Upload
Login or register

usafperson

Last status update:
-
Date Signed Up:9/06/2011
Last Login:6/21/2015
FunnyJunk Career Stats
Content Thumbs: 39 total,  69 ,  30
Comment Thumbs: 2829 total,  3293 ,  464
Content Level Progress: 72.88% (43/59)
Level 0 Content: Untouched account → Level 1 Content: New Here
Comment Level Progress: 58% (58/100)
Level 223 Comments: Mind Blower → Level 224 Comments: Mind Blower
Subscribers:1
Content Views:25813
Times Content Favorited:1 times
Total Comments Made:364
FJ Points:2678

latest user's comments

#210 - Fair enough. Appreciate you clarifying. I understand where you… 06/18/2015 on Christian Science Facts 0
#202 - I know what it means literally, I want to know what you think … 06/18/2015 on Christian Science Facts 0
#200 - And oh my goodness did you even click on those links you sent? 06/18/2015 on Christian Science Facts 0
#199 - If you read more than the first sentence of my comment, then y…  [+] (2 new replies) 06/18/2015 on Christian Science Facts 0
User avatar
#201 - sideism (06/18/2015) [-]
it means they don't make up much of the modern scientific community, in fact very little
User avatar
#202 - usafperson (06/18/2015) [-]
I know what it means literally, I want to know what you think it means in the context of my comment and this content.
#197 - Yes I agree, that's exactly what I implied. 06/18/2015 on Christian Science Facts 0
#196 - Got any demographics so we know where we stand at the moment? …  [+] (5 new replies) 06/18/2015 on Christian Science Facts 0
User avatar
#200 - usafperson (06/18/2015) [-]
And oh my goodness did you even click on those links you sent?
#199 - usafperson (06/18/2015) [-]
If you read more than the first sentence of my comment, then you'll find that the hard questions come later.

You can't assume that this correlation means that Christians don't understand or use science.
User avatar
#201 - sideism (06/18/2015) [-]
it means they don't make up much of the modern scientific community, in fact very little
User avatar
#202 - usafperson (06/18/2015) [-]
I know what it means literally, I want to know what you think it means in the context of my comment and this content.
#194 - I, not unreasonably, assumed you'd seen it because it's a repl…  [+] (2 new replies) 06/18/2015 on Christian Science Facts -1
User avatar
#206 - djequalizee (06/18/2015) [-]
I'm not saying that. I was taking the content to mean that pure Christianity hasn't really contributed to science. If it's saying that Christians can't be scientists then i certainly disagree. Like i said, personal belief doesn't really affect science in my opinion. It becomes a problem when you start rejecting reality because of a religious ideal.

I'm not making fun of it, the content is. I guess i just read it differently than you
User avatar
#210 - usafperson (06/18/2015) [-]
Fair enough. Appreciate you clarifying. I understand where you're coming from now.
#190 - Read, regurgitate, repeat  [+] (9 new replies) 06/18/2015 on Christian Science Facts +1
#243 - ciacheczko (06/18/2015) [-]
Isn't it true tho? A scientist that happens to be christian still analyses facts - otherwise he wouldn't be a scientist. Your belief doesn't go in the way of your work, unless you allow it to. And they are good examples of that. They have their faith, but don't brainlessly yell that evolution doesn't exist. That's how it should be done.

However christianity itself is a religion, not a branch of science. You can't measure it, it has no weight, no mathematical rules apply to it. It rather works as a philosophy some chose to follow. The guy is right. And In my opinion people who thumbed him down in your screen were morons without basic skill of comprehensive reading. Or thinking at all.
User avatar
#292 - usafperson (06/19/2015) [-]
Refer to my the lower paragraphs in my comment #194 below. I agree with you in that sense, but I don't think that's what the content was implying, or else it really wouldn't be funny at all.
#195 - anon (06/18/2015) [-]
if 2 people say the same thing it must be wrong
User avatar
#197 - usafperson (06/18/2015) [-]
Yes I agree, that's exactly what I implied.
User avatar
#192 - djequalizee (06/18/2015) [-]
Also can i state that saying my argument is wrong because someone else said it makes no sense at all
User avatar
#191 - djequalizee (06/18/2015) [-]
Didn't see that, to be honest. But it's true. Just because a christian scientist came up with something doesn't mean it's christian science. The things you listed didn't come out of a bible.
User avatar
#194 - usafperson (06/18/2015) [-]
I, not unreasonably, assumed you'd seen it because it's a reply to one of the highest ranked comments and because you quoted it exactly. If you didn't that's fine.

As you might take from the screen cap, this just depends on how you define "Christian science." If you define Christian science strictly as science from the bible, which isn't a science book, then congratufuckinglations. No shit Sherlock, the bible isn't a science text book. Really just makes this content unfunny and irrelevant because nobody really expects it to be. The joke of the content is reasonably assumed to be that science and religion conflict, or that religious people don't like, ignore, or can't understand science. And in that case, it's completely and utterly wrong.

With the content in light of your definition of Christian science, it's the same as making fun of a car manual for not having algebra in it.
User avatar
#206 - djequalizee (06/18/2015) [-]
I'm not saying that. I was taking the content to mean that pure Christianity hasn't really contributed to science. If it's saying that Christians can't be scientists then i certainly disagree. Like i said, personal belief doesn't really affect science in my opinion. It becomes a problem when you start rejecting reality because of a religious ideal.

I'm not making fun of it, the content is. I guess i just read it differently than you
User avatar
#210 - usafperson (06/18/2015) [-]
Fair enough. Appreciate you clarifying. I understand where you're coming from now.
#184 - The big bang theory came from a Catholic Priest. The fathe…  [+] (39 new replies) 06/18/2015 on Christian Science Facts +2
User avatar
#249 - testaburger (06/18/2015) [-]
A christian scientist doing science does not make it christian science.
User avatar
#293 - usafperson (06/19/2015) [-]
Refer to my the lower paragraphs in my comment #194 below. I agree with you in that sense, but I don't think that's what the content was implying, or else it really wouldn't be funny at all.
User avatar
#238 - Gandalfthewhite (06/18/2015) [-]
christianity hasn't educated and discovered anything. The people just happened to be christian, their faith wasn't a contributing factor.
User avatar
#294 - usafperson (06/19/2015) [-]
The church is what organized and led much of it. The church wouldn't have done that if there were no church. Not saying it would have never happened at all if the church never existed, just that the church, existing and acting by faith, is what did it.
User avatar
#234 - Sewallman (06/18/2015) [-]
You're not only wrong, you're probably not even credible.

1st: WRONG

2nd: Galileo wasn't for the church, he constantly pointed out flaws with theology

3rd: Maybe

4th: As of 2009, 95% of the general public believe in a higher power of some kind, more than 50% of every scientists is not religious in the slightest. nearly 20% of scientists believe in some undefined divinity and around 40% believe in a christian/catholic god. Since historically around 80% of scientific achievements have been found within the past 100 years and going off of these statistics.. You're wrong there too.

Believe what you want though. This was supposed to just be harmless.

User avatar
#298 - usafperson (06/20/2015) [-]
"80% of scientific achievements have been found within the past 100 years and going off of these statistics."

Oh my.
User avatar
#299 - usafperson (06/20/2015) [-]
Your 80% statement aside, remember that mass education was basically a result of the church, and that most basic science, knowledge, and discoveries came from that.
User avatar
#300 - Sewallman (06/20/2015) [-]
You remember the dark ages, where Christianity was actually to blame for the deterioration of western Europe following the fall of the Roman Empire?

Also, the scientific method was conceived in Egypt, then adopted and tweaked elsewhere. I thought you meant something else, I guess.

Also, with your last statement.. Remember how Rome and Greece had some great schools that predated AD times, and remember how they tried making them as accessible as possible for the people from other city states.

You can fuck off now. Srsly. Nigger
User avatar
#302 - usafperson (06/21/2015) [-]
Dark ages Christianity thing is a myth. Look it up.

Modern scientific method. The thing you should have learned in like elementary school? Look it up.

Didn't say the church invented education or anything. Go back and read it again if you have to, and look it up.

You might notice a theme here. Do some research.

You can fuck off now. Sysly. What the fuck did you just fucking say about me, you little shit? Ill have you know I graduated top of my class in the Navy Seals, and Ive been involved in numerous secret raids on Al-Quaeda, and I have over 300 confirmed kills. I am trained in gorilla warfare and Im the top sniper in the entire US armed forces. You are nothing to me but just another target. I will wipe you the fuck out with precision the likes of which has never been seen before on this Earth, mark my fucking words. You think you can get away with saying that shit to me over the Internet? Think again, fucker. As we speak I am contacting my secret network of spies across the USA and your IP is being traced right now so you better prepare for the storm, maggot. The storm that wipes out the pathetic little thing you call your life. Youre fucking dead, kid. I can be anywhere, anytime, and I can kill you in over seven hundred ways, and thats just with my bare hands. Not only am I extensively trained in unarmed combat, but I have access to the entire arsenal of the United States Marine Corps and I will use it to its full extent to wipe your miserable ass off the face of the continent, you little shit. If only you could have known what unholy retribution your little clever comment was about to bring down upon you, maybe you would have held your fucking tongue. But you couldnt, you didnt, and now youre paying the price, you goddamn idiot. I will shit fury all over you and you will drown in it. Youre fucking dead, kiddo.
User avatar
#303 - Sewallman (06/21/2015) [-]
The Scientific Method has been around far longer than AD times Go look it up
If you add a scent to cat litter, it doesn't mean you invented cat litter.

You said that mass education was a result of the church Scroll up

I'll get to the rest later. It's father's day and my daughter is in the hospital.

User avatar
#304 - usafperson (06/21/2015) [-]
I said the modern scientific method. scroll up It's a significant advance and what we use today. look it up

Yes, I said that "mass education was basically a result of the church." look it up Similar to the modern scientific method, I'm not saying the church invented education or even mass education, but they successfully brought it about on a much larger level.
Or shit, wiki it. Fucks sake.
en.wikipedia.org/?title=History_of_education
en.wikipedia.org/?title=History_of_education#Formal_education_in_the_Middle_Ages_.28500.E2.80.931600_AD.29

I'm sorry about your daughter. Happy Fathers day. I hope she's okay.
User avatar
#301 - Sewallman (06/20/2015) [-]
Developed and tweaked elsewhere means perfected over a long period of time and by many people practicing the rudimentary fundamentals that Ancient Egypt had conceived.
User avatar
#295 - usafperson (06/19/2015) [-]
1.
www.google.com/search?q=founder+of+the+big+bang+theory&oq=founder+of+the+big+bang+theory&aqs=chrome..69i57.6031j0j1&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

2.
www.google.com/search?q=founder+of+the+big+bang+theory&oq=founder+of+the+big+bang+theory&aqs=chrome..69i57.6031j0j1&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#q=founder+of+the+modern+scientific+method
en.wikipedia.org/?title=Roger_Bacon

3. K

4. Irrelevant. If you wanna argue about why, we can.

People like you my friend are the type of people that can go on all day about how uneducated and stubborn and ignorant Christians are, and then you go and post stuff like this. Stop that.
User avatar
#279 - thesovereigngrave (06/18/2015) [-]
I' of the opinion that "Christian scientists don't mean it's Christian science" but the origins of the Big Bang theory lie with the "primeval atom" idea of Georges LemaƮtre, a Belgian priest.
#245 - anon (06/18/2015) [-]
usafperson is not going to believe you. Christians believe what they've been told to.
They don't give a damn hue about facts or 'knowledge'.

Also I like your style.
#297 - anon (06/20/2015) [-]
I find that most atheists also believe in what they've been told to.
User avatar
#296 - usafperson (06/19/2015) [-]
Why do you act like you know me? You don't know what I "give a damn" about. I'm very much a person of science and logic. None of this has yet contradicted my faith. And even for my religion, it is largely upheld by what I can logically determine. I only wish that I could believe more purely from faith. That's just always been hard for me.
User avatar
#231 - rakogoki (06/18/2015) [-]
i dont think the post is saying no christian has ever contributed to science, that would be ridiculous. sewallman probably meant "things christianity itself has contributed to science", like what good has the bible been in explaining how the universe works?
User avatar
#233 - Sewallman (06/18/2015) [-]
Nah man, it literally says "Christian Science Facts Comp"

and that's it.
User avatar
#221 - stilch (06/18/2015) [-]
Don't know about the rest, but the Big Bang Theory did not come from a catholic priest.
The priest you are referring to merely stated that everything was moving apart, therefor at one time must have been together. (Roughly saying that was when God created everything).
The modern Big Bang Theory is barely related to that one mans findings, as many people before made the same claim (most of which were burned at the stake for heresy against the church) and many more did after.
#252 - breadnsteak (06/18/2015) [-]
User avatar
#193 - sideism (06/18/2015) [-]
when they make up more than 10% of modern scientists
User avatar
#196 - usafperson (06/18/2015) [-]
Got any demographics so we know where we stand at the moment?
Also, why then? Why not 50%? Why does it matter what percent of professional scientists are Christian right now for this idea to make any sense?
User avatar
#200 - usafperson (06/18/2015) [-]
And oh my goodness did you even click on those links you sent?
#199 - usafperson (06/18/2015) [-]
If you read more than the first sentence of my comment, then you'll find that the hard questions come later.

You can't assume that this correlation means that Christians don't understand or use science.
User avatar
#201 - sideism (06/18/2015) [-]
it means they don't make up much of the modern scientific community, in fact very little
User avatar
#202 - usafperson (06/18/2015) [-]
I know what it means literally, I want to know what you think it means in the context of my comment and this content.
User avatar
#189 - djequalizee (06/18/2015) [-]
Christian science =/= Christian scientists
#190 - usafperson (06/18/2015) [-]
Read, regurgitate, repeat
#243 - ciacheczko (06/18/2015) [-]
Isn't it true tho? A scientist that happens to be christian still analyses facts - otherwise he wouldn't be a scientist. Your belief doesn't go in the way of your work, unless you allow it to. And they are good examples of that. They have their faith, but don't brainlessly yell that evolution doesn't exist. That's how it should be done.

However christianity itself is a religion, not a branch of science. You can't measure it, it has no weight, no mathematical rules apply to it. It rather works as a philosophy some chose to follow. The guy is right. And In my opinion people who thumbed him down in your screen were morons without basic skill of comprehensive reading. Or thinking at all.
User avatar
#292 - usafperson (06/19/2015) [-]
Refer to my the lower paragraphs in my comment #194 below. I agree with you in that sense, but I don't think that's what the content was implying, or else it really wouldn't be funny at all.
#195 - anon (06/18/2015) [-]
if 2 people say the same thing it must be wrong
User avatar
#197 - usafperson (06/18/2015) [-]
Yes I agree, that's exactly what I implied.
User avatar
#192 - djequalizee (06/18/2015) [-]
Also can i state that saying my argument is wrong because someone else said it makes no sense at all
User avatar
#191 - djequalizee (06/18/2015) [-]
Didn't see that, to be honest. But it's true. Just because a christian scientist came up with something doesn't mean it's christian science. The things you listed didn't come out of a bible.
User avatar
#194 - usafperson (06/18/2015) [-]
I, not unreasonably, assumed you'd seen it because it's a reply to one of the highest ranked comments and because you quoted it exactly. If you didn't that's fine.

As you might take from the screen cap, this just depends on how you define "Christian science." If you define Christian science strictly as science from the bible, which isn't a science book, then congratufuckinglations. No shit Sherlock, the bible isn't a science text book. Really just makes this content unfunny and irrelevant because nobody really expects it to be. The joke of the content is reasonably assumed to be that science and religion conflict, or that religious people don't like, ignore, or can't understand science. And in that case, it's completely and utterly wrong.

With the content in light of your definition of Christian science, it's the same as making fun of a car manual for not having algebra in it.
User avatar
#206 - djequalizee (06/18/2015) [-]
I'm not saying that. I was taking the content to mean that pure Christianity hasn't really contributed to science. If it's saying that Christians can't be scientists then i certainly disagree. Like i said, personal belief doesn't really affect science in my opinion. It becomes a problem when you start rejecting reality because of a religious ideal.

I'm not making fun of it, the content is. I guess i just read it differently than you
User avatar
#210 - usafperson (06/18/2015) [-]
Fair enough. Appreciate you clarifying. I understand where you're coming from now.
#60 - I really should have proof read before posting, sorry. *Go… 06/18/2015 on laughed 0