Fahrenheit 9/11

Quoting SivCorp,

And don't try Whiskey. It isn't worth it. If people won't apply the same standards to the Bible as other ancient texts, that is their problem. You will not win that argument, because people are close minded to anything that resembles religion, God, or anything that doesn't center around them.

Oh, I'm not going to try. I'm simply submitting my opinion.

Quoting BoobzTwo,

reply 148

Whiskey144 – The Bible - the sacred book of the Christian (whatever) religion. I and several billion people around the world think differently about you’re ‘the truth’ is all?

Please resubmit your post, as it makes little grammatical sense.

Quoting EternalRequiem,

reply 149

do you know how many times the Bible has actually been changed and rewritten?

Aside from the fact that I was simply submitting my opinion, you will, naturally, provide proof that the Bible has been changed and/or rewritten. OTOH, I'll of course note that the standards used for other ancient texts isn't applied to the Bible.

Double standard FTW /sarcasm.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting SivCorp,

reply 147

Through this whole "discussion" I have yet seen anyone submit a solution to all these problems.... interesting.

Quoting psychoak,

reply 126

... just light them on fire in the streets of DC, the ones that don't burn we can hang as witches.

EDIT: CRAP, I think I just became a terrorist.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Daiwa

Join Date 07/2001

+351

Does all this mean the Obama Administration's non-truths are all lies? Just aksin.

Successfully updated karma reason!

AlLanMandragoran

Join Date 09/2010

+63

Quoting SivCorp,

reply 147

Through this whole "discussion" I have yet seen anyone submit a solution to all these problems.... interesting.

Solution? I think the solution is an educated populace taught to critically think. The more the merrier.

Recognition propaganda is everywhere - both sides of the fence, all angles, including "MY" side of the argument, whatever that is
Willingness to critically think and Truth as the highest ideal

Absent acknowledgement of those two bullet points honest debate is meaningless imho. We live in a version of the Matrix - where propaganda and democracy (i.e. two wolves and a sheep voting what to have for dinner) is the rule of the day. People regurgitate pundit arguments (both conservative and liberal). Those in charge of democracy (government, money creators/destroyers, news media, Hollywood, TV, etc) control information and propagandize to sway the majority. Edward Bernays, Noam Chomsky, and others have very insightful input on this. When you know your opponent is intellectually dishonest and is just trying to "win", regardless of the facts, it's eye opening.

Bottom line: it's difficult for us peons to truly know what is going on nationally or internationally due to the lack of or control of information. We do not experience these national/international events ourselves - they are shown and explained to us via different methods. Just as an attorney/judge can help sway a jury by making arguments to toss out or withhold evidence, the powers at be can control/manipulate information to sway us masses about any number of issues.

Bernays says this about us peons:

"In theory, every citizen makes up his mind on public questions and matters of private conduct. In practice, if all men had to study for themselves the abstruse economic, political, and ethical data involved in every question, they would find it impossible to come to a conclusion about anything. We have voluntarily agreed to let an invisible government sift the data and high-spot the outstanding issues so that our field of choice shall be narrowed to practical proportions. From our leaders and the media they use to reach the public, we accept the evidence and the demarcation of issues bearing upon public questions; from some ethical teacher, be it a minister, a favorite essayist, or merely prevailing opinion, we accept a standardized code of social conduct to which we conform most of the time."

I highly recommend reading the book, who Edward Bernays was, and his impact to this day. Amazing stuff.

+1

Successfully updated karma reason!

Bernay is a very interesting person.

And I do actually agree with your two bullet points.... but what about personal bias that clouds soooo many people's minds?

Why do people always treat science, theology and religion as enemies? All they do is ask a different question about life.

Science - How it works?

Theology - Why does it matter?

Religion - What is my role?

Quoting EternalRequiem,

reply 149

Quoting Whiskey144, reply 146Except for the problem that the Bible isn't "non-truths" or lies.

It is THE truth.
do you know how many times the Bible has actually been changed and rewritten?

This quote demonstrates that you have not done sufficient research into the writing and preservation of ancient texts. Your personal take on what it contains and its message aside.... One must accept the Bible as it is and has been, or determine all other historical written artifacts as irrelevant.

LoL myfist0! a terrorizing... terrorist

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting Daiwa,

reply 153

Does all this mean the Obama Administration's non-truths are all lies? Just aksin.

Well, there is a word to describe a multitude of truth's and lies along with an endless volume of smoke and mirrors making it virtually impossible to prove anything either way.... That word is 'politics'!

Solution... Keep your intuition keenly sharpened and your mind open!!

Edit: and trust no expert or group or individual or established fact.... well you can trust them but not with 'absolute' trust.... which comes under keeping an open mind.

Successfully updated karma reason!

ElanaAhova

Join Date 09/2008

+105

There IS a movie version of the book Fahrenheit 451....

Successfully updated karma reason!

ElanaAhova

Join Date 09/2008

+105

if i refered to the wrong person / post, I (conditionally) apologize. I have a very limited amount of time to read here until I return home from IL. I wonder how you know my intentions since you labeled them as "conviently ignoring." The ONLY intent of my post was to point the discussion away from personalities (which contributes very little) and back to content. But you labelmy post as 'conviently ignoring." You must know my thoughts, intentions, feelings better than I do. I commend you on your super- knowledge....

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quite a lively discussion going. I had nothing to add until SivCorp made this comment #147:

Through this whole "discussion" I have yet seen anyone submit a solution to all these problems.... interesting.

Elanahova posts 127:

Truth is truth, no matter WHO states it. False is false, no matter who states it. The fact that a person does not totally, 100% ACT according the the truth they espouse does NOT invalidate what they state.

Well said.

BT posts 130

People are going to remain malleable to the dictates of their government as long as they allow their leaders to politicize every aspect of their life. Politics bespeaks of strife and struggle, criminality, lies and deceit, fabrications

This is true however, it's not only politics that bespeaks of strife, criminality, lies, deceit. etc.

Fr. Owen Francis Dudley's (1882-1952) book, "YOU and thousands like you" is a very good and profitable read. He looks at life in the atomic era and sees the world bent on destruction. The following are his ideas and I have to agree.

The present ordering of the world is materialistic and the supreme acheivement of materialsim is the nuclear bomb. We are sliding toward a suicidal end and no government, no policy or military power, in fact there is nothing in the present materialistic ordering to avert final catastrophe.

People aren't made just to exist but to live, truly live to what the US Constitution calls pursuit of happiness. To me, this happiness is in the end eternal happiness. To live is to live for God, Who is life and the source of all life and its End.

SivCorp,

According to Dudley and I quite agree, we change the world by changing ourselves. Only you and I, and thousands of other ordinary people can change that ordering and we can only change it by changing ourselves.

Successfully updated karma reason!

AlLanMandragoran

Join Date 09/2010

+63

And I do actually agree with your two bullet points.... but what about personal bias that clouds soooo many people's minds? Why do people always treat science, theology and religion as enemies?

Bias is a constant battle. All we can do is acknowledge that each of us see the world through our own unique rose-colored glasses... and continue to try to be as objective as possible.

I think theology and religion are generally considered to be antithetical to science. For whatever reason this Creation is full of dualities: right/wrong, left/right, up/down, Sun/Moon, liberal/conservative, Heaven/Hell, positive/negative, plus/minus, etc. Religion/theology is considered to be strictly faith-based, thus the opposite of science's methods of observation and experiment.

In the end are they mutually exclusive? I don't think so. I might derail this thread if I elaborate my own personal beliefs so I'll quit while I'm ahead.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting AlLanMandragoran,

reply 160

Religion/theology is considered to be strictly faith-based, thus the opposite of science's methods of observation and experiment.

And, most importantly, revision of your beliefs in light of new evidence. I personally think that they are polar opposites, but I would be interested in hearing your opinion as well.

Successfully updated karma reason!

ElanaAhova

Join Date 09/2008

+105

Regarding this post and the one following it.....

SivCorp

Member No.3,485,114
Karma+31

Just think of what we could really do if the neo-politicians stopped pretending to oppose each other on non-political issues like...

1 GW,
2 Abortions,
3 Religion,
4 The constitution,
5 War,
6 Peace (???),
7 Human rights,
8 Civil rights,
9 God given rights,
10 Sexual divergences,
11 Green whatever,
12 Racism,
13 Immigration reform,
14 Border control,
15 Energy restrictions,
16 Developing our own resources, etc.

Ok, lets look at this list then, and see what I see here.

1 - stands for what?

2 - morality, what does one stand for? If you can't defend the innocent and unborn you have no business procreating.

3 - not going there....

4 - If you can not live under a countries founding documents, then you should leave that country for one that you agree with.

5,6 - war and peace are simple conflict resolutions

7 - what rights do you want to have? what rights will you give up? and who decides? Do you really want to go there?

8 - same as above

9 - still same as above

10 - the problem is in the definition.... going against the natural order of things is obviously a problem.

11 - slime? I suppose it is good to be responsible with what we have, isn't it?

12 - I have none, just experience.

13 - A country without any law will degrade into lawlessness

14 - same as above

15 - politics should not influence the free market, period.

16 - same as above

I don't see how protecting a nations people is non-political. I don't see how having law to protect the people i non-political. I don't see how providing a free market for productivity to thrive is non-political.

And I don't see how you can be taken seriously when you make these obviously flawed statements.

So many statements above are just so, well, American. Love it or leave it!!!! 'If you cannot live under a country's founding documents, then you should leave that country for one that you agree with.'

We need to return to our g-d given constitution: let us live under the founding fathers' views; Blacks may be enslaved and become chattel. Women may not vote, nor may they hold public office,. nor in many states even own property or sign contracts. The original owners of the land, the nations here before european-americans, should be pushed into the pacific, hunted for scalps, to collect the bounty european american governments placed on their heads, or killed with smallpox infected blankets given to them by european-americans. Anyone who supports any abortion should "... not be allowed to procreate..." but be sent back to what ever heathen / non-christian country they came from,or killed./ imprisioned. The constitution OBVIOUSLY supports the g-d given truth that human life begins the nano-second the sperm and egg meet. It is vitally importent that no one be allowed to go against the 'natural order of things.' I mean, all my co-religionists, and allies / real friends, know, for a fact, exactly what the 'natural order of things' is... and those who disagree are definately believing / understanding / reasoning wrong.... (They probably don't believe the crristian bible is g-d's word.) 'Politics should not influence the free market, period.' So, true, there are just too many goverment intrusions into the free market... it makes it so difficult for corporations and the ultra rich to accumulate... General Electric just might be hurt if those damn liberals / fake christians keep intruding into the free market! The best way for the people to deal with dangerious products, tainted food, is to allow the market to destribute it, and when people get sick, die,etc., word of mouth /news will tell everyone else, they will stop buying that company's tainted food,etc. Same with mortage funds, etc., when a few million people see their investments swindled (re-invested) out from under them, others will stop investing in those products, and stock brokers will stop placing ther clients money in those products: the free market will correct this error! Stop the government from intruding. And when the giants in the free market rig the game against the common people, well, thats free market as well.

Lets get back to the founding principles that made this country great! Too bad most of the founding fathers were really Dietists, and not christers. Jefferson published an edition of the gospels that editied out all the (supposed) referernces to jesus' diety, and the 'miracalious' events. Franklin had no use for religion in almost any form. Adams, was a member of a congregation that would, today, bnest be described as unitarian (jesus not divine,etc.). Most of the founders held to the newtonian view that g-d created the world / universe, like a mechenical watch, wound it up,and let it be / walked away. So many people today read their christian / free market ideology back into the founding fathers and use it as a whip to try to get the goverment to enact and enforce their 'moral' views (natural order of things - law based on their interpretation of the christian bible - wrapped in the US flag and words like'heritage,' and 'family.'

I really hope the folks who actually believe that the founding fathers were evangelical-fundy-christians AND die hard supporters of Adam Smith-Ricardo's free market ideologues don't get the USA they are dreaming of. If they do, the corporations will, when done with them ,throw them out like a piece of garbage. Adam Smith's 'invisible hand' (that orders the free market) will reduce their persons to a mere commodity to be used and then thrown away, just like a soiled napkin, or other used up paper product. Capitalism, as an econoomic system is 'savage.' Corporations separate individual profit taking from individual responsibility. I got rich becuase my corporation fired workers, lowered wages, eliminated benefits, health care, pensions, etc., but I did not do it personally, its the corporation that did it. I just collected even more dividends, and looked the other way when my corp raided pension funds,or took other's investments and re-invested/swindled them. Its not personal, it business, (apologies to the g-d father) and its exactly what the founding fathers would do. Its exactly what Jesus would do - totally, yes?

Successfully updated karma reason!

AlLanMandragoran

Join Date 09/2010

+63

Quoting LightofAbraxas,

reply 161

Quoting AlLanMandragoran, reply 160Religion/theology is considered to be strictly faith-based, thus the opposite of science's methods of observation and experiment.

And, most importantly, revision of your beliefs in light of new evidence. I personally think that they are polar opposites, but I would be interested in hearing your opinion as well.

In short, here goes my basic assumptions:

If there is a Creator, Creator is by default above his/her Creation - let's call Creation "Brad's EWOM Sandbox" and the Creator "Brad"
Science is limited to observing and experimenting within the boundaries of Brad's EWOM Sandbox - our self-aware Sovereigns checking out their little world. What is this fertile land?
Thus, observing and experimenting beyond the boundaries of Brad's EWOM Sandbox is impossible, i.e. proving Brad exists. Why am I here asketh the sovereign? Did someone or something make me?
Faith may be the only way to bridge the gap between Brad's EWOM Sandbox and what, if anything, such as Brad, lies beyond

Now personally I find it fascinating that we can observe and experiment things such as gravity, the speed of light, etc. but have no idea why the speed of light is 186,000 miles per second vs. a much slower 2 mph. We can deduce that we wouldn't exist (at least in present form) if light traveled at 2 mph but we don't know why the sandbox is organized that way (either from random chance from a Big Bang or outside will). In the end we may see the rules giving the Universe structure but never be able to prove why the structure is the way it is.

In the end I truly have no idea. I came up with this stuff long ago smokin' while playing Master of Magic.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting ElanaAhova,

reply 157

There IS a movie version of the book Fahrenheit 451....

This has already been noted and has been dismissed as irrelevance to the topic at hand, due primarily to my (initially) mistaking this thread as discussing the book Fahrenheit 451 and the terribadness (or so I've heard) of the movie.

Quoting ElanaAhova,

reply 158

if i refered to the wrong person / post, I (conditionally) apologize. I have a very limited amount of time to read here until I return home from IL. I wonder how you know my intentions since you labeled them as "conviently ignoring." The ONLY intent of my post was to point the discussion away from personalities (which contributes very little) and back to content. But you labelmy post as 'conviently ignoring." You must know my thoughts, intentions, feelings better than I do. I commend you on your super- knowledge....

I label your post as "conveniently ignoring" because you ignore the fact that BoobzTwo has been dismissing the arguments of her opposition on the basis that they hold opposing views and are, therefore, simpletons.

OTOH, I've just been insulting her and trying to force her to actually prove that her view is correct, as well as that those who hold an opposing view are "simpletons" for doing so.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting AlLanMandragoran,

reply 163

In short, here goes my basic assumptions:

If there is a Creator, Creator is by default above his/her Creation - let's call Creation "Brad's EWOM Sandbox" and the Creator "Brad"

Science is limited to observing and experimenting within the boundaries of Brad's EWOM Sandbox - our self-aware Sovereigns checking out their little world. What is this fertile land?

Thus, observing and experimenting beyond the boundaries of Brad's EWOM Sandbox is impossible, i.e. proving Brad exists. Why am I here asketh the sovereign? Did someone or something make me?

Faith may be the only way to bridge the gap between Brad's EWOM Sandbox and what, if anything, such as Brad, lies beyond

Now personally I find it fascinating that we can observe and experiment things such as gravity, the speed of light, etc. but have no idea why the speed of light is 186,000 miles per second vs. a much slower 2 mph. We can deduce that we wouldn't exist (at least in present form) if light traveled at 2 mph but we don't know why the sandbox is organized that way (either from random chance from a Big Bang or outside will). In the end we may see the rules giving the Universe structure but never be able to prove why the structure is the way it is.

In the end I truly have no idea. I came up with this stuff long ago smokin' while playing Master of Magic.

First, fantastic, you are a man after my own my own heart. But... a couple things I'd like to say.

1) What do you think about the arguement that might suggest that: what you have said presupposes a Creator and then looks for clues to support that idea?
2) Who is to say that life would be impossible (although possibly very different) if the Universe's fundamental values took different values?
3) What is to be said about a Creator that defines the variables of his world and then leaves that world to its own devices?
4) To use another analogy, what would you say about a father that has a bunch of kids, boots them out of the house leaving only a handbook on how to live, and says: "I'm not going to have any part of actually raising you, but if you misbehave, I'm going to come back and spank your asses raw one day." Would you call child services?

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting LightofAbraxas,

reply 165

First, fantastic, you are a man after my own my own heart. But... a couple things I'd like to say.

1) What do you think about the arguement that might suggest that: what you have said presupposes a Creator and then looks for clues to support that idea?
2) Who is to say that life would be impossible (although possibly very different) if the Universe's fundamental values took different values?
3) What is to be said about a Creator that defines the variables of his world and then leaves that world to its own devices?
4) To use another analogy, what would you say about a father that has a bunch of kids, boots them out of the house leaving only a handbook on how to live, and says: "I'm not going to have any part of actually raising you, but if you misbehave, I'm going to come back and spank your asses raw one day." Would you call child services?

I'll point out that you can't really use said analogy; if there is a Creator (which I believe so), then said being is so immensely powerful and different that their motives would be fairly inscrutable to mankind.

Put another way: who are we, the created, to judge the One who created us?

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting AlLanMandragoran,

reply 163

Quoting LightofAbraxas, reply 161Quoting AlLanMandragoran, reply 160Religion/theology is considered to be strictly faith-based, thus the opposite of science's methods of observation and experiment.

And, most importantly, revision of your beliefs in light of new evidence. I personally think that they are polar opposites, but I would be interested in hearing your opinion as well.
In short, here goes my basic assumptions:

If there is a Creator, Creator is by default above his/her Creation - let's call Creation "Brad's EWOM Sandbox" and the Creator "Brad"
Science is limited to observing and experimenting within the boundaries of Brad's EWOM Sandbox - our self-aware Sovereigns checking out their little world. What is this fertile land?
Thus, observing and experimenting beyond the boundaries of Brad's EWOM Sandbox is impossible, i.e. proving Brad exists. Why am I here asketh the sovereign? Did someone or something make me?
Faith may be the only way to bridge the gap between Brad's EWOM Sandbox and what, if anything, such as Brad, lies beyond

Now personally I find it fascinating that we can observe and experiment things such as gravity, the speed of light, etc. but have no idea why the speed of light is 186,000 miles per second vs. a much slower 2 mph. We can deduce that we wouldn't exist (at least in present form) if light traveled at 2 mph but we don't know why the sandbox is organized that way (either from random chance from a Big Bang or outside will). In the end we may see the rules giving the Universe structure but never be able to prove why the structure is the way it is.

In the end I truly have no idea. I came up with this stuff long ago smokin' while playing Master of Magic.

Oh, interesting post!

but i think it will eventually be possible to scientifically prove God exists despite the fact that God has set things up so that he cannot be detected scientifically (for various reasons of faith free will, and probably some aspect of Startreks Prime directive thrown in as well??!!). But God for obvious reasons cannot hide the fact that life exists, and i feel that it is life that must eventually scientifically prove God exists. Despite all the scientific work on Evolution, and despite all the discoveries from what is dug up from beneath the earth, i reckon DNA will eventually be the key to fast traking a proper understanding of Evolution, its limitations with regard to the origins of species (what God built and what changed naturally thereafter) and its utter failure to explain the beginning of life. DNA is basically a recorded history of everything we want to know right under our noses, all we have to do is figure out how to access all that hidden information! Oh wait, i hope God didn't do anything sneaky with DNA such as something along the lines of 'source code'???

As for Gravity and the speed of light etc etc well were seeing it from the perspective of our dimention, but i have a theory that our dimension operates as a reflection of a primary dimension...well reflection is not quite the right word? (continued later i'm busy at work)

Successfully updated karma reason!

AlLanMandragoran

Join Date 09/2010

+63

Quoting LightofAbraxas,

reply 165

First, fantastic, you are a man after my own my own heart. But... a couple things I'd like to say.

1) What do you think about the arguement that might suggest that: what you have said presupposes a Creator and then looks for clues to support that idea?
2) Who is to say that life would be impossible (although possibly very different) if the Universe's fundamental values took different values?
3) What is to be said about a Creator that defines the variables of his world and then leaves that world to its own devices?
4) To use another analogy, what would you say about a father that has a bunch of kids, boots them out of the house leaving only a handbook on how to live, and says: "I'm not going to have any part of actually raising you, but if you misbehave, I'm going to come back and spank your asses raw one day." Would you call child services?

My own rose-colored glasses. Without a doubt that's certainly possible. The Universe itself may be it's own creator and all of us may just be the Universe understanding itself. The dilemma is none of us can prove it thus enter the faith thing.
Life certainly could be possible but I daresay if gravity was half the strength or light traveled 10x as fast would we be the same? Probably not.
Now that is an interesting point, one in which I've struggled with myself. I have a serious issue with adults who mess with kids - why would the Creator allow that? Why do horrible things happen? Dunno. It may boil down to context - without evil, does good exist? It gets back to the duality question - if a Creator exists it certainly appears he/she gave each us of a choice to believe or not to believe. It certainly does appear we have freewill - within the boundaries of the sandbox. As a parent I could make the perfect sandbox for my children to play in. In fact, what if I had the power to make perfect children who always make perfect choices in a perfect sandbox? Do they truly have freewill if they're preprogrammed act like little perfect robots? Freewill creates the ability to choose imperfection, whether intentional or not.
I've pondered this idea before: if I was the Creator and I had the power of perfection, how many perfections would I make before I said "Hmm, what if I made something where I impart part of me (freewill), and I observe what happens?" If I'm omnipotent, is it logical to assume I could also turn off the omnipotent power (i.e. grant freewill to the creation)? I set up a sandbox of rules, turn off the omnipotent power, and observe what happens. Using Brad as an analogy: he could code his Sovereign to always make the perfect decisions or he could impart within the Sovereign freewill - the ability to choose independent of Brad's direct "strings".

Ahh, hell I don't know. Just throwin' this out there around the Fahrenheit 9/11 campfire. Maybe we're all really plugged into the Matrix and Energizer batteries for robots. Puff puff give!

Successfully updated karma reason!

To continue with my philosophy of only addressing posters that are willing to engage at a more than superficial level:

Also, what about the dinosaurs? If the Bible had said: "You won't believe this right away, but, one day you will discover that before I tried creating Man, I messed around with giant lizards. You'll find their bones eventually," then I wouldn't have any problem with believing.

It's some food for thought.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Daiwa

Join Date 07/2001

+351

I can sum up Fahrenheit 9/11 in one word: joke.

OK, maybe it needs two words: sick joke.

Successfully updated karma reason!

AlLanMandragoran

Join Date 09/2010

+63

Quoting Mystikmind,

reply 167

Oh, interesting post!

but i think it will eventually be possible to scientifically prove God exists despite the fact that God has set things up so that he cannot be detected scientifically (for various reasons of faith free will, and probably some aspect of Startreks Prime directive thrown in as well??!!). But God for obvious reasons cannot hide the fact that life exists, and i feel that it is life that must eventually scientifically prove God exists. Despite all the scientific work on Evolution, and despite all the discoveries from what is dug up from beneath the earth, i reckon DNA will eventually be the key to fast traking a proper understanding of Evolution, its limitations with regard to the origins of species (what God built and what changed naturally thereafter) and its utter failure to explain the beginning of life. DNA is basically a recorded history of everything we want to know right under our noses, all we have to do is figure out how to access all that hidden information! Oh wait, i hope God didn't do anything sneaky with DNA such as something along the lines of 'source code'???

As for Gravity and the speed of light etc etc well were seeing it from the perspective of our dimention, but i have a theory that our dimension operates as a reflection of a primary dimension...well reflection is not quite the right word? (continued later i'm busy at work)

Good stuff. I've always wondered this too: what does the surface of an electron look like and could some form of "life" exist on it? Are both "small" and "large" infinite? What if the smaller space becomes, the slower time interaction becomes? What if the larger space becomes, the faster time interaction becomes? In a way this makes sense because our interaction with Creation is dependent on how fast signals travel to our brain via nerve endings. The smaller distance in space, teh faster said signals travel. What if our measurement of time, a year (revolution of our planet around the Sun), is equivalent to 1 trillion electron years (I have no idea how many times an electron revolves around the nucleus in a year or even a second). Are there little Brad's coding EWOM AI on the surface of little electrons and little dudes like me reporting bugs and crash reports? Dunno but far out nonetheless. LOL.

[Edit] Apparently a hydrogen electron rotates at around 2,200 kilometers per second. Hell if I know how many orbits that is over that short distance. It must be in the billions or trillions.

http://education.jlab.org/qa/electron_01.html

Successfully updated karma reason!

AlLanMandragoran

Join Date 09/2010

+63

Quoting LightofAbraxas,

reply 169

To continue with my philosophy of only addressing posters that are willing to engage at a more than superficial level:

Also, what about the dinosaurs? If the Bible had said: "You won't believe this right away, but, one day you will discover that before I tried creating Man, I messed around with giant lizards. You'll find their bones eventually," then I wouldn't have any problem with believing.

It's some food for thought.

It's possible, as with any good public speaker, the message limited in scope and tailored to the audience of the time. On the flip side of the argument the book could say "one day you'll figure out how to fly in the air like birds or travel to land on that big circle you call the moon." That statement wouldn't mean much to the people of the time I gather.

I guess what I'm saying is tailoring a message to fit the "age" of the audience - kind of like not trying to teach calculus to my 2 year old son. It would be pointless, he's not ready.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting AlLanMandragoran,

reply 163

Quoting LightofAbraxas, reply 161Quoting AlLanMandragoran, reply 160Religion/theology is considered to be strictly faith-based, thus the opposite of science's methods of observation and experiment.

And, most importantly, revision of your beliefs in light of new evidence. I personally think that they are polar opposites, but I would be interested in hearing your opinion as well.
In short, here goes my basic assumptions:

If there is a Creator, Creator is by default above his/her Creation - let's call Creation "Brad's EWOM Sandbox" and the Creator "Brad"
Science is limited to observing and experimenting within the boundaries of Brad's EWOM Sandbox - our self-aware Sovereigns checking out their little world. What is this fertile land?
Thus, observing and experimenting beyond the boundaries of Brad's EWOM Sandbox is impossible, i.e. proving Brad exists. Why am I here asketh the sovereign? Did someone or something make me?
Faith may be the only way to bridge the gap between Brad's EWOM Sandbox and what, if anything, such as Brad, lies beyond

Now personally I find it fascinating that we can observe and experiment things such as gravity, the speed of light, etc. but have no idea why the speed of light is 186,000 miles per second vs. a much slower 2 mph. We can deduce that we wouldn't exist (at least in present form) if light traveled at 2 mph but we don't know why the sandbox is organized that way (either from random chance from a Big Bang or outside will). In the end we may see the rules giving the Universe structure but never be able to prove why the structure is the way it is.

In the end I truly have no idea. I came up with this stuff long ago smokin' while playing Master of Magic.

An excellent way to visualize it.
I guess sometimes smoking will unlock ones prejudice and catch a glimmer of light.

Quoting LightofAbraxas,

reply 165

1) What do you think about the arguement that might suggest that: what you have said presupposes a Creator and then looks for clues to support that idea?
2) Who is to say that life would be impossible (although possibly very different) if the Universe's fundamental values took different values?
3) What is to be said about a Creator that defines the variables of his world and then leaves that world to its own devices?
4) To use another analogy, what would you say about a father that has a bunch of kids, boots them out of the house leaving only a handbook on how to live, and says: "I'm not going to have any part of actually raising you, but if you misbehave, I'm going to come back and spank your asses raw one day." Would you call child services?

I have my own view on those points.....

1) unprovable, therefor faith.

2) the fundamentals of "life" could have been anyway the Creator wanted, but this is what He set up, so this is all we can see and test.

3) Who said He left?

4) I think the answer lies in one area that you are all missing.... Love.

I see the Creator not as a scientist or old man, but like a child. Now, follow this line of thought... A child wants to be loved, wants to be in contact with love. This is the way God is. He made a creation that could love Him. Free will gave that possibility to His creation. If we were all robots, then that is not love, that is slavery. No one can be loved by a robot.

Well God wants companions, not slaves, so that is why only one "sentient" being is on this planet, in this realm. He made us to be that companion.

He also gave us this AMAZING sandbox! It impresses me every time when we find out more about this world that we never thought possible. And what is amusing is this, the more we discover, the closer we come to the truth.... The truth that this universe COULDN'T have been random, that there necessitates a start, a Creator. And this creation is in conflict, conflict with free will, and the consequences therein.

/preaching.... sorry, I get carried away sometimes.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting AlLanMandragoran,

reply 171

Good stuff. I've always wondered this too: what does the surface of an electron look like and could some form of "life" exist on it? Are both "small" and "large" infinite? What if the smaller space becomes, the slower time interaction becomes? What if the larger space becomes, the faster time interaction becomes? In a way this makes sense because our interaction with Creation is dependent on how fast signals travel to our brain via nerve endings. The smaller distance in space, teh faster said signals travel. What if our measurement of time, a year (revolution of our planet around the Sun), is equivalent to 1 trillion electron years (I have no idea how many times an electron revolves around the nucleus in a year or even a second). Are there little Brad's coding EWOM AI on the surface of little electrons and little dudes like me reporting bugs and crash reports? Dunno but far out nonetheless. LOL.

[Edit] Apparently a hydrogen electron rotates at around 2,200 kilometers per second. Hell if I know how many orbits that is over that short distance. It must be in the billions or trillions.

http://education.jlab.org/qa/electron_01.html

Well may we wonder things about electrons/atoms but what i wonder is what is an atom if there is no time?

If you look at a standard 30cm ruler, you will see that it has two ends, an a centre. Also the ruler has different mathematical points of measure relative to its centre and its ends, you can identify different locations, 12cm, 23cm etc etc How long is your finger, 8cm, there is the point it connects to the body and there is where it finishes. All matter throughout the universe has mathematical statistics about it's size and location that you can measure. Now assuming the universe extends forever and has no ends, therefore it has no centre either. And if the universe has no ends or no centre then therefore how is it possible to have a fixed location in space where say a planet is located? or a solar system? or a galaxy? or even your finger?? I'm not quite sure how, but to me this seems to indicate that it is impossible for any matter as we perceive it, to exist! Or am i just crazy? And assuming for a moment that I'm not crazy, then the only possible explanation is that time dos not really exist, since if you eliminate time from the equation, then the paradox of location within infinity is solved, ,,, i think???

Edit: i just Googled the paradox of location within infinity and got nothing? hmmm, perhaps i am just crazy?

Successfully updated karma reason!

lol know what I find funny... lots of people call the creator a HE, HE could actually be a SHE

Successfully updated karma reason!

Fahrenheit 9/11

… the movie – 2004 – By Michael Moore