search results matching tag: adams
» channel: learn
go advanced with your query
Search took 0.002 seconds
Videos (1000) | Sift Talk (23) | Blogs (100) | Comments (1000) |
Videos (1000) | Sift Talk (23) | Blogs (100) | Comments (1000) |
Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Already signed up?
Log in now.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Remember your password?
Log in now.
my bodyguard-bully asskicking scene
you make a valid point sir.
but mordhaus posted the next time adam baldwin and chris makepeace meet the bully and matt dillon.
More like asskicking bully scene.
Ricky Gervais And Colbert Go Head-To-Head On Religion
I think there are aspects of this that fall into the realm of philosophy.
I personally don't think we can ever have "The Truth" in that ultimate sense. Pretend for a minute that the SUVAT equations (the equations of motion) are completely accurate. I can drop a ball from a certain height and you can time it and we'll find to some degree of accuracy that the equations were right.
The ball and the floor didn't need to calculate anything. Whilst me and you sit there with a stopwatch technical manual, assorted tape measures to find the distance, expensive cameras to figure out when i dropped the ball..... Whilst we are tying down an uncertainty, the ball and floor have already done it.
When you get right down to it, we simply cannot know an exact time. We can never know an 'exact' anything, because now we need to discuss where the "ball" ends and where the "floor" begins on a molecular level. And no matter how much we agree, the uncertainty principle gets us in the end - we don't and can't know the exact location of fundamental particles. An "exact" anything ends up being a conceptual thing that we can't ever test.
But where i'm going with this is that we're kind of talking about the nature of understanding. We know the volume of a sphere if we know its radius, but how do we create the same sphere accurately? Our brains don't have a resolution, but the tools we use in reality do - reality itself quite possibly has a resolution. We think of minecraft as a blocky, low resolution simulation of an analogue reality. Similarly, i think maths is an 'analogue' (in that it can be "exact") simulation of a limited resolution reality - reality only looks analogue when you don't look very closely.
All that is to say, we DO understand the ball dropping and hitting the floor, but "exactness" is a thing that only exists in the act itself. The only thing left for us to decide is what we consider accurate enough.
Perhaps "god" wanted to know what would happen if he set off a big bang. He sat down, calculated it all out in the language of the gods (the language of perfection; maths) and realised that due to uncertainty, the only way to know exactly what would happen was for it to actually happen. (Douglas Adams?)
It doesn't make a difference to your ability to make a statement per se, but speaking to a friend of mine who is a physicist his answers are somewhat different. He's suggested that reading more about it will make it more confusing and that we are invariably wrong and don't know shit. I happen to agree with him. That's not to say one shouldn't attempt to gain as much knowledge as possible, but that it's not always as easy as "go read a text book and it should be nice and clear", because reading it should hopefully generate more questions than it answers. Hopefully I've worded that so it makes sense.
Anyway, the sum of human knowledge is dynamic steaming pile of shit. Yes, it's gotten us a long way. But we're still like dung beetles tending to it and it will be a long time until we can transform it into something close to the truth.
Maybe when we can integrate AIs into us we'll accelerate things a little.
Liberal Redneck - Muslim Ban
@transmorpher
so when i point out the historical implications,i am somehow automatically disregarding the inherent problems within islam itself?
and your counter is to not only NOT counter,but refuse to acknowledge the historical ramifications,because that is some political,agenda driven-drivel.
that the ONLY acceptable argument is to focus on the religion itself,and ignore all other considerations,because,again..just tools to be used and abused by the left to fuel the far right.
am i getting this right so far?
that to include history is actually the path that stops that path to move forward?
and here i was still hanging on to that tired old adage "those who refuse to recognize history,are doomed to repeat it".
i am glad that you found those authors so respectful and admired their analysis and dedication to research,but you didn't even bother to use one of THEIR arguments.you simply made claims and then told us you read some books.
dude..now i am just kinda...sad for you.
i am sorry that you are oblivious to your own myopia,and that you are coming across as condescending.yet really haven't posted anything of value that you have to contribute.
you are just pointing the finger and accusing people of their arguments being dishonest,when it appears to me that everyone here has taken the time to try to talk to you,and your replies have been fairly static.
hitchens tried to make the case,and failed in my opinion(i am not the only one),but a case i suspect you are referencing.that even if we took the history of neoliberalism,colonialism and empire building OFF the table.islam would STILL be a gaggle of extremist radicals seeking a one world caliphate.
which is why i referenced dearborn michigan.
it is why i mentioned kabul afghanistan.
we are talking about the radicalization of muslims.
why are they growing?
where do they come from?
why do they seem to be getting more and more extreme?
which many here have attempted to answer,including myself.
but YOU are addressing and entirely different question:
'what is wrong with islam as a religion"
well,a LOT in fact and i already mentioned islams dire need for a reformation,but it goes further than that.you see the epistemology of both judiaism and christianity have been thoroughly argued over and over....and over..that what you find today is a pretty succinct refinement of their respective theologies.
agree/disagree..maybe you are atheist or agnostic,that is not the point.the point is that the so-called "finished' product has pretty clear philosophies,that adherents can easily follow.
for judaism this is in large part to the talmud,which is a living document,where even to this day rabbis debate and argue the finer details.not to be confused with holy scripture the torah.
christianity was forced to acknowledge its failings and flaws,because the theology was weak,and was becoming more and more an amalgamation of other religious beliefs,but most of all,and i think most importantly,the in-fighting with the vatican and the church of england had exposed this weakness,and christianity was on the brink of collapse due to its own hubris and arrogance.
they had no central authority.no leadership that the people could come to in order to clarify scripture.
so thanks to the bravery of martin luther,who risked being labeled a heretic,challenged the political power,which in those days was religious,and so began the process of reformation.
and also ended the dark ages,and western civilization stepped into the "age of enlightenment".
islam has had no such reformation,though is in desperate need of one.they had no council of nicea to decide what was holy canon and what was not,which is why you have more gospels of jesus in the quran than you do in the actual bible.
the king james bible has over 38,000 mis-translations in the old testament alone,whereas the quran has....well...we don't know,because nobody challenges the veracity of the quran.
am i winning you over to my side yet?
still think i am leftist "stooge' and "useful idiot"?
look man,
words are inert.
they are simply symbols.
they are meaningless until we lay eyes on them and GIVE them meaning.
so if you are a violent,war-loving person-------your religion will be violent,and warmongering.
if you are a peaceful and loving person----then your religion will be peaceful and loving.
the problem is NOT religion itself,and i know my atheists really don't want to hear that,but it's true.religion is going nowhere.
the problem is fundamentalist thinking.
the problem is viewing holy scripture as the unerring word of god.
which is why you see creationists attempt,in vain,to convince the rest of us that the earth is only 6,000 yrs old,and their only proof or evidence is a book.
so we all point and laugh.....how silly..6,000yrs old.crazy talk.
but WHY is the creationist so adamant in his attempts to defend his holy text?
because to accept the reality that the earth is not 6,000 yrs old but 14 billion yrs old,is to go against the word of god,and god is unerring,and if the bible is the word of god....and god is unerring.........
now lets go back to dearborn michigan.
if hitchens and harris are RIGHT,then that relatively stable community of muslims are really just extremists waiting for the angels to blow their horn and announce the time for JIHAD!!!
and,to be fair,that is a possibility,but a small one.
why?
because of something the majority of christians experience here in the states,canada,europe,australia...they experience pushback.
does this mean that america does not have radical christians in our midst?
oh lawdy do we ever.
ok ok..i am doing it again.
me and my pedantic self.
suffice to say:
islam IS a problem,even taken as a singular dynamic,that religion has serious issues.
but they are not the ONLY problem,which is what many of here have been trying to talk about.
ALL religions have a problem,and that problem is fundamentalism.which for christianity is a fairly new phenom (less than 100 yrs old) whereas islam has suffered from this mental malady pretty much since its inception.
ok..thats it..im done.pooped,whipped and in need of sleep.
hope i clarified some things with ya mate,but i swear to god if you respond with a reiteration of all your comments.i am going to hunt you down,and BEAT you with a bible,and not that wimpy king james either!
the hefty scofield study bible!
The Brachistochrone Problem
Great video. Everything's better with Adam Savage
Electric Cars Aren't As Green As You Think
Adam FAILED to Ruin Tesla has been added as a related post - related requested by PlayhousePals on that post.
Godless – The Truth Beyond Belief
So...if a fetus is created from only female DNA, it would be sinless? Why aren't the church and all Christians pushing for cloning research then?
Even if it were possible, it would all be for naught once the first sin was committed. Adam didn't have a sin nature either until he committed sin.
you need infinity +1 rooms, and then you're moving into unreal numbers....not the place to be when trying to prove something is real.
You can talk to the mathematicians about it. I was only using that as a rough analogy to illustrate an idea. I can't say for sure how the mechanics of it worked, I only know that God considered it justice for all sin.
If he atoned for all sin, why is disbelief still a sin? All sin is either atoned for or not.
There is atonement for unbelief but there is something you have to do, which is repent and believe the gospel. If you're in court and the judge tells you that if you go and see the clerk and sign some paperwork he'll let you go free, and you refuse to sign the paperwork, he isn't going to let you out.
So..
Godless – The Truth Beyond Belief
Hey newtboy, you have a misunderstanding there. The original sin was committed in the garden of Eden, when Adam and Eve ate of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Because of that, death entered the world through Adam:
1 Corinthians 15:21-22: For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. 22For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.
Jesus didn't have a sin nature because God was His Father. That was, I think, one of the reasons why the virgin birth was necessary. Jesus is the new Adam.
In regards to Jesus bearing our punishment, Jesus fully bore Gods wrath for all sin. The way I understand it is this: Jesus, being God, is an infinite being. Because He is an infinite being, He could bear an infinite punishment in a finite amount of time. It seems counter intuitive to us finite creatures, but there is a good illustration of the concept by a mathematician named David Hilbert:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hilbert's_paradox_of_the_Grand_Hotel
The idea is that you have a hotel with an infinite amount of rooms which is totally occupied. A guest comes by who wishes to be accommodated so the owner has the guest in room 1 move to room 2, and the guest in room 2 move to room 3, etc, which makes room for the guest. You can do this an infinite amount of times.
As far as partying in hell, that is not what the bible says will happen. The bible describes hell as eternal conscious torment. In juxtaposition to that, this is what the bible says Heaven is like:
Revelation 21:3-5
And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying:
“Behold, the dwelling place of God is with man,
and He will live with them.
They will be His people,
and God Himself will be with them as their God.
He will wipe away every tear from their eyes,
and there will be no more death
or mourning or crying or pain,
for the former things have passed away.”
And the One seated on the throne said, “Behold, I make all things new.” Then He said, “Write this down, for these words are faithful and true.”
Let's not forget original sin. Jesus certainly committed that one by being born.
I also take issue with his short vacation in hell equating to "taking the punishment we deserve". How does a long weekend by one equate to eternity for billions? I've discussed that with shiny before, but I don't understand his answer.
I'm with you, though. Much better to party at the hookilaou in hell than lay prostrate in heaven.
Blade Runner 9732 - Deckard's Apartment Tour Real Time
I'd rather be in Adam Jensen's appartment.
Adam Ruins Everything - Climate Change
To be fair, there is already a tonne of science out there.
Seriously though, this doesn't fit with the Adam Ruins Everything vibe (usually he debunks what he's ruining rather than just being a sober reminder that we are kinda fucked).
Meh. This reads like a morality play written for school children. It'd be nice to see something with a bit more actual science in it that doesn't insult the viewer's intelligence.
Kids These Days
Adam Ruins Millennials has been added as a related post - related requested by Lendl on that post.
Lendl (Member Profile)
Your video, Adam Ruins Millennials, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.
Millennials in the Workplace - Simon Sinek
Adam Ruins Millennials has been added as a related post - related requested by Lendl.
Kids These Days has been added as a related post - related requested by Lendl.
Millennials in the Workplace - Simon Sinek
This douchenozzle has a clear case of juvenoia. It really irks me when a "consultant" in the field is so ignorant of the science and history of the topic he is speaking about.
Upvoting to bring attention to these 2 educational videos that I thought would be on here already (if they are and I failed to find them, let me know)
*related=http://videosift.com/video/Adam-Ruins-Millennials
*related=http://videosift.com/video/Kids-These-Days
Naughty Candy Heart Butt Plug -
*ban
Adam & Eve Best Sex Toy Reviews for Valentine's Day
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ed6fJuX-EBw
Mordhaus (Member Profile)
Your video, Adam Ruins Everything - Keep America Beautiful, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.