God?
- Thread starter KerrTexas
- Start date
Roel van Houten
Quantum Scribe
Well, if that was your experience I have no business in telling you that god doesn't exist. To me however, this story sounds just as believable as an episode of the Twilightzone. Besides, why should every unexplainable phenomenon be attributed to god?
Roel
Faith is universal. Our specific methods for understanding it are arbitrary. Some of us pray to Jesus, some of us go to Mecca, some of us study subatomic particles, others aerospace, some of us observe ghosts, some of us watch the Twilightzone and some of us go searching on internet message boards... In the end we are all just searching for truth, that which is greater than ourselves...
Even you are not exempt from this Roel!
Even you are not exempt from this Roel!
Roel van Houten
Quantum Scribe
Re: Cookbook for Creation
I could argue that I am aware of the fact that what you believe is false. In that case, my level of understanding would be higher. But to tell you the truth I don't think either of us has a higher level of understanding; I think we are both on the same level, but interpreting things in another way.
Have you not read my post? I said I don't feel insulted in any way. The reason that I've not studied Quabalah as deeply as you have, is because it doesn't appeal to me. Also I don't see the added value of Quabalah. It may have some interesting insights, but since it relies heavily on the existence of a deity, I'd rather get the same insights from other sources.
I did respond! Negative proof is harder to come by than any other kind of proof, which is why I've stated several times that I am unable to proof that god does not exist. Furthermore I think it's silly that I have to proof something that I think does not exist in the first place. May I also remind you that, although you have provided evidence, I think it's insufficient. The evidence that you provide is comparable to "the emperors new clothes"; it's undoubtly very beautiful, but invisible to the public /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
Yes and I have given you my reasons why it does not make sense for me to believe in god. I don't see why and how I should explore beyond my senses. Even if I did, I'm quite sure that I won't find any evidence for a creator. I say this because the physical "evidence" you've provided to prove gods existence haven't exactly persuaded me either.
Roel
I could argue that I am aware of the fact that what you believe is false. In that case, my level of understanding would be higher. But to tell you the truth I don't think either of us has a higher level of understanding; I think we are both on the same level, but interpreting things in another way.
Have you not read my post? I said I don't feel insulted in any way. The reason that I've not studied Quabalah as deeply as you have, is because it doesn't appeal to me. Also I don't see the added value of Quabalah. It may have some interesting insights, but since it relies heavily on the existence of a deity, I'd rather get the same insights from other sources.
I did respond! Negative proof is harder to come by than any other kind of proof, which is why I've stated several times that I am unable to proof that god does not exist. Furthermore I think it's silly that I have to proof something that I think does not exist in the first place. May I also remind you that, although you have provided evidence, I think it's insufficient. The evidence that you provide is comparable to "the emperors new clothes"; it's undoubtly very beautiful, but invisible to the public /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
Yes and I have given you my reasons why it does not make sense for me to believe in god. I don't see why and how I should explore beyond my senses. Even if I did, I'm quite sure that I won't find any evidence for a creator. I say this because the physical "evidence" you've provided to prove gods existence haven't exactly persuaded me either.
Roel
KerrTexas
Super Moderator
Re: Cookbook for Creation
Not necessarily, Roel. I knew someone that had a very powweful sense of hearing. She could hear sound from quite a distance, and even hear things I never could. One more than one occasion she would stop and ask me," Do you hear that?" No, I did not hear whatever she was referring to, and always as we got closer, it was then I would hear the thing she had asked me about. So, how could my interpretion even apply if I can't hear what she did?
It isnt just a level of understanding, but also an increased awareness as well.
Not necessarily, Roel. I knew someone that had a very powweful sense of hearing. She could hear sound from quite a distance, and even hear things I never could. One more than one occasion she would stop and ask me," Do you hear that?" No, I did not hear whatever she was referring to, and always as we got closer, it was then I would hear the thing she had asked me about. So, how could my interpretion even apply if I can't hear what she did?
It isnt just a level of understanding, but also an increased awareness as well.
RainmanTime
Super Moderator
Re: Cookbook for Creation
You're in rare form today, Roel! /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif Making me laugh and think all at the same time!
(Referring, of course, to your jokes about witches and THE truth of Enegy)
That is too general of a statement to be true. On some topics we are clearly at different levels of understanding. You know WAY more than me about web publishing, which is your craft. I wouldn't be wrong to also say I know a bit more than you about systems engineering, and aircraft. If you agree we are at different levels of understanding on these topics, then I'd say it's quite possible we could be at different levels of understanding on Qabalah. In fact, based on the following, I'd say it is highly likely:
Do you know which aspects of Wicca were derived from Qabalah, Roel? There are quite a few common (self-similar?) themes between them you might want to check out.
Yes. Exactly. And many of them are verifiable SCIENTIFIC insights, I might add. That is part of the story that I am trying to get across. Please tell me where any of my science has been wrong!?
Ahhh, but you see, this is another misunderstanding of yours. It does not "rely" on a God. This technology "is" and "is valuable" even if you don't believe in God! You can pick up the literal science of Qabalah like a hammer, and use it to your hearts content without ever having to believe some "god" created that hammer. You should try it out...Qabalah is like the world's ultimate Swiss Army knife! /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
What some of us are just saying is that if you do use the Qabalah as a tool, or road map, as OvrLrdLegion says, you might just find God accidentally. In fact, it is more common than not to those of us who first looked at the Tree Of Life scientifically (that is how I started out).
I'm not asking for evidence that you prove God does not exist. I am asking you to provide evidence that my scientific claims about energy, and how it relates to Massive SpaceTime, are wrong. I've asked for people to show me I am wrong on this, but I have seen no evidence of its incorrectness. Tell me where my graphic in this thread is incorrect. Show me how Energy, Matter, Motion, Mass, Space, and Time are NOT related as I have described.
I speak only the language of science when it comes to Massive SpaceTime. And I do not see you yet refuting that "Energy is all there is." Were it not for the Energy from our Sun, you would not be, nor would I. Energy IS the force of Creation, and that is an undisputable scientific fact that all scientists agree to and understand. The fact that you cannot "make the leap" of understanding the sum total of Energy in our universe, the total Force of Creation, as God has nothing to do with my evidence. It has everything to do with your belief system.
Yes, I agree...it HAS been invisible to the public for a long time. But you know what? More and more people are beginning to see its connections and relevance. Madonna is no ditz, she is a terribly successful woman. Is it just POSSIBLE she applied the Qabalah Creation Formula (QCF) to her acts of Creation? Hey.....wasn't one of her albums named Ray Of Light?
Whoa....what a freakin coincidence, huh, Roel? /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
More to come....gotta jump in the pool and cooooool off.
RMT
You're in rare form today, Roel! /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif Making me laugh and think all at the same time!
That is too general of a statement to be true. On some topics we are clearly at different levels of understanding. You know WAY more than me about web publishing, which is your craft. I wouldn't be wrong to also say I know a bit more than you about systems engineering, and aircraft. If you agree we are at different levels of understanding on these topics, then I'd say it's quite possible we could be at different levels of understanding on Qabalah. In fact, based on the following, I'd say it is highly likely:
Do you know which aspects of Wicca were derived from Qabalah, Roel? There are quite a few common (self-similar?) themes between them you might want to check out.
Yes. Exactly. And many of them are verifiable SCIENTIFIC insights, I might add. That is part of the story that I am trying to get across. Please tell me where any of my science has been wrong!?
Ahhh, but you see, this is another misunderstanding of yours. It does not "rely" on a God. This technology "is" and "is valuable" even if you don't believe in God! You can pick up the literal science of Qabalah like a hammer, and use it to your hearts content without ever having to believe some "god" created that hammer. You should try it out...Qabalah is like the world's ultimate Swiss Army knife! /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
What some of us are just saying is that if you do use the Qabalah as a tool, or road map, as OvrLrdLegion says, you might just find God accidentally. In fact, it is more common than not to those of us who first looked at the Tree Of Life scientifically (that is how I started out).
I'm not asking for evidence that you prove God does not exist. I am asking you to provide evidence that my scientific claims about energy, and how it relates to Massive SpaceTime, are wrong. I've asked for people to show me I am wrong on this, but I have seen no evidence of its incorrectness. Tell me where my graphic in this thread is incorrect. Show me how Energy, Matter, Motion, Mass, Space, and Time are NOT related as I have described.
I speak only the language of science when it comes to Massive SpaceTime. And I do not see you yet refuting that "Energy is all there is." Were it not for the Energy from our Sun, you would not be, nor would I. Energy IS the force of Creation, and that is an undisputable scientific fact that all scientists agree to and understand. The fact that you cannot "make the leap" of understanding the sum total of Energy in our universe, the total Force of Creation, as God has nothing to do with my evidence. It has everything to do with your belief system.
Yes, I agree...it HAS been invisible to the public for a long time. But you know what? More and more people are beginning to see its connections and relevance. Madonna is no ditz, she is a terribly successful woman. Is it just POSSIBLE she applied the Qabalah Creation Formula (QCF) to her acts of Creation? Hey.....wasn't one of her albums named Ray Of Light?
Whoa....what a freakin coincidence, huh, Roel? /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
More to come....gotta jump in the pool and cooooool off.
RMT
Roel van Houten
Quantum Scribe
Re: Cookbook for Creation
Not necissarily, no, but it is possible. Since you keep coming up with these wonderful anecdotes I have one for you to:
Some time ago I went to Ibiza with some of my friends. One night they all decided to smoke a joint, except for me. They all claimed they had seen a UFO, but I didn't. Now of course this UFO was a hallucination, but I was the only one who could see that.
I kmow it doesn't make much sense, but the same applies to your anecdotes /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
Roel
Not necissarily, no, but it is possible. Since you keep coming up with these wonderful anecdotes I have one for you to:
Some time ago I went to Ibiza with some of my friends. One night they all decided to smoke a joint, except for me. They all claimed they had seen a UFO, but I didn't. Now of course this UFO was a hallucination, but I was the only one who could see that.
I kmow it doesn't make much sense, but the same applies to your anecdotes /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
Roel
KerrTexas
Super Moderator
Re: Cookbook for Creation
Two different things Roel. She was NOT hallucinating. Those sounds existed, but her level of sensing them was higher than mine. Her range for sounds was also wider than mine, as proved by hearing tests done by professionals. So her understanding of the realm of sound was much greater than mine could be, since she heard in ranges that I could not.
Another antedote...at work they have labels with item numbers on the tags. the tags on the displays are to high for me to read. ( since I am an old man ) ( at least I think so since my radio station now states they play the "classics" ) ( for Rainman..KLOS, he knows )
The younger guys can read those numbers. So in this regard, their level of awareness is higher than mine. They can see something I can not. So if they state that they see a 123456 as the item number, who am I to disagree when I cant see what they do?
Two different things Roel. She was NOT hallucinating. Those sounds existed, but her level of sensing them was higher than mine. Her range for sounds was also wider than mine, as proved by hearing tests done by professionals. So her understanding of the realm of sound was much greater than mine could be, since she heard in ranges that I could not.
Another antedote...at work they have labels with item numbers on the tags. the tags on the displays are to high for me to read. ( since I am an old man ) ( at least I think so since my radio station now states they play the "classics" ) ( for Rainman..KLOS, he knows )
The younger guys can read those numbers. So in this regard, their level of awareness is higher than mine. They can see something I can not. So if they state that they see a 123456 as the item number, who am I to disagree when I cant see what they do?
RainmanTime
Super Moderator
Tetrahedral Thinking - Church of the SubGenius
Some more thoughts, Roel:
Oh believe me, I hear ya brother! Glad you can admit this. All the hoopla of what "canned religions" claim about God really warped my mind for awhile as well. I don't buy into a lot of it, but there is a core of truth there that the Catholic Church (as a minimum) decided to hide from its flock. The Gnostic Catholics had/have more knowledge than the "mainstream" Catholic Church will ever tell you about.
How about the logical explanation that it takes you to initiate a new creation as well? And guess what, you use energy to do it. Yep.... we can call you Roel, creative subsystem of God, making excellent web creations to inspire and inform others! /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
They SEEM to appear by accident. Do you know for SURE they appear by accident? Can you analyze the universal system of energy so completely to prove it was an accident?
Yes, and isn't it WONDERFUL? I know you remember me talking about contradiction and paradox before. The grandfather paradox is a classic of time travel. We know from Godel's Incompleteness Theorem that contradictory statements can be formed in any closed system of logics and semantics. But the bigger question is "what do they mean?". Well, we have found the operational answer to that question in the field of systems engineering. When we run into a logical paradox within any closed system boundary, that is the "clue" to the systems engineer that s/he must jump outward to the next systemic level of context. Per Shannon's theory of information, any contradiction of a logical subsystem can (and must) be resolved by information at the level of its supersystem. The systems engineer solves the contradiction in the subsystem by introducing NEW INFORMATION (another recurring theme...I'll keep pointing them out) from the supersystem down to the subsystem level. An INTERFACE SIGNAL is defined between the supersystem and the subsystem that breaks the contradiction. This is how we will have to solve the grandfather paradox of time travel....Einstein was, indeed, trying to look at and describe the next higher subsystem of our universe!
The systems engineering stuff I have told you above is fact, Roel. It is how I do my job, and it has been put into practice many times. If you can provide evidence that it is incorrect, I am ready to hear it.
I'll take that as a compliment, even though you didn't mean it that way. You see, this is the same kind of criticism that breakthrough scientists have heard down thru the ages. People who did NOT understand what they were talking about were saying "ahhhh.... you are overapplying things that we know about...it doesn't work that way."
Since it appears you cannot prove me wrong on the Scientific side of Energy-Matter-Motion & Massive Spacetime, the only area you can deny me is the Spiritual side. I am just claiming that it is high time for both of these disparate poles to be brought together.
Then if all the science fits, the application is only a matter of belief that it DOES apply. I acknowledge that you don't think it logically applies, but I think there will come a day when you will find that logic. I describe the logic as the fact that you and I would not be here without Energy. Fact. Energy cannot be created or destroyed (same thing people say about God), it can only change its form (another thing people say about God). Fact.
Thank God I have the Energy to type this much on a sunny Saturday in SoCal!
Uhhhh...HELLO, ROEL! /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif I have been talking science! I *DID* approach an understanding of God from a scientific way! Are you now going to tell me that the relationships of Mass, Space, and Time are not SCIENCE????? Sheesh....it would be a new one on me, since all through engineering school that is all they taught us as the fundamental system of physical units.
Well...this particular thread IS about God.
But OK, if you want me to shut up about God, and continue to talk about the science of Energy, and Massive SpaceTime, and how it relates to time travel....then why don't you do this: Start another thread about anything you wish relating to how I am incorrect (or questions you might have) on Energy, Entropy, Information, Closed Loops, and Massive SpaceTime. Oh yeah, throw in Chaos and Fractals too, since they play part of this.
If YOU start a new thread that is sans-God, and pro-understanding of physical Massive SpaceTime and time travel....I will participate, and keep my ego turned off, and not even mention a peep about God. Deal?
Did you know that today is red wine day??? /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
RMT
Some more thoughts, Roel:
Oh believe me, I hear ya brother! Glad you can admit this. All the hoopla of what "canned religions" claim about God really warped my mind for awhile as well. I don't buy into a lot of it, but there is a core of truth there that the Catholic Church (as a minimum) decided to hide from its flock. The Gnostic Catholics had/have more knowledge than the "mainstream" Catholic Church will ever tell you about.
How about the logical explanation that it takes you to initiate a new creation as well? And guess what, you use energy to do it. Yep.... we can call you Roel, creative subsystem of God, making excellent web creations to inspire and inform others! /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
They SEEM to appear by accident. Do you know for SURE they appear by accident? Can you analyze the universal system of energy so completely to prove it was an accident?
Yes, and isn't it WONDERFUL? I know you remember me talking about contradiction and paradox before. The grandfather paradox is a classic of time travel. We know from Godel's Incompleteness Theorem that contradictory statements can be formed in any closed system of logics and semantics. But the bigger question is "what do they mean?". Well, we have found the operational answer to that question in the field of systems engineering. When we run into a logical paradox within any closed system boundary, that is the "clue" to the systems engineer that s/he must jump outward to the next systemic level of context. Per Shannon's theory of information, any contradiction of a logical subsystem can (and must) be resolved by information at the level of its supersystem. The systems engineer solves the contradiction in the subsystem by introducing NEW INFORMATION (another recurring theme...I'll keep pointing them out) from the supersystem down to the subsystem level. An INTERFACE SIGNAL is defined between the supersystem and the subsystem that breaks the contradiction. This is how we will have to solve the grandfather paradox of time travel....Einstein was, indeed, trying to look at and describe the next higher subsystem of our universe!
The systems engineering stuff I have told you above is fact, Roel. It is how I do my job, and it has been put into practice many times. If you can provide evidence that it is incorrect, I am ready to hear it.
I'll take that as a compliment, even though you didn't mean it that way. You see, this is the same kind of criticism that breakthrough scientists have heard down thru the ages. People who did NOT understand what they were talking about were saying "ahhhh.... you are overapplying things that we know about...it doesn't work that way."
Since it appears you cannot prove me wrong on the Scientific side of Energy-Matter-Motion & Massive Spacetime, the only area you can deny me is the Spiritual side. I am just claiming that it is high time for both of these disparate poles to be brought together.
Then if all the science fits, the application is only a matter of belief that it DOES apply. I acknowledge that you don't think it logically applies, but I think there will come a day when you will find that logic. I describe the logic as the fact that you and I would not be here without Energy. Fact. Energy cannot be created or destroyed (same thing people say about God), it can only change its form (another thing people say about God). Fact.
Thank God I have the Energy to type this much on a sunny Saturday in SoCal!
Uhhhh...HELLO, ROEL! /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif I have been talking science! I *DID* approach an understanding of God from a scientific way! Are you now going to tell me that the relationships of Mass, Space, and Time are not SCIENCE????? Sheesh....it would be a new one on me, since all through engineering school that is all they taught us as the fundamental system of physical units.
Well...this particular thread IS about God.
If YOU start a new thread that is sans-God, and pro-understanding of physical Massive SpaceTime and time travel....I will participate, and keep my ego turned off, and not even mention a peep about God. Deal?
Did you know that today is red wine day??? /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
RMT
RainmanTime
Super Moderator
God, I am SO \"wrong\"!
Attention K-Mart Shoppers (sheesh, I am giving away my age!):
For a limited time, where the blue light is flashing, we have a special on "making Ray wrong". The product will move quickly, so we suggest you don't hesitate to Make Ray Wrong! /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
There is One, and only One, situation that can make me "wrong" with this statement. Can anyone guess what it is????? Please post your answers to this thread, and the prize will go to the first one with the only possible answer (for us humans):
RMT
/ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif Having fun on Saturday afternoon...
Attention K-Mart Shoppers (sheesh, I am giving away my age!):
For a limited time, where the blue light is flashing, we have a special on "making Ray wrong". The product will move quickly, so we suggest you don't hesitate to Make Ray Wrong! /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
There is One, and only One, situation that can make me "wrong" with this statement. Can anyone guess what it is????? Please post your answers to this thread, and the prize will go to the first one with the only possible answer (for us humans):
RMT
/ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif Having fun on Saturday afternoon...
RainmanTime
Super Moderator
Genesis in Hebrew
Hello nicknack,
I hope you are having a nice weekend...
Well, the core of the Bible is the Old Testament, specifically the first five (PHIve?) books of the Old Testament. Those Phive books were originally written in Hebrew. This is why one must always go back to that original Hebrew to analyze and understand what it was saying in its native language. All English interpretations of it are different due to how one interprets Hebrew, which are long, literal strings of characters. And the fact is that Hebrew is a very numerical language because it has a very numerical alphabet. And numbers are what we know to be the primary language of science.
I wouldn't say it is about "expecting" you to believe anything. It is more about what you find as you use the Tree Of Life. The spiritual aspect is inherent in the fact that you are on a journey in your incarnate life. Myself, and others, call it a spiritual journey, and we liken it to climbing from position #10 on the Tree Of Life, up towards position #1. That is the vision of the map that OvrLrdLegion describes.
I agree, inasumch as you mean these two things are discrete, separate phenomenon. So now what if we described God as continuous creation? This is the life force, and it has no End. God will never end because the embodiment of God is continuous creation via new Energy patterns in our universe.
Hmmm.... have you ever shopped at a K-Mart, nicknack? /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif With these words of yours, you have made me "wrong" in another statement I made... and I'm happy to admit it. You can already see the Light of God, can't you? Do you know what I am getting at?
Well, we can see right off the bat that they have a relation in number: There are three terms in each relation: F=ma & V=IR. That is a start, right? Let's go on from there:
1) F=Force, and have you ever heard Voltage (V) described as Electro Motive Force (EMF)?
2) The mass (m) of an object defines its inertial RESISTANCE to motion. The "R" of the electrical equation represents electrical RESISTANCE.
3) The "a", for Acceleration, is a measure of the motion of the mass "m". The "I" measure of electrical current is a measure of "time rate of change of electrical charge", or charge velocity.
Thus, with deference to the science of fractals, we say that these two important equations of mechanics and electronics are "self-similar" in the basic laws that they describe. And these two basic laws describe a helluva lot of truth with regard to how Mass, Space, and Time interact with one another.
The relationships of these equations are a certain amount of evidence that universal laws are based on mixings of THREE, is it not true? We could also add E = mc^2 to this list to see how universal laws are defined in groupings of three. What are your thoughts about this? Do you believe in 3 Gods as 1?
RMT
Hello nicknack,
I hope you are having a nice weekend...
Well, the core of the Bible is the Old Testament, specifically the first five (PHIve?) books of the Old Testament. Those Phive books were originally written in Hebrew. This is why one must always go back to that original Hebrew to analyze and understand what it was saying in its native language. All English interpretations of it are different due to how one interprets Hebrew, which are long, literal strings of characters. And the fact is that Hebrew is a very numerical language because it has a very numerical alphabet. And numbers are what we know to be the primary language of science.
I wouldn't say it is about "expecting" you to believe anything. It is more about what you find as you use the Tree Of Life. The spiritual aspect is inherent in the fact that you are on a journey in your incarnate life. Myself, and others, call it a spiritual journey, and we liken it to climbing from position #10 on the Tree Of Life, up towards position #1. That is the vision of the map that OvrLrdLegion describes.
I agree, inasumch as you mean these two things are discrete, separate phenomenon. So now what if we described God as continuous creation? This is the life force, and it has no End. God will never end because the embodiment of God is continuous creation via new Energy patterns in our universe.
Hmmm.... have you ever shopped at a K-Mart, nicknack? /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif With these words of yours, you have made me "wrong" in another statement I made... and I'm happy to admit it. You can already see the Light of God, can't you? Do you know what I am getting at?
Well, we can see right off the bat that they have a relation in number: There are three terms in each relation: F=ma & V=IR. That is a start, right? Let's go on from there:
1) F=Force, and have you ever heard Voltage (V) described as Electro Motive Force (EMF)?
2) The mass (m) of an object defines its inertial RESISTANCE to motion. The "R" of the electrical equation represents electrical RESISTANCE.
3) The "a", for Acceleration, is a measure of the motion of the mass "m". The "I" measure of electrical current is a measure of "time rate of change of electrical charge", or charge velocity.
Thus, with deference to the science of fractals, we say that these two important equations of mechanics and electronics are "self-similar" in the basic laws that they describe. And these two basic laws describe a helluva lot of truth with regard to how Mass, Space, and Time interact with one another.
The relationships of these equations are a certain amount of evidence that universal laws are based on mixings of THREE, is it not true? We could also add E = mc^2 to this list to see how universal laws are defined in groupings of three. What are your thoughts about this? Do you believe in 3 Gods as 1?
RMT
Roel van Houten
Quantum Scribe
Re: Cookbook for Creation
I know that witches have adopted some rituals and ceremonies from many religions, ranging from Christianity to ancient Egyptian magic and most importantly Quabalah. I believe Jews and Pagans share a holiday Sam...something... I can't remember the name and I don't know if this holiday has any specific relationship with the Quabalah, but since Quabalah is inextracably linked to Jewish believes, I guess that there is a link here /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif I'm not sure, but I think the infamous pentagram also finds its origin in the Quabalah?
By the way, the i-ching also has a lot in common with the quabalah.
I'm not saying your science has been wrong, I'm merely stating that you're abusively using existing scientific facts to justify your belief in a deity. Now again, the science in itself is not wrong, I just don't see the connection to god. I refuse to believe that the Relativity-theory is meant to prove the existence of a deity. Of course you can knead any theory so that it fits into your own believes.
Mmmh, no matter how hard I try, most descriptions of the Quabalah are something along the lines of:
[italic] Kabbalah refers to an esoteric doctrine concerning God and the universe, asserted to have come down as a revelation to elect saints from a remote past, and preserved only by a privileged few. [/italic]
Also, can you provide an explanation of the words "Neshamah", "Yehidah" and "Chayyah" without using the words "deity", "god" or "creator"?
I can imagine that the Quabalah can be valuable to nonbelievers as well, but I don't think those parts of the Quabalah are exclusive.
Why should I disprove that? I actually agree with you on this subject more or less. Even if I wanted to disprove your theory, I wouldn't have sufficient scientific knowledge to do so. I only fail to see the link to a creative force, creator, god or whatever.
If indeed all scientist agree to the statement that energy is the force of creation, then I can only conclude that they mean another type of creation. A large number of scientists don't even believe in a Creator. Which proves that you are twisting scientific facts to justify your believes.
I guess you mean Esther?
I can't deny that she's a smart woman. I grew up listening to her music and watching her videos. But that is in no way evidence that what she believes is true.
Other artists are tied to The Church of Scientology, which - by the way - is the only form of religion I hold a grudge against. I'm glad Madonna...err I mean Esther has the same sympathies towards Scientology /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
Also, religion can be a major source of inspiration... Like I said earlier, I really like Fertile Ground.
Damn, I could use a dip in the pool as well... it's 4 am and I'm still sweating like a pig on a spit roast /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
I know that witches have adopted some rituals and ceremonies from many religions, ranging from Christianity to ancient Egyptian magic and most importantly Quabalah. I believe Jews and Pagans share a holiday Sam...something... I can't remember the name and I don't know if this holiday has any specific relationship with the Quabalah, but since Quabalah is inextracably linked to Jewish believes, I guess that there is a link here /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif I'm not sure, but I think the infamous pentagram also finds its origin in the Quabalah?
By the way, the i-ching also has a lot in common with the quabalah.
I'm not saying your science has been wrong, I'm merely stating that you're abusively using existing scientific facts to justify your belief in a deity. Now again, the science in itself is not wrong, I just don't see the connection to god. I refuse to believe that the Relativity-theory is meant to prove the existence of a deity. Of course you can knead any theory so that it fits into your own believes.
Mmmh, no matter how hard I try, most descriptions of the Quabalah are something along the lines of:
[italic] Kabbalah refers to an esoteric doctrine concerning God and the universe, asserted to have come down as a revelation to elect saints from a remote past, and preserved only by a privileged few. [/italic]
Also, can you provide an explanation of the words "Neshamah", "Yehidah" and "Chayyah" without using the words "deity", "god" or "creator"?
I can imagine that the Quabalah can be valuable to nonbelievers as well, but I don't think those parts of the Quabalah are exclusive.
Why should I disprove that? I actually agree with you on this subject more or less. Even if I wanted to disprove your theory, I wouldn't have sufficient scientific knowledge to do so. I only fail to see the link to a creative force, creator, god or whatever.
If indeed all scientist agree to the statement that energy is the force of creation, then I can only conclude that they mean another type of creation. A large number of scientists don't even believe in a Creator. Which proves that you are twisting scientific facts to justify your believes.
I guess you mean Esther?
Other artists are tied to The Church of Scientology, which - by the way - is the only form of religion I hold a grudge against. I'm glad Madonna...err I mean Esther has the same sympathies towards Scientology /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
Also, religion can be a major source of inspiration... Like I said earlier, I really like Fertile Ground.
Damn, I could use a dip in the pool as well... it's 4 am and I'm still sweating like a pig on a spit roast /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
Roel van Houten
Quantum Scribe
Re: Tetrahedral Thinking - Church of the SubGenius
Uhm no. My creativity does not come from god. I do use energy to create things, yes. Again, I fail to see why Energy equals God. That's a link you've created in your mind. So I guess we can call God a creative subsystem of Ray.
Remember. Energy = Energy. It's not selfaware; there's no indication whatsoever that it is.
No, they seem little acts of creation to you. Are YOU sure that they are acts of creation? Can you prove that they are? Many what you would call "decisions" in evolution are in fact accidents. Many lifeforms sometimes grow bodyparts in wrong places. Sometimes these mutations are useful and permanent and sometimes they are useless and they disappear after several generations. I think you'll have a hard time convincing me that these are acts of creation instead of accidents.
Yet again, you are absolutely right. Or perhaps you're not, but I do not have sufficient knowledge to dismiss your statement. BUT, again my problem lies in the fact that you think that next higher subsystem involves a creator, deity or god. That's ONLY SPECULATION. Again, any evidence you may provide is as real as the emperors new clothes. /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
*breathes a sigh of relieve*
For the love of all that is holy and righteous, thank you! That's precisely the area that I'm denying. I will never (ouch, that's a long time, better make that hardly ever) doubt your science.
Yes, so my logical conclusion is that people have always abusively attributed unexplainble phenomena to god, while in fact it was energy all the time. And still, energy is not selfaware and thus does not have the power to create.
You've been talking non-stop about science and spirituality, but you only used a thread of microfiber to link the two. And in my opinion every time you linked science and spirituality with this tiny microfiber, I came a long with an axe to chop the link into even tinier pieces /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
I can't deny your qualities, but I guess you'll agree when I say that nobody is perfect.
Yes and I'm enjoying the discussion. I was only trying to say that if we continue talking about MassiveSpaceTime or any other topic (be it in another thread), I'd appreciate it if we could keep god out of the equation, since that seems to be the only obstacle in our discussions.
Yes, I will. Right now I'm kind of busy, hence my presence at this late hour. I'm also thinking of making a website devoted to "timeparticles". Mmmmh, as I'm typing this I see someone beat me to it /ttiforum/images/graemlins/frown.gif Here. Good thing it has no content yet. I have some ideas for my timeparticle theory /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
Yay! Pop the Glen Ellen... A merlot would be nice. /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
Uhm no. My creativity does not come from god. I do use energy to create things, yes. Again, I fail to see why Energy equals God. That's a link you've created in your mind. So I guess we can call God a creative subsystem of Ray.
Remember. Energy = Energy. It's not selfaware; there's no indication whatsoever that it is.
No, they seem little acts of creation to you. Are YOU sure that they are acts of creation? Can you prove that they are? Many what you would call "decisions" in evolution are in fact accidents. Many lifeforms sometimes grow bodyparts in wrong places. Sometimes these mutations are useful and permanent and sometimes they are useless and they disappear after several generations. I think you'll have a hard time convincing me that these are acts of creation instead of accidents.
Yet again, you are absolutely right. Or perhaps you're not, but I do not have sufficient knowledge to dismiss your statement. BUT, again my problem lies in the fact that you think that next higher subsystem involves a creator, deity or god. That's ONLY SPECULATION. Again, any evidence you may provide is as real as the emperors new clothes. /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
*breathes a sigh of relieve*
For the love of all that is holy and righteous, thank you! That's precisely the area that I'm denying. I will never (ouch, that's a long time, better make that hardly ever) doubt your science.
Yes, so my logical conclusion is that people have always abusively attributed unexplainble phenomena to god, while in fact it was energy all the time. And still, energy is not selfaware and thus does not have the power to create.
You've been talking non-stop about science and spirituality, but you only used a thread of microfiber to link the two. And in my opinion every time you linked science and spirituality with this tiny microfiber, I came a long with an axe to chop the link into even tinier pieces /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
I can't deny your qualities, but I guess you'll agree when I say that nobody is perfect.
Yes and I'm enjoying the discussion. I was only trying to say that if we continue talking about MassiveSpaceTime or any other topic (be it in another thread), I'd appreciate it if we could keep god out of the equation, since that seems to be the only obstacle in our discussions.
Yes, I will. Right now I'm kind of busy, hence my presence at this late hour. I'm also thinking of making a website devoted to "timeparticles". Mmmmh, as I'm typing this I see someone beat me to it /ttiforum/images/graemlins/frown.gif Here. Good thing it has no content yet. I have some ideas for my timeparticle theory /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
Yay! Pop the Glen Ellen... A merlot would be nice. /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
Roel van Houten
Quantum Scribe
Re: God, I am SO \"wrong\"!
I can only think of possible situations:
1) we can perceive lightning, which is said to be pure energy
2) we can perceive images, sound (and sometimes even taste and smell) in our dreams, yet they only consist of energy
Do I at least get the consolation prize? /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
Roel
I can only think of possible situations:
1) we can perceive lightning, which is said to be pure energy
2) we can perceive images, sound (and sometimes even taste and smell) in our dreams, yet they only consist of energy
Do I at least get the consolation prize? /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
Roel
zerubbabel
Chrono Cadet
Re: Tetrahedral Thinking - Church of the SubGenius
Psalms 14:1-3
1 The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good. 2 The LORD looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there were any that did understand, and seek God. 3 They are all gone aside, they are all together become filthy: there is none that doeth good, no, not one
Ec 9:10 - Show Context
Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might; for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave, whither thou goest.
Job 11:7-12
7 Canst thou by searching find out God? canst thou find out the Almighty unto perfection? 8 It is as high as heaven; what canst thou do? deeper than hell; what canst thou know? 9 The measure thereof is longer than the earth, and broader than the sea. 10 If he cut off, and shut up, or gather together, then who can hinder him? 11 For he knoweth vain men: he seeth wickedness also; will he not then consider it? 12 For vain man would be wise, though man be born like a wild ass's colt.
1Kings 19
11 And he said, Go forth, and stand upon the mount before the LORD. And, behold, the LORD passed by, and a great and strong wind rent the mountains, and brake in pieces the rocks before the LORD; but the LORD was not in the wind: and after the wind an earthquake; but the LORD was not in the earthquake: 12 And after the earthquake a fire; but the LORD was not in the fire: and after the fire a still small voice. 13 And it was so, when Elijah heard it, that he wrapped his face in his mantle
According to the "evidence" above, as Roel states, God simply cannot be a part of any equation. Nor, as the "evidence" above also indicates, the "fool" who does not "in his heart" believe in God--is not necessarily the definition of what we consider the "fool" to be.
>>>>>>>Yes, and isn't it WONDERFUL? I know you remember me talking about contradiction and paradox before. The grandfather paradox is a classic of time travel. We know from Godel's Incompleteness Theorem that contradictory statements can be formed in any closed system of logics and semantics. But the bigger question is "what do they mean?". Well, we have found the operational answer to that question in the field of systems engineering. When we run into a logical paradox within any closed system boundary, that is the "clue" to the systems engineer that s/he must jump outward to the next systemic level of context. Per Shannon's theory of information, any contradiction of a logical subsystem can (and must) be resolved by information at the level of its supersystem. The systems engineer solves the contradiction in the subsystem by introducing NEW INFORMATION (another recurring theme...I'll keep pointing them out) from the supersystem down to the subsystem level. An INTERFACE SIGNAL is defined between the supersystem and the subsystem that breaks the contradiction. This is how we will have to solve the grandfather paradox of time travel....Einstein was, indeed, trying to look at and describe the next higher subsystem of our universe!<<<<<<<<<<
Before any paradox can be addressed, the paradox of this thread must be addressed. Like it or not, we are all "subsystems" of the supersystem (however we define it), and there must be a way to incorporate it all to get beyond to the truth hidden behind the "noise". There is consistency here even though the consistent "systems" are inconsistent with each other. I love pure science. I rarely see pure spirituality, but I love it as well. I respect passion even if misguided. I often get angry at some things said, but often find that my anger is unjustified if taken in the spirit meant. I have a feeling that much of the anger here has already been largely spent. Humanity has entered into the picture and the mundane (and profound) issues of our daily lives make us realize, if only for a short time, that the grave is real and that our individual lives are all we really have. Herein lies the true contradiction, for as ordered and determininistic is the universe seems to be(including us), we are as unique in this universe as the concept of God is. We muck up the whole equation. With our mindless free will, we can not get it together. It boggles me to even conceive that a perfect entity would create something as imperfect as us. Consciousness does not follow the rules. It just damn well goes where it pleases. IT is the cause of all war and injustice, and it is responsible for the most honorable acts. In the end, if the universe is any indication, chaos must once again become pattern. A pattern is developing here. There seems to be some willingness to compromise. Rainman comes up with interesting analogies that I enjoy and I see his spirit and passion consistent throughout. I have similar interests so it is easy to step from one realm of study to another without making the physical connection. Cat is my soul sister and she can do no wrong--even when she steps out of character and BECOMES a character!! Don't take her too seriously, she PURRS when you talk nice to her. You know how finicky cats can be? OverLords contributions are much appreciated!! Again, like Rainman, I enjoy following the trails. Damn if I don't like Roel. He's a great atheist!! Trollface is good, but he could learn some lessons from Roel--even though Roel often comments on Trolls good points. Humor makes a difference. And heart. How can I disagree with anyone who has a profound sense of the injustices and senseless pain in the world. I appreciate the perserverence that you all have put into this thread. I have followed it from the beginning, not feeling any desire to enter into the debate as, I'm sure, many other of our friends out there who are interested in the outcome--if any. Can we summarize this and pursue a common goal? I have a great many questions still, many of them I do not know yet. Can we all step out of the box here? Can we keep ourselves from becoming uptight by all the catch phrases that signal our belief systems? Can a scripture quote that is relevant to the discussion be as accepted as a quote from Darwin? Can synchronicity be a valid indicator of intuitive thinking? Can an artistic expression have some bearing upon upon a conundrum that defies a logical connection? The science of the future, in my estimation, will be made up of such steps and the ability of those to adapt to it will be the catalysts for the next generation of scientists who "think outside the box" and accomplish what we now consider pure magic. Time Travel. Immortality. Conquering paradox. Overcoming death. Sounds like magic now. Someday, pure science?
Psalms 14:1-3
1 The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good. 2 The LORD looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there were any that did understand, and seek God. 3 They are all gone aside, they are all together become filthy: there is none that doeth good, no, not one
Ec 9:10 - Show Context
Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might; for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave, whither thou goest.
Job 11:7-12
7 Canst thou by searching find out God? canst thou find out the Almighty unto perfection? 8 It is as high as heaven; what canst thou do? deeper than hell; what canst thou know? 9 The measure thereof is longer than the earth, and broader than the sea. 10 If he cut off, and shut up, or gather together, then who can hinder him? 11 For he knoweth vain men: he seeth wickedness also; will he not then consider it? 12 For vain man would be wise, though man be born like a wild ass's colt.
1Kings 19
11 And he said, Go forth, and stand upon the mount before the LORD. And, behold, the LORD passed by, and a great and strong wind rent the mountains, and brake in pieces the rocks before the LORD; but the LORD was not in the wind: and after the wind an earthquake; but the LORD was not in the earthquake: 12 And after the earthquake a fire; but the LORD was not in the fire: and after the fire a still small voice. 13 And it was so, when Elijah heard it, that he wrapped his face in his mantle
According to the "evidence" above, as Roel states, God simply cannot be a part of any equation. Nor, as the "evidence" above also indicates, the "fool" who does not "in his heart" believe in God--is not necessarily the definition of what we consider the "fool" to be.
>>>>>>>Yes, and isn't it WONDERFUL? I know you remember me talking about contradiction and paradox before. The grandfather paradox is a classic of time travel. We know from Godel's Incompleteness Theorem that contradictory statements can be formed in any closed system of logics and semantics. But the bigger question is "what do they mean?". Well, we have found the operational answer to that question in the field of systems engineering. When we run into a logical paradox within any closed system boundary, that is the "clue" to the systems engineer that s/he must jump outward to the next systemic level of context. Per Shannon's theory of information, any contradiction of a logical subsystem can (and must) be resolved by information at the level of its supersystem. The systems engineer solves the contradiction in the subsystem by introducing NEW INFORMATION (another recurring theme...I'll keep pointing them out) from the supersystem down to the subsystem level. An INTERFACE SIGNAL is defined between the supersystem and the subsystem that breaks the contradiction. This is how we will have to solve the grandfather paradox of time travel....Einstein was, indeed, trying to look at and describe the next higher subsystem of our universe!<<<<<<<<<<
Before any paradox can be addressed, the paradox of this thread must be addressed. Like it or not, we are all "subsystems" of the supersystem (however we define it), and there must be a way to incorporate it all to get beyond to the truth hidden behind the "noise". There is consistency here even though the consistent "systems" are inconsistent with each other. I love pure science. I rarely see pure spirituality, but I love it as well. I respect passion even if misguided. I often get angry at some things said, but often find that my anger is unjustified if taken in the spirit meant. I have a feeling that much of the anger here has already been largely spent. Humanity has entered into the picture and the mundane (and profound) issues of our daily lives make us realize, if only for a short time, that the grave is real and that our individual lives are all we really have. Herein lies the true contradiction, for as ordered and determininistic is the universe seems to be(including us), we are as unique in this universe as the concept of God is. We muck up the whole equation. With our mindless free will, we can not get it together. It boggles me to even conceive that a perfect entity would create something as imperfect as us. Consciousness does not follow the rules. It just damn well goes where it pleases. IT is the cause of all war and injustice, and it is responsible for the most honorable acts. In the end, if the universe is any indication, chaos must once again become pattern. A pattern is developing here. There seems to be some willingness to compromise. Rainman comes up with interesting analogies that I enjoy and I see his spirit and passion consistent throughout. I have similar interests so it is easy to step from one realm of study to another without making the physical connection. Cat is my soul sister and she can do no wrong--even when she steps out of character and BECOMES a character!! Don't take her too seriously, she PURRS when you talk nice to her. You know how finicky cats can be? OverLords contributions are much appreciated!! Again, like Rainman, I enjoy following the trails. Damn if I don't like Roel. He's a great atheist!! Trollface is good, but he could learn some lessons from Roel--even though Roel often comments on Trolls good points. Humor makes a difference. And heart. How can I disagree with anyone who has a profound sense of the injustices and senseless pain in the world. I appreciate the perserverence that you all have put into this thread. I have followed it from the beginning, not feeling any desire to enter into the debate as, I'm sure, many other of our friends out there who are interested in the outcome--if any. Can we summarize this and pursue a common goal? I have a great many questions still, many of them I do not know yet. Can we all step out of the box here? Can we keep ourselves from becoming uptight by all the catch phrases that signal our belief systems? Can a scripture quote that is relevant to the discussion be as accepted as a quote from Darwin? Can synchronicity be a valid indicator of intuitive thinking? Can an artistic expression have some bearing upon upon a conundrum that defies a logical connection? The science of the future, in my estimation, will be made up of such steps and the ability of those to adapt to it will be the catalysts for the next generation of scientists who "think outside the box" and accomplish what we now consider pure magic. Time Travel. Immortality. Conquering paradox. Overcoming death. Sounds like magic now. Someday, pure science?
RainmanTime
Super Moderator
Re: God, I am SO \"wrong\"!
No consolation prize for you, Roel! Step to the front of the line. You mentioned Light, and that was all that is needed. Isn't the speed of light a wonderful thing to contemplate? Sort of like how, in the old days, people used to contemplate the speed of sound.... and wonder..... about Nature.
Would anyone care to doubt that the speed of light is the measure that defines time for us? Is this not one of the "keys" to understanding how to travel thru time?
RMT
No consolation prize for you, Roel! Step to the front of the line. You mentioned Light, and that was all that is needed. Isn't the speed of light a wonderful thing to contemplate? Sort of like how, in the old days, people used to contemplate the speed of sound.... and wonder..... about Nature.
Would anyone care to doubt that the speed of light is the measure that defines time for us? Is this not one of the "keys" to understanding how to travel thru time?
RMT
RainmanTime
Super Moderator
Re: Tetrahedral Thinking - Church of the SubGenius
Good points, Zerub. Thanks for lurking and contributing.
I think there is a critical mass of people who participate and lurk in this forum who, collectively, have the pieces to the puzzle. The more we all share, the more we put the disparate pieces together. The more we cooperate to put the pieces together, the more we can all see what this jigsaw puzzle looks like.
RMT
Good points, Zerub. Thanks for lurking and contributing.
I think there is a critical mass of people who participate and lurk in this forum who, collectively, have the pieces to the puzzle. The more we all share, the more we put the disparate pieces together. The more we cooperate to put the pieces together, the more we can all see what this jigsaw puzzle looks like.
RMT
KerrTexas
Super Moderator
Re: Tetrahedral Thinking - Church of the SubGenius
One outcome has been learning alot about each other. I think we have gained quite a bit by our interactions. Sometimes laughing, sometimes cursing, still coming back to the table, sometimes stepping back, sometimes stepping forward, in our quest of an understanding. In our attempt to understand the mysteries of the Universe, we have found an understanding of each other.
I know that everything that has been presented has caused a great deal of thought and consideration of other points of view. I have had to quite a bit of research to respond to some of the comments and learned a great deal.
For that I thank everyone that has participated in this adventure. I am sure that we will continue have our ups and downs, but all for the common good I hope, and an even greater understanding.
Yes, someday. /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
One outcome has been learning alot about each other. I think we have gained quite a bit by our interactions. Sometimes laughing, sometimes cursing, still coming back to the table, sometimes stepping back, sometimes stepping forward, in our quest of an understanding. In our attempt to understand the mysteries of the Universe, we have found an understanding of each other.
I know that everything that has been presented has caused a great deal of thought and consideration of other points of view. I have had to quite a bit of research to respond to some of the comments and learned a great deal.
For that I thank everyone that has participated in this adventure. I am sure that we will continue have our ups and downs, but all for the common good I hope, and an even greater understanding.
Yes, someday. /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
Re: Tetrahedral Thinking - Church of the SubGenius
Zerub, Baal Shem Tov! /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
You have once again set a good example of what it means to not be arbitrary or capricious! Exhibiting one of Gds best character examples...
Gd cannot learn anything new because before he created anything he knew all about it. There is no progression in knowledge for Gd as there is with man... But, some day we will all come to know the greater good and possess all knowledge... Understanding all of nature and its design and objective verses chaos...
Thinking "outside the box" in the process of combining and sharing our thoughts, a day will come where we will not be able to hold a torch to light anothers path without brightening our own... We will come to realize that we cannot live for ourselves alone. Our lives are connected by a thousand invisible threads, and along these sympathetic fibers our actions run as causes, and return to us as results. And when one tugs at a single thing in nature, come to find out it is attached to the rest of the world...
Today the network of relationships linking the human race to itself and to the rest of the biosphere is so complex that all aspects affect all others to an extraordinary degree. Someone should be studying the whole system, however crudely that has to be done, because no gluing together of partial studies of a complex nonlinear system can give a good idea of the behavior of the whole... /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
Itchy gitchi yaya dada Voulez-vous coucher avec moi, ce soir
Zerub, Baal Shem Tov! /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
You have once again set a good example of what it means to not be arbitrary or capricious! Exhibiting one of Gds best character examples...
Gd cannot learn anything new because before he created anything he knew all about it. There is no progression in knowledge for Gd as there is with man... But, some day we will all come to know the greater good and possess all knowledge... Understanding all of nature and its design and objective verses chaos...
Thinking "outside the box" in the process of combining and sharing our thoughts, a day will come where we will not be able to hold a torch to light anothers path without brightening our own... We will come to realize that we cannot live for ourselves alone. Our lives are connected by a thousand invisible threads, and along these sympathetic fibers our actions run as causes, and return to us as results. And when one tugs at a single thing in nature, come to find out it is attached to the rest of the world...
Today the network of relationships linking the human race to itself and to the rest of the biosphere is so complex that all aspects affect all others to an extraordinary degree. Someone should be studying the whole system, however crudely that has to be done, because no gluing together of partial studies of a complex nonlinear system can give a good idea of the behavior of the whole... /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
Itchy gitchi yaya dada Voulez-vous coucher avec moi, ce soir
trollface
Quantum Scribe
Re: Cookbook for Creation
Okay. Again, I've only skimmed this thread, so if I don't address something don't panic, I'll be back - probably this evening. As it is, I'm feeling kind of angry yet also warm and fuzzy and full of love for all, so forgive the possibly odd tone of this post.
Thank you. We may not always see eye to eye, but I do genuinely appreciate this.
Interesting you should say this. As I said above this is the first time I've been angry in more than 5 years, and it's taken extremely extreme circumstances to bring it about. And, even so, I've still not actually lost my temper. It's been at least 7 years since I did that.
So, if anger is a sign of the ego, then what does the fact that I very, very rarely get angry say about mine? Confirmation bias again - you see me say I'm angry and take it as evidence that I'm an egoist without taking the time to learn the circumstances surrounding my anger. I'm sure that what I'm saying here won't alter your opinion at all, but if what you say about anger and ego is true then what you've actually demonstrated is that I am not controlled by my ego at all.
I don't believe that to be true, we all are slaves to our egos to a greater or lesser dregree (and let us not forget that the word "ego" actually means "self"), but I think it serves as an illustration of how what you claim as evidence of certain things in actuality proves nothing of the kind.
Anger, snideyness, snippyness (and there's been some behind the scenes stuff you're not privvvy to). but you're absolutely right. I had said that I was going to ignore CAT, and that still seems like the right thing to do. Bringing her into the conversation was petty and childish and the kind of action that a person who acted how you seem to think I do would take. I have no excuse and would like to publicly apologise to everyone reading this thread, as I should not have acted in this manner.
Really, Ray. If you're going to dis me for my behaviour, you're probably better off thinking up your own phrases, rather than just repeating what I say.
Most importantly confirmation bias. I cannot stress it enough. Confirmation bias. Address that, if nothing else.
Oh, Ray, you are a lovable rogue but I really do despair when it becomes apparent that you simply don't take in what other people say. How do you expect to participate in meaningful debate if you don't actually pay attention to what other people tell you? Once more, for the record, as I have said explicity and implicity many, many times - I do not think that "right" or "wrong" are absolutes, or even mutually exclusive. I'm an amatuer semiologist. Maybe you need to look into semiology before you can appreciate where I'm coming from, but mark this and make sure it sinks into your consiousness, as I get tired of repeating myself - there is no such thing as "right" or "wrong". All there is is perspective. The power of meaning and significance lies with the reader, be it a media text or real life that s/he is reading. I am giving you my opinion, and would never ever claim to have a full handle on "THE truth" - that is your claim and is exactly what you are doing.
I think you're right that it's a stupid and futile thing to claim to be the holder of absolute knowledge and "THE truth". But it's not me that makes that claim, it's you. I really think you might be right about my being here telling you things about yourself because you certainly seem to be projecting qualities that you possess onto me.
You yourself have said that this is not all I do. So, what's wrong with debunking falsehoods again?
It's not. Maybe it is on this site, but I see a lot of dodgy claims on this site. You don't imagine for one second that what I do and what I am on this site is the be all and end all of my existence, do you?
I seem to rememebr that my debunking had your support when it was Chronohistorian I was debunking. Now I am attacking theings that you agree with, rather than disagree with, it's suddenly a bad thing. Go figure.
If my debunking is wrong, then you have nothing to fear from it, surely? You should welcome it as it helps you to prove your point further, rather than feel slighted and afraid.
No, I am, too. I've had constructive discussions with people with very, very similar beliefs to Ray off-board, both with people from this board and with others. It's the way Ray presents his ideas that I find off-putting and unpalatable. It's the closed-mindedness and conviction of being right to the exclusion of all else that gets in the way of what he's trying to say and renders any actual message he's trying to convey as mere background noise.
Okay, so the whole number thing is nothing but a metaphor? Well why didn't you say so in the first place? A metaphor can be anything you like. I was concerned with the literal truth of the matter.
Tell you what. I'll prove to you that God doesn't exist just as soon as you prove to me that Hubert the invisible purple dancing beaver deity doesn't exist.
Actually, I was being a sarcastic smart-arse at that point, and subtly emphasising my point that Ray seems to project things he doesn't like about himself onto me (maybe I really am a reflection of his soul? It's a slightly disturbing concept, but there you go). Apart from the opening where I addressed Ray specifically, that entire paragraph was cut and pasted from one of his posts.
I'm not so keen on Ms. Milano myself, but Holly Marie Combs is stunningly beautiful. Exactly my type.
I was actually going to respond to more than I have done, but I've suddenly lost all interest. To quote the Governator, I'll be back.
Okay. Again, I've only skimmed this thread, so if I don't address something don't panic, I'll be back - probably this evening. As it is, I'm feeling kind of angry yet also warm and fuzzy and full of love for all, so forgive the possibly odd tone of this post.
Thank you. We may not always see eye to eye, but I do genuinely appreciate this.
Interesting you should say this. As I said above this is the first time I've been angry in more than 5 years, and it's taken extremely extreme circumstances to bring it about. And, even so, I've still not actually lost my temper. It's been at least 7 years since I did that.
So, if anger is a sign of the ego, then what does the fact that I very, very rarely get angry say about mine? Confirmation bias again - you see me say I'm angry and take it as evidence that I'm an egoist without taking the time to learn the circumstances surrounding my anger. I'm sure that what I'm saying here won't alter your opinion at all, but if what you say about anger and ego is true then what you've actually demonstrated is that I am not controlled by my ego at all.
I don't believe that to be true, we all are slaves to our egos to a greater or lesser dregree (and let us not forget that the word "ego" actually means "self"), but I think it serves as an illustration of how what you claim as evidence of certain things in actuality proves nothing of the kind.
Anger, snideyness, snippyness (and there's been some behind the scenes stuff you're not privvvy to). but you're absolutely right. I had said that I was going to ignore CAT, and that still seems like the right thing to do. Bringing her into the conversation was petty and childish and the kind of action that a person who acted how you seem to think I do would take. I have no excuse and would like to publicly apologise to everyone reading this thread, as I should not have acted in this manner.
Really, Ray. If you're going to dis me for my behaviour, you're probably better off thinking up your own phrases, rather than just repeating what I say.
Most importantly confirmation bias. I cannot stress it enough. Confirmation bias. Address that, if nothing else.
Oh, Ray, you are a lovable rogue but I really do despair when it becomes apparent that you simply don't take in what other people say. How do you expect to participate in meaningful debate if you don't actually pay attention to what other people tell you? Once more, for the record, as I have said explicity and implicity many, many times - I do not think that "right" or "wrong" are absolutes, or even mutually exclusive. I'm an amatuer semiologist. Maybe you need to look into semiology before you can appreciate where I'm coming from, but mark this and make sure it sinks into your consiousness, as I get tired of repeating myself - there is no such thing as "right" or "wrong". All there is is perspective. The power of meaning and significance lies with the reader, be it a media text or real life that s/he is reading. I am giving you my opinion, and would never ever claim to have a full handle on "THE truth" - that is your claim and is exactly what you are doing.
I think you're right that it's a stupid and futile thing to claim to be the holder of absolute knowledge and "THE truth". But it's not me that makes that claim, it's you. I really think you might be right about my being here telling you things about yourself because you certainly seem to be projecting qualities that you possess onto me.
You yourself have said that this is not all I do. So, what's wrong with debunking falsehoods again?
It's not. Maybe it is on this site, but I see a lot of dodgy claims on this site. You don't imagine for one second that what I do and what I am on this site is the be all and end all of my existence, do you?
I seem to rememebr that my debunking had your support when it was Chronohistorian I was debunking. Now I am attacking theings that you agree with, rather than disagree with, it's suddenly a bad thing. Go figure.
If my debunking is wrong, then you have nothing to fear from it, surely? You should welcome it as it helps you to prove your point further, rather than feel slighted and afraid.
No, I am, too. I've had constructive discussions with people with very, very similar beliefs to Ray off-board, both with people from this board and with others. It's the way Ray presents his ideas that I find off-putting and unpalatable. It's the closed-mindedness and conviction of being right to the exclusion of all else that gets in the way of what he's trying to say and renders any actual message he's trying to convey as mere background noise.
Okay, so the whole number thing is nothing but a metaphor? Well why didn't you say so in the first place? A metaphor can be anything you like. I was concerned with the literal truth of the matter.
Tell you what. I'll prove to you that God doesn't exist just as soon as you prove to me that Hubert the invisible purple dancing beaver deity doesn't exist.
Actually, I was being a sarcastic smart-arse at that point, and subtly emphasising my point that Ray seems to project things he doesn't like about himself onto me (maybe I really am a reflection of his soul? It's a slightly disturbing concept, but there you go). Apart from the opening where I addressed Ray specifically, that entire paragraph was cut and pasted from one of his posts.
I'm not so keen on Ms. Milano myself, but Holly Marie Combs is stunningly beautiful. Exactly my type.
I was actually going to respond to more than I have done, but I've suddenly lost all interest. To quote the Governator, I'll be back.