-  [WT]  [PS]  [Home] [Manage]

[Return] [Entire Thread] [Last 50 posts] [First 100 posts]
Posting mode: Reply
  1.   (reply to 12458)
  2. (for post and file deletion)
/phi/ - Philosophy
  • Supported file types are: GIF, JPG, PNG, WEBM
  • Maximum file size allowed is 1000 KB.
  • Images greater than 200x200 pixels will be thumbnailed.
  • Currently 660 unique user posts. View catalog

  • Blotter updated: 2011-01-12 Show/Hide Show All

There's a new /777/ up, it's /gardening/ Check it out. Suggest new /777/s here.

Movies & TV 24/7 via Channel7: Web Player, .m3u file. Music via Radio7: Web Player, .m3u file.

WebM is now available sitewide! Please check this thread for more info.

Anonymous 16/03/09(Wed)08:23 No. 12458 ID: 3ee603
12458

File 145750821398.jpg - (22.25KB , 900x600 , crop-538599cc8101c-imgID3636752.jpg )

Did Darwin answer the question of what the meaning of life is?


182 posts omitted. Last 50 shown.
>>
Anonymous 17/10/21(Sat)18:06 No. 13235 ID: 6af4de

>>13228

Yes. To believe in Darwins theory is only something a cretin would do. Even when you compare other chimpanzee cells with human ones, measurements have shown that a chimpanzee cell has 10 percent more DNA than a human cell. Both technically and comparatively it all is extremely farfetched.

Apples and oranges.


>>
Anonymous 17/10/25(Wed)11:14 No. 13237 ID: 0a9892

>>13226

Alex Jones is a insanity catalyst. He makes absolutely retarded predictions all the time and his followers gobble it up like flies swarming around shit.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwURLwd8pEA


>>
Anonymous 17/10/26(Thu)11:33 No. 13238 ID: 2013f3

>>13237

He's a living cartoon character. His only goal in life is to acquire as much wealth as possible while he's scamming his audience.

>I am an actor
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vj-m5U3IdrY


>>
Anonymous 17/10/26(Thu)14:15 No. 13239 ID: ec9b1c

>>13235

Darwinists are experts at mental gymnastics.


>>
Anonymous 17/10/27(Fri)02:01 No. 13241 ID: 43ed39

>>13228
Darwin's theories are not the same as the theory of evolution. Darwin was wrong about a lot of things, but when you start talking about fedora-tipping, it's clear that you're just ignoring all scientific fact for convenience sake.

If creatures did not evolve, via one method or another, they could not exist without divine creation. Is that what you are suggesting is reality?


>>
Anonymous 17/10/27(Fri)06:24 No. 13242 ID: 6af4de

>>13239

It's not even mental gymnastics at this point. It's flat out denial. They say there is evidence to support their claims but there isn't. Fedora tippers all live in their own little containment zone where they only listen to what they want to hear.


>>
Anonymous 17/10/27(Fri)08:39 No. 13243 ID: 16cd3d

>>13242

That's what's so convenient about being a fedora tipper. They say they're right a priori so therefore they can dismiss everything that contradict their world view.


>>
Anonymous 17/10/27(Fri)18:27 No. 13244 ID: ebab07

>>13230
There are paleontological proofs too


>>
Anonymous 17/10/28(Sat)11:27 No. 13247 ID: 6af4de
13247

File 150918282845.jpg - (45.08KB , 404x620 , Archaeopteryx.jpg )

>>13243

So true. The paleontological "evidence" has come to naught. Comparative anatomy is humorous because like >>12853 mentions there are so many gaps in the fossil record and many of the features they claim are attributed to humans are actually apelike. The Taung Childs skull isn't human.

Pic related is another example. The idea that Archaeopteryx had descended from dinosaurs was first suggested in the 1870s by Thomas Huxley because of the simi­larities of the legs and hips of birds with those of dinosaurs. How­ever, Huxley was ignoring one inconvenient fact and that is that Archaeopteryx, like all birds, has a wishbone (analogous to the clavicle or collarbone in mammals) whereas dinosaurs did not have collarbones.

Fedora tippers always ignore facts that doesn't support their claims.


>>
Anonymous 17/10/30(Mon)10:08 No. 13248 ID: b9726c

>>13247

I guess their euphoria works as anesthesia so they can cope with their sore rectums.


>>
Anonymous 17/10/30(Mon)16:02 No. 13249 ID: feaec9

>>13248
Darwin may not have found the meaning of life, but his "theory" does account for one mechanism of it. Holes in the fossil record tend to get filled; carbon dating is more accurate than ever and modern projects use multiple dating techniques to improve their accuracy. This doesn't mean you can't have your Abrahamic nonsense if you really need it; the man himself didn't intend to conflict with any Abrahamistic notions of the divinity of man you might have.

Just because alien interlopers interfered with the evolution of apes in the fertile crescent doesn't mean it didn't happen according to the plan they entrusted to Noah before abandoning our strip-mined planet while it underwent some climate change.

>people who believe god of love from the sky made them in his own image and is coming back for those still loyal to him and to punish the rest for eternity.


>>
Anonymous 17/11/01(Wed)09:43 No. 13257 ID: 3c4694

>>13248

Indeed. Fedora tipping gives you an enlightened numbness that shields you from critical thinking.


>>
Anonymous 17/11/01(Wed)11:19 No. 13258 ID: 826ee7
13258

File 150953157091.jpg - (47.27KB , 469x463 , ec9603bc80ce46a8a0202ce33cc3fc4a--photo-tips-fedor.jpg )

>>13243

>They say they're right a priori so therefore they can dismiss everything that contradict their world view.

This thread pretty much prove it. It's interesting yet sad at the same time. The so called champions of science get surprisingly unscientific whenever they get confronted with evidence that negate their Darwinian "fact".

They act just like the people they deem as fanatics.


>>
Anonymous 17/11/02(Thu)08:53 No. 13259 ID: 32ca83

>>13249

>carbon dating
>accurate

lol

http://anthropology.msu.edu/anp264-ss13/2013/02/07/radiocarbon-dating-a-closer-look-at-its-main-flaws/
>the amount of Carbon-14 in the atmosphere has not been steady throughout history. In fact, it has fluctuated a great deal over the years. This variation is caused by both natural processes and human activity. Cosmic rays and changes in Earth’s climate can cause irregularities in the amount of Carbon-14 in the atmosphere


>>
Anonymous 17/11/03(Fri)15:20 No. 13261 ID: 487af6

>>13259

>it is only accurate from about 62,000 years ago to 1,200 A.D.

So much for "million year old fossils", hahahahaha.


>>
Anonymous 17/11/07(Tue)21:11 No. 13271 ID: 6af4de
13271

File 151008546234.png - (422.12KB , 524x551 , 1509992531988.png )

>>13248

Most atheists have mental health issues.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/texas-church-shooter-devin-kelley-escaped-mental-health-facility-after-attacking-wife-stepson/
>The man who shot and killed 26 people in a Texas church Sunday was checked into and escaped from a mental health facility in New Mexico in 2012, according to a police report

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/devin-kelley-atheism-texas-shooting-who-was-he-creepy-weird-classmates-latest-a8041161.html
>Texas shooter 'preached atheism' and was an outcast, say former classmates


>>
Anonymous 17/11/09(Thu)12:15 No. 13273 ID: 44a1c4

>>13271

Now that's a highly euphoric gentleman right there.


>>
Anonymous 17/11/09(Thu)14:17 No. 13274 ID: ec9b1c

>>13259

Once again it is shown that fedora tippers have no proof for their claims.


>>
Anonymous 17/11/11(Sat)08:54 No. 13281 ID: fe9887

It's interesting how the it's usually the Illogical that thrive on the approval of others, especially in great numbers, in some sort of "circle-jerk" fashion. The exchanges of agreement here almost appear to come from a movie script or some stage act. It looks like it could come from a conversation someone might have with themselves. "I can't be the only one that is noticing this. Right?"

Understanders of evolution don't depend on the approval of others, because they understand it so well that it is beyond the necessity of discussion at this day-and-age and forming a herd about it -- you either understand it or you don't; you either think macroscopically or microscopically. I feel no hostility towards these people (or person) at all. With understanding comes peace. Their deviation from fact has left them clueless and prone to mock and ridicule as well as to get angry and hostile in defending their unsolvable/conclusion-less position, much like every religion and cult in the past. Evolution is an understanding that is shifting from theory/belief to everyday fact: most are silent about it now because there is no reason to defend it. The onus is on the stragglers who still don't get it, and whose descendants are likely to fall behind as the world's understanding advances and as the rest learn more about our world and universe.


>>
Anonymous 17/11/11(Sat)11:24 No. 13282 ID: d60c6c

>>13281

>The exchanges of agreement here almost appear to come from a movie script or some stage act. It looks like it could come from a conversation someone might have with themselves.

You sound schizophrenic, m8. Time to walk away from the keyboard and get some fresh air.


>>
Anonymous 17/11/11(Sat)17:33 No. 13283 ID: fe9887

>>13282
"Haha, no kidding! So true. Indeed. These fedora tippers who think we are one person schizophrenically samefagging, to give a faulty and weird impression that because many people agree with me, "here", that I am right and they are wrong, should have their head examined. I couldn't have said it better myself."

Your dialogue is painful to read. It's actually cringe-worthy.

Without trying to come across as condescending or arrogant, may I ask how old you are? Or is any answer but the truth expected in the same way you've evaded it in something as now simple as the origin of life?


>>
Anonymous 17/11/11(Sat)18:17 No. 13284 ID: d60c6c

>>13283

So you basically think that everybody else in this thread except you are one and the same person? https://www.webmd.com/schizophrenia/guide/schizophrenia-paranoia
>People with paranoid delusions are unreasonably suspicious of others.

Maybe you should try spending less time behind your computer or get some medication.


>>
Anonymous 17/11/11(Sat)18:32 No. 13285 ID: fe9887

>>13284
I'm not stating it as fact, but I'm suggesting that it is very likely. The "pat on the back and high five" approach you take to express an agreement among your "supporters" is stilted like that one would see in an act. It's very hard for me to believe that it's possible for there to exist this many people who cannot understand evolution in a time where information is readily available and in excessive amounts, but since most understanders of evolution choose not to get involved I suppose one would only see the vocal idiots. So in light of this it certainly is possible that there is no samefagging, but like most if not all things in life: "trust your intuition". To me it's obvious you are samefagging. Whether I'm wrong or not has no effect on me. It's just a way for me to find solace in the lack of understanding of your lack of understanding.


>>
Anonymous 17/11/11(Sat)18:37 No. 13286 ID: d60c6c

>>13285

You have legit issues, dude. Seek professional help.


>>
Anonymous 17/11/11(Sat)19:02 No. 13287 ID: fe9887

>>13286
Knew that was coming from no one other than someone like you who cannot reason for themselves.

Here's a "plot twist": maybe /you/ need the psychiatric help.


>>
Anonymous 17/11/11(Sat)19:04 No. 13288 ID: 32ca83

>>13274

Carbon dating is about as accurate as guessing (and that's about it). The margin of error is huge.


>>
Anonymous 17/11/11(Sat)19:48 No. 13289 ID: d60c6c
13289

File 151042610016.jpg - (241.08KB , 672x615 , youarebeingwatched.jpg )

>>13287

>plot twist

Oh, boy. Whatever you say, Truman. Don't forget to look for hidden microphones in your pillowcase.


>>
Anonymous 17/11/11(Sat)20:37 No. 13291 ID: fe9887

>>13289
Hence the quotations. You folks use memetic phrases so frequently I thought I'd return one of them. Even you, who uses them carelessly, see how ridiculous and silly they are.

Have you ever looked at yourself or is this all an act?


>>
Anonymous 17/11/11(Sat)21:11 No. 13292 ID: d60c6c

>>13291

Have you considered getting a girlfriend? Maybe afterwards you won't come off as a goofy weirdo.


>>
Anonymous 17/11/12(Sun)03:38 No. 13293 ID: 9fd7e5

>>13292
I was going to criticize your argumentum ad amicam, but there's an even bigger underlying truth here. The premise of a line such as "wow dude you like seriously need a girlfriend bro" is that one's value is based on one's reproductive fitness, and that being a goofy weirdo harms a person because it hinders that end. That sounds suspiciously like the mechanics of natural selection.

In a sense, this fact might make you, d60c6c, even more noble. Even though they would quickly label you a neckbearded fedora-tipping Cheeto-guzzling My Little Pony fucker, you still defend those users as more than some lazy troll samefag or circlejerk. If only we could all be more like you.


>>
Anonymous 17/11/12(Sun)06:31 No. 13294 ID: d60c6c

>>13293

What are you talking about? I just said he needs a girlfriend because his mental health is damaged. He could use a helping hand in dealing with his paranoid delusions.


>>
Anonymous 17/11/12(Sun)08:57 No. 13295 ID: 6af4de

>>13288

Wouldn't that mean that carbon dating lacks consideration for the amount of radiocarbon distributed in various areas? Radiocarbon begins to decay as soon as it is formed. When a quantity of radiocarbon is produced in the atmosphere, half of that amount will have decayed away after 5,700 years. So, 5,700 years after a tree dies, it contains only half the proportion of radiocarbon that exists in a living tree. After a total of 11,400 years, or two half-lives, it will contain only one quarter. After about five half-lives, or roughly 30,000 years, only an immeasurably small residue remains and so the radiocar­bon test is only good for dating remains younger than this natu­ral "ceiling." To assume that radiocarbon is spread evenly across the Earth isn't really believable.


>>
Anonymous 17/11/12(Sun)17:42 No. 13296 ID: 9fd7e5

>>13294
If it were specifically someone who could help with paranoia and schizophrenia, you could have more credibly suggested an actual mental health professional. You didn't. You went straight for girlfriend, and that's very revealing.


>>
Anonymous 17/11/12(Sun)18:55 No. 13299 ID: d60c6c

>>13296

I actually said earlier that he should seek out professional help. But since he's a total spastic with major trust issues he would never talk to a therapist.

He probably needs to get laid and that's why he should get a girlfriend. A therapist won't suck his dick, you know.


>>
Anonymous 17/11/13(Mon)06:05 No. 13300 ID: 32ca83

>>13295

Exactly.

https://matthew2262.wordpress.com/2013/02/18/examining-radiocarbon-dating/
>As straightforward as radiocarbon seems to be there are actually a large number of underlying assumptions that the entire dating process relies on.
>The atmosphere has had the same amount of C14, (in terms of production, mixing and transfer rates) in the past as it is now.
>There has been complete and rapid mixing of C14 throughout the various carbon reservoirs on a worldwide basis.
>C14 rapidly mixes and is spread evenly throughout the biosphere.

The whole method itself is kind of unreliable when you consider how little scientists know about previous stages of distribution throughout prehistoric times.


>>
Anonymous 17/11/13(Mon)08:52 No. 13304 ID: fe9887

>>13299
I simply have a hard time believing that here can exist this many people lacking a basic reasoning capacity.

My only resort is to assume that the silly exchanges of agreement were nothing but one person trying to give some sort of pretense that they are right. If I'm wrong, what it means would be even more horrific, because then what we're really dealing with is a larger percentage of "slower" people, not only here but likewise elsewhere, than I originally thought. My doubt is the result of a general optimistic outlook on humanity, not a schizophrenic distrust that someone with a very limited mental capacity like yours would assume.

It's okay, even if you don't believe in the accuracy of carbon dating, I still remain optimistic that there is hope for you. But here's the hard part for you: use the brain you were given and draw conclusions based on the logic, which non-coincidentally manifests itself when you go to places specifically designed to house the thousands upon thousands of specimens and fossils of families and phyla and see the transitional change over time chronologically ordered from carbon dating and DNA analysis. It is no coincidence that the result is a hierarchy.

Despite this overwhelming evidence that someone possessing the slightest intellect can see as a pattern, somehow it blows straight past you and you instead settle for a simpler notion that because you don't understand it and because some guy blogs about the integrity of carbon dating, it must therefore be false.


>>
Anonymous 17/11/13(Mon)15:17 No. 13305 ID: 979e29
13305

File 151058264587.jpg - (480.70KB , 2048x1536 , Ra.jpg )

>>13304
Post of a fedora image and a complete avoidance of everything you mentioned in 3... 2...

Its been a long, long, long thread and we're still waiting to hear what these fedora posting nogoodniks believe. All they can do is claim that everything posted on Wikipedia is incorrect because of reasons they won't illustrate, because doing so would explain what they believe, opening themselves up to the ridicule they deride everyone else with.

Enjoy your co-opted pagan holidays fellas. May as well get it over with and start worshiping Ra.


>>
Anonymous 17/11/13(Mon)20:13 No. 13306 ID: 6af4de

>>13300

I wonder how fedora tippers rationalize their failed theories. There's a huge gap in the fossil record, their taxonomy is poorly constructed and the most trustworthy dating method they have relies on mainly one thing and that is that this one isotope is evenly spread across time, areas and organisms, which they can't even prove.


>>
Anonymous 17/11/14(Tue)15:37 No. 13308 ID: 0a2684

>>13306

maybe it's laziness combined with indifference? like, "oh, look at this huge flaw! meh, whatever. let's use it anyway"


>>
Anonymous 17/11/16(Thu)08:55 No. 13309 ID: 32ca83

>>13306

They're so far into their comfort zone that they can't be bothered to examine those theories.


>>
Anonymous 17/11/20(Mon)12:04 No. 13313 ID: 09a262
13313

File 151117585472.jpg - (155.24KB , 363x519 , 1511108050495.jpg )

>>13308

>laziness

Can't argue with that. Mostly because fedora tippers consume hot pockets and soda.


>>
Anonymous 17/11/23(Thu)10:57 No. 13316 ID: ae0f07
13316

File 151143103352.jpg - (127.25KB , 814x640 , downloadfile.jpg )

>>13313

That's a nice fedora. I bet he reads "The God delusion" while he visits McDonalds.


>>
Anonymous 17/11/26(Sun)10:19 No. 13324 ID: 6af4de
13324

File 15116879394.gif - (152.12KB , 200x200 , fedora tipper.gif )

>>13309 

Agreed. Another flawed dating method besides carbon dating is the uranium-lead method. If you use the uranium-decay method on the rocks of the Earths crust you get the conventionally ac­cepted age of over 4 000 000 000. But if you use the same method on the atmosphere, you get an age of only 100 000. 

Same can be said about potassium-argon dating. 
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF02597188 
>The potassium-argon method is attractive for dating volcanics since it can be applied to rocks of Pleistocene age and older, thus encompassing important periods of general volcanic activity. 
>However it has been found that dates obtained on whole rocks and on included minerals frequently show gross discordances. 

J. G. Funkhouser and J. J. Naughton used the potassium-argon method on volcanic rocks from Mount Kilauea and got ages of up to 3 000 000 000 years when the rocks are known to have been formed in a modern eruption in 1801. 

Fedora tippers have absolutely no clue what they're talking about.


>>
Anonymous 17/12/14(Thu)08:25 No. 13374 ID: 32ca83

>>13324

I wonder how fedora tippers can claim that they know the age of the Earth and the universe when all of the known dating methods are inaccurate? Even fossils can't be properly dated.


>>
Anonymous 17/12/14(Thu)10:13 No. 13375 ID: ec2e4b

>>13374
The (light-)age of the universe is relatively easy to estimate.


>>
Anonymous 17/12/14(Thu)14:36 No. 13377 ID: 1f4405

>>13374

They don't know at all. It's guessing, that's what it is. Nobody has actually measured and objectively proven the definite speed of light either so to date the universe is impossible.


>>
Anonymous 17/12/15(Fri)15:12 No. 13378 ID: b2d00d

>>13377
>Nobody has actually measured and objectively proven the definite speed of light
>evolution can't be proven by comparing human DNA to ape DNA
>there's no evidence of life in space because never seen a living thing from another planet

I get it. You don't accept anything you can't demonstrate with your own two hands and see with your own two eyes. It's a kind of certainty only the Amish cultivate as a virtue--have you considered becoming Amish? You can join, but you'd probably have to give up the internet. I think it'd be good for you; learn to work with your hands and whatnot.

Getting back to my point; I do get it. You won't admit anything that is in any degree uncertain as a truth. Right, absolute truth is the only truth... I get it.


>>
Anonymous 17/12/15(Fri)19:57 No. 13379 ID: d60c6c

>>13374

All of the dating methods available today have surprisingly huge age results and they also tend to be exaggerated. All of the million year old fossils aren't really millions of years old.


>>
Anonymous 17/12/15(Fri)22:38 No. 13380 ID: a870df

>>13378
Not just that, he could learn how to build a barn in a day.


>>
Anonymous 17/12/16(Sat)18:24 No. 13381 ID: 32ca83

>>13379

If a volcanic eruption that happened less than 400 years ago gets dated to be over 3 000 000 000 years old it's hard to take fedora tippers seriously.



[Return]


Delete post []
Password  
Report post
Reason