Pale Blue Dot - Carl Sagan. Most Important video ever made, Please Watch

"Some people think God is an outsized, light-skinned male with a long white beard, sitting on a throne somewhere up there in the sky, busily tallying the fall of every sparrow. Others—for example Baruch Spinoza and Albert Einstein—considered God to be essentially the sum total of the physical laws which describe the universe. I do not know of any compelling evidence for anthropomorphic patriarchs controlling human destiny from some hidden celestial vantage point, but it would be madness to deny the existence of physical laws."

"The idea that God is an oversized white male with a flowing beard who sits in the sky and tallies the fall of every sparrow is ludicrous. But if by God one means the set of physical laws that govern the universe, then clearly there is such a God. This God is emotionally unsatisfying... it does not make much sense to pray to the law of gravity."
 
Don't you think it's a little narcissistic to call this "the most important video ever made"? Isn't that just a little presumptuous and arrogant?
dont you think its a little "narcissistic " , "presumptuous and arrogant" to inject your god and beliefs into the OP's thread and hijack it ?
 
Just giving him a dose of his own medicine.
i just went through his posts dating back to last year and cannot find 1 where he ever mentioned religion or god in any of them , are you delusional ? or if you are referring to Sagan i have watched/read everything he has ever done and never once has he ever done what you suggest .

i seriously dont intend this to be a slam or to be mean but you really do need some help if you are being serious .
 
i just went through his posts dating back to last year and cannot find 1 where he ever mentioned religion or god in any of them , are you delusional ? or if you are referring to Sagan i have watched/read everything he has ever done and never once has he ever done what you suggest .

i seriously dont intend this to be a slam or to be mean but you really do need some help if you are being serious .

I think his problem is Sagan not believing in the type of God he does.
 
lol , if that is the case he needs to let it go because that guy has been dead for 16 years . whatever , it is imposable to rationalize with people like that so im done .

The more ardently and aggressively religious a person is, the less qualified and able they are to discuss anything. It just becomes an all-encompassing obsession that blinds them from the world and prevents logical thinking.
 
The more ardently and aggressively religious a person is, the less qualified and able they are to discuss anything. It just becomes an all-encompassing obsession that blinds them from the world and prevents logical thinking.
It's no wonder that the those who rally against radical Islam, are also the most radical in their own religious beliefs.
 
It's no wonder that the those who rally against radical Islam, are also the most radical in their own religious beliefs.

Hey, don't get me wrong -- I hate radical islam too. I think punitive strikes against those nutjobs, leaving a wake of destruction behind us, every time they act up as Michael Scheuer suggests is the optimal strategy. But, that folks on our side of the war of civilizations are also zealots willing to ignore all reason and science is annoying.
 
i just went through his posts dating back to last year and cannot find 1 where he ever mentioned religion or god in any of them , are you delusional ? or if you are referring to Sagan i have watched/read everything he has ever done and never once has he ever done what you suggest .

i seriously dont intend this to be a slam or to be mean but you really do need some help if you are being serious .

Well, I have watched videos that do that, so I can't agree with you. You are just wrong.
 
The more ardently and aggressively religious a person is, the less qualified and able they are to discuss anything. It just becomes an all-encompassing obsession that blinds them from the world and prevents logical thinking.

If that's not arrogant and presumptuous, I don't know what is. You are effectively saying, "I am the only one who can be right, no matter what kind of argument a religious person makes because that person's argument is invalid simply by virtue of the fact that they are religious."

Also, your definition of religious is broadly defined as those who do not rule out the idea that there could possibly be a Creator.
 
Here's my point. There are only two possibilities as to how the universe originated. Either it was created, or it spontaneously emerged from nothing. There is no evidence to suggest that nothing can become something without the input of energy, not to mention where all the matter and the laws that govern both energy and matter came from. People who completely rule out the possibility of a Creator are effectively saying that it must have happened that way, even though there is no way they can prove this is even possible. Any rational human being without bias would treat both hypotheses as equally valid.
 
Back
Top