Green Coffee Bean

Page 3 of 15 First 12345 ... Last

  1. Quote Originally Posted by Whacked View Post
    Geo: If that's you in the avatar, I'm gonna mind my P's and Q's for my own safety. If not, I'm about to own ur azz. LOL (j/k!)
    That's definitely not me, it's from the upcoming Batman movie (I figure people are allowed to be geeks on one things and I'm a Batman geek).

    Also I don't wear masks


  2. Quote Originally Posted by Geoforce View Post
    That's definitely not me, it's from the upcoming Batman movie (I figure people are allowed to be geeks on one things and I'm a Batman geek).

    Also I don't wear masks
    Marvel > DC


    PESCIENCE.COM

    "The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance." - Socrates
    •   
       


  3. Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Arnold View Post
    scientific theories are supported by evidence. There are many theories for the origin of the universe and the nature of the universe. None are wholly accepted but they are supported by tons of sophisticated evidence

    religion is not a theory because it does not rely upon empirical evidence. it relies on blind belief in a bunch of contradictory and non-sensical ancient ramblings. To try to put the bible on the same playing ground as sciences such as cosmology and quantum physics is ludicrous

    Sorry, dont mean to sound mean
    One of my favorite quotes from a professor at my university is the following: "Yes, evolution is a theory, just like gravity."

  4. Quote Originally Posted by JudoJosh View Post
    Marvel > DC


    That's a bit of an understatement MARVEL>​dc
    E-PHARM Nutrition Representative
    Better one ugly truth than a million pretty lies
    Check Out Ur-Spray and D-Serine at Prototype Nutrition




  5. Got it. So, the burden of proof just as easily falls on the Atheists to prove theor claims through scientific fact that spontaneous activity of spontaneous previously non-existing matter erupted from nowhere for some unknown reason with zero proof and evolved into something


    Quote Originally Posted by JudoJosh View Post
    The burden always lies on those who are making the claims.
    A-Minds HYPE-SLAYER! All posts & feedback are guaranteed to be unsolicited and legit
    "The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge. Fools despise wisdom & instruction"
    Proverbs 1:7

  6. Quote Originally Posted by JudoJosh View Post
    Marvel > DC


    Don't disagree, but keep this in mind:

    Batman>than all other superheros.

    Non negotiable.

  7. As far as trying to explain faith to an Atheist, this is what I tell my Atheist buds....

    I can't and never will be able to prove that Chocolate is delicious.

    Once you try it though, you will understand.

    For me, it is a FACT that chocolate is yummy; despite this lacking "scientific" fact.

    Where's my proof? In my heart and soul. I get happy and all my problems go away when I am eating chocolate.

    Can a scientist prove chocolate is delish? Nope.

    Does that mean it's not? Nope

    Is chocolate for everyone? Nope. But for the vast majority of us, it's pure undeniable bliss.

    Sounds ridiculously elementary (and it is), but it keeps it simple and seems to help them understand and we always get a good laugh out of the pathetic analogy.

    I thought I'd add a little levity to this thread since these threads never ever end well.

    PS: Geo: What's with the mask? LMAO
    A-Minds HYPE-SLAYER! All posts & feedback are guaranteed to be unsolicited and legit
    "The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge. Fools despise wisdom & instruction"
    Proverbs 1:7

  8. Malt does more than Milton can to justify God's ways to man.

    --A. E. Houseman

  9. If the solar system was brought about by an accidental collision, then the appearance of organic life on this planet was also an accident, and the whole evolution of Man was an accident too. If so, then all our present thoughts are mere accidents - the accidental by-product of the movement of atoms.

    And this holds for the thoughts of the materialists and astronomers as well as for anyone else's. But if their thoughts - i.e., Materialism and Astronomy - are mere accidental by-products, why should we believe them to be true? I see no reason for believing that one accident should be able to give me a correct account of all the other accidents. It's like expecting the accidental shape taken by the splash when you upset a milk-jug should give you a correct account of how the jug was made and why it was upset. -CS Lewis


    Someone once said that if you sat a million monkeys at a million typewriters for a million years, one of them would eventually type out all of Hamlet by chance. But when we find the text of Hamlet, we don't wonder whether it came from chance and monkeys. Why then does the atheist use that incredibly improbable explanation for the universe? Clearly, because it is his only chance of remaining an atheist. At this point we need a psychological explanation of the atheist rather than a logical explanation of the universe. -Peter Kreeft

    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Arnold View Post
    scientific theories are supported by evidence. There are many theories for the origin of the universe and the nature of the universe. None are wholly accepted but they are supported by tons of sophisticated evidence

    religion is not a theory because it does not rely upon empirical evidence. it relies on blind belief in a bunch of contradictory and non-sensical ancient ramblings. To try to put the bible on the same playing ground as sciences such as cosmology and quantum physics is ludicrous
    A-Minds HYPE-SLAYER! All posts & feedback are guaranteed to be unsolicited and legit
    "The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge. Fools despise wisdom & instruction"
    Proverbs 1:7

  10. Wow this is new to me.
    •   
       


  11. I do not feel obliged to believe that same God who endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect had intended for us to forgo their use. -Galileo
    The atheist can't find God for the same reason that a thief can't find a policeman. -Unknown

    Humanism or atheism is a wonderful philosophy of life as long as you are big, strong, and between the ages of eighteen and thirty-five. But watch out if you are in a lifeboat and there are others who are younger, bigger, or smarter. -William Murray





    Quote Originally Posted by bigdavid View Post
    One of my favorite quotes from a professor at my university is the following: "Yes, evolution is a theory, just like gravity."
    Quote Originally Posted by sidoious View Post
    Malt does more than Milton can to justify God's ways to man.

    --A. E. Houseman
    A-Minds HYPE-SLAYER! All posts & feedback are guaranteed to be unsolicited and legit
    "The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge. Fools despise wisdom & instruction"
    Proverbs 1:7

  12. Quote Originally Posted by Whacked View Post
    Got it. So, the burden of proof just as easily falls on the Atheists to prove theor claims through scientific fact that spontaneous activity of spontaneous previously non-existing matter erupted from nowhere for some unknown reason with zero proof and evolved into something
    Nope

    Saying that god doesnt exist is a response to the claim being made that he does. The claim is being made by the religious ones. The statement by atheist is a response to said claim hence why the burden of proof falls on the religious ones as they are the ones making the claim of his existence

    As far as creation vs evolution or creation vs big bang. As Pat already pointed out earlier, there is evidence in favor of both of these. These claims are not made out of thin air, but you are right, if one claims the universe started with a big bang then they have the burden of proof, but again there is evidence out there for this to be a possibility (but that discussion is beyond the scope of this thread and quite frankly my understanding) Is it an indisputable fact? No as there really arent any "facts" in science, only theories. But this is why science is great as it is forever growing, evolving, changing and being challenged. It revolves around the hunger to have a better understanding of things. Rarely are things ever accepted which results in there always being someone testing someone else's theory/work where religion remains stagnate. You accept whatever is presented to you via some book or religious leader and dont question it and will just believe it. Your problem is your comparing theory to blind faith when the two are not the same. Science is based on theories and evidence where as religion is based purely on blind faith. You really cant compare the two and thats why these science vs religion threads are usually pointless to get involved with.

    NOTE: I am not taking sides and by any means am not discrediting your faith or belittling your beliefs. This is not my intention. Also, I will not not participate any further into this religion v science discussion. I have learned a long time ago it is a pointless venture. I typically stay out of any thread that is about religion or politics. was only commenting on your post saying they had the burden to prove god doesnt exist. You cant prove a negative so it falls on the religious ones to prove his existence.
    PESCIENCE.COM

    "The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance." - Socrates

  13. So...did God make green coffee beans?

  14. Quote Originally Posted by JudoJosh View Post
    Nope

    Saying that god doesnt exist is a response to the claim being made that he does. The claim is being made by the religious ones. The statement by atheist is a response to said claim hence why the burden of proof falls on the religious ones as they are the ones making the claim of his existence

    As far as creation vs evolution or creation vs big bang. As Pat already pointed out earlier, there is evidence in favor of both of these. These claims are not made out of thin air, but you are right, if one claims the universe started with a big bang then they have the burden of proof, but again there is evidence out there for this to be a possibility (but that discussion is beyond the scope of this thread and quite frankly my understanding) Is it an indisputable fact? No as there really arent any "facts" in science, only theories. But this is why science is great as it is forever growing, evolving, changing and being challenged. It revolves around the hunger to have a better understanding of things. Rarely are things ever accepted which results in there always being someone testing someone else's theory/work where religion remains stagnate. You accept whatever is presented to you via some book or religious leader and dont question it and will just believe it. Your problem is your comparing theory to blind faith when the two are not the same. Science is based on theories and evidence where as religion is based purely on blind faith. You really cant compare the two and thats why these science vs religion threads are usually pointless to get involved with.

    NOTE: I am not taking sides and by any means am not discrediting your faith or belittling your beliefs. This is not my intention. Also, I will not not participate any further into this religion v science discussion. I have learned a long time ago it is a pointless venture. I typically stay out of any thread that is about religion or politics. was only commenting on your post saying they had the burden to prove god doesnt exist. You cant prove a negative so it falls on the religious ones to prove his existence.
    This is a fallacy I often see in these religious type debates. Those who believe in a higher power want you to prove one doesn't exist instead of proving one does exist. As you said earlier you can't prove a negative.

  15. Quote Originally Posted by sidoious View Post
    So...did God make green coffee beans?
    I think that's what we're working on

    Though I don't know that the quotes really strengthen your argument really Whacked you can find just as many quotes about atheism from brilliant minds. I mean this is the big problem of philosophy and has been for a long time. A lot of people have said smart stuff on both sides.

    "The deepest sin against the human mind is to believe things without evidence. Science is simply common sense at its best -- that is, rigidly accurate in observation, and merciless to fallacy in logic."

    Thomas Henry Huxley.

  16. Quote Originally Posted by Geoforce View Post
    I think that's what we're working on

    Though I don't know that the quotes really strengthen your argument really Whacked you can find just as many quotes about atheism from brilliant minds. I mean this is the big problem of philosophy and has been for a long time. A lot of people have said smart stuff on both sides.

    "The deepest sin against the human mind is to believe things without evidence. Science is simply common sense at its best -- that is, rigidly accurate in observation, and merciless to fallacy in logic."

    Thomas Henry Huxley.
    I think the trouble with this particular philosophical debate is that people start slinging rocks and calling names. The bottom line is none of us will truly know until we know. Until then we should just try to get along. I will have to say that this thread(though no longer about green coffee bean extract lol) seems to have for the most part retained its civility. That is a good thing.
    E-PHARM Nutrition Representative
    Better one ugly truth than a million pretty lies
    Check Out Ur-Spray and D-Serine at Prototype Nutrition




  17. lmao @ a theist getting offended (by a sarcastic tongue-in-cheek comment) enough to derail an informative thread into a pompous justification for his religion. I guess this thread is dead now, good while it lasted.

  18. Oh and one more thing...can you imagine that the rest of the world would ever dream a bunch of muscle heads would be sitting around the computer locked in a philosophical debate? I think not!
    E-PHARM Nutrition Representative
    Better one ugly truth than a million pretty lies
    Check Out Ur-Spray and D-Serine at Prototype Nutrition




  19. Quote Originally Posted by truthornothin View Post
    Oh and one more thing...can you imagine that the rest of the world would ever dream a bunch of muscle heads would be sitting around the computer locked in a philosophical debate? I think not!
    I can guarantee you I've been flexing calves and biceps the whole time I've posted in this thread

  20. Quote Originally Posted by Geoforce View Post
    I can guarantee you I've been flexing calves and biceps the whole time I've posted in this thread
    That goes without saying lol, my super gripper and forearm exerciser are never at rest lol and just when you thought this thread was derailed beyond all salvation check this out, not only is green coffee bean extract touted as a fatloss agent it appear that unlike its roasted brethren(coffee beans in hell lol) is antihypertensive check this out
    Hypertens Res.
    2004 Oct;27(10):731-7.
    Green coffee bean extract improves human vasoreactivity.

    Ochiai R, Jokura H, Suzuki A, Tokimitsu I, Ohishi M, Komai N, Rakugi H, Ogihara T.
    Source

    Biological Science Laboratories, Kao Corp, Tochigi, Japan. [email protected]

    Abstract

    Our previous study revealed the antihypertensive effects of green coffee bean extract (GCE) ingestion in spontaneously hypertensive rats. We suggested that this antihypertensive action was due to the fact that GCE contains chlorogenic acid (CQA) as a major phenolic compound, and CQA in turn contains ferulic acid as a metabolic component that acts on nitric oxide (NO) derived from the vascular endothelium. In this study, the effects of GCE on blood vessels were evaluated in healthy males. The subjects were 20 healthy males with reduced vasodilation responses measured by strain gauge plethysmograms (SPG) to ischemic reactive hyperemia. Of the 20 subjects, 10 (mean age, 37.2 years) ingested a test drink containing GCE (CQA: 140 mg/day), and the other 10 (mean age, 34.8 years) ingested a placebo drink for 4 months. During the ingestion period, SPG, pulse wave velocity (PWV), and serum biochemical parameters were measured, and acceleration plethysmograms (APG) were taken. The reactive hyperemia ratio (RHR) in the test drink group began to increase after ingestion for 1 month and was significantly higher (p <0.05) than that in the placebo group after ingestion for 3 months and 4 months. In addition, after ingestion for 4 months, the test drink group showed a significant decrease (p <0.01) in the plasma total homocysteine level compared with the pre-ingestion level. However, there were no significant differences in PWV or APG between the test drink group and the placebo drink group. The improvement in RHR after ingestion of a drink containing GCE suggested an improvement in vasoreactivity by this component.

    PMID: 15785008 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] Free full text


    Publication Types, MeSH Terms, Substances


    LinkOut - more resources
    E-PHARM Nutrition Representative
    Better one ugly truth than a million pretty lies
    Check Out Ur-Spray and D-Serine at Prototype Nutrition




  21. also see here, for the pub med study regarding chlorogenic acid found in green coffee beans and its effect on fat loss and glucose metabolism

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3267522/
    E-PHARM Nutrition Representative
    Better one ugly truth than a million pretty lies
    Check Out Ur-Spray and D-Serine at Prototype Nutrition




  22. I will post a pubmed abstract showing god doesn't exist. Pubmed knows all

  23. Quote Originally Posted by mr.cooper69 View Post
    I will post a pubmed abstract showing god doesn't exist. Pubmed knows all
    You just had to keep it stirred up
    Display Settings:


    Format
    • Summary
    • Summary (text)
    • Abstract
    • Abstract (text)
    • MEDLINE
    • XML
    • PMID List

    Apply
    Send to:

    Choose Destination
    • File
    • Clipboard
    • Collections
    • E-mail
    • Order
    • My Bibliography
    • Citation manager


    • FormatSummary (text)Abstract (text)MEDLINEXMLPMID ListCSV

    Create File

    • 1 selected item: 10547166
    • FormatSummarySummary (text)AbstractAbstract (text)MEDLINEXMLPMID ListMeSH and Other Data
    • E-mail
    • Subject
    • Additional text

    E-mail "SPAM" filtering software notice

    Add to Clipboard
    Add to Collections
    Order articles
    Add to My Bibliography
    Generate a file for use with external citation management software.
    Create File









    Arch Intern Med. 1999 Oct 25;159(19):2273-8.
    A randomized, controlled trial of the effects of remote, intercessory prayer on outcomes in patients admitted to the coronary care unit.

    Harris WS, Gowda M, Kolb JW, Strychacz CP, Vacek JL, Jones PG, Forker A, O'Keefe JH, McCallister BD.
    Source

    Mid America Heart Institute, Saint Luke's Hospital, Kansas City, MO, USA.

    Erratum in

    • Arch Intern Med 2000 Jun 26;160(12):1878.


    Abstract

    CONTEXT:

    Intercessory prayer (praying for others) has been a common response to sickness for millennia, but it has received little scientific attention. The positive findings of a previous controlled trial of intercessory prayer have yet to be replicated.
    OBJECTIVE:

    To determine whether remote, intercessory prayer for hospitalized, cardiac patients will reduce overall adverse events and length of stay.
    DESIGN:

    Randomized, controlled, double-blind, prospective, parallel-group trial.
    SETTING:

    Private, university-associated hospital.
    PATIENTS:

    Nine hundred ninety consecutive patients who were newly admitted to the coronary care unit (CCU).
    INTERVENTION:

    At the time of admission, patients were randomized to receive remote, intercessory prayer (prayer group) or not (usual care group). The first names of patients in the prayer group were given to a team of outside intercessors who prayed for them daily for 4 weeks. Patients were unaware that they were being prayed for, and the intercessors did not know and never met the patients.
    MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:

    The medical course from CCU admission to hospital discharge was summarized in a CCU course score derived from blinded, retrospective chart review.
    RESULTS:

    Compared with the usual care group (n = 524), the prayer group (n = 466) had lower mean +/- SEM weighted (6.35 +/- 0.26 vs 7.13 +/- 0.27; P=.04) and unweighted (2.7 +/- 0.1 vs 3.0 +/- 0.1; P=.04) CCU course scores. Lengths of CCU and hospital stays were not different.
    CONCLUSIONS:

    Remote, intercessory prayer was associated with lower CCU course scores. This result suggests that prayer may be an effective adjunct to standard medical care.

    Comment in



    PMID: 10547166 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE
    E-PHARM Nutrition Representative
    Better one ugly truth than a million pretty lies
    Check Out Ur-Spray and D-Serine at Prototype Nutrition




  24. Quote Originally Posted by Whacked View Post
    Pat, don't get weak on me now, your dry ball-breaking hilarious sarcasm married with hardcore, black and white, genuine say it like it is attitude is why I respect you. A rare thing for me on this board as many sell out so easily. Now apologize for being trying to be respectful. It's so unbecoming of you!



    Back OT please............

    that statement wasnt for u. it was just in case there was a god and a jesus. dont want them pissed at me
    Anabolicminds.com Featured Author

  25. Quote Originally Posted by Whacked View Post
    Geo: If that's you in the avatar, I'm gonna mind my P's and Q's for my own safety. If not, I'm about to own ur azz. LOL (j/k!)

    On a serious note, I can appreciate yours and the perspective Pat just relayed as well. It's the convicted Atheists adamant that there is no God that get to me. Like, how can you be so sure, where is the proof? Many of these cats aren't like the Pat Arnold's of the world so science is NOT what they are even hanging their hats on! It's more like a misplaced, pure disdain for the very thought a "GOD". Let me explain...

    Look, I've met many of these types and the vast majority base their views on supercharged anger and/or having a run of bad luck/life occurrences and they need a scapegoat. They are bitter and vengeful. By denouncing God, they feel they are getting even or something LOL
    .
    they are like those vegan types that condemn meat as being deadly and believe that non-organic grown foods are evil.
    Anabolicminds.com Featured Author

  26. Quote Originally Posted by JudoJosh View Post
    You cant prove a negative.

    Asking someone to prove that god doesnt exist is like asking someone to prove that spiderman isnt the love child of sonic the hedgehog and one of the power puff girls.

    The burden of proof doesnt fall on the atheists but on the religious ones making the existence of god claims. The burden always lies on those who are making the claims. Problem is there is no proof. It all is about having blind faith, which is why you cant really have a debate about his existence or not. Its either or believe or dont.
    but atheists say god doesnt exist definitively. that is a claim. its different than saying there is no evidence for the existence of a god
    Anabolicminds.com Featured Author

  27. Quote Originally Posted by truthornothin View Post
    I am very scientifically minded but I look at it this way, when science creates life I'll lend the atheists my ear, until then... I am a doubting Thomas(my middle name) I want proof either way. right now in my opinion you cannot disprove an intelligent design in the universe. I am in good company here are a few quotes from a well respected man of science Albert EinsteinAlbert Einstein
    "
    i dont have a problem with this opinion. I more or less share it. But its a long way from believing in a certain religion as the explanation.

    oh, and now you have to contemplate who designed the intelligent designer. It seems that at one point in time everything had to arise out of nothing with no one behind it. Or, time and space has realities which we are unable to grasp with our little minds
    Anabolicminds.com Featured Author

  28. Not sure who you are referring to as I have yet to see ONE disrespectful comment casted by anyone anywhere. This thread has remained as respectful and civil the entire time and amongst good dudes that all get along outside of our religious differences.

    FWIW: It's posts like yours that stir the pot.

    Be well.

    Quote Originally Posted by Younglifter16 View Post
    lmao @ a theist getting offended (by a sarcastic tongue-in-cheek comment) enough to derail an informative thread into a pompous justification for his religion. I guess this thread is dead now, good while it lasted.
    A-Minds HYPE-SLAYER! All posts & feedback are guaranteed to be unsolicited and legit
    "The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge. Fools despise wisdom & instruction"
    Proverbs 1:7

  29. Quote Originally Posted by Whacked View Post
    As far as trying to explain faith to an Atheist, this is what I tell my Atheist buds....

    I can't and never will be able to prove that Chocolate is delicious.

    Once you try it though, you will understand.

    For me, it is a FACT that chocolate is yummy; despite this lacking "scientific" fact.

    Where's my proof? In my heart and soul. I get happy and all my problems go away when I am eating chocolate.

    Can a scientist prove chocolate is delish? Nope.

    Does that mean it's not? Nope

    Is chocolate for everyone? Nope. But for the vast majority of us, it's pure undeniable bliss.

    Sounds ridiculously elementary (and it is), but it keeps it simple and seems to help them understand and we always get a good laugh out of the pathetic analogy.

    I thought I'd add a little levity to this thread since these threads never ever end well.

    PS: Geo: What's with the mask? LMAO

    the good taste of chocolate can be pretty adequately explained by biology and the influence of natural selection on what we find tasty and not tasty. god didnt grant us the ability to like the taste of certain foods, they were acquired over eons
    Anabolicminds.com Featured Author

  30. LMAO................. dear LORD!

    Touche


    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Arnold View Post
    the good taste of chocolate can be pretty adequately explained by biology and the influence of natural selection on what we find tasty and not tasty. god didnt grant us the ability to like the taste of certain foods, they were acquired over eons
    A-Minds HYPE-SLAYER! All posts & feedback are guaranteed to be unsolicited and legit
    "The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge. Fools despise wisdom & instruction"
    Proverbs 1:7
  

  
 

Similar Forum Threads

  1. Green cofee bean extract
    By Deccadick in forum Supplements
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 09-19-2007, 12:24 PM
  2. Green Tea, Black Coffee
    By yeahright in forum Nutrition / Health
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 09-26-2006, 12:02 PM
  3. White bean dip
    By yeahright in forum Recipes
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-17-2006, 02:33 AM
Log in
Log in