Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo

Religion cannot be proven by worldly sciences


  • Please log in to reply
2034 replies to this topic

#1831 Pineapples

Pineapples

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,720 posts
  • Joined: 15-June 10

Posted 21 October 2012 - 11:39 PM

I can't believe this discussion continues still.

Instead of bickering over what is the origin of life, or whatever it is now that's being discussed, why don't some of you learn to realize that we don't have the answer? There's not enough proof, and there never will be.

Instead of being stuck on what happened in the past, perhaps it's time to look to the future instead, and get on with life.
  • 0

Pineapple_jumps.gifPineapple_jumps.gif

 


#1832 Jägermeister

Jägermeister

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,593 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 12

Posted 21 October 2012 - 11:41 PM

This thread just died without Sharpshooter antagonizing people :lol:
  • 0
Posted Image

#1833 Common sense

Common sense

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,685 posts
  • Joined: 08-January 06

Posted 21 October 2012 - 11:57 PM

*
POPULAR

This thread just died without Sharpshooter antagonizing people :lol:


Which means actual debate can take place in an environment that is free of insults and one-liners.
  • 9

#1834 Jägermeister

Jägermeister

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,593 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 12

Posted 22 October 2012 - 12:56 AM

Which means actual debate can take place in an environment that is free of insults and one-liners.


Hallelujah!

I can't believe this discussion continues still.

Instead of bickering over what is the origin of life, or whatever it is now that's being discussed, why don't some of you learn to realize that we don't have the answer? There's not enough proof, and there never will be.

Instead of being stuck on what happened in the past, perhaps it's time to look to the future instead, and get on with life.


I think it's a good thing that people look for answers, but I agree with you 100% on the idea that none of us can know for sure.
People can have their own opinions, and have every right to try and justify them. But it is when they try to push their opinions (even if they are pheasible and show a good use of logic) as non-disputable facts when it can become an issue.

Edited by Jagermeister, 22 October 2012 - 01:07 AM.

  • 0
Posted Image

#1835 Tortorella's Rant

Tortorella's Rant

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,132 posts
  • Joined: 11-April 12

Posted 22 October 2012 - 01:08 AM

These discussions are revolving doors anyway. I've seen this one come back to something that was already discussed in the first place more than once. Not to mention epic wastes of time. People argue here and other forums like they're going to change the minds of others. That isn't going to happen. People are going to believe what they believe and won't change how they see things even if the truth came up and bit them on the ass. Accept it, go out and enjoy life.
  • 0
Posted Image

#1836 Kryten

Kryten

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,620 posts
  • Joined: 02-February 12

Posted 22 October 2012 - 11:57 AM

I can't believe this discussion continues still.

Instead of bickering over what is the origin of life, or whatever it is now that's being discussed, why don't some of you learn to realize that we don't have the answer? There's not enough proof, and there never will be.

Instead of being stuck on what happened in the past, perhaps it's time to look to the future instead, and get on with life.


So true. Why should anyone discuss such a simple subject? The answer is there is no answer. Look to the future by being apathetic. Makes perfect sense.
  • 1
Posted Image

#1837 Kryten

Kryten

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,620 posts
  • Joined: 02-February 12

Posted 22 October 2012 - 12:18 PM

These discussions are revolving doors anyway. I've seen this one come back to something that was already discussed in the first place more than once. Not to mention epic wastes of time. People argue here and other forums like they're going to change the minds of others. That isn't going to happen. People are going to believe what they believe and won't change how they see things even if the truth came up and bit them on the ass. Accept it, go out and enjoy life.


Does this mean you won't be posting in this thread anymore? :P

I kid, but I will admit this thread def has hit the skids since Sharp's banishment. Sometimes the discussions can get tedious for some (mostly Canadians) or extremely important for others (mostly Americans). Either way, the cure for a breakdown in discussion should always be a clip of Christopher Hitchens.


  • 0
Posted Image

#1838 WHL rocks

WHL rocks

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,615 posts
  • Joined: 09-May 10

Posted 22 October 2012 - 03:11 PM

Mobile
  • 0

#1839 Pineapples

Pineapples

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,720 posts
  • Joined: 15-June 10

Posted 22 October 2012 - 09:39 PM

Hallelujah!



I think it's a good thing that people look for answers, but I agree with you 100% on the idea that none of us can know for sure.
People can have their own opinions, and have every right to try and justify them. But it is when they try to push their opinions (even if they are pheasible and show a good use of logic) as non-disputable facts when it can become an issue.


Exactly. People present their ideas as fact, when they clearly are only ideas. People can believe whatever they want to believe. But to start arguments over it is pointless when there is no way of ever knowing the truth.
  • 0

Pineapple_jumps.gifPineapple_jumps.gif

 


#1840 JoeyJoeJoeJr. Shabadoo

JoeyJoeJoeJr. Shabadoo

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,574 posts
  • Joined: 02-September 09

Posted 22 October 2012 - 10:09 PM

When the cat's away....
  • 0
Posted Image

#1841 J.R.

J.R.

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,087 posts
  • Joined: 04-July 08

Posted 23 October 2012 - 09:56 AM

Exactly. People present their ideas as fact, when they clearly are only ideas. People can believe whatever they want to believe. But to start arguments over it is pointless when there is no way of ever knowing the truth.


Well no, a LOT of things can actually be answered by Science. "Is there a god" specifically, is not one of those things.

However, related subjects such as evolution, the origins of the universe/Big Bang etc can and do dispute vast swaths of the assorted holy books and the religions that believe in them and start to poke a lot of holes in religious *ahem* "theories" about the existence of god.

From there, it's a very minute leap of logic and common sense to determine on one's own that "god" (or gods) are nothing more than constructs of primitive peoples to help explain and define to them what were confusing events and due to a lack of scientific knowledge at the time, unexplainable. That framework was later then twisted and used by those in power to control the masses for political purposes. There is PLENTY of data and history to show all of that as well.

Now again, that last paragraph in no way "proves" there's no god(s) but it does certainly bring their existence in to serious question and should give most modern, intelligent humans at the very least, pause.

Edited by J.R., 23 October 2012 - 09:57 AM.

  • 2

"Science is like an inoculation against charlatans who would have you believe whatever it is they tell you."
- Neil deGrasse Tyson

jg4428.jpg2s9up7p.jpg


#1842 Pineapples

Pineapples

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,720 posts
  • Joined: 15-June 10

Posted 23 October 2012 - 01:00 PM

Well no, a LOT of things can actually be answered by Science. "Is there a god" specifically, is not one of those things.

However, related subjects such as evolution, the origins of the universe/Big Bang etc can and do dispute vast swaths of the assorted holy books and the religions that believe in them and start to poke a lot of holes in religious *ahem* "theories" about the existence of god.

From there, it's a very minute leap of logic and common sense to determine on one's own that "god" (or gods) are nothing more than constructs of primitive peoples to help explain and define to them what were confusing events and due to a lack of scientific knowledge at the time, unexplainable. That framework was later then twisted and used by those in power to control the masses for political purposes. There is PLENTY of data and history to show all of that as well.

Now again, that last paragraph in no way "proves" there's no god(s) but it does certainly bring their existence in to serious question and should give most modern, intelligent humans at the very least, pause.


Well of course science can prove many things, I'm not arguing against that.

Science does make many question their beliefs. There seems to be a lot more agnostics around now then there was a decade ago. I've had to think about my beliefs from time to time. But I always come back to: science brings no reason to life. And I don't think everything exists just for the sake of existing.

But nothing can be proven anyway. Like I've said before, God could have created the big bang; and there's no way we could find out. I like hearing people's beliefs. I just don't like it when people present them as fact.
  • 1

Pineapple_jumps.gifPineapple_jumps.gif

 


#1843 VICanucksfan5551

VICanucksfan5551

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,843 posts
  • Joined: 11-August 04

Posted 23 October 2012 - 01:08 PM

Well of course science can prove many things, I'm not arguing against that.

Science does make many question their beliefs. There seems to be a lot more agnostics around now then there was a decade ago. I've had to think about my beliefs from time to time. But I always come back to: science brings no reason to life. And I don't think everything exists just for the sake of existing.

But nothing can be proven anyway. Like I've said before, God could have created the big bang; and there's no way we could find out. I like hearing people's beliefs. I just don't like it when people present them as fact.

Why does there have to be an objective reason for existence?
  • 0
Posted Image
Posted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted Image

#1844 J.R.

J.R.

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,087 posts
  • Joined: 04-July 08

Posted 23 October 2012 - 02:12 PM

Why does there have to be an objective reason for existence?


Because it makes him sad to realize that in the grand scheme of the vast universe over billions and billions of years...that he truly is no more significant than an ant.

Edited by J.R., 23 October 2012 - 02:13 PM.

  • 0

"Science is like an inoculation against charlatans who would have you believe whatever it is they tell you."
- Neil deGrasse Tyson

jg4428.jpg2s9up7p.jpg


#1845 Nevlach

Nevlach

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,020 posts
  • Joined: 04-April 05

Posted 23 October 2012 - 03:49 PM

Or maybe to him it seems strange that a universe devoid of meaning and purpose could give rise to creatures who are so obsessed with finding meaning and having a purpose.

Edited by Nevlach, 23 October 2012 - 03:50 PM.

  • 1
Posted Image
Posted Image

#1846 SkeeterHansen

SkeeterHansen

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,138 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 11

Posted 23 October 2012 - 03:52 PM

Another religious joke..


One of the best examples of how ridiculous government paperwork can be is illustrated by a recent case in Louisiana. A company president was trying to buy some land in Louisiana for a plant expansion, and he wanted to finance this new facility with a government loan.

His lawyer filled out all the necessary forms, including the abstract---tracing the title to the land back to 1803. The government reviewed his application and abstract and sent the following reply:

'We received today your letter enclosing application for your client supported by abstract of title. We have observed, however, that you have not traced the title previous to 1803, and before final approval, it will be necessary that the title be traced previous to that year. Yours truly.'

As a result, the lawyer sent the following letter to the government:

'Gentlemen, your letter regarding title received. I note you wish title to be claimed back further than I have done it.

'I was unaware that any educated man failed to know that Louisiana was purchased by the United States from France in 1803. The title of the land was acquired by France by right of conquest of Spain. The land came into possession of Spain in 1492 by right of discovery by a Spanish-Portugese sailor named Christopher Columbus, who had been granted the privilege of seeking a new route to India by Queen Isabella.

'The good queen, being a pious woman and careful about title, took the precaution of securing the blessing of the Pope of Rome upon Columbus' voyage before she sold her jewels to help him.

'Now the Pope, as you know, is the emissary of Jesus Christ, who is the Son of God. And God made the world. Therefore, I believe it is safe to assume that He also made that part of the United States called Louisiana, and I now hope you're satisfied.'


I don't get it...

Edited by MaximYapierre, 23 October 2012 - 03:55 PM.

  • 0

/=S=/


#1847 Nevlach

Nevlach

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,020 posts
  • Joined: 04-April 05

Posted 23 October 2012 - 04:01 PM

I don't want to offend anyone but this is funny:

  • 1
Posted Image
Posted Image

#1848 Pineapples

Pineapples

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,720 posts
  • Joined: 15-June 10

Posted 23 October 2012 - 11:08 PM

Why does there have to be an objective reason for existence?

Because it makes him sad to realize that in the grand scheme of the vast universe over billions and billions of years...that he truly is no more significant than an ant.


I think it makes more sense that everything in the universe happened for a reason, instead of it just happening for the sake of happening.
  • 2

Pineapple_jumps.gifPineapple_jumps.gif

 


#1849 Mr. Ambien

Mr. Ambien

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,198 posts
  • Joined: 07-April 03

Posted 24 October 2012 - 12:04 AM

I can't believe this discussion continues still.

Instead of bickering over what is the origin of life, or whatever it is now that's being discussed, why don't some of you learn to realize that we don't have the answer? There's not enough proof, and there never will be.

Instead of being stuck on what happened in the past, perhaps it's time to look to the future instead, and get on with life.

The study of the past, for scientific reasons, helps understand the fundamental building blocks of life, and help us understand more about our planet, space, time, possible existence of other life forms, particles, and so on. It's one thing to be seeking out knowledge, to have answers, and look to better or correct them.

It's another to pre-emptively have an answer from the days of witch burning and animal sacrificing natives.. and base all things around that, as it's highly prone to error, and even worse, potentially dragging down people who have an honest, humble, and vested interest in learning about these things. There will be countless amounts of information that we don't have now that we'll have in 20, 50, 100 years from now, tossing out the past means never learning in the future.. just as bad as religion.

Or maybe to him it seems strange that a universe devoid of meaning and purpose could give rise to creatures who are so obsessed with finding meaning and having a purpose.

Or that purpose is a subjective thing, and it's some utterly strange, mind-boggling religious preoccupation to be so affixed on the meaning of one's life, or the meaning of some random event, a thought process that will result in zero useful information, and a lifetime of pointless cyclical superstition denying one the ability to actually learn something.

Edited by zaibatsu, 24 October 2012 - 12:10 AM.

  • 0

#1850 Tortorella's Rant

Tortorella's Rant

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,132 posts
  • Joined: 11-April 12

Posted 24 October 2012 - 12:16 AM

I don't want to offend anyone but this is funny:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3PDZTveY4uQ&feature=g-vrec


Funny, I watched that today too, lol.
  • 0
Posted Image

#1851 VICanucksfan5551

VICanucksfan5551

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,843 posts
  • Joined: 11-August 04

Posted 24 October 2012 - 01:08 AM

I think it makes more sense that everything in the universe happened for a reason, instead of it just happening for the sake of happening.

Why would it make more sense, though? Are you sure you don't believe that because you want there to be purpose? It's an emotionally-appealing thought.

Edited by VICanucksfan5551, 24 October 2012 - 01:11 AM.

  • 0
Posted Image
Posted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted Image

#1852 J.R.

J.R.

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,087 posts
  • Joined: 04-July 08

Posted 24 October 2012 - 10:47 AM

I think it makes more sense that everything in the universe happened for a reason, instead of it just happening for the sake of happening.

Why would it make more sense, though? Are you sure you don't believe that because you want there to be purpose? It's an emotionally-appealing thought.


Exactly. It's emotionally appealing. That's it.

Why the heck would "reason" behind any of this make "more sense"??!!

It's a happy coincidence that rain falls, wind blows and stars shine to support life on our puny planet. To assume they care about or even consider each other is silly. That's a simple case of projecting human emotion to naturally occurring conditions.
  • 2

"Science is like an inoculation against charlatans who would have you believe whatever it is they tell you."
- Neil deGrasse Tyson

jg4428.jpg2s9up7p.jpg


#1853 TOMapleLaughs

TOMapleLaughs

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 31,764 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 05

Posted 24 October 2012 - 11:35 AM

I kid, but I will admit this thread def has hit the skids since Sharp's banishment.

Sharp was banished? For what?

In that case, here's a link to another 'atheism is on the rise' article:
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2012/1018/breaking31.html


Ireland - People 'with no religion' on the rise.

Some 4,690 babies were categorised as having no religion last year, an analysis of Census 2011 findings by the Central Statistics Office has found.

It noted a four-fold increase in the number of people who said they had no religion, were atheists or agnostics, since 1991. Some 277,237 people fell into this category last year. The group included 14,769 children of primary school age, and 14,478 of secondary school age.

The analysis of Census 2011 also found the proportion of the population who were Catholics reached its lowest point in 2011 at 84.2 per cent, but its congregation, at 3.86 million, was the highest since records began. This was explained by the number of Catholic immigrants living here.

Of the 3.8 million Catholics in this State last year, 8 per cent were non-Irish. Polish people were the biggest group with 110,410 Catholics, followed by the UK with 49,761.

Experts said that the growing numbers of atheists and large increases in the religions of immigrants from Eastern Europe, Africa and Asia led to the changes. Some 110,410 Poles account for the largest non-Irish group of Catholics.

The Iona Institute, which describes itself as a pro-marriage, pro-religion think tank, said the figures on non-religious should be assessed with caution.

“Not belonging to any particular religion is not the same as being irreligious,” spokesman for the organisation David Quinn said.

He pointed to a survey by the prestigious Pew Forum in the US that found that one in five Americans does not belong to a religion but half of this group consider themselves to be either religious or spiritual.

“Ticking the ‘no religion’ box can simply mean a person doesn’t belong to any particular religion, but it doesn’t necessarily mean they are purely secular in their thinking, let alone that they are atheists,” Mr Quinn said.


The CSO also noted a sharp increase in unemployment among Travellers – rising from almost 75 per cent in 2006 to more than 84 per cent last year.

There were 29,573 Travellers living here in April 2011, accounting for 0.6 per cent of the total population. Co Galway had the highest number of Travellers with 2,476 people, followed by south Dublin with 2,216. There were only 152 Travellers enumerated in Co Waterford.

Deirdre Cullen, senior statistician at the Central Statistics Office (CSO), said the latest Census 2011 report shows the growing diversity of the population.

“This report again underlines the fact that Ireland has an increasingly diverse population where changing cultures and religious beliefs play an important part,” she said


Mr. Quinn here seems to believe that checking off 'no religion' doesn't necessarily mean the person isn't either religious or spiritual. Grasping at straws? Or does he have a point.

It underlines that while people are still open to the undefinable idea of religion and spirituality, more and more don't exactly want to be linked an organized church. I'd probably be put into this category as well.

Of course, organized church has some work to do if they want to re-expand their flock. Hey, if the end of days happens on schedule this year, then you can guarantee a boost in membership. Yay?
  • 0
Posted Image

#1854 J.R.

J.R.

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,087 posts
  • Joined: 04-July 08

Posted 24 October 2012 - 11:43 AM

Sharp was banished? For what?

In that case, here's a link to another 'atheism is on the rise' article:

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2012/1018/breaking31.html




Mr. Quinn here seems to believe that checking off 'no religion' doesn't necessarily mean the person isn't either religious or spiritual. Grasping at straws? Or does he have a point.

It underlines that while people are still open to the undefinable idea of religion and spirituality, more and more don't exactly want to be linked an organized church. I'd probably be put into this category as well.

Of course, organized church has some work to do if they want to re-expand their flock. Hey, if the end of days happens on schedule this year, then you can guarantee a boost in membership. Yay?


I'm a spiritual Atheist but don't subscribe to organized religion or a belief in god(s).
  • 1

"Science is like an inoculation against charlatans who would have you believe whatever it is they tell you."
- Neil deGrasse Tyson

jg4428.jpg2s9up7p.jpg


#1855 TOMapleLaughs

TOMapleLaughs

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 31,764 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 05

Posted 24 October 2012 - 12:55 PM

Spirituality: A simple case of projecting human emotion to naturally occurring conditions.

???
  • 0
Posted Image

#1856 J.R.

J.R.

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,087 posts
  • Joined: 04-July 08

Posted 24 October 2012 - 01:00 PM

Spirituality: A simple case of projecting human emotion to naturally occurring conditions.

???


Not in my case. Just an appreciation for the common origins of everything and the vastness of infinity. You can feel connected to the universe without believing some malarkey about "purpose" or "design".
  • 1

"Science is like an inoculation against charlatans who would have you believe whatever it is they tell you."
- Neil deGrasse Tyson

jg4428.jpg2s9up7p.jpg


#1857 TOMapleLaughs

TOMapleLaughs

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 31,764 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 05

Posted 24 October 2012 - 01:04 PM

So you're connected to purposelessness. I see.
  • 0
Posted Image

#1858 J.R.

J.R.

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,087 posts
  • Joined: 04-July 08

Posted 24 October 2012 - 01:06 PM

So you're connected to purposelessness. I see.


Why not? There's a great freedom in it.
  • 0

"Science is like an inoculation against charlatans who would have you believe whatever it is they tell you."
- Neil deGrasse Tyson

jg4428.jpg2s9up7p.jpg


#1859 Drybone

Drybone

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,403 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 12

Posted 24 October 2012 - 01:08 PM

Why does there have to be an objective reason for existence?


causality world view means cause and effect.

So if we are here then there should be a reason.

However, I have often wondered if the empirical evidence will show us an answer we didnt want to find.
  • 1
Posted Image

#1860 J.R.

J.R.

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,087 posts
  • Joined: 04-July 08

Posted 24 October 2012 - 01:11 PM

causality world view means cause and effect.

So if we are here then there should be a reason.

However, I have often wondered if the empirical evidence will show us an answer we didnt want to find.


So you're saying we're not really here...? :unsure:

:P
  • 0

"Science is like an inoculation against charlatans who would have you believe whatever it is they tell you."
- Neil deGrasse Tyson

jg4428.jpg2s9up7p.jpg





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.