Man United NSR Politics thread

[StrikerCW]

David Palmer is Dennis Haysbert :cool:
I know. I googled. :D

edit: 100th reply of this thread. :D

[littleman]

No, all I'm trying to point out is that if you believe in abiogenesis, you believe in miracles. And it's not a stretch to say that if you believe in God, you also believe in miracles. So essentially at this point both theories are very improbable. And thus, one theory should not be forced down the throats of children - i don't see any problems with having elective ID classes in high schools, which explains the unlikliness of scientific explanation and presents an alternate point of view. The fact is - we don't know how life originated and most likely will never find out. Although I don't see any problem with believing in evolution AND beliveing that life did not originate from lifeless matter.
By the way, did you know that 40% of scientists believe in God? (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/23/national/23believers.html?ei=5090&en=a7fec44c68be1f25&ex=1282449600&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss&pagewanted=all)

I call bullshit.

There was once when if you believed that atoms existed, you believe in something entirely ridiculous. History should be filled with such parallel cases where if you believed in something yet unproven, you were ridiculed.. only for it to be proven true in the future.

You are obviously positing a case where abiogenesis is naturalistically IMPOSSIBLE, or highly unlikely. In which you are jumping the gun, and talking out of your ass (no really, I respect you as a poster and you owned nice, but this is total BS).

Please, be a little more critical.

[Stud83]

little, you are missing the point. I am sure it could be and would be proven that it is theoretically possible for abiogenesis to take place. At least in the lab conditions. But the likelihood of that event actually happening in real life is infinitely small and every scientist you ask will attest to that. It has nothing to do with atoms existing or not, it's just that it is already known that a lot of very complex chemical reactions have to take place in a particular order (well, if you simplify things) in order for there to even be a small chance of live matter appearing.
Basically, the theory states that RNA molecules capable of catalyzing their own continuing replication could've formed. That's essentially it. Right now the scientists are trying to figure out how small the molecules could've been in order for them to turn into the larger ones and start up the whole process. Which, in theory, may be proven, but it won't elevate the probabililty figures by much.
So even if it did happen that way... how is that not a miracle?

[StrikerCW]

Coincidence.

[littleman]

little, you are missing the point. I am sure it could be and would be proven that it is theoretically possible for abiogenesis to take place. At least in the lab conditions. But the likelihood of that event actually happening in real life is infinitely small and every scientist you ask will attest to that. It has nothing to do with atoms existing or not, it's just that it is already known that a lot of very complex chemical reactions have to take place in a particular order (well, if you simplify things) in order for there to even be a small chance of live matter appearing.
Basically, the theory states that RNA molecules capable of catalyzing their own continuing replication could've formed. That's essentially it. Right now the scientists are trying to figure out how small the molecules could've been in order for them to turn into the larger ones and start up the whole process. Which, in theory, may be proven, but it won't elevate the probabililty figures by much.
So even if it did happen that way... how is that not a miracle?

Because of STASTISTICS..

Alright, say I give you a regular deck of poker cards and draw 6 from them. What are the chances that you get 3 Aces and 3 Kings? Well, I'd like to tell you myself but my calculator ain't showing the digits right.. Basically it's

1/52 * 1/51 * 1/50 * 1/49 * 1/48 * 1/47 = 0.000000000006 (about that).

Did you know that the same is true for ANY hand that you get?



Fact is, statistical anomalies DO happen. Think of winning the lottery. Think of people who've managed to win lotteries twice in their life. If of course, you choose to interpret this or any other statistical rarity as divine intervention, then I can scarcely seek to move you from your position. But once you recognize that rare things do happen, and do happen without divine intervention, then you realize how non-holy abiogenesis is.

Thing is, you probably see life as sacred and the creation of it, since difficult, as a holy act. My call on this is different, I take a naturalistic outlook. Things that are a statistical rarity do happen, and if your account is right, then abiogenesis did happen "by chance". Remember, your account of "miracles" (being very rare things) happen for bad things as well.. some people do get infected with two very rare diseases at the same time (1 in 100 million + chance).. is that a miracle too?

[Stud83]

Because of STASTISTICS..

Alright, say I give you a regular deck of poker cards and draw 6 from them. What are the chances that you get 3 Aces and 3 Kings? Well, I'd like to tell you myself but my calculator ain't showing the digits right.. Basically it's

1/52 * 1/51 * 1/50 * 1/49 * 1/48 * 1/47 = 0.000000000006 (about that).

Did you know that the same is true for ANY hand that you get?



Fact is, statistical anomalies DO happen. Think of winning the lottery. Think of people who've managed to win lotteries twice in their life. If of course, you choose to interpret this or any other statistical rarity as divine intervention, then I can scarcely seek to move you from your position. But once you recognize that rare things do happen, and do happen without divine intervention, then you realize how non-holy abiogenesis is.

Thing is, you probably see life as sacred and the creation of it, since difficult, as a holy act. My call on this is different, I take a naturalistic outlook. Things that are a statistical rarity do happen, and if your account is right, then abiogenesis did happen "by chance". Remember, your account of "miracles" (being very rare things) happen for bad things as well.. some people do get infected with two very rare diseases at the same time (1 in 100 million + chance).. is that a miracle too?

Fair enough. The problem is that you just don't understand the magnitude of the numbers.

But just so that you understand it: the probability of the smallest known RNA molecule capable of self-replicating, appearing once in 10 billion years is about 1/10^70.
So... Suppose every American (250 million) bought 1 lottery ticket in a lottery when there is only 1 winner. And you won it. Then the next day, everyone again bought 1 ticket... and you won again! Then the next day you won again. And you keep winning every day for 10 days in a row in this lottery!
Would you also call it coincidence? Do you believe it may actually happen? Same person winning the lottery 10 days in a row with 250 million people playing and only one winner? Mathematically speaking, the likelihood of that happening is 0 (any probability less that 10^(-50) is considered impossible).

And btw, I majored in CS with Data Analysis concentration and minored in Math, so you don't have to explain statistics to me.

...And check your card calculations, they are off. The probability of getting 6 different cards is obviously greater than the probability of getting 3 aces and 3 kings. When you take 2 Aces from the deck, you are much more likely to get a card other than an Ace. (probability of getting another Ace is 1/25, while the probability of getting any other card is 4/50). So you are wrong in assuming that the fixed probability is true for any hand that you get.

[SirManchester]

let me ask you something then, since you're so hellbent on miracles, do you actually believe United winning the treble is a miracle? Do you think sports incidents which are very unlikely; like a super run or a wonder goal, or a last minute comeback/win are miracles?

[StrikerCW]

I think this topic is just going to have to be agree to disagree because noone is going to convince anyone on this, especially in a politics thread.

I'll give Stud its a very very large impossibility that it happened naturally. But you still can't discount the possibility that maybe it just did. For instance, how many other places are there in the Universe with the exact conditions as Earth? A very very small number. I'd venture to say that close in the 1e20's or more number of other bodies in the universe and maybe earth just happened to have the right stuff. Who knows? But the possibility of improbability is still there.

Once again, same thing for ID...

[Stud83]

let me ask you something then, since you're so hellbent on miracles, do you actually believe United winning the treble is a miracle? Do you think sports incidents which are very unlikely; like a super run or a wonder goal, or a last minute comeback/win are miracles?

Um... SM, look, "very unlikely" in your case is maybe 1/1000 or 1/1000000000. And while the number is very small, mathematically speaking, it still can happen. And, in fact, it happens all the time, no miracles here.
We are talking about a number which is infinitely smaller than this one. Not thousand times smaller, not even billion to the billionth time smaller. It's more like billion to the billionth to the billionth to the billionth to the billionth to the billionth to the billionth times smaller. At best. And that's only speculation at this point, coulda shoulda woulda - no bacteria that small has actually been found. But even if we assume it to be found,
Seriously, do you think it's possible for a person to win a lottery 2 weeks in a row every single day? I mean winning it twice in a row is very very strange. Winning it 3 times in a row would be absolutely shocking. Winning it 10 times in a row would be a miracle.

[listen_up_fergie]

Um... SM, look, "very unlikely" in your case is maybe 1/1000 or 1/1000000000. And while the number is very small, mathematically speaking, it still can happen. And, in fact, it happens all the time, no miracles here.
We are talking about a number which is infinitely smaller than this one. Not thousand times smaller, not even billion to the billionth time smaller. It's more like billion to the billionth to the billionth to the billionth to the billionth to the billionth to the billionth times smaller. At best. And that's only speculation at this point, coulda shoulda woulda - no bacteria that small has actually been found. But even if we assume it to be found,
Seriously, do you think it's possible for a person to win a lottery 2 weeks in a row every single day? I mean winning it twice in a row is very very strange. Winning it 3 times in a row would be absolutely shocking. Winning it 10 times in a row would be a miracle.

I'm just curious as to how you can ascertain that the probability of abiogenesis having occured is as low as you claim it was. It's not like you've actually sat down with a supercomputer and entered all the variables - its more a conjecture on your part.

[SirManchester]

Um... SM, look, "very unlikely" in your case is maybe 1/1000 or 1/1000000000. And while the number is very small, mathematically speaking, it still can happen. And, in fact, it happens all the time, no miracles here.
We are talking about a number which is infinitely smaller than this one. Not thousand times smaller, not even billion to the billionth time smaller. It's more like billion to the billionth to the billionth to the billionth to the billionth to the billionth to the billionth times smaller. At best. And that's only speculation at this point, coulda shoulda woulda - no bacteria that small has actually been found. But even if we assume it to be found,
Seriously, do you think it's possible for a person to win a lottery 2 weeks in a row every single day? I mean winning it twice in a row is very very strange. Winning it 3 times in a row would be absolutely shocking. Winning it 10 times in a row would be a miracle.

It's only logical that it would be more unlikely for something to occur given smaller numbers, however that doesn't also mean that it couldn't happen, because it most certainly can. no miracles about it.

[littleman]

Um... SM, look, "very unlikely" in your case is maybe 1/1000 or 1/1000000000. And while the number is very small, mathematically speaking, it still can happen. And, in fact, it happens all the time, no miracles here.
We are talking about a number which is infinitely smaller than this one. Not thousand times smaller, not even billion to the billionth time smaller. It's more like billion to the billionth to the billionth to the billionth to the billionth to the billionth to the billionth times smaller. At best. And that's only speculation at this point, coulda shoulda woulda - no bacteria that small has actually been found. But even if we assume it to be found,
Seriously, do you think it's possible for a person to win a lottery 2 weeks in a row every single day? I mean winning it twice in a row is very very strange. Winning it 3 times in a row would be absolutely shocking. Winning it 10 times in a row would be a miracle.

This "incredibly small" mathematical figure doesn't mean it couldn't happen.

[Howard Zinn]

Let's get some post SOTU stuff going here.


My first impression: it's lovely how quickly Bush moves through this thing. The whole night took an hour total. I like conciseness.

[Numquam Moribimur]

Let's get some post SOTU stuff going here.


My first impression: it's lovely how quickly Bush moves through this thing. The whole night took an hour total. I like conciseness.


like i said it was a good speech ...but the negativity between the two parties is upsetting

[SirManchester]

He just mumbled the same things he's been mumbling for the past year. Nothing new, and it doesn't mean it was any good. He's been talking the talk for years, I doubt he'll walk the walk this time around again.

[Howard Zinn]

like i said it was a good speech ...but the negativity between the two parties is upsetting


It was a good speech. He accomplished his goals, and his speaking skills were actually quite impressive despite a few bumbles. He has come a long way since his first SOTU and this one.

The negativity between the two parties is greatly over-exagerated. Democrats and Republicans actually disagree on very little, though I'm sure I'll get my head ripped off for saying this.

[SirManchester]

It was a good speech. He accomplished his goals, and his speaking skills were actually quite impressive despite a few bumbles. He has come a long way since his first SOTU and this one.

The negativity between the two parties is greatly over-exagerated. Democrats and Republicans actually disagree on very little, though I'm sure I'll get my head ripped off for saying this.

This guy is the president of the ********in United States!!! either you guys are just easily impressed or you have lowered yoru standards because you expect your politicians to come off as ignorant kids.

I agree with the latter though.

[Sapphire]

I thought it was an OK speech, but I really disliked Bush's smarmy tone. I know he has the capability to put on an air of seriousness and solemness, because we saw it post-911. The state of the union is the most important speech of the year, and I'd like to see him reflect the gravity of our political engagements in his manner and tone. I hate it when he gets all smirky and cracks jokes. We're at war, the sh!t just hit the fan in Palestine, our federal government is swarming with scandal, not to mention about a dozen other serious issues. It's not appropriate in this format, and it makes me wonder if he's lost the plot, just like when he was cracking jokes after Katrina.

[SirManchester]

I thought it was an OK speech, but I really disliked Bush's smarmy tone. I know he has the capability to put on an air of seriousness and solemness, because we saw it post-911. The state of the union is the most important speech of the year, and I'd like to see him reflect the gravity of our political engagements in his manner and tone. I hate it when he gets all smirky and cracks jokes. We're at war, the sh!t just hit the fan in Palestine, our federal government is swarming with scandal, not to mention about a dozen other serious issues. It's not appropriate in this format, and it makes me wonder if he's lost the plot, just like when he was cracking jokes after Katrina.


If you think this was bad, you should check out his interviews and behaviors overseas. It's downright pathetic, other nations have serious and professional leaders and then they and their people get a look at this dolt..it's just pathetic, I can't understand how people still look up to him here.

[Sapphire]

This guy is the president of the ********in United States!!! either you guys are just easily impressed or you have lowered yoru standards because you expect your politicians to come off as ignorant kids. It's true. But we've been getting seriously outrageously dumbed-down speeches from him lately. There was even a word he used I had to look up: rostrum (it means "pulpit")