MMike's description of time not being constant and so on is not uncommon as a scientific concept (or at least the general gist of it), and this is why: Science attempts to describe natural phenomena without using "God" as a reason; either the chain of cause-and-effect needs to have begun with something that is not bound by the limits of cause-and-effect (What caused the Big-Bang; what caused that? What was the first cause? "God" is an easy answer there), or time as we assume it works is an illusion and isn't as simple as a cause-and-effect chain, but instead best related to a curve with an asymptote at 0 -- never having a starting point.
PHeMoX, I don't know what's unusual about Joozey being agnostic on the basis of neither side disproving the other. Most people I know who are 'uninterested' in the topic assume that God has been proven not to exist, and are atheists. Few people I know describe themselves as agnostic, and those who do have logical grounds for their position.
The irony in all this is that the concept of modern day Gods in the Christian or Islamic sense can not exist without ignorant worshippers that believe in organized and highly profitable religion. A shame really, especially if there's some truth in there, having to literally pay for it would have been the last thing a God would have demanded.
Unfortunately your argument about all religion being a system of control is as uneducated as ever. Like I've told you before, the picture of a highly profitable church is a very narrow view, with mostly Roman Catholicism in mind. The Roman Catholic church being representative of Christianity in general is a very typical view of the media and those who know
of Christianity but little
about it. But there's a reason there's a difference between "Protestant" and "Roman Catholic", and you'll find that many Protestant churches' only financial goals are to make ends meet, or to raise funds (or volunteering workers) for those in need around the world.
I have traveled around a fair bit, and only seen one Christian non-Catholic church that showed any indication that it was profitable: Hillsong.
The "official" scientific view (if their ever was one) would be at least agnostic, as nothing can be false for sure until it is disproven, and nothing can be described with 100% certainty as a law -- only theorized to likely hold true.
To bring the topic
back to where it's meant to be, the church of Google is a funny joke. It's interesting that people react so strongly to it on the site -- if the "Church of Google" is a threat to their beliefs then there's something wrong.
When amy started this thread I had a look at the different pages, and it is quite funny
Commandment #6 is the funniest imho, but thankfully Google is always gentle with its correction!
Jibb
