[xeberus]

Originally Posted by Roflcopter

O'Reilly's entire point wasn't about the literal moon and tide.

Poor diction aside, O'Reilly's point is valid, these so-called theories of the origin of the universe aren't even close, and probably never will be.

Even the most avid of Atheistic microphysicists won't suggest that they could answer that.

well dude.. his point really isn't valid, i can answer the questions hes asking. i can very adequately answer those questions with a google search.

we may not know exactly, 100% how absolutely everything happened, but we have a pretty good guess. a guess backed up with sufficient evidence to make a reasonable person think "ah". a guess he could discover himself with a google search if you cant tell i use google a lot.

[M.C]

Originally Posted by Roflcopter

I thought it was simple, rather than seeing the rant as some pre-historic, Native American polytheistic-esque rant, that Bill was simply asking how and why would the world exist...

That being, an ecosystem capable of supporting sentient life, rather than on Mars or any other place else we know of.

Furthermore, how the ecosystem is so perfectly capable of supporting these beings, etc.


Taking things literally seems to be the bane of the left brained people.

Take what O'Reilly said at face value and look at the macro encompassing theme he's talking about, rather than "Bill said we don't know where tides come from, but we do, he's dumb."

Bill asks how do these things work, we give him answers.

If he said "how did the universe get here", we'd have less answers. He didn't. He asked how these things work, why does the tide go in and out without fail? We know that. Why does the sun go down and up without fail? We know that. He asks why the Earth has a moon, and mars doesn't have any. Mars has 2 moons.

His entire debate on why he believes in magic is because he says, and I quote "no one can explain to me why the tides go in and out without fail, why the sun goes up and down". That's his exact quote, and we have those exact answers.

[xeberus]

Originally Posted by M.C

Bill asks how do these things work, we give him answers.

If he said "how did the universe get here", we'd have less answers. He didn't. He asked how these things work, why does the tide go in and out without fail? We know that. Why does the sun go down and up without fail? We know that.

His entire debate on why he believes in magic is because he says, and I quote "no one can explain to me why the tides go in and out without fail, why the sun goes up and down". That's his exact quote, and we have those exact answers.

While Bill may be a complete idiot. He is rich, so props to Bill. I bet he does more blow and hookers than... me..

[Roflcopter]

Originally Posted by M.C

Bill asks how do these things work, we give him answers.

If he said "how did the universe get here", we'd have less answers. He didn't. He asked how these things work, why does the tide go in and out without fail? We know that. Why does the sun go down and up without fail? We know that. He asks why the Earth has a moon, and mars doesn't have any. Mars has 2 moons.

His entire debate on why he believes in magic is because he says, and I quote "no one can explain to me why the tides go in and out without fail, why the sun goes up and down". That's his exact quote, and we have those exact answers.

Yes, we know, its called using extended metaphors and albeit poor analogies to describe a larger, universal truth.

O'Reilly's whole deal is that he doesn't believe that the order of the universe as it stands, which perfectly supports life, and humans, and only takes place on Earth and not anywhere else on Mars, could be the result of just random chance.

By asking how did it get there? He's also implicitly asking "Why". Clear as day. Why did sometime this world form from nothing and build a landmass so perfectly adaptable to humankind? Why did, this random collection of molecules and energy form into microorganisms that would develop into beings capable of logical thought? Etc.

O'Reilly is questioning how a 1/10000000 twist of fate that led to this universe developed into what it is today without an overseer or intelligent design.

Originally Posted by xeberus

While Bill may be a complete idiot. He is rich, so props to Bill. I bet he does more blow and hookers than... me..

A complete idiot with a Bachelor's from Marist, a Masters from Boston University, AND a Masters from Harvard.

There is a reason the dude is the number one political commentator in the United States bar none. He's the man in terms on News and politics. And he's known as the hardest interview in the industry.

This dude is not Rush Limbaugh who just says controversial shit just to get attention, while being almost entirely uneducated.

[xeberus]

Originally Posted by Roflcopter

O'Reilly's whole deal is that he doesn't believe that the order of the universe as it stands, which perfectly supports life, and humans, and only takes place on Earth and not anywhere else on Mars, could be the result of just random chance.

By asking how did it get there? He's also implicitly asking "Why". Clear as day. Why did sometime this world form from nothing and build a landmass so perfectly adaptable to humankind? Why did, this random collection of molecules and energy form into microorganisms that would develop into beings capable of logical thought? Etc.

O'Reilly is questioning how a 1/10000000 twist of fate that led to this universe developed into what it is today without an overseer or intelligent design.

Well we formed under this planets conditions, not the other way around. From what we know about the formation of this planet all things required for life were present. Life on this planet under these conditions was very probable looking from a recent point in time before life formed here. Life should not be on mars currently, its not suitable for life like the earth is.

Well Bill believes the universe came from nothing as be believe god said it and poof from nothing sprang forth the universe. No intelligent atheist would ever say something comes from nothing, that is nonsense and not possible with what we know about the universe.

Also, look at the evolution of man. We evolved to best adapt to the terrain, not the other way around. The planet was not built for us, but us for it.

[Roflcopter]

Originally Posted by xeberus

Well we formed under this planets conditions, not the other way around. From what we know about the formation of this planet all things required for life were present. Life on this planet under these conditions was very probable looking from a recent point in time before life formed here. Life should not be on mars currently, its not suitable for life like the earth is.

Well Bill believes the universe came from nothing as be believe god said it and poof from nothing sprang forth the universe. No intelligent atheist would ever say something comes from nothing, that is nonsense and not possible with what we know about the universe.

Also, look at the evolution of man. We evolved to best adapt to the terrain, not the other way around. The planet was not built for us, but us for it.

So you believe that the Earth was just there forever in some semi-perfect state before humans developed from micro-organisms?

Also the point is not whether or not we developed from the terrain around us but why sentient life would even develop in the first place.

It is a long way from a simple one-celled prokaryote to something just sprouting legs and walking and being

[xeberus]

Originally Posted by Roflcopter

A complete idiot with a Bachelor's from Marist, a Masters from Boston University, AND a Masters from Harvard.

There is a reason the dude is the number one political commentator in the United States bar none. He's the man in terms on News and politics. And he's known as the hardest interview in the industry.

This dude is not Rush Limbaugh who just says controversial shit just to get attention, while being almost entirely uneducated.

I'm actually familiar with his education. BA in history, taught english, got a masters in broad cast journalism, masters of public administration. Gentleman's C's do go a long way, especially for him . He is another rush limbaugh. He talks out of his ass to the uneducated in america, and he makes a truck load of cash doing it.

[xeberus]

Originally Posted by Roflcopter

So you believe that the Earth was just there forever in some semi-perfect state before humans developed from micro-organisms?

Also the point is not whether or not we developed from the terrain around us but why sentient life would even develop in the first place.

It is a long way from a simple one-celled prokaryote to something just sprouting legs and walking and being

No way, it formed in time.

Well it just makes sense that it would under such conditions and over a long enough span of time.

We certainly are, we've come a long way

[Roflcopter]

Originally Posted by xeberus

I'm actually familiar with his education. BA in history, taught english, got a masters in broad cast journalism, masters of public administration. Gentleman's C's do go a long way, especially for him . He is another rush limbaugh. He talks out of his ass to the uneducated in america, and he makes a truck load of cash doing it.

Right, in some of the most exclusive colleges in the country. It's not a coincidence.

[xeberus]

Originally Posted by Roflcopter

Right, in some of the most exclusive colleges in the country. It's not a coincidence.

Well it takes family and connections, not just ability to do what he's done in terms of education. Its not a coincidence, but I could have done the same coming from his family , except I might have gotten a real degree along the way ;D no offense to history majors.