Will God help Madeline McCann?

[1066gull]

I'm not completely heartless, no parent deserves to have their child taken from them.

Agreed, but there is an awful lot of responsibility the must take.

 

[Bozza]

I'm not completely heartless

You're aware that, with respect to this particular conversation point, you appear very much to be completely heartless?

 

[Rusthall Seagull]

Science is in itself a form of faith. By definition, science cannot reveal everything, Godel proved this years ago with the incompleteness theorum. Indeed, science and religion are not incomatible. They both model our intellectual incapacity to understand our place in the universe and explain it in terms that humans understand. Both have been missused (e.g. climate change), both are open to question and both are certainly incorrect (in a cosmic sense).

I think that is what I spent 2 hours trying to say!!!

 

[Starry]

You're aware that, with respect to this particular conversation point, you appear very much to be completely heartless?

How does me saying they made a bad decision to leave three babies alone make me heartless? That's a fact. Leaving three babies alone is a bad thing. No one can or will convince me otherwise. If believing that three children aged 3 and under need adult supervision at all times makes me heartless then I'm heartless and staying that way.

 

[readingstockport]

Science is in itself a form of faith. By definition, science cannot reveal everything, Godel proved this years ago with the incompleteness theorum. Indeed, science and religion are not incomatible. They both model our intellectual incapacity to understand our place in the universe and explain it in terms that humans understand. Both have been missused (e.g. climate change), both are open to question and both are certainly incorrect (in a cosmic sense).

This is where I disagree. Science is not a form of faith, the fact that a situation has arisen/been created where what is said is taken as an article of faith does not make science in itself a form of faith. The fact there are repeatable measurements and experiments within science move it away from being faith based. Religion is unlike that in that there are no repeatable measuarable experiments possible within it's framework, ergo it is faith.

Religion may well be true, I don't believe so myself, but if it is then any god that treats both humans as his personal playthings by creating the tree of knowledge and animals as vassals for humans to use and abuse as they deem fit is not worthy of worshiping. For the majority of 'his' creation life is a short, shitty, vicious struggle for survival. Very caring of him to have created that framwork.

 

[Cheeky Monkey]

They screwed up and made one of the very worst parenting decisions they could have.

100% correct. What they did is undefendable and no rational person could disagree. The layout of the resort etc. is a complete irrelevance, the only thing of relevance is their utter stupidity in making the choice they did. Being wise after the event doesn't even come into it.

 

[Bozza]

How does me saying they made a bad decision to leave three babies alone make me heartless? That's a fact. Leaving three babies alone is a bad thing. No one can or will convince me otherwise. If believing that three children aged 3 and under need adult supervision at all times makes me heartless then I'm heartless and staying that way.

OK.

 

[Cheeky Monkey]

How long before the McCann's release a book 'Madeline - Our Story' and the scramble to make the TV adaptation begins?

 

[Nibble]

How long before the McCann's release a book 'Madeline - Our Story' and the scramble to make the TV adaptation begins?

16 days

 

[Dick Knights Mumm]

100% correct. What they did is undefendable and no rational person could disagree. The layout of the resort etc. is a complete irrelevance, the only thing of relevance is their utter stupidity in making the choice they did. Being wise after the event doesn't even come into it.

And let him who is without sin cast the first stone.

 

[readingstockport]

I've tried to be relatively civil in this thread but that post from dick knights mum has pissed me off I'm afraid.

Bloody religious people are all to keen to throw the first sodding stone at we atheists and anyone else they don't agree with like homosexuals, women who chose/need to have an abortion and the like and the roman catholics are the sodding worst so I'm afraid f*** em quite frankly.

 

[Lokki 7]

And let him who is without sin cast the first stone.

So you admit that they have sinned?

 

[Billy the Fish]

A good representation of the distance they were from the kids in the sun today
http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2007250393,00.html
It wasn't 200m up the road as someone said yesterday

 

[Lady Bracknell]

Agreed that no parent deserves to have a child abducted. But equally, no child deserves that fate either and all the while we sling blame at the parents, the plight of the child seems to be ignored.

However, I'm really not sure how useful it is to turn the hunt for Madelaine into a Princess Diane style circus where we are all expected to bare our own suffering souls.

I also wonder whether this massive European publicity tour might be counterproductive. Because if she has been abducted to be kept or "sold on" to adoptive parents, she'll now be so well known that it might drive the abductor(s) to dispose of her.

 

[readingstockport]

A good representation of the distance they were from the kids in the sun today
http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2007250393,00.html
It wasn't 200m up the road as someone said yesterday

And doesn't she look utterly distraught in that picture?

 

[Cheeky Monkey]

And let him who is without sin cast the first stone.

My daughter is ten and at no point during her upbringing has she ever been placed in the situation MM was placed in. I find it utterly unacceptable that anyone would seek to defend them in any way at all, what they did was self indulgent, nothing more. I'm sorry but in my parenting book you just do not do what they did and I think the consequences of their actions prove me right.

 

[Billy the Fish]

Bloody religious people are all to keen to throw the first sodding stone at we atheists and anyone else they don't agree with like homosexuals, women who chose/need to have an abortion and the like and the roman catholics are the sodding worst so I'm afraid f*** em quite frankly.

Wrong, Muslims are the worst.

And doesn't she look utterly distraught in that picture?

What's that got to do with anything?

 

[aftershavedave]

My daughter is ten and at no point during her upbringing has she ever been placed in the situation MM was placed in. I find it utterly unacceptable that anyone would seek to defend them in any way at all, what they did was self indulgent, nothing more. I'm sorry but in my parenting book you just do not do what they did and I think the consequences of their actions prove me right.

i'm happy to agree 100% with mr monkey. self-indulgence at its worst.

 

[chip]

This is where I disagree. Science is not a form of faith, the fact that a situation has arisen/been created where what is said is taken as an article of faith does not make science in itself a form of faith. The fact there are repeatable measurements and experiments within science move it away from being faith based. Religion is unlike that in that there are no repeatable measuarable experiments possible within it's framework, ergo it is faith.

The fact that accepted scientific principles (within the limits of our comprehension) have been proved to be incorrect implies that it is faith based. All science is an approximation to the actual - again implying faith. I think that you have overestimated how much science can explain or predict and there you are straying into the realm of God - that force that explains all we cannot understand. We cannot explain the processes whereby milk diffuses into warm tea, how accurate do you think the hypothesis explaining the formation of the universe are?

I don't care whether it is science or God or whatever. I just hope that this poor child is found safe and unharmed.

 

[Buzzer]

The point is that in science, under a given set of parameters, you can prove something to be the case.

So given any three-sided shape (where it's a triangle, a zoolank, whatever), the sum of it's internal angles (measured in whatever you chose to measure it in) will equal the same number of measurement units that can be seen on one side of a straight line.

We can perform tests to check that this is true. We can ask other people to perform tests, and they will all come up with the same result.

Religion is based upon belief. We could test whether God exists, and ask other people to test for us. Clearly it is difficult to test; let us take simply asking someone whether they believe in God as a test of his existance. If you ask many people to do this 'test', you will get different results from different people. There is not, and cannot be, a consensus.

I've got a feeling that is completely incoherent but I can't be bothered to go back through and read it so I hope it makes some vague sense...

this is what Wittgenstein was saying. You can't have UNIVERSAL truths, only truths that are true within one's own boundaries of knowledge, definition and language.