have you noticed the change? It seems humour and expression of opinion has mutated into “saying what is true in a blunt way” (I call it “truhtiny“) and “saying what you feel with a lot of swears.” (I call it “nonsensical rantings of ignorant teens and idiots“).
Now I won’t say that I am psychic (because then I have to charge you for my prophesies), but many of my speculations about what’s to come have come true (No mr. Dawkins I have no written proof). To my recollection I once said “In the future jokes will be just saying what is true with a smile“. That prophecy came along with others like “in the future reality show contestants will die as part of the rules“, “In the future religion will be replaced by science with horrible consequences (ie. doomsday)“, “Violence and random acts of destruction will increase to an [almost] anarchic level” and “and one day I will die. Most likely at the age of 35 by heart attack.”
I don’t know when, how or if those last prophecies will come true, but if they do then it will be proof that I am psychic wouldn’t it?As I see it being physic only means you have to see the most bleak outcome to humanity and give it an unspecified timespan and sooner or later it will come true.
Now that statement does not mean I agree with mr Dawkins about there being no real psychics in the world. I think intuition, intelligence and feelings are strong scorches for viewing future and understanding the past. I also see that if you knew the future, like mr. Dawkins demands of psychics, instead of just felt them, that in it self would change things.
Let’s take the scientific prophecy of global warming.
Global Warming hasn’t been proved without problems and there still are alot of “retarded people” who question the entire thing. Also new evidence has been needed to prove why global warming, that are suppose to be over us as in fact done the opposite, made things colder. The UN science people claim this to be low levels of humidity in the atmosphere and that’s why it’s not getting warmer but colder.
Ahh, I see what the UN did there.Isn’t this just cold reading (no pun intended)? First the scientist will say “Danger. Danger! Global warming will melt the icecaps! Danger. Danger. (Remember to give us money so we can find out more ways for you to die.) Danger. Danger.” and then something random happens and then it’s “Danger Danger. Low level of humidity in atmosphere will make it colder. Danger. Danger. (Give us money so we can find out other things that will kill you.) Danger! Danger!”
Atheist and atheist scientist will always view everything of mystery, the little strangeness in everyday life, will be referred to as a coincidences. If an eighty year old lady gets hit by a car and survives, that’s not a “miracle” but a mathematical absurdity that with further investigation will prof merely random. It’s like if you throw an infinite number of white balls into the air one of them are bound to fall down black. It’s not a mystery it’s just facts.Now it may appear that I am anti-science, and I am really not. I am more for science than any atheist is for religion. I in fact love science. It’s fun to know about the stars, what psychology has learned about why we do things, and how sociology claim that they are the only true human science. It’s interesting to follow the gen-pool of humans back to apes, or perhaps not, as we don’t KNOW yet (the missing link is still missing). It’s lovely to think about the big bang, and how it all began.
Where I don’t like science is when the claim to know all that it’s needed to know, when they clearly don’t! When science meddles in politics, or politics meddle in science (even more dangerous and very much the case). When certain besserwisers try to meddle in how parents should raise their children (as an atheist), when moral questions are had and try to steal the last bit of influence religion has on everyday life. You should keep your fucking mouth shout. You have been wrong before, you will be wrong again. An hypothesis, or theory does not make fact! If a scientist can’t tell the difference we are in BIG TROUBLE.
What ever science discovers in the future, has rejected in the past, claimed to be true that now is unheard of, will not and shall no change religion. Just as science shall not change art (no reason to remove the gods from Hellenic plays), politics or daily life of the individual. I am a secularist and the day that science can claim to be free of politics, then I think religion should not be used in politics either. And if we are lucky, in the end, no one will care about politics in any respect.
I also think that Dawkin (and his kin) will never find any evidence of there being psychics because as I said precognition involves feelings and Dawkin have NON! I don’t think a real scientist should have feelings as it affects their judgement. The purest scientist sees emotions as illusions to distract us from logic. I mean, if scientist had feeling other than that of being a god, then how could we have tortured people in concentration camps to jump forward in Medicare?