The one and only Masahiro Tanaka posting and bidding thread

[Dr. Dinger]

No.

 

This seems like a matter of semantics. I'm not necessarily talking about a white guy with a beard sitting in the clouds. The Big Bang would qualify as a higher power, seeing as it created our universe. A higher power doesn't have to be omniscient or sentient, does it?

[kcjaysfan]

This seems like a matter of semantics. I'm not necessarily talking about a white guy with a beard sitting in the clouds. The Big Bang would qualify as a higher power, seeing as it created our universe. A higher power doesn't have to be omniscient or sentient, does it?

 

I think in this situation semantics are important for clarity. Higher power has, as far as I'm aware, always implied a sentient entity.

 

And saying that the Big Bang is what created our Universe is a misnomer. This is where the semantics are quite important, because some define the Big Bang as the initial state of the Universe, where all matter was condensed into a point, whereas I've also seen some describe it as including when all the matter came into existence. However, saying that it includes the time when matter came into existence does not make it a creator, or a higher power. It's simply an event.

 

Even if you define higher power simply as an event/entity that creates something, then every single entity is a creator, assuming that the object can interact, and through that interaction leave a byproduct. In so defining, you eventually work your way up in scale to having the Big Bang being a creator. But then you must ask the question of how did it come about. Since we can't answer that, one possibility is to assume that something caused/created it, but that just begs the question ad nauseam and has no scientific merit.

 

By saying that the Universe was created by someone or something, your "higher power" only introduces a meaningless philosophical question that has absolutely no place in the scientific method.

[GD]

smart people words

 

I've always wondered this and I'm young so I have no idea about any of this. I'm Jewish with no strong beliefs, I just like the values of my religion but the beliefs seem a little off to me. I'm undecided on a deity or afterlife because I really don't have the time or energy to think about that s***. I've always wondered about the big bang, though: how did the matter that condensed get "there," wherever there is? Or, "when matter came into existence," as you said; how did it come into existence? What are the theories behind that? It's always just seemed so spectacularly beyond me, creating something out of nothing.

 

These are genuine questions and you're a smart mofo which is why I ask. These aren't meant to start fights or anything lol.

[Abomination]

I've always wondered about the big bang, though: how did the matter that condensed get "there," wherever there is? Or, "when matter came into existence," as you said; how did it come into existence? What are the theories behind that? It's always just seemed so spectacularly beyond me, creating something out of nothing.

 

I think I tried to answer that earlier in the thread, but I'm not 100% sure I got it right.

[connorp]

I've always wondered this and I'm young so I have no idea about any of this. I'm Jewish with no strong beliefs, I just like the values of my religion but the beliefs seem a little off to me. I'm undecided on a deity or afterlife because I really don't have the time or energy to think about that s***. I've always wondered about the big bang, though: how did the matter that condensed get "there," wherever there is? Or, "when matter came into existence," as you said; how did it come into existence? What are the theories behind that? It's always just seemed so spectacularly beyond me, creating something out of nothing.

 

These are genuine questions and you're a smart mofo which is why I ask. These aren't meant to start fights or anything lol.

 

He answered that question. There's no answer... to me, atheists are no different than religious nuts.

 

RN say "theres a god cause i say so"

..and athiests say" theres no god cause i say so"

 

..it really boils down to that.

[connorp]

I think I tried to answer that earlier in the thread, but I'm not 100% sure I got it

right.

 

Yeah but you still didnt explain an origin in that theory. You gave a Point A and maybe where it went from there..

 

But not how you got to point A

[jays4life19]

So. Um. Yeah...Off topic much?

 

How about that guy Tanaka? Heard he's alright.

[Abomination]

Yeah but you still didnt explain an origin in that theory. You gave a Point A and maybe where it went from there..

 

But not how you got to point A

 

It is the origin, the constructs creating it are outside the structure of our universe (I think).

 

Anyhow, back to topic

[GD]

I think I tried to answer that earlier in the thread, but I'm not 100% sure I got it right.

 

Did you? Where? The forum must've skipped unread posts again.

[LunchBox]

So. Um. Yeah...Off topic much?

 

How about that guy Tanaka? Heard he's alright.

 

It's BTS' fault for saying David Robertson is a top-five reliever, to which someone responded "Jesus is a top-five deity", which I assumed was simply a reference to Ang's brother or something. Next thing you know, this thread needs to be renamed "Masahiro Tanaka and the Origins of the Universe".

[SAAviour]

I agree with renaming the thread as lunchbox suggests.

I also read verducci's article about tanakas innings and it worries me, unless the yanks sign him then it pleases me.

[kcjaysfan]

I've always wondered this and I'm young so I have no idea about any of this. I'm Jewish with no strong beliefs, I just like the values of my religion but the beliefs seem a little off to me. I'm undecided on a deity or afterlife because I really don't have the time or energy to think about that s***. I've always wondered about the big bang, though: how did the matter that condensed get "there," wherever there is? Or, "when matter came into existence," as you said; how did it come into existence? What are the theories behind that? It's always just seemed so spectacularly beyond me, creating something out of nothing.

 

These are genuine questions and you're a smart mofo which is why I ask. These aren't meant to start fights or anything lol.

 

I'm not terribly well-versed on string theory, so I can't really speak intelligently on how it suggests a formation of matter. I do know, that in quantum physics, it's acceptable for virtual particle-antiparticle pairs to be created from vacuum fluctuations which would allow for the formation of matter in “empty” space. I'm not a cosmogonist, so this is also quite a bit beyond my area of expertise.

 

 

He answered that question. There's no answer... to me, atheists are no different than religious nuts.

 

RN say "theres a god cause i say so"

..and athiests say" theres no god cause i say so"

 

..it really boils down to that.

 

I consider myself an agnostic. I don't hold the belief that there is no god; I simply hold no belief at all. There is no way to scientifically explore the existence of a higher power, so I see no reason to contemplate its existence, or lack thereof. The majority of atheists and agnostics (as this term is often used interchangeably) hold a fairly similar viewpoint. There are some that do take it a step further, saying that there is no god, but to suggest that their reasoning is “cause I say so” is patently disingenuous.

[connorp]

Not exactly. The burden of proof lies with the people who say they possess knowledge about a god. The for/against sides aren't equiprobable. If I tell you that unicorns exist you shouldn't feel compelled to tell me that the existence of unicorns is equally as probable as me being incorrect about the exitsence of unicorns . Absent any proof on my end you're very much entitled to call me crazy. All the more so if I start trying to get tax breaks and effect changes in policy based on my belief in unicorns.

 

Not a good analogy with the unicorns. There are many well educated archaeologists/historians and such that support some evidence from biblical times for instamce. Nothing concrete obviously but circumstantial..unlike a unicorn theory Just because some stories are obviously greatly exagerrated doesnt mean there cant be some truth.

[connorp]

Yeah i know atheist and agnostic can be used interchangeably but to me its a big diff. I can respect a highky skeptical scientific agnostic..just dont like when people make leap to: "there is no aupetnatural being"..

 

I consider myself an open-minded agnostic

[connorp]

I agree with renaming the thread as lunchbox suggests.

I also read verducci's article about tanakas innings and it worries me, unless the yanks sign him then it pleases me.

 

I would hate if Yanks sign him. They have zero to lose and everything to gain.

[kcjaysfan]

Next thing you know, this thread needs to be renamed "Masahiro Tanaka and the Origins of the Universe".

 

If the Jays sign him, someone needs to make that a sign to bring to his first home appearance.

 

Yeah i know atheist and agnostic can be used interchangeably but to me its a big diff. I can respect a highky skeptical scientific agnostic..just dont like when people make leap to: "there is no aupetnatural being"..

 

I consider myself an open-minded agnostic

 

I agree that there is a difference between agnostic and atheist, and I'm not a fan of someone definitively saying there is no supernatural being. I do think it's legitimate to say "it's quite unlikely that there is a god, so I will choose to believe that it does not exist." As BTS said, the burden of proof should lie on those that claim the existence, not the other way around.

[Chappy]

He answered that question. There's no answer... to me, atheists are no different than religious nuts.

 

RN say "theres a god cause i say so"

..and athiests say" theres no god cause i say so"

 

..it really boils down to that.

 

One type of nut causes war, the other just talks s***.

[Randy The Robot]

Very few people would actually say that.

 

Lol wut. Pretty sure every rational person in the world would say that.

[kcjaysfan]

Lol wut. Pretty sure every rational person in the world would say that.

 

A rational line of inquiry would not lead one to that definitive of a statement.

[Anemic0ffense]

One type of nut causes war, the other just talks s***.

 

I really hate this argument that atheists use. Some of the worlds most bloodthirsty human beings were atheist (Mao, Stalin, Lenin, etc...)

 

"Religion is the opiate of the masses" - Karl Marx "The Communist Manifesto"

[Caper]

and The one and only Masahiro Tanaka posting and bidding thread goes completely to s***.

[Caper]

I really hate this argument that atheists use. Some of the worlds most bloodthirsty human beings were atheist (Mao, Stalin, Lenin, etc...)

 

"Religion is the opiate of the masses" - Karl Marx "The Communist Manifesto"

 

Yip. If religion vanished from the world tomorrow, wars wouldn't miss a beat.

[EdelweissBouquet]

Religion is often used as a reason for going to war,

but it is rarely the purpose.

[connorp]

and The one and only Masahiro Tanaka posting and bidding thread goes completely to s***.

 

Meh. Not really. I mean there were prob 200 good comments on the matter that covered all the bases..so then when the original topic dies out, the attention can get changed to conversational filler. Think its healthy for the board. Gives people to chime in and get to know anoter a bit. Ruined threads are where idea never get discussed.

 

..and the filler will die down and when theres breaking new on issue it will get posted.

[LunchBox]

Apparently the MLB is somehow going to prevent Tanaka from donating funds to Rakuten for "stadium improvements".

 

By what means they believe themselves capable of interceding is entirely questionable. Once Tanaka signs, he's free to do what he pleases with those earnings, no?

 

None of this makes any sense, unless Rakuten leveraged Tanaka saying they wouldn't post him this year unless he kicks back a portion of his salary and the MLB is stepping in to prevent the player being coerced.

 

The only way I can see the MLB having any power in this scenario is if Tanaka is seeking their aid.

[connorp]

I have mentioned im agnostic but i think you guys are being unfair to paint all religious people as uneducated rubes that believe in something wheres theres not a shred of proof to hang on.

 

There many archaeolohists/historians with PhD's and the like that believe after looking at the real picture. Of course theres nothing concrete and it takes a leap of faith still..but stuff like Jesus existing has a lot of support. Also, the evidence tells us he was a prophet (like Muhammad, who also made this "claim" later on), divinity was only radically introduced in one book of the bible, contrary to everything before it.

 

One of the many things i can think of would be story or arc of covenant. Ethiopians have claimed for over 2,000 years that they have it. They never claimed it had powers like in movies. Its guarded outside (the place where its supposedly kept)..but inside one man has been charged with being the keeper and once entering and being ordained, he can never leave. So theyve at least been dedicated to the story.

 

Im just saying we're not talking about dragon and alien hunters (though i will say that aliens are logically existing somewhere due to odds that there are livable conditions elsewherd in such a vast space)

[jayswin11]

I hope Tanaka signs soon so the rest of the SP (Santana, Garza, Jimenez) fall into place.

[connorp]

Apparently the MLB is somehow going to prevent Tanaka from donating fundsto Rakuten for "stadium improvements".

 

By what means they believe themselves capable of interceding is entirely questionable. Once Tanaka signs, he's free to do what he pleases with those earnings, no?

 

None of this makes any sense, unless Rakuten leveraged Tanaka saying they wouldn't post him this year unless he kicks back a portion of his salary and the MLB is stepping in to prevent the player being coerced.

 

The only way I can see the MLB having any power in this scenario is if Tanaka is seeking their aid.

 

Yeah that would mean Japan team shadingly circumventing the agreement. It should be heavily scritinized

[connorp]

Your story, about the mystical arc, always searched for, but never found ... supposedly in existence and so well guarded by a group of people who can't even figure out how to feed themselves, that they can leave the rest of the world pondering its existence over millenia. And only one man stands between this mythical object and the rest of the world, when much of this world would give anything to find and/or possess this object ... reads like a really bad Indiana Jones sequel. On par with dragon and alien hunters.

 

Meh..who knows if its the real arc..but honestly you think youre very intelligent but its actually the opposite. Your logic is very simple and uninformed. You dont have any education in the matter to have an informed opinion. You just "know" because youre really smart..*eye roll*

 

Have you ever been to the Middle East? Or do you just regurgitate what you've been spoon fed to believe. Im quite sure its the latter. I myself have been in the region a few times now. Man, if i believed what all Americans are led to believe about Canadians growing up..i would be an uniformed knub too

 

Yes, the countries can be terribly corrupt but you dont understand the culture and their respect for their ancestory. Why wouldnt any reasonable minded person sell if for $500m dollars,right?Then whole tribes could live well for the rest of their lives.

 

Or why wouldnt people just bum rush the place guns a blazing and take out all the guards..and then what, escape in the endless miles of open desert somehow with the country's supposed treasure?.. And then fence it somehow?..rather people know its not magical like an Indiana Jones' movie. Its just an artificact and not going to have special powers to take over world.

 

The head of the whole country in terms of religion isnt even allowed in. Its a sacred tradition that is respected and upheld even if they dont know its only a replica. Without a doubt they believe.

 

Try taking your pompous head out of your ass and educate yourself before giving definitive opinions.

Edited December 28, 2013 by connorp

[LunchBox]

Jim Bowden offered Dan Haren as the best possible Tanaka comp. For what it's worth, between his age 25-31 seasons Dan Haren was the sixth best pitcher in baseball posting 32.6 WAR, which totally blew my mind.

 

EDIT: another fun fact from that time period, Mark Buehrle has 22 WAR in 224 GS while Kershaw has 21.9 WAR in 149 GS.