Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Is Cornucopianism the new Creationism?

General discussions of the systemic, societal and civilisational effects of depletion.

Re: Is Cornucopianism the new Creationism?

Unread postby babystrangeloop » Sun 05 Feb 2012, 01:09:10

Cornucopianism is also cool, just ask an apologist.
babystrangeloop
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 638
Joined: Sat 25 Jun 2011, 04:34:57

Re: Is Cornucopianism the new Creationism?

Unread postby SeaGypsy » Sun 05 Feb 2012, 01:53:17

All words are loaded. Vile, is a very loaded word. Criticism is warranted and welcome. My reading is that there are 2 totally different meanings to creationism. One is the Bible based standard Christian Science perspective. Another (the one I use) is that science has not (nor do I believe ever will) explain the jump from elemental physics to biology. This massive hole in science leaves plenty of room for conjecture. The conjecture leaves plenty of room for critique. 'Vile' is not a critique usually used in intellectual/ scientific debates. Pretentious. Willfully ignorant. Absolutely lacking in credibility. These are valid critiques, particularly of the first definition.
SeaGypsy
Master Prognosticator
Master Prognosticator
 
Posts: 9284
Joined: Wed 04 Feb 2009, 04:00:00

Re: Is Cornucopianism the new Creationism?

Unread postby Keith_McClary » Sun 05 Feb 2012, 02:46:57

AgentR11 wrote:Creationism, is without a doubt, bad science. But do you even care WHY its bad science? It isn't its truth or false-ness; its the method. There is nothing experimental, repeatable, testable about creationism, it isn't properly falsifiable, it is, a horrible blob of regurgitated doctrine, wrapped in an equally worthless bag of technobabble in an attempt to appear scientific.
Their sleaziest aspect is how they avoid talking about their own creator/designer/yaahoovah "scientific theory".

They should tattoo themselves with a "designer" label.
Facebook knows you're a dog.
User avatar
Keith_McClary
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 7344
Joined: Wed 21 Jul 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Suburban tar sands

Re: Is Cornucopianism the new Creationism?

Unread postby FarQ3 » Sun 05 Feb 2012, 09:36:24

This is comment is aimed at most of you. I believe in many of the same things that you all do. I am a very intelligent man and yet I also believe in Christ's teachings. Are you saying that this makes me any less intelligent than someone that doesn't feel the need to explore the realm of life other than what is presented before them.

How much 'scientific fact' is really 'a given' in that much of last century's scientific fact has been proven incorrect and even misleading. We all have 'faith' in our own way, only some people are blind to that fact.

Yes, comparing cornucopianism to creationism or any other facet of christian teaching is offensive to christians. It doesn't take an intelligent person to realise that.
Oils just aint oils ..... unless you believe the IEA :)
User avatar
FarQ3
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 82
Joined: Wed 19 Jan 2011, 19:32:35
Location: Western Australia

Re: Is Cornucopianism the new Creationism?

Unread postby vision-master » Sun 05 Feb 2012, 09:51:39

I suppose I used "Creationism" as a euphemism for "bad science". Should I apologize?

Once it was almost universally believed that the universe revolved around the Earth. As astronomy developed systems which depicted planets going around the Earth started to show deficiencies which made them impossible to use without making corrections. Rather than abandon the fundamental idea that the Earth was at the center modifications were made to the model of the Earth at center. A major modification was called "epicycles" that described the planets as not only going around the Earth but also being attached to invisible spheres that rotated causing effects.

Fast-forward to now and you will find that there are "epicycle apologists"


Everything happens in your head
"You wake up from the dream everyday. But You have to wake up even from a waking state."

The light of the body is the eye: therefore when your eye is single, your whole body also is full of light; but when your eye is evil, your body also is full of darkness.
Luke 11:34

You say Amen, I say Aten. :)
Image
Last edited by vision-master on Sun 05 Feb 2012, 10:06:40, edited 3 times in total.
vision-master
 

Re: Is Cornucopianism the new Creationism?

Unread postby SeaGypsy » Sun 05 Feb 2012, 09:57:03

FarQ3 wrote:This is comment is aimed at most of you. I believe in many of the same things that you all do. I am a very intelligent man and yet I also believe in Christ's teachings. Are you saying that this makes me any less intelligent than someone that doesn't feel the need to explore the realm of life other than what is presented before them.

How much 'scientific fact' is really 'a given' in that much of last century's scientific fact has been proven incorrect and even misleading. We all have 'faith' in our own way, only some people are blind to that fact.

Yes, comparing cornucopianism to creationism or any other facet of christian teaching is offensive to christians. It doesn't take an intelligent person to realise that.


Or to realize that the Bible is only a tiny and politically slanted version of the person you Greco Roman Christists call 'Jesus Christ'. It also has no meaning for the word 'created'.
SeaGypsy
Master Prognosticator
Master Prognosticator
 
Posts: 9284
Joined: Wed 04 Feb 2009, 04:00:00

Re: Is Cornucopianism the new Creationism?

Unread postby Cog » Sun 05 Feb 2012, 10:00:11

Putting down the bong would help you wake up more easily VM.

Just saying.
User avatar
Cog
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 13416
Joined: Sat 17 May 2008, 03:00:00
Location: Northern Kekistan

Re: Is Cornucopianism the new Creationism?

Unread postby vision-master » Sun 05 Feb 2012, 10:34:33

vision-master
 

Re: Is Cornucopianism the new Creationism?

Unread postby FarQ3 » Sun 05 Feb 2012, 10:38:59

Well SeaGypsy, I am not Greco Roman as you proclaim, you know sweet FA about me as a matter of fact. I am Australian Christian if you wish to 'label' me. As for the bible being politically slanted, that's your point of view and I respect that but agree to disagree. As for the reference to the word 'created' modern translation of ancient hebrew has often been found to be lacking in comparison to the ancient latin translation. There was actually a hebrew word that could be translated to the word 'made' which isn't all that dissimilar to the word created, what do you want to believe?

I don't really want to come to a peak oil website and debate religious beliefs, or vilification as it may be. I come here for intelligent information about peak oil related matters. I'm a firm believer that we are past the peak of worldwide oil production (conventional crude) and on the slide to what will be a biblically apocalyptic cesation of things as we know them.
Oils just aint oils ..... unless you believe the IEA :)
User avatar
FarQ3
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 82
Joined: Wed 19 Jan 2011, 19:32:35
Location: Western Australia

Re: Is Cornucopianism the new Creationism?

Unread postby vision-master » Sun 05 Feb 2012, 10:48:00

The Apocalypse means 'lifting of the veil' . Why do Christian wankers spin everything into 'end of the world'. lsol
vision-master
 

Re: Is Cornucopianism the new Creationism?

Unread postby Lore » Sun 05 Feb 2012, 11:10:09

vision-master wrote:The Apocalypse means 'lifting of the veil' . Why do Christian wankers spin everything into 'end of the world'. lsol


Semantics, it also can be interpreted as universal destruction or widespread disaster. The meaning of words evolves over time, just as being gay today doesn't necessarily mean you're happy.
The things that will destroy America are prosperity-at-any-price, peace-at-any-price, safety-first instead of duty-first, the love of soft living, and the get-rich-quick theory of life.
... Theodore Roosevelt
User avatar
Lore
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9021
Joined: Fri 26 Aug 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Fear Of A Blank Planet

Re: Is Cornucopianism the new Creationism?

Unread postby vision-master » Sun 05 Feb 2012, 11:20:24

Lore wrote:
vision-master wrote:The Apocalypse means 'lifting of the veil' . Why do Christian wankers spin everything into 'end of the world'. lsol


Semantics, it also can be interpreted as universal destruction or widespread disaster. The meaning of words evolves over time, just as being gay today doesn't necessarily mean you're happy.


See how this has been twisted.......

New International Version (©1984)
Your eye is the lamp of your body. When your eyes are good, your whole body also is full of light. But when they are bad, your body also is full of darkness.

King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)
The light of the body is the eye: therefore when thine eye is single, thy whole body also is full of light; but when thine eye is evil, thy body also is full of darkness


One talks about when thine eye is single and another talks about when your eyes are good. :lol:
vision-master
 

Re: Is Cornucopianism the new Creationism?

Unread postby FarQ3 » Sun 05 Feb 2012, 11:28:02

VM, do you know how pathetic it is calling people names on a website. A gutless act, absolutely gutless to the max. I stated 'biblically apocalyptic cesation of things as we know them' if you can read there is nothing there about end of the world. In biblical terms it's actually all about a change to a new beginning.
Oils just aint oils ..... unless you believe the IEA :)
User avatar
FarQ3
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 82
Joined: Wed 19 Jan 2011, 19:32:35
Location: Western Australia

Re: Is Cornucopianism the new Creationism?

Unread postby vision-master » Sun 05 Feb 2012, 11:29:59

So what's next, report my post. lol
vision-master
 

Re: Is Cornucopianism the new Creationism?

Unread postby AgentR11 » Sun 05 Feb 2012, 12:37:30

FarQ3 wrote:This is comment is aimed at most of you. I believe in many of the same things that you all do. I am a very intelligent man and yet I also believe in Christ's teachings. Are you saying that this makes me any less intelligent than someone that doesn't feel the need to explore the realm of life other than what is presented before them.

How much 'scientific fact' is really 'a given' in that much of last century's scientific fact has been proven incorrect and even misleading. We all have 'faith' in our own way, only some people are blind to that fact.


Two points, I don't think any of the serious writers on this forum would ever suggest that practicing a religious faith makes someone less intelligent, nor that intelligent people can not be religiously active. Anyone that does, you can safely place them in a bucket labelled "emotionally charged fools" and entertain yourself by poking them every once in a while.

The second though, is that science isn't something to have faith in. Its a tool. Any principal in your field, that is in the least bit unclear, should be relentlessly challenged, until either it is clear, or proven false. OTOH, principals that are not relevant to the actions in your life can be left, ignored, discarded, or accepted without consequence as the mood suits you. If your life's purpose does not relate to it, you can accept or reject The Origin of Species out of hand; but you should also pass on the opportunities to challenge the choices of those whose work does relate to it.

However, if one chooses to have FAITH in, or BELIEVE in The Origin of Species, then that one is a fool, unworthy of respect or concern.
Yes we are, as we are,
And so shall we remain,
Until the end.
AgentR11
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 6357
Joined: Tue 22 Mar 2011, 09:15:51
Location: East Texas

Re: Is Cornucopianism the new Creationism?

Unread postby AgentR11 » Sun 05 Feb 2012, 12:47:46

FarQ3 wrote:I don't really want to come to a peak oil website and debate religious beliefs, or vilification as it may be. I come here for intelligent information about peak oil related matters. I'm a firm believer that we are past the peak of worldwide oil production (conventional crude) and on the slide to what will be a biblically apocalyptic cesation of things as we know them.


Well, we do tend to range far and wide here, I think there is another website that is much stricter in its subject matter.

There are, however, numerous threads here about the various aspects of peak oil; all with plenty of controversy to post about. Though the doomers here have somewhat come to a consensus opinion concerning a slow, grinding collapse, as opposed to an obvious, pivotal moment where stuff stops working.
Yes we are, as we are,
And so shall we remain,
Until the end.
AgentR11
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 6357
Joined: Tue 22 Mar 2011, 09:15:51
Location: East Texas

Re: Is Cornucopianism the new Creationism?

Unread postby Outcast_Searcher » Sun 05 Feb 2012, 15:57:15

dorlomin wrote:
babystrangeloop wrote: I am writing about Cornucopianism.
You are talking rubbish.

+1

Creationism (young earth creationism) is CLEARLY nonsense to anyone willing to objectively look at a simply overwhelming (and growing) mountain of scientific evidence. (Whatever your theology may be - that is another issue).

OTOH, there is far more we don't know about macroeconomics than we do. (I maintain that the core of the doomer vs. cornucopian argument is really a macroeconomic issue). Hard core doomerism is just as much an agenda and like a religious point of view as is "hard core" cornucopionism.

There is plenty of evidence for both sides (or for a more moderate point of view), and we simply don't know how things will turn out in (say) our lifetimes, energy-wise.

But hey, if it makes you feel better to make an unreasonable comparison, hoping it builds credibity to the rubbish you are talking -- then have a nice time. Just don't expect this to change the opinion of those willing to try to take a balanced look at anything but the hard core doomer position.
Given the track record of the perma-doomer blogs, I wouldn't bet a fast crash doomer's money on their predictions.
User avatar
Outcast_Searcher
COB
COB
 
Posts: 10142
Joined: Sat 27 Jun 2009, 21:26:42
Location: Central KY

Re: Is Cornucopianism the new Creationism?

Unread postby vision-master » Sun 05 Feb 2012, 17:07:55

Creationism (young earth creationism) is CLEARLY nonsense to anyone willing to objectively look at a simply overwhelming (and growing) mountain of scientific evidence. (Whatever your theology may be - that is another issue).


Then again, why are we so different? Why didn't dolphins evolve into making cities? Also, if you look at the Earth objectively, it's a living highly conscious being as is our Sun. :)
vision-master
 

Re: Is Cornucopianism the new Creationism?

Unread postby SeaGypsy » Sun 05 Feb 2012, 18:04:50

FarQ3 wrote:Well SeaGypsy, I am not Greco Roman as you proclaim, you know sweet FA about me as a matter of fact. I am Australian Christian if you wish to 'label' me. As for the bible being politically slanted, that's your point of view and I respect that but agree to disagree.


Then you are a fool. What Bible do you read if not the Greco Roman? They are all based on the same translations by King James' team. Unless you are Eastern Orthodox, in which case there are slightly different translations.

A book which simulataneously proclaims itself as "The Manual for Life" and dictates "Serve your Masters as you would serve God Himself, for it is God who put these Masters in their thrones." Or to that effect. What absolute phooey.
SeaGypsy
Master Prognosticator
Master Prognosticator
 
Posts: 9284
Joined: Wed 04 Feb 2009, 04:00:00

Re: Is Cornucopianism the new Creationism?

Unread postby PrestonSturges » Sun 05 Feb 2012, 18:14:27

SeaGypsy wrote:All words are loaded. Vile, is a very loaded word. Criticism is warranted and welcome. My reading is that there are 2 totally different meanings to creationism. One is the Bible based standard Christian Science perspective. Another (the one I use) is that science has not (nor do I believe ever will) explain the jump from elemental physics to biology. This massive hole in science leaves plenty of room for conjecture. The conjecture leaves plenty of room for critique. 'Vile' is not a critique usually used in intellectual/ scientific debates. Pretentious. Willfully ignorant. Absolutely lacking in credibility. These are valid critiques, particularly of the first definition.


How life started is pretty much irrelevant to the mechanism of evolution. Saying that evolution isn't valid until the origin of life is proven is like claiming that someone does not understand human nutrition since they don't know how life started. It's a classic "red herring" argument.
User avatar
PrestonSturges
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 6052
Joined: Wed 15 Oct 2008, 03:00:00

PreviousNext

Return to Peak Oil Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 90 guests