Civil Discussion About Religion

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by wolfeskins

without going into details, every evolutionary belief has been proved to be nothing more than theorys

The only reason the theories can't be proven was because we weren't around to record history over the course of billions of years. I'd love for you to go into details, because all of the arguments against the theory of evolution are scientifically flimsy at best.

[wolfeskins]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

The only reason the theories can't be proven was because we weren't around to record history over the course of billions of years. I'd love for you to go into details, because all of the arguments against the theory of evolution are scientifically flimsy at best.

the reason they cannot be proven is becaue they are just theoies. why is it people need scientific proof to know if something exists ? i believe some poeple who are non believers use science as a crutch. they are fearfull of what happens after death and they say to themselves "well i can't see god and there's not enough scientific evidence to prove he is real, so i'll just continue to not believe".

can you see the wind ? no, but you can see and feel the effects of the wind. what is your reasoning for believing there is a thing called wind? is it because some scientists created a way to measure the speed of it.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by wolfeskins

the reason they cannot be proven is becaue they are just theoies. why is it people need scientific proof to know if something exists ? i believe some poeple who are non believers use science as a crutch. they are fearfull of what happens after death and they say to themselves "well i can't see god and there's not enough scientific evidence to prove he is real, so i'll just continue to not believe".

can you see the wind ? no, but you can see and feel the effects of the wind. what is your reasoning for believing there is a thing called wind? is it because some scientists created a way to measure the speed of it.

I can conduct observable scientific studies on wind, i can feel it as my hair hair reacts to it. I know better than to go outside when wind speed is 150 mph because the likelihood of getting hurt is very high. That's the difference. God requires only faith and by definition faith is:

Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence.

[The Huddle]

Originally Posted by saden1

I can conduct observable scientific studies on wind, i can feel it as my hair hair reacts to it. I know better than to go outside when wind speed is 150 mph because the likelihood of getting hurt is very high. That's the difference. God requires only faith and by definition faith is:

Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence

Like when people still insist Joe Gibbs will turn the Redskins around?

(sorry, couldn't resist)

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by wolfeskins

the reason they cannot be proven is becaue they are just theoies. why is it people need scientific proof to know if something exists ? i believe some poeple who are non believers use science as a crutch. they are fearfull of what happens after death and they say to themselves "well i can't see god and there's not enough scientific evidence to prove he is real, so i'll just continue to not believe".

can you see the wind ? no, but you can see and feel the effects of the wind. what is your reasoning for believing there is a thing called wind? is it because some scientists created a way to measure the speed of it.

Very, very good post.
I also noticed the same thing. Evolution can't be proven, but it is universally beleived by athiests / agnostics etc. God can not be proven, but He is universally dismissed by the same people. Why is God dismissed, but evolution embraced? Niether can be proven 100%. Doesn't make sense to me.

[724Skinsfan]

Roulette 101: Pick a number, put down a wager, like $5. If the ball does not land on your #, you lose $5. Since you are down $5 you need to make the original wager plus your total loss. So place a $10 bet on the same number. If you lose the $10 dollars you must put in (at least) $15. You have to have sufficient funds to continue with this way of wagering until eventually your number is the one that the ball lands on. It may take a thousand dollars or more but that's about the only (and simplest) way of making cash in roulette. The key is picking the same number (or group of numbers) until you win AND you always bet more than your total loss thus far.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by 724Skinsfan

Roulette 101: Pick a number, put down a wager, like $5. If the ball does not land on your #, you lose $5. Since you are down $5 you need to make the original wager plus your total loss. So place a $10 bet on the same number. If you lose the $10 dollars you must put in (at least) $15. You have to have sufficient funds to continue with this way of wagering until eventually your number is the one that the ball lands on. It may take a thousand dollars or more but that's about the only (and simplest) way of making cash in roulette. The key is picking the same number (or group of numbers) until you win AND you always bet more than your total loss thus far.

Wrong again, Flanders. There are 38 squares on the board (including 0 and 00), but you only get paid 36 times your money for hitting a number.

Do that over time and you're going to lose, guaranteed.

Gambling wins and losses come from repeating the bets over the short run. Over the short run, luck rules the game. Over the long run, the math always wins.

[724Skinsfan]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Wrong again, Flanders. There are 38 squares on the board (including 0 and 00), but you only get paid 36 times your money for hitting a number.

Do that over time and you're going to lose, guaranteed.

Gambling wins and losses come from repeating the bets over the short run. Over the short run, luck rules the game. Over the long run, the math always wins.

My name's not Flanders. How did you come up with that?

[724Skinsfan]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Wrong again, Flanders. There are 38 squares on the board (including 0 and 00), but you only get paid 36 times your money for hitting a number.

Do that over time and you're going to lose, guaranteed.

Gambling wins and losses come from repeating the bets over the short run. Over the short run, luck rules the game. Over the long run, the math always wins.

Figured it out, you're right. It would only work for a limited time.

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by 724Skinsfan

Roulette 101: Pick a number, put down a wager, like $5. If the ball does not land on your #, you lose $5. Since you are down $5 you need to make the original wager plus your total loss. So place a $10 bet on the same number. If you lose the $10 dollars you must put in (at least) $15. You have to have sufficient funds to continue with this way of wagering until eventually your number is the one that the ball lands on. It may take a thousand dollars or more but that's about the only (and simplest) way of making cash in roulette. The key is picking the same number (or group of numbers) until you win AND you always bet more than your total loss thus far.

You actually have a good mind for what my system says. But don't bet the actual numbers. Bet the black and reds, and bet the 1st / 2nd / 3rd 12's, and the even / odds. A simple way is this...put $5 on 2nd 12, and $5 on 3rd 12. Then put $5 on red, and $5 on odd. (total of $20 on table) So let's say it hits on black 13. You won with 2nd 12, so that's $10 winning there, you also won with $5 odd, so that's $5 there, so you won $15, and get $10 back from your wager (the $5 on 2nd twelve and the $5 on odd) You lost $10 total (from 3rd 12, and black). So you now have $25 in your pocket, which means you are up $5 total. Now since you already won 2nd 12 and odd, don't play those again, but double the money in the area you did lose in. So bet $10 red this time. If You lose again, bet $20 and so on, so let's say you hit on that $20 bet. Now you win $20, but only lost $10...$15 if you count the first $5, but I already counted that in my previous numbers, so you just won $10 more. So now your first session is over and you have won / taken away from the table, $15. Repeat the process when you notice patterns. ie: Red has hit 3 times in a row, or 1st 12 hit 2 times in a row. Etc.

A non beleiver will always be a non beleiver unless they try.
So try Free Roulette: Learn to play roulette today for free and give my basic system a try. I have a complex system that I use, but that would take a really long time to explain.
I usually only do the system once or twice, occasionally 3 times depending on the patterns, then I walk away from the table with anywhere from $15-$75. Do this 10 times, and even at the smallest amount, you are up $150. I will generally play 30 times throughout my cruises (for instance) and the first time I went on a cruise I won over 1k. But I rarely win less than $500 when I do play. That is kinda my bench mark of success.
The second you get greedy, you lose. The second you stray from the process, you lose. If you think small, and think strategically, you'll win. Never let the other players around you intimidate you to play more, just stick to the process. The reason people lose at a lot of these games is because they get greedy. The best times to play are after 00 or 0 hit, cause the chance they hit again are slimmer. But after about 10-13 times of green not hitting, put $1 on both, when they do hit, and they will, you come out on top even more, if they don't while using my system, no biggy, you lost only a few dollars but you are still up a lot.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by jsarno

You actually have a good mind for what my system says. But don't bet the actual numbers. Bet the black and reds, and bet the 1st / 2nd / 3rd 12's, and the even / odds. A simple way is this...put $5 on 2nd 12, and $5 on 3rd 12. Then put $5 on red, and $5 on odd. (total of $20 on table) So let's say it hits on black 13. You won with 2nd 12, so that's $10 winning there, you also won with $5 odd, so that's $5 there, so you won $15, and get $10 back from your wager (the $5 on 2nd twelve and the $5 on odd) You lost $10 total (from 3rd 12, and black). So you now have $25 in your pocket, which means you are up $5 total. Now since you already won 2nd 12 and odd, don't play those again, but double the money in the area you did lose in. So bet $10 red this time. If You lose again, bet $20 and so on, so let's say you hit on that $20 bet. Now you win $20, but only lost $10...$15 if you count the first $5, but I already counted that in my previous numbers, so you just won $10 more. So now your first session is over and you have won / taken away from the table, $15. Repeat the process when you notice patterns. ie: Red has hit 3 times in a row, or 1st 12 hit 2 times in a row. Etc.

A non beleiver will always be a non beleiver unless they try.
So try Free Roulette: Learn to play roulette today for free and give my basic system a try. I have a complex system that I use, but that would take a really long time to explain.
I usually only do the system once or twice, occasionally 3 times depending on the patterns, then I walk away from the table with anywhere from $15-$75. Do this 10 times, and even at the smallest amount, you are up $150. I will generally play 30 times throughout my cruises (for instance) and the first time I went on a cruise I won over 1k. But I rarely win less than $500 when I do play. That is kinda my bench mark of success.
The second you get greedy, you lose. The second you stray from the process, you lose. If you think small, and think strategically, you'll win. Never let the other players around you intimidate you to play more, just stick to the process. The reason people lose at a lot of these games is because they get greedy. The best times to play are after 00 or 0 hit, cause the chance they hit again are slimmer. But after about 10-13 times of green not hitting, put $1 on both, when they do hit, and they will, you come out on top even more, if they don't while using my system, no biggy, you lost only a few dollars but you are still up a lot.

Jsarno, I'd love to discuss gambling more, because I do love it. But given that it's off topic, this is going to be my last post on the subject.

The math is simple. Every spot on the board pays you off as if there are 36 possible numbers to bet. If you bet red or black, they pay you 1 to 1 (36/18). If you bet 1st 12, they pay you 3 to 1 (36/12). If you play a 4-corner bet, they pay you 9 to 1 (36/4). But there are 38 spots on the board. That means, on average, you're going to make your money back on 36 of the 38 spots. On the 37th and 38th spots, you will lose. That's why the house advantage in roullette is 5.2% (on a table with 0 and 00). It's 2.7% on a table with just 0. You can look those numbers up.

That means over time, if you play enough, you will lose either 5.2% or 2.7% of the money you bet.

I can tell that if all you're doing is playing on cruises and the occasional trip to the casino, your system hasn't gotten a good enough workout. I encourage you to play 1000 spins, betting the same amount of money each time, using any system you wish. You'll see the results.

That's it on the subject.

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Jsarno, I'd love to discuss gambling more, because I do love it. But given that it's off topic, this is going to be my last post on the subject.

The math is simple. Every spot on the board pays you off as if there are 36 possible numbers to bet. If you bet red or black, they pay you 1 to 1 (36/18). If you bet 1st 12, they pay you 3 to 1 (36/12). If you play a 4-corner bet, they pay you 9 to 1 (36/4). But there are 38 spots on the board. That means, on average, you're going to make your money back on 36 of the 38 spots. On the 37th and 38th spots, you will lose. That's why the house advantage in roullette is 5.2% (on a table with 0 and 00). It's 2.7% on a table with just 0. You can look those numbers up.

That means over time, if you play enough, you will lose either 5.2% or 2.7% of the money you bet.

I can tell that if all you're doing is playing on cruises and the occasional trip to the casino, your system hasn't gotten a good enough workout. I encourage you to play 1000 spins, betting the same amount of money each time, using any system you wish. You'll see the results.

That's it on the subject.

I agree with you, it is off subject, and we should no longer comment on it. I ask again, just try what I posted. I know the numbers you provide. I have a masters in finance...I KNOW numbers. I beleive I found a small loop hole in the system.
ps- I have played more roulette than everyone on this site combined (more than likely). I'm not trying to tell you to kill someone...I'm telling you just to try my basic system on a free website. That's all. You canPM me with how much you "won". It's free, what's the harm?

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by wolfeskins

the reason they cannot be proven is becaue they are just theoies. why is it people need scientific proof to know if something exists ? i believe some poeple who are non believers use science as a crutch. they are fearfull of what happens after death and they say to themselves "well i can't see god and there's not enough scientific evidence to prove he is real, so i'll just continue to not believe".

can you see the wind ? no, but you can see and feel the effects of the wind. what is your reasoning for believing there is a thing called wind? is it because some scientists created a way to measure the speed of it.

I wasn't going to respond to this, but since Jsarno actually bought this crap, now I feel the need.

You can see and feel the effects of the wind because it has been scientifically proven to exist. Wind is caused by the movement of air molecules (oxygen, nitrogen, etc.) which moves due to differences in high and low barometric pressure. Those molecules are gaseous matter. They move towards low pressure pockets in the atmosphere. You can measure the wind's velocity - our weathermen can tell us when wind gusts hit 50 mph. This isn't voodoo. It's science.

And pretty simple science at that.

This post of yours makes me feel very disappointed in the American education system, specifically the math & science departments. You don't have to see something to know it exists. There are other ways to prove it. However, there is no proof that God exists.

[wolfeskins]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

I wasn't going to respond to this, but since Jsarno actually bought this crap, now I feel the need.

You can see and feel the effects of the wind because it has been scientifically proven to exist. Wind is caused by the movement of air molecules (oxygen, nitrogen, etc.) which moves due to differences in high and low barometric pressure. Those molecules are gaseous matter. They move towards low pressure pockets in the atmosphere. You can measure the wind's velocity - our weathermen can tell us when wind gusts hit 50 mph. This isn't voodoo. It's science.

And pretty simple science at that.

This post of yours makes me feel very disappointed in the American education system, specifically the math & science departments. You don't have to see something to know it exists. There are other ways to prove it. However, there is no proof that God exists.

thank you, you are actually proving my point when you say "you don't have to see something to know it exists". that's the exact reason i know god does exist. just like the wind, i've never seen him but also just like the wind, i have seen and felt the effects of him.
we can debate this until we're both blue in the face but the fact is god has changed me, he has made me into a different person, that is a fact you can never argue against. i'm living proof that god does exist.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by wolfeskins

thank you, you are actually proving my point when you say "you don't have to see something to know it exists". that's the exact reason i know god does exist. just like the wind, i've never seen him but also just like the wind, i have seen and felt the effects of him.
we can debate this until we're both blue in the face but the fact is god has changed me, he has made me into a different person, that is a fact you can never argue against. i'm living proof that god does exist.

What were you doing when god was changing you? Sit idle? My take is that you made the necessary changes, god just inspired you.

I am glad for you but the fact of the matter is your "transformation" is not something you can scientifically study to prove the existence of god. In hard sciences anyways but perhaps psychologically and philosophically.