Slashdot Mirror


Titan Moon's Bright Hot Spot

An anonymous reader writes "Saturn's largest moon, Titan, has been the target of great interest because of its unusual pre-biotic chemistry and thick atmosphere. The Colorado-Boulder Space Science Institute announced a new mystery today involving a persistently bright spot, perhaps one of four possibilities. The spot could be a surface coloration, a mountain range, a cloud, or a hot spot."

201 comments

  1. Hot Spot? by TimTheFoolMan · · Score: 5, Funny

    As long as there's WiFi there, who cares how cold it is?

    Tim

    1. Re:Hot Spot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've discovered, by looking at the spot through a spectromoter, a pattern. Through analysis of the pattern, I have discovered an alien language, and futher translated to be something along the lines of: "This space for rent, call the Glarxo Corporation for more details!"

      The rest is a bit fuzzy, but I think I caught a 42 in there...

    2. Re:Hot Spot? by TimTheFoolMan · · Score: 4, Funny

      As long as it doesn't say, "Posted: The 3rd planet is scheduled for demolition due to plans for an intergalactic bypass..."

    3. Re:Hot Spot? by AndroidCat · · Score: 1

      But what if they close down the WiFi on weekends? How long is the Titan weekend anyway?

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
    4. Re:Hot Spot? by centauri · · Score: 1

      I'm a little concerned that it might read: "WE APOLOGIZE FOR THE INCONVENIENCE."

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Durga.
    5. Re:Hot Spot? by spauldo · · Score: 1

      Naw, you have to go to the offices on alpha centauri for that.

      --
      Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach either, do tech support.
  2. Fifth possibility: pre-biotic party! by noidentity · · Score: 4, Funny

    I, for one, welcome our new pre-biotic lifeform overlords!

    1. Re:Fifth possibility: pre-biotic party! by Che+Guevarra · · Score: 1

      Get under his cape! Get under......usdfou

  3. Life, evolution, everything... by Che+Guevarra · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    Life on the moons of other planets means what? To me it means God is everywhere and has a super weird plan. I've always been ready to believe that the universe is for everyone and I'm ready to accept it. To others it means life evolves and all religion dies. What does it mean to Slashdot people?

    1. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by Asshat+Canada · · Score: 0

      It means the Jedi Order must be instituted immediately.

      Peace and Justice do not dispense themselves.

    2. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by kfg · · Score: 5, Funny

      What does it mean to Slashdot people?

      Really cool pets.

      KFG

    3. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Life does evolve, whether you believe it or not.

    4. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To me it means God is everywhere and has a super weird plan.

      God's plan is... to not have a plan. just spread life everywhere and see what grows... there might be a bit more to it than that, but mostly I think God just has whims to occasionally bear down wrath/ etc etal... It was enough to Drive Lucifer out of heaven to try and build an army in hell to overthrow the kingdom of heaven. He could be evil, or he could just be really pissed at God's careless additute...

    5. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by Lisandro · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Perhaps it'll help people to start taking the Scriptures literally (in the case of Christianity), and think a bit for themselves. Religion shouldn't have to clash with Science. At all.

      Anyway, back to the main topic, there's no mention of what could be creating the hotspot. If it gets confirmed, what could it be? Massive geological activities? A mothership warming up for takeoff perhaps? :)

    6. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by zappepcs · · Score: 5, Insightful

      To others it means life evolves and all religion dies

      What? You mean that religion is still alive? I thought we killed that with priests sexual behaviors & coverups, gay marriages, and general rememberances of holy wars?

      The trouble with religion is that it mandates that you must justify everything to fit your previously held views and faith rather than explore and make up your own mind when presented with another possible take on the universe.

      Its a shame, or perhaps just sham, that religion has anything to do with it. It is space exploration, no more startling than when Columbus went looking for tea bags by heading for Florida.

      For some reason people think that life on other planets means something religious? It means that there is life on other planets. If your faith has no room for an omniscent god to have created life on some planet that you aren't part of, I pity you.

      Perhaps it would be better if we ALL simply sat down and decided that these old religious things we carry around are not right, and a new view is in order?

    7. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ya know, the bible and christianity doesn't really say anything about life on other planets, for or against. That's entirely beyond the scope of the bible.

      Perhaps it would be better if we ALL simply sat down and found out what we were talking about before spouting off half-assed gibberish.

    8. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by Che+Guevarra · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm sorry. I'm a big space explorer. Without sounding too preachy, I just meant to say that I'm a "Christian" scientist who is willing to admit that natural selection and a lot of other things might be true. And without making apologies, I was also trying to hedge bets because I see the truth in the natural order of things but I didn't know the 400 pound angry guy was going to jump
      .

    9. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by Che+Guevarra · · Score: 1

      Damn me for low posting... GOD.

    10. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by agentcdog · · Score: 3, Informative
      Everyone has a religion.

      "Everyone you say who says that they have no religious beliefs is just so certain about their belief that they accept it as truth. If you just start asking probing questions, and they start getting mad, then you've found their religion." --Orson Scott Card.

      We now know yours. Hugs. :)

      BTW, Mormons beleive there is life on other planets as a matter of religion. I'm sure they're not the only ones.

      --
      If I understand Dirac correctly, his meaning is this: there is no God, and Dirac is his Prophet. -Pauli
    11. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by Camel+Pilot · · Score: 4, Interesting
      time for obligitory Sagan quote:

      How is it that hardly any major religion has looked at science and concluded, 'This is better than we thought! The Universe is much bigger than our prophets said, grander, more subtle, more elegant'? Instead they say, 'No, no, no! My god is a little god, and I want him to stay that way.' A religion, old or new, that stressed the magnificence of the Universe as revealed by modern science might be able to draw forth reserves of reverence and awe hardly tapped by the conventional faiths.
    12. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by Che+Guevarra · · Score: 1

      Life on the Moon said Mohamed Atta was going to killl us.... That cool? No, it's not, but that's what it says in Baghdad for our sisters and brothers.

    13. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The trouble with religion is that it mandates that you must justify everything to fit your previously held views and faith rather than explore and make up your own mind when presented with another possible take on the universe."

      Hi. I'm religious, and you're full of shit.

    14. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by timmarhy · · Score: 1

      not all religion dies but it certainly smashs many conceptions of the earth being the center of the universe and man being in the image of god, and the jews being gods people etc. bottom line is major religions are all based on primitive stories, which hold no room for space exploration. and to admit any one of those beliefs is wrong opens the flood gates to the idea maybe the whole thing is a scam.

      --
      If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
    15. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by krymsin01 · · Score: 2, Funny

      We'll make great pets, you mean?

      --
      stuff
    16. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by ardor · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Ah, the typical ignorant Slashdot reader. You do know that there are more religions than the Christian one? If you actually read parts of the bible you would have noticed that a) most of it MUST NOT be read literally, but as metaphors, b) the things Jesus said (if he existed) apply to everday life. I mean things like treat other like you want to be treated yourself. I DO NOT believe in a billionaire pope who shits on the "followers".

      Or buddhism? Buddhism and Christan belief are actually very similar - the ORIGINAL Christian belief, that is, not the one warped by the Catholic Church. Both do not really try to describe the Universe, and do not impose Dogmata all around (thats what the church did!) but are very, very good lessons of how to make peace with oneself, how to get to KNOW oneself, how to look through the piles of illusions so many people are trapped in. Thus, I do think beliefs are right (i do not count Buddhism as a religion), but religions are not. Organized belief is never good, since it takes away the ability to think freely. Also, religions are often filled with dogmata and priests plundering their followers. But to live without a belief is not possible. Your belief is that you have to be 100% rational.

      --
      This sig does not contain any SCO code.
    17. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by renoX · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Everyone has a religion.

      "Everyone you say who says that they have no religious beliefs is just so certain about their belief that they accept it as truth. If you just start asking probing questions, and they start getting mad, then you've found their religion." --Orson Scott Card.

      Well, can you expect another view from someone who has a religion?
      Talk about a biased viewpoint!
      As an atheist, when someone tells me but how is-it possible than 'physic laws' has produced such complex universe where some little modification in the laws would have destroyed it, I don't get upset, I just answer 'I don't know'.

      You know saying that there is a god, is just as bad: who created the god? So this "answer" is not an answer at all..

      So we all don't know, but that's the religious people who tend to get upset when one say this: they know, they have their 'faith'..
      Bah, talk about wearing blindhorses.
    18. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by Andy+Gardner · · Score: 1

      What does this mean to Slashdot people?
      Appologies, I read the subject as Life, the universe, everything...

      The answer obviously being 42

    19. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by ardor · · Score: 1

      Of course. Now the next step is to acknowledge that there are religious people on BOTH sides, scientists and religious zealots. The former say there is no god and they do not accept any non-rational junk, the others say that science is just a deception of the devil and we all must praise their God.

      However, if you say that you don't know, then you are actually an agnostic. Agnostics know only that they don't know. Atheists know that there cannot be a God. I am an agnostic myself, btw, however thats no reason for not thinking about the possibilities (as long as they remain possibilities).

      --
      This sig does not contain any SCO code.
    20. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by renoX · · Score: 1

      There are several definition about atheism..
      But I don't consider myself as an agnostic: I don't think that the two possibilites 'there is no god' and 'there are god(s)' have the same weight!
      I don't know what happened at the beginning of the universe or why it happened, but I consider that god(s) as described by religions (which have human look, that you can pray, which shield us from death through one way or another etc..) are about as interesting as 'father christmas' as a concept, so I consider myself atheist, not agnostic.

    21. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by dthx1138 · · Score: 1

      Obviously, it is the 8th level of hell, with the giant vat which is boiling all murderers for eternity.

      Science!

      --
      I just found the box to change my sig. Um.... [timeless witticism].
    22. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by Liquidrage · · Score: 1

      Are you suggesting there's some verse that states something along the lines of:

      And he said to them, "Go unto the hot spot of the largest moon of the body in the sky with the large ring"

      I really don't see how that was supposed to help people to start taking the scriptures literally. Are you sure you're just not doing a "The Bible said God created everything. Everything exists. Therefore God did it. And the Bible is once again proven correct."?

    23. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by ardor · · Score: 1

      Don't make the mistake many people do: don't think of a god as some guy with a beard, who's used to be praised by his followers, etc. etc. Thats one bitter consequence of the medieval period: our concept of religion has been reduced to the harmful definition the church forced upon everyone.

      I don't think that if a god exists, it would be like you said (human form etc.) However, I refuse to say that there is definitely nothing of higher conciousness, simply because we can neither prove nor disprove it.

      --
      This sig does not contain any SCO code.
    24. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by Beryllium+Sphere(tm) · · Score: 1

      Nobel laureate in physics Abdus Salam saw his work as inseparable from his religion: "The Holy Quran enjoins us to reflect on the verities of Allah's created laws of nature; however, that our generation has been privileged to glimpse a part of His design is a bounty and a grace for which I render thanks with a humble heart." I've heard other Muslims express sentiments much like Sagan's.

    25. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem with a god of science is that it makes humanity all that much more insignificant, and that's something small minded people won't tolerate. If they ever come to admit that their god may be bigger than their prophets said, then they already believe in science, so having a religion about it is a moot point.

    26. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by renoX · · Score: 1

      Well agreed but by *every religion* include these type of elements, not only church as you said, but all the religions..

      So if there was some kind of god without those attributes, it would be totally different from what is currently described as god, so why name it 'god'?

      I don't rule out that "something unkwnow" exist, but as I know nothing about it, I apply Occam razor: nothing exist until you can proove me otherwise --> atheist.

    27. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Many Christian and Jewish scientists share(d) similar sentiment, Einstein being an often quoted example. And, IIRC, it was Woytila who proclaimed that the Big Bang theory fits with The Genesis. Sagan was not completely right with this one.

    28. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by Tim+C · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Why does it smash the idea of man having been created in the image of God? If there is life on other planets, then it'll just be more plants and animals. Exotic perhaps, perhaps even based on sulphur chemistry for example, but still just plants and animals. The discovery of new species of plants and animals on this planet didn't smash that idea, why should discovering them on a different planet do so? Ditto the Jews being the chosen people.

      (Disclaimer: I'm not religious, I just don't follow your logic)

    29. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by Teancum · · Score: 2, Insightful

      As an atheist, I hope you can appreciate that atheism is a religious viewpoint as well. You may put faith in "rational thought", "human nature", or a variety of other philosophical thoughts. Indeed, atheism has as much if not more variety as any other major world philosophical approach (aka religion). I have seen far more "faith" in the concept of global warming than I've seen religious people have "faith" that their god will protect them from harm. Or even "faith" that the United Nations should be strengthened and American soverignty be abolished. It is a matter of a point of view, and neither philosophical viewpoint is grounded on divine influence, but it does drive people with a passion to have it take up their entire life for that one cause.

      I even know some "atheists" that go to "church", in the sense they get together once a week (usually Sunday because it is convinent due to local socal norms) and have a barbeque or a game of poker in the afternoon with others sharing their philosophical viewpoint. They openly admit this is only for social reasons, simply because they want to meet other people. The local newspaper and the Chamber of Commerce even publish the contact information for this group as a "church" for visitors to come and participate with if you happen to be in town.

      Where religious people (I count myself among them) get upset with is when I'm told I can't have my religious viewpoint, or that I need to keep it in the closet. Outward signs that I have a religious viewpoint (such as a school teacher wearing a cross on their chest when they teach class) is prohibited in a public setting.

      I'll admit that there is a fine line between being permitted to display religious attitudes and forcing the group or community to follow in those religious viewpoints, but from my experience with current politically correct thought is that such religious expression is encouraged or even demanded to be supressed altogether. An overeaction to this supression is what currently drives the "religious right" in America today. Unfortunately most atheists simply don't understand the motivation, and that tends to enflame the arguements rather than address the issue.

    30. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by mcsporran · · Score: 2

      Calling Atheism a religion is like calling bald a hairstyle.

      --
      This is NOT a signature.
    31. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by Legion303 · · Score: 1

      "As an atheist, I hope you can appreciate that atheism is a religious viewpoint as well."

      How utterly idiotic.

      Religion requires faith. To try to claim atheism has faith in the nonexistence of a god is the same as saying adults have faith in the nonexistence of Santa Claus and the Easter bunny. It is not a matter of faith, it is a matter of not believing in ficticious entities who have absolutely no evidence to support their existence.

      You will also find most true atheists don't attempt to prove the nonexistence of any god, because of two very important reasons: 1.) it is impossible to prove a negative, and 2.) there is no point in belaboring the self-evident. There is no Santa Claus, and there is no magic sky fairy who listens to your prayers at night.

      If you want to believe in delusions, that's your business. Don't try to claim my nonbelief in your particular breed of insanity is a religion.

    32. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by renoX · · Score: 2, Interesting

      > As an atheist, I hope you can appreciate that atheism is a religious viewpoint as well.

      Nope, because my point of view 'there is no god' is falsifiable: if I'm witness to real miracles, I'd become religious (religious as in beleiving in supreme beings not as being part of a particular religion of course), wouldn't you?

      Which make this *very different* from the faith of religious people.

      As for your meetings that you say are equivalent as "going to church": usually when people go to church, they do it to pray, so..

      For the rest, I'm French and we do have very strict limitations on religious right of people in the schools, and I agree with those. And we have no backlash, currently at least..

    33. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by MikTheUser · · Score: 1

      Perhaps it would be better if we ALL simply sat down and decided that these old religious things we carry around are not right, and a new view is in order?

      Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, 1749-1832, German poet and scientist: "10,000 more years will pass, and the fairytale of the Jesus Christ will still keep people from coming to their senses."

    34. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by Epistax · · Score: 1

      I think a person isn't ignorant if they can agree that:

      The universe is at minimum, billions of years old.
      DNA exists, and it changes, therefore evolution exists.
      Religious leaders are not authorities on or of anything. They are spiritual guides, however they often misguide.

      That's all it takes people.

    35. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think God had a tremendous sense of humor when he named one of the planets Uranus...home of the Klingons...

    36. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by Mattsson · · Score: 1

      That depends on how you define the word "religion".

      Since my parents choose to christen me and I haven't had the energy or motivation to officially leave the christian churth I'm, on paper, a christian
      In reality I don't belive in that religion, so I'm not a christian.
      I also do not belive in any other selfdescribed religion, so I count myself as one of those who have no religion.
      Some people, almost without exception folks who are religious, say that since I do think that some of the scientific theories about the universe might be true, without absolute proof thereof, I *do* have a religion.
      If I had been one of those who "religiously" belive in those theories, I might have agread to having som sort of nonsupernatural-religion, but as it stands, I disagree whith that point of view.
      If I say "I have no religion" and stand fast to that, that is a standpoint, not a religion.

      Don't know why I bother to write this really... Since I won't change your standpoint and you won't change mine. =/
      And that's, of course, how it should be. Noone has the right to demand that anyone else changes their point of view.

      --
      /.Mattsson - My native language is not English, so please don't whine over linguistic errors. (That's lame anyway...)
    37. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by srleffler · · Score: 1

      For that matter, even if there were intelligent life on other planets it doesn't necessarily smash the idea of humans having been created 'in the image of God'. Many, if not most, modern Christians do not interpret 'in the image of God' to mean a physical image. We are created in God's image in the sense that we have a capacity to know, to understand, to love, and to do good. God can pretty clearly take on any physical form he likes. It wouldn't be very meaningful to say that we are created in his image physically. So, it's quite possible that if we met intelligent aliens they might also be 'created in God's image', even if they look nothing like us.

    38. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by Woy · · Score: 1

      Or maybe, just maybe, we can look at the "magnificence of the Universe" without a "god" intermediary and stop being children.

      --
      "If God created us in his own image we have more than reciprocated." - Voltaire
    39. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by srleffler · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think Sagan's view may be a little too narrow here. There is certainly a long history of Christian scientists and philosophers who have looked at the universe and nature with awe and seen the handiwork of God there. My God is a big god. A God who created a Universe that is vaster than we can possibly imagine, with more worlds than we can count. A God who created the beauty and mystery of quantum mechanics, and relativity. We are God's children, but I have little doubt that in this vast universe God has other children. Maybe we will meet them someday, in this life or the next. I hope so.

    40. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by srleffler · · Score: 1

      To be fair, while Einstein often referred to God, it's not clear what his beliefs were and they can be construed to be metaphorical. This doesn't impact your main point, though. There are certainly many other scientists (past and present) who are also religious, and who see the wonder of the universe as more evidence of the greatness of God.

    41. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "10,000 more years will pass, and the fairytale of the Jesus Christ will still keep people from coming to their senses."

      If you're gonna quote Goethe, do it right and don't ascribe him your own opinions. That one passage, when taken out of its context, went like this:

      Es bleibt wahr: das Märchen von Christus ist Ursache, daß die Welt noch 10000 Jahre stehen kann und niemand recht zu Verstand kommt, weil es ebenso viel Kraft des Wissens, des Verstandes, des Begriffs braucht, um es zu verteidigen als es zu bestreiten.

      "It is still true: the fairytale of Christ is the reason to why the world can last another 10 000 years and nobody will really come to their senses, because it takes as much power of knowledge, understanding and sentience to defend it as it takes to oppose it." (My translation)

      That's an excerpt from a personal letter, when he was talking about the Roman-Catholic church. It's not representative of Goethe or his philosophy or religious beliefs. You might as well start quoting from his "der ewige Jude" (the eternal Jew) and try to use Goethe to support anti-semitism.

    42. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If your faith has no room for an omniscent god to have created life on some planet that you aren't part of, I pity you.

      Perhaps it would be better if we ALL simply sat down and decided that these old religious things we carry around are not right, and a new view is in order?


      Let me get this straight, you start off by telling me that religion is dead, by your own decree, because of what is basically a handful of freaks. These freaks, by the way, would, and do, exist without the benefit of religion and instead of abusing alterboys they would have probably have taken the high road and entered the schools as teachers and abused 8 year old boys there instead... but no, it must be the religion, you must be right.

      Than you go on to say IF your faith has no place for life on other planets you pity us. As if we need it.

      You finish it up with a really heavy handed statement that everyone on the face of the fucking planet should get together and "choose" to follow your idealogy? Christ, you want to talk about having the attitude of intolerance that so many in the various religions have had that have stained the name of religion.

      I guess this type of abusive and biggoted attitude spreads well beyond the church and has carried its way to your very enlightened outlook on life.

      They only thing that seperates you from the kind of religious fanatics that shout down "heretics" (or do worse to them) is that you dont claim to get your "wisdom" from a higher begin. It seems that you think that you're the higher being. If that doesn't make a good portion of the populous scoff I don't know what will.

      The sthing that bothers me the most about all of this is that while you ave a +5 insightful I'll probably get modded down as flaimbait or troll. The slashdot crowd is not very kindly to those who support the ideal of religious freedom unless it involves the rights of those to bash the faith of others.

    43. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or maybe, just maybe, we can look at the "magnificence of the Universe" without a "god" intermediary and stop being children.

      Ahhh, the arrogance of the young and foolish.

    44. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by AndroidCat · · Score: 1
      What does it mean to Slashdot people?

      Besides DDOSing them and melting their servers?

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
    45. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by fimbulvetr · · Score: 1

      parts of the bible you would have noticed that a) most of it MUST NOT be read literally, but as metaphors,

      This is typical of the latest bible thumpers. 100 years ago, I'm sure everyone argued that everything in the bible was correct. Now, they're saying most of it is, and some parts are only metaphors.
      I can't wait to hear how people will justify it in 50 years.

    46. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Relativity is not a mystery. Quantum mechanics is not a mystery. The Universe is pretty mysterious*, but physics is a series of models of the Universe created and entirely understood by humans.
      Unless you meant your god is Einstein? :P

      *in the sense that it's complicated and counter-intuitive, rather than supernatural...

    47. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by turgid · · Score: 1

      What a feeble and pathetic god it is if we humans are made in its image.

    48. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're equating religion with Christianity. You're an ignorant fool who's been, ironically enough, brain-washed by your Christian world into ignoring the rest of humanity and their own separate religions.

    49. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How is it that this got modded down as off topic but the fucktard who went off on religion got modded as insightful? It seems to me that there are a lot of /. users getting mod points that are full of shit and deserve to be meta-modded out of existance.

    50. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by J05H · · Score: 1

      > Everyone has a religion.

      I have to disagree. You might argue that atheists have a religion (faith that there is no god), but that doesn't hold for agnostics or more broadly even Buddhists. Agnosticism is a belief in provability - reality and nature are provable, if a god/supernatural can be proven, an agnostic would believe. Essentially, faith is not enough.

      Buddhists don't believe in gods, neccessarily, despite the apparent worshipping of idols. it is a belief system based on personal behavior and righteous interaction with others. They revere the Buddha, but don't think of him as sky/creator god, but an enlightened teacher.

      People that claim 'science' or 'darwin' is a religion don't understand the scientific process nor what constitutes a religion.

      josh

      --
      gigantino.tv - Heavy but weighs nothing.
    51. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by ToasterofDOOM · · Score: 1

      You hit the nail on the head. Scripture isn't meant to be taken literally. For all of you 7-day creationists out there i distinctly recall somewhere in the Bible it says "to the lord a day is like a thousand years and a thousand years is like a day." I am a Christian and I go to church regularly. My friends believe in evolution, and I like to think that evolution is totally plausible as well. Big Bang? Yeah I'm there. Ever heard "Let there be light!"?

      --
      I am Spartacus
    52. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by turgid · · Score: 2, Insightful
      The trouble with that is that most people are lazy and relatively stupid. They prefer to believe what their authority figures (ministers, priests, politicians, journalists etc.) tell them to and it suits them fine.

      To take a rational, scientific view would involve independent thought, reasoning and research; skills that many people are incapable of, or don't want to burden themselves with.

      Bread and the circus.

    53. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by Lisandro · · Score: 1

      Sorry, it was "stop taking the scriptures literally." I needed sleep when i posted :)

    54. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by BlueFashoo · · Score: 1

      Bald can be a hairstyle. I believe the word you're looking for is "color."

      --
      Nice Marmot
    55. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by Neurotoxic666 · · Score: 1

      With breasts.

      --
      You are more than the sum of what you consume. Desire is not an occupation.
    56. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by BlueFashoo · · Score: 3, Informative

      A viewpoint about religion does not a religion make.

      Atheism is no more a religion than asantaclausism. The only defining characteristic of atheism is the lack of a belief in some sort of god. That's it, nothing else. And yes, agnostics are a subset of atheists.

      Religions, on the other hand, are a collection of beliefs regarding supernatural entities, (or what are percieved as supernatural entities) and worship of those entities, with a collection of rituals attached to it. All this is done in the hopes of acquiring some sort of favor from the entity, eg. forgiveness, salvation, success, etc.

      See, atheism, while it has one belief concerning supernatural entities, lacks the worship, magic rituals, and prayer that religions have. There is no moral code attached to atheism, whis is not to say that atheists have no morals.

      --
      Nice Marmot
    57. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by BlueFashoo · · Score: 1

      We may not have the right to demand that others change their point of view, but we certainly do have the right to attempt to persuade them, otherwise we might as well just shut up and go to the beach. Which sounds like a very good idea except for the May grey.

      --
      Nice Marmot
    58. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Read Paradise Lost. God is a prick.

    59. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by kfg · · Score: 1

      With breasts.

      When the ad hits the back of the comic books I'll betcha the squid women outsell sea monkeys 100 to 1.

      KFG

    60. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by Teancum · · Score: 1
      if I'm witness to real miracles, I'd become religious


      Unfortunately, there is a history of people who are witnesses to spiritual events, even miracles, who openly dismiss them for one reason or another.

      In short, even if you see a miracle, odds are likely that you would not become any more religious than you already are.

      A classic example is how many soldiers "became religious" when they were at the Hanoi Hilton. Yeah, for the moments they were in struggle fighting the North Vietnamese as a prisioner they prayed to God, but as soon as they got out and returned to America, many of these soldiers stopped their prayers and could care less about God or what role He might have had in their release.

      As for your meetings that you say are equivalent as "going to church": usually when people go to church, they do it to pray, so..


      This may be a difference in religious attitudes between Europe and America. For the most part, I don't know any Christian or Moslem for that matter who feels like they have to be in a church in order to pray. They may be there to gain religious instruction, seeking spiritual guidance from a religious leader, or to socialize with people who have the same religious viewpoint. There are community and political aspects that also show up with religious worship, but having it as the only place to pray is not the role of a church.

      For the rest, I'm French and we do have very strict limitations on religious right of people in the schools, and I agree with those. And we have no backlash, currently at least.


      In America, supposedly we have the 1st Ammendment that guarentees that the government will not "establish a religion or prohibit the free exercise thereof". Civil liberty groups try to push for denoucing any establishment of religion, but often forget that free exercise of religion is just as important. Apparently France doesn't have this sort of religious freedom protection at all.
    61. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by Teancum · · Score: 1

      Since you have insulted my intelligence, I could choose not to respond, but I find that you are indeed professing faith.

      Faith is living a lifestyle that demonstrates what you believe to be true about this Universe, how it was formed, and what its governing principles have in regards to how it affects your life.

      If you choose to believe that there is no God or gods that govern this Universe, then that is also an expression of faith. This is a faith that there is no god to return to when you die, that it really doesn't matter what you do, and no final accountability other than in some abstract way that the legacy of your life has had on the rest of your species. You can have ethics and morals and also be atheistic (an argument often used against atheism), but it must be grounded in something more basic like saving the world or helping humanity in general.

      Otherwise, get out your Uzi and go out of this life with a bang, having fun and trashing all that you can. Of course, that is another form of insanity that some people do choose to follow as well. "Eat, drink, and be merry, for tommorrow we will die."

      I just find that there is more to life than that, and more basic good that can come from following religious philosophies that have come from our ancestors. Even if you may not strictly believe that God exists, at least pay attention to what concepts have been developed by over 1000 generations of oral and written traditions. There may be something to life that you are missing.

    62. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by Teancum · · Score: 1

      Atheism is far too much of a catch-all term for all of the other possibilities for philosophical viewpoints regarding the nature of this Universe.

      What I would call atheism could be also called "Secular-Humanism", or the belief in scientific principles and moral secular government. Even this is hard to pin down, but is a common philosophy found in Western Europe and the Americas, and is a common meme of 21st Century society and culture.

      The problem I have is that those who have this viewpoint won't even try to understand people like myself who have a very different viewpoint. I accept the fact that I am accountable to a higher being. For me (not all religions believe this), my God does not really care if I worship him. That is not the point. What is important is that I improve myself and become a better person today than I was yesterday. Also, I hold as a belief that what we call a human life goes way beyond the brief period of time between birth from our mothers and death in a grave. Furthermore, who I call God also has a non-interference philosophy that values personal freedom to choose and act as you want. This includes the ability to even deny God if that is the path you want to follow. Or for you to have the ability to oppress others against their will. I choose to allow freedom and to encourage political and social frameworks that promote religious tolarance. This is not the same as elimination of religious thought altogether as some atheistic philosophers have advocated.

      Religious rituals and worship is there to pass on traditions from our past, to open our eyes that there may be more to life than what you normally think is there, and in part to disguise religious truths from the unbelievers. Far too often people who are not of a religious tradition make light of sacred things, such as the supposed desecration of the Quoran that is getting so much attention lately. By encrypting this in a spiritual code, this information can be passed to other believers without the contexts understandable to believers getting corrupted by unbelievers. This occurs primarily due to millenia of repression of religious thought by governments and non believers. It also allows people who are seeking spiritual enlightenment to learn at their own pace, but still participate in a community of like-minded people.

    63. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uhmmmm yeah, so basically you're saying the earth existed before the big bang? Or are you saying the contents shouldn't be taken literally to the point that everyting in there might be the other way around? Or are you like going that god created the universe and everything and genesis is, well duh, just a story of a creation myth and doesn't have to anything to do at all with christianity? Just in there for fun and to get the story started, so to speak. Oh, and just for your information: the theory of evolution is a biological thing and hasn't anything to do with big bangs and such.

    64. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by coopex · · Score: 1

      >Faith is living a lifestyle that demonstrates what you believe to be true about this Universe, how it was formed, and what its governing principles have in regards to how it affects your life.

      from dictionary.com, the second defn. of Faith
      Faith: Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence.
      and the first defn. of Religion
      Religion: Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe.
      Going by the defn, then atheism would be simply a rational response to the idea of god, Occam's Razor and all (do not multiply entities beyond what is necessary), while religion *requires* faith, as something supernatural by definition cannot be observed.

      So being atheist is the complete absense of faith, at least in a god.

      As for >ethics and morals ... must be grounded in something more basic like saving the world or helping humanity in general.

      That's just your opinion, and an opinion that's not based on any facts. Is it really that hard to believe that some people live by a moral code because they think that's the right thing to do? If you look at history, I believe only jainism has the same number of religious wars as atheism, namely, zero.

      To end, I'll mangle a quote from Sylvie and Bruno: "I feel sure, now, that the most absolute Christian may be leading, though walking blindfold, a pure and noble life.", and give a link Founding Fathers quotes against religion

      --
      The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
    65. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by renoX · · Score: 1

      >>
      Unfortunately, there is a history of people who are witnesses to spiritual events, even miracles, who openly dismiss them for one reason or another.

      Uh?
      1) spiritual events mean nothing, that people in a desesperate situation try to cling to religion as a way to keep their hopes is normal, but it doesn't mean that religions are true, just that it do work as an 'opium for the people'.

      Anyway are you suggesting that their liberation was a miracle? What about those who died before being able to return home?

      2) Currently I only know about three type of "miracles":
      -obvious scam
      -strange physical events: for the one who were real events, all have been explained without breaking physics law, the other only relies on reports and the events didn't reoccur..
      -miraculous health recovery: we know so little about how human's body work that it isn't funny..

      Now if someone is able to fly in front of me, or walk on the water, and that it is proven that it is not a trick, I would call this a miracle.

      As for the 'going to church' part, in Europe people don't need to go to church to pray either, but when they go to church, they do it to pray, so it isn't simply a meeting as those atheist guys do..

      Also about the religious freedom:
      1) in France we have religious freedom protection, but for the private life, public schools are considered as a public institute, so no obnoxious religious sign are tolerated: a jewel will be accepted but not if it is too big, veils are not accepted.
      2) Knowing that at the investiture, the president of the USA swears on the bible, somehow the religious freedom in the US seems to me a little weird, it would be very funny to hear the turmoil it would create, if one president would want to swear on the Coran for example :-)

    66. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >the belief in scientific principles

      As far as I'm aware, the only belief you need for science is that the natural world isn't entirely inexplicable.

    67. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by Rei · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Pardon me for a second, but...

      1) Secular humanism is not atheism, even if you call it that. If you don't believe in god, and you take a "other people can rot in a ditch for all I care" attitude, you're not a secular humanist.

      2) Most atheists have had plenty of time to understand religious people, as 90% of the people around them are theists, and almost half the country is evangelical.

      3) When, on Earth, did the parent "oppress" others? Talk about a persecution complex, geez. I'll never get how people who are part of a religion that composes 3/4ths of the US population think they're being oppressed. Who is this little non-Christian cabal that is keeping you down?

      4) Since when was it "atheists" who desecrated the Quran? The religious beliefs of those involved weren't stated, but given the strong Xian majority... your evidenceless assumptions are, quite frankly, insulting. Besides, haven't you seen the sign or read the tracts? Let me tell you, it's not this country's tiny atheist minority that is anti-Islam...

      5) Millenia of repression of religious thought

      Excuse me????? Did you forget about the fact that the catholic church essentially *ruled europe* during the middle ages? Before that, there was the powerful influence of the Teutonic and druidic religions in the north, and the Greek-descended religions in the south. What "atheistic regimes" are you picturing here? Heck, many early governments claimed to either be descended from gods, or gods themselves.

      Seriously... get out of your persecution fantasy world here - religion used to rule almost every society.

      --
      All we want to do is eat your brains.
    68. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by master_p · · Score: 1

      "What? You mean that religion is still alive?" Unfortunately, not only alive, but thriving as well. Check out the statistics about people going back to religions. We are headed for a 2nd dark ages. "hat you must justify everything to fit your previously held views and faith" As long as politicians use 'God' to justify their actions, so people will do. "For some reason people think that life on other planets means something religious?" Yes, it's called the 'anthropocentric view': most people think that God created them and only them. They can't see how puny they are. "If your faith has no room for an omniscent god to have created life on some planet that you aren't part of, I pity you." Count me in. "Perhaps it would be better if we ALL simply sat down and decided that these old religious things we carry around are not right, and a new view is in order?" Ha ha ha. We can't decide on much easier issues...

    69. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by srleffler · · Score: 1

      I'm a physicist. Trust me, there is plenty of mystery in both quantum mechanics and relativity. Both are complicated and definitely counter-intuitive. To the extent that the theories we have are created by us, yes there is no mystery there. The mystery lies (as always) in the real world, and in the things we do not yet understand. There is more physics waiting there for us to discover, and it's hard to tell what we might find.

    70. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      "Calling Atheism a religion is like calling bald a hairstyle."

      Bald IS a hairstyle, Mr. Tannen.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    71. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by Shadowlore · · Score: 1

      I'll never get how people who are part of a religion that composes 3/4ths of the US population think they're being oppressed. Who is this little non-Christian cabal that is keeping you down?

      You make several errors in thought process in arriving at your implied conclusion there. First, the US is not a solid whole, it is a collection of areas. As such what happens in one area may not, and generally does not, reflect what happens in all areas, even by aggregate. This alone should demonstrate to you how the situation you sneer at can and indeed does happen.

      Furthermore, it is irrelevant what 2/4s the population believes theistically speaking. 3/4s the population does not make the laws. Generally, less than half the population is eligible to vote, and of them generally less than half actually do vote. This brings us to a minority. Half of half is a quarter, and thus a minority. Thus it is shown that a minority can indeed oppress the majority so long as the level of oppression is below that which is required for enough of the majority to take corrective action. This can continue for some time and it is *possible* we are seeing the beginnings of actions by said "silent majority".

      Further, the national laws are made by a few hundred people. Influence them and you've got your national oppression of a given class. Repeat this in various states of the Union and you can easily generate much feelings of oppression.

      Sadly, when the "oppressed majority" finally do take action they will overreact and reverse the oppression. They will use the very tools they complain about to reverse the (percevied|real) oppression.

      Finally, given the incredible amount of laws, interpretations fo laws, regulations, and codes both public and private, it is not that difficult to get appressive legislation slipped in among other legislation.

      So don't be so quick to believe in the majority rules dogma. The world is ruled by those who show up. And somewhere in the neighborhood of 3/4 of Americans don't bother to.

      --
      My Suburban burns less gasoline than your Prius.
    72. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by The+Briguy · · Score: 1
      Um, everyone over the age of 18 is eligible to vote, that is about 210 million people out of 290 million.

      120 million actually bothered to vote in the last election, and 61 million voted for Bush. Now from that I can see where you say "a quarter of the population gets to choose".

      However, You make it sound like its only one group that gets out to vote, while it is really varing percentages of every group over 18 that votes. The people who don't vote are usually the people in the middle who don't really care who wins. This makes it exceedingly difficult to oppress the majority, since they will feel the need to vote and will turn out en mass in the next election.

      Finally, the religious right controls the country right now! You make it sound like they are a tiny oppressed minority. If you are looking for the oppressed in America today, I can tell you where to look, and it isn't the white, right-wing suburbs. Its still the poor, black disatvantaged inner cities that are still stuck in a vicious poverty cycle.

      If you want to talk about the oppressed groups among whites its almost certainly the gay community. The atheists always take a hammering in speeches, but its impossible to tell who they are, usually, so they usually get a pass.

      Anyway, its true that America is ruled by the people who show up and not neccesairly the majority. But if you think the religious right is the oppressed group in America today, you need to check into the loonie bin. Or get a job on talk radio.

    73. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by Legion303 · · Score: 1

      "Since you have insulted my intelligence"

      I give what I get. You may find it codified in a slightly different form in your book of fairy tales in Luke 6:31. If you want to continue redefinining words, I'll be happy to continue describing your redefinitions as idiotic.

      If I jump up from the surface of the earth, I will come back to the ground in a mathematically defined manner. This is not faith in gravity, but rather knowledge that of the countless number of times people have jumped off the ground, there has not been a single reliable report of anyone failing to come back down. Similarly, there has been not a single reliable case for the existence of a supernatural being. "The universe itself" doesn't cut it.

      Your contention that people can't have ethics (presumably you meant *good* ethics) unless they either a.) are religious (implied) or b.) want to help humanity is as idiotic as your definitions of "faith" and "religion" were.

    74. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by moz25 · · Score: 1

      If atheism is a form of religion, then isn't religion a form of atheism? After all, even the most religious person fearful of their own god is entirely atheistic towards the gods of other religions.

      In my own (limited) experience, a christian person was surprised why I didn't fear his god. Then I told him that to understand why I didn't fear his god, he should understand why he didn't fear Allah. That was easy, he said, because it was nonsense and Allah doesn't exist.

      Thus... you are an atheist. I'm an atheist too, just a bit more than you. You reject 99% of all gods and I reject 100% :-)

    75. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by moz25 · · Score: 1

      A classic example is how many soldiers "became religious" when they were at the Hanoi Hilton.

      Okay, so those soldiers would be able to thank their (your?) god for any of these situations:
      1) they didn't get sent to Vietman
      2) they didn't die or get injured
      3) they got injured but at least didn't die
      4) they got captured and mistreated but didn't die
      5) they got killed but at least didn't get tortured

      The flaw in your thinking is that practically no single situation can escape being "explained" by the existence of your god.

      Unfortunately, there is a history of people who are witnesses to spiritual events, even miracles, who openly dismiss them for one reason or another.

      If there's anything history teaches us, then that's that people explain things as miracles too often when they simply don't understand what they're seeing. Do you believe in UFO's? Many people do. Many people have witnessed the Loch Ness Monster. Is that proof for you?

    76. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by Woy · · Score: 1

      Ahhh, the arrogance of the Anonymous Cowards.

      --
      "If God created us in his own image we have more than reciprocated." - Voltaire
    77. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Faith is believing in something in the absence of evidence or in contradiction of the evidence. I need no faith to say that I see no evidence for the existance of god(s) and therefore I don't believe they exist. I'm not going to say that I am 100% absolutely certain that there is no god, any more than I'm going to say that I'm absolutely certain that ESP, ghosts, aliens in flying saucers, fairies, dragons, and unicorns don't exist, but I don't believe in them either. Its only religious people who seem to require absolute certainty in their beliefs.

    78. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by Rei · · Score: 1

      Pop quiz: How many atheist senators or representatives or supreme court justices or presidents have their been in the entire history of the United States?

      Answer: Zero

      Summary: Get out of your oppression fantasy.

      --
      All we want to do is eat your brains.
    79. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by renoX · · Score: 1

      Just a side note about your point 2: not everybody is living in the US, you know.. :-)

      I'm French and if memory serves, there is about 30% of French who are "non-believers", and among the believers only a little are going to church even once a year..

      That said, even in my country, religious people would be hard pressed to find themselves "oppressed", it is just that people are loosing interest in religions (especially organised religions)..

    80. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by Teancum · · Score: 1

      I believe only jainism has the same number of religious wars as atheism, namely, zero.

      Considering that most communist countries are (or were) officially atheist, I think you can count several non-zero wars that they were involved with. Religious intentions regarding the wars notwithstanding, and indeed many of these conflicts were done to eliminate religious thought. And certainly it was to spread their philosophies further (with the exception of the "Great Patriotic War"... which did further spread the ideas anyway as a result).

      I'm not saying all athiests are communist, but the conflicts that communist governments were involved with did spread atheistic thought, and in a manner similar to the spread of Islam in the 12th Century as well as Christian Crusades and conquests of Western and Northern Europe by Christian armies.

      It could even be argued that even tacit tolerance for religious thought in communist countries was a major part of the downfall of those governments (notably the role of the Catholic Church in Communist Poland).

      RE: Faith

      I deliberately phrased the definition of faith that I used to exclude reference to God or gods. I totally disagree with the assertion that an atheist is somebody without faith. They may not have faith in God or even any person, but I am claiming that you indeed have faith in something, even if it is only in yourself.

      In this case I also disagree with this use of authority to claim that my definition of faith is wrong. All a dictionary attempts to do is put into words what the meaning of a word or phrase has. And the authority of dictionary.com is no better or worse than my own. I have spent years studying the concept of faith, in addition to holding ecclesiastical office, if you want to get down to who has authority to comment on these things.

      The same thing goes to the definition of religion. You are deliberately putting god into the definition so you can take yourself out of the category. I am arguing that religion does not require belief in the supernatural, but instead is a philosophy that governs how you live. That many people with religion may feel that philosophy came from a divine source is another issue, but it is not necessarily a part of the definition of religion, and including that aspect into the definition only serves to muddle this arguement.

      I am also looking at history and remarking that ethics have to have some fundimental basis of reason in order for them to mean anything. If you lack that foundation, you can twist your ethics to allow you to do just about anything you want to do, including oppression, murder, and most things that would commonly be called unethical by traditional ethical systems.

      Indeed, a common complaint about corporations is that they have no ethical standards other than the quest for more money. It is even written into the corporate charters to be exactly that... to "maximize profit through proper management of resources and thoughful investing." These organizations may have been started by what you or I would call moral people, but using the charter as the only standard to go against companies like Enron was able to cause a lot of heartburn. And most often a company (nor its corporate officers in extreme cases) really care if somebody is killed due to their business practices. Often they even plan on it as a necessary part of their business plan, and can give fairly accurate estimates regarding how many people will die when they get into some project.

      I would argue that atheists with moral codes of ethics are indeed people who also have some faith in things that are greater than themselves, even if it isn't God. That may be in the future of humanity, their country, or aquired "wisdom of the ages", or even fear of getting hurt or killed if you don't follow some ethical values. This is faith pure and simple, and does not require a divine influence to support it.

    81. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by Teancum · · Score: 1

      By continuing to call me as having lesser intelligence than yourself and making light of things I consider to be sacred, you are showing just who you are. Rude, insulting, and desiring to engage in a flame war. And somebody with a serious psycosis that is afraid they may be wrong.

      All I'm asking is that you try to understand the viewpoint I'm coming from, not to join my religious faith as it is apparent that you are already quite set on your current philosophical approach to life.

      Ethics in some cases is a codification of life habits. This can be like the Hippocratic Oath or the oath of office for a soldier. This can even be the code of conduct by criminal organizations like the Mafia. By having ethical behavior, you know just where you have made a mistake and what the consequences of those mistakes could be, and not necessarily just legal consequences.

      I am contending that people can't have ethics without at least some foundation in something beyond themselves. It doesn't have to be in some supernatural force, but it does have to be in something that doesn't change just because your circumstances have changed. Without this foundation, you can talk yourself into doing just about anything for any reason, and even come up with a "rational" reason for doing it.

      As far as a "single reliable case for the existance of a supernatural being" is concerned, I guess that is a matter of what you would set as the standard for a "reliable case". If I told you that I personally had the opportunity to talk with God himself, I doubt you would ever believe me. If I told you I was your God, you would probabally spit in my face just to prove a point. I can try to talk you out of your assumption of the non-existance of God, but that would be useless unless you are willing to acknowledge that there is at least a possibility that God could exist.

      For me, I will tell you that I know God does exist, and I also believe that in time you will find out for yourself that this is true. I am also willing to wait for events that go beyond this mortal life we are living at the moment for you to get this realization, but it would be sad for you if that happens and God does in fact exist.

    82. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by Legion303 · · Score: 1

      "By continuing to call me as having lesser intelligence than yourself"

      Feel free to point out where I made any such claim.

      "If I told you that I personally had the opportunity to talk with God himself, I doubt you would ever believe me."

      No, but I would suspect there was a "serious psychosis" involved.

      "but it would be sad for you if that happens and God does in fact exist."

      And here you display your utter arrogance once again. It would be "sad for [me]" only to you.

      "I can try to talk you out of your assumption of the non-existance of God"

      This is the best part. You appear to have completely missed the point of my "jumping up" example. You can try all you like, but it doesn't change the fact that I don't need to believe in something that has no basis for existence.

    83. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by jc42 · · Score: 1

      Just a side note about your point 2: not everybody is living in the US, you know.. :-),

      Hey, I've heard that. The current US administration has a name for those non-Americans: Irrelevant. ;)

      I'm French and if memory serves, there is about 30% of French who are "non-believers", and among the believers only a little are going to church even once a year..

      A couple of years ago, at a social gathering of some of my wife's co-grad-students at Boston University, my wife asked a French student about the large Catholic majority in France. The reply was "Well, every so often we kill any non-Catholics who didn't have the sense to get out."

      There's a lot of history behind that observation. You can substitute many other religious groups and still get an accurate statement. And the people doing the killing don't have to actually practice whatever their supposed faith is; they can still use it to justify oppressing or killing non-believers. There is a theory that this is the primary reason for most religious faiths, no matter how strongly the founders tried to advise otherwise.

      Every once in a while, religious doctrines produce groups like Quakers or Baha'i. But not too often. It might be interesting to see the behavior of a government run by such a religion. But there don't seem to be enough historical cases to be able to draw any conclusions.

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    84. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by BlueFashoo · · Score: 1

      Nixon was a Quaker, on the other hand, he got out of Vietnam (in his 4th year of office) and established the EPA and NOAA. He also opened diplomatic relations with China.

      --
      Nice Marmot
    85. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by A.Ichthys · · Score: 1

      I would say that is true of many people, regardless of their religion (or lack of it). Take a small minded person, teach them the scientific method, and they will become just as dogmatic and narrow minded about the "correct" way to conduct an experiment as any religious fanatic. It is about the person, not the philosophy they espouse.

    86. Re:Life, evolution, everything... by Mattsson · · Score: 1

      True, true.
      But some people should have that right revoked. The loud and obnoxius ones. ^_^
      And, of course, those who chose to use violence while doing the persuading, like the goverments of most countries with large offensive power.

      --
      /.Mattsson - My native language is not English, so please don't whine over linguistic errors. (That's lame anyway...)
  4. 2005: A Space Spodyssey by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We already know what this persistently bright spot is, /.

    Kubrick and Clark told us back in 1968

    Slow news day? There wasn't a Mozilla update you could post?

    1. Re:2005: A Space Spodyssey by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the obilisk.

    2. Re:2005: A Space Spodyssey by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (Obligatory)

      A breast?

    3. Re:2005: A Space Spodyssey by digismack · · Score: 1

      Slow news day? There wasn't a Mozilla update you could post?

      Or a dupe of the Google CEO article?

      --
      http://www.hollowdepth.com
    4. Re:2005: A Space Spodyssey by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      its a couple more star wars nerds playing with thier petrol filled glass tube light sabers.

  5. Damn it by Albinofrenchy · · Score: 1

    Time to move the mother ship I guess.

    --
    "A man is but the product of his thoughts what he thinks, he becomes." -Mahatma Gandhi
    1. Re:Damn it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Time to move the mother ship I guess.

      Like Harvey in Little Britain?

  6. radio by fvdham · · Score: 1

    Near the hotspot a radio beacon
    was detected. It transmitted:
    "Evacuate. All ships move to Earth"

  7. Re:Life, the Universe, Everything... by carterhawk001 · · Score: 1, Interesting

    God to humanity:
    Oh yeah...theres life outside earth, must have slipped my mind 2000 years ago.....

  8. When you're hot, you're hot by Greg+Hullender · · Score: 5, Funny
    From the article: If the spot glows at night, researchers will know it's hot.

    It's good to know we've got our brightest people on this.

    --Greg

    1. Re:When you're hot, you're hot by Ziviyr · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Why can't we point an infrared camera at it?

      --

      Someone set us up the bomb, so shine we are!
    2. Re:When you're hot, you're hot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because we don't RTFA.

    3. Re:When you're hot, you're hot by NanoGator · · Score: 1, Funny

      "It's good to know we've got our brightest people on this."

      I bet you're just beaming over your funny mod.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    4. Re:When you're hot, you're hot by NanoGator · · Score: 4, Funny

      "Why can't we point an infrared camera at it?"

      There's an obelisk in the way.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    5. Re:When you're hot, you're hot by Andy+Gardner · · Score: 1

      Another case of 'Scientific Research That Could Have Been Avoided'?

      /sarcasm

    6. Re:When you're hot, you're hot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Why can't we point an infrared camera at it?

      That is what they are doing you dumbass.

      "Its visual and infrared mapping spectrometer, using the longest, reddest wavelengths that the spectrometer sees, observed the spot, the brightest area ever observed on Titan."

      Maybe if you read the articles you wouldn't have to post such stupid questions.

    7. Re:When you're hot, you're hot by Progman3K · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The article mentions that they will be doing a fly-by of the spot again, but in 2006.

      And at that time, the spot will be on the planet's nightside, so the infrared data we'll get back will be even clearer.

      --
      I don't know the meaning of the word 'don't' - J
    8. Re:When you're hot, you're hot by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      There's an obelisk in the way.

      A.K.A. Alien DRM

    9. Re:When you're hot, you're hot by Ziviyr · · Score: 1

      Given that an anonymous put that lousy synopsis up there, and you're anonymous and speak like a fat sneezy turtle, why don't I try coining something...

      FOAC!

      --

      Someone set us up the bomb, so shine we are!
    10. Re:When you're hot, you're hot by Lotharjade · · Score: 1

      Why do you think they put the place in florida?
      "ya see dat der? Dats a muun. Itsa orbitin that big planet doohicky like a moth swings round ma porch light ah night. Beer?"

      --
      Party at O'zorgnax's Pub! Buy me a Slurmtini aye?
    11. Re:When you're hot, you're hot by d474 · · Score: 1
      "...researchers will know it's hot.
      "It's good to know we've got our brightest people on this."
      Paris Hilton?
      --
      Authority questions you. Return the favor.
  9. As an aside by bloodstar · · Score: 1

    I wonder if we'll one day be travelling out to Titan to grab some of those hydrocarbons that are everywhere on the planet. It's probably not very economical, but I can visualize any future colonies going there to grab what they need. Hey, it's pie in the sky, but you never know.

    --
    "The bass, the rock, the mic, the treble. I like my coffee black, just like my metal" - Mindless Self Indulgence
    1. Re:As an aside by scsirob · · Score: 2, Funny

      No you can't. I just patented mining operations on Titan... And all other extra-terrestrial planets and moons. Yes, it's a broad patent. Sue me..

      --
      To Terminate, or not to Terminate, that's the question - SCSIROB
    2. Re:As an aside by krymsin01 · · Score: 1

      It's not econimical at ALL if you are thinking about mining the resources and bringing them back here. However, if you want to do something with them out there, while you are already in the neighborhood, it makes perfect sense. Assuming the human race makes it that far, one day we'll start screwing up the other planets.

      --
      stuff
    3. Re:As an aside by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 1

      I hold the patent on aggregate matter, which you infringe on with your planets and moons and such. Cease and hand over you patents or I will sue you and revoke your right to exsist!

      Bwahahahaha!

      --
      There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
    4. Re:As an aside by bcmm · · Score: 1

      Planet. Titan is a planet?

      --
      # cat /dev/mem | strings | grep -i llama
      Damn, my RAM is full of llamas.
    5. Re:As an aside by Yorrike · · Score: 1

      Nope, it's a moon. But it's a lot bigger than Mercury which is classified as a planet, simply because of it's orbital prejudice. So if you classify planets in terms of mass and volume rather than orbit, it could well be a planet.

      --

      Looks can be deceiving. Or CAN they?

  10. Good news to me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Hey I'm excited, ever since the last election I've been looking for a bright spot.

    1. Re:Good news to me. by stormi · · Score: 0

      hahaha......

      --
      "if only i had known i would have been a locksmith." -albert einstein
  11. VimS? by kihjin · · Score: 1

    So, Vim is space-capable now?

    Emacs: Your move.

    --
    This slashdot-related signature is a stub. You can help kihjin by expanding it.
    1. Re:VimS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can't believe I'm the only one that found that funny.

  12. Re:Life, the Universe, Everything... by Che+Guevarra · · Score: 0, Troll

    I'd very much like to find the very fudge caked coward that moded this post down... Life on other planets very well may change our thinking. Just because the moderator is a university schooled ponk does not mean our downhill chocolate slide has to be a total downer. Come -- on --- dude! Ride --- it --- with --- me.... Moooode === up==== dude====(all down hill_) lamer foooooo ----- oooo ---- ooo ----llllllllll.

  13. Is that a false color image of Titan? by theurge14 · · Score: 0

    I thought Titan had an opaque orange atmosphere. False color imaging makes this hotspot stand out alot more than it otherwise would, no?

  14. why is asking WHAT DOES THIS MEAN offtopic? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    can anyone explain that?

    this is actually the main topic. if you think we're just doodling about there, you're wrong.

    we really carea bout what this stuff means.

  15. We are so primitive by nate+nice · · Score: 3, Interesting

    We have billions of stars in this galaxy alone capable of maybe supporting life. Then there are billions more galaxies we have zero information about. At least 1289712 of them have to have life. The universe is amazing. It's hilarious we are studying planets in our solar system. Oh man, I wish I lived 5000 years from and maybe more. I can't wait until we figure out how to exploit light speed and really way beyond. Light speed is too slow actually. Anyways, anyone that says we are alone in space is crazy. There has to be aliens everywhere. Whaaaa!!!!!

    --
    "If you are a dreamer, a wisher, a liar, A hope-er, a pray-er, a magic bean buyer ..."
    1. Re:We are so primitive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      There is probably life everywhere in the universe, but your message illustrates again that "intelligent" life may well be an evolutionary dead end and a brief accident.

    2. Re:We are so primitive by dalutong · · Score: 0

      a couple points:
      then why haven't the aliens come here?
      (maybe we're the most advanced, or they've agreed not to mess with other life.)

      of course maybe it only indicates that there are no ways to travel at sufficient speeds.

      --

      What comes first, finding a teacher or becoming a student?
    3. Re:We are so primitive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      well, we have to start somewhere. might as well start in our own universe.

    4. Re:We are so primitive by fireboy1919 · · Score: 1

      Under the current assumption of how life came to exist (random chance at the current level of randomness), the chance that we are alone in the galaxy is very high.

      We can't really be sure how much farther beyond our galaxy the Universe actually reaches, or how big the galaxy actually is. The amount of extrapolation necessary to reach the probability of other life is staggering.

      Either our theories about how likely life is, and how big the galaxy is are wrong, or there aren't any neighbors nearby.

      --
      Mod me down and I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine!
    5. Re:We are so primitive by p3d0 · · Score: 1

      That's called the Fermi Paradox.

      --
      Patrick Doyle
      I mod down every jackass who puts his moderation policy in his sig. Oh, wait a sec....
    6. Re:We are so primitive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anyways, anyone that says we are alone in space is crazy.

      Hrmph! Never mind space, some Americans think they're alone on this planet.

    7. Re:We are so primitive by multipartmixed · · Score: 1

      > the chance that we are alone in the galaxy is very high.

      Only if the universe is finite.

      Have we proven that yet?

      --

      Do daemons dream of electric sleep()?
    8. Re:We are so primitive by fireboy1919 · · Score: 1

      Um...we're pretty sure that the galaxy is finite, even if the universe isn't, which was my claim. Going outside the galaxy is going a mind-bogglingly long way. As I said, the guess is wildly innaccurate since so much is extrapolated.

      However, we have no good way of knowing that the Universe is finite, but current best guess says that it is.

      The big three theories of creation - superstring, big bang, and God all specify a finite age and finite size (that there is a finite amount of space that contains matter even if space itself is boundless). Actually, this is an implication you usually get from any finite-age theory, since space and time are so related, -and finite age comes from observation of entropy. I'm inclined to believe there's some truth to finite universe size because of this.

      --
      Mod me down and I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine!
    9. Re:We are so primitive by spauldo · · Score: 1

      No, no, no - there's other people on the planet. Who else would we bomb?

      --
      Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach either, do tech support.
    10. Re:We are so primitive by Mishra100 · · Score: 1

      Who the hell would want to try to be friends with humans... We kill each other for crap sakes.

      "Yeah lets go to earth and make friends with them so they can judge us and make us feel terrible. Then kill us for being different...."

  16. Entertainment by Bob+Gelumph · · Score: 5, Funny

    Couldn't it just be a red light district? Even the most remote hell-hole needs hookers.

    --
    I'm gonna need a spec.
    1. Re:Entertainment by CarpetShark · · Score: 1
      red light district? Even the most remote hell-hole needs hookers.
      You must be thinking of Redmond ;)
  17. That's Hot by MichaelGospatrick · · Score: 1

    (sorry)

    --
    My genetic programming website: http://www.helpmefigurethisout.com/
  18. hrm by ImTheDarkcyde · · Score: 1

    isnt there an article around here somewhere about useless scientific research? honestly, if we havnt even set foot on mars yet, why even look at saturn

    1. Re:hrm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why bother going to Mars when I haven't even gotten out of bed yet?

    2. Re:hrm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "isnt there an article around here somewhere about useless scientific research? honestly, if we havnt even set foot on mars yet, why even look at Saturn"

      Has to be one of the most dip-shit posts I've seen for a while.

      We "havnt" understood the hydrogen atom yet, why even look at quarks.
      We "havnt" understood the common cold, why even think about cancer.
      We "havnt" understood rain clouds, why even think about hurricanes.
      We "havnt" understood _blank_, why even look at _youFillHere_.

      For the sake of humanity I hope parent was trying to be funny.

  19. obviously by Madcapjack · · Score: 1

    obviously a moon base.

    1. Re:obviously by moosesocks · · Score: 1

      that's not a moon.....

      --
      -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
  20. Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Reminds me of another quote:

    Psalm 19:1 The heavens declare the glory of God,
    and the sky above proclaims his handiwork.
  21. Titan's Hot Spot? by sunwolf · · Score: 3, Funny

    As an amateur meteorologist, I find that strangely erotic.

    Okay, I lied, I'm not a meteorologist.

    o_O

  22. Its no a moon,.. by Will+Fisher · · Score: 1

    Its a space station.

  23. I think it's obvious. by artifex2004 · · Score: 1

    It's a sheep. Shaun the Sheep, more precisely.

    Or maybe I just need some sleep. Well, I know I can count on Shaun to help me! :)

  24. this is by metroplex · · Score: 1

    a rebel base, obviously. Arm the weapons

    --
    "Words of wisdom: drop that zero and get with the hero" -- Vanilla Ice
  25. Re:We are so primitive - certainly true in UK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  26. Then YOU are the agnostic by aepervius · · Score: 1

    OTOH for those , like me, and maybe the parent poster, who think there is absolutly NOTHING, then we are atheist. And for us, truly the Orson Scott Card quote does not apply at all.

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
  27. obligatory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All these worlds are yours except Titan. Attempt no landing there.

  28. Bomb it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Probably terrorists , bomb first , ask questions later.

  29. Maybe by JustOK · · Score: 2, Funny

    it's its bellybutton

    --
    rewriting history since 2109
    1. Re:Maybe by Toutatis · · Score: 1

      AFAIK bellybutton doesn't emit light. Maybe if you burn its lint, but I haven't test it.

    2. Re:Maybe by JustOK · · Score: 1

      stare at it awhile longer. It might do things that you wouldn't expect.

      --
      rewriting history since 2109
  30. I was secretly hoping... by silent_poop · · Score: 1

    ...that one of the possibilities would have been a giant black monolith.

    --

    --
    silence is poetry.
    1. Re:I was secretly hoping... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is one. But with all the lights from the film crew there from Iapetus, we can't see it. Inconsiderate jerks and their light-pollution!

  31. Re:Please cum by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Alternatively, you could just rip his head off and shit directly down his throat. I mean, given his email address, I'd say it's safe to assume that he's "dying" for someone to kill him anyway. I say someone should help the poor wayward soul out.

  32. Slime world? by Jon+Abbott · · Score: 2, Informative

    NewScientist just ran an article that talks about "slime worlds", areas on planets that emit a near-infrared light, but amazingly there was no mention of the bright red spot on Titan. Perhaps we have found a slime world?

  33. Re:Life, the Universe, Everything... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well if there is life on other planets, I hope it's not as fucking stupid and useless as you are.

  34. It's not "hot" by JetJaguar · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I work peripherally with some of the Cassini people, and the "hot spot" theory has been more or less abandoned. Radar observations have already confirmed that the spot isn't glowing or emitting energy on it's own. But they still don't know what it is.

    --

    Shop Smart, Shop S-mart!

  35. approximately the size and shape of West Virginia by exp(pi*sqrt(163)) · · Score: 4, Funny

    This is getting insane. Why would I ever use West Virginia as a unit of area? From reading stories on /. I'm much more familiar with the surface of Titan than West Virgina (and I suspect I'm not the only one). Shouldn't we be measuring the size of West Virgina in Titans?

    --
    Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
  36. The Evolution of Religion by NetSettler · · Score: 1

    For some reason people think that life on other planets means something religious?

    I have often said "There are no political answers, only political questions." When someone tries to convince you not to answer a certain way to a question they allege is not political, they're being naive or disingenuous. Consider a question like: "What services will this hospital provide?" and a response that includes "Abortion." Telling someone that the answer must not include political answers like that is a trick. Leaving out abortion is just as political.

    Why is he babbling off-topic like this? you find yourself asking just about now. Well, I've recently extended my rule to say "There are no religious answers, only religious questions." If one possible answer to a question is "Religion caused this." then the question is religious. That tells us something as important about religion as the politics rule tells us about politics.

    Religion isn't the study of a kind white man with a booming voice who hangs out in the clouds and is good pals with someone named Peter. Religion is simply the way each of us answer the inevitable questions about the Universe, where it came from, etc. Stories about the Bible are one set of people's answers, Science is another. Science, in that sense, is another kind of religion with different rules. It adds the ability to test what it knows at the expense of knowability of other things. Some people find testability comforting and don't mind knowing. Others find knowability comforting, and will sacrifice testing for it.

    Perhaps it would be better if we ALL simply sat down and decided that these old religious things we carry around are not right, and a new view is in order?

    I think it's reasonable to think of science as a (growing) subset of religion, if you think of religion as the quest to know All The Answers. It's pretty clear that no matter what religion you have, it needs to explain the testable aspects of science. But saying that religion then has no place or has been obviated by science makes no sense. No matter how many things are discovered, we'll have a lot of unknowables for a long time yet, probably forever. I don't see any harm in a live and let live policy for religion as long as it has the same policy for science. Of course, now we're back to politics, so I must be drifting off-topic again and should stop before I'm modded down.

    --

    Kent M Pitman
    Philosopher, Technologist, Writer

    1. Re:The Evolution of Religion by moz25 · · Score: 1

      Religion and science are fundamentally different at their base assumptions. The concept of falsifiability, which is part of the Scientific Method is not present in religion. Religion "explains" everything, because every argument comes down to "god did it". Yet, while it explains, it cannot predict since all possible outcomes are covered with essentially the same explanation.

      You seem to be using the argument "but not being religious is also a form of being religious!" ... but doesn't that just muddle everything and essentially call pretty much everything religious, including believing in Santa and the Easter Bunny? The throwing-it-on-one-heap is an attempt at giving a shaky belief system a form of credibility it does not deserve.

    2. Re:The Evolution of Religion by NetSettler · · Score: 1

      while [Religion] explains, it cannot predict

      This is why I said, for purposes of this discussion anyway, that science could be usefully viewed as a subset or religion, and not vice versa. Prediction is not a goal of all religions, only explaining is. Prediction is a goal of some religions. Moreover, each religion has the burden of at least explaining the effects of science, even as science evolves. But most religions don't stop there--most seek to explain other things, too.

      In the context of this article, Science may explain that molten lava, or lichen, or mineral deposits made this glow on Titan (just to keep this on topic). But religion and philosophy are free to go farther, asking whether if there is lichen present, does that mean God had a backup plan in case earth failed, or does that mean there is no God. Either of these positions must be taken on faith since neither can be proven. You may appeal to Ocham's Razor in preferring the "no God" theory, but that is hardly proof.

      I'm just saying that science and religion are about Man's basic desire to put the world into a frame of reference, and that some of the questions man asks are not answerable by science, so religion (and, incidentally, philosophy) exist as broader nets to discuss the unanswerable.

      Incidentally, in terms of the basic questions Man asks, I always appeal to the set addressed by the Dewey Decimal System. It seems as an indexing system not to be as popular as when I grew up, but I still always liked the questions it asked. Even those who know it may nto know its basis, and may wish to follow that link to understand.

      I think you're right that pretty much anything can be religious. If you look at the list of accepted religions in the world, many are pretty much equivalent to believing in the Easter Bunny. I have friends that make up very elaborated theories of a "next life" that don't come from any organized religion. Each person answers the basic questions in a form appropriate to them. The thing people in disparate religions seem to agree on more than the answers are the questions, hence my reference to Dewey above. The fact that there is no set answer is why some people might say the concept is useless. But there are many questions for which there is no set answer that are not useless. Most questions of ethics and morality fall into that category--and it's usually the asking of questions and the search for answers that is important, not the fact of a particular answer.

      Required Viewing: Dark Star (particularly the discussions of Phenomenology).

      --

      Kent M Pitman
      Philosopher, Technologist, Writer

    3. Re:The Evolution of Religion by moz25 · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure I understand why you classify science as a subset of religion. If you want to put them in a classification tree, then another label as the root would seem better: one branch leads into naturalistic, rational and quantifiable knowledge, the other goes into supernatural and philosophical ones.

      I agree with you that absence of proof is not in itself proof, but can one really prove a false negative? I consider an explanation posed in rational and naturalistic terms more usable than one based on the supernatural: even if a supernatural entitiy exists, we can observe that it has a great deal of respect for consistency and hardly ever breaks the known laws of physics. If something happens that cannot be explained by science, we can indeed call it a miracle.

      As for science... in my view, science is a "mere" tool that provides excellent methods and tools for building great complicated things, but it's not ever going to answer a simple answer like "why am I here?" -- I don't think the answer lies within anything that can be explained rationally.

      Some call science a form of religion in itself. That doesn't make sense to me: not only would it be a very poor and depressing religion, but many religious scientists (and I've known a few pretty smart ones) would be following two different religions at the same time.

      Personally, I do hope that there is an afterlife and all that, but if there is one then I'd like to think that it's something entirely understanding and accepting of all people. But of course a hell-less religion for which you don't have to actually do anything is not going to be popular :-) On the other hand, a question I like to ask is: "why are we humans better than the other animals? Aren't we being a bit to full of ourselves?" -- it is entirely plausible to me that there is simply nothing after we die. I can understand why people don't like to believe that, though. I certainly don't.

      To continue a bit on your trend: isn't religion a subset of atheism? After all, a religious person rejects at least 99% of all gods that have ever been worshipped. An atheist that rejects 100% of all gods would only be slightly more atheistic.

    4. Re:The Evolution of Religion by NetSettler · · Score: 1

      Some call science a form of religion in itself...

      Empirically, as a matter of science, it's clear that the reason scientists believe in science is that they have faith, not proof that the Universe is well-ordered. If the Universe were not well-ordered, science would be meaningless. Scientists take it on faith that a certain amount of variation from statistical probability implies truth, but it is at least conceivable to think of Science as a faith if you believe God made the rules and is capable of bending them.

      Consider a well-ordered virtual reality simulation; there's no reason the programmer can't have a back door. As such, all the science in the virtual reality world can test the apparent rules of the virtual reality--e.g., that things that glow on Titan require a source of energy such as biology, chemistry, or physics. But maybe that's not required. Maybe conservation isn't required. Maybe the real truth is that it's just programmed that way and that the owner of the virtual reality can violate that any time it wants by just writing a special subroutine called emit_light_consuming_nothing. You probably take it on faith that the Great Maker won't do that. The answer to your question lies in the observation that you apparently think it's a religion if someone believes God would intervene but considers it a non-religion if they believe they can conclude God won't.

      I'm all about Science because I see little point in wasting time on things I cannot observe or predict. But I don't feel I'm being slighted if someone wants to label that a religion. Heck, I think it's nice if they do label it that. It makes any work I do in that area tax-deductible.

      isn't religion a subset of atheism? After all, a religious person rejects at least 99% of all gods

      There are various different ways I could go about answering this, but the briefest is to say that Atheism is not an absence of belief in God, it's an assertion of the non-existence of God. It therefore contradicts religions and religions contradict it, hence I'd say it is a religion. Agnosticism might come closer to being common ground, but it would depend on how you define it (where it just permits or actively requires uncertainty about God), though perhaps there's a difference between believing there's no useful evidence about God and not taking a position on whether there is useful evidence on God--probably the latter is the only true subset, and I'm not sure it has a better name than just "uninquisitive".

      --

      Kent M Pitman
      Philosopher, Technologist, Writer

    5. Re:The Evolution of Religion by moz25 · · Score: 1

      Empirically, as a matter of science, it's clear that the reason scientists believe in science is that they have faith, not proof that the Universe is well-ordered. If the Universe were not well-ordered, science would be meaningless.

      I think that the way science evolved is: "hey, if I smash these two rocks together, then there's fire... and if I do it again, it does the same thing" and that religion evolved from "there's thunder in the sky because you didn't obey oogabooga".

      The problem with comparing faith in the scientific method with faith in a divine entity is that it seeks to find some sort of equivalency on a qualitative basis. The fact that some form of trust is needed does not make them equivalent children of the same tree. My faith in my girlfriend's fidelity is not religious. Faith in an entity that goes out of its way to be totally ambiguous and hard to detect and then basing a system of strong and unshakeable opinions on that... that is religious.

      The answer to your question lies in the observation that you apparently think it's a religion if someone believes God would intervene but considers it a non-religion if they believe they can conclude God won't.

      I think it has a scientific component if you deduce from a falling apple that mass attracts and I think it has a religious component if you justify a system of strong opinions and fear from the one time it doesn't fall. There will always be things that cannot be explained or done by contemporary science. Do we believe these days that diseases are a result of a god being angry with us? No, we know much more about the processes by which they spread and what we can do about it. If people honestly believed that diseases are their god's way of sending messages, then surely they would campaign against all medical research?

      The lack of a god figure in an explanation is not the same as expressing the explanation in terms of the non-existence of that god figure. Without science, we wouldn't even know about Titan. If those phenomena can be accurately explained, will that mean people will stop believing in their god? No, they will move on to the next phenomenon. Explanations that don't depend on the (non-)existence of a god do of course leave open the existence of that god.

      I don't consider myself an atheist, for the reason that all the things I do believe in (either rationally or irrationally) are very poorly represented by the label "this guy doesn't believe in god". I choose not to follow any of the mainstream religions for far more reasons than that I believe supernatural phenomena do not exist. I simply don't believe that any superintelligent being would be as smallminded as their gods appear to be.

  37. Re:Oh not again... by deglr6328 · · Score: 1

    Sweetie we already talked about this,.... remember? You have to take the little pink pill eeeevery day or doctor will be upset with you next time we visit.....mmmmk hon?

    --
    - "Hear that?! The percolations are imminent! Cease your ingress!"
  38. A Alien Outpost... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

    Could it be possible that this "hot spot" might just be an alien outpost with city lights reflecting off the buildings?

  39. Best way to make a strong point ... by vlad_petric · · Score: 1

    ... is to post an "argument" that's not falsifiable.

    --

    The Raven

  40. It's Pleixis-3 you numb-nuts by l0ungeb0y · · Score: 1

    Shit, like it's only Sector-G993's third largest and definitely most racey inter-fucking-steller resort! I mean who hasn't heard of the quad-tittied Zaljingo Dancers and the city of a million spice-bars? Sheeesh.

  41. Re:Life, the Universe, Everything... by idonthack · · Score: 1

    You're right.

    It allows it to make more sense.

    If God is infinite, why would He be satisfied with just creating life here? He's already created an infinite universe (as far as we can tell), and it would be a waste to not populate it. If He really is infinite like every religous person believes, then there would also be an infinite number of populated worlds.

    --
    Why is it that when you believe something it's an opinion, but when I believe something it's a manifesto?
  42. Warning: Don't send an imaging probe there! by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    It is the ultimate Goatse prank.

    1. Re:Warning: Don't send an imaging probe there! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What? It's moon is covered with japanese men dropping excrement on eachothers heads?

  43. Re:approximately the size and shape of West Virgin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because an average american is much more familiar with the size of west virginia than the same size in square miles or should i even bother to say the size of Titan?

    I would personally prefer square kilometers, go figure.

  44. The Reason The Weatherman Is Always Wrong... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    maybe God is has a lottery every now and again. "Lets make the weather shit...*closes eyes and points finger*...HERE!"

  45. OT: Re:Life, evolution, everything... by David+Rolfe · · Score: 1
    BlueFashoo said: Bald can be a hairstyle. I believe the word you're looking for is "color."

    I hate to get prescriptive on you, but bald cannot be a hairstyle:
    hairstyle
    noun
    a particular way in which a person's hair is cut or arranged.
    By definition there must be hair there -- hair to style. That's like saying that not having a beard is a beard-style or being dead is a lifestyle.

    If you are trying to make the point that atheism:religion::color:hairstyle, you probably could have said it in a better way.

    Can you agree atheism:theism::bald:hair (the most basic meanings, obviously antonyms)? If you take religion (at Oxford's word) to be
    the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, esp. a personal God or gods
    then it would be fair to substitute theism for religion in the above analogy, at which point, your whole argument fails. And the parent poster is correct -- that is "Calling Atheism a religion is like calling bald a hairstyle."

    To be fair: your supposition is that atheism is some kind of religion, but look at it in terms of what atheism means, "the theory of belief that God does not exist." Isn't that directly antithetical to the definition of religion? I know where your argument is though, don't get me wrong. If one cannot prove the existence or non-existence then one must take it on faith that there is no God and (fallaciously) faith must equal religion. But really that's just it -- atheist's faith doesn't imply religion (or religiosity) at all.

    (full disclosure, I am an agnostic secular humanist with Buddhist leanings)
    --
    Read Heinlein's 1953 Revolt in 2100, now more than ever.
    1. Re:OT: Re:Life, evolution, everything... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >If one cannot prove the existence or non-existence

      One cannot disprove god, simply because believers generally refuse to come up with something even resembling a coherent description of their version of god. If, after some considerable pressure, they do give a description, and you show them that that leads to all sorts of problems with their other beliefs, the goalposts start moving.

      Basically it's just a cheap trick. They make you believe you have to disprove all possible versions of god. That of course isn't true. Just need to disprove the one from the bible, and all christians would need to shut up. disprove the one in the quran and ditto for islam. There's only some 2500 of them and most are already debunked thoroughly.

      I got raised protestant (reformed) and got out of it because of too much gobledygook. Oh, and I agree with everything else, I just thought you might like this for consideration.

      Cheers

    2. Re:OT: Re:Life, evolution, everything... by BlueFashoo · · Score: 1

      Traditionally, the phrase is "Calling Atheism a religion is like calling bald a hair color." That is what I was driving at. Essentially, I was a being a pedantic bastard. And shaving your head bald is a hairstyle, but that's semantics.

      I never meant to imply that atheism was a religion. In fact, I explicitly stated otherwise in some other post in this thread. I think in general we pretty much agree, and that there was just a small misunderstanding between us.

      Personally, I define atheism as the lack of a belief in a god or gods, which makes agnosticism a subset of atheism, equivalent to "weak" atheism, differeing only in whether they emphasize belief or knowledge when describing themselves.

      (full disclosure, I am an weak atheistic secular humanist who likes Epicurus and John Stuart Mill)

      --
      Nice Marmot
    3. Re:OT: Re:Life, evolution, everything... by BlueFashoo · · Score: 1

      Me again,

      Don Hirschberg:

      Calling Atheism a religion is like calling bald a hair color.


      http://www.wisdomquotes.com/cat_agnosticismatheism .html

      --
      Nice Marmot
    4. Re:OT: Re:Life, evolution, everything... by BlueFashoo · · Score: 1

      Arguing on Slashdot is such a waste of time. :-)

      Isn't that why we come here?

      --
      Nice Marmot
    5. Re:OT: Re:Life, evolution, everything... by David+Rolfe · · Score: 1

      Haha, I wasn't even aware it was a quotation. :-D Thanks for the pointer though. But yeah, I acknowledge I was just on a semantic argument.

      Thanks for the link, too.

      --
      Read Heinlein's 1953 Revolt in 2100, now more than ever.
    6. Re:OT: Re:Life, evolution, everything... by David+Rolfe · · Score: 1

      Here's my favorite from that page...

      Francis Bacon:

      Atheism leaves a man to sense, to philosophy, to natural piety, to laws, to reputation; all of which may be guides to an outward moral virtue, even if religion vanished; but religious superstition dismounts all these and erects an absolute monarchy in the minds of men.

      --
      Read Heinlein's 1953 Revolt in 2100, now more than ever.
  46. best and brightest by Mal-2 · · Score: 1

    It's an owed favor. This was the best thing they could think of to say about West Virginia, after one engineer got high on bug juice (lab ethanol and Dr Pepper) and insulted another engineer's family tree "that doesn't fork". Even this engineer couldn't bring himself to describe West Virginians as "bright", so he applied the term to its equivalent on Titan.

    Duh.

    Mal-2

    --
    How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
  47. They call the location Xanadu... by Assassin+bug · · Score: 1

    "In Xanadu did Kubla Kan A stately pleasure-dome decree: Where Alph, the sacred river, ran Through caverns measureless to man Down to a sunless sea..." -- Samuel Coleridge

  48. OT: Re:Life, evolution, everything... by David+Rolfe · · Score: 1

    Oh wait - here you are saying what I was saying in my other reply to you. Haha. Arguing on Slashdot is such a waste of time. :-)

    Sorry for the trouble. Well anyway, since we agree that atheism is not a religion, consider my previous reply to be merely about "baldness as the null set of hairstyles" compared to "atheism as the null set of religion". I think you you might agree with me there as well (with that clarification), that 'color' is not the null set of hairstyles, and thus not apt to describe atheism's relationship to other religious belief.

    Again, sorry to waste your (our) time.

    --
    Read Heinlein's 1953 Revolt in 2100, now more than ever.
  49. Insert Obligatory Uranus Joke here... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    C'mon slashdotters, no one posted a Uranus joke about this...????

  50. We'll leave the light on for you by Miamisky · · Score: 1

    It's Motel 6 headquarters you fools!

  51. An unlikely scenario... by d474 · · Score: 1

    Two people in observatory looking through a telescope at Titan...

    Astrophysicist: "Do you see that bright spot?"
    Paris Hilton: "Uh-huh..."
    Astrophysicist: "What do you think of that mysterious surface feature?"
    Paris Hilton: "That's hot."

    --
    Authority questions you. Return the favor.