The Endocannabinoid System and Evolution

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: 3n19m470
Tried to reply...to chronaut. "What are the evolution advantages?

Perhaps something embedded for later use... if we ever became intelligent enough, or evolved enough, and cultivate the god plant for proper use, it will activat tree the proper boosters signals to our dna to progress to the next stage. The universe knows that a species which has mastered the cannabinoids to activate their receptors, to a high enough population density ....they are wise and peace loving... they are allowed inside heaven. Their cannibus receptors begin interacting with other humans receptors, communicating like Furbys and allows us to find answers like never before, solving the great mysteries of this chapter, and beginning the next chapter. Why not?

Ok ok...but what I can tell you is that the proper application of cannibus CAN and will cause miraculous results for you individually, And for the human race as a whole.

I'm fairly sure that the endocannabinoid system has a lot of biochemical functions that have nothing to do with the feelings that THC triggers. It is just the case that THC happens to bind to the receptors

The CB1 receptor regulates GABA by inhibiting calcium from entering into the presynaptic axon terminals. You are talking about a very sophisticated regulatory system, and phyto-cannabinoids exert many of the same effects as endocannabinoids. Low amounts of THC, or better yet, a ratio of 1:1+ of THC:CBD would greatly mediate the "feelings" associated with just THC like that of which you mention.

It didn't "just so happen". It happened.

originally posted by: M4ngo

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: flyingfish

You'd have to be fairly weak minded to be 'religiously coerced' in a world of such philosophical variety. If someone stops searching, it may be because they have found something.

We are easily coerced, this is why we must be skeptical of unevidenced claims and learn critical thinking skills to protect ourselves and our children from religious indoctrination.

You have some evidence that complexity arises from randomness?

Actually, Ilya Prigogine, the Belgian scientist that received the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1977 basically proved this very thing.

Dissipative structures—far from equilibrium thermodynamics.
Complex systems can arise out of chaos.
Living organisms are dissipative structures. Humans are dissipative structures.

long before a state of equilibrium is reached in irreversible processes, orderly and stable systems can arise from more disordered systems.

www.nobelprize.org...

Prigogine was talking about how order can be emergent from chaotic systems.

Chaotic systems are not random. They are unpredictable in the micro, but are systematically constrained and so express those constraints in distribution, in the macro.

The order arises not from the random seeds, but from the constraints applied.

originally posted by: M4ngo

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: 3n19m470
Tried to reply...to chronaut. "What are the evolution advantages?

Perhaps something embedded for later use... if we ever became intelligent enough, or evolved enough, and cultivate the god plant for proper use, it will activat tree the proper boosters signals to our dna to progress to the next stage. The universe knows that a species which has mastered the cannabinoids to activate their receptors, to a high enough population density ....they are wise and peace loving... they are allowed inside heaven. Their cannibus receptors begin interacting with other humans receptors, communicating like Furbys and allows us to find answers like never before, solving the great mysteries of this chapter, and beginning the next chapter. Why not?

Ok ok...but what I can tell you is that the proper application of cannibus CAN and will cause miraculous results for you individually, And for the human race as a whole.

I'm fairly sure that the endocannabinoid system has a lot of biochemical functions that have nothing to do with the feelings that THC triggers. It is just the case that THC happens to bind to the receptors

The CB1 receptor regulates GABA by inhibiting calcium from entering into the presynaptic axon terminals. You are talking about a very sophisticated regulatory system, and phyto-cannabinoids exert many of the same effects as endocannabinoids. Low amounts of THC, or better yet, a ratio of 1:1+ of THC:CBD would greatly mediate the "feelings" associated with just THC like that of which you mention.

It didn't "just so happen". It happened.

I am suggesting that the drug works because it can bind to the receptors, not that the receptors were made to bind the drug.

The "stoned ape" hypothesis presupposes that we have evolved to be intoxicated and 'improved' by drugs. It isn't a particularly rational hypothesis IMHO.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: M4ngo

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: flyingfish

You'd have to be fairly weak minded to be 'religiously coerced' in a world of such philosophical variety. If someone stops searching, it may be because they have found something.

We are easily coerced, this is why we must be skeptical of unevidenced claims and learn critical thinking skills to protect ourselves and our children from religious indoctrination.

You have some evidence that complexity arises from randomness?

Actually, Ilya Prigogine, the Belgian scientist that received the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1977 basically proved this very thing.

Dissipative structures—far from equilibrium thermodynamics.
Complex systems can arise out of chaos.
Living organisms are dissipative structures. Humans are dissipative structures.

long before a state of equilibrium is reached in irreversible processes, orderly and stable systems can arise from more disordered systems.

www.nobelprize.org...

Prigogine was talking about how order can be emergent from chaotic systems.

Chaotic systems are not random. They are unpredictable in the micro, but are systematically constrained and so express those constraints in distribution, in the macro.

The order arises not from the random seeds, but from the constraints applied.

A random system = non-deterministic

A chaotic system = deterministic

Life did not arise out of randomness. This is illustrated by dissipative structures—which arise from irreversible processes. That means that THC did not just happen to bind to the endogenous receptors which regulate all physiological processes. It has happened through irreversible processes. Life does not arise from randomness on Earth, so your question becomes irrelevant.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: M4ngo

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: 3n19m470
Tried to reply...to chronaut. "What are the evolution advantages?

Perhaps something embedded for later use... if we ever became intelligent enough, or evolved enough, and cultivate the god plant for proper use, it will activat tree the proper boosters signals to our dna to progress to the next stage. The universe knows that a species which has mastered the cannabinoids to activate their receptors, to a high enough population density ....they are wise and peace loving... they are allowed inside heaven. Their cannibus receptors begin interacting with other humans receptors, communicating like Furbys and allows us to find answers like never before, solving the great mysteries of this chapter, and beginning the next chapter. Why not?

Ok ok...but what I can tell you is that the proper application of cannibus CAN and will cause miraculous results for you individually, And for the human race as a whole.

I'm fairly sure that the endocannabinoid system has a lot of biochemical functions that have nothing to do with the feelings that THC triggers. It is just the case that THC happens to bind to the receptors

The CB1 receptor regulates GABA by inhibiting calcium from entering into the presynaptic axon terminals. You are talking about a very sophisticated regulatory system, and phyto-cannabinoids exert many of the same effects as endocannabinoids. Low amounts of THC, or better yet, a ratio of 1:1+ of THC:CBD would greatly mediate the "feelings" associated with just THC like that of which you mention.

It didn't "just so happen". It happened.

I am suggesting that the drug works because it can bind to the receptors, not that the receptors were made to bind the drug.

The "stoned ape" hypothesis presupposes that we have evolved to be intoxicated and 'improved' by drugs. It isn't a particularly rational hypothesis IMHO.

Phyto-cannabinoids exist because of irreversible processes on Earth.

Endocannabinoids exist because of irreversible processes on Earth.

Plants = dissipative structures = life

Humans = dissipative structures = life

Evolution.

originally posted by: M4ngo

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: M4ngo

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: flyingfish

You'd have to be fairly weak minded to be 'religiously coerced' in a world of such philosophical variety. If someone stops searching, it may be because they have found something.

We are easily coerced, this is why we must be skeptical of unevidenced claims and learn critical thinking skills to protect ourselves and our children from religious indoctrination.

You have some evidence that complexity arises from randomness?

Actually, Ilya Prigogine, the Belgian scientist that received the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1977 basically proved this very thing.

Dissipative structures—far from equilibrium thermodynamics.
Complex systems can arise out of chaos.
Living organisms are dissipative structures. Humans are dissipative structures.

long before a state of equilibrium is reached in irreversible processes, orderly and stable systems can arise from more disordered systems.

www.nobelprize.org...

Prigogine was talking about how order can be emergent from chaotic systems.

Chaotic systems are not random. They are unpredictable in the micro, but are systematically constrained and so express those constraints in distribution, in the macro.

The order arises not from the random seeds, but from the constraints applied.

A random system = non-deterministic

A chaotic system = deterministic

Life did not arise out of randomness. This is illustrated by dissipative structures—which arise from irreversible processes. That means that THC did not just happen to bind to the endogenous receptors which regulate all physiological processes. It has happened through irreversible processes. Life does not arise from randomness on Earth, so your question becomes irrelevant.

My question was, if the poster flyingfish had some evidence that "complexity arises from randomness". I asked this because it is a fundamental precept behind Big Bang cosmologies and other subsequent science but is entirely un-evidenced and contrary to what we know of as consequences of randomness.

Now it appears that you agree that life does not arise from randomness. The next step is to see that neither can a universe arise from the same, and for much the same reason.

You see, the standard Big Bang cosmological hypothesis is that matter arose from truly random quantum fluctuations which created supersymmetric quantum scale virtual particles. These particles would normally annihilate with each other and so matter should not exist. For matter to exist the supersymmetric balance needs to be broken and the vparticles prevented from annihilating.

Experiments by Casimir showed that these vparticles do exist but also that they cannot come into existence if they are crowded out by the creation of other virtual particles. In other words, they cannot come into existence within a singularity where they would occupy the same physical location as other particles.

The other problem is with preventing the vparticles from annihalating. You'd have to generate sufficient force gradients to keep them separate, like one would get gravitationally in a Black Hole, causing it to spew out matter and energy via Hawking radiation. But to get mass like that, you'd need matter and in the protouniverse there is none, so you cannot get a universe from nothing, even with quantum fluctuations.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: M4ngo

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: M4ngo

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: flyingfish

You'd have to be fairly weak minded to be 'religiously coerced' in a world of such philosophical variety. If someone stops searching, it may be because they have found something.

We are easily coerced, this is why we must be skeptical of unevidenced claims and learn critical thinking skills to protect ourselves and our children from religious indoctrination.

You have some evidence that complexity arises from randomness?

Actually, Ilya Prigogine, the Belgian scientist that received the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1977 basically proved this very thing.

Dissipative structures—far from equilibrium thermodynamics.
Complex systems can arise out of chaos.
Living organisms are dissipative structures. Humans are dissipative structures.

long before a state of equilibrium is reached in irreversible processes, orderly and stable systems can arise from more disordered systems.

www.nobelprize.org...

Prigogine was talking about how order can be emergent from chaotic systems.

Chaotic systems are not random. They are unpredictable in the micro, but are systematically constrained and so express those constraints in distribution, in the macro.

The order arises not from the random seeds, but from the constraints applied.

A random system = non-deterministic

A chaotic system = deterministic

Life did not arise out of randomness. This is illustrated by dissipative structures—which arise from irreversible processes. That means that THC did not just happen to bind to the endogenous receptors which regulate all physiological processes. It has happened through irreversible processes. Life does not arise from randomness on Earth, so your question becomes irrelevant.

My question was, if the poster flyingfish had some evidence that "complexity arises from randomness". I asked this because it is a fundamental precept behind Big Bang cosmologies and other subsequent science but is entirely un-evidenced and contrary to what we know of as consequences of randomness.

Now it appears that you agree that life does not arise from randomness. The next step is to see that neither can a universe arise from the same, and for much the same reason.

You see, the standard Big Bang cosmological hypothesis is that matter arose from truly random quantum fluctuations which created supersymmetric quantum scale virtual particles. These particles would normally annihilate with each other and so matter should not exist. For matter to exist the supersymmetric balance needs to be broken and the vparticles prevented from annihilating.

Experiments by Casimir showed that these vparticles do exist but also that they cannot come into existence if they are crowded out by the creation of other virtual particles. In other words, they cannot come into existence within a singularity where they would occupy the same physical location as other particles.

The other problem is with preventing the vparticles from annihalating. You'd have to generate sufficient force gradients to keep them separate, like one would get gravitationally in a Black Hole, causing it to spew out matter and energy via Hawking radiation. But to get mass like that, you'd need matter and in the protouniverse there is none, so you cannot get a universe from nothing, even with quantum fluctuations.

So then you agree, humankind is the result of evolution on Earth.

Dissipative structures result from irreversible processes. This includes life.

It would make sense then that we are moving away from the "Big Bang" and the universe is "expanding" because we are moving further away from equilibrium.

We see more order, complex systems, and Life further away from equilibrium.

I'm not interested in the beginnings. This thread isn't about that. It's about evolution on Earth.

originally posted by: M4ngo

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: M4ngo

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: M4ngo

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: flyingfish

You'd have to be fairly weak minded to be 'religiously coerced' in a world of such philosophical variety. If someone stops searching, it may be because they have found something.

We are easily coerced, this is why we must be skeptical of unevidenced claims and learn critical thinking skills to protect ourselves and our children from religious indoctrination.

You have some evidence that complexity arises from randomness?

Actually, Ilya Prigogine, the Belgian scientist that received the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1977 basically proved this very thing.

Dissipative structures—far from equilibrium thermodynamics.
Complex systems can arise out of chaos.
Living organisms are dissipative structures. Humans are dissipative structures.

long before a state of equilibrium is reached in irreversible processes, orderly and stable systems can arise from more disordered systems.

www.nobelprize.org...

Prigogine was talking about how order can be emergent from chaotic systems.

Chaotic systems are not random. They are unpredictable in the micro, but are systematically constrained and so express those constraints in distribution, in the macro.

The order arises not from the random seeds, but from the constraints applied.

A random system = non-deterministic

A chaotic system = deterministic

Life did not arise out of randomness. This is illustrated by dissipative structures—which arise from irreversible processes. That means that THC did not just happen to bind to the endogenous receptors which regulate all physiological processes. It has happened through irreversible processes. Life does not arise from randomness on Earth, so your question becomes irrelevant.

My question was, if the poster flyingfish had some evidence that "complexity arises from randomness". I asked this because it is a fundamental precept behind Big Bang cosmologies and other subsequent science but is entirely un-evidenced and contrary to what we know of as consequences of randomness.

Now it appears that you agree that life does not arise from randomness. The next step is to see that neither can a universe arise from the same, and for much the same reason.

You see, the standard Big Bang cosmological hypothesis is that matter arose from truly random quantum fluctuations which created supersymmetric quantum scale virtual particles. These particles would normally annihilate with each other and so matter should not exist. For matter to exist the supersymmetric balance needs to be broken and the vparticles prevented from annihilating.

Experiments by Casimir showed that these vparticles do exist but also that they cannot come into existence if they are crowded out by the creation of other virtual particles. In other words, they cannot come into existence within a singularity where they would occupy the same physical location as other particles.

The other problem is with preventing the vparticles from annihalating. You'd have to generate sufficient force gradients to keep them separate, like one would get gravitationally in a Black Hole, causing it to spew out matter and energy via Hawking radiation. But to get mass like that, you'd need matter and in the protouniverse there is none, so you cannot get a universe from nothing, even with quantum fluctuations.

So then you agree, humankind is the result of evolution on Earth.

Dissipative structures result from irreversible processes. This includes life.

It would make sense then that we are moving away from the "Big Bang" and the universe is "expanding" because we are moving further away from equilibrium.

We see more order, complex systems, and Life further away from equilibrium.

I'm not interested in the beginnings. This thread isn't about that. It's about evolution on Earth.

Yes, but it's really stretching things to believe that a recreational drug "evolved us".

We have an incredibly complicated neurology. which can be affected by some chemicals which happen to 'fit' chemically into the surface of specific nerve cells, disrupting normal function.

Some vast time ago, we found a plant that made us intoxicated when we burned it and breathed its smoke. It isn't a "survival of the fittest" thing, in fact intoxication slows reflexes, clouds judgement and dulls pain.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: M4ngo

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: M4ngo

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: M4ngo

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: flyingfish

You'd have to be fairly weak minded to be 'religiously coerced' in a world of such philosophical variety. If someone stops searching, it may be because they have found something.

We are easily coerced, this is why we must be skeptical of unevidenced claims and learn critical thinking skills to protect ourselves and our children from religious indoctrination.

You have some evidence that complexity arises from randomness?

Actually, Ilya Prigogine, the Belgian scientist that received the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1977 basically proved this very thing.

Dissipative structures—far from equilibrium thermodynamics.
Complex systems can arise out of chaos.
Living organisms are dissipative structures. Humans are dissipative structures.

long before a state of equilibrium is reached in irreversible processes, orderly and stable systems can arise from more disordered systems.

www.nobelprize.org...

Prigogine was talking about how order can be emergent from chaotic systems.

Chaotic systems are not random. They are unpredictable in the micro, but are systematically constrained and so express those constraints in distribution, in the macro.

The order arises not from the random seeds, but from the constraints applied.

A random system = non-deterministic

A chaotic system = deterministic

Life did not arise out of randomness. This is illustrated by dissipative structures—which arise from irreversible processes. That means that THC did not just happen to bind to the endogenous receptors which regulate all physiological processes. It has happened through irreversible processes. Life does not arise from randomness on Earth, so your question becomes irrelevant.

My question was, if the poster flyingfish had some evidence that "complexity arises from randomness". I asked this because it is a fundamental precept behind Big Bang cosmologies and other subsequent science but is entirely un-evidenced and contrary to what we know of as consequences of randomness.

Now it appears that you agree that life does not arise from randomness. The next step is to see that neither can a universe arise from the same, and for much the same reason.

You see, the standard Big Bang cosmological hypothesis is that matter arose from truly random quantum fluctuations which created supersymmetric quantum scale virtual particles. These particles would normally annihilate with each other and so matter should not exist. For matter to exist the supersymmetric balance needs to be broken and the vparticles prevented from annihilating.

Experiments by Casimir showed that these vparticles do exist but also that they cannot come into existence if they are crowded out by the creation of other virtual particles. In other words, they cannot come into existence within a singularity where they would occupy the same physical location as other particles.

The other problem is with preventing the vparticles from annihalating. You'd have to generate sufficient force gradients to keep them separate, like one would get gravitationally in a Black Hole, causing it to spew out matter and energy via Hawking radiation. But to get mass like that, you'd need matter and in the protouniverse there is none, so you cannot get a universe from nothing, even with quantum fluctuations.

So then you agree, humankind is the result of evolution on Earth.

Dissipative structures result from irreversible processes. This includes life.

It would make sense then that we are moving away from the "Big Bang" and the universe is "expanding" because we are moving further away from equilibrium.

We see more order, complex systems, and Life further away from equilibrium.

I'm not interested in the beginnings. This thread isn't about that. It's about evolution on Earth.

Yes, but it's really stretching things to believe that a recreational drug "evolved us".

We have an incredibly complicated neurology. which can be affected by some chemicals which happen to 'fit' chemically into the surface of specific nerve cells, disrupting normal function.

Some vast time ago, we found a plant that made us intoxicated when we burned it and breathed its smoke. It isn't a "survival of the fittest" thing, in fact intoxication slows reflexes, clouds judgement and dulls pain.

Cannabis is a recreational drug? Even the non-intoxicating phyto-cannabinoids like CBD which relieves children from suffering?

Endocannabinoids are in both vertebrates and invertebrates, including aquatic life.

I never suggested life evolved because of or from Cannabis.

The OP has dissolved into the ether. Why start a thread if you don't intend to participate yourself? Because people don't agree with you or have different opinions? It was a very interesting thread - you posed a good question. Why did you drop it?

originally posted by: Phantom423
The OP has dissolved into the ether. Why start a thread if you don't intend to participate yourself? Because people don't agree with you or have different opinions? It was a very interesting thread - you posed a good question. Why did you drop it?

Huh? I've participated throughout the entire thread.

Do you have anything interesting to say or want to add in any thoughts you might have? I'm all for getting back on track, but due to differing opinions and beliefs, me and the other poster sort of got side tracked away.

Here, I'll get it started:

NASA is sponsoring endocannabinoid research being conducted at the ISS. It is on bone loss and exploring possible stem cell regeneration modalities. So basically, the endocannabinoid system could potentially be (which I think it will) have a vital role to play in new therapeutics and medical devices for space. Amazing how it will probably become vital to human survival while exploring the cosmos.

Also makes me think about virtual particles. Endocannabinoids are produced on demand and regulate energy homeostasis. Virtual particles pop in and out (on demand?) and are part of an energy field.

There's a weird connection there. My thinking is, what if virtual particles are like the endocannabinoids and are regulating space and evolving, adapting, and creating something from nothing. Endocannabinoids regulate electric signals, neurotransmitters, and pop in and out, on demand, when needed or receptors activated by outside sources. So, could virtual particles be thought of as a "neurotransmitters", an energy field regulating space?

a reply to: flyingfish

"Democracy was created to protect the minority from the majority."

Not correct. It's the other way around. Democracy was created to protect the majority from the minority.

a reply to: chr0naut

"Let's also remember the numbers of deaths that those atheist regimes caused. Lets take Stalinist Russia; Three million imprisoned in Gulags (for political reasons), 20 million deaths (A. Solzhenitsyin estimated 60 million deaths). Or Maoist China; 40 million deaths. Hardly "successful secular societies"."

I wouldn't call those regimes atheist. That’s a flagrant lie. Like religion, they had their own dogma.

a reply to: M4ngo

Sorry - I posted to the wrong thread.

originally posted by: surnamename57
a reply to: chr0naut

"Let's also remember the numbers of deaths that those atheist regimes caused. Lets take Stalinist Russia; Three million imprisoned in Gulags (for political reasons), 20 million deaths (A. Solzhenitsyin estimated 60 million deaths). Or Maoist China; 40 million deaths. Hardly "successful secular societies"."

I wouldn't call those regimes atheist. That’s a flagrant lie. Like religion, they had their own dogma.

Honestly, it isn't a "flagrant lie". It is a well documented historical truth. They had their own dogma, it was atheism.

State atheism From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: surnamename57
a reply to: chr0naut

"Let's also remember the numbers of deaths that those atheist regimes caused. Lets take Stalinist Russia; Three million imprisoned in Gulags (for political reasons), 20 million deaths (A. Solzhenitsyin estimated 60 million deaths). Or Maoist China; 40 million deaths. Hardly "successful secular societies"."

I wouldn't call those regimes atheist. That’s a flagrant lie. Like religion, they had their own dogma.

Honestly, it isn't a "flagrant lie". It is a well documented historical truth. They had their own dogma, it was atheism.

State atheism From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Actually, it was communism. I don't have to look at Wikipedia to know what those regimes were like. I come from an ex-communist country. And I'm not young, if you know what I mean.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: surnamename57
a reply to: chr0naut

"Let's also remember the numbers of deaths that those atheist regimes caused. Lets take Stalinist Russia; Three million imprisoned in Gulags (for political reasons), 20 million deaths (A. Solzhenitsyin estimated 60 million deaths). Or Maoist China; 40 million deaths. Hardly "successful secular societies"."

I wouldn't call those regimes atheist. That’s a flagrant lie. Like religion, they had their own dogma.

Honestly, it isn't a "flagrant lie". It is a well documented historical truth. They had their own dogma, it was atheism.

State atheism From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So now you accept well documented truths?

Good.

Religion is a well document fictional truth.

Evolution can be seen with human eyeballs.

originally posted by: M4ngo

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: surnamename57
a reply to: chr0naut

"Let's also remember the numbers of deaths that those atheist regimes caused. Lets take Stalinist Russia; Three million imprisoned in Gulags (for political reasons), 20 million deaths (A. Solzhenitsyin estimated 60 million deaths). Or Maoist China; 40 million deaths. Hardly "successful secular societies"."

I wouldn't call those regimes atheist. That’s a flagrant lie. Like religion, they had their own dogma.

Honestly, it isn't a "flagrant lie". It is a well documented historical truth. They had their own dogma, it was atheism.

State atheism From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So now you accept well documented truths?

Good.

Religion is a well document fictional truth.

Evolution can be seen with human eyeballs.

A fictional truth? Is that like a black white, massive nothing or an up down?

I'm pretty sure that most religions can be seen with human eyeballs too.

Nor was I denying evolution, I just deny it as an excuse for ignorant doublespeak Cannabinoid ranting.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: M4ngo

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: surnamename57
a reply to: chr0naut

"Let's also remember the numbers of deaths that those atheist regimes caused. Lets take Stalinist Russia; Three million imprisoned in Gulags (for political reasons), 20 million deaths (A. Solzhenitsyin estimated 60 million deaths). Or Maoist China; 40 million deaths. Hardly "successful secular societies"."

I wouldn't call those regimes atheist. That’s a flagrant lie. Like religion, they had their own dogma.

Honestly, it isn't a "flagrant lie". It is a well documented historical truth. They had their own dogma, it was atheism.

State atheism From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So now you accept well documented truths?

Good.

Religion is a well document fictional truth.

Evolution can be seen with human eyeballs.

A fictional truth? Is that like a black white, massive nothing or an up down?

I'm pretty sure that most religions can be seen with human eyeballs too.

Nor was I denying evolution, I just deny it as an excuse for ignorant doublespeak Cannabinoid ranting.

Ignorant doublespeak cannabinoid ranting?

Not sure what that is suppose mean, so please do elaborate.

originally posted by: M4ngo

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: M4ngo

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: surnamename57
a reply to: chr0naut

"Let's also remember the numbers of deaths that those atheist regimes caused. Lets take Stalinist Russia; Three million imprisoned in Gulags (for political reasons), 20 million deaths (A. Solzhenitsyin estimated 60 million deaths). Or Maoist China; 40 million deaths. Hardly "successful secular societies"."

I wouldn't call those regimes atheist. That’s a flagrant lie. Like religion, they had their own dogma.

Honestly, it isn't a "flagrant lie". It is a well documented historical truth. They had their own dogma, it was atheism.

State atheism From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So now you accept well documented truths?

Good.

Religion is a well document fictional truth.

Evolution can be seen with human eyeballs.

A fictional truth? Is that like a black white, massive nothing or an up down?

I'm pretty sure that most religions can be seen with human eyeballs too.

Nor was I denying evolution, I just deny it as an excuse for ignorant doublespeak Cannabinoid ranting.

Ignorant doublespeak cannabinoid ranting?

Not sure what that is suppose mean, so please do elaborate.

Must have been word salad. Been salad? I dunno...