Search results

For anyone who understands science, including the theory of evolution, there simply is no "face value" to believe in. Conflating that understanding with religious faith is a mistake.

Really? Which VSL would that be, exactly? Mine makes it quite clear that nature, including evolution, is "the way things work". So I'll thank you to not call me a hypocrite. And then I'll point out that it may be your choice to believe the universe works according to some collection of ancient...

Retired FF here. Agree with MarkR. It's kind an apples-to-oranges comparison. IMO, the big difference is that the bond between FF's and (I assume) between LEO's, is driven by external things, "the job", in other words. The risks, the hours, the work environment, etc. all make demands unlike most...

And that, as others have already observed here, is the saddest thing; that far too many people allow things other than reason to cloud there judgement. There's a word for that. The word is "superstition". Yes, I am aware that superstition and "faith" are pretty much interchangeable in many...

When the risks presented by failing to be vaccinated are far, far greater, refusing to accept the risks of vaccination is anything but reasonable.

In cases where the evidence is abundant and incontrovertible, as in the case of the efficacy of vaccination for common contagious diseases, there can be only one rational conclusion. Making another conclusion is, to say the least, foolish. We are not talking about a matter of "perception" or...

Yeah. Those are thecrackpots we're talking about. No supporting science. Lots of ignorant and fearful groupthink. Lots of needlessly sick people.

"Nut"? No, not for asking questions. Foolish, yes, when it comes to your decision on vaccinations. The evidence overwhelmingly indicates that getting vaccinated is the better choice.

...and faith. Masons must be both. :biggrin: Thank you, Brother. I am pleased that you found it useful.

My beliefs... 1. The "blinders" imposed upon my awareness by this physical experience would no longer exist. To suggest that my spirit would "go" somewhere would be to make unwarranted presumptions about the nature of spirit and awareness. It would be different. 2. Religions are a worldly...

Tolerant of what? The crackpot notion that the moon landings were all an elaborate ruse? I disagree. Such notions deserve all the derision that can be heaped upon them. Now, the fools who actually believe such notions? It might be argued that they deserve some kind of tolerance, but I'd say that...

You may believe anything you like. People believe all kinds of foolish things, but most of them don't choose Masonic discussion forums to air those foolish beliefs. Why are you here?

FTFA... "And if CO2 does get to be a problem, Dyson believes we can just do some genetic engineering to create a new species of super-tree that can suck up the excess." Dr. Dyson should probably stick to his area of expertise. I suspect that the bulk of those with serious expertise in...

If you are literate (as in "well read") enough, you're likely to blow right past it. :001_smile:

The Book of Genesis is a set of ancient stories that were told mouth-to-ear until someone decided to write them down. Since then, they have been translated and edited many, many times. That much is fact. To argue that the contents of that book are fact is completely absurd as there is nothing...

And there is your mistake - trying to argue that the two are not mutually exclusive. One is a scientific theory and the other is a myth. One invites critical thinking to determine it's veracity and the other requires only belief. They are two very different things and any attempt to weigh one...

So... those enlightenment era men who conceived of the idea that religion, any religion, as the source of a government's authority was a bad idea might have been onto something? :6:

In my SR jurisdiction there was a man of similar age and who was capable of only rather hoarse, low-volume speech. It was a treat to listen to him as his command of the ritual, including subtler nuances... you know, of the type a trained actor knows how to deliver, were without equal. IIRC...

I didn't know they had a name for it. Cool.

No... We are trying to tell you that you are conflating the terms "theory" with "scientific theory" and that you appear to be doing so deliberately, in an attempt to defend an indefensible position. I will now also tell you that mixing politics into a discussion that has already wandered...