Society/Culture Nobody has anything new to say about God.

[Snake_Baker]

Yeah, but why? Why do you care so much? Isn’t it a waste of your time talking about people who believe in such nonsense?

I know that’s why I fade in and out of this thread. But you are here all the time, posting memes and s**t. Haven’t you got anything better to do?

It's my thread, you're just visiting.

 

[Janus]

It's my thread, you're just visiting.

You know threads aren’t children right? Are you really that hard up for self-validation and self-esteem that you need to take ownership of a discussion topic?

And yet here you are, saying that religion/god is stupid?

Come on man. I’ll tell you my story. I was fully religious at one point, but then I kept noticing the hypocrisy of people who claimed to be serving god but that I knew were not being blessed, as it were. So I figured the path I was on must not be the right one if that was allowed to happen and started being a bit like Kane from Kung Fu...walking the earth and just reading all sorts of weird stuff to learn the great mystery.

I fully understand the path of the atheist and why they don’t believe in god. I don’t have an issue with it at all. I’m just wondering why you have an issue with those that do believe. So tell us, Master.

 

[Total Power]

You know threads aren’t children right? Are you really that hard up for self-validation and self-esteem that you need to take ownership of a discussion topic?

And yet here you are, saying that religion/god is stupid?

Come on man. I’ll tell you my story. I was fully religious at one point, but then I kept noticing the hypocrisy of people who claimed to be serving god but that I knew were not being blessed, as it were. So I figured the path I was on must not be the right one if that was allowed to happen and started being a bit like Kane from Kung Fu...walking the earth and just reading all sorts of weird stuff to learn the great mystery.

I fully understand the path of the atheist and why they don’t believe in god. I don’t have an issue with it at all. I’m just wondering why you have an issue with those that do believe. So tell us, Master.

I was like Snakey, some 10 years ago (proof is in this forum), i continually argued pretty much like him, to the point where people blocked me even..defending atheism at any cost with put downs and making fun of anyone who said anything i didn't agree with, not to mention i was a militant atheist. It's ok, it's the path he has chosen in this life, i care less about what he believes in, i just wish he would behave like an adult does. Roylion is an atheist too and i had the pleasure debating and disagreeing with Roy many times..but he is just an amazing person to debate with. There's a difference between an intelligent man and one masquerading as an intelligent science lover.

 

[RupieDupie]

No, it doesn't matter how old the Universe is, and we're definitely not 13 Billion years old, only that it is important to note that change is ticking by somewhere yet a not-yet-born-conscious-being is not conscious of this. This not-yet-born-conscious-being is "experiencing" nothing, that is, a period of time of "13 billion years" doesn't even last a moment from the perspective of the not-yet-born-conscious-being



No, because "time" (for lack of a better word) only exists when the Universe exists, having "time" in absence of a Universe would be supernatural. If "time" starts at the beginning of the Universe the Universe has always existed.

I'm not arguing that the natural world has to have a creator, that is what a person who believes in Intelligent Design would have to believe.



I'm not arguing for an intelligently designed Universe, only that a person who believes in Intelligent Design cannot imagine a Universe in absence of a designer, by their belief, not mine, this would be impossible.

Here’s another unsolicited response, but because I’m replying to my own post...

...another way to look at the Intelligent Design conundrum

Old Bill Paley is walking across a field and he pitches his foot against a stone, one might ask him how the stone got to be there to which he’ll reply “how the fruck do I know, it might have lain there forever”

But if instead of pitching his foot against a stone he pitched his foot against a watch, if asked the same question, how the watch came to be there, his response would be different, the watch has moving parts and mechanisms to serve a purpose, and therefore has a creator...

But the conundrum is, if The Universe necessarily has a creator, this should be evident in the stone as well. That is, the stone should not serve as evidence against having a creator.

If the Universe, according to Bill and his ilk (not me), is created by a Creator what can be used as evidence that something was not created? Or that something is created? It all should be the same s**t.

 

[Roylion]

Roylion is an atheist too

Agnostic.

 

[Boston tiger]

Here’s another unsolicited response, but because I’m replying to my own post...

...another way to look at the Intelligent Design conundrum

Old Bill Paley is walking across a field and he pitches his foot against a stone, one might ask him how the stone got to be there to which he’ll reply “how the fruck do I know, it might have lain there forever”

But if instead of pitching his foot against a stone he pitched his foot against a watch, if asked the same question, how the watch came to be there, his response would be different, the watch has moving parts and mechanisms to serve a purpose, and therefore has a creator...

But the conundrum is, if The Universe necessarily has a creator, this should be evident in the stone as well. That is, the stone should not serve as evidence against having a creator.

If the Universe, according to Bill and his ilk (not me), is created by a Creator what can be used as evidence that something was not created? Or that something is created? It all should be the same s**t.

A rock, space dust , humans ... all a miracle. Their existence all beyond the human mind.

 

[Snake_Baker]

 

[Total Power]

Agnostic.

Fair enough, but the point is regardless valid, we can disagree on various issues without putting people down, without reading what they have to say.

 

[Snake_Baker]

Fair enough, but the point is regardless valid, we can disagree on various issues without putting people down, without reading what they have to say.

Stop carrying on like some pathetic child mining for sympathy

 

[Total Power]

Stop carrying on like some pathetic child mining for sympathy

Don't you have other threads to troll? my comment was for Roy, go back posting memes and reading headlines. The last 2 pages shows all about you and your education, say no more. I am not stooping to your level anymore. Even the dumbest of dumb people can't come up with some s**t you do..like head chopping s**t solving the consciousness issue. * me lol

 

[Snake_Baker]

Don't you have other threads to troll? my comment was for Roy, go back posting memes and reading headlines. The last 2 pages shows all about you and your education, say no more. I am not stooping to your level anymore. Even the dumbest of dumb people can't come up some s**t you do..like head chopping s**t solving the consciousness issue. **** me lol

1) My thread
2) I'm not trolling, I am deconstructing bullshit

 

[Total Power]

1) My thread

You are subject to bigfooty rules, the reason you been banned from countless threads is that you post too much s**t. This is a fact

2) I'm not trolling, I am deconstructing bullshit

By talking about things you don't know about and posting stuff which are made up lies? i asked you why you think its "s**t", you cannot come up with an answer to that cause your brain cannot handle reading past 4 lines. It's s**t cause you said so? then come up with ridiculous ideas without knowing how biology or evolution works. Then point finger at Deepak lol, you are Deepak on steroids.

 

[Snake_Baker]

You are subject to bigfooty rules, the reason you been banned from countless threads is that you post too much s**t. This is a fact

So what? Now you're virtue signalling. It's pathetic.

By talking about things you don't know about and posting stuff which are made up lies? i asked you why you think its "s**t", you cannot come up with an answer to that cause your brain cannot handle reading past 4 lines.

This is EXACTLY what you do.

Stop crying and act like a man.

 

[Snake_Baker]

 

[Total Power]

So what? Now you're virtue signalling. It's pathetic.

What happened, can't take your own medicine? this is exactly 99 percent of your posts.

This is EXACTLY what you do.

Stop crying and act like a man.

There is no crying, some sympathy for you though. I asked you to read what i posted, but i understand there might not be enough grey matter to process such information. If its not in pictures or headlines, your brain cannot process it.

 

[Snake_Baker]

You're a child.

 

[Total Power]

You're a child.

Quality reply. I asked you a simple question, what you think is IIT and why are you dismissing it without reading it despite this being the leading theory of consciousness at this time.

https://academic.oup.com/nc/article/2017/1/nix017/4060547

Integrated information theory (IIT) has established itself as one of the leading theories for the study of consciousness. IIT essentially proposes that quantitative consciousness is identical to maximally integrated conceptual information, quantified by a measure called Φmax


It's too much of a thing to ask, despite neuroscientists establishing it as the leading theory as of now. As i said, i have sympathy for you that you dont even believe in science.

 

[Snake_Baker]

It's too much of a thing to ask, despite neuroscientists establishing it as the leading theory as of now.

Really? Where is this poll?

 

[Total Power]

Really? Where is this poll?

*facepalm* literally. Do you read polls to subscribe to scientific theories? what do you say about M-theory then? Where is the poll that neuroscience believes consciousness is local? there is no ******* poll, all theories assuming local consciousness have failed us.

 

[Snake_Baker]

*facepalm* literally. Do you read polls to subscribe to scientific theories? what do you say about M-theory then? Where is the poll that neuroscience believes consciousness is local? there is no ******* poll, all theories assuming local consciousness have failed us.

Just pointing out another example of your misleading pontificating w***ery.

 

[Total Power]

Just pointing out another example of your misleading pontificating w***ery.

lol says the guy who said "show me a poll then i will believe". So why don't you show me a poll where your theory stands valid? in the world of neuroscience this is one of the leading theories of consciousness, the journal of neuroscience, lancelot and 10s of other peer reviewed journals agree with me. Why dont you show me one that agrees with you?

 

[Total Power]

Just pointing out another example of your misleading pontificating w***ery.

Since the 1980s, however, pioneers have helped making consciousness a researchable, scientific topic; and novel methods and theoretical advances (e.g. the global workspace theory (GWT)/global neuronal workspace hypothesis, and the integrated information theory of consciousness (IIT)) have yielded remarkable results, opening up the field for scientific and clinical progress (Leopold and Logothetis, 2003; Owen et al., 2006; Seth et al., 2008; Dehaene and Changeux, 2011; Aru et al., 2012a; Casali et al., 2013; Hobson et al., 2014; Oizumi et al., 2014; Pennartz, 2015; Tsuchiya et al., 2015; Koch et al., 2016b; Tononi et al., 2016).

http://www.jneurosci.org/content/37/45/10882

Atleast believe in science and neuroscience *head....you are just here to troll, as i said i am not stooping to your level anymore. You are not here to have a discussion, you are just here to troll and post damned lies and insults to make yourself look smart. Scientists are saying its a remarkable theory. Go back to your cellar, find someone else to bait. sh*tstain you are, anyone else wanting to discuss this is most welcome.

 

[Snake_Baker]

lol says the guy who said "show me a poll then i will believe".

No I didn't state that.

My aim was to point out some of your delusional behaviors to you in order to facilitate introspection, but it was again pointless.

So why don't you show me a poll where your theory stands valid? in the world of neuroscience this is one of the leading theories of consciousness, the journal of neuroscience, lancelot and 10s of other peer reviewed journals agree with me.

Prove it.

Why dont you show me one that agrees with you?

Just go out and pick up any scientific undergrad text book from a second hand book store (not the Chopra section either).

 

[Total Power]

Just go out and pick up any scientific undergrad text book from a second hand book store (not the Chopra section either).

Remarkable, you just won't answer my ******* question regarding IIT. What do you disagree? do you disagree with neuroscientists about sigma findings in IIT? answer, for once. We all know you won't answer, but try...for once.

 

[Total Power]

* me, you don't even believe in science or neuroscience, as long as you don't agree with it, but i got news for you. Science doesn't give a s**t about what your beliefs are, what i said still stands despite you throwing your toys out of the cot. Get a basic science education, goodluck Snakey, i hope you find another hobby after the arse whooping in this thread. Upwards and onwards for you