LinuxQuestions.org
Latest LQ Deal: Latest LQ Deals
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General
User Name
Password
General This forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!

Notices


View Poll Results: You are a...
firm believer 211 30.10%
Deist 21 3.00%
Theist 27 3.85%
Agnostic 136 19.40%
Atheist 306 43.65%
Voters: 701. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 06-25-2020, 07:35 AM   #9211
business_kid
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Jan 2006
Location: Ireland
Distribution: Slackware & Android
Posts: 11,533

Rep: Reputation: 1335Reputation: 1335Reputation: 1335Reputation: 1335Reputation: 1335Reputation: 1335Reputation: 1335Reputation: 1335Reputation: 1335Reputation: 1335

@hazel: I like the Galileo quote. Yes, of course, Poor Guy. They jumped very cruelly on him in 1615, when Copernicus had written the same. But he only had it published from his deathbed in 1543. And they didn't know the Scriptures in any case (Isa. 40:22)

@ ntubski: "scientifically unsound." I object to people saying "There's no God because there definitely was a Big Bang," but then when you put that alternative under the Microscope as rigorous scientists should do, it comes up short, like the Emperor with no clothes. Scientists are therefore expressing faith in the unknown, while condemning me for putting faith in the unknown, and even I know that's not scientifically sound.

On map/territory: This Universe is the Only one we know, and we can't get out of it. There is some sort of spirits existing, but it's 'not life as we know it' to borrow a Star Trek Phrase.

My understanding is that if you burn territory, that bit only burns; but if you burn the map, the whole map burns. Now we have destroyed bits of this territory: California Wildfires; rape of the Amazon Rainforests denuding areas; Australian wildfires; making deserts North & South of the equator @30 miles/year; sinking Islands in the Pacific; Melting Polar icecaps, etc. All these changes happened locally. That argues for it being reality. If this is the map, and something else the reality, with either different or no values of those 4 forces, we can declare certainly no universe turned out in the reality. So the map, with it's universe and diverse range of life on earth would be a poor representation of reality. But Seeing as this is the only spot we know, the values of the 4 physical forces argues for a Creator being active here, whether map or reality. Have it your own way, but I'm fooled into thinking this is the material Universe, a Creation of a Most Powerful Spirit.
Quote:
"Oh, someone will come up with a hypothesis, and then we'll all believe it." How unscientific is that?
Those exact words were a quote from a scientist locally who I pressed on the matter. He was a biologist, and if someone came up with a hypothesis, he would not look for loopholes but swallow it hook, line, & sinker. My Scientist knew the Origin of Life field, and would have loved to hit upon the hypothesis. Biologists in these parts are mainly University lecturers, turning out the same boring stuff year after year. It turns out science is more superstitious than I am, because science claims to have all the answers, and can categorically eliminate God as even the remotest possibility. But they haven't, and have to fudge or hope on certain bits. There is a place for a mix of the two, but the majority of today's scientists couldn't abide that.

"matter is God" That gets falsified at the Big Bang: Who exploded God? being the most obvious. Or, Science has no place because God is in the universe all around us. Do we have God's permission to eat God, etc. etc. Some people unaware of the side effects feel drugs stimulate such thinking
 
Old 06-25-2020, 09:23 AM   #9212
business_kid
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Jan 2006
Location: Ireland
Distribution: Slackware & Android
Posts: 11,533

Rep: Reputation: 1335Reputation: 1335Reputation: 1335Reputation: 1335Reputation: 1335Reputation: 1335Reputation: 1335Reputation: 1335Reputation: 1335Reputation: 1335
@enorbet: I agree, we have done enough talking and spamming of this thread without convincing each other and should let others say more.

I'm not convinced by your negative preconceptions of the Bible, a book you apparently don't understand. False religion has done an excellent job in prejudicing people against the Bible and I haven't been able to point out why the Bible is so different than what you actually think it is. Although not a scientific book, it contains scientific facts far in advance of knowledge of the times. It contains prophecies that unerringly come true written hundreds or thousands of years in advance. But you see it as a pile of <@%#&!>.

Thank you, thank you, for your off-the-cuff remarks on the Big Bang. On reflection, it occurred to me that there's an excellent argument to be made around the Big Bang with the rate of expansion being so critical. I haven't assembled it in order yet, but stacking up the things you'd have to know before exploding the Big Bang. I read there's between 1e23 and 1.2e32 atoms in the universe. Once you factor in the rate of expansion, and the whole soup of variables, you can really draw conclusions on what could have and not have happened without prior knowledge. I'll have to refine that somewhat and this is not the place to start.

To add to your anecdote: When I entered Electronics in the 1970s, valves were king in Video & Audio. My first jobs were fixing valve tvs, with a few transistors in them. You weren't safe with a digital IC over 2 Mhz switching. Now we have ≥4Ghz switching, and ICs that I can program under Linux, and I can have them fabricated on the far side of the world to be a complete circuit. The technological change has been dramatic - but so have the environmental costs.
 
Old 06-25-2020, 05:23 PM   #9213
ntubski
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2005
Distribution: Debian, Arch
Posts: 3,571

Rep: Reputation: 1874Reputation: 1874Reputation: 1874Reputation: 1874Reputation: 1874Reputation: 1874Reputation: 1874Reputation: 1874Reputation: 1874Reputation: 1874Reputation: 1874
Quote:
Originally Posted by business_kid View Post
@ ntubski: "scientifically unsound." I object to people saying "There's no God because there definitely was a Big Bang,"
Oh, well I would object to that too. It's quite nonsensical, even after removing the "definitely" (which I regard as unscientific). Though I would call it logically unsound.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unsound_(logic)

Quote:
On map/territory: This Universe is the Only one we know, and we can't get out of it. There is some sort of spirits existing, but it's 'not life as we know it' to borrow a Star Trek Phrase.

My understanding is that if you burn territory, that bit only burns; but if you burn the map, the whole map burns. Now we have destroyed bits of this territory: ...
Okay? Not sure what this has to do with anything I've said.

Quote:
Quote:
"Oh, someone will come up with a hypothesis, and then we'll all believe it." How unscientific is that?
Those exact words were a quote from a scientist locally who I pressed on the matter. He was a biologist, and if someone came up with a hypothesis, he would not look for loopholes but swallow it hook, line, & sinker.
Well, a more charitable interpretation would be that he meant that someone would eventually come up with a good and credible hypothesis and/or 'believe it" really means "provisionally accept it". But I wasn't there, and I don't know this person.

Quote:
"matter is God" That gets falsified at the Big Bang: Who exploded God? being the most obvious.
Why's that a problem? God exploded himself. God is the one with the get-out-of-recursive-paradoxes-free card, right?

Quote:
Or, Science has no place because God is in the universe all around us.
I don't see why science "has no place" in this scenario. God is irrelevant to science.

Quote:
Do we have God's permission to eat God, etc. etc.
Better to beg forgiveness than ask for permission
 
Old 06-25-2020, 05:40 PM   #9214
xlucas
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: May 2015
Location: Argentina
Distribution: Linux Mint
Posts: 10

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
I'm responding to the original question in this very long topic. I see some people have criticised this thread, but it really is interesting to see the proportion that comes out of a community that has a very specific interest, like GNU/Linux. I'm surprised that the poll results are more or less what I would expect of the general population today, so it looks like our particular interest in common doesn't make us as different as I expected. Now, to the question...

Brief answer: I'm an agnostic. Perhaps an atheist too, but most definitely, an agnostic.

What I mean: My philosophy is that doubt and curiousity are the parents of wisdom, so belief and faith are obstacles to somebody wanting to become any wiser. You may think and then reach the same conclusion as a believer and that's OK, but the thinking is the most important part to me. I do not think it's necessary to drive other people toward my way of thinking anyway, so I don't try, but some people might be interested in what I have to say or may be looking for somebody to say just what they've been trying to make in their minds and that might be me in some cases, so here it is, for them, and for anybody curious to know, even if they don't think the same. Now, as an agnostic, I do not claim that there's no god; I claim that nobody really knows or is able to know, despite many people claiming the contrary. I do think that it's overwhelmingly more likely that there is no god, but I don't have proof, so that is not the same as knowing.

Alright, that is me. I'm going to read what other people think now. I've been reading a few already
 
Old 06-26-2020, 04:05 AM   #9215
business_kid
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Jan 2006
Location: Ireland
Distribution: Slackware & Android
Posts: 11,533

Rep: Reputation: 1335Reputation: 1335Reputation: 1335Reputation: 1335Reputation: 1335Reputation: 1335Reputation: 1335Reputation: 1335Reputation: 1335Reputation: 1335
@xlucas: Welcome. I understand your position academically as non commitment, and I cannot criticise it. That's all right until you want answers. Some never do.

But the day comes for most people, where some tragedy, foreboding for the future, or simply a profound remark by someone sets them looking for answers. (Knowingly or not, we in this world seem to have had our fingers on the 'slow self-destruct' button for some time, and it's catching up on our society & environment). People search for answers then, and once they settle on something and hold it for some years, the cement is inclined to set, and they enter the closed-mind-fixed-position state.

@ntubski:
Quote:
> "matter is God" That gets falsified at the Big Bang: Who exploded God? being the most obvious.
Why's that a problem? God exploded himself. God is the one with the get-out-of-recursive-paradoxes-free card, right?
No. I'm not a believer in Mysticism or hocus-pocus. Matter is inanimate. God is a Spirit, and very much alive.

This discussion reveals ≤0.001% of what is known about God. It's hard to explain the basis of anyone's faith when God is seen purely through the narrow prism of "God-of-the-gaps vs. chance-of-the-gaps." What I have succeeded in doing is proving that "Rigorous Science" is actually "chance-of-the-gaps" but that's not enough to overturn the viewpoints long held. There's really only one religious gap: God's origin, and science has that one as well, with the 4 fundamental forces, and the origin of life, multiple extra chance-of-the-gaps problems, most notably in Evolution, a subject there's no point in tossing about. But I'm done arguing.

If I distill that point about the Big Bang, I'll post it out of interest, not out of contention.
 
Old 06-26-2020, 06:32 AM   #9216
ntubski
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2005
Distribution: Debian, Arch
Posts: 3,571

Rep: Reputation: 1874Reputation: 1874Reputation: 1874Reputation: 1874Reputation: 1874Reputation: 1874Reputation: 1874Reputation: 1874Reputation: 1874Reputation: 1874Reputation: 1874
Quote:
Originally Posted by business_kid View Post
Matter is inanimate. God is a Spirit, and very much alive.
Ah, so you hold a premise that contradicts the God is matter proposition. Fair enough.
 
Old 06-26-2020, 09:04 AM   #9217
enorbet
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jun 2003
Location: Virginia
Distribution: Slackware = Main OpSys
Posts: 2,834

Rep: Reputation: 2915Reputation: 2915Reputation: 2915Reputation: 2915Reputation: 2915Reputation: 2915Reputation: 2915Reputation: 2915Reputation: 2915Reputation: 2915Reputation: 2915
The most basic law of Logic is "Check your premises". The reason should be obvious but often isn't without reflection and critical thinking partly because "pattern recognition" is deeply ingrained in many animals and certainly the human animal brain. We see "rabbits in clouds". We are quick to judge. An example of this occurs during divorce. While nobody I know of wonders who caused a marriage (they just fell in love) but surely one partner is at fault for a divorce <sarcasm>. We have bias and most rarely question the disconnect. So it is relatively easy to look at the world and how it all fits together, especially down here where we live, and come to the conclusion that it was "designed for us" when actually it makes far more sense the other way around... the Nature of the world led to us, just as it once led to dinosaurs.

Consider one huge step that led from dinosaurs to Us - The KT Event in which 75% of plant and animal life went extinct, leaving only land animals weighing roughly 50 pounds or less in existence. There were many extinction events in Earth's 4 Billion Year history but the KT Event was both closer in time and large enough to wipe out sufficient numbers of large predators that our ancestors actually had a chance to survive, evolve and flourish. It is highly unlikely humankind, if existing at all, would be anything like we are today were it not for the KT Event.

We can come closer in time to no specific event but a collection of events that evolved such as the Tectonic events that shaped Africa and evolved out dense forests and replaced them with savanna. Had that not happened we might still be living in trees, have never gained intelligence. What all these events, instantaneous or prolonged, have in common is that very slight changes in conditions could have gone many possible ways until some "tipping point" was reached, just like how gathering snow on a slope has many factors that could or could not result in an avalanche.

Similarly in the very early Universe when matter first coalesced out of energy (E=MC^2 or M=E/C^2) and we know from tests in colliders that when matter is created in this manner it is "always" done in pairs... equal amounts Matter and AntiMatter. The key term here is "always". "Always" might be a stringent and absolute term if all we consider is one accelerator with specific conditions that has operated for perhaps a few human lifetimes. Things are likely very different when we are talking about very different conditions not stringently controlled and we can actually see that variation because WMAP reveals "structure"... variation.

So when we consider the number of particles in the entire Universe, that there was some extremely slight variation or error in "always created in pairs" makes sense even to us lowly, short-lived Homo Sapiens. Had the asteroid that impacted Earth been going just a wee bit faster or slower it's trajectory relative to Earth would have been different than it happened to be and it would have missed Earth, possibly entirely and forever, or possibly sooner or later and with less or greater impact, almost certainly on Us. Had there been precise balance in Matter and AntiMatter none of This would be here. Something else might, but All This is how it actually did turn out.

It has be posited, perhaps somewhat in jest but more as an example of the vast expanse of Deep Time and the role of Chance and Probability, that given a million monkeys hacking away on typewriters for enough time at some point a result would be the entire works of Shakespeare. If that's too many variables over too long a time to wrap one's mind around then take two cubes where the sides are labeled - thru 6... dice. Roll enough times and you will hit "Snake Eyes" eventually.

Let's drop back even further to a coin toss where there are only 2 possible outcomes with each having a 50% chance assuming they are extremely precisely made, perfectly balanced and rolled by a perfectly precise "hand" in a vacuum so no variation of conditions is possible. It only matters a little that gamblers often assume that if heads just resulted, surely Tails has greater odds of being next when in fact the odds never change despite what occurred before.

I think it can be seen that in the real world such perfection does not, will not, exist and even if it did for a moment it wouldn't for long. Real things are affected by their environment. Real things wear down and start with variations no matter how minute. In the Real World "identical" is just "really close" to being the same at least up here in the macro world. Down lower in the quantum world things are much stranger and non-intuitive.

Not only are things not precisely adjusted, not some human-imposed idea of perfection, it can be argued just as fervently that such variations from perfection, such as that imbalance between matter and anti-matter, are evidence that, Chaos and Entropy being real in this world, means no adjustment let alone an Adjuster, is needed nor evident, in fact, just the opposite.
 
Old 06-29-2020, 11:59 AM   #9218
business_kid
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Jan 2006
Location: Ireland
Distribution: Slackware & Android
Posts: 11,533

Rep: Reputation: 1335Reputation: 1335Reputation: 1335Reputation: 1335Reputation: 1335Reputation: 1335Reputation: 1335Reputation: 1335Reputation: 1335Reputation: 1335
When I finally read your last post, you reference the thought experiment of the million monkeys bashing at typewriters

Like any scientist, you really ought to read up on your subject before posting on it. You'd be surprised how much (and how much b.s.) is written about it. If you come up with a serious argument against design I'll address it. The crux of the matter is that typing monkeys whose output is *INTELLIGENTLY SORTED* can indeed produce shakespeare's works. If you leave them typing randomly, it's a non runner, with odds of 1 in 10^hundreds of thousands.

You have, in fact made MY point (In essence, Intelligent Design) .
 
Old 06-30-2020, 04:36 AM   #9219
enorbet
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jun 2003
Location: Virginia
Distribution: Slackware = Main OpSys
Posts: 2,834

Rep: Reputation: 2915Reputation: 2915Reputation: 2915Reputation: 2915Reputation: 2915Reputation: 2915Reputation: 2915Reputation: 2915Reputation: 2915Reputation: 2915Reputation: 2915
I think you missed the point business_kid. Since no monkeys understand much of the English language, or any other human language for that matter, they are indeed typing randomly. The mental exercise is rather flawed in that I've never heard it specified as to the exact nature of "The works of Shakespeare" in that I suspect the originator meant every word would be in there somewhere among millions of pages of gobbledegook and someone who knew not only the English language but the works of Shakespeare would have to "collate" it all together.

However I think the point was exactly that it shouldn't be taken too far, get too specific, as they are details unneeded to the effect of the overview that given sufficient time, elements and events, almost anything can happen. Maybe the originator should've just used two, million-sided dice. The odds of Snake Eyes with such dice is astronomical but roll them bones enough times and it WILL happen.

The larger point is that "hindsight is 20/20". It's all too easy to assume deliberate cause when random chance is apparently everywhere (unless you imagine God is really OCD compelled to micromanagement like controlling the outcome when we actually do roll dice) and in early beginnings when things have far more possible outcomes than later in a progression when some outcomes become inevitable. This is what The Butterfly Effect is all about and far less sarcastic and silly than a million typing monkeys.

Sorry Brother anything you think you should attribute to "Design" is more easily and more consistently defined by Occam's Razor in a world filled with random chance events in my view. Mathematics is REALLY good at calculating probabilities.
 
Old 06-30-2020, 11:03 AM   #9220
jamison20000e
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2005
Location: ...uncanny valley... infinity\1975; (randomly born:) Milwaukee, WI, US( + travel,) Earth( I wish,) END BORDER$!◣◢┌∩┐ Fe26-E,e...
Distribution: any GPL that works well on my cheapest; has been KDE or CLI but open... http://goo.gl/NqgqJx &c ;-)
Posts: 3,948
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 1345Reputation: 1345Reputation: 1345Reputation: 1345Reputation: 1345Reputation: 1345Reputation: 1345Reputation: 1345Reputation: 1345Reputation: 1345
Quote:
Originally Posted by hazel View Post
May I quote Galileo? "The Bible was written to show us how to go to heaven, not to show us how the heavens go." Why on earth should you expect a book which is about God, His people and His plan of salvation to contain information about quasars and black holes?
So if there is a creator it must not care about patent laws or assumed reverse-engineering would never be a thing?!.

It's no opinion I enjoy peace and quiet!
Seems how I can't keep myself unsubscribed; I'll point out( once again) religion is just an opinion. If you never spoke an opinion you'd always be right...

Last edited by jamison20000e; 06-30-2020 at 11:06 AM. Reason: Typ0
 
Old 06-30-2020, 11:44 AM   #9221
business_kid
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Jan 2006
Location: Ireland
Distribution: Slackware & Android
Posts: 11,533

Rep: Reputation: 1335Reputation: 1335Reputation: 1335Reputation: 1335Reputation: 1335Reputation: 1335Reputation: 1335Reputation: 1335Reputation: 1335Reputation: 1335
Agree this sort of thing shouldn't be taken too far. So I won't. I did quote the statistical odds against your premise, though
Quote:
Originally Posted by business_kid
If you leave them(the monkeys) typing randomly, it's a non runner, with odds of 1 in 10^hundreds of thousands.
You scientifically believe that, if you want to. If anyone could accept an event with that sort of odds, there's no point in me saying much. Do you believe in the tooth fairy?

I've shown you that you don't have scientific proofs, you have a faith in science (Answers will be found, etc), while upset that I have a faith in the divine (Answers are in the Bible).
 
Old 06-30-2020, 11:47 AM   #9222
sp331yi
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2020
Location: NM
Distribution: antiX 19.2 | Slacko pup | Miyo
Posts: 104

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
"As human beings, we are endowed with freedom of choice, and we cannot shuffle off our responsibility upon the shoulders of God or nature. We must shoulder it ourselves. It is our responsibility." ~ Arnold J. Toynbee (1949). “Civilization on Trial”
 
Old 06-30-2020, 04:22 PM   #9223
enorbet
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jun 2003
Location: Virginia
Distribution: Slackware = Main OpSys
Posts: 2,834

Rep: Reputation: 2915Reputation: 2915Reputation: 2915Reputation: 2915Reputation: 2915Reputation: 2915Reputation: 2915Reputation: 2915Reputation: 2915Reputation: 2915Reputation: 2915
Quote:
Originally Posted by business_kid View Post
Agree this sort of thing shouldn't be taken too far. So I won't. I did quote the statistical odds against your premise, though
No you didn't. You just made up a really large number "with odds of 1 in 10^hundreds of thousands" to try to make your point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by business_kid View Post
You scientifically believe that, if you want to. If anyone could accept an event with that sort of odds, there's no point in me saying much. Do you believe in the tooth fairy?
Is that supposed to upset, humiliate or anger me? Not likely. If you really wish to calculate odds, instead of just making stuff up, go here ---

https://www.omnicalculator.com/statistics/dice

There one can enter in the number of sides a die has and the number of dice to be rolled as well as the desired outcome, like Snake Eyes, and you will get an actual iteration number. In the case I mentioned of two, one million sided dice calculating the number of rolls on average to result in Snake Eyes is roughly 1,000,000,000,000 rolls. Even if we assume exceptional lifespans of 100 years since 100 years is only roughly 876,600 hours...oh lets be generous and call it a million hours. Even at a lousy 4 seconds per roll it would take many thousands of 100 year lifetimes never stopping to eat or sleep just continuous rolling to reach the goal of one snake eyes on average. That's real and seriously low odds BUT it will occur eventually given enough time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by business_kid View Post
I've shown you that you don't have scientific proofs, you have a faith in science (Answers will be found, etc), while upset that I have a faith in the divine (Answers are in the Bible).
You mistake confidence for faith and they are very different. I trust in the odds of probability based on objective, repeatable, evidence. You believe in words written by incredibly superstitious men from 2000 years ago, decades after the events, after sparse and error-ridden translation through at least 4 different languages and numerous revisions purporting to originally be revealed to select mystics by some supernatural (jealous and fickle) invisible entity who isn't even of this Universe, none of which you have anything remotely like direct experience. See the difference?
 
Old 07-01-2020, 12:36 PM   #9224
jamison20000e
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2005
Location: ...uncanny valley... infinity\1975; (randomly born:) Milwaukee, WI, US( + travel,) Earth( I wish,) END BORDER$!◣◢┌∩┐ Fe26-E,e...
Distribution: any GPL that works well on my cheapest; has been KDE or CLI but open... http://goo.gl/NqgqJx &c ;-)
Posts: 3,948
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 1345Reputation: 1345Reputation: 1345Reputation: 1345Reputation: 1345Reputation: 1345Reputation: 1345Reputation: 1345Reputation: 1345Reputation: 1345
Strip malls, malls, old movie theaters, walmarts &c: as they get shut down, still money to be made there.
Insane we tust!

More: Unimaginable tracks of time in books to dust that just don't evolve and some that do.

One way of thinkin is for yourself, another is to believe in what you're told!

However as all are communists to children, telling them how to be, it's no wonder...

Last edited by jamison20000e; 07-01-2020 at 01:16 PM. Reason: more
 
Old 07-01-2020, 01:18 PM   #9225
jamison20000e
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2005
Location: ...uncanny valley... infinity\1975; (randomly born:) Milwaukee, WI, US( + travel,) Earth( I wish,) END BORDER$!◣◢┌∩┐ Fe26-E,e...
Distribution: any GPL that works well on my cheapest; has been KDE or CLI but open... http://goo.gl/NqgqJx &c ;-)
Posts: 3,948
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 1345Reputation: 1345Reputation: 1345Reputation: 1345Reputation: 1345Reputation: 1345Reputation: 1345Reputation: 1345Reputation: 1345Reputation: 1345
Unless communism isn't as bad as said?

Add: Most teachers are older. If we get to be their age,,, will be more advanced, repeat stupidly.

Let each grade teach the last. Kids learning by teaching, from who will be more advanced! They're already getting rid of religion for us anyway! LOL

Last edited by jamison20000e; 07-01-2020 at 01:29 PM.
 
  


Reply

Tags
bible, censorship, christ, christian, determinism, education, faith, free will, god, human stupidity, humor, islam, jesus, magic roundabout, mythology, nihilism, peace, pointless, polytheism, poser, quran, religion, virtue, war, zealot


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
New Religion (no linux in this thread, sorry) Calum General 16 07-11-2016 01:48 PM
The touchpad "tapping" questions answers and solutions mega-thread tommytomthms5 Linux - Laptop and Netbook 4 10-30-2007 06:01 PM
What is your religion? jspenguin General 9 04-25-2004 01:28 PM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:10 PM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration