Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by action

  1. The Religion/Spirituality Thread

    the issue wether jesus existed or not, is a distraction. it doesn't matter if it is 100 % proven that he existed. because then you have the unresolved issue wether he was the son of god or not. So why tire ourselves with this? God could exist, yet at the same time jesus could have never existed. One does not exclude the other. But if god does exist, then he pretty much is the master of everything, and he "could" have sent jesus to earth if he was so inclined. He "could" have influenced the writers of the bible, to offer us humans some kind of... code that provides some insight in his thinking. But all of that is secondary: it is not needed for the existence of a god.
  2. The Religion/Spirituality Thread

    there actually is a term for my viewpoint: pataphysics pataphysics, is to science what "open G string tuning" is to rock music. A new, exciting framerwork from which we can propose new theories and unconventional theories I have this great book, that is entirely handwritten (it's in dutch so most of you wont understand what is written here) and provides some shocking and thought provoking theories on the world. Most of it is just mocking science, but here and there you'll find some interesting thought processes. Not saying this is how science should work, but it can help to broaden your view, so to speak. To think unconventionally, to try to go beyond the limits of our understanding.
  3. The Religion/Spirituality Thread

    slippery slope. there was also no evidence of the earth being a sphere there was no evidence for bacteria
  4. The Religion/Spirituality Thread

    throw away the bible and any other religious book, and start anew with a religion 2.0 that is based on science. I think, that is what's going to tip us from being a basic civilisation to a more advanced state. I can certainly imagine a super intelligent, highly advanced alien race having some concept of the nature of god. I can also imagine how this knowledge will make them refrain from going into war with each other, almost instantly, thus highly benefitting advancment
  5. The Religion/Spirituality Thread

    your premise is wrong. you define god as defined in the bible. Why limiting yourself, already? Why not start from the most basic (god is some kind of energy), and go from there? evidence is only gathered through research, as with pretty much every scientific discovery
  6. The Religion/Spirituality Thread

    why this hesitance to talk about god in a scientifc way? supposed god exists, isn't he also some natural phenomenon that can be explained? this is a huge field in science, that isn't even barely touched upon yet it is of fundamental importance to all of us. In stead, we're researching futile things like the composition of matter. dark matter is invisible, it's immaterial. are you saying we shouldn't investigate that either?
  7. The Religion/Spirituality Thread

    this is all just reassurance by scientists who realise their limitations, and they're giving excuses. there is a hell of a lot yet to discover. We litterally haven't discovered 85 % of matter in the universe yet, let alone investigated it.
  8. The Religion/Spirituality Thread

    I see your objection, but I believe the cultural impact of a scientific method, should not be considered. Or it should, I don't know. One can argue that without science, millions of people wouldn't have died an early death. But equally, many people survived because of it. Does a scientific method affect culture? Maybe. Isn't it all a behind the scenes thing though? Some scientist pondering over theories, in his head, then trying to produce an experiment to test that theory? Science does too little to prove there is a god or not. There is too much hesitance, cold water fear. Why do I never see debates on weather some scientific discovery could point to god? Are scientists afraid to lose credibility? Most certainly. One has not to look further than this thread, with two distinct camps: the scientific anti god people, and the god (and therefore anti-scientific) people. To just put away that prejudice, what harm could it do?
  9. The Religion/Spirituality Thread

    no need for the tone. the phenomenon is also seen with small molecules
  10. The Religion/Spirituality Thread

    it's just a matter of means. it's all for the good cause. the world did not end when people traveled by train. it was just a means to get from point A to point B. Intuition seems like a dirty word to intellectuals. I understand, they see that as a threat to their superiority (everyone has intuition, but only the elite have knowledge). But that's ok, I'm not worried about the mental well-being of the elite in the future, progress will be made by people who think out of the box. not many will join them at first, and old fashioned intellectuals will oppose it in the fiercest ways. but it's only a matter of time, until we reach a little deeper. And when that time comes, we will look back at 18th century enlightment and see the huge disadvantage and limitations of it
  11. The Religion/Spirituality Thread

    this wave - particle duality proves that reality does not exist, until observed. It proves, that old fashioned explantions (such as your abiogenesis which are straightforward) are not sufficient to describe the universe. To make sense of the double slit experiment, you have to see reality as a range of possibilities, that are only set in stone when observed, and can retroactively be changed, back in time, by fundamental forces if we try to dig any deeper (see the quantum eraser)
  12. The Religion/Spirituality Thread

    I also notice how my board status has just been changed to "god".
  13. The Religion/Spirituality Thread

    if we want it or not, the uncertainty principle forces us to incorporate "belief" in science. science needs to be "upgraded" in order to evolve any further. This upgrade exists in the form of throwing away the chains that 18th century enlightment imposed on us. the biggest scientific breakthroughs were made, not by book people, but by people who thought out of the box, let their intuition guide them, and were ridiculed by the established scientific community.
  14. The Religion/Spirituality Thread

    does there ever exist supporting evidence, to anything? when is something ever proven? when was anything proven, ever? many theories, that were "proven" in the past, have been shown to be false. we can't even decide between the state of wave or particle when it comes to subatomic particles! proof, any proof, is only as valid as quantum mechanics allow (the uncertainty principle).
  15. this movie should be mandatory study material at high school. there is so much life whisdom and character in that movie, it's insane
  16. he could have sung "sister's aren't doing it for themselves" in stead but he picked the classic by the misfits in stead. because it is shocking, and therefore, very much fun. In 1992, duff still was a badass. 2019 duff, and with him the rest of the gunners, asshole to asshole couldn't make a beer fart in a whirlwind anymore
  17. this coming from the man who sang "if you don't shut your mouth you gonna feel the floor" with lots of compassion Duff's current danger levels:
  18. The Religion/Spirituality Thread

    this does not in any way violate the theory of a creator of the universe No one is denying that life originated due to the processes you describe. We are in agreement on this. what I'm saying (and what you fail to grasp) is that a creator has created the singularity, this infinitely small and dense point in a vacuum that contained all the information and energy needed to form our universe including life, from which the big bang could happen. The theory of a creator is in line with the latest scientific discoveries, of which I have already showed you three examples (and which you haven't adressed). Your explanation of abiogenesis and what not, is an explanation of the universe after it was formed. Science can observe the universe as it is, discover the processes behind this, and it's all nice and dandy but ultimately is doesnt offer an explanation for the universe to begin with, nor does it make a creator unlikely. The less science can explain how the universe could pop out of nowhere, the more likely a creator becomes. I don't care if the bible, the quran and other books seem ridiculous. Those are just books. Take them for what they are. The books are not a topic of discussion, they are not the backing of my argument. Just because these books are ridiculous / incoherent does not change a single fact about scientific observations.
  19. The Religion/Spirituality Thread

    I believe in the intricate framework of the universe that, if programmed by humans it would require a computer the size of earth. I believe in the way quantum particles can go back in time to mess with our experiments (proven in a scientific setting) and I believe in the computer code that is found on the deepest elemental level. in other words, I believe in God
  20. The Religion/Spirituality Thread

    pure logic (I know, our logical capabilities are limited as per definition, but it's the only thing we have so we'll just make do with it) observation: there is a universe with life in it explanation 1: abiogenesis (or whatever it is called) the universe and life, with all it's proven intricacies, all happened spontaneous, out of a vacuum (it must be a vacuum in this theory, or else you imply a creator) or.... explanation 2: a creator made it all and fine tuned the universe in such a way, that life can emerge in it. If you look over all the scientific data, that is already gathered (extremely fine-tuned cosmic values; quantum inconsistencies and the observation of pixels and computer code on a fundamental level of matter), and you apply logic to it, then the more probably answer is a creator, rather than a vacuum
  21. The Religion/Spirituality Thread

    random self assembly? look at what you're saying. you believe in random self-assembly. What is that? things putting themselves together and becoming life? Not very likely. why is random self assembly more probably than god? it's equally esotheric, but out of the two a creator seems like the least improbable. if random self assembly was a thing, I would have never needed to assemble my ikea furniture anymore Energy does not add, and energy does not go away. So how can things spring into existence, "ab nihilo"?
  22. The Religion/Spirituality Thread

    moe? also, more hostile than when earth was still a pile of hot boiling lava?
  23. The Religion/Spirituality Thread

    has biogenesis suddenly stopped? If so, Why? If not, where is all the new life on earth, created every day with biogenesis?
  24. The Religion/Spirituality Thread

    fancy way to say god
  25. The Religion/Spirituality Thread

    I'm aware of the basic processes behind this, those are described to a certain degree by science indeed. but science can't explain the role of dark energy in all of this, for one thing. Actually, science doesn't really "explain" it rather than "observe" what happens, and then communicates it back to us. But an "observation", even in great detail, is not an explanation. Why is there gravity? What is it? To this day unexplained yet of very high importance to the creation of solar systems.