RE: Why do you believe? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


vincentML -> RE: Why do you believe? (6/23/2013 6:27:54 PM)

quote:

Also, it is reported that there is something else out there....
"Distant clusters of galaxies are all shifting inexorably towards the same spot in the sky, beyond the boundary of what we can see, a baffling discovery by Nasa scientists that seems to challenge our understanding of the Big Bang.

That would be new and exciting. Every theory is subject to challenge. Except of course if someone is claiming they have experiments to show that consciousness can be projected to effect events at a distance. That is not subject to challenge. [8|]

Dark Energy? Maybe real. Or maybe just a fill in hypothesis to explain the acceleration of the galaxies. But better than a god of the gap.




vincentML -> RE: Why do you believe? (6/23/2013 6:35:36 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

for all we know, since we do not know the boundaries our knowable universe may very well fit into a grain of sand in the big picture.

for all we know.

Yup. Ours may be part of a multiverse.




Real0ne -> RE: Why do you believe? (6/23/2013 7:41:52 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML


quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

the idea that "space" is expanding is a bit hard to believe. now planets gaiing greater distance between each other in a given space makes more sense.

there is no way to determine if "space" is expanding unless the boundaries of "space" are known.

Quantum physics is hard to believe. Einstein's theory that space curves is hard to believe. His theory that time slows as the traveler approaches the speed of light is hard to believe. However, predictions arising from these theories confirm them. This aint a church, Toto. It doesn't matter if you think any of it is a bit hard to believe. Science will go on without your approval.



yeh but einstein was a great fudge maker.

its mostly bullshit, in fact tesla called bullshit to his face.
set the world back over 100 years in power physics.
but there is HUGE money to be made when there is no "real" progress

quote:

The Structure of the Ether

On a body as large as the sun, it would be impossible to project a disturbance of this kind [e.g., radio broadcasts] to any considerable distance except along the surface. It might be inferred that I am alluding to the curvature of space supposed to exist according to the teachings of relativity, but nothing could be further from my mind. I hold that space cannot be curved, for the simple reason that it can have no properties. It might as well be said that God has properties. He has not, but only attributes and these are of our own making. Of properties we can only speak when dealing with matter filling the space. To say that in the presence of large bodies space becomes curved, is equivalent to stating that something can act upon nothing. I for one, refuse to subscribe to such a view.

– Nikola Tesla3



quote:

This concept quickly became dogma as it helped solve a number of dilemmas, for instance, they no longer had to search for the ether because according to this view, it didn’t exist. “Einstein did not disprove the existence of the ether…. He only stated [in Special Relativity] that whether or not it existed, light would always travel at the same speed.”7

From the perspective of popular science writers, “belief in the nonexistence of the ether remained alive, but in actuality, by 1916, Einstein had replaced the old ether in his theory of General Relativity by curved space-time itself. Only, this new ‘ether’ is no longer a medium in three-dimensional Euclidean space, but in four-dimensional non-Euclidean (curved) space-time.”8 It was this idea that was completely unacceptable to Tesla, and he criticised Einstein in the 1930s because of it.


Tesla postulated that everything in the universe derived its energy from external sources.

Tesla addressed this factor with his construction of the first prototype of a thinking machine, his telautomaton or remote controlled robot which was in the form of a wireless activated boat that the inventor displayed before the public at Madison Square Garden in 1898.13

The reason we fall back to the Earth when we jump up is not this mystical force of gravity, but rather it is because the Earth is constantly absorbing a tremendous amount of ether to keep all of its elementary particles spinning. We are just in the way of this influx. This view explains what gravity is, and also explains Tesla’s seemingly odd statement that the sun is absorbing more energy than it is radiating. The more you think about it, the more this seemingly nutty idea makes perfect sense. The sun requires a gargantuan amount of etheric energy to keep its integrity.
Grand Unification

Now we go to Einstein, who as we learn from the new Isaacson biography, came to reject Mach’s principle. Einstein did indeed see a connection between gravity and acceleration, but he was not ready to accept the etheric view, because to do so would mean to drive a stake through his precious theory of relativity. Remember, he said that if ether could be detected, then his theory was wrong.

Now, four years later, in 1920 after reconsidering the necessity of the ether, for instance, as a means to propagate light, Einstein changed his mind.

Einstein never came to view gravity as the absorption of ether by elementary particles and electromagnetism as a product of this process, because to do so would be to abandon relativity. Einstein also never was able to integrate gravity into his grand unification scheme, a problem he wrestled with for the entire last half of his life.

A large number of thinking physicists believe that an ether of sorts exists, and that forces of some type may transcend lightspeed. Once one begins to study ether theory, profound new insights concerning such things as particle spin, zero point energy, the fundamental structure of matter and space, the constancy of lightspeed and the link between gravity and electromagnetism begin to emerge.

The above is excerpted and adapted with permission from Marc J. Seifer’s book Transcending The Speed Of Light: Consciousness, Quantum Physics & the Fifth Dimension (Inner Traditions, 2008).



a jap kid already proved that the speed of light is not constant.

curved space time continuum, great scifi stuff




Real0ne -> RE: Why do you believe? (6/23/2013 7:44:36 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML


quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

for all we know, since we do not know the boundaries our knowable universe may very well fit into a grain of sand in the big picture.

for all we know.

Yup. Ours may be part of a multiverse.



more great scifi stuff




jlf1961 -> RE: Why do you believe? (6/23/2013 9:36:35 PM)

Okay, I may be a "primitive" or something like that, but I tend to rely on my faith in God as a security blanket. I believe we are all given free will to make our own choices.

I have also known people that believe in a universal consciousness, not "god" but I have never understood exactly what the mean either.

I do not try to shove my faith down anyone's throats, which some say make me a poor christian since I do not "spread the word."

As I said in a previous post, there have been three incidents in my life that I consider miracles, four if you count the time I ended up with a straight heart flush playing poker in Reno...

But I have to admit that Kirata has a point. The Global Consciousness Project has some interesting data, which is hard to discredit by any logical means.

So before people start blasting that project as something other than science or calling it pseudoscience before you read the published data on the project, it has been peer reviewed, at least that is my understanding.

Besides, there is another proof there is a god, Kirata keeps challenging me in ways that make me ask questions, which gives me another chance to strengthen my faith, as well as learn something new.

For that, I thank him, and I pray that he is blessed with 72 virgins of legal age and astonishingly good looks.




crazyml -> RE: Why do you believe? (6/24/2013 1:41:47 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

quote:

ORIGINAL: crazyml


quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne


but JC is the personification and embodiment of God, so now what?


I'm sure those squirrely godless fuckers will have a good explanation.

For me, I kind of understanding what the term "Christian Atheist" means, but since I'm not signed up I can't possibly say what sort of lawyer's trick those tricksters might pull to get around the Son of God hoo-haa.




yeh well its a classic case of orwellian double think because so many people now days dont know their asses from a hole in the ground.

They have no real or truly grounded structured base to expand from thanks to our wonderful government school,,,,,erg sorry....indoctrination centers that are teaching them the state sanctioned religion, secular humanist atheism.


Are you babbling now? Only that last bit came through as "babble babble babble".

quote:




quote:

ORIGINAL: crazyml

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne


on what "moral" grounds does an atheist stand?


That'll be the "moral" grounds that don't rely on threats of eternal damnation to do what is right.




dood frankly I expected a whole lot more than beer fart on that one, I am surprised thats the best you could muster.



Well, let me set your mind at rest, it's by no means the best I can muster, but in the interests of karmic thrift I simply mustered the minimum required to blow the nonsensical idea that morality comes only from god away.






crazyml -> RE: Why do you believe? (6/24/2013 1:45:09 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

So.... which bit of "christian" don't you understand??
That's where the term 'christian' came from!  [:D]

So you can't be a christian atheist.
You either subscribe to the christian ethos, or you deny it.
It really is as black and white as that.

If you follow the teachings of christ, then you cannot be an atheist - at least by definition of what an atheist is.
But that doesn't necessarily preclude that you also shun the idea of being a good and kind person etc.


ETA: The term 'christian atheist' is an oxymoron.


I'm really sorry - you seem to be under the misapprehension that I failed to take your point, despite my making it clear to you that I understand the issue with "Christ" and "Atheism". I event went to the trouble to reassure you that I understand your objection "I take your point, the terminology does feel a little odd.".

Can you see how that's a <finger quotes>Signal</finger quotes> that I see where you're going?

Then you'll see I respectfully put you right

"But there's an identifiable group of people, holding a set of shared beliefs that describe themselves as christian atheists. "

So... I have no idea why you might thing that I don't understand your point.

I'm also really sorry that you're so stuck on the "Christ and Atheism" thing that you seem incapable of recognising that it's a pretty fucking handy way to describe people who subscribe to christian values without believing in god.

Can I suggest you untwist your knickers?




MrBukani -> RE: Why do you believe? (6/24/2013 2:20:48 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

Okay, I may be a "primitive" or something like that, but I tend to rely on my faith in God as a security blanket. I believe we are all given free will to make our own choices.

I have also known people that believe in a universal consciousness, not "god" but I have never understood exactly what the mean either.



That was what I am lookin for. If you rely on faith as a security blanket, that would imply you would be less secure if you loose your faith. My question was, do you feel like that?

About a universal conciousness. I think we should describe those concepts in the simplest of words. The more simple a concept, it's less likely to find flaws in it.
Like love seems to be a universal conciousness like any emotion. Even animals have emotions. So is this the godpartical?
I think so, that's why many people say god is love, cause it's the best and supreme emotion we love to love. Maybe some runalong atheist satanist will say NOOOOOO, it's hate and anger and sadness. But the twisted lonely exemption on the rule of law, confirms that law. So it's not like math wich can give 100% it's more like nature wich only gives 99% accuracy because of the immense infinity of possibility, and the rule everything has a unique quality.
So to get 100% identical proof between 2 identical object is the measure by wich you prescribe the variables minus 1. The unique.

Is this magical and scientific sufficient data?




VideoAdminChi -> RE: Why do you believe? (6/24/2013 3:06:58 AM)

I believe that this thread will be locked until I send letters to numerous posters for numerous violations. Meanwhile, on other threads, do not make other posters the topic. You may attack posts but not posters.




VideoAdminChi -> RE: Why do you believe? (7/2/2013 5:41:56 PM)

After removing dozens of posts and sending scads of gold mail, this thread is again open for posting. Please return to the topic and do not make other posters the topic.




vincentML -> RE: Why do you believe? (7/3/2013 11:53:37 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne


quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML


quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

for all we know, since we do not know the boundaries our knowable universe may very well fit into a grain of sand in the big picture.

for all we know.

Yup. Ours may be part of a multiverse.



more great scifi stuff

Maybe so. But what else is there? A cantakerous, ephemeral fellow who lives in the sky and sacrificed his kid? A hodgepodge of iron age writings formulated into a Book? Astrophysics has demonstrated the validity of some predictions. More than can be said for any of the holy texts. Much more. Is there an alternative?




vincentML -> RE: Why do you believe? (7/3/2013 12:00:39 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

Junk science [:-]

Oh no! You found someone who disagrees? Well damn, that settles that. Everybody move along now, nothing to see here.

K.


Any scientific experimentation to support an issue is subject to criticism. If someone cannot accept that basic tenet of science then he should not pretend to be scientific. He should remain in the safe cosy cave of his 'spiritual awareness.' Until a decisive case can be made that will withstand criticism it is pseudoscience. . . . junk science.





Kirata -> RE: Why do you believe? (7/4/2013 1:07:22 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

Any scientific experimentation to support an issue is subject to criticism. If someone cannot accept that basic tenet of science then he should not pretend to be scientific. He should remain in the safe cosy cave of his 'spiritual awareness.' Until a decisive case can be made that will withstand criticism it is pseudoscience. . . . junk science.

I think there are several problems with your post. The first, obviously, is that nobody has claimed that the research is immune to criticism. You're just making shit up. The second is that criticism, too, is subject to review and not simply rendered valid by ideological fiat. Finally, the people behind the GCP are experienced researchers with impeccable credentials. Portraying them as purveyors of "junk" and "pseudoscience" is the last refuge of a scoundrel.

K.




GotSteel -> RE: Why do you believe? (7/4/2013 8:00:22 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
But I have to admit that Kirata has a point. The Global Consciousness Project has some interesting data, which is hard to discredit by any logical means.

Texas sharp shooting.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
So before people start blasting that project as something other than science or calling it pseudoscience before you read the published data on the project, it has been peer reviewed, at least that is my understanding.

So before you start defending it as something other than pseudoscience have you looked to see what their peers have to say about it?




Kirata -> RE: Why do you believe? (7/4/2013 11:47:07 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: GotSteel

pseudoscience

One example of consciousness producing an observable effect on a physical system is you posting claims that the notion is pseudoscience.

K.




MrBukani -> RE: Why do you believe? (7/5/2013 1:52:31 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

Any scientific experimentation to support an issue is subject to criticism. If someone cannot accept that basic tenet of science then he should not pretend to be scientific. He should remain in the safe cosy cave of his 'spiritual awareness.' Until a decisive case can be made that will withstand criticism it is pseudoscience. . . . junk science.

I think there are several problems with your post. The first, obviously, is that nobody has claimed that the research is immune to criticism. You're just making shit up. The second is that criticism, too, is subject to review and not simply rendered valid by ideological fiat. Finally, the people behind the GCP are experienced researchers with impeccable credentials. Portraying them as purveyors of "junk" and "pseudoscience" is the last refuge of a scoundrel.

K.


Of course you people have claimed just that, cause it's all subjective wich makes it immune to criticism. I am beginning to wonder maybe you are a muslim.[:D]
Impeccable= perfect = faultless.
You just jumped from one rock to another in ONE post.
Totally solid dude.[;)]




Kirata -> RE: Why do you believe? (7/5/2013 2:03:55 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MrBukani
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

nobody has claimed that the research is immune to criticism...

Of course you people have claimed just that, cause it's all subjective wich makes it immune to criticism...

You just jumped from one rock to another in ONE post.
Totally solid dude.

And you'll be back real soon with a link to where I claimed "it's all subjective," right dude?

K.




MrBukani -> RE: Why do you believe? (7/5/2013 2:21:14 AM)

Why would I?
I once heard a man say, people do not want to hear the truth unless you make them laugh about it.
So let's turn the world upside down in one big joke.
We can all laugh about our own ignorance and maybe just maybe learn something real.
[;)]
So let's keep it simple and avoid the trappings of difficult words like impeccable, wich you know by now any critic is gonna pick on.
Maybe use the word renowned or something like that.
Hope that helps.




Kirata -> RE: Why do you believe? (7/5/2013 2:27:57 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MrBukani

Why would I?

Maybe so people won't think you just make shit up?

K.









MrBukani -> RE: Why do you believe? (7/5/2013 3:13:25 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: MrBukani

Why would I?

Maybe so people won't think you just make shit up?

K.









I try to avoid that by makin hard and clear statements where I stand. But I am not impeccable. What people want to believe is their business. To undermine and challenge flawed belief is my business. Even my own presumptions.
Isn't it rare that people on a forum admit they have been wrong.
So again it's easy and deceptive to dance around the fire of perception.
Stand still, make a solid statement about what you observe as truth and deception.
That will make life and debate a lot easier.




Page: <<   < prev  8 9 10 [11] 12   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.0625