GeneralThis forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Introduction to Linux - A Hands on Guide
This guide was created as an overview of the Linux Operating System, geared toward new users as an exploration tour and getting started guide, with exercises at the end of each chapter.
For more advanced trainees it can be a desktop reference, and a collection of the base knowledge needed to proceed with system and network administration. This book contains many real life examples derived from the author's experience as a Linux system and network administrator, trainer and consultant. They hope these examples will help you to get a better understanding of the Linux system and that you feel encouraged to try out things on your own.
Click Here to receive this Complete Guide absolutely free.
Nope. Youtube is, I'm afraid, not a deciding factor in Valhalla. When Ragnarok comes and Zombie-Jesus comes down to smite the infidels with his golden fleece, Youtube will be first on the list.
On a more serious note, did you know that Christians trying to debate scientists using only the Bible was pointed out as a terrible idea sometime between 354-430 AD?
Originally Posted by St Augustine
Usually, even a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and the other elements of this world, about the motion and orbit of the stars and even their size and relative positions, about the predictable eclipses of the sun and moon, the cycles of the years and the seasons, about the kinds of animals, shrubs, stones, and so forth, and this knowledge he hold to as being certain from reason and experience. Now, it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking nonsense on these topics; and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn. The shame is not so much that an ignorant individual is derided, but that people outside the household of faith think our sacred writers held such opinions, and, to the great loss of those for whose salvation we toil, the writers of our Scripture are criticized and rejected as unlearned men. If they find a Christian mistaken in a field which they themselves know well and hear him maintaining his foolish opinions about our books, how are they going to believe those books in matters concerning the resurrection of the dead, the hope of eternal life, and the kingdom of heaven, when they think their pages are full of falsehoods and on facts which they themselves have learnt from experience and the light of reason? Reckless and incompetent expounders of Holy Scripture bring untold trouble and sorrow on their wiser brethren when they are caught in one of their mischievous false opinions and are taken to task by those who are not bound by the authority of our sacred books. For then, to defend their utterly foolish and obviously untrue statements, they will try to call upon Holy Scripture for proof and even recite from memory many passages which they think support their position, although they understand neither what they say nor the things about which they make assertion. [1 Timothy 1.7]
So, to all those people who think the Bible explains science, listen to the good Saint. And I don't mean Simon Templar.
According to at least some of the great Islamic thinkers (e.g. Al-Ghazali), God does not refute science; rather God is the underpinning of physical law (or rather, "physical law" is simply the direct manifestation of God's rational will). That does not invalidate science, it only points to the gaping blind spot in the scientific world view. Why should we stop at the limits of science? Why ask what laws underlie physical phenomena but not ask why those laws exist in the first place? Yes, one could deduce more basic physical laws but then that is moving around in a circle that cannot be broken until one enters into a different mindset (just as the question of what makes apples fall down from a tree cannot be solved as long as one keeps thinking in terms of apples and trees instead of principles that exist on a wholly different plane). Just because the scientific method is incapable of providing the answer does not mean that there isn't any. After all, the scientific method is only a set of conventions adopted by a certain set of people to address a particular set of questions in a specific way. The real point is that, likewise, religion is not going to answer scientific questions because it has its own set of conventions. To explain how something works is not the same thing as explaining why it exists or works at all (and the other way round).
Does anyone else find it unfortunate that people can't seem to just answer the OP's question without arguing why they are right and those with different beliefs are wrong?
I mean, I'm an atheist, I'm a Buddhist, I'm a pacifist, and I DO believe that Linux is THE BEST, but I have no beef with theists, people who think the Buddha was a fat chinese dude, avid gun collectors, or people who willingly give their money to Bill Gates.
If you ask me what I think of this or that, I'll tell you, and it makes no difference to me whether you agree or disagree.
If you think so much of Jesus, it seems a little strange to me you feel you have to do his work for him and save the world. As a Buddhist, of course I consider the Buddha to be The Man (although I consider Patrick Volkerding to be The Man as well.... and Linus Torvalds for that matter), but I don't feel obliged to correct people who point out what they perceive to be flaws in his (the Buddha's) doctrine, nor do I feel offended when people insult or mock him. It's not like they can hurt him! :P (And if they could, I suppose he wouldn't be enlightened after all, lol)
The point is, if you are happy with your beliefs, great! Don't change it for anyone and don't let anyone convince you otherwise, but don't push it onto people who don't want to be pushed! If someone comes up to you and says "hey, prove to me that god exists," then well, they did ask for it, but don't just start attempting to convert people who most likely don't want to be converted. If your way is The Way, people will find it, and letting people come to you will only serve as proof that you're secure and confident enough in it that you don't need to advertise for it.
So yeah, that's my rant. Feel free to bury it in refutes, mockery, insults, whatever you want.... just don't get yourself booted from LQ.
for all those who subscribe to the evolution religion
please remember evolution has never been proven...
IF evolution could be scientifically proven
it would be called the Law of Evolution wouldn't it?
but its not
its called the Theory of Evolution
as for religious indoctrination easuter; I was not raised in the church, etc
actually the religious indoctrination you speak of is when evolution is taught in our schools
and something else; no scientist in the world can claim to know how Life began
oh sure, they'll say some kind of bacteria suddenly appeared somewhere
but seriously,they will all admit sooner or later that they do not really know.
and it wasn't a lightning bolt hitting a mud puddle that started it.
it is funny how people believe in aliens or evolution easier than they can believe in God
when His presence and work is so visible
Every line of this demonstrates a total lack of knowledge of science, what science is, what science accomplishes, and how the scientific method works.
Your ignorance is truly breathtaking. Your entire argument here is completely rejected by any scientist as having a false basis, no understanding, and completely false conclusions.
And, no. The theory of evolution would never be called the "law" of evolution. There are no "laws" in science - not a single one. The "law" of gravitation and newton's "laws" are themselves theories which get their names because Newton - some 500 years ago - called them such. No modern scientist accepts the term as having any validity whatsoever.
A theory is the highest and best output of science.
WEll to be brutally honest , i couldn't care less !!!
i mean , HELLO ! me sharing a personal story with you has ruined your day ??
my advice to you , go see a psychiatrist dude , you really appear to be traumatized or have some serious emotional issues...
and just for the record , i'm not gonna lie or censor my opinions just because some folks can't handle the truth!
Originally Posted by jay73;
Yawn, here we go again. Occam's razor is reductionist. If only because it is constantly being branded about by all those atheists whose self-claimed brilliance does not prevent them from quoting the theory only in part (the part that fits them best - not to mention that spelling the man's name appears to be a problem in its own right):
i'm rather mystified in regards to what you're actually ranting about ...lol
but thanx for the delicious irony !
i'm referring to your vain and superfluous attempt to brand all atheists as being arrogant . but let me guess dude , you're an agnostic from the looks of things who is trying to sell the classic "we can't know about god whether he exists or not" kind of shit , isn't it??
btw , did you know that the term agnostic means "ignorant" ?
Have you ever studied creationism?
well i wouldn't say that i've "studied" any of these as their isn't much to study about them except for the fact that they are man made crap.
but to answer your questions, YEs i'm quite familiar with them.
btw , satanism is quite interesting though especially the lavian interpretation
Originally Posted by H_TeXMeX_H;
I have a Necronomicon, I sometimes summon small imps to mess with my neighbor's dogs Sometimes, I summon a Balrog (this often requires several large sacrifices, like a herd of cattle), and sometimes it breaks free of my control ... then things get messy. Of course, there's also the standard "army of darkness" spell, but zombies smell so bad, I can't stand the smell.
there is actually a cult on youtube called cthulu cult or some whack like that which "teaches" the existence of the almighty cthulu the god of the dark force and whatnot...
Originally Posted by rsciw;
I find it rather weird that in a forum dealing a lot with technology, real stuff, logic, rational stuff, there are this many people believing in someone imaginary
Well i'd say that it's genetic , monkeys which include humans (academically known as primates) have been and among many other animals observed to display many symptoms of superstition , in an experiment were a bird is locked in a cage with a touch display that when touched in will release food , will always repeat the same dance before doing so even though the pattern that will release the food is actually random....there lots of other psychology experiments like that...
Originally Posted by linus72;
for all those who subscribe to the evolution religion
please remember evolution has never been proven...
Please SHut it right there , don't say any further nonsense until you've reviewed a high school biology text book !!!
YOU KNOW ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ABOUT BIOLOGY ! DO YOU COPY THAT KID ?
and yes my blood is at evaporation temperature right now thanks to your creationist propaganda and lies !!!!
how many fucking times , do we have to explain to simpletons like you that the origin of species is NOT (i repeat NOT) the same thing as evolution , that's called A-BIOGENESIS !
This kind of willful ignorance just pisses me off , if i were your teacher in school i'd have smacked you across the face for failing to do your homework.....AGAIN !
Please do me , yourself and everybody else in here a favor and never ever talk about science/religions/god/biology anymore... at least not until you do your homework..
Well, I stopped reading when I reached the following:
[Collins quote omitted]
Yes, well, I couldn't agree with him on that either. Mostly I posted it because it shows that (a) there are educated practicing scientists who are believers. They're not all in the mold of the people St Augustine was talking about or some of the posters here...
(b) it's possible to separate the "why" questions (even if you don't agree with the answers) from the "how" questions. It's also possible to not agree with the validity of "why" questions...
Last edited by mostlyharmless; 07-16-2010 at 06:33 PM.