The World Ending?

[Trepvalkyrie]

As science likes to turn their head on the disasters such as Chernobyl?

Huh?

I think we've hit rock bottom now.

[KingCrab]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_disaster

[Desosus]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_disaster

Yeah, we know what chernobyl is... Care to elaborate on what you meant by mentioning it?

[KingCrab]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_disaster

Yeah, we know what chernobyl is... Care to elaborate on what you meant by mentioning it?

while ignoring the other more ummm genocidal parts.

Science is not without its genocides

Im out though. I don't feel like doing the research required to keep this going on. I've already started resorting to lower quality points. (As you saw from the last post)

[Desosus]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_disaster

Yeah, we know what chernobyl is... Care to elaborate on what you meant by mentioning it?

while ignoring the other more ummm genocidal parts.

Science is not without its genocides

Im out though. I don't feel like doing the research required to keep this going on. I've already started resorting to lower quality points. (As you saw from the last post)

Yeah, if that's the level we've descended to, I'm done here.

[KingCrab]

So, we've come to the agreement this discussion is ended?

Religion and Science both have pros and cons. Argument summarized?

[Lim-Dul]

I haven't been reading for the past few pages, only eating popcorn, but no, I can't agree that both religion and science have pros and cons in the way you want it to be, that is, they are "equal".

Religion has basically no upsides apart from giving people a warm and fuzzy feeling inside, a feeling of belonging and keeping the fear of death away. It was also useful in dark times since it did in fact advance culture but in the way that priests were the only educated people and they had to be to keep the masses in check.

Science itself as a concept has absolutely no downsides whatsoever, the misuse of its discoveries of course does. However, science is bereft of ideology in its pure form (even though it was used FOR ideologies) while ideology and indoctrination and self-delusion are the foundations of every religion.

I can't really think of a single recent (mark my words: recent - and by recent I mean since like the middle ages) example of where religion did the world as a whole ANY good.

[KingCrab]

Whole kinds of reasons past few pages. Mainly by Khan. Check em out.

[Cartoonman]

Duty Calls

"What do you want me to do? LEAVE? Then they'll keep being wrong!"

[cdferg]

I can't really think of a single recent (mark my words: recent - and by recent I mean since like the middle ages) example of where religion did the world as a whole ANY good.

The world as a whole? No. But you don't think the thousands of missionaries and hundreds of religious-based organizations that give aid to third world countries aren't doing a bit of good? Of course any person can do a good service or save lives of others, religious or not.

Is it even possible to do the world as a whole any good?

[cdferg]

The law of the Old Testament has served its purpose already. Jesus came and fulfilled that law, so why don't you try reading the New Testament as well as the Old?

Revelation 2:20-23

Mark 7:10

Oh, and Deso, if you're going to use a verse, try not to take it out of context. That's how most misconceptions are made: when people copy and paste a verse that, while standing alone, can mean something entirely different. If you'll notice, in Mark 7:10, Jesus is quoting Moses' words, from Exodus 21:17. No where in the verse does Jesus say "if you curse your parents, you'll be put to death".

[Desosus]

The law of the Old Testament has served its purpose already. Jesus came and fulfilled that law, so why don't you try reading the New Testament as well as the Old?

Revelation 2:20-23

Mark 7:10

Oh, and Deso, if you're going to use a verse, try not to take it out of context. That's how most misconceptions are made: when people copy and paste a verse that, while standing alone, can mean something entirely different. If you'll notice, in Mark 7:10, Jesus is quoting Moses' words, from Exodus 21:17. No where in the verse does Jesus say "if you curse your parents, you'll be put to death".

How about Revelation 2:20-23?

[Lim-Dul]

The world as a whole? No. But you don't think the thousands of missionaries and hundreds of religious-based organizations that give aid to third world countries aren't doing a bit of good? Of course any person can do a good service or save lives of others, religious or not.

Is it even possible to do the world as a whole any good? :skeptical:

You hit it on the nail - these people would be doing good no matter what, religion or not - unless it's one of those "I'll do you good if you accept my religion" kind of affairs in which case no, they aren't doing any good because it's not selfless.

[cdferg]

these people would be doing good no matter what, religion or not

Well we can't really say that either. Personally, I wouldn't've been the kind of person who would go on mission trips or serve at soup kitchens, but because Christ demonstrated his love for me, I now know that I must demonstrate my love for others.

"I'll do you good if you accept my religion"

It saddens me to know there are people who think like this.

How about Revelation 2:20-23?

Just like any book, you have to understand the setting, themes, tone, characters, etc. And for Revelations, this is also true. Revelations is a book written by John, and is a written prophesy about the "end times" or "rapture", given to John directly from God. It is (in my knowledge) the only part of the Bible that hasn't happened yet. In verses 20-23, the Son of God is asking the seven churches to repent of their sins. "I will make those who commit adultery with her [Jezebel] suffer intensely, unless they repent of their ways. I will strike her children dead." Jezebel is an idol, a false prophet, and has led people astray and on a path of wickedness. People have gone against God and worshiped things of the world, and in Revelations, the whole book is about the "judgement times", where God is just plain fed up. I'm not a Biblical analyzer, so don't take all I say to heart, but my guess on why God (Son of God) would strike down people in these verses is just because He's frustrated. He has given people the chance to change their ways, but they have refused.

Can I ask you something though? Did you just Google "inconsistencies of murder in the bible" or something? I do respect your argument, though. I, myself, am confused at why God does what he does, and why there are some inconsistencies. I'll never know all the answers, and neither will anyone else. Somethings make sense, and others don't. "God is God. He knows what he is doing. When you can't trace His hand, trust His heart".

[kattoo]

Just something I found on reddit earlier on today which I think sums up what my thoughts on Christianity are in general, plus - this guy is a bad-ass:

[KingCrab]

Just something I found on reddit earlier on today which I think sums up what my thoughts on Christianity are in general, plus - this guy is a bad-ass:

All I'm going to say is, I may be a Christian, but I won't force my ideas upon you. Unfortunately as that post proves, there are those people who decided they need to and stereotype religions in general. That is all

[cdferg]

there are those people who decided they need to and stereotype religions in general.

We don't use stereotypes! Not us! We're all above that!

[Desosus]

Just like any book, you have to understand the setting, themes, tone, characters, etc. And for Revelations, this is also true. Revelations is a book written by John, and is a written prophesy about the "end times" or "rapture", given to John directly from God. It is (in my knowledge) the only part of the Bible that hasn't happened yet. In verses 20-23, the Son of God is asking the seven churches to repent of their sins. "I will make those who commit adultery with her [Jezebel] suffer intensely, unless they repent of their ways. I will strike her children dead." Jezebel is an idol, a false prophet, and has led people astray and on a path of wickedness. People have gone against God and worshiped things of the world, and in Revelations, the whole book is about the "judgement times", where God is just plain fed up. I'm not a Biblical analyzer, so don't take all I say to heart, but my guess on why God (Son of God) would strike down people in these verses is just because He's frustrated. He has given people the chance to change their ways, but they have refused.

Can I ask you something though? Did you just Google "inconsistencies of murder in the bible" or something? I do respect your argument, though. I, myself, am confused at why God does what he does, and why there are some inconsistencies. I'll never know all the answers, and neither will anyone else. Somethings make sense, and others don't. "God is God. He knows what he is doing. When you can't trace His hand, trust His heart".

Yeah, I couldn't really care why he's condoning murder of innocent children. You can hem and haw about it all you like but that's what is says there.

And yes, I did google inconsistincies in the bible. I also googled murder in the bible. As you can see, there are plenty of examples people have found, and I found those in about 5 minutes flat. Imagine what a determined person could find on the internet. While the new testament may be an improvement in that it doesn't call for murder quite as much, I don't think anyone today would consider its entirety as a good moral guideline.

And sorry, but "he knows what he's doing" is a terrible copout. Why don't you go to Africa and see a child dying of thirst and hunger and say that to him?

If a god exists and it allows things like that to happen, I have no problem calling such a god an evil psychopath.

You can say what you want, I have better morals than your so called god. A 10 year old would have better morals than the god who calls for murder and genocide.

[boblol0909]

Just like any book, you have to understand the setting, themes, tone, characters, etc. And for Revelations, this is also true. Revelations is a book written by John, and is a written prophesy about the "end times" or "rapture", given to John directly from God. It is (in my knowledge) the only part of the Bible that hasn't happened yet. In verses 20-23, the Son of God is asking the seven churches to repent of their sins. "I will make those who commit adultery with her [Jezebel] suffer intensely, unless they repent of their ways. I will strike her children dead." Jezebel is an idol, a false prophet, and has led people astray and on a path of wickedness. People have gone against God and worshiped things of the world, and in Revelations, the whole book is about the "judgement times", where God is just plain fed up. I'm not a Biblical analyzer, so don't take all I say to heart, but my guess on why God (Son of God) would strike down people in these verses is just because He's frustrated. He has given people the chance to change their ways, but they have refused.

Can I ask you something though? Did you just Google "inconsistencies of murder in the bible" or something? I do respect your argument, though. I, myself, am confused at why God does what he does, and why there are some inconsistencies. I'll never know all the answers, and neither will anyone else. Somethings make sense, and others don't. "God is God. He knows what he is doing. When you can't trace His hand, trust His heart".

Yeah, I couldn't really care why he's condoning murder of innocent children. You can hem and haw about it all you like but that's what is says there.

And yes, I did google inconsistincies in the bible. I also googled murder in the bible. As you can see, there are plenty of examples people have found, and I found those in about 5 minutes flat. Imagine what a determined person could find on the internet. While the new testament may be an improvement in that it doesn't call for murder quite as much, I don't think anyone today would consider its entirety as a good moral guideline.

And sorry, but "he knows what he's doing" is a terrible copout. Why don't you go to Africa and see a child dying of thirst and hunger and say that to him?

If a god exists and it allows things like that to happen, I have no problem calling such a god an evil psychopath.

You can say what you want, I have better morals than your so called god. A 10 year old would have better morals than the god who calls for murder and genocide.

You forgot the part about keeping women silent

[Lim-Dul]

but because Christ demonstrated his love for me, I now know that I must demonstrate my love for others.

Uhm, how exactly did Christ "demonstrate" his love for you? ;-)

[KingCrab]

but because Christ demonstrated his love for me, I now know that I must demonstrate my love for others.

Uhm, how exactly did Christ "demonstrate" his love for you?

A quote my sister recently said was "Take nails through your hands and feet and wear a crown made of thorns, and then you can tell me how to live my life."

He died on the cross so we may be cleansed of sin. I frankly don't care of this crap of "where's your proof?!?!" Also, you may think me an idiot to believe so, but I believe Jesus died on the cross to save us from sin. If you don't believe it, oh well. I pray that maybe one day you will. No matter what scientific analogies that you make out of the lack of proof, I don't believe Ferg or I will be changing our beliefs.

And all I ask is before you say or do anything more, please watch this all they way through.



I have one final question:
What is our purpose for being on this planet?

God Bless

[boblol0909]

[youtube][/youtube]

He died on the cross so we may be cleansed of sin. I frankly don't care of this bullshit of "where's your proof?!?!"

I thought christians considered cussing a sin?

[kattoo]

King, please, go to this site, read it and tell me what you think of all the analogies. This is just the tip of the iceberg.

[Desosus]

Yeah, my god kattoo, didn't you know that christ died to absolve us of sin? More specifically, he died to save us from our sinful nature. Even more specifically than that, he died to save us from our sinful nature in which we were made by god. Even more specifically than that, he died to save us from our sinful nature in which we were made by god because some supposed ancient ancestor ate a piece of fruit from a tree that he wasn't supposed to eat from.

So in essence, god sacrificed his son (not really, since he was just going to resurrect him anyway), to save us from a sin that he gave us, because someone a long time ago disobeyed him.

Firstly, putting aside the notion that scientifically speaking, you can't get such a widely varied genome from 2 individuals of a species who can only reproduce sexually, don't you think it's a bit of a douchebaggy move to create sinful people and then blame them for sin?

As to your video kingcrab, all I can say is that that video is proof of nothing... Hell, forget proof, it's not even indicative of anything. It's not even mildly swaying. There's a very good reason that anecdotal evidence is never taken at face value.

http://www.snopes.com/religion/chalk.asp

[KingCrab]

I thought christians considered cussing a sin?[/quote]

Nice to be forgiven of your sin isn't it?

Like I said, nothing will change my mind.

The video was never meant to sway you or prove anything. It was showing you that it doesn't matter what you prove to me logically I still exist.

3 Questions Though
1. If there is no heaven or hell, in essence there is no consequences to anything we do on this earth. It's ok to murder someone because they are just going to die and fade from existence anyways. If someone is sad, they can kill themselves to end their misery because there is no existence after this. What do YOU believe happens to us after we die?

2. If you want science to prove something, then you would know that the universe is constantly expanding. This has been scientifically proven. If this is true, then in theory the universe didn't always exist. It had to be created by someone or something. This can be argued from both sides on what happened.

3. My question that was ignored the first time. What is our purpose on this earth?

Also, you say science will one day, given enough time, figure out everything. You also said that I have no proof to prove God exists. However, I'm going to go deeper and ask where is your scientific proof that God does NOT exist? I know most people ask atheists this, but it's true. Back in the old days, they couldn't see atoms, yet someone theorized they existed. Today, we can't see God, but religious people theorize and believe he is there. If science is to one day discover all, who is to say that science may not possibly discover a sentient being of sorts?

[Desosus]

The video was never meant to sway you or prove anything. It was showing you that it doesn't matter what you prove to me logically I still exist.

If that's what you got from that video, then you severely misinterpreted what it was trying to say. Either that or you're being disingenuous because the video was proven to be nothing more than a cute (false) story. I'll let you pick which one.

1. If there is no heaven or hell, in essence there is no consequences to anything we do on this earth. It's ok to murder someone because they are just going to die and fade from existence anyways. If someone is sad, they can kill themselves to end their misery because there is no existence after this. What do YOU believe happens to us after we die?

So you're saying that the only reason you don't go around murdering people is because you won't get into heaven? That seems rather immoral of you.

I think of myself as a moral person. The reason that I don't murder people is because it's an evil thing to do, not because I'm going to be punished for it if I do, which seems to be what religious people are saying when they use that argument.

Morality for morality sake seems more moral than morality for the sake of avoiding punishment doesn't it?

I don't believe anything "happens" after you die. The particular pattern of firing neurons in your brain will cease to exist and along with it, your consciousness. You will simply cease to be a conscious living person. Why does there need to be something that happens after you die? Is it just because your mind can't comprehend the concept of non-existence? More arguments from personal ignorance in that case.

2. If you want science to prove something, then you would know that the universe is constantly expanding. This has been scientifically proven. If this is true, then in theory the universe didn't always exist. It had to be created by someone or something. This can be argued from both sides on what happened.

More arguments from personal ignorance. "You don't know how X happens, therefore, god did it.". I suppose my theory that a pink unicorn with a leather fetish created the universe is equally as valid as whatever sky fairy you believe in seeing as there is exactly the same amount of evidence for each. If there is no evidence for an occurence of something, then all you can do is speculate. The human mind is incredibly feeble in that it craves explanation for things and if real explanations cannot be found, it will settle for crappy explanations.

You could MAYBE put forth the argument of an entity which exists outside of our spacetime as we know it. It could well exist. It could even be your god. But that last scenario is highly unlikely because there is no reason to believe in your god any more than there is to believe in any other.

In any case, I do not think that there is any such figure, merely on the basis that arguments from personal ignorance do not sway me in the slightest. For all I know, the entirety of the universe is a science experiment created by a hyper-intelligent species of aliens living in a space-time continuum outside our own. But there is no more reason to believe that than to believe in a god. There simply is no evidence.

3. My question that was ignored the first time. What is our purpose on this earth?

So you're saying that life cannot exist without purpose at all? Or are you trying to imply that without god, there is no purpose?

I can posit several different theories for our "purpose" that have no basis in religious thinking.
Helping our fellow man
Evolving as a species
Improving ourselves

From a strictly scientific perspective, our purpose is to ensure the continued survival of our species. Our bodies are merely mechanisms for our genes to propagate themselves. Since the rise of self replicating mechanisms came about, that has always been true and will continue to be true for quite some time. Do you believe evolution happens?

Also, you say science will one day, given enough time, figure out everything. You also said that I have no proof to prove God exists. However, I'm going to go deeper and ask where is your scientific proof that God does NOT exist? I know most people ask atheists this, but it's true. Back in the old days, they couldn't see atoms, yet someone theorized they existed. Today, we can't see God, but religious people theorize and believe he is there. If science is to one day discover all, who is to say that science may not possibly discover a sentient being of sorts?

Once again, I say science MAY one day figure out everything.

To answer your question, in science you can not "prove" anything. Not ever. All you can do is build up more information and more evidence to support a hypothesis. That only increases the likelihood that what we think is true. It can never prove it. In the case of a supernatural entity, there is no proof that it exists or doesn't exist.

But let me put it to you this way. If I were to claim that I was god, you would ask for proof wouldn't you? But If I claimed that I wasn't god, you would take that at face value. The reason for that is because it is the extraordinary claim that requires proof. A god is a most extraordinary claim, an omniscient and omnipotent being (which is a contradiction since it is impossible to be both omniscient and omnipotent at the same time, in addition to the concept of omnipotence being a flawed concept in and of itself, a la the classic example of "could god create a rock so heavy that he could not lift it? If he can't create it, then he's not omnipotent, if he can create it, he can't lift it so he's not omnipotent) and so required extraordinary evidence to back it up. No such evidence exists so I see no reason to believe it exists.

To put it to you more simply, if I claimed I owned an invisible car, you would ask that I prove it. If I simply responded and told you to believe that it exists unless you could prove that it didn't exist, you'd think I was a nutcase.

Scientists may one day discover that there is a supernatural entity that created the universe. There's nothing to say that they won't. But that hasn't happened yet. And I only believe in things that are supported by evidence.

[KingCrab]

Only time will tell.

[Desosus]

Only time will tell.

Any answers to any of my questions?

So you're saying that the only reason you don't go around murdering people is because you won't get into heaven?

Morality for morality sake seems more moral than morality for the sake of avoiding punishment doesn't it?

So you're saying that life cannot exist without purpose at all? Or are you trying to imply that without god, there is no purpose?

Do you believe evolution happens?

If I were to claim that I was god, you would ask for proof wouldn't you?

[KingCrab]

Any answers to any of my questions?

So you're saying that the only reason you don't go around murdering people is because you won't get into heaven?

Morality for morality sake seems more moral than morality for the sake of avoiding punishment doesn't it?

So you're saying that life cannot exist without purpose at all? Or are you trying to imply that without god, there is no purpose?

Do you believe evolution happens?

If I were to claim that I was god, you would ask for proof wouldn't you?

1.)
I don't murder people because it is immoral by human standards and by religious beliefs. You can do a thousand good deeds and still not get accepted into Heaven. It is the same thing as volunteering. You volunteer to help people, not because of the reward.

Also, why CAN'T there be more to us than just this life? Why does it HAVE to end when our neurons die? If we cease to exist after our life has ended, what's the point in life itself? It gives us no value. I did not imply that without religion there is no point in life. I'm not even sure how you came up with that conclusion. The purpose of life can be interpreted differently by everyone.

You said, "Helping our fellow man, improving ourselves." It's funny because that's basically what Christianity taught me. Help one another and further myself so I may become noble and righteous to help mankind and resist the temptations of evil. Evolving as a species is just a bonus that we as humans have accomplished and will continue to accomplish.

From a strictly scientific perspective, our purpose is to ensure the continued survival of our species.

Why strive to survive if we will eventually cease to exist anyways?
Why is suicide generally not accepted if they have every right to take their own lives and end their misery once and for all since they won't exist anymore?


As for evolution, I believe God created the basis of life. Adam and Eve were the first two humans. Were they the same as the humans we see today? Probably not. The artists just depicted it that way since that's what their perception of a human being was.

Scientists may one day discover that there is a supernatural entity that created the universe. There's nothing to say that they won't. But that hasn't happened yet. And I only believe in things that are supported by evidence.

That's fine to believe that. You every right and every basis to. No one can tell you different.

You could MAYBE put forth the argument of an entity which exists outside of our spacetime as we know it. It could well exist. It could even be your god. But that last scenario is highly unlikely because there is no reason to believe in your god any more than there is to believe in any other.

Highly unlikely, improbable, but not yet proved to be impossible.

If I were to claim that I was god, you would ask for proof wouldn't you?

Of course. That's a huge claim. But as said earlier, the proof of God may be highly unlikely or highly improbable as of today, but that doesn't mean that there one day may not be some. So you may in fact own an invisible car, but just because I can't see it, doesn't mean that it isn't there or there won't one day be proof of said invisible car.

As for the whole "your God" area. I believe in the one and only God. Different religions give Him different names. A quote I love is "You call me many names. I am many different things. I am God to you, a theory to some, and just a fairy tale to others." I believe in THE God. God is just the name my religion gives him.

[Desosus]

I don't murder people because it is immoral by human standards and by religious beliefs. You can do a thousand good deeds and still not get accepted into Heaven. It is the same thing as volunteering. You volunteer to help people, not because of the reward.

So without religion you wouldn't be murdering people. However the changing cultural acceptance of what is right and what is wrong is what prompted the change in attitudes towards such issues as murder and slavery etc. not the emergence of any one religion or any one religion's figurehead. So it's really nothing to say that you do it because of religious beliefs. You do it because it's right, religion merely modifies itself so that it doesn't get caught out in the cold when people realise that cultural acceptances are changing. Same thing that's happening with evolution and the treatment of the gay community. Both were items on the christian agenda that were treated with scorn and scepticism, with religious proponents trying to "cure" gay people. Then the cultural acceptance changed and now christian leaders have to backpedal and accept it. Religious institutions no longer hold the power that they used to which can only be a good thing.

Also, why CAN'T there be more to us than just this life? Why does it HAVE to end when our neurons die? If we cease to exist after our life has ended, what's the point in life itself? It gives us no value. I did not imply that without religion there is no point in life. I'm not even sure how you came up with that conclusion. The purpose of life can be interpreted differently by everyone.

There could well be, but as always when it comes to debating religion, there is never any proof that there is. The onus is once again on you to show the evidence as your side is the one that is making the extraordinary claims.

Your statement of "If we cease to exist after our life has ended, what's the point in life itself?" is a statement which to me is severely disturbing. If this is the only life we get, which is what I believe, then this life is the ONLY thing that matters. I'm not just hanging around trying to score brownie points with the big guy upstairs so that he doesn't burn me in eternal hellfire.

Are you saying that because I don't believe in god and that I'm not going onto an afterlife that my life has no meaning? Your statements are contradictory:

"If we cease to exist after our life has ended, what's the point in life itself? It gives us no value."
"I did not imply that without religion there is no point in life."

That's right, you didn't imply it, you stated it outright. Perhaps you could clarify exactly what you mean.

You said, "Helping our fellow man, improving ourselves." It's funny because that's basically what Christianity taught me. Help one another and further myself so I may become noble and righteous to help mankind and resist the temptations of evil. Evolving as a species is just a bonus that we as humans have accomplished and will continue to accomplish.

And yet I can do all that and I have never been part of any religion whatsoever, from the moment I was born. Religion does not hold a monopoly on morality, as evidenced by the numerous moral atheists you'll find out there in the world today.

So you too would have been moral and good without the influence of religion and while that's not really a point against religion per se, it definitely mitigates the extent to which people use it as a point in favour of religion.

Why strive to survive if we will eventually cease to exist anyways?
Why is suicide generally not accepted if they have every right to take their own lives and end their misery once and for all since they won't exist anymore?

Why do we strive to survive? Because it is a genetic imperative. Why is suicide not accepted? Because it is a genetic imperative to try and stay alive. You may not understand this, not being a geneticist, but we are NOTHING but a vessel for our genes. Everything we do and everything we are is a result of genes evolving, coevolving and interacting. That is all we are.

As for evolution, I believe God created the basis of life, whether that be monkeys, single-celled organisms, or whatever and we evolved from that.

And on what basis do you believe that? Is it just because it's the most convenient thing for you to believe given the overwhelming evidence for evolution? Are the days gone where christians actually believed that god made man out of dust? Is it just too socially uncomfortable to say that you believe that?

Of course. That's a huge claim. But as said earlier, the proof of God may be highly unlikely or highly improbable as of today, but that doesn't mean that there one day may not be some. So you may in fact own an invisible car, but just because I can't see it, doesn't mean that it isn't there or there won't one day be proof of said invisible car.

So what you're saying is that while it may be possible, that I am god, you would ask for proof before you believed it. So why is your religion so special in that you don't need proof to believe in it?

I tell my friend I own an invisible car. He believes me and takes me at my word for it. Do you think my friend is an idiot? Cos I sure do.