PROOF that GOD Exists......
- Thread starter NetGuruINC
- Start date
Doer
Well-Known Member
Oh, btw, can anyone really prove there is nothing beyond our mundane reality? Nothing beyond the usual? Nothing about Now? Forget all the trappings of what we think we know about these matters and puzzle this.
If there is indeed, a maco-quantum effect ,a Many Worlds spawned by every tiny, fine grained increment of irreversible events. And if we, as a quantum mind, Observer, alter the experimental quantum effects. If we and some other conscious forms, exercise free will. If this is one of the ways the many worlds get altered. Seems big to me. Our world then was spawned by something, perhaps, not created, as such.
And it now seems the consensus of the Math heads is our Perception of Reality is Conceiving Reality.
Not as woo. As science.
If there is indeed, a maco-quantum effect ,a Many Worlds spawned by every tiny, fine grained increment of irreversible events. And if we, as a quantum mind, Observer, alter the experimental quantum effects. If we and some other conscious forms, exercise free will. If this is one of the ways the many worlds get altered. Seems big to me. Our world then was spawned by something, perhaps, not created, as such.
And it now seems the consensus of the Math heads is our Perception of Reality is Conceiving Reality.
Not as woo. As science.
Doer
Well-Known Member
crazyhazey
Well-Known Member
we have to remember our brain still lives long past our body though, so after your brain dies, can we truly know what comes next?
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
Heisenberg
Well-Known Member
Nice to see so many new icebergs floating through this thread, makes it easier on the glacier. 
Those who choose to assume NDE=life-after-death and then cease investigation choose a closed mind. That seems to be the sort of people the OP is fishing for.
Those who are interested in further investigation and would like to hear a summary opinion of science will listen to this.
Or just read
Those who choose to assume NDE=life-after-death and then cease investigation choose a closed mind. That seems to be the sort of people the OP is fishing for.
Those who are interested in further investigation and would like to hear a summary opinion of science will listen to this.
Or just read
Doer
Well-Known Member
Doer
Well-Known Member
Yes, sir, it is very hard to say and when we take into account the quantum information paradox, it's impossible to say subjectively when the inner experience stops. Also, impossible to say the nature or subjective duration of the death dream. This from wiki. Did not know about the jelly fish. No natural death? Got those genes in the lab somewhere, I hope. No telomerases? No TTAGGG coding on the gene ends?
----------------------------
Almost all animals who survive external hazards to their biological functioning eventually die from senescence. The only known exception is the jellyfish Turritopsis nutricula, thought to be, in effect, immortal.[SUP][3][/SUP] Unnatural causes of death include suicide and homicide. From all causes, roughly 150,000 people die around the world each day.[SUP][4][/SUP]
Physiological death is now seen as a process, more than an event: conditions once considered indicative of death are now reversible.[SUP][5][/SUP] Where in the process a dividing line is drawn between life and death depends on factors beyond the presence or absence of vital signs. In general, clinical death is neither necessary nor sufficient for a determination of legal death. A patient with working heart and lungs determined to be brain dead can be pronounced legally dead without clinical death occurring. Paradoxically, as scientific knowledge and medicine advance, a precise medical definition of death becomes more problematic.[SUP][6][/SUP]
BackyardBuds
Well-Known Member
....are we still going at this....man....science this, religion that...blah, blah, blah. Can't we all just smoke a bong and get along
Doer
Well-Known Member
I think we all are smoking the bong and getting along, discussing science-religion, blah blah. Do you have something to add or subtract? Perhaps a reduction of your eyelids?....are we still going at this....man....science this, religion that...blah, blah, blah. Can't we all just smoke a bong and get along
BackyardBuds
Well-Known Member
Well....I guess I could. I think some people are so desperate to prove or disprove something, that it comes off as pushy and annoying, and frankly makes people less likely to even listen with an open mind....let alone listen at all. I respect the fact that some people believe in God or what every deity or choose to follow scientific theory/process. Personally, finding a balance between spiritual and physical is what makes me tick. If you believe in God....then God bless you. If science is more your thing...more power to you. If you wanna go fishing....leave your baggage on the shore or you'll be swimming home. Now, its off the dentist and hopefully some fishin'....tight lines and stay high.
Zaehet Strife
Well-Known Member
Nobody wants to admit one simple fact.
Science has proven religion wrong time and time again. Science admits when it is wrong, changes, and tries to find out the truth again.
Religion has never proven science wrong, only science has. Religion hardly ever admits when it is wrong, and when it does, its so full of bull shit excuses about it you can smell it half way across the world.
People can't handle the truth, they don't want it, they would rather live happily in delusion. Some see this as a curse, some see it with envious eyes... some see it as absurd and rightly fucking retarded and weak.
Whatevs.
Science has proven religion wrong time and time again. Science admits when it is wrong, changes, and tries to find out the truth again.
Religion has never proven science wrong, only science has. Religion hardly ever admits when it is wrong, and when it does, its so full of bull shit excuses about it you can smell it half way across the world.
People can't handle the truth, they don't want it, they would rather live happily in delusion. Some see this as a curse, some see it with envious eyes... some see it as absurd and rightly fucking retarded and weak.
Whatevs.
eye exaggerate
Well-Known Member
...hey man, opinions are like assholes, everyone's got one - tighten up or spew crap I guess...
Religion isn't in the business of proving anything wrong other than our perceptions of self, imo. Why is it the strict domain of 'scientists' to prove people wrong? Does it make for a more effective cure of disease?I'm not a pure genius, but it is easy to see that one of these words is not like the others, one of these words does not belong:
"science" - "fucking retarded" - "weak"
afrawfraw
Well-Known Member
Yes, it does. It's called the Scientific Method....
The difference is when a scientist approaches another scientist and says, "I think you made an error here.", the other scientist says, "Oh, my! Thank you!"
When you approach a person of faith and say "I think you made an error here.", they say,"NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! FAITH! FAITH! FAITH!"
TogTokes
Well-Known Member
So true. And even sometimes the religious person will bomb some towers lol. Or w/e else they decide to do.. Religion rocks!
Doer
Well-Known Member
I gotta agree here. Religion these days has nothing against science. And science these days is not out to disprove religion. Science looks at an obviously Subjective world and calls that Objective research. Religion takes the only Objective knowledge we have, of our own Self and calls that Subjective Experience....hey man, opinions are like assholes, everyone's got one - tighten up or spew crap I guess...
I'm not a pure genius, but it is easy to see that one of these words is not like the others, one of these words does not belong:
"science" - "fucking retarded" - "weak"
eye exaggerate
Well-Known Member
...thanks, I get that. But why apply it to another person's life? There's life, and there's science. The two go well together, yet are sort of mutually exclusive. We can't prove why people are even here in the first place. < in the physical sense, sure, that's easy to prove (fckn fun as hell too
)...personally, when pointing out a flaw in thinking, I have yet to run into someone who has said, "sorry, no, I'm right - I'm a person of faith and that means I'm right." An extreme example, but do you see what I am saying?
afrawfraw
Well-Known Member
I hear that every time I exchange ideas with a person of faith. I believe the line is :"I just know."...thanks, I get that. But why apply it to another person's life? There's life, and there's science. The two go well together, yet are sort of mutually exclusive. We can't prove why people are even here in the first place. < in the physical sense, sure, that's easy to prove (fckn fun as hell too
...personally, when pointing out a flaw in thinking, I have yet to run into someone who has said, "sorry, no, I'm right - I'm a person of faith and that means I'm right." An extreme example, but do you see what I am saying?
Science is the observation of the universe, including life. It completely applies to us all, and equally. Just because we don't know something, doesn't mean we should guess. And just because someone guessed, doesn't mean you should perpetuate the guess. A posse ad esse. This is what boggles the Atheists mind. If you are susceptible to faulty logic, how far does that faulty logic infect your reasoning? The spectrum ranges from those who don't even believe to people killing their children in the name of their God. If a man truly believed a "Being" was watching all the time, would he steal? No. Would he rape? No. Would he even have sex with his own wife knowing it's a heavenly porno production? No! So some who claim to have faith, really don't. They buckle their safety belts, look both ways before crossing the street, and stay away from alligators for one reason only. Observation by scientists. So why utilize the technologies based on the sciences, only to deny the evidence which supports said science. Answer= Delusion!
Delusion defined: a persistent false psychotic belief regarding the self or persons or objects outside the self that is maintained despite indisputable evidence to the contrary; also: the abnormal state marked by such beliefs.
ALL evidence collected thus far does NOT support anything close to the Quran or the Bible. Yet the belief persists...Hmmmm.
eye exaggerate
Well-Known Member
...and sometimes a scientist's output is verbose. "All evidence collected" - I know actual, practicing scientists who disagree with that idea (some living and some deceased - just to point out a range of age).
We're missing something here and that is the fact that technology is void of feeling. Technology is dead until we make it 'come to life' by using it. I'm reminded here of Aristotle's "Prime Mover", for whatever reason
afrawfraw
Well-Known Member
I have to disagree with you there. Technology is void of feeling, yes. But scientists who don't value evidence? You have to understand that every theory is subjected to testing by 1,000's of scientists. If the theory performs for everyone, it is accepted as a valid theory. If it does not, it is ruled false. It is pointless to focus on the amount of the information we don't have. This value is limitless for us at this stage. We must endeaver to review the evidence in an unbiased manner. The only way to do that among ourselves, is to have everyone, "Take a gander" and record what they observed. Now look at what has been decided by ALL FAITHS. We call it science. Science is the observation of life without emotion. How effective would your iphone be if it suffered from depression? How good would your steering be if it experienced fear. Perhaps emotions are holding us back from reaching 1.0 on the Kardashev scale?...and sometimes a scientist's output is verbose. "All evidence collected" - I know actual, practicing scientists who disagree with that idea (some living and some deceased - just to point out a range of age).
We're missing something here and that is the fact that technology is void of feeling. Technology is dead until we make it 'come to life' by using it. I'm reminded here of Aristotle's "Prime Mover", for whatever reason