Epigenetics is not 'spooky' at all, nor is it 'un-addressed' or whatever nonsense you've dreamt up in the course of your daily skim-reading.

I suggest you watch this video, it's very simple and aimed at the layman/high school student.

Is this video final?

Meaning there won't be any epigenetics discoveries or new theories beyond it?

A few years ago I heard the epigenome was unmapped. It's a lot bigger than the human genome, you know.

Wow... How is there science without new theories or new discoveries?

I think I am seeing a root problem in debating people...I think people need to have a basic foundation in what they are discussing and some mutually accepted definitions. Or else the debate goes no where and you end up talking past each other.

its shows that debating is futile when emotion is involved.

Its silly for you to say that, however I proved why science revises itself and is correct every time here (so you are also correct to ignore science): Why science revisions are always correct.


Edit: just want to point out you went on a few times about me needing to show you proof, but then admitted you would just say the proof is bs anyways.

As usual, Hitchens says it best.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtkZH_FMXGY

Not really.

yes if we get stupid when our logic centre is activated then debating with emotion is useless.

People in this forum have changed their views on God questions so your assertion doesn't seem to hold.

Yeah, and what impact did their views have on their behavior?

Did it improve? Did it help them follow the Golden Rule?

Views aren't that hard to change.

Behavior is much harder.

Dont know.


Dont know.

Dont know.
Some no. Some are. Hes right that highly emotional held views are harder to change. But then i would guess highly held logical views are in the same boat.

Doesn't mean they can't be changed or haven't been changed, just that it takes more to change them.


Dont know. It depends on the behavior and views we are talking about. I stopped drinking soda recently. It wasn't that hard. I would find it harder to change the view the sun is hot.

Isn't that wonderful.

You can't measure the behavior that results from an atheistic worldview but you're competent to influence others' views?

I'd say you take stock of the U.S.S.R. under Stalin some time.

Lots of atheists at the helm there. They had no trouble buying communism hook, line and sinker.

A lot of communist governments have come to fruition and stayed in power in atheist countries: N. Korea, Vietnam, Cambodia, China, etc.

It's interesting that most of the Christian countries that communism started up in managed to neutralize or kick out communism though sometimes it took a few decades.

Im not a communist.

Stop arguing Splendour, you hate that remember?

Also, you have that point about communism backwards - those countries weren't 'atheist' before communism, but in some of those countries the communist government imposed state-atheism.

this doesn't suggest that its a good thing yet.

In what sort of countries did fascism take hold? I'm thinking of Spain, Italy and Germany here.

Not relevant.

They weren't?

There sure were a lot of Buddhists in some of them and some people think Buddhists are atheists.

Quote on Laos' Buddhist/Communist connection:

Even during the revolution, one of the main propaganda tactics of the Pathet Lao was to promulgate the compatibility of Buddhism and communism and to enlist the support of monks for their revolution. While many monks worked against the communists, it is clear also that many worked actively for them. When the communists came to power, they forbade the giving of alms to monks, but announced provision of a state-controlled ration of rice for monks. This ration was to be supplemented by food produced or earned by the monks themselves. Since then, monks have been required to perform productive roles in the community, primarily their traditional roles as teachers and healers.

http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/...d/laos-txt.htm

Leaving thread now.

I hate that my opinions always come across as arguing.

It's very relevant.

No, it's not relevant.

Some of the fascists like Hitler were really pagans masquerading as Christians.

You can check out Hitler's inner circle. Several like Himmler and Dietrich Eckhart were known occultists.

Hitler and the Occult
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitler_and_the_Occult

i think both are Christians because they count there time in years since jesus birth.

Ya and the occult was inspired by helena blavastky, who mentored annie besant, who mentored, jiddhu krishnamurti, who mentored bruce lee.

This occult talk is tied to Atlantis, aliens, and superior races, developed by Blavatsky from info she got from studying many subjects together.

The occult is a lot older than Blavatsky.

yes it runs right through here I mean

Yeah well since you posted post #171 I can't exchange posts with you any more.

I just can't take someone seriously with such a bad grasp of history.

Please forgive me.

Hitler was Catholic.