What's going on in Maynooth Seminary?

[omaghjoe]

But saying as we are on the subject of the universe and evidence....can you tell me what the evidence is of the universe?

All the proven scientific laws. They can be tested and provide identical results. They offer predictions which can be tested to be true or not. If not, those laws are discarded.

We can see it, hear it (radiation from the Big Bang), feel it (temperature), touch it (heavy elements on earth didn't come from the earth) and smell it.

We can even travel a fraction into it and look back at our place in it.

So whats the evidence of it, how is the evidence verified

Can you see anything of the Universe?

Yes, how do you see? how is it generated?

Certain cells in the retina can detect and interpret light. I believe this is some form of chemical reaction. These reactions are sent to the brains as (some sort of) electrical impulses which the brain then interprets.

Thats more or less the scientific understanding of it...now can you tell me how we experience that? how do we actually see something? Where is all of that projected onto so we experience it as "sight"?

[omaghjoe]

Actually Muppet instead of this going down the usual route which after following the logic for a while usually ends with you throing the head up and telling me that Im talking nonsense in a similar fashion to Gallsmans contribution.

Instead maybe you could tell us what your outlook is? You seem inspired to disprove and rubbish other people's outlooks so you must be very sure of your own outlook on life, perhaps you could you indulge us?

This is precisely what religion is to me. I couldn't have phrased it better myself. Thankfully I live in a time where I can say it. This is probably the first or maybe second generation even in Ireland where you can dare to criticise the Church.

So i presume thats a no then?

Why would I? I feel no desire to convert you to anything or any personal ideology I might have. I am curious and like to read about the world. History fascinates me but so does science. If history teaches me anything, it is that ideology is almost always eventually shown to be wrong and innocent people die because of it.

So my outlook is my own.

Well shouldnt you apply the same rigorous examination of your own outlook before any other? I mean what if your wrong?

[muppet]

But saying as we are on the subject of the universe and evidence....can you tell me what the evidence is of the universe?

All the proven scientific laws. They can be tested and provide identical results. They offer predictions which can be tested to be true or not. If not, those laws are discarded.

We can see it, hear it (radiation from the Big Bang), feel it (temperature), touch it (heavy elements on earth didn't come from the earth) and smell it.

We can even travel a fraction into it and look back at our place in it.

So whats the evidence of it, how is the evidence verified

Can you see anything of the Universe?

Yes, how do you see? how is it generated?

Certain cells in the retina can detect and interpret light. I believe this is some form of chemical reaction. These reactions are sent to the brains as (some sort of) electrical impulses which the brain then interprets.

Thats more or less the scientific understanding of it...now can you tell me how we experience that? how do we actually see something? Where is all of that projected onto so we experience it as "sight"?

In the visual cortex. That is where the electrical signals are interpreted and an image created. We learn to interpret these over time as we grow.

If you have a point, it would be nice to get to it. 

[omaghjoe]

NO sight is not experienced in the visual cortex, its just like the rest of the brain, it is a serious of neurons being fired. And neurons maybe part of the cause of sight but sight certainly is not experienced by within them.

[muppet]

Actually Muppet instead of this going down the usual route which after following the logic for a while usually ends with you throing the head up and telling me that Im talking nonsense in a similar fashion to Gallsmans contribution.

Instead maybe you could tell us what your outlook is? You seem inspired to disprove and rubbish other people's outlooks so you must be very sure of your own outlook on life, perhaps you could you indulge us?

This is precisely what religion is to me. I couldn't have phrased it better myself. Thankfully I live in a time where I can say it. This is probably the first or maybe second generation even in Ireland where you can dare to criticise the Church.

So i presume thats a no then?

Why would I? I feel no desire to convert you to anything or any personal ideology I might have. I am curious and like to read about the world. History fascinates me but so does science. If history teaches me anything, it is that ideology is almost always eventually shown to be wrong and innocent people die because of it.

So my outlook is my own.

Well shouldnt you apply the same rigorous examination of your own outlook before any other? I mean what if your wrong?

My own outlook is as a result of my own research. I could have went along with what I was told at mass, which I attended daily (not by choice) from about aged 12 to age 18. But it doesn't add up for me. The 'doctrine' has been wrong too many times and the Church is all about protecting its own position. The Donation of Constantine - a fraud to benefit the Archbishop of Rome, the arrest of Galileo - an insult to whoever gave us a brain - God included. Celibacy of Priests - purely to protect the wealth of the early Church.

The is no connection between that dogmatic behaviour and what was preached by Jesus, as far as I can see.

If I am wrong I just blame God for making me this way. 

[muppet]

NO sight is not experienced in the visual cortex, its just like the rest of the brain, it is a serious of neurons being fired. And neurons maybe part of the cause of sight but sight certainly is not experienced by within them.

This is where I stop.

Have it out with wikipedia: The perception of objects and the totality of the visual scene is accomplished by the visual association cortex. The visual association cortex combines all sensory information perceived by the striate cortex which contains thousands of modules that are part of modular neural networks.

Fight with the scientific world, DNA experts, empirical evidence or whoever you want, but I have seen you do this too often.

Bye.

[omaghjoe]

Actually Muppet instead of this going down the usual route which after following the logic for a while usually ends with you throing the head up and telling me that Im talking nonsense in a similar fashion to Gallsmans contribution.

Instead maybe you could tell us what your outlook is? You seem inspired to disprove and rubbish other people's outlooks so you must be very sure of your own outlook on life, perhaps you could you indulge us?

This is precisely what religion is to me. I couldn't have phrased it better myself. Thankfully I live in a time where I can say it. This is probably the first or maybe second generation even in Ireland where you can dare to criticise the Church.

So i presume thats a no then?

Why would I? I feel no desire to convert you to anything or any personal ideology I might have. I am curious and like to read about the world. History fascinates me but so does science. If history teaches me anything, it is that ideology is almost always eventually shown to be wrong and innocent people die because of it.

So my outlook is my own.

Well shouldnt you apply the same rigorous examination of your own outlook before any other? I mean what if your wrong?

My own outlook is as a result of my own research. I could have went along with what I was told at mass, which I attended daily (not by choice) from about aged 12 to age 18. But it doesn't add up for me. The 'doctrine' has been wrong too many times and the Church is all about protecting its own position. The Donation of Constantine - a fraud to benefit the Archbishop of Rome, the arrest of Galileo - an insult to whoever gave us a brain - God included. Celibacy of Priests - purely to protect the wealth of the early Church.

The is no connection between that dogmatic behaviour and what was preached by Jesus, as far as I can see.

If I am wrong I just blame God for making me this way. 

So there is a possibility that your outlook is wrong? I guess it requires some faith then....?

But I'm quite sure your on the right path anyway, if it works for you (I mean that sincerely BTW).

[omaghjoe]

NO sight is not experienced in the visual cortex, its just like the rest of the brain, it is a serious of neurons being fired. And neurons maybe part of the cause of sight but sight certainly is not experienced by within them.

This is where I stop.

Have it out with wikipedia: The perception of objects and the totality of the visual scene is accomplished by the visual association cortex. The visual association cortex combines all sensory information perceived by the striate cortex which contains thousands of modules that are part of modular neural networks.

Fight with the scientific world, DNA experts, empirical evidence or whoever you want, but I have seen you do this too often.

Bye.

..and so the ad hominen begins. You know yourself that I am not a science denier, discussing the setting that science is set, is about understanding science not denying it.

Science like everything else has a basis and that basis is our sensory experience. But who is to say that our sensory experience gives us a correct picture of reality. Ironically Science even agrees that it is crappy and decided that particles zipping around is a much more "realistic" version of reality, but we dont see or experience any of this reality at all. So my point is since science bases itself of our sensory experience its a massive leap to accept this as fact esp when science is even telling us its bollocks

I could see why you would prehaps think that from that quote but I can assure there is no evidence that we have the experience of sight within the visual cortex. Google the hard problem of consciousness if you dont believe me. Has anyone ever looked inside the visual cortex and observed another persons visual experience. No of course they havent they have looked in and seen neural patterns which are as you say electrical/chemical activity. And neurologists say that neurons are the end of the road...all the energy is expended from nerves and neurons so there is nothing else there.....nothing material at least....this is where the immaterial of us comes in, unless you deny that we actually have an experience at all (many do BTW). But its pretty basic stuff, I mean is the actual experience of pain something material? Course not, sure if sensory experience was material that means we should be able to make a machine that could experience it, that's surely impossible.

Check it out Muppet its interesting stuff, I know you would like it. Although you'll find the deeper you go, you see that there are no certainties and that science, religion, existence, mathematics etc are all based on a series of premises and presumptions, at some point tho you have to accept that and move on. And always mindful that some idea or discovery could mean that the concept of any of them comes crashing down at anytime 

[Lar Naparka]

Yawn.These allegations are unsubstantiated but as I said before there is no place in ministry for those using dating websites and they should be automatically expelled if caught doing so.

Tony, I wonder if I got this straight...
According to you, it appears right and proper that a priest should be expelled (excommunicated?) if he visits a gay website. No sexual relations of any sort with another adult male would appear to be what you are saying here. Consensual sex is out of the question.
Yet you seem to have no such difficulty where non-consensual sex with minors is concerned. The church authorities can go to whatever lengths they deem necessary to cover up the operations of paedophile clerics.
Am I missing something here??

[T Fearon]

Yawn,I will say it once again.The mishandling of child abuse allegations by the Church,BBC,Governments of all hues etc was deplorable.The emphasis on protection of the institution was shameful not to mention stupid as these things were always likely to come to the fore at some stage and by the self admission of Bishops latterly they did not even begin to take account of much less understand the impact on victims.I have never condoned cover ups by anyone.I remain resolute in my conviction that in his role as a Junior Priest reporting allegations of child abuse to his superiors means that Sean Brady can Have a clear conscience though.He made no attempt to cover up or suppress any information.

There can be no place in the ministry,or indeed the Church for that matter for those who engage in sex outside marriage or in same sex relationships.This is contrary to Church teaching so why would anyone doing these things want to be a member of a Church when they do not adhere to the beliefs of that church?

[muppet]

Yawn,I will say it once again.The mishandling of child abuse allegations by the Church,BBC,Governments of all hues etc was deplorable.The emphasis on protection of the institution was shameful not to mention stupid as these things were always likely to come to the fore at some stage and by the self admission of Bishops latterly they did not even begin to take account of much less understand the impact on victims.I have never condoned cover ups by anyone.I remain resolute in my conviction that in his role as a Junior Priest reporting allegations of child abuse to his superiors means that Sean Brady can Have a clear conscience though.He made no attempt to cover up or suppress any information.

There can be no place in the ministry,or indeed the Church for that matter for those who engage in sex outside marriage or in same sex relationships.This is contrary to Church teaching so why would anyone doing these things want to be a member of a Church when they do not adhere to the beliefs of that church?

I agree. Members of the Church who deliberately and persistently bear false witness should come into this category as well. For example, insisting one was a mere notary to certain meetings, when in fact one was the instigator and investigator during at least one of those meetings. Then fighting in the courts to deny a victim his FOI rights for a decade, to conceal the above, doesn't really sound anything like what Jesus taught to me.

So Tony you are right, either the Church is allows a certain moral and conscientious flexibility or it doesn't. You of course want it both ways, like any good grinder. 

[T Fearon]

Investigating allegations,making mistakes does not put that person on a par with those perpetrating sinful actions.

[muppet]

Investigating allegations,making mistakes does not put that person on a par with those perpetrating sinful actions.

I am not saying it does.

However, pretending you weren't an investigator, when you were, and then desperately using the courts to hide that fact, not to mention getting child victims to illegally sign an oath of silence, is not 'have a clear conscience' territory though.

[T Fearon]

Covering up one's embarrassment for a mistake years after the event,underplaying one's role in that mistake and following the archaic rules of an institution, 40 years ago,does not constitute sin.Learning from the mistake and overseeing the implementation of the most robust child protection procedures in Western Europe constitutes full redemption.

[muppet]

Covering up one's embarrassment for a mistake years after the event,underplaying one's role in that mistake and following the archaic rules of an institution, 40 years ago,does not constitute sin.Learning from the mistake and overseeing the implementation of the most robust child protection procedures in Western Europe constitutes full redemption.

Over his career Church attendance rates have fallen from around 90% to 30% (and still falling). Vocations have all but disappeared.

As for overseeing 'robust child protection procedures', have you any idea how pathetic that sounds? Bolting the stable door, is somehow a fitting bookend for his career, along with bolting the stable boys' mouths.

When a Government was found to have erred once on Smyth, it fell. Even though An Taoiseach had never directly been involved with Smyth he resigned.

Reynolds had integrity.

If people like Brady had done anything worthwhile at all, we wouldn't even be having this conversation.