|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 12:50 pm
Leavaros I would remind you that gravity is only a theory, too. -LD Wait a minute...If gravity is a theory, does that mean that I can fly? O_o
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 2:24 pm
No dear, my point was that many theories are in reality closer to laws that govern our world, gravity being one example. Apply this to evolution and....
-LD
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 5:25 pm
A few days ago, my classmates were really upset with me when our Philosophy teacher asked, who believed in a soul and who believed in this being all that there was. Everybody raised their hands at the first option, and I raised it at the 2nd option.
I believed in a soul all my life, until I found out that everything I was taught, all my life, was a lie. Not an intentional one, created by illness rather than maliciousness, but a lie never the less. After finding all the reasons, that are facts, for things that were and are wrong, I stopped believing in something extra.
But, I always believed in evolution. I've always been one to put science before religious fairy tales. Like it was said a few posts back, in this thread, some things are certain. Theory or not, you know how a rock is going to fall if you throw it horizontally. The acceleration of gravity is always going to be 9,81m/s2, two cups with the same volume, but different mass, are always going to hit the ground at the same time... and so on.
There are things we can't explain, but that doesn't necessarily mean they have no explanation. People used to think the Earth is flat. They thought the Fertility gods and goddesses make it rain. We found out it's not exactly like that... If we have always blamed a god for everything we couldn't understand, what makes us think it's not so now? What makes us think that we know everything, and that some things can't be explained by science? I think, that they just haven't been discovered yet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 24, 2007 10:21 am
I believe in a mix of the two - that a greater entity started life on earth and then from there things evolved.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 24, 2007 6:04 pm
[Helmorana] A few days ago, my classmates were really upset with me when our Philosophy teacher asked, who believed in a soul and who believed in this being all that there was. Everybody raised their hands at the first option, and I raised it at the 2nd option. I believed in a soul all my life, until I found out that everything I was taught, all my life, was a lie. Not an intentional one, created by illness rather than maliciousness, but a lie never the less. After finding all the reasons, that are facts, for things that were and are wrong, I stopped believing in something extra. But, I always believed in evolution. I've always been one to put science before religious fairy tales. Like it was said a few posts back, in this thread, some things are certain. Theory or not, you know how a rock is going to fall if you throw it horizontally. The acceleration of gravity is always going to be 9,81m/s2, two cups with the same volume, but different mass, are always going to hit the ground at the same time... and so on. There are things we can't explain, but that doesn't necessarily mean they have no explanation. People used to think the Earth is flat. They thought the Fertility gods and goddesses make it rain. We found out it's not exactly like that... If we have always blamed a god for everything we couldn't understand, what makes us think it's not so now? What makes us think that we know everything, and that some things can't be explained by science? I think, that they just haven't been discovered yet. Helmorana, the force of gravity on earth is such that the acceleration of a dropped object will always be -9.81 meters per seconds squared, but on Luna or Mars, this will not be the case. My point is not to be overly analytical with your studies--sometimes you must let relative theories do their job and save you some major headaches, you know? And I think most of us have an odd amount of faith (superstition, whatever) about the "currently unexplainable". In an odd way, I feel sometimes like I lose something integral when I drop a notch in belief. Some nights, I just look at the stars and wonder about things...haven't you? Even things that can't be explained should not be written off, but pondered. Hypothesis and theory, right? But...maybe that's just me. I apologize if I rubbed a sore spot, but I felt as if something needed to be said. And that, my dear, really is me. Love and Vale, -LD
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Sep 25, 2007 3:15 pm
XxDarkforcesxX Rebo_Nicky I agree. It is difficult to refute something, when there is proof for all to see. I also think it is a bad idea to invovle science in religion. mrgreen Unless you're a scientologist. but they have to PAY to read fiction novels that L. Ron Hubbard wrote. Lol, L. Ron made them believe a big fake story XD. As far as entertainment goes, I adore L. Ron Hubbard.!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Sep 28, 2007 9:18 am
Leavaros Helmorana, the force of gravity on earth is such that the acceleration of a dropped object will always be -9.81 meters per seconds squared, but on Luna or Mars, this will not be the case. My point is not to be overly analytical with your studies--sometimes you must let relative theories do their job and save you some major headaches, you know? And I think most of us have an odd amount of faith (superstition, whatever) about the "currently unexplainable". In an odd way, I feel sometimes like I lose something integral when I drop a notch in belief. Some nights, I just look at the stars and wonder about things...haven't you? Even things that can't be explained should not be written off, but pondered. Hypothesis and theory, right? But...maybe that's just me. I apologize if I rubbed a sore spot, but I felt as if something needed to be said. And that, my dear, really is me. Love and Vale, -LD You didn't touch a sore spot, it was just a discussion. Just because an opinion differs from your own it doesn't mean it's an attack, I was just telling my own side. However, I'm not really open to your manner of addressing me, I'm not your dear. THAT is a sore spot.
Are you trying to say gravity is relative and can't be trusted, but that we should just accept it as a given, or what? confused And why do you call the Moon Luna? I don't really follow your first paragraph, if you could elaborate further, please.
Gravity acceleration on Mars is 3,71m/s2, and on the Moon 1,62m/s2, btw. Basic High School Physics. Is that overly analytical? We don't have Physics anymore, but the gravitational accelerations are one of those things, that you had to use so many times you will never forget...
Trust me, I'm all for pondering the unexplainable, one of my Graduation Major thingies, or however English speakers refer to that, is Philosophy. Writing off or ignoring the unexplainable wasn't my point at all, it's just that my vote goes to the scientific, empirical approach to problem solving. Almost all sciences have their beginnings in Philosophy. Without people over analysing things modern society wouldn't exist. No medicine, maths, mobile phones, computers, cars, successful agriculture, psychology, sociology, history and carbon dating (or whatever you call that), no theory of modern economy, book printing... You wouldn't even be able to read things written waaaaaaay back because nobody would over analyse the scriptures to break the code.
That is why I think overanalysing is good.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Sep 28, 2007 12:03 pm
[Helmorana] That is why I think overanalysing is good. I completely agree with that. People always tell me that I do that too much, but I don't see why it's such a bad thing. I think most people are too accepting of ideas that are thrown at them (and don't really think about the who, what, where, when, and why kind of stuff), even if there's no logical explanation behind it. It's like, "Why do you believe that?" and their response is, "Because so and so said so, or because I read it in this book." That irritates me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Sep 28, 2007 3:43 pm
There are many moons, but only one Luna. My point in all of this is that even gravity--something that defines a huge part of our existence--is relative, if not in theory, then in practice. That is all.
I, too, think that analysis is good, but you know what they say about too much of a good thing....
Umm..... Can I ask why saying "my dear" bothers you? I call just about everyone 'dear' or 'honey' or 'sweetie'. I always have. I can't imagine stopping that now. I certainly don't mean anything negative by it. It's just a friendly term.
Love and Vale,
-LD
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Sep 28, 2007 5:36 pm
Not trying to speak for Vix here, but if it were me you had said that to, the fact that you put 'my' in front of 'dear' would've ticked me off the most. Because 'my' is a possesive word. You put that in front of a word such as 'dear' and it can come off totally wrong. That and stuff like that now-a-days can be taken as sexual harassment.
It might also have something to do with the fact that she may not actually know you. I had some guy say 'my love' to me once. It's fine when my boyfriend says it... but I didn't even know this guys name, and it was over the internet... kind of creepy.
People are different. Some people like being called stuff like that, others don't. I called one of my younger co-workers 'sir' once because I have respect for him and he didn't like it. I was like, "I say that to every one (with the exception of ma'am for females) that I have respect for". But that didn't change the fact that he didn't like being called that.
Everyone's different. If you call someone something and they don't like it just apologize and try your best not to call that specific person that again.
But of course, that's just my point of view. Vix and I are completely different people. And whatever her reason is for not wanting to be called that, I'm sure it's a good reason.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Sep 28, 2007 6:09 pm
Maggie got it down pretty well smile I don't know you, you're not my friend. I'm a very private person, I don't take kindly to terms of affection from people I haven't known for years, and with whom I have no personal relationship with.
How is gravity relative? Gravity is constant on a given planet, it depends on the size, mass and "construction" (I can't think of the proper word) of the planet. If it was relative it would mean that it's 9,81m/s2 if you look at it from one point of view on Earth, and 19,76m/s2 if you look at it from the opposite point of view.
Unless you mean that variation on the relativity of time, if you're at the dentists, it's ages, and if you're having fun, it's gone in no time.
I'm sorry, but I really don't follow.
Also, Luna comes from latin and it means "moon". Any moon. Even my own language has that word and we use it for any moon in discussion. Ours and the moons of Saturn. ("Saturnove lune") It depends on the capitalisation. Moon with capital M in English is our moon. Luna with capital L is our moon. Luna with little l is just a moon.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Sep 28, 2007 6:23 pm
Right, but our moon is still Luna, and other moons are no longer lunae. (If you remember, Helmorana, I've been taking Latin for 4 years....)
I mean relative in that sense that gravity is different depending on the planet, (asteroid, whatever), and that therefore, while gravity is real, gravity varies. It isn't a law, it's a theory. I try not to put too much faith in theories.
And...just because we aren't friends does not mean we can't be friends. 'Dear' is what it is: a term of affection. No more. No less. I'm sorry you've taken ill to it. If you wish, I won't call you that anymore.
Love and Vale,
-LD
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Sep 29, 2007 3:26 am
Leavaros Right, but our moon is still Luna, and other moons are no longer lunae. (If you remember, Helmorana, I've been taking Latin for 4 years....) Actually, I don't, I've been away for a long time, due to computer problems, so I don't really know who you are. And what do you mean by no longer? When did lunae (nom.pl.) stop meaning moons? And you should know this, you're the one taking Latin, I just pick it up from French, that when referring to a single moon that isn't ours, the declination and capitalisation is still luna (sing.nom.). That wasn't even what I was interested in, I was wondering why you were using a foreign word instead of a perfectly valid existing English word. I'm a bit touchy about these things because in my own language, I notice people preferring foreign words over domestic because they sound more... *insert xzy adjective* And the language is becoming less and less important. I see there is no such problem with English, when it's being spoken all over the planet, there is no risk of extinction, but the feeling still remains. Not a rationally justifiable feeling, but never the less. Quote: I mean relative in that sense that gravity is different depending on the planet, (asteroid, whatever), and that therefore, while gravity is real, gravity varies. It isn't a law, it's a theory. I try not to put too much faith in theories. Ok, thank you. I don't agree with you, but at least I know what you mean now. Quote: And...just because we aren't friends does not mean we can't be friends. 'Dear' is what it is: a term of affection. No more. No less. I'm sorry you've taken ill to it. If you wish, I won't call you that anymore. It's true, but until we become friends I won't feel any affection for you and therefore won't have a reason to call you by affectionate words. Those are for people I actually care about, my friends, my family, my boyfriend, people I've known for years or mean something special to me. You're just a name on a forum, whose opinions I don't agree with. Nothing to warm my heart, nothing to cool it either. And thank you, I would appreciate it if you wouldn't.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Sep 29, 2007 11:22 am
Interesting, isn't it? How cold the tongue can be, and yet so scathing?
-LD
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 26, 2007 4:42 pm
You know i think this whole deabte raises an intresting point, of is science just completely wrong or if its right how does it fit into the scheme of things for Wicca. I have my own theorys, but id like to see what other people have to say first. Btw someone said a bit earlier, i dont put too much faith into theorys, tell me how does a theory ever become a theorem if no one ever places any faith in it. Also i dont think it matters too much how we call something like the moon, everyone has their own reason for calling it by a certain name, i just try to remeber thats a symbol of Nemaine and Rhiannon and therefore seperates itself from other moons, satellites.etc. In saying that i understand what Helmorana means after just having been in France myself.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
![[Helmorana]'s avatar](https://a1cdn.gaiaonline.com/dress-up/avatar/ava/bc/67/3938c1944767bc_flip.png?t=1367148754_6.00_11)
