We die so we can live and learn (or not).
One dies because it didn't use its entropy to think.
Good thing there's (possibly) always next time, if you so think
Good thing there's (definitely) "right now."
Topic: Scientific proof that God exists? - page 424. (Read 845654 times)
One dies because it didn't use its entropy to think.
Good thing there's (possibly) always next time, if you so think
Good thing there's (definitely) "right now."
We die so we can live and learn (or not).
One dies because it didn't use its entropy to think.
Good thing there's (possibly) always next time, if you so think
We die so we can live and learn (or not).
One dies because it didn't use its entropy to think.
We die so we can live and learn (or not).
@BitChick @BADecker
Do you want to know why you should not consider it harmless to maintain your religious beliefs?
Do you want to know why you should not consider it harmless to maintain your religious beliefs?
How about the earth?
Those two believe a magical genie is going to appear and save mankind, fixing global warming and overpopulation.
If everyone believed that our actions on this world have consequence, we would make better choices as a society.
Thank Vod their numbers are going down and they are a dying breed.
In a recent interview for Voices of Liberty, analyst and VOL Contributor Julie Borowski had this to say about Ebola:
"I just personally think it’s not that it’s not that big of a deal. I think a lot of people are panicking over nothing. I think, really, the market can solve it more than the government can.”
Do you agree that the market can do a better job solving the Ebola “crisis” than the government?
"I just personally think it’s not that it’s not that big of a deal. I think a lot of people are panicking over nothing. I think, really, the market can solve it more than the government can.”
Do you agree that the market can do a better job solving the Ebola “crisis” than the government?
It is possible that that magic genie is Us.
It is more profitable to "treat" than to "solve."
Perhaps nominally on a shorter time scale and with distorted value representation systems.
Singular Homo sapiens lives are fairly short.
@BitChick @BADecker
Do you want to know why you should not consider it harmless to maintain your religious beliefs?
Do you want to know why you should not consider it harmless to maintain your religious beliefs?
How about the earth?
Those two believe a magical genie is going to appear and save mankind, fixing global warming and overpopulation.
If everyone believed that our actions on this world have consequence, we would make better choices as a society.
Thank Vod their numbers are going down and they are a dying breed.
In a recent interview for Voices of Liberty, analyst and VOL Contributor Julie Borowski had this to say about Ebola:
"I just personally think it’s not that it’s not that big of a deal. I think a lot of people are panicking over nothing. I think, really, the market can solve it more than the government can.”
Do you agree that the market can do a better job solving the Ebola “crisis” than the government?
"I just personally think it’s not that it’s not that big of a deal. I think a lot of people are panicking over nothing. I think, really, the market can solve it more than the government can.”
Do you agree that the market can do a better job solving the Ebola “crisis” than the government?
It is possible that that magic genie is Us.
It is more profitable to "treat" than to "solve."
Perhaps nominally on a shorter time scale and with distorted value representation systems.
@BitChick @BADecker
Do you want to know why you should not consider it harmless to maintain your religious beliefs?
Do you want to know why you should not consider it harmless to maintain your religious beliefs?
How about the earth?
Those two believe a magical genie is going to appear and save mankind, fixing global warming and overpopulation.
If everyone believed that our actions on this world have consequence, we would make better choices as a society.
Thank Vod their numbers are going down and they are a dying breed.
In a recent interview for Voices of Liberty, analyst and VOL Contributor Julie Borowski had this to say about Ebola:
"I just personally think it’s not that it’s not that big of a deal. I think a lot of people are panicking over nothing. I think, really, the market can solve it more than the government can.”
Do you agree that the market can do a better job solving the Ebola “crisis” than the government?
"I just personally think it’s not that it’s not that big of a deal. I think a lot of people are panicking over nothing. I think, really, the market can solve it more than the government can.”
Do you agree that the market can do a better job solving the Ebola “crisis” than the government?
It is possible that that magic genie is Us.
It is more profitable to "treat" than to "solve."
@BitChick @BADecker
Do you want to know why you should not consider it harmless to maintain your religious beliefs?
Do you want to know why you should not consider it harmless to maintain your religious beliefs?
How about the earth?
Those two believe a magical genie is going to appear and save mankind, fixing global warming and overpopulation.
If everyone believed that our actions on this world have consequence, we would make better choices as a society.
Thank Vod their numbers are going down and they are a dying breed.
In a recent interview for Voices of Liberty, analyst and VOL Contributor Julie Borowski had this to say about Ebola:
"I just personally think it’s not that it’s not that big of a deal. I think a lot of people are panicking over nothing. I think, really, the market can solve it more than the government can.”
Do you agree that the market can do a better job solving the Ebola “crisis” than the government?
"I just personally think it’s not that it’s not that big of a deal. I think a lot of people are panicking over nothing. I think, really, the market can solve it more than the government can.”
Do you agree that the market can do a better job solving the Ebola “crisis” than the government?
It is possible that that magic genie is Us.
@BitChick @BADecker
Do you want to know why you should not consider it harmless to maintain your religious beliefs?
Do you want to know why you should not consider it harmless to maintain your religious beliefs?
How about the earth?
Those two believe a magical genie is going to appear and save mankind, fixing global warming and overpopulation.
If everyone believed that our actions on this world have consequence, we would make better choices as a society.
Thank Vod their numbers are going down and they are a dying breed.
LOL projecting?
Please explain.
Please explain.
Quote
It is an abusive relationship, between you and your theism. The theism causes stress levels to rise when you encounter conflicting positions about your reality, and when you cannot conjure up a sufficient resolution to the conflict, you double-down and immerse yourself more into your theist narrative by seeking ways to wrap it around you tighter, adding layers of explanations as to why your mythical deity might permit so much horror and abuse in our lives if he is so powerful, you dream up excuses for him, to explain away the lack of intervention in natural disasters or personal suffering, all the while looking for ways to pretend to yourself that the good in your life is a reward from him and the bad is simply him testing you, you know, because he loves you so.
To me, it is you that seems to be stressed over others' theisms, not the subjects of your rant.
LOL projecting?
Please explain.
Please explain.
This means you are living a life of persistent neurological stress, with raised levels of cortisol causing a dysfunctional stress-response as it can never resolve the dichotomy between what you wish reality to be, versus what your brain knows reality to be.
Not necessarily. Quote
It is an abusive relationship, between you and your theism. The theism causes stress levels to rise when you encounter conflicting positions about your reality, and when you cannot conjure up a sufficient resolution to the conflict, you double-down and immerse yourself more into your theist narrative by seeking ways to wrap it around you tighter, adding layers of explanations as to why your mythical deity might permit so much horror and abuse in our lives if he is so powerful, you dream up excuses for him, to explain away the lack of intervention in natural disasters or personal suffering, all the while looking for ways to pretend to yourself that the good in your life is a reward from him and the bad is simply him testing you, you know, because he loves you so.
I think you're projecting.
Have you ever heard of the saying, "ignorance is bliss"? There comes a point where one perceives they can reliably place their beliefs and faiths upon What there's no need to question anymore.
For all your “evidence,” you still proceed by faith for you have not surmounted those challenges of solipsism (and, thus, those of Lemakasidian entropism).
Will you please explain the etymology of “Lemakasidian”? What does it symbolize?
“Lemakasidian” is an adjective derived from the name of Lemakasidion, a modern [withheld] politician.
(Underlying work.)
So what does Lemakasidion mean? "Eυκλειδης", for example, means "good/true glory".
"Lemakasidion" = "Λῆμακασἰδιoν" = "λῆμα" + "κασίδιoν" = "will, desire, purpose" + "cassis, helmet"
@BitChick @BADecker
Do you want to know why you should not consider it harmless to maintain your religious beliefs?
Because they require you to induce 'magical thinking' and 'thought avoidance' in order to ensure that the intellectually honest part of your psyche, your subconscious, does not break it down into its component parts and inform your conscious self of the truth of the delusion.
This means you are living a life of persistent neurological stress, with raised levels of cortisol causing a dysfunctional stress-response as it can never resolve the dichotomy between what you wish reality to be, versus what your brain knows reality to be.
It is an abusive relationship, between you and your theism. The theism causes stress levels to rise when you encounter conflicting positions about your reality, and when you cannot conjure up a sufficient resolution to the conflict, you double-down and immerse yourself more into your theist narrative by seeking ways to wrap it around you tighter, adding layers of explanations as to why your mythical deity might permit so much horror and abuse in our lives if he is so powerful, you dream up excuses for him, to explain away the lack of intervention in natural disasters or personal suffering, all the while looking for ways to pretend to yourself that the good in your life is a reward from him and the bad is simply him testing you, you know, because he loves you so.
It is disturbingly akin to the type of relationship that develops between a parent and the child they routinely abuse. The child seeks to excuse the behaviour of their parent, seeks to be able to find ways to get the parent to love them and approve of them, the child blames themselves for when the parent gets mad and hurts them and the child is elated and grateful to the parent when there are moment of fleeting reward from them.
You keep citing 'science' to support your position when, the truth is, your sources are utter crap. That's not science its pseudoscience reverse-engineered to support the end position of the theist delusion. It is mangled data and shonky interpretations designed to ensure that A+B=Bible.
Stop quoting 'facts' as facts, they are not. You are so terribly, terribly, wrong it isn't even funny. You have been, and are being, brainwashed and conditioned to readily accept the worst examples of theist 'scientific data' solely on the basis that they worked back from where they wanted to get to and ignored and discarded all the data that didn't fit their requirements.
You boldly assert things as true which are absolutely absurd. You make grand statements about your God's behaviour and intentions, as if these things are facts when they are simply what you have been told to believe.
Tell me, what's the difference between your God and Harry Potter? What aspects of your God exists outside of your imagination?
Do you want to know why you should not consider it harmless to maintain your religious beliefs?
Because they require you to induce 'magical thinking' and 'thought avoidance' in order to ensure that the intellectually honest part of your psyche, your subconscious, does not break it down into its component parts and inform your conscious self of the truth of the delusion.
This means you are living a life of persistent neurological stress, with raised levels of cortisol causing a dysfunctional stress-response as it can never resolve the dichotomy between what you wish reality to be, versus what your brain knows reality to be.
It is an abusive relationship, between you and your theism. The theism causes stress levels to rise when you encounter conflicting positions about your reality, and when you cannot conjure up a sufficient resolution to the conflict, you double-down and immerse yourself more into your theist narrative by seeking ways to wrap it around you tighter, adding layers of explanations as to why your mythical deity might permit so much horror and abuse in our lives if he is so powerful, you dream up excuses for him, to explain away the lack of intervention in natural disasters or personal suffering, all the while looking for ways to pretend to yourself that the good in your life is a reward from him and the bad is simply him testing you, you know, because he loves you so.
It is disturbingly akin to the type of relationship that develops between a parent and the child they routinely abuse. The child seeks to excuse the behaviour of their parent, seeks to be able to find ways to get the parent to love them and approve of them, the child blames themselves for when the parent gets mad and hurts them and the child is elated and grateful to the parent when there are moment of fleeting reward from them.
You keep citing 'science' to support your position when, the truth is, your sources are utter crap. That's not science its pseudoscience reverse-engineered to support the end position of the theist delusion. It is mangled data and shonky interpretations designed to ensure that A+B=Bible.
Stop quoting 'facts' as facts, they are not. You are so terribly, terribly, wrong it isn't even funny. You have been, and are being, brainwashed and conditioned to readily accept the worst examples of theist 'scientific data' solely on the basis that they worked back from where they wanted to get to and ignored and discarded all the data that didn't fit their requirements.
You boldly assert things as true which are absolutely absurd. You make grand statements about your God's behaviour and intentions, as if these things are facts when they are simply what you have been told to believe.
Tell me, what's the difference between your God and Harry Potter? What aspects of your God exists outside of your imagination?
For all your “evidence,” you still proceed by faith for you have not surmounted those challenges of solipsism (and, thus, those of limakasidian entropism).
Will you please explain the etymology of “limakasidian”? What does it symbolize?
“Limakasidian” is an adjective derived from the name of Limakasidios, a modern [withheld] politician.
(Underlying work.)
So what does Limakasidios mean? "Eυκλειδης", for example, means "good/true glory".
For all your “evidence,” you still proceed by faith for you have not surmounted those challenges of solipsism (and, thus, those of Lemakasidian entropism).
Will you please explain the etymology of “Lemakasidian”? What does it symbolize?
“Lemakasidian” is an adjective derived from the name of Lemakasidion, a modern [withheld] politician.
(Underlying work.)
For all your "evidence," you still proceed by faith for you have not surmounted those challenges of solipsism (and, thus, those of limakasidian entropism).
Will you please explain the etymology of "limakasidian"? What does it symbolize?
You don't need a deity to make the right choices in life, you've already proved that to yourself.
The "deity" gave me free will but His Spirit helps me make the right choices all of the time.
And I very much NEED a "diety!" I need God to pay the price for the sinful choices I have made or the price I will pay is an eternal one.
But you have said that you believe that you have the power in yourself. That is the risk you are willing to take with your soul. I would just question if that risk is a good one and if it will work for you if you happen to be wrong. Will believing in ourselves be enough to pay the price for our sins?
Your being does not contain within it entropy sufficient for "free[dom]." (And, indeed, it is for "His Spirit" that you have so known deprivation.)
The flaw in your thinking is that you missed the part about, while God exists within this universe (for His own pleasure), He also exists entirely without the universe. God, neither entropy or non-entropy.
“Entropy,” within American English, may refer to “a trend to disorder” (which neither yourself nor “BitChick” seem to exhibit—considering your consistency). Without disorder, one proceeds within defined bounds and, thus, proves constrained—not "free."
Entropy is visible in all of us, though it isn't very evident from one day to the next. It's called aging. The higher order of natural operation - such as life - the more evident entropy may be, simply because there are many more operations for it to act on.
You are a little difficult to understand at times, but if you are suggesting that people are not free, that is true from a scientific standpoint. There is no evidence of anything other than cause and effect, except perhaps, in higher math, where you can often prove things opposite of each other if you work at it hard enough.
Entropy can also be observed within a word of one whose output does not, necessarily, correspond to its input (that is, an “entity”).
You don't need a deity to make the right choices in life, you've already proved that to yourself.
The "deity" gave me free will but His Spirit helps me make the right choices all of the time.
And I very much NEED a "diety!" I need God to pay the price for the sinful choices I have made or the price I will pay is an eternal one.
But you have said that you believe that you have the power in yourself. That is the risk you are willing to take with your soul. I would just question if that risk is a good one and if it will work for you if you happen to be wrong. Will believing in ourselves be enough to pay the price for our sins?
Your being does not contain within it entropy sufficient for "free[dom]." (And, indeed, it is for "His Spirit" that you have so known deprivation.)
The flaw in your thinking is that you missed the part about, while God exists within this universe (for His own pleasure), He also exists entirely without the universe. God, neither entropy or non-entropy.
“Entropy,” within American English, may refer to “a trend to disorder” (which neither yourself nor “BitChick” seem to exhibit—considering your consistency). Without disorder, one proceeds within defined bounds and, thus, proves constrained—not "free."
Entropy is visible in all of us, though it isn't very evident from one day to the next. It's called aging. The higher order of natural operation - such as life - the more evident entropy may be, simply because there are many more operations for it to act on.
You are a little difficult to understand at times, but if you are suggesting that people are not free, that is true from a scientific standpoint. There is no evidence of anything other than cause and effect, except perhaps, in higher math, where you can often prove things opposite of each other if you work at it hard enough.
I never got this:
If there was life on Mars, another planet, or, a very, very, far away Galaxy - how is the book of Genesis consistent when it comes to that? What if this 'life' were either humanoid and/or very hard to distinguish from humans.
Keep in mind at this point in time, it would've been greatly impossible for Adam and Eve to know what a human specifically was since the term was invented afterwards, I assume. (If it wasn't - that makes absolutely no sense at all.)
How would this coincide with Genesis?
Since really no one has any proof at this moment of distant life, and, in those days they didn't know the classifications of a human...
----
Anyway, to a different tone:
Another error in Genesis (I'm sure this was brought up already), I'm pretty sure it's been proved that the flood didn't happen. There have been trees dating back to 4,000 years old. We wouldn't have fossilized plants, either, older than that.
Methuselah is literally 5,000 years old. The water pressure would've killed it or tore it's roots away by erosion of the dirt.
----
Plus it's the whole Bible-diet thing, but, let's not get into that.
If there was life on Mars, another planet, or, a very, very, far away Galaxy - how is the book of Genesis consistent when it comes to that? What if this 'life' were either humanoid and/or very hard to distinguish from humans.
Keep in mind at this point in time, it would've been greatly impossible for Adam and Eve to know what a human specifically was since the term was invented afterwards, I assume. (If it wasn't - that makes absolutely no sense at all.)
How would this coincide with Genesis?
Since really no one has any proof at this moment of distant life, and, in those days they didn't know the classifications of a human...
----
Anyway, to a different tone:
Another error in Genesis (I'm sure this was brought up already), I'm pretty sure it's been proved that the flood didn't happen. There have been trees dating back to 4,000 years old. We wouldn't have fossilized plants, either, older than that.
Methuselah is literally 5,000 years old. The water pressure would've killed it or tore it's roots away by erosion of the dirt.
----
Plus it's the whole Bible-diet thing, but, let's not get into that.
You should read the Space Trilogy books by C.S Lewis if the idea of life on other planets and with a connection to Genesis if that interests you.
Personally, I don't have a problem with the thought that God could have created more people in another galaxy if He chose too. Who knows, maybe He did and they are doing a far better job than we are? Maybe Eve didn't eat the forbidden fruit and sin never entered their world? I like to joke though that if there was centuries of people that had avoided eating the fruit, knowing that I have a problem not indulging in curiosity, I would have been the one to eat it!
What do you mean about no proof that the flood happened? The fact that trees only date back 4000 years proves something must have caused all the trees to die at that point? It is estimated that the Flood began approximately 4,359 years ago in the year 1656 AM or 2348 BC. The fact that there are no trees older than this brings great validity to a world wide flood. Also, there are over 200 (I have even heard over 300) flood stories from different cultures around the world. Here is a link to read more: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/flood-myths.html The fact that there are stories with similarities in all these cultures that did not speak to each other should cause at least someone to think that there is validity to it. Also, there are fossils of sea creatures in the middle of Kansas and in the Himilayas. How would sea creatures be at these locations without a flood? Also, if we look at the number of people on the earth there had to be a catastrophic event that happened about 4000 to 4500 years ago too because the population of the earth at the rate of growth per year coincides with this time.
You must've missed it:
Methuselah is literally 5,000 years old. The water pressure would've killed it or tore it's roots away by erosion of the dirt. Not to mention, when he created the world, I was disappointed to not see any dinosaurs mentioned.
There's no validity if there's a ton of stories. There's something called FOLKLORE and it's a part of every culture. Should we believe that, too?
And, the population of Earth is estimated and always will be. Using this in that context is highly inaccurate.
The dating of trees is not an exact science. The fact that the oldest tree we can find on earth is said to be 5000 years old, when the earth is considered billions of years old, should make a person pause for a moment and question what happened about that time. Shouldn't we find thousands of trees older than that otherwise?
Shouldn't we find a global layer of mineral deposits correspondent to flooding?
Yes. And we do.
On every continent are found layers of sedimentary rocks over vast areas. Many of these sediment layers can be traced all the way across continents, and even between continents. Furthermore, when geologists look closely at these rocks, they find evidence that the sediments were deposited rapidly.
Consider the sedimentary rock layers exposed in the walls of the Grand Canyon in northern Arizona This sequence of layers is not unique to that region of the USA. For more than 50 years geologists have recognized that these strata belong to six megasequences (very thick, distinctive sequences of sedimentary rock layers) that can be traced right across North America.
The lowermost sedimentary layers in Grand Canyon are the Tapeats Sandstone, belonging to the Sauk Megasequence. It and its equivalents (those layers comprised of the same materials) cover much of the USA . We can hardly imagine what forces were necessary to deposit such a vast, continent- wide series of deposits. Yet at the base of this sequence are huge boulders and sand beds deposited by storms. Both are evidence that massive forces deposited these sediment layers rapidly and violently right across the entire USA. Slow-and-gradual (present-day uniformitarian) processes cannot account for this evidence, but the global catastrophic Genesis Flood surely can.
Another layer in Grand Canyon is the Lower Carboniferous (Mississippian) Redwall Limestone. This belongs to the Kaskaskia Megasequence of North America. So the same limestones appear in many places across North America, as far as Tennessee and Pennsylvania. These limestones also appear in the exact same position in the strata sequences, and they have the exact same fossils and other features in them.
Unfortunately, these limestones have been given different names in other locations because the geologists saw only what they were working on locally and didn’t realize that other geologists were studying essentially the same limestone beds in other places. Even more remarkable, the same Carboniferous limestone beds also appear thousands of miles east in England, containing the same fossils and other features.
Also, a 1/40 scale of the Grand Canyon was made after Mt. St. Helen's erupted in 3 days. It did not take millions of years. We can observe this. In fact, now we know this was how the Grand Canyon was made.
For all your “evidence,” you still proceed by faith for you have not surmounted those challenges of solipsism (and, thus, those of Lemakasidian entropism).
Jump to: