Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by UV-RAY

  1. I'm just firmly in the freedom of expression camp knocker, whether I agree or disagree with any points raised or just take a more neutral viewpoint - a moderate perhaps?Like I said earlier, all too well throwing the toys about and blaming religion per se. When you suddenly realise that the vast majority aren't out vowing for the blood of non-believers, atheists, other religions or their counterparts.There's enough crap in this world to last us all a life time. Better we perhaps pulled together as a collective than fall for the bait eh? Put our differences aside..You know your history knocker, I am sure of that.

    Now that I do agree with.

  2. Surprisingly enough the Romans had a tolerant attitude towards different religions - that is with the exception of Christianity until Constantine decided, 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em', then he took charge and chaired a meeting of bishops who decided what should go in and what should not go in the new Testament of the Bible and I understand there were many to choose from, so it is quite likely there was a bit of 'cherry


    However I am still suspicious of Constantine's motives - I can't help but think he realised what a wonderful way to control the masses - and the rest my friends is history.

    Indeed Mike, I too view the New Testament with suspicion as like you say many testaments disappeared at that time. 

  3. I won't accept bigots, and think it's wrong to be like that - the thing about these sorts of people is that they choose to be like that. I'm sure bigots wouldn't accept my view and may not even recognise themselves as such, but I suppose that's up to them.  But there lies the rub - why should people accept your views on homosexuality, they're based on prejudice and ignorance, they're directed at a group of people who didn't choose to be who they are and rightly most people don't share your type of 'opinion' any longer.  It's not other people's problem that they don't like what you have to say, it's yours. You are the person who claims to be religious, yet will happily pedal hateful bile on here without a care or thought for the people reading it who may be more than a little upset to see someone sharing such opinions - surely you can see the hypocrisy in that - where in the bible does it suggest being so selfish and ignorant? That's the problem with people like you, it's all about you - your religion, your opinion, your apparent right to express whatever you please without thought or consideration for anyone or anything, merrily picking and choosing the elements of the bible you want to take notice of and ignoring the rest, it's ridiculous.  So before you reply, before you come back to pedal more thinly veiled bigotry, go away and look in the mirror then ask yourself at what point you allowed yourself to form opinions based on ignorance and prejudice, as just like everyone else you were born without those traits and have obviously picked them up somewhere along the way. You are right in one respect though, it's not god, not the bible, and not religion forcing you to have those views, the only person to blame for your prejudices is you.

    Excuse me where I've I pedalled hateful bile. Just because I don't approve doesn't make me a bigot, as for cherry picking parts of the bible well if you read the part regarding sodom and gomorrah and also about the roles of a man and woman in matrimony I think you'll find my views are well balanced. I find your post filled with hate and prejudice towards those who don't think like you, whereas  I already stated I wouldn't enforce my views on anyone else you are doing just that. Have you ever read the Bible and by read  mean all of it not just the bits you like throw out of context. 

  4. I was talking to him about recent climatic trends. I led the discussion but he whole heartedly agreed with everything I was saying. I've read that historically (evidenced within natural sources such as tree rings etc), periods of sudden climatic change were preceded by wild swings between extremes. Is that not what we're seeing across the world at the minute? Added to that the strange behaviour of the sun and we could perhaps be a little bit curious as to just what awaits us in the not too distant future?


    It's the same conversation I had with a senior geography lecturer who was also convinced that we would be headed into the freezer very soon.

    I think the very same as the evidence for such an event is mounting daily IMO, but I would say that such events will be certainly be global and not just effecting the NH, with global temps starting to decline within the next 5 years.

  5. Your definition of faith is very poor, maybe you're thinking of the Christian faith alone? You state that your beliefs are personal and you would not enforce your views on others, yet the way you derailed the thread on gay marriage suggests otherwise. 

    Not at all , may I suggest you reread what I said, though you are right on  my thoughts being based on Christian faith alone. My views on gay marriage and homosexuality are mine and mine alone, I think it's unnatural and wrong, others are entitled to think otherwise and I've no problem with that. However it does appear that my thoughts on this are a problem for others in accepting.

  6. What is faith then? What about those with faith in Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, Shamanism, Mormonism, Scientology, etc. To me, faith comes across as blind belief that requires dismissal of much rational thought, countering evidence and viewpoints.

    Faith is believing that God created the heavens and earth, not 7000 years ago has quoted by many. Science can only takes us so far with explainations on how and why we are here, it's not blind belief as you so eloquently put it. As for irrational viewpoints on homosexuality, that's a matter of opinion and belief in what's right and wrong, again this is down to personal beliefs and I for one don't expect others to think alike and nor would I enforce my views others. Can the same be said for those who oppose religion though?

  7. I noticed a mark lack of that in the gay marriage thread and I have just chosen my words with care. But the church does. And in the case of the catholic church it has made a huge difference to peoples lives.

    I agree Churches have, but I fail too see how's it's made a huge difference in their life as most of them aren't religious to start with.
  8. I think they can co-exist, as long as religious institution don't try to operate outside the law or impose themselves on the functioning of society.


    Everything must adapt to survive, but for something as dogmatic as religion, that will be more challenging and will likely lead to its demise.


    Spirituality, private practise and belief may still be compatible. But to believe in creationism, intelligent design, the holding of ancient bigoted views (the bible can justify most good and evil acts) with the only justification being religious texts, well, that isn't good enough anymore. We now have the education and hopefully the intelligence to think for ourselves. Having your life and views dictated by an ancient book is becoming increasingly unjustifiable.


    I think some aspects will live on, such as the practise of meditation, but there will always be people who feel the need to believe in order to give them comfort while having a difficult time or life, but I think it may eventually become an extreme minority.


    I don't see the persecution of religious people (apart from by other religions!), nor discrimination against them, are there example out there? As for stigmatised, maybe in a way, but it's mainly a stigma attached to having bigoted (homophobic) or irrational (creationist) beliefs with the religious texts being the only justification.

    But you have to have faith BFTV and if you have faith then those religious texts are what you follow, rightly or wrongly depending if you have faith. I oppose in homosexuality being accepted by means of marriage and civil partnerships, but that's my view and I still wouldn't openly direct my opinion on others as I neither believe in telling people what to do, say, or think.

  9. I think everyone is entitled to have their own views upheld and respected, whatever they are. I do feel a sense of smugness by some who view religion as mythical and inpractical by today's standards, which certainly creates unneeded tension and conflict. Remember we don't have to approve of things and certain aspects of today's society, but surely tolerance and respect is the way forward.

  10. No, what you're saying is completely daft. The 'social taboo' (for want of a stronger term) of adultery, theft, and murder exists even amongst the irreligious - obviously.Yes, the ancient 'thou shalt not murder' coincides with our law today, and for good reason! But to say that without religion the law wouldn't exist is ridiculous.

    Well that's just plain daft as you have no way of proving otherwise. The simple fact is that religion gave us the foundations for such laws and values, you can't argue with the facts, and why atheist find it hard to accept speaks volumes really. Like it or not we owe an awful lo to religion, both good and bad.

  11. Why do the sceptics love ice that will be all gone by late spring??? We've all seen the reasons for the freeze up ( and suffered from the results in the SW) but apart from the novelty of the story what interest is it in the environment section? Is it a linking to the enhanced Jet swings If so maybe look west a few hundred miles to the issues they've been having in Alaska with rain drenched mountains collapsing downslope?

    That's a rather odd thing too say GW, of course ice will disappear cometh the summer, that's not the point of the story as you know. It's quite exceptional considering it's only been recorded once before.
  12. Spot on. I fully support the removal of laws and attitudes based solely on the teachings of some ancient book :)

    But that would be basing laws on your opinions and the modern teachings of live and let live, which has really done us proud over the years.
  13. My recovery seems to be problematic with instability of the knee joint progressively worsening, this combined with light to moderate pain on the medial side of my knee and a valgus looking leg where my foot points inwards. My appointment with the consultant is next month, worst case scenario would be a revision and another attempt at an allograft. Worrying times ahead, both physically and financially.


    UK Outlook for Saturday 8 Feb 2014 to Monday 17 Feb 2014:

    It will be a wet and windy start to the weekend, with locally heavy rain spreading northeast on Saturday, and strong to gale force winds, locally severe gale in exposure. This will be followed by clearer, showery weather, these showers likely to be heavy and thundery at times with a risk of hail, and falling as snow over higher ground. It will remain unsettled and occasionally windy through the following week with further showers or longer spells of rain, these occasionally heavy and with hill snow in the north. The best of any drier and brighter interludes will probably be in the east and southeast. A dip in temperatures in the south around Sunday, but otherwise temperatures mostly near normal, the risk of frost and ice mainly in the north.

    Updated: 1258 on Mon 3 Feb 2014




    Looks like a rinse and repeat of the last two months. Hats off to the Meto, MOGREPS and  GLOSEA 5 have been fantastic at spotting trends this winter.

  15. It's a pity her claims temperatures in the 30s and 40s being similar to the 90s and 00s aren't backed up by the data, or the references she supplies (some of completely contradict her), not that most of her readers are likely to check them.



    Posted ImagePosted ImagePosted Image

    I think you'll find that's not the case, as I'm more inclined to believe Judith Curry a climate scientist than BFTV a blogger on Net Weather.Posted Image

  16. Tunnel vision SI? Your opinion of the blog and data, and a pretty poor one at that.

    What do you think? Perhaps a read of the actual sources for the data? Might teach you something.

    Not at all as all previous data was using only selected data from the Indian and South Atlantic oceans, why I've no idea. Also the site in question is and remains a poor blogging site frequented by those looking to get their fix of doctored doom and gloom.


    Posted Image

    Posted Image

    Global surface temps have still not risen for 17 years, no amount of tinkering can change this.
  17. sirs, you are deluded!Posted Image


    these people are weather forecasters and forecast without bias. and the vast majority of the popuation DO NOT LIKE IT COLD! forecasters included. and referring to gibbs/hammon as having a mild bias is actually quite insulting.


    its only on these forums that cold lovers come out to play, so when they say 'at least itll be mild' they are giving out the news most want to hear.


    as for a cold spell now.... lakes of ice? is that good news for those under flood? whats needed is dry weather, mild or cold but not freezing.

    You want too see my local alleged metrology  presenters on BBC North west, they definitely have a mild bias, but what they know about weather you could write on the back of a postage stamp. Also the vast majority of the UK aren't interested in weather or they would be posting here.

    • Like 3
  • Create New...