Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy
News announcements and other topics => News => Topic started by: WilbyInebriated on July 23, 2010, 10:40:11 PM
-
here is a thread for theists like techstuf to vet their deity...
-
here is a thread for theists like techstuf to vet their deity...
Don't forget to add your own views any time the spiritual inspiration strikes you like a righteous lightning bolt from a cloudless sky. Hallelujah!! ;D :( ::) :-\ :D :(
Like we need more of this on the OU site? I'm being facetious, but I'm also unchecking the "Notify Me of Replies" and the "Return to This Topic" icons permanently for this particular thread.
Cap-Z-ro is always around to enforce the rules as he sees fit.
--Lee
-
since someone created a thread specially dedicated to this subject,
i guess this is the perfect place to spill the beans.
i think that "most" of the humans living on this planet,
have a soul.
this soul is very similar to a quartz crystal.
but instead of being made out of silicon and oxygen,
this soul crystal is made out of pure energy.
a firearm cannot damage this soul with bullets.
but electromagnetic thoughts and feelings,
can reshape this energy-crystal.
either expanding this soul constructively,
or damaging it heinously (farrah day's out of control typing-claws).
nuclear radiation can shatter this soul crystal.
so that the agonized pieces have to be found and reassembled,
by higher density individuals.
but who cares about that branch of the subject !
over time,
layers are grown onto the soul crystal.
over billions of years,
and millions of reincarnation,
what started as a grain of sand,
eventually grows into a quartz crystal,
which is the size of a large house.
the soul started out understanding nothing,
but EVENTUALLY comes to understand everything.
so that eventually,
when the universe has grown too old and stagnant,
a fully grown soul crystal leaves the universe it evolved in.
and starts a new universe elsewhere.
where the developed soul crystal breaks off small chunks of itself,
to create trillions of sand-sized soul-crystals.
just like it itself started as a grain of energy-sand.
small,
powerless,
and not understanding jack about squat.
the developed soul crystal,
then manages the development,
of its trillions of offspring.
so that their layering progresses,
as quickly and painlessly,
as reasonably possible.
so that after billions of years have passed,
each of those grains of soul-sand,
have themselves grown to be the size of a large house.
then each of those trillions of house sized soul crystals,
leaves the universe they formed in,
and each one creates their own new universe,
somewhere else.
and so on,
and so on,
and so on.
forever and ever.
and there are so many universes created,
that NOTHING will ever be able to destroy them all.
but even if some farrah-jerk did destroy them all,
with her typing-claws,
than eventually new soul crystals would form out of the chaos.
to perfect the process of constructively growing themselves.
until we ended up with the exact same process that we have now......
i think that "god" exists.
but that it is just an extremely old soul crystal,
who started way before our souls started.
billions of years ago,
god was just as stupid and foolish as any of us are.
and he/it got so tired of the layer of reality that we live on,
that he/it has little to do with us directly.
do to the boredom factor.
that he/it only takes action to effect us,
when it is very important to our development,
for he/it to do so.
and in a few billion years from now,
we will have become exactly like god is now.
and we will all go off,
start our own universe,
create countless little idiot cronies,
and beat the shit out of them with the karmic system,
until each one of them is also the equal of "god".
my theory might paint a long and boring view of reality.
but it has got to be better,
than main stream religions track record.
"god" is just us, but was around sooner.
and they just want us to grow our understanding and wisdom.
-
11:11
this thread is specially dedicated to the subject of VETTING god. what you 'think' god is does not qualify.
if you have some material evidence or a logical proof, great! present it.
thank you for your cooperation.
-
I know you started this , but maybe you used the wrong term:
vetting;
Vetting is a process of examination and evaluation, generally referring to performing a background check on someone before offering him or her employment, conferring an award, etc. In addition, in intelligence gathering, assets are vetted to determine their usefulness.
so in a sense the other guy who posted gave his opinion on a background check about gods usefulness.....not to say it may not be fact, but what kind of facts do you offer
I contend that no one on this planet can offer any real facts, and vetting an unknown is not a worthwhile project
Nonetheless I do believe in a higher intelligence/power/god if you will , but it is more of the same view as some more enlightened people
in the expanse of the universe there is an abundant supply of pure energy (not potential) ....all atoms show us this.
I believe also that higher power exist as such, and that our soul/consciousness is also of that pure energy.....only while inside of us , it does have potential
from wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potential_energy
In physics, potential energy is the energy stored in a body or in a system due to its position in a force field or due to its configuration
so a "god" energy would not be contained in a body, only once that same pure energy is captured ( somehow) could it begin to take form and shape
so I ask you....how do you do a background check on something that has no form
-
I know you started this , but maybe you used the wrong term:
vetting;
Vetting is a process of examination and evaluation, generally referring to performing a background check on someone before offering him or her employment, conferring an award, etc. In addition, in intelligence gathering, assets are vetted to determine their usefulness.
well, lets see. it says 'generally referring to' right? problem is, i specifically specified god, so it's obvious i wasn't referring to performing a background check in the modern sense of the word. go back to your wiki, read the rest of the page and cases, and see if you can figure out why i was using that term in the context i did.
so in a sense the other guy who posted gave his opinion on a background check about gods usefulness.....not to say it may not be fact, but what kind of facts do you offer
key word there, opinion... i offer no facts, it's not necessary for me to do so. i'm not a theist. i don't believe in godfairies, and i'm not spreading the word of them to others.
I contend that no one on this planet can offer any real facts, and vetting an unknown is not a worthwhile project
do you have any material evidence or a logical proof to present?
Nonetheless I do believe in a higher intelligence/power/god if you will , but it is more of the same view as some more enlightened people
in the expanse of the universe there is an abundant supply of pure energy (not potential) ....all atoms show us this.
I believe also that higher power exist as such, and that our soul/consciousness is also of that pure energy.....only while inside of us , it does have potential
from wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potential_energy
In physics, potential energy is the energy stored in a body or in a system due to its position in a force field or due to its configuration
so a "god" energy would not be contained in a body, only once that same pure energy is captured ( somehow) could it begin to take form and shape
this thread is specially dedicated to the subject of VETTING god. what you 'believe' god is does not qualify. furthermore, since you like to pick at verbage, i think you used the wrong term. to say you 'have faith' would have been a better choice than to say you believe. go look up faith in your hallowed wiki and you will see what i mean ;)
if you have some material evidence or a logical proof, great! present it.
thank you for your cooperation.
so I ask you....how do you do a background check on something that has no form
not my problem, i am not a theist.
-
you got me.....flaws
all kinds of flaws in the traditional god
also...no facts to confirm
-
most things that exist,
do not leave "physical proof".
either because their physical parts are "proof" of nothing,
or because most of the components that they are composed of,
are not even physical.
for the above reasons,
a person who only understands physical proof,
is incapable,
of understanding most of the universe.
because most of the universe,
would either be inconclusive to their self-squished brain,
or would be invisible to their non-physical mental perception.
AKA a willful belief based blindness,
in physical proof only.
AKA ultra-hypocricy.
but it gets even more hypocritical than that.
because a persons opinion,
that physical proof is required,
is itself mostly non-physical.
because opinion is a thought,
and thoughts are mostly non-physical !
so a person who only honors physical proof,
should also be physically and ethically incapable,
of honoring their own opinion !
they also could not honor their own perception of reality.
because perception,
while often using physical things as reference points,
is mostly made of non-physical thinking.
physical proof is a crutch,
that people who don't understand how probability works,
often use to comfort themselves with.
people who insist,
that physical proof is important,
when all of reality amounts to an educated guess.
their own educated guess,
that physical proof is important,
is no more valid,
than an educated guess,
that insists that god is real.
a belief in physical proof,
is for suckers and chumps.
it is worthless at best,
extremely limiting at so-so,
and destroys peoples quality of life at worst.
and if their belief effects all of society,
than it destroys the quality of life,
of all of society.
it is a thief that steals from people,
at least as much as the cAtholic Lurch and its Dope,
steals from people.
there is a greater probability that some god being real,
than there is a probability,
that physical proof is a reasonable and constructive belief system.
a god "could" exist.
but physical proof-ism ALWAYS fails to help anything.
someone can construct a a semi-functional god-bot more easily,
than they can convert the erroneous belief in physical proof-ism,
into a constructive methodology,
by which to operate someones brain.
you should not believe in a god who does the work for you.
but you should believe in physical proof, even less !
-
11:11
i repeat, this thread is specially dedicated to the subject of VETTING god. what you 'think' god is does not qualify.
if you have some material evidence or a logical proof, great! present it. why is this so difficult? it's only one deity to vet, it's not like i am asking you to vet all 1,111 of your 'spirit guardians'...
thank you for your cooperation.
-
@11:11,
I understand most of what you are saying and agree in part, but what does this mean (farrah day's out of control typing-claws)?
Regards, Larry
-
farrah day is a female british person,
with a mean-streak as wide as the atlantic ocean.
even by the historical standards of the average british person,
her viciousness is in the excess.
farrah day is known for committing the most heinous psychological attacks imaginable,
on this forum.
she has found a way to soak her words in cyanide,
before posting them.
she/it projects her personal opinion onto others,
as if she/it is the only valid mind that exists.
yet utterly fails to listen to others.
beyond the amount of listening that it takes,
to invent a new way,
to scrag other peoples minds.
i don't know how often her typing-claws have been slashing over the last few months,
or if she hasn't finally been banned by a mod.
i've almost given up on contributing to this forum in the past,
because a presence as downright awful as hers,
appeared to be tolerated here.
-
11:11, you need 911.
-
11:11, you need 911.
care to elaborate on your opinion ?
or are we to assume that you have no constructive opinion to share ?
-
@11:11
Wow, how can one elaborate on the divine truth of which you speak?
Let me see now. You come here making metaphorical statements and a few logical ones that I happen to agree with. Scary thought.
But to come here and talk about farray day and her poison is so damned funny. What is your objective or agenda? Is it to share your supreme understanding?
You don't believe in proof. You don't seem to need it. But I must ask, are you saying these things to improve ones understand of what you feel truth is? If so, maybe you should lower yourself to others conscious processes, like mine, by speaking in a way that most of us do, without others having to try to figure out what the hell you are saying.
If you want followers, no doubt you can find them. They don't need proof either, just a willingness to believe in your wisdom.
Here is the fun part for you. Now you get to respond, no doubt with selfless intent, in order to show others the way of my misguidance.
Your turn. Enlighten me oh great one.
-
Hi everyone. An interesting subject. If I had to try and prove that God existed I'd probably point to the fact that there appears to be an existence of matter and the possibility is therefore that there was some 'cause' to generate that matter. And then - perhaps that 'cause' is God? But it's all pretty bewildering. Frankly I think it takes enormous courage not to believe in God. And probably a fair helping of courage to believe in a personal God. All that supervision. The attack on the unco-operative conscience. Not a happy thought. Brave reach here guys. I'm of the opinion that this 'gift' of life, if such it is, and if it is not a happy accident - is actually something that I'd rather do without. It's way too 'gravity bound'. And way too much tedium in those daily imperatives. I'd rather propose that there was a radical design flaw if we've really been created. Hopefully evolution will eventually put things right and make things more bearable. Meanwhile - if there is a personal God out there? Then I confess - I've lost the plot. Pretty lights in the night sky and some wonderful views of this our earth. But dear me. I've seen enough of both. And human nature? That's a misnomer. There seems to be very little that's natural in humans. We've become as overspecialised as the dinosaurs.
-
Rosemary,
Thank you. You speak in terms which I understand. Although I do not agree with all of your assessments, it is refreshing to comprehend your logic.
All too many times I have pondered the question about god. Looked into many religions and belief systems trying to find a better understanding.
Is god an entity, or energy, or what? The word god conjures up many different realities for many people. Personally I find it intriguing because it seems a way for people to try to grasp a reality in which they can comprehend.
We are animals with intellect. Animals love and they don't think about god. Depending on ones own experience and mental capacity, we all have our own way of thinking about things. As for me, my journey has led me to believe the more I know, the more I realize what I don't know. Absolute truth will always be subjective in my mind because it is like the universe, never ending. But if I figure out the square root of pi, then I know I am close..........
Striping away the ego, the emotion and the prejudices within allows one to look further. But, in saying that, that is what casts shadows on the whole god thing. Believing in god is purely an emotional realm as I see it so far. Not saying that believing is god is wrong, just that it is emotional. It also seems to me that we are slowly distancing ourselves further apart as a whole or unity because we losing some of the innate natural consciousness that takes away from natures intent, which I believe is survival.
God is like over unity. Will always try to find it with or without success.
By the way, over the years I have had met many others who have changed my mind on many subjects. So what I just said may not be true to me in 10 more years, just for now.
Good luck and will to you.
B
-
larryc, this thread isn't to ask questions about why someone doesn't like farrah... do it in a private msg.
icanbeatbob, this thread isn't for you to post insults, nor is it for your personal opinions on what 'god' is... start your own thread about your opinions.
@ all, this thread is specially dedicated to the subject of VETTING god. what you 'think' god is does not qualify.
if you have some material evidence or a logical proof, great! present it. if not, don't post.
WHY DO I HAVE TO KEEP REPEATING THIS?
-
Sorry to tread on your thread. You shouldn't have to monitor your own thread. Won't happen again.
Cheers!
-
_
-
@11:11
Wow, how can one elaborate on the divine truth of which you speak?
Let me see now. You come here making metaphorical statements and a few logical ones that I happen to agree with. Scary thought.
But to come here and talk about farray day and her poison is so damned funny. What is your objective or agenda? Is it to share your supreme understanding?
You don't believe in proof. You don't seem to need it. But I must ask, are you saying these things to improve ones understand of what you feel truth is? If so, maybe you should lower yourself to others conscious processes, like mine, by speaking in a way that most of us do, without others having to try to figure out what the hell you are saying.
If you want followers, no doubt you can find them. They don't need proof either, just a willingness to believe in your wisdom.
Here is the fun part for you. Now you get to respond, no doubt with selfless intent, in order to show others the way of my misguidance.
Your turn. Enlighten me oh great one.
i shouldn't bother to explain myself,
to someone like you.
because people like you,
have a tendency,
to take everything that is said,
and twist it into a distasteful mockery of the truth.
i recently ended an association,
with someone for whom my best,
was never good enough.
they always found something of mine to criticize.
even when they had to invent things to criticize me about.
and to hell if they ever saw me,
for who i really was.
because they were not considerate enough,
to want to know the real me.
i have no need to waste time,
on a person like that again.
swimming through quick sand,
would be less caustic,
to my minds structural integrity.
but i will say,
that the thought forms that i have,
are the only thought forms that i own.
i cannot think like other people think.
and i am sick of other people thinking,
that i should think more like them.
if i told you that you should think more like i think,
than you might have an idea,
of how rotten it feels,
to be told that.
i find your thought forms,
to be at least as repulsive,
as you find my thought forms to be repulsive,
bob.
though likely more so.
i could not be paid enough,
to willingly adapt the thought forms that i see,
in much of society.
because i notice things that go unnoticed.
shockingly and appallingly unnoticed.
and i am grateful from Allah to Zedd,
that i notice what most do not notice.
by the way.
i read what bob and drunk willy posted,
immediately above this post.
but drunk willy is dead to me.
so meh.
maybe if sananda resurrected willy from the dead,
than i would listen to willy again.
but of course,
willy would have to first submit physical proof,
that willy lives again.
because willy could not reasonably promote a personal opinion,
that his subjective belief system,
has not first confirmed,
to be absolutely and undeniably real.
........an opinion that is absolutely real.
you might as well try to prove,
that george w bush,
did not publicly lie,
hundreds of times.
it still irritates me like an ebola infection,
that clinton got canned,
for lying "once",
over something that effected no one.
yet bush lied "hundreds of times",
over things that effected EVERYONE.
yet he didn't get canned,
nobody cared,
and the people who had access to fire arms and anti-chip-ammunition,
still supported him,
as if he were the best thing since sliced bread.
i like chocolate,
more than i like ice cream.
but drunk willy,
will first have to physically prove his non-undead status,
if he wants to refute my claims to chocolate preference !
-
11:11 this is the third time i have had to say this to you.
i repeat, this thread is specially dedicated to the subject of VETTING god. what you 'think' god is does not qualify. babbling about what thought forms you have or like to have does not qualify. babbling about whom you quit associations with does not qualify. babbling about your political preferences does not qualify... in point of fact, NONE of your posts qualify.
if you have some material evidence or a logical proof, great! present it. why is this so difficult? it's only one deity to vet, it's not like i am asking you to vet all 1,111 of your 'spirit guardians'...
please keep your posts to the topic. thank you for your cooperation. don't post again without material evidence or a logical proof or you will be reported to the moderator.
-
11:11 this is the third time i have had to say this to you.
i repeat, this thread is specially dedicated to the subject of VETTING god. what you 'think' god is does not qualify. babbling about what thought forms you have or like to have does not qualify. babbling about whom you quit associations with does not qualify. babbling about your political preferences does not qualify... in point of fact, NONE of your posts qualify.
if you have some material evidence or a logical proof, great! present it. why is this so difficult? it's only one deity to vet, it's not like i am asking you to vet all 1,111 of your 'spirit guardians'...
please keep your posts to the topic. thank you for your cooperation. don't post again with material evidence or a logical proof or you will be reported to the moderator.
if you had typed that without challenging me,
than i might have respected your wishes.
but you cannot declare war against someones testicles,
AND expect to diplomatically get a cease fire,
at the same time.
you cannot have your cake,
and eat it too.
because you are not bribing others with enough money,
to do so.
i will address the large errors in your argumentational position,
when i'm in a better mood.
because right now,
i have more important things to work on,
than outlining your unsupportable,
philosophically bankrupt,
self-defeating,
line of thinking.
by the way.
the mods on this website,
do not care.
if they did care,
than many of the active forum posters,
would have been banned long ago.
banned for posts that are far worse,
than anything that i have ever posted.
banned BEFORE they had scared away most of the talent,
that actually presented innovative ideas.
not unlike how they are still scaring the talent away,
with pitch forks and torches,
to this day.
-
if you had typed that without challenging me,
than i might have respected your wishes.
but you cannot declare war against someones testicles,
AND expect to diplomatically get a cease fire,
at the same time.
you cannot have your cake,
and eat it too.
because you are not bribing others with enough money,
to do so.
i will address the large errors in your argumentational position,
when i'm in a better mood.
because right now,
i have more important things to work on,
than outlining your unsupportable,
philosophically bankrupt,
self-defeating,
line of thinking.
by the way.
the mods on this website,
do not care.
if they did care,
than many of the active forum posters,
would have been banned long ago.
banned for posts that are far worse,
than anything that i have ever posted.
banned BEFORE they had scared away most of the talent,
that actually presented innovative ideas.
not unlike how they are still scaring the talent away,
with pitch forks and torches,
to this day.
i didn't challenge 'you', and what's your mood got to do with it? mood is a thing for cattle or making love or playing the baliset... you're just dancing around, using logical fallacies as your argument, trying to avoid the FACT that you cannot provide a single shred of material evidence nor a logical proof. which, i might add, does nothing to advance your position. your repeated lack of material evidence and refusal to provide a logical proof only serves to strengthen my position...
furthermore, it is not necessary for you to outline my 'unsupportable, philosophically bankrupt, self-defeating, line of thinking', because that still does not vet your imaginary godfairy... but feel free to engage in more strawman and red herring arguments that further demonstrate your inability to vet your imaginary godfairy.
-
Wilby:
Very interesting topic.
My only evidence is me. I type, therefore I am. Or at least, I am here. Only God could make someone like me, with all of my faults...any other manufacturer would have not let me pass QC and I would have been recycled.
Proof? Not really I suppose. But it was the best that I could do given the circumstances and the available information I had at hand at the time of my post.
I hope you are well and still ice fishing in the winter using a JT flashlight.
Bill
-
hi bill, thanks for the humorous response. great timing.
i am well and hope you are too. to be truthful, i can't wait for hard water, even though the summer fishing has been great this year. i still have a couple jt's in the hard water kit for shining up glow jigs, but switched the icehouse lighting to a SEC circuit. i was playing around using the whole lake instead of just a glass of water... ;) interesting stuff.
-
it still irritates me like an ebola infection,
that clinton got canned,
for lying "once",
over something that effected no one.
yet bush lied "hundreds of times",
over things that effected EVERYONE.
Clinton lost his job? Who knew? I thought he served the full 8 years.
Anyway, it is impossible to prove that there is a god, mainly because there is no god, but also because there is no religion out there that believes in a god that can be sensed in any way. (Unanswered prayers are written off to "god's will," and so forth.) So this challenge will go unanswered, and this thread is going nowhere, not that it's important to believers. They do not need evidence, they have faith.
-
shrugged, i repeat, this thread is specially dedicated to the subject of VETTING god. what you 'think' god is (or isn't) does not qualify. you obviously saw that i wrote this numerous times already... do you think you are special? do i have to specifically say this to everyone that posts in this thread?
if you have some material evidence or a logical proof, great!, post it. otherwise keep your opinions and comments to yourself.
-
shrugged, i repeat, this thread is specially dedicated to the subject of VETTING god. what you 'think' god is (or isn't) does not qualify. you obviously saw that i wrote this numerous times already... do you think you are special? do i have to specifically say this to everyone that posts in this thread?
if you have some material evidence or a logical proof, great!, post it. otherwise keep your opinions and comments to yourself.
It cannot be done. There is no proof of god and can be no proof of god, and I think you know this. It does not take a great intellect to logically debunk pretty much any religious claim out there, but I think the recent string of authors - Hitchens, Dawkins, Harris - who in fact are great intellects, have pretty much shredded all religious arguments beyond doubt.
All that is left is faith, not reason. And this is why no religious person would even care to vet his god for you. Evidence does not matter in light of faith.
What I don't get is why faith in a divine being is considered such a virtue. Why would willingness to blindly believe in something that in turn shapes your life, despite a complete lack of evidence for such beliefs, be considered a positive trait is beyond me. I can understand faith in people, who have a track record that can be verified. But I cannot understand faith in some old book, whose chain of custody cannot be even guessed at.
But I think that is the better question to ask. Why do the faithful believe?
-
It cannot be done. There is no proof of god and can be no proof of god, and I think you know this. It does not take a great intellect to logically debunk pretty much any religious claim out there, but I think the recent string of authors - Hitchens, Dawkins, Harris - who in fact are great intellects, have pretty much shredded all religious arguments beyond doubt.
All that is left is faith, not reason. And this is why no religious person would even care to vet his god for you. Evidence does not matter in light of faith.
What I don't get is why faith in a divine being is considered such a virtue. Why would willingness to blindly believe in something that in turn shapes your life, despite a complete lack of evidence for such beliefs, be considered a positive trait is beyond me. I can understand faith in people, who have a track record that can be verified. But I cannot understand faith in some old book, whose chain of custody cannot be even guessed at.
you're not really very bright. what part of "shrugged, i repeat, this thread is specially dedicated to the subject of VETTING god. what you 'think' god is (or isn't) does not qualify. you obviously saw that i wrote this numerous times already... do you think you are special? do i have to specifically say this to everyone that posts in this thread?
if you have some material evidence or a logical proof, great!, post it. otherwise keep your opinions and comments to yourself." didn't you understand?
But I think that is the better question to ask. Why do the faithful believe?
great! grand! wonderful! start your own thread about it then... and quit posting here if you cannot provide some material evidence or a logical proof.
-
attention everyone. what has been said to the others also applies to you. if you cannot provide material evidence or a logical proof don't post.
this means you... and you shrugged... and you ramset... don't make yourselves look totally asinine by continuing to post.
-
Shrug
Quote:
Why do the faithful believe?
------------------------------
Its more like a "Knowing",than a Believing.
Almost like a "sense" a Common sense we share!
Someday when you get ready to breathe your last breath,
you'll be moments away from
"The rest of the story"
Till then
??
Shrugs and kisses
Chet
-
ramset, what part of "if you have some material evidence or a logical proof, great!, post it. otherwise keep your opinions and comments to yourself." didn't you understand? was it a specific word that threw you for a loop or was it the idea as a whole?
-
I wasn't finished Wilby
What part of "Faith" is so foreign to you that you can't even look at the
Placebo effect and see an unexplainable "ANOMALY"
I see faith
I see Placebo [a manifestation of '"FAITH"]
I see a creator that Honors "FAITH"
Perhaps you have a better explanation for a placebo?
Chet
-
of course you weren't ::) tu stultus es... q.e.d.
-
I wasn't
Really!
I'm a little slow you know.
Chet
-
Shrug
Quote:
Why do the faithful believe?
------------------------------
Its more like a "Knowing",than a Believing.
Almost like a "sense" a Common sense we share!
Someday when you get ready to breathe your last breath,
you'll be moments away from
"The rest of the story"
Till then
??
Shrugs and kisses
Chet
But how can you know? Is it maybe that it is a pleasant thing to hope for, an everlasting afterlife? I suppose it would nice to live forever in paradise, but there is the downside of being forced to adore the almighty the entire time. Hitchens compared this to North Korea, and I think he was not far off.
And Wilby, quit being such a tyrant. Threads evolve, and if it wasn't for this tangential discussion, you would be buried off the front page already and that would be the end.
You cannot tell me you have never steered a discussion off topic.
-
First, there is not enough evidence either way to prove the existence or non-existence of a god.
We can only speculate one way or another -there is no right or wrong. Therefore I believe the opinions of the people posting in this thread should not be squelched in this regard.
I would like to add this to the conversation: Everything that we observe came from something, or rather nothing. What started all of this? And what started that? - and on and on into infinity. What I have to assume is that in the beginning of time, space, energy, and matter there was nothing. For all the detractors on this forum and around the world in the scientific community - our existence in this plane of reality should prove to all deniers that you can create an entire universe, multiverse or whatever you believe, out of nothing. Now this revelation leads to the following questions: Did nothing will itself into existence so we can observe its creation? Was nothing bored with being nothing or did it just become aware of itself? Is nothing sentient? What created that nothing? These are questions that cannot be answered we can only ponder.
Now as far as hard evidence is concerned:
If there is hard evidence towards a connection to a greater energy it would be the experiments performed by Dr. Rick Strassman at the University of New Mexico with the chemical compound Dimethyl Tryptamine. DMT is a chemical created by our pineal gland that is secreted in large quantities 40-50 days after conception and again right after we die. It is the most powerful hallucinogen on this planet and it's naturally created by our brain. DMT is classified as a schedule 1 drug and is illegal even though our own body creates it. At the conclusion of the studies Dr. Strassman believed that DMT could be the "spirit molecule". He wrote a book called DMT: The Spirit Molecule if any of you are interested. DMT fits the bill as the chemical that could carry a soul to and from a human host, unfortunately due to its highly controlled nature I doubt anymore clinical studies will be performed on it. Although the Uniao do Vegetal church won a battle against the Supreme Court recently to allow Ayahuasca (5-MeO DMT) to be used during its religious ceremonies. I think it would be interesting to pursue more clinical research into the actions, methods, and purpose of DMT.
I hope I shed some light on this subject for you all.
-
hi bill, thanks for the humorous response. great timing.
i am well and hope you are too. to be truthful, i can't wait for hard water, even though the summer fishing has been great this year. i still have a couple jt's in the hard water kit for shining up glow jigs, but switched the icehouse lighting to a SEC circuit. i was playing around using the whole lake instead of just a glass of water... ;) interesting stuff.
you rule-bashed all those poor innocent posters,
for typing what you perceived,
to be unrelated to this threads topic.
yet you did not rule-bash pirate,
for doing the exact same thing,
simply because you are friends with him !
even though what pirate posted to this thread,
was little different,
than what everyone else posted to this thread.
you then broke your own thread-rules,
by replying to pirate,
with an off-topic post of your own,
containing little more than words about fishing.
you have yourself done,
what you harassed and threatened everyone else,
for doing !
in addition to contributing several times more harassment and threats,
than you have advanced anything constructive.
you think it is ok,
for you and your friends,
to break your rules,
but not for everyone else ?
does your interest in criticism,
extend only to others,
yet not to yourself ?
and that does not include your lying,
about how little you understand,
for the intention of making yourself look superficially better,
than people who you dislike.
your personal ethics,
are conveniently flexible !
i thought you were made of sterner stuff !!!
the fish that you troll from the lake,
have a spine.
you should grow a spine as well,
and stop trolling your own thread !
i grow less and less interested in responding,
to your increasingly self-important positions,
your increasingly malignant character flaws,
and your narrow minded non-understanding.
this thread was already self-defeating in the first place,
for reasons that you have shown yourself,
to be philosophically incapable,
of understanding.
i have standards,
regarding what i will respond to.
and you are demonstrating yourself,
to fall far below those standards.
by the way.
i still prefer chocolate,
more than i prefer ice cream.
-
One of the Big ones is there a God?
Well first we split the argument into science and god, simply because we cannot entertain a just because I think so argument.
People of faith must accept science as being part of their god, for all religions believe their god or god, created all things as such it follows that all things scientific are created by god. Now outcomes, some religions believe that God determines the results of things or outcomes, we can quickly dispel this as a myth, by saying god determined that a child should be raped tortured and then die, this would not follow that god is a being of wisdom nor would any right thinking person for or against the argument believe that anyone or god would determine this to be a desired outcome or result. This is a result of action by man.
So is there a god? Well science itself says there has to be a god by its own logic, an object be it god or other is determined to be real if it can be quantified or measured. How do we do this in simple terms? Easy, a scientist says just because they have faith in god does not make him real, but the scientists just did by saying "in god" "him" he classified god as an object, to reference something it has to exist. So how do we define further that it exists? is a mental thought proof of an object? A dream is an object that can be measured recalled and no single human denies the existence of dreams they are a physical existing measurable quanta, so too is faith, one in the conscience one in the unconscious, we do not say the content of the dream is real, but we do say it is real, yet we cannot see it, touch it, heat it or bottle it or examine it under a microscope. So too many scientific objects have the same problem, neutrinos for example, some items cannot be seen or measured, simply the result of their presence is the proof, in short something causes a reaction or something is missing from and equation, we cannot find it or see it yet we know it is there because of the end result of the equation, neutrinos were named for a missing part of an energy equation, we did not count neutrinos by there presence but by the change in the other component levels. We accepted on faith that it must be so, we accepted on faith that it must be so. So science itself works on faith that things must be so more often than you imagine, so how do we link the two? a novel or story is what links the two. Though it may be questioned as to what a dream is, a novel or story cannot be questioned, the story may be real or fictional but the story itself exists. A story handed down unwritten in texts exists, this form is an entity, unlike a thought that is a not real, the story itself is an entity as a story, god is a similar entity, not a story of a sequence of events that has created an entity, the story itself, unlike the story that can be the novel if placed in text, God can be separated as a single thought or entity an instant visualisation of all that one imagines God to be, not the story of god, but the singular word exists as an entity in all men, even atheists have this visualisation of an entity they believe false. So we can say that god is an entity and science can not argue, they can however argue whether the entity has any power of its own and can argue if without the creation of the entity, how could god have existed before man to create the world. I pondered this as the greatest challenge to solve and consider the answer as this, we know in science and from history as an undeniable fact, that men will often have the same thought as another, this is seen often in the world of inventors and writers alike, they have never met yet this often unique thought has arrived in both, this is not math and conclusion, this is creativity, the concept of the invention or the story are both entities, if a single person did not start or create the entity and it simply exists and all mankind can draw or see the entity or if only two men see the entity, it is clear it exists and it is clear it exists beyond the realm of the story of an individual to create and pass on. This life existence of an entity able to perpetuate itself in anyone without even prior contact with another living human multiple times is prove the entity is self existent, an entity can be taken and moved and passed on, it is an object. If we simply go back to earliest man scattered over the planet, religions or god awareness sprang up unconnected as separate acknowledgement of the same entity, you can look at a star or outer planet an imagine there is other life, this is not entity is a math conclusion, based on your own existence on this planet, the original god entity had no mathematical logical or basis to create the conclusion that there is was or should be a god, without having the notion presented by others, the entity was found without reason or math simultaneously around the world. So we acknowledge there is an entity existing known as God, Is this entity an all powerful entity? without question the history of the world is determined by the faith in this entity, in God we trust is on currency, courts make you place your hand on the bible, so we know the entity has great power over men. Is the entity powerful without man is the only other question? Well, the measles are only powerful with man as a host, so too many things such as human only viruses that need a host, and so too mental disease that cannot be seen by a microscope, yet it exists and we accept that it does. So whilst a creative thought, virus, unseen mental illness or a dream may be the closest cousin to the entity God for comparative purposes, it does meet all the same criteria in scientific measurement. So the answer must be yes. As to the power of god outside the host other than that self replication in other hosts I cannot say in science.
But I did answer the question, is there a God.
As to intelligent design as an answer, I say no to design as a good argument as most objects have a reason for being and improve or evolve accordingly, what I think that the world missed that no one has ever written is that the planet and the surface of the planet do not support each other and are not connected, if one imagines that things evolve to support a surrounding system as part of a singular being such as the planet, you have failed to noticed that the planet under the 20 feet of plant crap and tree roots, does not give a rats ass about the surface content of the planet, volcanoes, tidal waves and so on that are created by the pre animal and plant world, the base planet constantly destroys the since created biological planet surface in an arbitrary manner, there is no symbiotic link between the two, for the upper also does not benefit the lower.
This is closer to proof of being placed here than any other recorded comment in history, no other human ever noticed or record this fact, that the planet and the surface bio planet are not symbiotic, so too it also proves the other theory that the biological evolution may be more random than even science realises, what it does disprove absolutely though is the Pagan earth mother theory, because this bitch does not care about what is on the surface, further no biological evolution will ever effect the subsurface pre-existing planet.
Our planet is not our planet, our world exists on this planet, that is like the lea calling the dog his own, we are as plants a fungal infection on the dog, as animals merely fleas with no teeth, they are not one entity nor do not they coexist, the dog has non use for the fleas or the fungus, just as the planet has no use for our thin film layer of fungus and fleas. Our world exists in a thin film of moss and insects that cover a rock. We are not one we are separate entities and a solar flare would show this accurate, for in one day the thin film of sludge that is our world would be gone and the planet would remain, that same molten ball of cooling particles orbiting without purpose in space.
One reply no other responses will be entered.
Vetted and done
-
you rule-bashed all those poor innocent posters,
for typing what you perceived,
to be unrelated to this threads topic.
yet you did not rule-bash pirate,
for doing the exact same thing,
simply because you are friends with him !
even though what pirate posted to this thread,
was little different,
than what everyone else posted to this thread.
you then broke your own thread-rules,
by replying to pirate,
with an off-topic post of your own,
containing little more than words about fishing.
you have yourself done,
what you harassed and threatened everyone else,
for doing !
in addition to contributing several times more harassment and threats,
than you have advanced anything constructive.
you think it is ok,
for you and your friends,
to break your rules,
but not for everyone else ?
does your interest in criticism,
extend only to others,
yet not to yourself ?
and that does not include your lying,
about how little you understand,
for the intention of making yourself look superficially better,
than people who you dislike.
your personal ethics,
are conveniently flexible !
i thought you were made of sterner stuff !!!
the fish that you troll from the lake,
have a spine.
you should grow a spine as well,
and stop trolling your own thread !
i grow less and less interested in responding,
to your increasingly self-important positions,
your increasingly malignant character flaws,
and your narrow minded non-understanding.
this thread was already self-defeating in the first place,
for reasons that you have shown yourself,
to be philosophically incapable,
of understanding.
i have standards,
regarding what i will respond to.
and you are demonstrating yourself,
to fall far below those standards.
by the way.
i still prefer chocolate,
more than i prefer ice cream.
I beg to differ. In my post I offered "material evidence or a logical proof" (To quote Wilby) in an attempt to keep to the topic at hand. If someone does not agree with my proof, that is outside of my control. I also posted a disclaimer to my proof as well.
Bill
-
I beg to differ. In my post I offered "material evidence or a logical proof" (To quote Wilby) in an attempt to keep to the topic at hand. If someone does not agree with my proof, that is outside of my control. I also posted a disclaimer to my proof as well.
Bill
i made that point earlier.
most of what exists,
either does not have physical parts,
does not leave physical proof of it exists,
or does not leave physical proof that is conclusive.
you say that your physical body,
and your existence,
are proof of god.
but that is not true.
because your physical body,
is inconclusive proof,
of anything.
let alone conclusive proof of a god.
you cannot even proof that your physical body exists.
you cannot proof that that it is nothing more than a solid hologram,
that is not actually there.
your opinion that you have a physical body,
is merely your perspective.
AKA your personal opinion.
just as your physical body,
being conclusive proof that god exists,
is also your personal opinion.
because your physical body's existence/non-existence,
is logically separate,
from the existence/non-existence,
of a god.
those things are are fundamentally dependent,
upon your personal opinion.
just as a belief in physical-proof-ism,
is just a personal opinion.
drunk willy has howled over and over again,
that personal opinion,
is out of subject with this thread.
which for the above reasons,
means that EVERYTHING is off subject,
with this threads subject.
including the threads official willy-screamed subject,
your original post,
and willy's hypocritical post about fishing.
if personal opinion,
is an invalid subject in this thread,
than that means that a belief in physical proof,
is also an invalid subject in this thread.
because without personal opinion,
there cannot be a belief in physical proof.
which means that drunk willy's requirements,
logically invalidate the subject,
of this thread.
turning this thread into a giant oxymoron.
drunk willy himself,
doesn't seem to understand the folly,
of a belief in physical proof,
in a thread where personal opinion,
is invalid.
either because his brain is not listening,
or because he doesn't grasp the intense irony.
but i suspect that he mostly just wants to growl at other people.
so he's getting what he wants anyway.
and i still prefer chocolate,
more than i prefer ice cream.
-
but i suspect that he mostly just wants to growl at other people.
so he's getting what he wants anyway.
nope, just playing with a bit of reverse psychology to see how many childlike minds take the bait... caught you, caught shrugged, caught chetty... it's quite clear none of you adults (other than bill) can follow a simple request, nor know what a cogent argument is, so you see there really was a point to it, other than the obvious one shruggy so 'cleverly' pointed out, the one and same that you just figured out but somehow still have to post but as i said, go on demonstrating how asinine you can be.
@shrugged... if you want to 'evolve' this thread, step off... like i told you previously, quit being a belligerent ass and start your own thread.... moron.
-
One of the Big ones is there a God?
Well first we split the argument into science and god, simply because we cannot entertain a just because I think so argument.
People of faith must accept science as being part of their god, for all religions believe their god or god, created all things as such it follows that all things scientific are created by god. Now outcomes, some religions believe that God determines the results of things or outcomes, we can quickly dispel this as a myth, by saying god determined that a child should be raped tortured and then die, this would not follow that god is a being of wisdom nor would any right thinking person for or against the argument believe that anyone or god would determine this to be a desired outcome or result. This is a result of action by man.
So is there a god? Well science itself says there has to be a god by its own logic, an object be it god or other is determined to be real if it can be quantified or measured. How do we do this in simple terms? Easy, a scientist says just because they have faith in god does not make him real, but the scientists just did by saying "in god" "him" he classified god as an object, to reference something it has to exist. So how do we define further that it exists? is a mental thought proof of an object? A dream is an object that can be measured recalled and no single human denies the existence of dreams they are a physical existing measurable quanta, so too is faith, one in the conscience one in the unconscious, we do not say the content of the dream is real, but we do say it is real, yet we cannot see it, touch it, heat it or bottle it or examine it under a microscope. So too many scientific objects have the same problem, neutrinos for example, some items cannot be seen or measured, simply the result of their presence is the proof, in short something causes a reaction or something is missing from and equation, we cannot find it or see it yet we know it is there because of the end result of the equation, neutrinos were named for a missing part of an energy equation, we did not count neutrinos by there presence but by the change in the other component levels. We accepted on faith that it must be so, we accepted on faith that it must be so. So science itself works on faith that things must be so more often than you imagine, so how do we link the two? a novel or story is what links the two. Though it may be questioned as to what a dream is, a novel or story cannot be questioned, the story may be real or fictional but the story itself exists. A story handed down unwritten in texts exists, this form is an entity, unlike a thought that is a not real, the story itself is an entity as a story, god is a similar entity, not a story of a sequence of events that has created an entity, the story itself, unlike the story that can be the novel if placed in text, God can be separated as a single thought or entity an instant visualisation of all that one imagines God to be, not the story of god, but the singular word exists as an entity in all men, even atheists have this visualisation of an entity they believe false. So we can say that god is an entity and science can not argue, they can however argue whether the entity has any power of its own and can argue if without the creation of the entity, how could god have existed before man to create the world. I pondered this as the greatest challenge to solve and consider the answer as this, we know in science and from history as an undeniable fact, that men will often have the same thought as another, this is seen often in the world of inventors and writers alike, they have never met yet this often unique thought has arrived in both, this is not math and conclusion, this is creativity, the concept of the invention or the story are both entities, if a single person did not start or create the entity and it simply exists and all mankind can draw or see the entity or if only two men see the entity, it is clear it exists and it is clear it exists beyond the realm of the story of an individual to create and pass on. This life existence of an entity able to perpetuate itself in anyone without even prior contact with another living human multiple times is prove the entity is self existent, an entity can be taken and moved and passed on, it is an object. If we simply go back to earliest man scattered over the planet, religions or god awareness sprang up unconnected as separate acknowledgement of the same entity, you can look at a star or outer planet an imagine there is other life, this is not entity is a math conclusion, based on your own existence on this planet, the original god entity had no mathematical logical or basis to create the conclusion that there is was or should be a god, without having the notion presented by others, the entity was found without reason or math simultaneously around the world. So we acknowledge there is an entity existing known as God, Is this entity an all powerful entity? without question the history of the world is determined by the faith in this entity, in God we trust is on currency, courts make you place your hand on the bible, so we know the entity has great power over men. Is the entity powerful without man is the only other question? Well, the measles are only powerful with man as a host, so too many things such as human only viruses that need a host, and so too mental disease that cannot be seen by a microscope, yet it exists and we accept that it does. So whilst a creative thought, virus, unseen mental illness or a dream may be the closest cousin to the entity God for comparative purposes, it does meet all the same criteria in scientific measurement. So the answer must be yes. As to the power of god outside the host other than that self replication in other hosts I cannot say in science.
But I did answer the question, is there a God.
As to intelligent design as an answer, I say no to design as a good argument as most objects have a reason for being and improve or evolve accordingly, what I think that the world missed that no one has ever written is that the planet and the surface of the planet do not support each other and are not connected, if one imagines that things evolve to support a surrounding system as part of a singular being such as the planet, you have failed to noticed that the planet under the 20 feet of plant crap and tree roots, does not give a rats ass about the surface content of the planet, volcanoes, tidal waves and so on that are created by the pre animal and plant world, the base planet constantly destroys the since created biological planet surface in an arbitrary manner, there is no symbiotic link between the two, for the upper also does not benefit the lower.
This is closer to proof of being placed here than any other recorded comment in history, no other human ever noticed or record this fact, that the planet and the surface bio planet are not symbiotic, so too it also proves the other theory that the biological evolution may be more random than even science realises, what it does disprove absolutely though is the Pagan earth mother theory, because this bitch does not care about what is on the surface, further no biological evolution will ever effect the subsurface pre-existing planet.
Our planet is not our planet, our world exists on this planet, that is like the lea calling the dog his own, we are as plants a fungal infection on the dog, as animals merely fleas with no teeth, they are not one entity nor do not they coexist, the dog has non use for the fleas or the fungus, just as the planet has no use for our thin film layer of fungus and fleas. Our world exists in a thin film of moss and insects that cover a rock. We are not one we are separate entities and a solar flare would show this accurate, for in one day the thin film of sludge that is our world would be gone and the planet would remain, that same molten ball of cooling particles orbiting without purpose in space.
One reply no other responses will be entered.
Vetted and done
denied.
contains non sequiturs, logical fallacies, unsubstantiated assumptions, etc. ad infinitum, ad nauseam...
-
First, there is not enough evidence either way to prove the existence or non-existence of a god.
We can only speculate one way or another -there is no right or wrong. Therefore I believe the opinions of the people posting in this thread should not be squelched in this regard.
I would like to add this to the conversation: Everything that we observe came from something, or rather nothing. What started all of this? And what started that? - and on and on into infinity. What I have to assume is that in the beginning of time, space, energy, and matter there was nothing. For all the detractors on this forum and around the world in the scientific community - our existence in this plane of reality should prove to all deniers that you can create an entire universe, multiverse or whatever you believe, out of nothing. Now this revelation leads to the following questions: Did nothing will itself into existence so we can observe its creation? Was nothing bored with being nothing or did it just become aware of itself? Is nothing sentient? What created that nothing? These are questions that cannot be answered we can only ponder.
Now as far as hard evidence is concerned:
If there is hard evidence towards a connection to a greater energy it would be the experiments performed by Dr. Rick Strassman at the University of New Mexico with the chemical compound Dimethyl Tryptamine. DMT is a chemical created by our pineal gland that is secreted in large quantities 40-50 days after conception and again right after we die. It is the most powerful hallucinogen on this planet and it's naturally created by our brain. DMT is classified as a schedule 1 drug and is illegal even though our own body creates it. At the conclusion of the studies Dr. Strassman believed that DMT could be the "spirit molecule". He wrote a book called DMT: The Spirit Molecule if any of you are interested. DMT fits the bill as the chemical that could carry a soul to and from a human host, unfortunately due to its highly controlled nature I doubt anymore clinical studies will be performed on it. Although the Uniao do Vegetal church won a battle against the Supreme Court recently to allow Ayahuasca (5-MeO DMT) to be used during its religious ceremonies. I think it would be interesting to pursue more clinical research into the actions, methods, and purpose of DMT.
I hope I shed some light on this subject for you all.
you didn't shed anything except your manners, you're posting exactly what you have been asked not to... what part of "if you have some material evidence or a logical proof, great!, post it. otherwise keep your opinions and comments to yourself." didn't you understand? was it a specific word that threw you for a loop or was it the idea as a whole?
-
yes, post again 11:11, please demonstrate one more time just how asinine and clueless you can be...
-
vetting god with the mind impossible! , you can just feel the fear of immense space
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wsd2WJfplKk&feature=player_embedded#!
-
Wilby
Quote:
if you have some material evidence or a logical proof, great! present it.
----------------------------------
So Chetty mentioned
"THE PLACEBO EFFECT"
also known as FAITH
This I offer once again as an example of a higher power working through his creation.
God will Honor the Faith of a heathen
It s quite amazing what we can do if we "BELIEVE"
Nothing to do with religion.
Placebo is no "VOODO"
ITS FACT, in E V E R Y medical research study, where they have to evaluate
actual results.
They address PLACEBO EFFECT
What part of this "DO" you understand ?
I present Evidence
A documented ANOMALY
Chet
E;Tu btutemous P.U.D.
show me those pretty "CAPS"
-
Wilby
Quote:
if you have some material evidence or a logical proof, great! present it.
----------------------------------
So Chetty mentioned
"THE PLACEBO EFFECT"
also known as FAITH
This I offer once again as an example of a higher power working through his creation.
God will Honor the Faith of a heathen
It s quite amazing what we can do if we "BELIEVE"
Nothing to do with religion.
Placebo is no "VOODO"
ITS FACT, in E V E R Y medical research study, where they have to evaluate
actual results.
They address PLACEBO EFFECT
What part of this "DO" you understand ?
I present Evidence
A documented ANOMALY
Chet
E;Tu btutemous P.U.D.
show me those pretty "CAPS"
this is not material evidence, nor is it a logical proof. a documented anomaly doesn't qualify as material evidence of god anymore than tenbatsu's DMT is material evidence of a 'spirit molecule'... non sequitur. IT DOES NOT FOLLOW.
chetty, it is more than obvious you wish to be a cheerleader and not a player, at least do yourself the favor of learning what a cogent argument is and how to apply logic and reason. learning about the various fallacies, non sequitur, etc. would also serve you well...
-
Wilby ,
Maybe your right !
I don't understand! I see "the placebo effect" as logical proof.
That's my reality ,not yours! [yet].
So ...........
You have an explanation for the worlds most documented example of the closest thing you can get, next to a slap on the head from the creator himself?
Just how physical does your example have to be to meet the criteria of this thread?
The physical effects connected with "The placebo effect"[Faith],
Boggle the mind!!
Chetty
Oh , sorry
I'm done [that slow thing again]
-
chetty... you make me laugh ::)
from your hallowed wiki:
Placebo effect, the tendency of any medication or treatment, even an inert or ineffective one, to exhibit results simply because the recipient believes that it will work.
now lets apply some logic starting with the definition of placebo effect. "...simply because the recipient BELIEVES that it will work." why do they believe it will work? because they don't know it's a sugar pill (inert)... and the non-sugar pill they took before DID work. now, let us take the case of 'near beer' and someone who has never before drank 'real beer' but has seen its effects (MATERIAL EVIDENCE) on others. if they drink the 'near beer' under the ASSUMPTION that it is 'real beer' they might experience the placebo effect, but what do you think will happen if they are told it is inert prior to consumption? are you suggesting the placebo effect occurs if the recipient KNOWS it's a sugar pill?
let us take a look at your hallowed wiki's definition of faith which is a subset of belief:
faith, a belief "not resting on logical proof or material evidence."
it should be clear now why it DOES NOT FOLLOW.
now go google 'logical fallacies' and 'non sequitur' and stop asking me to hold you by the hand and educate you...
-
Wilby
Google "Malignant melanoma"
I wasn't talking about sugar pills and "TUMMY ACHES"
Mind Boggling stuff
Completely unexplainable
{snicker]
Chetty
-
Wilby
Google "Malignant melanoma"
I wasn't talking about sugar pills and "TUMMY ACHES"
Mind Boggling stuff
Completely unexplainable
{snicker]
Chetty
completely irrelevant... ::)
let us try a little exercise chetty. please enlighten us as to what is the premise and what is the conclusion in your 'placebo logic', and i use the word logic loosely here, quoted below.
What part of "Faith" is so foreign to you that you can't even look at the
Placebo effect and see an unexplainable "ANOMALY"
I see faith
I see Placebo [a manifestation of '"FAITH"]
I see a creator that Honors "FAITH"
Perhaps you have a better explanation for a placebo?
Chet
when you can manage that, we can continue.
-
Its "Completely Irrelevant "
In Wilby's world!
So far!
Enjoy !
You don't understand it ,you can't explain it,
you think its all in WEEKY
Enjoy!
Chetty
OH
the slow thing again
Faith
I see a creator that honors faith
manifested in what WEEky calls the placebo effect.
-
Its "Completely Irrelevant "
In Wilby's world!
So far!
Enjoy !
You don't understand it ,you can't explain it,
you think its all in WEEKY
Enjoy!
Chetty
it is compeletly irrelevant because you cannot logically demonstrate 'how it follows'... you don't even comprehend what your premise and conclusion is. ::)
again, let us try a little exercise chetty. please enlighten us as to what is the premise and what is the conclusion in your 'placebo logic', and i use the word logic loosely here, quoted below.
What part of "Faith" is so foreign to you that you can't even look at the
Placebo effect and see an unexplainable "ANOMALY"
I see faith
I see Placebo [a manifestation of '"FAITH"]
I see a creator that Honors "FAITH"
Perhaps you have a better explanation for a placebo?
Chet
when you can manage that, we can continue.
-
'how it follows"
I thought I explained my beliefs fairly well
I'll pray about it ,
and get back to you
Chetty
Summary
Faith
I see a creator that honors faith
manifested in what WEEky calls the placebo effect.
I'm not done yet [still have to pray]
This could take some time!
You can continue.............
You need a Hug or anything??
well OK than................
The "D" one!
But I can't play anymore !
I have to go build that Hydrogen thingy!
Later
Chetty
Oh
And Pray!
-
I'll pray about it ,
and get back to you
::) that will be about as effective as trying to solve an algebra equation by chewing bubblegum...
you don't need to pray to tell what was the premise and what was the conclusion, you're just stalling. and if you could be so kind, please tell us whether your argument was deductive or inductive...
http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/prior.html
-
WilbyInebriated, I think you missed the point of my original post. There is no conclusive evidence for either atheists, theists, or agnostics to be the victor. This is an argument with no end and therefore your original rules are meaningless and futile as no one would be able to respond to "your" thread on a public forum.
Your aggressive stance and trolling demeanor does nothing for your position and makes you look childish and immature. This forum has been in desperate need for proper moderation for some time now and you are becoming another example of that.
-
This thread is a perfect example why Jesus said, “Don’t cast your pearls before swine.â€
“Do not give what is holy to the dogs; nor cast your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you in pieces" (Matthew 7:6).
Spiritual dumbness has nothing to do with one's IQ. You can be a certified genius yet be dumb as a rock in spiritual matters.
Don't waste your time preaching to those who are obviously hardened and scornful. They will turn and tear you to pieces with their words, which is exactly what is happening in this thread. We have an angry dog spinning in circles and biting at everyone around it.
Clearly, what is happening here shows the wisdom of those words He spoke thousands of years ago.
Amazing, isn’t it?
-
WilbyInebriated, I think you missed the point of my original post. There is no conclusive evidence for either atheists, theists, or agnostics to be the victor. This is an argument with no end and therefore your original rules are meaningless and futile as no one would be able to respond to "your" thread on a public forum.
Your aggressive stance and trolling demeanor does nothing for your position and makes you look childish and immature. This forum has been in desperate need for proper moderation for some time now and you are becoming another example of that.
i understood completely. however, in point of fact, it had been requested several times that you don't post if you cannot provide material evidence or a logical proof. you choose to post regardless... this is an argument which should never have begun, and never would have, had you (and the others) shown some regard.
you are the example of the need for proper moderation...
-
This thread is a perfect example why Jesus said, “Don’t cast your pearls before swine.â€
“Do not give what is holy to the dogs; nor cast your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you in pieces" (Matthew 7:6).
Spiritual dumbness has nothing to do with one's IQ. You can be a certified genius yet be dumb as a rock in spiritual matters.
Don't waste your time preaching to those who are obviously hardened and scornful. They will turn and tear you to pieces with their words, which is exactly what is happening in this thread. We have an angry dog spinning in circles and biting at everyone around it.
Clearly, what is happening here shows the wisdom of those words He spoke thousands of years ago.
Amazing, isn’t it?
and yet you cannot provide a single shred of material evidence nor a logical proof of your imaginary godfairy, imagine that. amazing isn't it... ::) furthermore, you are putting the cart before the horse. vet your imaginary godfairy before you go spouting its alleged dogma.
this thread is a perfect example of why bertrand russell said ""what a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. the origin of myths is explained in this way."
-
See I like Wilby[I really do]
He has hutspa
Look at this Quote:
imaginary godfairy
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Is that "CUTE" or what?
Snicker
AS far as Moderation/censor ship
You don't like Wilby?
Hang up!
Chetty
PS
And he does teach me things!!
Thanks wilbyinebriated!
-
See I like Wilby[I really do]
He has hutspa
Look at this Quote:
imaginary godfairy
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Is that "CUTE" or what?
Snicker
AS far as Moderation/censor ship
You don't like Wilby?
Hang up!
Chetty
again, for the third time, let us try a little exercise chetty. please enlighten us as to what is the premise and what is the conclusion in your 'placebo logic', and i use the word logic loosely here, quoted below.
What part of "Faith" is so foreign to you that you can't even look at the
Placebo effect and see an unexplainable "ANOMALY"
I see faith
I see Placebo [a manifestation of '"FAITH"]
I see a creator that Honors "FAITH"
Perhaps you have a better explanation for a placebo?
Chet
when you can manage that, we can continue.
ps chet, i worked for several years in the '90's as a statistician at an institution that did phase I - IV clinical trails of pharmaceuticals, including double blind placebo... no imaginary godfairy was ever there. ;)
-
Wilby
Sorry
I haven't finished praying or thinking or meditating about that!
Your right I need to focus!!
I have a big honey Doo list and The NCV to get back to!
Chetty
-
Your last response to my post just proves my previous accusations.
Who's more the fool? The one who responds to the pointless argument, or the one who creates it?
I think that's an easy one to answer.
With that, I will be leaving this thread as I've said all I needed to say.
-
Your last response to my post just proves my previous accusations.
Who's more the fool? The one who responds to the pointless argument, or the one who creates it?
I think that's an easy one to answer.
With that, I will be leaving this thread as I've said all I need to say.
the only thing it proves is that you cannot honor a simple request... and yet again you post, looking childish and immature, demonstrating once more your lack of regard. ::)
-
This whole topic is questionable but I'll play once and say
that there's usually a website for most anything ...
http://www.proofthatgodexists.org/welcome.php (http://www.proofthatgodexists.org/welcome.php)
I know nothing about the above site other than the start page,
and no I won't respond to anything anyone says about this post.
tak
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eqNVtktU2HA&feature=fvst
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eqNVtktU2HA&feature=fvst
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_DKfJfKb5y0
-
This whole topic is questionable but I'll play once and say
that there's usually a website for most anything ...
http://www.proofthatgodexists.org/welcome.php (http://www.proofthatgodexists.org/welcome.php)
I know nothing about the above site other than the start page,
and no I won't respond to anything anyone says about this post.
tak
a false antecedent will give the appearance of leading to any conclusion... but such arguments are never sound.
-
WilbyInebriated had no interest in the actual topic of this thread. He is a troll and that's what he does. That much is obvious.
Which of the following has he proven once again?:
a. WilbyInebriated is a jackass
b. WilbyInebriated is a shithead
c. WilbyInebriated is an antagonistic prick
d. WilbyInebriated should be banned
e. WilbyInebriated has nothing of positive merit or measure to contribute in this forum
f. WilbyInebriated thrives on denigrating others
g. WilbyInebriated thinks he is superior
h. WilbyInebriated is the moron (and he knows it)
h. All of the above
-
WilbyInebriated had no interest in the actual topic of this thread. He is a troll and that's what he does. That much is obvious.
Which of the following has he proven once again?:
a. WilbyInebriated is a jackass
b. WilbyInebriated is a shithead
c. WilbyInebriated is an antagonistic prick
d. WilbyInebriated should be banned
e. WilbyInebriated has nothing of positive merit or measure to contribute in this forum
f. WilbyInebriated thrives on denigrating people
g. WilbyInebriated thinks he is superior
h. WilbyInebriated is the moron (and he knows it)
h. All of the above
another logical fallacy as a response... imagine that. ::)
-
The entire pretense of this thread is a fallacy, and you know it ;)
Have fun basking in your shame, jackass.
-
The entire pretense of this thread is a fallacy, and you know it ;)
Have fun basking in your shame, jackass.
do you have some material evidence or a logical proof of god? or are you just barking to hear your voice little doggie?
i'm shameless... don't you know what hutspa is? ::)
-
drunk willy often says the exact opposite,
of what is true.
yet he doesn't seem to be aware,
that he is doing it.
does that make drunk willy an involuntary satanist ?
because satanists love to do the opposite,
of what is true and/or constructive ?
drunk willy is often guilty,
of what he accuses others of doing/beings.
even when the accused person,
is not what they are accused of being.
drunk willy,
is what i call a smart fool.
they have too many intelligence units,
and not enough wisdom units.
the result,
is that they have enough detail potential,
to destroy everything.
but not enough wisdom potential,
to prevent them from destroying everything.
plus a vast amount,
of vicious hubristical insolence,
along the way.
intelligent fools,
are the equivalent,
of angry 4 year olds,
who know how to use lethal weapons.
but piss-bad administrative decisions,
economic ruin (inflation due to limitless greed),
and public ridicule of people who possess actual competency,
are more often their lethal weapons,
than knives,
fire arms,
artillery,
and nuclear bombs.
physical weapons of destruction,
are more often used,
by stupid fools,
rather than by smart fools.
but it is often the payroll provided by smart fools,
that is the primary motivation,
for the wholesale destruction of everything,
that is physically committed,
by stupid fools.
in other words,
if it were not for smart fools,
than stupid fools,
would be far less destructive !
which means that smart fools,
are often legally and karmically responsible,
for what stupid fools do.
smart fools are truly the bane,
of any civilization,
which is unfortunate enough,
to be infested by them.
and they have no clue what so ever,
that they are their societies worst possible enemy.
because if they had enough mental perception,
to be aware of how unconstructive their actions are,
than they would not be smart fools.
they have been shown to DESTROY entire civilizations,
in the past.
the death of the roman empire,
being a fine example,
of the outcome,
of their smart foolishness.
AKA destroying thousands of times more value,
than they are valuable as individual people.
value that sometimes takes thousands of years to rebuild.
the rebuilding of which,
is sorely delayed,
by their constant poisoning,
of the re-development of knowledge.
so they knock it all down,
they go out of their way to KEEP it knocked down,
over thousands of years,
free of charge.
thinking they are allah's gift to the world,
the whole time !!!
drunk willy thinks that his opinion is better than everyone elses.
when in reality,
drunk willy has far more to be ashamed of,
than anyone else has to be ashamed of !
drunk willy does not need to be banned.
he needs to be made to wear cement baby booties,
and thrown into the ocean.
that is the only way to be certain,
that he will not destroy thousands of times more value,
than he himself is valuable.
by sending him to a permanent time out,
before he sends most of our quality of life,
into a permanent time out.
sending drunk willy on a scuba diving expedition,
with a 100 pound cement payload,
will not kill him.
as drunk willy is undead.
as drunk willy is dead to me,
yet still posts garbage,
due to his undead animation.
we don't know what type of undead he is.
but most undead are not destroyed by scuba diving for pearls.
so it will not legally be murder.
making him dive for his first ever pearls of wisdom,
the hard way,
is merely a way,
to keep him out of societies way.
and my preference for chocolate,
instead of ice cream,
is still millions of times more valid,
than the invalid subject of this thread !
WHEN WILL YOU CEDE TO THE GREATER WORTHINESS,
OF MY CHOCOLATE-PERSONAL-OPINIONISM,
DRUNK WILLY !!!
or does someone need to physically proof,
the personal-opinionism-based existence of chocolate,
first ?
and cease with your only responding,
to the last paragraph,
of someone else's post.
read other peoples posts,
before dumping out your fool brain,
for once !
-
11:11, is that your idea of deductive logic? i hope not...
now, do you have some material evidence or a logical proof of god? or are you just barking to hear your voice little doggie?
regarding
WHEN WILL YOU CEDE TO THE GREATER WORTHINESS,
OF MY CHOCOLATE-PERSONAL-OPINIONISM,
DRUNK WILLY !!!
i'll do that when you do this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fFyHTU8tg_0
-
11:11
I really think that your contributions here are absolutely NOT required. I have never read such drivel on any forum ever. I'd be glad if you could spare us this nonsense. I'm amazed that Wilby tolerates having your posts at all. You are monopolising what could otherwise be an interesting thread. May I, for one, impose on you to either get on topic or get off the thread? It is absolutely NOT of interest what you think. Clearly you've never managed the art.
-
.
-
If you have some material evidence or a logical proof, great! present it.
I present Love
I gave it a good think![praying and such]
If I were just a pile of DNA, Morphing into whatever ?
Why do I love?
Its a design feature!
I could smother you in examples of love!
Chetty
-
11:11 speaks drivel? There's wisdom to be found in those 'ramblings', so learn to learn from
everything you read, and use your expression of distaste sparingly and carefully.
A portrait of intellectual (smart) fools
There are all kinds of fools, but the most intriguing ones are the bright fools. They appear to be intelligent and even religious, but they still make a mess of their lives because of their lack of wisdom. They feel miserable, because they don't understand that the pathway to happiness is not power and fame but wisdom and understanding. Here is a composite picture of the well-educated smart fools:
- They win the whole world but lose their own souls.
- They live as if they will never die.
- They want to play God, because they think that God either does not exist or he does not care.
- They are more concerned about looking good than acting right.
- Their conscience is seared by greed and arrogance.
- They have too much knowledge and information but very little human understanding.
- Their hubris prevents them from listening to words of wisdom from others.
- They are too busy defending and justifying their actions that they are not able to learn from their mistakes.
- They are unaware of their own blind spots and foolishness.
- Their judgments are often clouded and distorted by false assumptions, biases and self-interests.
- Their course of action is often dictated by how to win the turf-war rather than how to resolve the conflict.
- They like to hide behind their position of authority and overrule good decisions.
- They subscribe to dominant paradigms and conventional wisdoms and resent innovative solutions.
- They intellectualize everything and rarely consider the spiritual and humane dimensions of their actions.
- They are guided by expediency rather than principles.
- They often lose big by gaining small advantages.
- They would not hesitate to lie to cover up their wrong doings.
- They never say what they mean and never mean what they say.
- They use people and exploit relationships for their own gains.
- They don't have the courage to stand up for what is right and just.
- Their world is very small, because they only live for themselves.
- They think that they are smart enough to fool everyone including God.
- They don't recognize their boundaries and limitations.
- They are always ready to make deals, without realizing that they may have dealt away their souls to the devil.
- When the house they built collapses, they even do not realize that it has been built on sand.
tak
-
More fatuous platitudes? And this is what? Wisdom? A guarantee for happiness - IF that's 11.11's mission in life - is self-satisfaction. It seems that 11.11 has secured that happiness - is my opinion. It is a happiness that, frankly, I'd happily do without. Your standard parrot would do a better job of preaching. If 11.11 had the modesty to realise he was off topic I would be more inclined to accuse him of wisdom. As it is he appears to be bereft and I rather suspect that he has simply given us a self-portrait in that long list of vacuous and irrelevant observations. I'd copy them as reference if I thought it mattered.
-
If you have some material evidence or a logical proof, great! present it.
I present Love
I gave it a good think![praying and such]
If I were just a pile of DNA, Morphing into whatever ?
Why do I love?
Its a design feature!
I could smother you in examples of love!
Chetty
chetty... i am very disappointed. you obviously haven't been paying attention... 'presenting love' and then attributing 'why you love' to a design feature of god is a logical fallacy. it does not follow.
quit being so lazy and learn what logic is. here i even made a clicky thing for you, since you appear to require someone holding your hand... (http://lmgtfy.com/?q=logical%20fallacies)
-
Wilbyi
Ok
I will look at the clicky thing,
maybe then I'll understand your rules.
Chetty
-
HHMMmm...............
I'll be Back!
[Spoken like a California Governor.]
-
WilbyInebriated,
Quote:
people, all people, have a need to share a bit of themselves with others.
------------------------------------
Design feature!!
[not optional, standatrd equipment]
Hows it go?
I[the big "I"] could live anywhere in the universe,
But I chose to live in "YOU"!
Even Rainmen!
Perhaps especially "RainMen"!
Chetty
-
Wilby - for what it's worth, here's my take. God - thus far - has been appropriated by mere mortals and these mere mortals presume to 'speak on behalf of God'. Which is absurd. Religion is that systematic appropriation of that right. And religion is best served where it preys on guilt and the promotion of a sense of obligation, where sins can be expiated - only at a price. Big subject.
So. There are a few considerations related to religion. The one is the presumption of authority - which is always questionable. And then there's the ability to exploit a message to any self-serving purpose - thereby corrupting any moral basis of religion. Which is historically evident and seems to be traditional. The 'exclusivity' that belongs to religion is barbaric and presumptive and does little to promote the general well-being of the individual - or even alleviate the suffering of the human condition.
But we do have reason - and it is reasonable to assume a beginning and it is thereby also reasonable to recognise that, in as much as we were not 'responsible' for that 'beginning' then someone or something may be. And where it may not be entirely logical - it is, nonethelss, 'understandable' to attribute that beginning to 'God'. That we then apply 'human properties' to God - is perhaps a little pretentious - but it's kind of understandable and it's a kind of bench mark. We're definitely not PERFECT and one hopes that 'deep inside' the potential to be 'perfect' would be nice. Therefore, by contrast to us - perhaps that God like being - is perfect. Hopefully.
So, in it's way God represents an aspiration - of sorts. NOW. What I think is this. Religion - ALL religion - bastardises the human condition - where and if it constantly reminds us of a collective guilt - this wild unsolicited, undeserved inheritance that we got from some clumsy choices that some distant forebear may have made. Frankly if God is willing to punish everyone in such a way - then he's somewhat tyrannical and somewhat unforgiving. Not the kind of God I'd care to know. Certainly not PERFECT. However. If and where religion advances a 'greater understanding' and, as Chet keeps saying 'love' - then that's definitely in line with PERFECTION. It's the kind of aspirational high that I think could keep the entire human race more or less motivated and motorised.
But it's a really deep subject. We are all hidebound by evolutionary constraints. And I wonder if there are sufficient natural pressures to induce greater evolutionary adaptations. But what we do have, collectively, is a brain. And where - to date - evolution has depended on those external pressures - I wonder if we are not now evolving a greater capacity to discover things like 'anti gravity' - perpetual motion - time travel - all those things - subjects - that are, outside of these forums - considered impolite subjects for discussion. But which, nonetheless, are preferred states of being and which I, personally, would consider more perfect than our present lot.
In other words - the 'reach' into new fields of endeavours - into better adaptations - into perfection - rests on a kind of collective reach which is taking over from Nature's usual methods of evolutionary adaptation. In other words - it's not necessarily a question of survival. In fact it may be - in the long term. But, by and large it's the cherry - the improved condition of survival. And since this has NOTHING to do with religion and everything to do with logic - and as our 'logic' forges this path so to speak - then - that is the same logic that first perceived of the state of perfection. And that concept of a state of perfection is, in turn, vested in the concept of a 'creator' at the beginning - who, hopefully, is greater than us mere mortals.
Therefore do I believe in God. And therefore do I absolutely NOT subscribe to any religion. And that's my tuppence worth. ;D
Kindest as ever,
Rosie
-
it's amazing to me that after all of the discovery and understanding of thousands of years of observation and research, by the some of the best minds our world has produced - so many people prefer to believe bronze age goatherders, about whom we know little except they were incredibly ignorant by today's standards and steeped in superstition. these people sought to explain what they couldn't understand by creating myths about god(s) that created and ruled the earth and the stars. in their case, it was understandable, they didn't have the incredible knowledge we do today, nor the tools to explore and understand the universe that we now have. less understandable to me is why many prefer to cling to the superstitions they created in those ancient times.
-
it's amazing to me that after all of the discovery and understanding of thousands of years of observation and research, by the some of the best minds our world has produced - so many people prefer to believe bronze age goatherders, about whom we know little except they were incredibly ignorant by today's standards and steeped in superstition. these people sought to explain what they couldn't understand by creating myths about god(s) that created and ruled the earth and the stars. in their case, it was understandable, they didn't have the incredible knowledge we do today, nor the tools to explore and understand the universe that we now have. less understandable to me is why many prefer to cling to the superstitions they created in those ancient times.
Agreed. I can only argue this in terms of Christianity as it's the only religion I know anything about. Here's the thing. There are claims made by reputable witnesses that Jesus walked on water, stilled the storm, fed the thousands, healed the sick, and on and on. We can discount that evidence as 'pure fabrication' or we can acknowledge the truth of it. Either way. To my own interpretation of the central message here - is that Christ continually advised us that we need do no more than 'ask' and it will be granted'. Apparently at all stages of this mission of his he kept reminding the healed, or those happy beneficiaries of those multiple miracles - that they could now do so simply by exercising their own 'faith'. In other words - the central message here is 'have faith' ask away - and it will be granted. Nothing is out of reach. Dream your dreams.
Now. To my way of thinking - whether Christ was God's anointed son - or wether he was just the most extraordinary and charismatic person - what can't be argued that he literally 'gave his life' so that we'd get rid of 'guilt' which seems to be some kind of archetypal response that we're literally born with. That's a pretty generous gesture and I'm sure that I, for one, certainly appreciate it. The trouble is that it didn't seem to work. His great historical contribution to the human psyche to FREE it of guilt was then appropriated by the Church who distorted the message to KEEP REMINDING us of our guilt. DEFER your gratifications and satisfactions - until you get to heaven. ::)
It is my opinion that this appropriation of authority to interepret Christ's message actually diametrically contradicts the core message in Christianity. In effect - our actual heritage is freedom from guilt which religion finds offensive - and it is RELIGION or the CHURCH that requires that we are not thereby 'freed'. In effect they require those shackles and the more the better. Very exploitable.
So. I actually think that man's evolutionary reach is dependant on 'loosening the shackles' of guilt and then loosening the 'dreams' that I suspect we all yearn for - and then, indeed - one could, perhaps, get a general improvement in the human condition.
But the actual question then is how much of these 'reportings' are the result of susperstition. There's no way here to find an answer until we actually manage time travel. So. Perhaps the question could be rephrased to the object lessons in those simple belief structures. Where they are simply tools to exploit the persistent deprived conditions of living and life - then clearly they're corrupted. And where they point to an expanded good will and well being and fulfillment of dreams - then perhaps they are not so evidently corrupted. But both object lessons can result both inside religion and outside religion. And depending on the self serving nature of those dreams, or otherwise, then the truth is that even unshackled dreams can be dangerously corruptible.
So. Best thing for me personally is to 'eschew' religion and follow some reach towards the collective good of humanity and that relies - not on belief structures but logic.
And I have no trouble, logically, in understanding that Jesus was trying to rid us of our collective guilt. Very desirable. And certainly required if we're to challenge the apparent constraints of the 'forces' and the rest. ;D
Kindest as ever,
Rosie
-
You know I can not say I know any gods of any stories, or myths, or by any religions. The world is so full of many religions. Like fads over the ages they come and go. The greek gods is just such a story. That was before the biblical stories. Like a fad it came and went. Strange how back then so many would swear upon anything that zeus was real, yet today few if any would. This is what is happening to the modern day biblical religion. And thats what many dont like. Personally it dont matter to me, religions serve a purpose for a time, to ease minds and worries, in hopes something greater loves them. Why? Perhaps because our love for ourselves or others simply is not enough to supply what we need, so as an escape to this misery of not enough love and to many problems or worries we as a species invent gods, and pretend our gods love us and make us special, and will solve our problems. Its an escape from the insanity of reality and the lack of love therein. Its not really a bad thing,,tho many bad things have been done over or in the name of gods and religions. This is the truth, plain and simple, if such a thing can be simplified. Faith is a strange thing, its a way to believe something with no proof,,and in many cases with no results even. And I am not saying that is a bad thing, it serves a need, fills a hole or bridges a mental gap which is lacking in understanding. We all need that sometimes, but how often do we see it for what it really is? Strangely we are already gods, compared to animals, to lower life forms, over the tiny creatures. Maybe the question is how good are we at being these gods. And perhaps that is why we cant imagine any greater god being better then we are. Perhaps that is why all of humanities religions have gods that are not absolute unconditional love, but usually say something to the effect do what I say or do it my way or perish ,,or be destroyed. I find it odd some cant see this, even in the modern biblical religion it says their god is unconditional love, but then in the next phrase that would be said sooner or later,,that you must obey/serve and do what god says or go to hell, or some even say burn forever in he-double-hockysticks...And that is not what an all loving god of unconditional love would say, as anyone with a bit of common sense would know that. That is not a put down of the biblical religion itself as I think all religions world wide, all through the ages, all are made up. But they did serve a psychological need, or many for a time. And they all will pass in time like fashion fads, that just become unfashionable eventually. And just like in the past new god/s and religions will come to take their place. This will repeat as it has in ages past untill we become a species that can supply enough of our physical and emotional needs, to not need it anymore.
-
11:11
this thread is specially dedicated to the subject of VETTING god. what you 'think' god is does not qualify.
if you have some material evidence or a logical proof, great! present it.
thank you for your cooperation.
OP, I am quite disappointed with your non sequitur quote "vetting God". You have set forth limits and demand physical evidence of the force that is beyond most will or wit.
What is God?.
A non thinking logical answer is not true and it is impossible to produce an answer our current state due to biological limitations of perceptions using our 5 sensory.
To produce physical evidence requires manifestation of matter which is a process of brain associations with determined values pre-linked and stored in memory called conscious. So therefore your answer will be a continuum of pure speculations.
To produce a pure state answer requires a being to communicate to you anomalous cognition which is a different mode of transmission. State of super conscious is not comprehensible to 99.99 percent of the population.
What is GOD?.
It is a pure super state of being. Not human Deity such as dogmatic Jesus or Allah etc. These were enlightened beings, we all are capable of controlling the greater force such as defying gravity and giving life to the dead.
My answer is How to be God?
All is love, light and unity. :)
-
OP, I am quite disappointed with your non sequitur quote "vetting God". You have set forth limits and demand physical evidence of the force that is beyond most will or wit.
What is God?.
A non thinking logical answer is not true and it is impossible to produce an answer our current state due to biological limitations of perceptions using our 5 sensory.
there is no non sequitur... a non sequitur is an argument in which its conclusion does not follow from its premises. i have offered no argument, i have simply asked techstuf (and people like him) to provide material evidence or a logical proof of his imaginary godfairy. but since we are on the topic of logical fallacy, it's funny that first you say it is impossible to produce an answer, which by the way, you cannot possibly know... ;)
and then you follow with this!?!?
What is GOD?.
It is a pure super state of being. Not human Deity such as dogmatic Jesus or Allah etc. These were enlightened beings, we all are capable of controlling the greater force such as defying gravity and giving life to the dead.
i'm amused by your contradiction here. ;) and as far as defying gravity and giving life to the dead by "controlling the greater force"... well, i'll believe that when you demostrate it. ::)
My answer is How to be God?
All is love, light and unity. :)
logical fallacy, red herring... i didn't ask "how to be god?".
LOL, keep working at it, you'll get this logic thing some day. ;)
now, since you seemed to have missed this in the post of mine that you quoted ::) i'll say it again: this thread is specially dedicated to the subject of VETTING god for people like techstuf. so before you post again go read my opening post a little closer and a few of techstuf's posts and decide if you are like him. and again, what you 'think' god is does not qualify. if you have some material evidence or a logical proof, great! present it.
thank you for your cooperation.
-
For good MEASUREMENT you need the RIGHT INSTRUMENT !
Could you measure God or Love with a lineal ? He (She) is …cm ?? …inches ??
Pure nonsense.
I WILL SHOW YOU HOW TO MESSURE GOD WITH A LINEAL.
First: you take that lineal. You are now able to measure distances.
First dimension. No good for measuring GOD OR LOVE.
Second: you take that lineal bend the two endings toward each other.
Fix them. You have a circle. You are now able to measure surfaces.
Second dimension. Still not good for measuring God !!
How comes most people are struck to this inapt instrument ?
You measure a monatomic God, write endless books about Him,
try to convince everybody that you are right ??
You should admit at least your wrong measurement !
HE is shining white = the circle is complete white = believers.
SHE is dark black = the circle is complete black = nonbelievers.
The only dynamism possible is that off KUNDALINI.
The snake that bites his tale. The energy bend inwards.
Continuing until non-existence !!
This is dead ! Or dying !!
Third: you take that circle, with both your hands.
One hand you turn towards your body, the other away from it.
Now you have the sign for eternity. You added a third dimension !!!
This is the instrument to measure eternity. But never forget that you
first have to input equal but opposite energies to make it work.
How to visualise endless things ?? Build a picture off it.
For one picture tells more than a thousand words.
Most adequate sign: eternity symbol, or Yin-Yang
To explain everything !!
Don’t ever try to kill the devil, you will need him to keep balance.
There is no thing that makes balance on his one.
Admit the devil, admit that God never dismissed him, make love to Lilith,
(this is the same !!)
-
::)
-
::)
Kin Sea Atoll
Salt Lake Ion
Likes At Loan, Like At Loans
-
Alkali Stone
Stella Nokia
Ali Snotleak
and of course the famous
alt.snakeoil
-
What if there is a religious text that is so mathematically complex, so scientifically perfect, that no mortal could possibly have written it? Would that be evidence of a God? The fact of the matter is, that text does exist and from a purely scientific perspective, there is nothing more fascinating that I have ever examined.
Most mortals such as Wilby are just to simple to recognize it exists. Had Einstein not polluted the mathematical relationship between light and gravity, you would by now be coming to the conclusion that you are a fractal of a universe and nature creates through fractals. With a firm understanding of relativity under one foot and a solid understanding of fractal geometry under the other foot, at a fundamental level you know everything in the universe.
Those that would assign everything to God and those that would deny God regardless of the evidence are two half wits of the same non-functioning mind. Wilby's lack of knowledge of ancient history prevent him from noticing the great pyramid is both an observatory and a calender of the future placed on this Earth by higher beings thousands of years ago. Knowledge is like the tide, it ebbs and flows. The deluges wipe the Earth clean of half wits every 12,995.5 years along with the technology and knowledge they possessed.
Wilby would probably deny higher beings created life on this Earth while claiming those pyramids were build by 100,000 men pulling on a giant rope. The graven images of helicopters, jets and radiolytic medicine capable of curing all disease somehow escape his attention.
If God is real, no belief is necessary and no belief is necessary if you understand the science and history of God. I'm writing a book on the subject right now and so I won't tip my hand. The book is full evidence that cannot be denied.
Those that suppress this knowledge through various means do so to keep the masses confused, divided and conquered. The persona of pure evil that exists on this Earth for a short moment more are doomed to become a burning diamond in the sky soon enough. Are you listening Hartman?
Wilby is nothing more than a tool in someone else's shed and a dull one at that. He is a one trick pony obsessed with the term "logical fallacy" and in the process blinds himself to the mysteries far greater than science could or would ever acknowledge exist.
I don't know who he has a beef with and I am certainly not going to bother myself reading the typical dribble that comes with a thread like this. What I do know is that text exists, is written like the layers of an onion and contains an equal distant skip code. I surely doubt any mortal could have written that.
You find science and history being taught with the same exact words. Also within those words, you find a code that intimates this is the beginning of what God has to say to you. You find a forth layer and that is far too sacred for the mortals that ply these muddy waters. That text is the Torah written in Hebrew.
No human is capable of encoding the mind of God and ultimately no belief is necessary, quite the opposite is true. Knowledge is the key to understanding God but you can't see what is written unless you already have that knowledge. This is how God sorts the wheat from the chaff.
"In the beginning God created the heavens and the Earth and the Earth was void and without form." Wilby would see that as history too stupid to realize that is also a description of matter.
"Then God said let there be light". Again the mouth breather sees the first layer - history. He is not capable of realizing that mass is matter in a gravitational field and that non-polarized toroidal vacuum energy is produced by the Sun in a form such as static electricity. It is that gravity that pulls matter down to mass. E=mc2 just happens to represent that vacuum energy that condenses matter down to mass. Without the Sun, we would entropy back to matter in the same way half of Wilby's brain did as a result of severe alcohol abuse.
"Then God divided the light from the darkness" You were just taught right thumb rule as the Earth begins to rotate and so on. The relationship between light, gravity and electricity are in plain sight if you are enlightened.
Saint Buzz, the God of free energy sent to enlighten you hath spoken. Where's my missing stars bitches? I want my stolen stars back!
Saint Buzz hath returned to the heavens to bask in the light of what is left of his useless overunity gold stars. Go forth and be a half wit no more.
so that's a no from you regarding the request for extant material evidence and/or a logical proof for the existence of your imaginary godfairy creator friend...
thank you for your admission.
oh and buzz... thank you for proving evolution actually does apply to trolls. you have demonstrated with your return and latest posts that trolls can evolve from spending all their time talking about what 'they would do or think...' to spending all their time talking about 'what others would do or think'... bravo! should i call the nobel committee? oh what am i saying... i'm sure you have already, to toot your own horn. ::)
i have your stars bitch... you can have them back when you KNEEL BEFORE ZOD!
-
just laugh, ya, laugh wilby. ;D
i'll accompany you in laughing, bwa hahahahahahhahahahhahahahhahahhahahahh lol ;D
-
just laugh, ya, laugh wilby. ;D
even tinselkoala refutes you and your imaginary godfairy creator/savior friend teetsatan...
he has posted a picture of your lord and master, the flying spaghetti monster.
-
even tinselkoala refutes you and your imaginary godfairy creator/savior friend teetsatan...
he has posted a picture of your lord and master, the flying spaghetti monster.
oh really?! that's amazing, ;D
imagine he got a picture from God and you are believing?! :o wow that's really really amazing! :o :o :o and you are believing then lets cheers on that and laugh out loud bwahahahahahahahahhahahahha ;D
another great grade level logic from wilby bwahahahahahahahahahahhha ;D ;D ;D ;D
cheers! lets toss for your punishment. bwahahahahhahahha lol ;D ;D ;D ;D
ok then lets laugh again. lol bhwa hahahahahhahahahhahaahhhahhahha lol ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
You're really you, you you lol ;D
-
i'll be missing you wilby regards me to your dad bwahahahahahhahahaahahahhahahahah lol ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
I did, I got the picture from God.
Or as close to God as you can really get: the Universe itself gave it to me, and I teased it out from barely detectable fluctuations in the EM ambience.
Not only that, but it is a picture of what you and I are made of: stardust.
-
W
Your just to simple.... Its not your fault !!
You stand in the forest and scream at the top of your Lungs
SHOW ME THE STUPID TREE"S
COME ON MORONS SHOW ME THE TREE"S!!
its not your fault "W"...........
But you really have to calm down ,you're scramblin your DNA [epigenetics]
We just found out "stress" causes almost instant evolution on an unprecedented scale.
Seeing as you really don't know what the designer of your DNA is really capable of or has planned for you.[we are not talking religion here or Fairy stories]
Easy does it.........
Thx
Chet
-
I did, I got the picture from God.
Or as close to God as you can really get: the Universe itself gave it to me, and I teased it out from barely detectable fluctuations in the EM ambience.
Not only that, but it is a picture of what you and I are made of: stardust.
http://bibledestroyed.webs.com/Jacob%20saw%20Gods%20face%20and%20his%20life%20was%20preserved,%20no%20one%20has%20seen%20Gods%20face%20and%20would%20die%20if%20they%20did.html (http://bibledestroyed.webs.com/Jacob%20saw%20Gods%20face%20and%20his%20life%20was%20preserved,%20no%20one%20has%20seen%20Gods%20face%20and%20would%20die%20if%20they%20did.html)
Sorry bro. but your picture is not accepted because it is conflict in the Bible.
because you should be died by now if you saw the real true God.
as the logic says that. :)
so that is the reason why you should read the Bible so that you should not be deceive. :)
-
@ milehigh's letter to me
"14-year-old girl gunned down in the street like a dog in the name of the Lord.
Makes you stop and think a bit, no? How can you not at least have mixed feelings about religion? "
Here is my answer for that, and for the benefit of the doubt. ;D
do not afraid to the one that can kill your body and can't kill your soul, but be afraid to the one that can kill body and soul in the lake of fire.
To die is gain and to live is Christ. So nothing to loose either of the two is favorable.
For it is appointed to a person to die weather you are young or old, and it is much better if you die in the name of the Lord.
for you will be with God eternally ;)
Tito L. Oracion ;D
-
@ milehigh's letter to me
"14-year-old girl gunned down in the street like a dog in the name of the Lord.
Makes you stop and think a bit, no? How can you not at least have mixed feelings about religion? "
Here is my answer for that, and for the benefit of the doubt. ;D
do not afraid to the one that can kill your body and can't kill your soul, but be afraid to the one that can kill body and soul in the lake of fire.
To die is gain and to live is Christ. So nothing to loose either of the two is favorable.
For it is appointed to a person to die weather you are young or old, and it is much better if you die in the name of the Lord.
for you will be with God eternally ;)
Tito L. Oracion ;D
I got the same PM from Milehigh. It is a common tactic used by non believers to put believers to the test.
Its funny, because 'we' know that Gods plan is something we have to accept along the way.
People are going to die. Young and old. From natural causes to evil deeds.
Its not that 'we' dont care. Its not that we are not saddened.
Its just that, with what 'we' believe, we do not question Gods plan. We are only here a short time.
The tactic used by Milehigh is one that has intent on pitting us against God to pose the question of 'why'? To instill anger in us towards God for what he let happen to that little girl. To disrupt faith.
I suppose Milehigh is probably 'for' abortion. Is that 14 year old girl worth any more than the unborn child? No. They are the same. Paul Ryan said the other day, when he saw the ultrasound of his unborn daughter, she was the size of a bean. But you could detect a heartbeat in that bean. That bean is alive with full possibility to be just like you or me or anyone. Paul nicknamed his daughter Bean. ;] He is Pro Life. So am I.
Mags
-
To instill anger in us towards God for what he let happen to that little girl. To disrupt faith.
Think. Faith would not be necessary if things were just all peachy and nice. No evil, no disease, no fear, no death. What would we need faith in if there is nothing to fear, no death and no problems? ;]
God has his reasons for doing it this way. I accept that. ;]
Mags
-
Mags,
No faith is necessary if you know what God is and where you live within that body. God no more knows or cares if a little girl lives any more than you know or care if one of your skin cells fall off.
I barely scratched the surface of what I know about this from a purely scientific perspective but if all Wilby has to offer is his self delusional desire to be some flying-homo-bad-ass then the thread is as pointless as Wilby's pathetic existence.
Rise before Zod, Kneel before Zod
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKDFop0aqYQ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKDFop0aqYQ)
Wilby was obviously attracted to the skin tight sequined low cut v-neck jump suit and the actor with dodgy x-chromosome credentials speaking with that all too familiar slight lisp...
Perhaps we should instead be vetting Wilby?
TheBuzz hath ranted
You can never know God without faith first. :)
-
Mags,
No faith is necessary if you know what God is and where you live within that body. God no more knows or cares if a little girl lives any more than you know or care if one of your skin cells fall off.
I barely scratched the surface of what I know about this from a purely scientific perspective but if all Wilby has to offer is his self delusional desire to be some flying-homo-bad-ass then the thread is as pointless as Wilby's pathetic existence.
Rise before Zod, Kneel before Zod
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKDFop0aqYQ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKDFop0aqYQ)
Wilby was obviously attracted to the skin tight sequined low cut v-neck jump suit and the actor with dodgy x-chromosome credentials speaking with that all too familiar slight lisp...
Perhaps we should instead be vetting Wilby?
TheBuzz hath ranted
i see you're still trying for that ad hominem fallacy blue ribbon buzzy... instead of presenting a cogent argument for the existence of your imaginary godfairy. ::)
so that's ANOTHER no from you regarding the request for extant material evidence and/or a logical proof for the existence of your imaginary godfairy creator friend...
thank you for your admission, you moronic godbot.
physical evidence that gawd has spoken to you... HAA ::) thanks for laughs godbots... your retarded hypocrisy nourishes me.
-
Wiki: Judaism
Faith itself is not a religious concept in Judaism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judaism). Although Judaism does recognize the positive value of Emunah[18] (generally translated as faith, trust in God) and the negative status of the Apikorus (heretic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heresy)), faith is not as stressed or as central as it is in other religions, especially as it is in the faith-possessed Christendom (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christendom). It could be a necessary means for being a practicing religious Jew, but the emphasis is placed on practice rather than on faith itself. Very rarely does it relate to any teaching that must be believed.[19] Classical Judaism does not require one to explicitly identify God (a key tenet of faith in Christianity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity)), but rather to honour the idea of God.
so you're stating the jews honor stupidity and ignorance... how quaint. ::)
-
People are good and evil and it doesn't matter if they believe in a god or not.
I think people who belief in a god who created the universe and then earth for us are dumb but I thread them the same :)
Wake up! we are not the reason for the universe to exist! There is more to it, we are just not capable to understand everything, not even a fraction. The easiest thing to do is belief in a fairytale and act like you know everything, the hardest thing to do must be clearing your brain and think.
it's not about us people!
-
That would be your religion but that is not so for me. I cited the Torah in my original post.
Belief or faith is accepting something as true though you have no experience of it. I have physical evidence that a higher being has spoken to me many times. My thinking is that God avoids crazy people just like I do.
no brother, God is a loving and a very good God He doesn't avoid everyone as long as you have FAITH to him.
Well, i'm not sure about your personal experience, just continue to pray with humility and He will guide you to truth.
Read the bible, believe in the bible and continue to become loving and good in his sight. and He will care for you. ;)
-
so you're stating the jews honor stupidity and ignorance... how quaint. ::)
Another amature word twister. Thinks he is taking it right from you mouth as if he has a link to prove you said it. Amature hour at its best.. how quaint. :P
Id be embarrassed to post garbage like that. ;)
Magzimus Leviticus
-
Belief and disbelief are magical thoughts. There are just things that I know and things that I do not know. I know that there is a G-d. I know that we exist as a fractal within a Universe that is G-d.
The evidence that higher beings once lived on this planet and that a G-d spoke to Moses is undeniable. I really could not care less what ones religion is, I care what they do. It is the acts and deeds that matter and can be measured and I doubt that G-d sees it any other way.
The whole notion that one can "vet" G-d is a symptom called an "elevated sense of self worth" indicative of a secondary psychopath. Everyone should Google "psychopathy - The mask of sanity". You should find Wilby listed under the antisocial subset of a secondary psychopath. They are the chemically dumbed down root of all evil that exist within in the US.
THE PSYCHOPATH - The Mask of Sanity
http://www.cassiopaea.com/cassiopaea/psychopath.htm (http://www.cassiopaea.com/cassiopaea/psychopath.htm)
ANOTHER no from you regarding the request for extant material evidence and/or a logical proof for the existence of your imaginary godfairy creator friend... imagine that! ::)
thank you for ANOTHER admission of the fact that you have no more extant evidence nor proof to substantiate your asinine claims than there is to substantiate claims of leprechauns... you godtards are such hypocritical lunatics.
yeah... you know... in the very same manner and sense that i KNOW you are a fucking moron. ::)
the whole notion of your imaginary godfairy is asinine and delusional.
-
This thread is now locked.
Please no more religeous threads here on overunity.com
You can discuss this on other forums.
Many thanks for your understanding.
Regards Stefan. ( admin)