> Roy Jose Lorr wrote:
>

>> Robert Epstein wrote:
>>

>>> Roy Jose Lorr wrote:
>>>

>>>> Robert Epstein wrote:
>>>>

>>>>> Roy Jose Lorr wrote:
>>>>>

>>>>>> Robert Epstein wrote:
>>>>>>

>>>>>>> Roy Jose Lorr wrote:
>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> Robert Epstein wrote:
>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> Awaken21 wrote:
>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>> On Jan 6, 1:41 pm, panamfl...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>> On Jan 6, 7:54 am, Awaken21 gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jan 6, 4:15 am, Michael Gray newsguy.com> wrote:

>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>> We'vee been waiting for more than 60,000 years for religion to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> deliver, and what so far?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Only negatives, and suppression of reality.

>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>> Well for me it saved my life and I'm less than 50 years old.

>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>> Since modern ATHEISTIC science sprang up after say, 1600,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> it has
>>>>>>>>>>>>> delivered reliably and consistently.

>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, science tells me that religion does one of two things to a
>>>>>>>>>>>> person, it makes them happier and opens up their minds or it
>>>>>>>>>>>> has no
>>>>>>>>>>>> effect on their happiness and closes their minds.

>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>> I know where I'd put my money.

>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>> On what works for you? Interesting you think other's who are
>>>>>>>>>>>> doing the
>>>>>>>>>>>> same are idiots.

>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>> And phucking woo-woos like you can give it all to a priest
>>>>>>>>>>>>> who will
>>>>>>>>>>>>> piss it up against a wall, whilst laughing at your sheer
>>>>>>>>>>>>> gullibility!

>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>> Ewwww, cynicsm. You know if you don't believe sincerity
>>>>>>>>>>>> exists you'll
>>>>>>>>>>>> end up living a reality where that is true.

>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Sincerity exists where the skeptical are allowed to measure and
>>>>>>>>>>> verify.

>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Interesting belief. Seems to me sincerity exists without need of
>>>>>>>>>> verification, outside of my own ability to sense my own state
>>>>>>>>>> of mind.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>> Many scientists are also
>>>>>>>>>>>> religious, where does that leave the priests of science
>>>>>>>>>>>> which you
>>>>>>>>>>>> believe in as a religion?

>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Calling science a religion shows that you know nothing about
>>>>>>>>>>> either.
>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Your reading comprehension is a little lacking. I did not say
>>>>>>>>>> science
>>>>>>>>>> was religion, I said expecting it to answer everyting is
>>>>>>>>>> approaching
>>>>>>>>>> science in the same way religious zealots approach their
>>>>>>>>>> religion.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>> A shame science couldn't teach me how to be
>>>>>>>>>>>> a happy balanced person,

>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Your emotional weaknesses are not the responsibility of the
>>>>>>>>>>> scientific
>>>>>>>>>>> method.

>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Exactly. Science does not have all the answers for human
>>>>>>>>>> beings. Good
>>>>>>>>>> tool within it's scope.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>> but then christianity couldn't do that for me
>>>>>>>>>>>> either. Seeking through reason of result can be a tedious
>>>>>>>>>>>> thing.

>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Most of the happy people I know do not "seek" anything other
>>>>>>>>>>> than
>>>>>>>>>>> their lover's affection, their child's smile, and a really
>>>>>>>>>>> good meal.
>>>>>>>>>>> I think most people make life much more difficult than it
>>>>>>>>>>> needs to be.
>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Yes, most people seek fullfillment in their lives outside of
>>>>>>>>>> science,
>>>>>>>>>> including scientists.
>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> quite a few of them join string quartets.

>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The religion of science makes music a science. Everything is
>>>>>>>> science to the science supplicant. Materialism is a faith based
>>>>>>>> religious concept.

>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You seem prejudiced. The scientists I recall hearing about who
>>>>>>> play music use it as a break from thinking about science, not
>>>>>>> another example of science. They're not computers, they're people.

>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I too play music and of course I'm also prejudiced. Prejudice is
>>>>>> a natural defense mechanism that comes with the territory of being
>>>>>> human. Anyone claiming not to be prejudiced is fibbing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To those indoctrinated in the church of science everything must
>>>>>> fit into the materialist scheme, else the cult would naturally
>>>>>> collapse in on itself. What the materialist refuses to recognize
>>>>>> is that reverence for man made constructs is subject to the same
>>>>>> methods of deconstruction as are all other human reasoned biases.
>>>>>> When deciding on a preference for an ultimate authority there are
>>>>>> only two choices: God or self. That's just the way it works.

>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The above has nothing to do with music. Scientists are not so
>>>>> robot-like that they "think" about materialism or anything else
>>>>> while they are playing. Perhaps you have never met a real
>>>>> scientist, or heard one play the violin. :)

>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I've met and played with all sorts of people, including scientists
>>>> who play music both for profession and recreation. I can see you
>>>> lack more than a bystander's passing awareness of music. You may
>>>> find it useful to talk with a few of the musical scientists you're
>>>> acquainted with to get a take on their perceptions of music.

>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I am a professionally trained musician who plays piano, guitar,
>>> woodwinds and with singing background in both pop/rock/folk and legit
>>> show/classical music.

>>
>>
>>
>> Professionally trained by whom, Lester Lanin, Ringo Starr, Goggi
>> Grant? The studios are chock full of music piddling dilettantes who
>> can't play Jazz. My local is 802, what's yours?

>
>
> Congratulations, you're a Union man. That also has nothing to do with
> music.

>
> No.....I wasn't trained by Ringo Starr. Neither was Eric Dolphy.

> are you, a celebrity-monger?

>

>> Looks like you have only a bystander's
>>

>>> acquaintance with intelligence.

>>
>>
>>
>> Brilliant.

>
>
> Yes, your thought-process is equally impressive to me.
> Have a nice day.