test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Housewife rewrites Harry Potter to be more Christian

12346

Comments

  • lordarathronlordarathron Member Posts: 249 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    I've not specified any religious cleric at all, and indeed, there are some massively manipulative clerics. And equally, I originally posted, that if benefit of the doubt must be extended to concepts like Darwin's theory of evolution (plot holes and all) rather than the null hypothesis, then by extension, the same standard must be applied to theism, rather than the null hypothesis :cool:



    When an Institution, an Establishment, perpetuates a deliberate lie, that casts doubt on anything said Establishment claims, and becomes little more than an attempt to maintain a 'Party Line' which subsequent scientists either uphold and stick to, or wind up ridiculed and sidelined...
    ^^^Yes.
    One issue is that people who could become great scientists are being ostracized for their religious beliefs. (See Expelled)
  • marcusdkanemarcusdkane Member Posts: 7,439 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    ^^^Yes.
    One issue is that people who could become great scientists are being ostracized for their religious beliefs. (See Expelled)

    Exactly. To me, that's not so much 'discovery' and imparting of knowledge, but deliberate manipulation and indoctrination by an Establishment...
  • worffan101worffan101 Member Posts: 9,518 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    ^^^Yes.
    One issue is that people who could become great scientists are being ostracized for their religious beliefs. (See Expelled)

    *headdesk*

    "Expelled" is a propaganda film created by a religious lobby to complain that scientists don't want to use their religious ideology in place of science. It contains massive amounts of quote mining and very selectively-edited clips of well-known scientists, edited purposefully to make it seem as though said scientists are saying the exact OPPOSITE of what they actually said.

    It's a piece of tripe.
  • dalolorndalolorn Member Posts: 3,655 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    I suppose the question is more: Why element A and not B?

    *shrugs* Well, all the universes would have at least one variant that interacted with any other given universe, but...

    Oh well, time to stop spinning in circles. Thought experiment time! :D

    Imagine we have three universes, 1, 2, and 3. Imagine they each consist of one unit of matter, and last two units of time. Mind you, each of the universes has three units of volume.

    Assuming no inter-universal travel is possible, and time travel is equally impossible, there will be a number X of possible variants for each of these universes, for example, 1.

    1a: Matter starts in point A, moves into point B, universe ends.

    1b: Matter starts in point A, moves into point C, universe ends.

    1c: Matter starts in point A, moves nowhere, universe ends.

    So, X equals 3. There are three possible variants of universe 1. Consequently, there are also three possible variants of universes 2 and 3, but that's not relevant right now.

    Let's now assume that time travel is possible.

    1d: Matter starts in point A, travels back in time and appears in point C of universe 1e through some arcane process. Universe ends.

    1e: Matter starts in point A, moves into point B, matter from 1d travels back in time from the end of its universe and materializes in point C. Universe ends.

    I'm not even going to calculate how many variants we now have, but it's a lot more than three. Furthermore, timelines 1a-1c have no idea timelines 1d-... exist, because they never realized they could travel through time before their universes ended.

    Now, let's assume that inter-universal travel is also possible. This now allows for even weirder options.

    1x: Matter starts in point A, moves into point B, matter from 2y travels into another universe and materializes in point C. Nobody really knows why C, but whatever. Universe ends.

    1x+z: Matter starts in point A, and so forth, matter from 2x travels into another universe and materializes in point C. To add to the confusion, matter from 3x also figures out how to travel into 1x+z, materializing in point B. All three units of matter die unspectacularly as their universe ends.

    Now, let's assume that somehow, one of these three universes has more than one unit of matter. I need this because I can't explain the following scenario if there's only one unit of matter.

    Also, let's take a break while I write up the next part.

    Infinite possibilities have implications that could not be completely understood if you turned this entire universe into a giant supercomputer.p3OEBPD6HU3QI.jpg
  • lordarathronlordarathron Member Posts: 249 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    worffan101 wrote: »
    *headdesk*

    "Expelled" is a propaganda film created by a religious lobby to complain that scientists don't want to use their religious ideology in place of science. It contains massive amounts of quote mining and very selectively-edited clips of well-known scientists, edited purposefully to make it seem as though said scientists are saying the exact OPPOSITE of what they actually said.

    It's a piece of tripe.
    On the contrary, it has little or no religious connotation. It specifically is stated that it is not religious, and ascribes to no religion. Intelligent Design is not religion per se.
  • ryan218ryan218 Member Posts: 36,106 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    worffan101 wrote: »
    *headdesk*

    "Expelled" is a propaganda film created by a religious lobby to complain that scientists don't want to use their religious ideology in place of science. It contains massive amounts of quote mining and very selectively-edited clips of well-known scientists, edited purposefully to make it seem as though said scientists are saying the exact OPPOSITE of what they actually said.

    It's a piece of tripe.

    Just googled it and you're absolutely right. Expelled is not a documentary, it's a poor tabloid article-turned-film.
  • worffan101worffan101 Member Posts: 9,518 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    On the contrary, it has little or no religious connotation. It specifically is stated that it is not religious, and ascribes to no religion. Intelligent Design is not religion per se.

    1. False.
    2. Saying you're not religious and being religiously based are two different things.
    3. The Supreme Court says otherwise.
  • ryan218ryan218 Member Posts: 36,106 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    worffan101 wrote: »
    1. False.
    2. Saying you're not religious and being religiously based are two different things.
    3. The Supreme Court says otherwise.

    Since when does the Supreme Court get to decide what does and doesn't define a religion?
  • worffan101worffan101 Member Posts: 9,518 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    ryan218 wrote: »
    Since when does the Supreme Court get to decide what does and doesn't define a religion?

    In the US, it gets to define what qualifies as religion for the purposes of separation of church and state.

    Not the best example, but still...
  • dalolorndalolorn Member Posts: 3,655 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    1SOMETHING: Two units of matter start in points A and B. One of them moves into universe 2SOMETHINGELSE, but the other does not. Universe ends. Presumably, universe 2SOMETHINGELSE also ends.

    1SOMETHINGCOMPLETELYDIFFERENT: Two units of matter start in points A and B. One of them moves into universe 3 (I'm going to stop indexing them, this is ridiculous and you get the idea anyway by now), another moves into universe 2. Universe ends. Universes 2 and 3 also end. For added complexity, let's assume universes 2 and 3 swapped their own units of matter.

    Basically, the reason some timelines of some universes will never interact with another universe and/or timeline is that nobody will figure out how to do it before the universe ends. It's fairly Newtonian, really - A leads to B leads to C and all. Uncertainty principles and stuff are only there because we have no idea which timeline we're in, and can never know for certain anyway because knowing that would automatically change the timeline.

    Infinite possibilities have implications that could not be completely understood if you turned this entire universe into a giant supercomputer.p3OEBPD6HU3QI.jpg
  • ryan218ryan218 Member Posts: 36,106 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    worffan101 wrote: »
    In the US, it gets to define what qualifies as religion for the purposes of separation of church and state.

    Not the best example, but still...

    Isn't having the courts define it inherently a mixing of Church and State?
  • lordarathronlordarathron Member Posts: 249 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    worffan101 wrote: »
    1. False.
    2. Saying you're not religious and being religiously based are two different things.
    3. The Supreme Court says otherwise.
    Everyone brings their own ideas to the table, so admittedly, everyone has some bias.
  • dalolorndalolorn Member Posts: 3,655 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    ryan218 wrote: »
    Isn't having the courts define it inherently a mixing of Church and State?

    Unfortunately, the two are inseparable by virtue of being in a timeline where they are capable of interacting with each other. See what I did there? :D

    Edit: Holy cow, I might condense all this I'm saying into a signature. It would beat complaining about a Douglas Adams quote I've almost completely forgotten about by now...

    Infinite possibilities have implications that could not be completely understood if you turned this entire universe into a giant supercomputer.p3OEBPD6HU3QI.jpg
  • worffan101worffan101 Member Posts: 9,518 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    ryan218 wrote: »
    Isn't having the courts define it inherently a mixing of Church and State?

    Now that's a good question.

    I'm not a constitutional lawyer, though. Ask Glenn Greenwald or somebody.
  • dalolorndalolorn Member Posts: 3,655 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    worffan101 wrote: »
    I'm not a constitutional lawyer, though.

    Is it a bad thing that the first thing I can say to that post (specifically the quoted section) is "You are in some subset of our universe"? :o

    Infinite possibilities have implications that could not be completely understood if you turned this entire universe into a giant supercomputer.p3OEBPD6HU3QI.jpg
  • worffan101worffan101 Member Posts: 9,518 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    dalolorn wrote: »
    Is it a bad thing that the first thing I can say to that post (specifically the quoted section) is "You are in some subset of our universe"? :o

    No.

    Because in some universe I'm Batman. :cool:
  • dalolorndalolorn Member Posts: 3,655 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    worffan101 wrote: »
    No.

    Because in some universe I'm Batman. :cool:

    And in some subset of your subset of your universe, I kill you because you're evil.

    With a lightsaber. :D

    ... Which explains one of the countless reasons I try to ignore the infinite multiverse out there and just do what I'd do if I didn't know I was destined to do it...

    Infinite possibilities have implications that could not be completely understood if you turned this entire universe into a giant supercomputer.p3OEBPD6HU3QI.jpg
  • worffan101worffan101 Member Posts: 9,518 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    dalolorn wrote: »
    And in some subset of your subset of your universe, I kill you because you're evil.

    With a lightsaber. :D

    ... Which explains one of the countless reasons I try to ignore the infinite multiverse out there and just do what I'd do if I didn't know I was destined to do it...

    And in some universe, I'm Captain of the Enterprise.

    Which is awesome.
  • dalolorndalolorn Member Posts: 3,655 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    worffan101 wrote: »
    And in some universe, I'm Captain of the Enterprise.

    Which is awesome.

    Arguably, that's not even a variant of you anymore, and it's definitely not you, but...

    I think I'm going to leave this thread if this is what it's going to turn into. I have better things to do than contemplate the infinite possibilities of the multiverse. :cool:

    Infinite possibilities have implications that could not be completely understood if you turned this entire universe into a giant supercomputer.p3OEBPD6HU3QI.jpg
  • worffan101worffan101 Member Posts: 9,518 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    dalolorn wrote: »
    Arguably, that's not even a variant of you anymore, and it's definitely not you, but...

    I think I'm going to leave this thread if this is what it's going to turn into. I have better things to do than contemplate the infinite possibilities of the multiverse. :cool:

    Yeah, I think we broke the thread.

    Eh, that's fine.
  • ryan218ryan218 Member Posts: 36,106 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    worffan101 wrote: »
    No.

    Because in some universe I'm Batman. :cool:

    And in another universe, you're Matt Murdoch, so a cross between the two. ;)
  • dalolorndalolorn Member Posts: 3,655 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    worffan101 wrote: »
    Yeah, I think we broke the thread.

    Eh, that's fine.

    I just hope my wreck of a thought experiment got its message across... :o

    Infinite possibilities have implications that could not be completely understood if you turned this entire universe into a giant supercomputer.p3OEBPD6HU3QI.jpg
  • ryan218ryan218 Member Posts: 36,106 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    dalolorn wrote: »
    I just hope my wreck of a thought experiment got its message across... :o

    Here's a question; if the infinite universes theory is correct, then does that not mean that there is another universe where the theory is incorrect?

    *Sits back as minds are blown.*
  • dalolorndalolorn Member Posts: 3,655 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    ryan218 wrote: »
    Here's a question; if the infinite universes theory is correct, then does that not mean that there is another universe where the theory is incorrect?

    *Sits back as minds are blown.*

    I hadn't thought of that. On the flip side, if it is correct, it must automatically be correct for the entire multiverse. In, I should add, the broadest usage of the word 'multiverse'. It's just that sort of theory. :)

    Edit: What do you think about the signature? There's a small bit in the picture, too. :D

    Infinite possibilities have implications that could not be completely understood if you turned this entire universe into a giant supercomputer.p3OEBPD6HU3QI.jpg
  • lordarathronlordarathron Member Posts: 249 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    Hmm... at this point I think I'm going to leave this conversation...
  • dalolorndalolorn Member Posts: 3,655 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    Hmm... at this point I think I'm going to leave this conversation...

    It would probably be best if we all did so. It'll save us all a lot of time at the very least.

    Infinite possibilities have implications that could not be completely understood if you turned this entire universe into a giant supercomputer.p3OEBPD6HU3QI.jpg
  • mimey2mimey2 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    Good idea.

    Besides, it doesn't matter.

    If the idea of the 'infinite universes' is correct, then that means in some universe somewhere, the Daleks did detonate the Reality Bomb successfully and we're all gonna go 'poof' anyways.

    (Which on a side note, is a REALLY huge plot hole in regards to that episode.)
    I remain empathetic to the concerns of my community, but do me a favor and lay off the god damn name calling and petty remarks. It will get you nowhere.
    I must admit, respect points to Trendy for laying down the law like that.
  • dalolorndalolorn Member Posts: 3,655 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    mimey2 wrote: »
    Good idea.

    Besides, it doesn't matter.

    If the idea of the 'infinite universes' is correct, then that means in some universe somewhere, the Daleks did detonate the Reality Bomb successfully and we're all gonna go 'poof' anyways.

    (Which on a side note, is a REALLY huge plot hole in regards to that episode.)

    Doubtful. I don't know what the Reality Bomb is supposed to be, but if it does what I'm guessing it does, then it would only have affected a predefined subset of the multiverse.

    ... Granted, that doesn't necessarily exclude the possibility that we're in that subset... :eek:

    Infinite possibilities have implications that could not be completely understood if you turned this entire universe into a giant supercomputer.p3OEBPD6HU3QI.jpg
  • ashkrik23ashkrik23 Member Posts: 10,809 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    So if there's a multi-verse..that means we live in the DC universe...

    But why isn't Batman swinging around the cities!???


    I call shenanigans.
    King of Lions rawr! Protect the wildlife of the world. Check out my foundry series Perfection and Scars of the Pride. arcgames.com/en/forums#/discussion/1138650/ashkrik23s-foundry-missions
    ashkrik_by_lindale_ff-d65zc3i.png
  • gulberatgulberat Member Posts: 5,505 Arc User
    edited September 2014
    worffan101 wrote: »
    Thank you, Gulberat, for bringing a healthy dose of sanity and undeniable truth to this thread. I salute you!

    I am sorry...I cannot accept this while you are insulting a friend of mine. :-/

    Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-)
    Proudly F2P.  Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
Sign In or Register to comment.