Karma
- Thread starter china
- Start date
That's funny, because that's exactly what they did. In fact, they had several VWs, and always had at least one rebuilt engine in the garage, so they could swap it out when needed.
He'd keep the Karmann until Thanksgiving weekend, then come back with a van until spring.
In the early 1980s, Mazda sold the 323 with a turbo engine. That engine is a bolt-in for early Miatas, so if you happen to have an early Miata, go hunting for an old 323 turbo.
At least it attempts to find explanations. It's done fairly well on the first two, and would argue strongly that those absolutes are not absolute at all. We've been around those ideas before here. Your version of things is simply that god did it and no further explanation is necessary or possible, which doesn't explain anything. It's an attempt to explain something complex and difficult to understand by postulating something even more complex and difficult to understand as the cause, which gets us exactly nowhere. As for that little graphic about atheism you posted: you put the "cool" emoticon at the end of it, which suggests you think it's a cogent statement. It's not, it's the most egregious straw man fallacy I've seen from you yet. You know perfectly well that's not what atheism is.
How does your version of "science" explain it "better"?
Alley, I don’t think science ‘explains it better’. Science explains it, for it to ‘explain it better’ there has to be another explanation (better than what?). But there is none, I don’t regard religious explanation of anything as a valid explanation.
Science is the only game in town. So science ‘explains it’, it does not ‘explain it better.
It certainly can't account for existence, the laws of logic, absolute truth, absolute morals...
Here you are opening up a whole new can of worms. I don’t agree that there are any absolute truths (well, there may be a few in science) or absolute morals.
Alley, I don’t think science ‘explains it better’. Science explains it, for it to ‘explain it better’ there has to be another explanation (better than what?). But there is none, I don’t regard religious explanation of anything as a valid explanation.
Science is the only game in town. So science ‘explains it’, it does not ‘explain it better.
It certainly can't account for existence, the laws of logic, absolute truth, absolute morals...
Here you are opening up a whole new can of worms. I don’t agree that there are any absolute truths (well, there may be a few in science) or absolute morals.
It has a theory of life, not the origin of life, that's for sure. We had the big bang and whatever was prior is not clearly explained by your department. It was either nothing, or some other blind, impersonal natural force which is outside of time, space, and matter. And which would need its own explanation of origin of course.
I don't need to postulate God, he was demonstrated through Jesus Christ.
Do you really want to travel down that road? You know truth is absolute and I've seen you state so.
Morals...yes... a big topic.
But you swore that tolerance of other ideas meant that they were valid ideas! You not tolerating me! How can you single me out! HATE CRIME!!
That's right, so why won't you let ID scientists into the club, they're open to all causes, not just natural ones. I tells ya why, its because your department wants to remove God from the picture, that's why.
I'll ask you again:
If there are no absolute morals then is it ABSOLUTELY wrong for me to suppress SirJosephPorter's freedom of speech? Is is ABSOLUTELY wrong for me to hurt SJP's family?
Or by yours. It's okay to admit we don't know things, you know.
I don't think so. Take a closer look at the assumptions you have to make to justify that claim, it's the logical fallacy called begging the question. Are you aware that there's absolutely NO evidence outside the New Testament that Jesus even existed?
I'd agree that there must be some absolute truths, statements about the nature of reality that are absolutely correct, simply because I assume, as science must, that reality is at least in principle consistent and comprehensible, but that doesn't mean we know what any of them are, and it's a bit of casuistry on your part to conclude from that that I've stated that truth is absolute.
Last edited:
Have you ever been looking over your shoulder to someone you've insulted when you wanked into the stopsign?
Boy! Wanking really must hurt.;-)
It happens all the time. You think someone should be whacked for being an Ahole and then stub your toe. As John said, "Instant Karma is going to get you."