb I read from June just mentioned that it's possibly twice the age we know so I'm talking way out if we're going with "eternal" theories.

Where can I find the estimate on what was before the big bang?

 

[Zenos7]

I'm saying before the big bang, and one blurb I read from June just mentioned that it's possibly twice the age we know so I'm talking way out if we're going with "eternal" theories.

Where can I find the estimate on what was before the big bang?

We have no idea about pre-bigbang afaik.