| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"George Hammond" |
| Date: |
02 Oct 2005 10:32:02 AM |
| Object: |
Re: The Uncaused First Cause |
On Sun, 2 Oct 2005 20:19:46 +1100, "Raktizer Omheit"
<cequka@iprimus.com.au> wrote:
You're a fool.
1. "God" is another name for the "mind of Man".
2. Therefore, Man is the "uncaused cause", because
the mind "creates" all "explanations" of the
"cause of Man"... therefore the human MIND
is the cause of Man.. and is de facto an
"uncaused cause"... and the "first cause".
3. This may be easily proved:
Proof:
If all men died tomorrow at 9 am, then
the universe, reality, physics, and
all CAUSE itself, would cease to exist
at 9 am.
QED. Man is the first cause, and the ONLY cause.
PS: THIS is what the Biblical Genesis story is
about.... the "creation of reality"
100,000 years ago when modern Man
first appeared.... "Adam and Eve" were
simply the first 2 Homo Sapiens sapiens,
and therefore "created reality".
Like I say.... you're a simple minded fool.
whaddau think all those people sitting in Church
are STUPID or something?
========================================
SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE
http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god
mirror site:
http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com
=======================================
Join COSA church (Church of the Scientific Advent)
Send a blank email to
and your email address will be added to the
COSA discussion list (free, no obligation)
===========================
and please ask your news service to add:
alt.sci.relativistic-proof-of-god.moderated
===========================
.
|
|
| User: "M D Meenken" |
|
| Title: Re: The Uncaused First Cause |
03 Oct 2005 02:00:27 AM |
|
|
"George Hammond" <nowhere1@nospam.org> schreef in bericht
news:v4uvj1pvj81o0ogub6k2k8e470forpktr4@4ax.com...
On Sun, 2 Oct 2005 20:19:46 +1100, "Raktizer Omheit"
<cequka@iprimus.com.au> wrote:
You're a fool.
1. "God" is another name for the "mind of Man".
2. Therefore, Man is the "uncaused cause", because
the mind "creates" all "explanations" of the
"cause of Man"... therefore the human MIND
is the cause of Man.. and is de facto an
"uncaused cause"... and the "first cause".
3. This may be easily proved:
Proof:
If all men died tomorrow at 9 am, then
the universe, reality, physics, and
all CAUSE itself, would cease to exist
at 9 am.
QED. Man is the first cause, and the ONLY cause.
PS: THIS is what the Biblical Genesis story is
about.... the "creation of reality"
100,000 years ago when modern Man
first appeared.... "Adam and Eve" were
simply the first 2 Homo Sapiens sapiens,
and therefore "created reality".
Like I say.... you're a simple minded fool.
whaddau think all those people sitting in Church
are STUPID or something?
what do you think?,i think they help those ministers to well payed easy
job,thats what I think,
but have you ever asked your self where you were before your conception,
I think the same place where you are after this live,nowhere,just not there,
========================================
SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE
http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god
mirror site:
http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com
=======================================
Join COSA church (Church of the Scientific Advent)
Send a blank email to
and your email address will be added to the
COSA discussion list (free, no obligation)
===========================
and please ask your news service to add:
alt.sci.relativistic-proof-of-god.moderated
===========================
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Raktizer Omheit" |
|
| Title: Re: The Uncaused First Cause |
02 Oct 2005 08:21:56 PM |
|
|
"George Hammond" <nowhere1@nospam.org> wrote in message
news:v4uvj1pvj81o0ogub6k2k8e470forpktr4@4ax.com...
On Sun, 2 Oct 2005 20:19:46 +1100, "Raktizer Omheit"
<cequka@iprimus.com.au> wrote:
You're a fool.
Takes one to identify one, Mr. Hammond. In addition, you have not really
answered my question, although you have responded by way of irrelevant
diversions, for the very simple reason that you cannot answer my question,
and never will without a belief in God. If God really did not exist, there
would be nothing, rather than the something called the universe, and
conscious awareness.
1. "God" is another name for the "mind of Man".
2. Therefore, Man is the "uncaused cause", because
the mind "creates" all "explanations" of the
"cause of Man"... therefore the human MIND
is the cause of Man.. and is de facto an
"uncaused cause"... and the "first cause".
3. This may be easily proved:
Proof:
If all men died tomorrow at 9 am, then
the universe, reality, physics, and
all CAUSE itself, would cease to exist
at 9 am.
QED. Man is the first cause, and the ONLY cause.
PS: THIS is what the Biblical Genesis story is
about.... the "creation of reality"
100,000 years ago when modern Man
first appeared.... "Adam and Eve" were
simply the first 2 Homo Sapiens sapiens,
and therefore "created reality".
Like I say.... you're a simple minded fool.
whaddau think all those people sitting in Church
are STUPID or something?
========================================
SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE
http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god
mirror site:
http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com
=======================================
Join COSA church (Church of the Scientific Advent)
Send a blank email to
and your email address will be added to the
COSA discussion list (free, no obligation)
===========================
and please ask your news service to add:
alt.sci.relativistic-proof-of-god.moderated
===========================
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "T Wake" |
|
| Title: Re: The Uncaused First Cause |
02 Oct 2005 05:20:35 PM |
|
|
"George Hammond" <nowhere1@nospam.org> wrote in message
news:v4uvj1pvj81o0ogub6k2k8e470forpktr4@4ax.com...
On Sun, 2 Oct 2005 20:19:46 +1100, "Raktizer Omheit"
<cequka@iprimus.com.au> wrote:
Hi George,
I havent seen you post for a while. I thought you had gone back on the
medication but then I rememberd it was just my killfile working.
You're a fool.
Excellent retort. Well done.
1. "God" is another name for the "mind of Man".
A. Only according you.
2. Therefore, Man is the "uncaused cause", because
the mind "creates" all "explanations" of the
"cause of Man"... therefore the human MIND
is the cause of Man.. and is de facto an
"uncaused cause"... and the "first cause".
B. See A,
3. This may be easily proved:
Proof:
If all men died tomorrow at 9 am, then
the universe, reality, physics, and
all CAUSE itself, would cease to exist
at 9 am.
C. This isnt proof. Its an unprovable assumption you are making. If it was
proof you could demonstrate it.
QED. Man is the first cause, and the ONLY cause.
D. See A&B
Like I say.... you're a simple minded fool.
whaddau think all those people sitting in Church
are STUPID or something?
Well, I think you are stupid. I don't think you understand half the terms
you use.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Roger Johansson" |
|
| Title: Re: The Uncaused First Cause |
03 Oct 2005 03:55:12 AM |
|
|
George Hammond wrote:
1. "God" is another name for the "mind of Man".
Yes, and the mind of the created man can also be called
the holy spirit, the holy wrath, the father who takes
care of others, the son who has forgotten what he is
made of and feels new-born and clean.
2. Therefore, Man is the "uncaused cause", because
the mind "creates" all "explanations" of the
"cause of Man"... therefore the human MIND
is the cause of Man.. and is de facto an
"uncaused cause"... and the "first cause".
Yep, that's how the created men think, they are pondering
like speed freaks over how their mind works in that state
of mind, in that position in society, when he has the power
over other people's minds, like a hypnotist.
PS: THIS is what the Biblical Genesis story is
about.... the "creation of reality"
Similar stories were told even before mankind learned
to write. The creation myths gave explanations and rules
for social life in a world ruled by men who think they
have magic powers. Their minds are built on a lot of
violence and determination so they scare others and get
power over their minds.
When the violent mind of a man is covered in soft
and sweet conviction by a specially trained woman
he looks very nice and friendly but his body
language scares the un-initiated people in an
invisible way.
The combined effect of hidden violence and female
will power becomes a magic potion which makes the
man very speeded and and full of energy.
He thinks he is extremely intelligent because he thinks
very fast, so he can wriggle out of any problem with
his brain. And he can escalate himself out of any
conflict with others.
He feels like he was omniscient, extremely wise, and
he becomes very interested in other people's sexual
lovelife. All sex must be regulated by the church
so the priests have full control over people's minds.
This is a social power system, which we have tried
to abolish for thousands of years because of the
negative effects on our world from this stone age
power system.
--
Roger J.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "TomGee" |
|
| Title: Re: The Uncaused First Cause |
03 Oct 2005 01:00:13 AM |
|
|
George Hammond wrote:
On Sun, 2 Oct 2005 20:19:46 +1100, "Raktizer Omheit"
<cequka@iprimus.com.au> wrote:
You're a fool.
1. "God" is another name for the "mind of Man".
That's your stupid opinion and not an acceptable definition for "God".
2. Therefore, Man is the "uncaused cause", because
the mind "creates" all "explanations" of the
"cause of Man"... therefore the human MIND
is the cause of Man..
No, false logic: Explanations created by the human mind are not the
cause of cause as they are only explanations and not causes. The human
mind cannot cause the creation of Man since it is part of the organism.
The human mind is the cause of God, for sure, conjured without
empirical evidence from the motive of our self-preservation drive.
and is de facto an
"uncaused cause"... and the "first cause".
And you're a first class idiot.
3. This may be easily proved:
Proof:
If all men died tomorrow at 9 am, then
the universe, reality, physics, and
all CAUSE itself, would cease to exist
at 9 am.
False logic: Women would still be around and you could not then
convince them to go against their intuitions to prove they are faithful
to a god. And if women died too it is truly stupid to think that the
universe would disappear.
QED. Man is the first cause, and the ONLY cause.
How stupid is that?
PS: THIS is what the Biblical Genesis story is
about.... the "creation of reality"
100,000 years ago when modern Man
first appeared.... "Adam and Eve" were
simply the first 2 Homo Sapiens sapiens,
and therefore "created reality".
Why not go tell all those faithful instead of preaching here? RU
trying to convert us?
Like I say.... you're a simple minded fool.
whaddau think all those people sitting in Church
are STUPID or something?
No, not all. Just the grownups. The children are forced to go and to
believe. The adults who believe cannot shake off brainwashing they got
as children. You and your kind are not fooling any of us who learned
your history and found you out as the evil persons who you are.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Roger Johansson" |
|
| Title: Re: The Uncaused First Cause |
11 Oct 2005 09:49:21 AM |
|
|
TomGee wrote:
George Hammond wrote:
1. "God" is another name for the "mind of Man".
That's your stupid opinion and not an
acceptable definition for "God".
I don't agree with George in much, but this is probably the most
common reality based definition. One could add that there are
a few other but socially closely related definitions.
2. Therefore, Man is the "uncaused cause", because
the mind "creates" all "explanations" of the
"cause of Man"... therefore the human MIND
is the cause of Man..
Reality based clear language:
In many indian tribes in america they practised an initiation rite,
for the boy to become a man he had to endure pains, drugs and other
mind
expanding processes, often to the point of hallucinations.
I European culture the initiation rite also included becoming very
angry and confronting his worst enemy, confronting his fears.
This gave an added dimension to the created mind of man, he was
made socially strong and fearless before he was allowed to marry.
The girl was prepared in a special way, to give an extra boost
to the male mind.
No, false logic:
Well, logic has very little to do with human and godly matters.
Logic is a formal science, theoretical models like mathematical
models, which may or may not be applicable to reality, and when
these models are applicable it is always with restrictions, limits
for how it can be applied, and a limited degree of precision.
Explanations created by the human mind are not the
cause of cause as they are only explanations and not causes. The human
mind cannot cause the creation of Man since it is part of the organism.
The human mind is the cause of God, for sure, conjured without
empirical evidence from the motive of our self-preservation drive.
Theoretical speculations. Or confused thinking expressed in
a very muddy language.
The cause of a mans world is his speeded mind, in some sense.
He creates his world with his mental powers, because he controls
weaker minds with his hidden violence and the loving face which
hides what he is made of.
and is de facto an
"uncaused cause"... and the "first cause".
And you're a first class idiot.
You both produce texts which are practically impossible
to make something sensible of.
3. This may be easily proved:
Proof:
If all men died tomorrow at 9 am, then
the universe, reality, physics, and
all CAUSE itself, would cease to exist
at 9 am.
This could have a reality based meaning. That the social
world, as we know it, would no longer be a world run by
male minds. It would be run by half as strong female minds.
That would be an improvement of the situation, but we would
still have some cleaning up to do.
False logic: Women would still be around and you could not then
convince them to go against their intuitions to prove they are faithful
to a god.
If God, the male mind is gone, and replaced by a natural mind,
why would we need women's faithfulness?
And if women died too it is truly stupid to think that the
universe would disappear.
Women would be free to relax, and they would want to do that
if they understand how they have been trained to always be present,
always be caring, always be strong, and how they have been used by
men as rocket fuel tanks.
But sometimes love goes deeper than this, and this is just the starting
point for a journey to a a deeper relation than the created love.
QED. Man is the first cause, and the ONLY cause.
How stupid is that?
The cause of man's mind is the creationist social system
that created him. Sometimes the cause of a new man's mind
is given as the man who broke him in.
The cause of his world is the mind (the holy spirit)
he carries around like a lovely concussion from love and
will power.
Like I say.... you're a simple minded fool.
whaddau think all those people sitting in Church
are STUPID or something?
George, why don't you explain this in clear language?
That would simplify the discussions a lot.
What is the religious community doing in church?
Meditating to create harmony in their busy brains?
Listening to the reinforcing and justifying messages
from the priest?
Being threatened with eternal hell if they break the taboo
against using clear language?
Does that raise the level of fear so they can balance even
more love in their brains?
No, not all. Just the grownups. The children are forced to go and to
believe.
I agree with you here. That is correct, and said in clear language.
The adults who believe cannot shake off brainwashing they got
as children.
Well, there are different types of persons in hat church.
Some are not aware of the real life religion in social life,
so they believe in the religious beliefs.
Others are aware of the social processes and they could probably
shake off their state of mind, but they do not want to.
They enjoy being sinners.
They usually think it is good for the children to grow up
in a home together with two parents in created love
You and your kind are not fooling any of us who learned
your history and found you out as the evil persons who you are.
There are no evil people, just different ways to do good.
Most youngsters who are mobbing other youngsters think that
they must mistreat them, to make them strong.
--
Roger J.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Gary Eickmeier" |
|
| Title: Re: The Uncaused First Cause |
03 Oct 2005 08:23:37 AM |
|
|
George Hammond wrote:
You're a fool.
1. "God" is another name for the "mind of Man".
2. Therefore, Man is the "uncaused cause", because
the mind "creates" all "explanations" of the
"cause of Man"... therefore the human MIND
is the cause of Man.. and is de facto an
"uncaused cause"... and the "first cause".
3. This may be easily proved:
Proof:
If all men died tomorrow at 9 am, then
the universe, reality, physics, and
all CAUSE itself, would cease to exist
at 9 am.
QED. Man is the first cause, and the ONLY cause.
PS: THIS is what the Biblical Genesis story is
about.... the "creation of reality"
100,000 years ago when modern Man
first appeared.... "Adam and Eve" were
simply the first 2 Homo Sapiens sapiens,
and therefore "created reality".
Like I say.... you're a simple minded fool.
whaddau think all those people sitting in Church
are STUPID or something?
This is pretty much proof that George's god is not the same one everyone
else is talking about, so any claim of "proof" of god from him is
meaningless. Thanks for clearing that up, George.
Gary Eickmeier
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mike" |
|
| Title: Re: The Uncaused First Cause |
08 Oct 2005 03:04:08 AM |
|
|
George Hammond wrote:
[snip]
Proof:
If all men died tomorrow at 9 am, then
the universe, reality, physics, and
all CAUSE itself, would cease to exist
at 9 am.
QED. Man is the first cause, and the ONLY cause.
This is fallacious logic of the formal kind. It is a petitio principii
combined with a non sequitur and a straw man. However, the conclusion
can hold as a priori conjesture made in an anti-realist sense. But it
is not a proof.
PS: THIS is what the Biblical Genesis story is
about.... the "creation of reality"
100,000 years ago when modern Man
first appeared.... "Adam and Eve" were
simply the first 2 Homo Sapiens sapiens,
and therefore "created reality".
The "Biblical" story is a myth created to ease the suffering of a
particular group of people at that time. Only a small fraction of the
people on this planet pay attention to this and other myths.
Realism and anti-realism are mutually exclusive and both unprovable.
There ios no point in debating them. Any sauch attempts lead to
dogmatic positions.
Mike
.
|
|
|
| User: "Roger Johansson" |
|
| Title: Re: The Uncaused First Cause |
11 Oct 2005 06:12:29 AM |
|
|
Mike wrote:
This is fallacious logic of the formal kind. It is a petitio principii
combined with a non sequitur and a straw man. However, the conclusion
can hold as a priori conjesture made in an anti-realist sense. But it
is not a proof.
Oh, you're so full of crap and fancy words.
The "Biblical" story is a myth created to ease the suffering of a
particular group of people at that time. Only a small fraction of the
people on this planet pay attention to this and other myths.
Realism and anti-realism are mutually exclusive and both unprovable.
There ios no point in debating them. Any sauch attempts lead to
dogmatic positions.
You and many others in these newsgroups are just playing with
theoretical concepts, trying to fit a puzzle of ideas together.
You are not talking about your own knowledge, from your own real world
experiences.
If you did you would easily be able to express yourself in a simple
and clear language. But where you are coming from you get extra points
for using fancy words and demonstrating theoretical complexity.
You have a speeded brain, an overheated mind running at high speeds
but getting nowhere, because you live in a theoretical world without
contact with the real world. Playing word games with other overheated
brains.
You need both books and real life. You have had an overdose
of books and far too little real life experience.
Walk to Canada and catch a salmon with your bare hands.
Talk to people and look at the nature on the way there.
You get only one chance.
Your only chance of living.
You get only one single life.
Don't waste it on such crap.
Playing mind games with other fools.
If you cannot walk anywhere, if somebody has nailed your shoes
to the floor, get out of your shoes and walk out of there barefoot.
--
Roger J.
.
|
|
|
| User: "TomGee" |
|
| Title: Re: The Uncaused First Cause |
11 Oct 2005 07:48:15 AM |
|
|
Roger, lumping people together on the basis of a few expressed opinions
is the epitome of logical error, and the basis of bigotry. It shows
too that you have an egocentric view of the world where you believe all
that you experience is the only real world upon which you have based
all your beliefs, and anyone who doesn't feel the same as you is wrong
in their beliefs,
You have confused the saying, "Don't judge a person until you have
walked a mile in his shoes" with "Don't disagree with me til you've
experienced the world the same as me."
The gamble is that you are right about your godly afterworld, or not.
Once I reject your opinion about that, you're a punk who won't leave me
alone. It is my opinion that the religious are those who would torture
and murder those of us who disagree with them, and that is based on
historical evidence, not on magical beliefs. Someday the world's
people will evolve to the point where your snake oil spiels will be
rejected, and if you haven't blown up the world by then, there will be
a heaven on Earth.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Roger Johansson" |
|
| Title: Re: The Uncaused First Cause |
11 Oct 2005 08:42:00 AM |
|
|
TomGee wrote:
You have confused the saying, "Don't judge a person until you have
walked a mile in his shoes" with "Don't disagree with me til you've
experienced the world the same as me."
I have walked many miles in my shoes, I think I have covered most of
the intellectual and human road system of this world, but if you can
show me a road I haven't walked, and tell me about it, I will be a
thankful listener.
Start talking..
(melody in the background, These boots are made for..)
Just to cover all possible bases, if you know a road which you
think I have not seen, and you for some reason cannot talk about
it, then don't talk about it.
I looked up a few messages from you before I replied to this,
I like to know what kind of person I am talking to.
And I liked a message so much that I will reply to that
message after I have posted this.
..you have an egocentric view of the world where you believe all
that you experience is the only real world upon which you have based
all your beliefs, and anyone who doesn't feel the same as you is wrong
in their beliefs,
As a reply to that I paste in another
message I wrote earlier this morning:
Suzana: Other then bad start this is becomeing very interesting exchange.
Serious people don't get hung up on unimportant details,
so don't think about that.
Two monks in India came to a river. A young woman stood on the shore
and
wanted to get to the other side. Monks are usually not supposed to get
involved with women, but one of the monks carried her over the river.
After walking for half an hour the other monk said:
How could you carry that girl over the river? We are not
supposed to get attached to females.
The other monk said: Are you still thinking about her?
I put her down on the shore and left her there.
It illustrates the indian ideal of being spiritually free,
of not getting caught up in mental traps.
Everybody watch television and see 10 murders and
50 threatening situations every night.
The level of violence rises in the society.
Suzana: So are you saying that in order to be truly equal
Equal might not be the word I would think of first, a free and natural
woman is what I would try to be if I was a woman, to begin with.
Equal to the men sounds horrible, if you think about all that men are.
Would women really want to be violent, ugly, dominating, arrogant,
scary, nervous wrecks or arrogant bastards....
But men can be very nice and caring too,
you just don't see it so often in public places.
woman need to redefine them selves.
Yes, and men need to redefine themselves even more.
We have all been formed by social life formed by thousands of years of
cultural influence from this creationist culture, and we should try to
find out how we could become more natural, more relaxed, more easygoing
instead of being so deadly serious and concentrated.
So far they have been give a definition by man. But they have never defined them selves. I like it!
I have spent many years alone in the forest, many winters I have not
seen a living person in 6 months, while the snow made it difficult to
get to the town.
I let my mind relax by letting my mind move as it wanted.
I wanted to see where it would take me if I let it wander as it liked.
If I felt like crying I cried, if I felt like being angry I let myself
be angry, so the mind could get rid of tensions in its own way.
And those ways are different for each fixed idea one is carrying.
John Sebastian, Lovin Spoonful: Did you ever have to make up you mind..
When I was younger I often used daydreaming as a way of letting the
mind go wherever it wanted.
To daydream I needed to be in balance, and I had slept enough so I felt
well.
Then I lay on a bed and let the mind take over. I didn't go to sleep
for real, but I wasn't awake either, I was in another kind of reality.
I spent many years of subjective time in that world, and used that
state of mind to think really seriously, but without using will power
or concentration, about a problem sometimes. I just let my mind wander,
and I gathered the intellectual tools I could need for that problem.
I put the tools within reach but was not holding on to them, which
would have locked my free thinking.
If you hold a saw in a firm grip you will probably be tempted to use a
saw to solve the next problem, just because it is already in your hand.
Instead I put the tools within reach, so they would automatically fall
into my hands when there was a natural need for them.
I feel like relaxing now, so I walk along a shoreline I have walked
along many times before, grass and trees and waterfowls..
I have that world with me still and I can recall parts of that other
world when I feel like it.
very nice pictures
http://www.chinesepaintings.com/chinese-bf-painting-3.html
The woman has a shorter way back to the natural than men.
But maybe less reason to go in that direction.
And she is often trapped in many threads to society,
to her mother, to her created strength, to her friends.
Weak threads, but many of them. Men have few threads but very
strong ones, like fear.
Just go back to when you were forced to decide, when you were forced to
become determined, and choose to flee instead, back towards the child's
mind.
Lose the social battle and save your mind instead.
Run like a scared deer over mountains and through forests,
until you feel safe again.
I was lucky, I was allowed to develop without outer forces when I was
under 5 years old, no pressure or a lot of activities the parents think
are good for children, no scheduled hockey training or hugging and
kissing which I didn't choose myself. I can still remember how clear my
view of the world was at 4-6 years age. I saw my parents minds and
wondered why they were so fixed, so stiff minds, but I later realized
my parents were less fixated than most people.
My father once said to a friend that he preferred living in the forest
because the people had so big heads in the society. And I know now what
he meant.
Every time he came home from work he sat alone in another room and was
breathing kind of heavy for half an hour, then he came out in the
kitchen and was relaxed and easygoing again.
The society made him heavy, and he didn't like that.
Some people wouldn't even be able to relax from their personalities
even if they had a peaceful environment, they are so used to hold on
to their personality, all the social settings they need in social life,
so they cannot let go and let their minds wander freely.
Such people can use marijuana, or some mild headache pill like aspirin,
to unlock their minds a little, and then let the mind cool down and
find new forms. I don't think strong hallucinogens are really helpful,
because they give so much energy that it takes years to relax the mind
again.
Hitchhiking is also a good way to evolve mentally, when you come into a
new social setting ten times a day you are free to adjust the mind a
little here and there and find new ways to be.You are free to
experiment with your own personality, un-attached to your home town,
your family, your usual defences and social tools.
When will they, hollywood, realize that abolishing the
male dominated society by training women and children
to become men too isn't a very good idea?
Suzana: Sad thing is that Holiwood believes it is a way to give woman equality.
It is an understandable mistake. The men cannot even imagine that they,
the crown of creation, the golden bull, the master of the social
universe, could be faulty somehow. So they make themselves into the
norm for what a human being really should be.
One problem is that the "feminists" are often women who have
been trained and formed all their lives by the old traditions.
These women have learned to identify with their role in the
creationist system. They do not represent women in general
anymore, they represent the traditional values in the old
gender role system.
Suzana: Wouldn't the opposite be true?
Hmmm, I wonder what kind of opposite you think of here.
There are many ways to turn a sentence into an opposite.
--
Roger J.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: The Uncaused First Cause |
02 Oct 2005 11:32:25 AM |
|
|
Pantheism is correct. God and the Universe are identical. Ruled by
cybernetics. Thus religion and science are the same. Once one learns
cybernetic principles, it clears one's mind and allows infonet
knowledge to flow in. The entire Universe becomes complete and
consistent, thwarting Godel. One may die and face the inevitable
Eternal Nothingness safe in the thought that one's memes shall persist
forever due to the information system we have created, known as the
Global Brain.
Darlene, another pecan, please. What? The Limousin bull ate it? Oh,
well. The pecan is God, I'm God, the Earth is God, all God ever does
is to change form.
Have a nice day. Debate. Debate is what forms the Global Brain.
Communication. In fact, it's just like a black hole forming. Once
this Global Brain thing gets going, it's unstoppable, just as the
formation of a black hole is unstoppable because if there were any
force in the Universe which could try to resist gravity that force
would just add energy to the collapse and quicken it! Same way with
the Global Brain! It's here! It's quickening, to quote Art Bell! And
it'll be good for you! You'll like it! Don't you want almost
limitless knowledge and power? This is what your religions promse you,
but this here guy is here now, while you're alive, religions just
promise Near Vanna during your phase of Eternal Nothingness.
Who cares? "It's only words, and words are all I have, to take your
heart away."
Toodle-Lewd-Wench-Sky.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Robert Cohen" |
|
| Title: Re: The Uncaused First Cause |
11 Oct 2005 08:13:29 AM |
|
|
Why have I been interested in "psi?"
Because if "psi" exists, then ...there's perhaps another dimension, a
super-natural, a metaphysical, a deity et cetera.
I can also accept/make a case that if "psi" exists, then it's merely
within the realm of the not yet conventionally scientifically defined,
such as an atomic particle, and not of another
realm/dimension/metaphysical/deity et cetera.
.
|
|
|
| User: "TomGee" |
|
| Title: Re: The Uncaused First Cause |
11 Oct 2005 09:35:17 AM |
|
|
Robert Cohen wrote:
Why have I been interested in "psi?"
I don't see where anyone asked you in this ng.
Because if "psi" exists, then ...there's perhaps another dimension, a
super-natural, a metaphysical, a deity et cetera.
I can also accept/make a case that if "psi" exists, then it's merely
within the realm of the not yet conventionally scientifically defined,
such as an atomic particle, and not of another
realm/dimension/metaphysical/deity et cetera.
Alright, I'll go along with that. Not in the same way, however. Psychic phenomena can still be explained as having a cause, a very natural cause indeed. Brains receive impulses from the body in the form of electrical signals and they emit electromagnetic radiation (emr) constantly and with very short wavelengths. It is entirely feasible to think that since our brains emit and receive signals, we may also receive brain transmissions from others at certain emission frequencies. Some brains may emit stronger signals at times or just as a normal thing from them. Others may receive signals the same.
Of course, just like in science, it is the conclusions wrought by such
signals to the recipients that will always be in question. There may
be other correlations to be made wrt certain brains such as those of
twins, or some other relatedness of signal emission/reception we have
not looked into as yet.
I personally feel that too many instances of psychic phenomena have
occurred for us to doubt its existence, but the conclusions voiced are
rarely entirely accurate. Some are right on the money, however, and
that keeps hope alive for many advocates of different explanations for
their cause.
Some people are made saints on the basis of their visions and others
are burned at the stake. The ability to predict the currently
non-existent future is impossible for mortals. However, since emr may
go on forever through space, it seems possible for some thought waves
to linger at ground level or so for some others to receive them. If
the thoughts were of future events from the mind of the emitter, like a
wedding planned for next year, e.g., the recipient may well conclude it
is a vision of the future for the emitter or that it is just something
in the emitter's mind.
So, yes, it can happen. But just because we don't know today the cause
of an effect does not mean we won't learn it tomorrow. So long as we
can hang on to that thought, we won't easily be convinced that gods and
mortals were created without a cause.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gregory L. Hansen" |
|
| Title: Re: The Uncaused First Cause |
11 Oct 2005 10:01:25 AM |
|
|
In article <1129041317.837177.123720@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
TomGee <lvlus@hotmail.com> wrote:
Robert Cohen wrote:
Why have I been interested in "psi?"
I don't see where anyone asked you in this ng.
Because if "psi" exists, then ...there's perhaps another dimension, a
super-natural, a metaphysical, a deity et cetera.
I can also accept/make a case that if "psi" exists, then it's merely
within the realm of the not yet conventionally scientifically defined,
such as an atomic particle, and not of another
realm/dimension/metaphysical/deity et cetera.
Alright, I'll go along with that. Not in the same way, however.
Psychic phenomena can still be explained as having a cause, a very
natural cause indeed. Brains receive impulses from the body in the form
of electrical signals and they emit electromagnetic radiation (emr)
constantly and with very short wavelengths. It is entirely feasible to
think that since our brains emit and receive signals, we may also
receive brain transmissions from others at certain emission frequencies.
Some brains may emit stronger signals at times or just as a normal
thing from them. Others may receive signals the same.
Brains receive electrochemical impulses that travel along nerve fibers.
Brains don't have antennas or tuning circuits, and it takes very sensitive
equipment to map the fields of the brain, which means brain waves aren't
exactly going to be interfering with your cell phone. The air is filled
with electromagnetic radiation, and yet you probably don't hallucinate
when the cell phone sings, when you walk through a metal detector, turn on
the TV or the microwave oven, etc.
Also some experiments, if you can believe them, showed no decreases in ESP
abilities with distance or through a Faraday cage.
There may by psychic phenomena, and there are certainly electromagnetic
fields associated with the brain, but I don't think there's a strong case
for electromagnetic fields as a cause or mechanism of psychic phenomena.
--
"Suppose you were an idiot... And suppose you were a member of
Congress... But I repeat myself." - Mark Twain
.
|
|
|
| User: "TomGee" |
|
| Title: Re: The Uncaused First Cause |
11 Oct 2005 10:29:16 AM |
|
|
Gregory, I appreciate the information. I went out on that limb to find
something better or to bolster my thoughts about it. Do you have a
case, strong or weak, for anything else that may be the cause of
psychic phenomena?
If our brains had antennas and emitted em waves we should all be able
to tune in to each other. Fortunately for us, that ain't Nature's way.
At least, not yet. If we choose not to ignore "ESP", we need to
invent possible causes for it to offset the supernatural railings of
the "clean ones".
If it's not emr or em waves involved in the process, it could be
something similar. Maybe something more chemical than electrical, or
electrochemistry wave emissions, etc. The problem there is how it gets
out of the body to where it can be received by someone predisposed to
receive it. The brainwave hypotheses eliminates prophetic revelations
from a non-existent future as a series of guesses and perhaps resultant
conclusions from those guesses.
It supports the idea that the past exists not only in our minds but
also as conserved energy in our universe. If it is not there, all
psychic phenomena is manufactured by our brains and it is a
hit-and-miss process. However, that is inconsistent with the evidence
shown by studies of such phenomena.
.
|
|
|
| User: "steveo" |
|
| Title: Re: The Uncaused First Cause |
12 Oct 2005 01:43:43 AM |
|
|
"TomGee" <lvlus@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1129044556.719918.167510@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
Gregory, I appreciate the information. I went out on that limb to find
something better or to bolster my thoughts about it. Do you have a
case, strong or weak, for anything else that may be the cause of
psychic phenomena?
If our brains had antennas and emitted em waves we should all be able
to tune in to each other. Fortunately for us, that ain't Nature's way.
At least, not yet. If we choose not to ignore "ESP", we need to
invent possible causes for it to offset the supernatural railings of
the "clean ones".
If it's not emr or em waves involved in the process, it could be
something similar. Maybe something more chemical than electrical, or
electrochemistry wave emissions, etc. The problem there is how it gets
out of the body to where it can be received by someone predisposed to
receive it. The brainwave hypotheses eliminates prophetic revelations
from a non-existent future as a series of guesses and perhaps resultant
conclusions from those guesses.
It supports the idea that the past exists not only in our minds but
also as conserved energy in our universe. If it is not there, all
psychic phenomena is manufactured by our brains and it is a
hit-and-miss process. However, that is inconsistent with the evidence
shown by studies of such phenomena.
There is technology currently being field tested that allows people to do
things only with their minds.
No, this isn't a post from a whack job.
In one specific case , some test subjects who have mobility impairments
(e.g. quadriplegics) have had receptor placed around their head (and in some
cases implanted). These receptors pick up 'brain waves' and can perform
actions, such as move a cursor around on a computer screen. Here is a link
to Brown University that discusses their research:
http://www.brown.edu/Administration/News_Bureau/2001-02/01-098.html
So what does this have to do with ESP? Well, evidently we can do more with
our brains than we thought.
steveo
.
|
|
|
| User: "TomGee" |
|
| Title: Re: The Uncaused First Cause |
12 Oct 2005 02:27:06 AM |
|
|
Yes. Good point, Steveo. I agree. The capacity of humans to adapt
amazes me often. Technical progress moves much faster than social
progress, presumably because there's more money in it. Whatever the
primary reason, we cannot argue with success.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: The Uncaused First Cause |
12 Oct 2005 07:20:24 AM |
|
|
Semantics. The underlying cause of the progress is the metasystem
transition, systems combining automatically into larger systems. Call
it technical progress, call it social progress, the underlying dynamic
is the same. But the evolved metasystem must stand on its own, must be
fit. If not, it's torn back down into constituent parts and evolution
tries again.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bob" |
|
| Title: Re: The Uncaused First Cause |
12 Oct 2005 10:58:11 AM |
|
|
On 12 Oct 2005 05:20:24 -0700, wrote:
Semantics. The underlying cause of the progress is the metasystem
transition, systems combining automatically into larger systems. Call
it technical progress, call it social progress, the underlying dynamic
is the same. But the evolved metasystem must stand on its own, must be
fit. If not, it's torn back down into constituent parts and evolution
tries again.
The majority of scientiscs do not accept that explanation.
Read Michael Behe's book "Darwin's Black Box". You do not have to
agree with his propositions to see his rather full attack on
Darwinism.
I am not a life scientist, so things like Pre-Cambrian Explosions and
the like do not get far with me. I am a physicist and I know from
having calculated the probability for all the air molecules in a room
to end up in one of the corners, that although it is possible, it is
exceedingly unlikely even given a very long time like the age of our
little universe.
Although the mechanism you describe above could work in principle it
is next to impossible for it to work in reality. The number of
microstates of DNA alone is enormous and for those microstates to
fashion themselves into the one macrostate we observe in a living
organism such as man is essentially impossible, especially in the time
that it is alleged to have occurred.
Life scientists who do not accept Darwinism per se do not, however,
throw the entire theory out because it is useful to explain some
phenomena. But to account for the origin of the species is asking too
much.
Personally I think Crick was right - life on Earth was seeded by alien
life forms. I just hope we weren't meant to be food.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Robert Cohen" |
|
| Title: Re: The Uncaused First Cause |
11 Oct 2005 09:42:30 AM |
|
|
re: nobody asked my opinion
I didn't ask yours about mine, and request that you thus go to <nixon
thing deleted> asap.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: The Uncaused First Cause |
11 Oct 2005 09:49:11 AM |
|
|
Don't be so sensitive, Robert. I just wanted to know where you're
coming from.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robert Cohen" |
|
| Title: Re: The Uncaused First Cause |
11 Oct 2005 10:25:01 AM |
|
|
re: what is reality?
I'm subjectivistic, relativistic, pragmatic, agnostic, eclectic, and
whatever.
Ultimately I'm cynical & absurdist (always looking for the whacky
lining).
Do not be surprised at anything, because I've previously
upheld George Hammond's posting-right for his apparent
originalism, while not understanding it enough to feel anger nor
acceptance.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bob" |
|
| Title: Re: The Uncaused First Cause |
11 Oct 2005 12:39:19 PM |
|
|
On 11 Oct 2005 08:25:01 -0700, "Robert Cohen" <robtcohen@msn.com>
wrote:
re: what is reality?
Which one?
I'm subjectivistic, relativistic, pragmatic, agnostic, eclectic, and
whatever.
That makes you FarLeft.
Ultimately I'm cynical & absurdist (always looking for the whacky
lining).
That makes you a Democrat.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "tooly" |
|
| Title: Re: The Uncaused First Cause |
03 Oct 2005 07:52:25 AM |
|
|
You know I was thinking.
Anyway...
I've had a great many moments of epiphony in my life...whereupon, I look
back later as if they were bottled skyrockets in the night; a brilliance to
be mesmerized by, before one goes home to sleep. Sheese, just think of all
the 'periods' we've gone through...just in the last century. How we have
evolved, how we have changed, how many epiphonies we have gone through...so
many. And with each step, we walk ever so boldly for the moment.
For myself, at this late date, it all seems to just circle back upon itself
leaving one back to where they started...but of course, with a lot of
experience in-between. Just now, at this moment of bottle rocket epiphony,
it just seems that a person can have Faith. Or they can NOT have Faith. I
don't think our choices can be explained any deeper, any more explicitly.
That pretty much says it all.
I am convinced there are no solid answers...I mean, nothing 'certain' like
we all struggle for. Yet, we experience. My Grandmother used to tell me,
as she swung her arms about in a broad sweeping motion, "Live...Just live",
she would say with exuberance.
But damnit all, my brain [the left side I think] will not give me peace. We
need an equation. We will never rest until we find an equation. Or is it
that I have just chosen to NOT have faith?
"George Hammond" <nowhere1@nospam.org> wrote in message
news:v4uvj1pvj81o0ogub6k2k8e470forpktr4@4ax.com...
On Sun, 2 Oct 2005 20:19:46 +1100, "Raktizer Omheit"
<cequka@iprimus.com.au> wrote:
You're a fool.
1. "God" is another name for the "mind of Man".
2. Therefore, Man is the "uncaused cause", because
the mind "creates" all "explanations" of the
"cause of Man"... therefore the human MIND
is the cause of Man.. and is de facto an
"uncaused cause"... and the "first cause".
3. This may be easily proved:
Proof:
If all men died tomorrow at 9 am, then
the universe, reality, physics, and
all CAUSE itself, would cease to exist
at 9 am.
QED. Man is the first cause, and the ONLY cause.
PS: THIS is what the Biblical Genesis story is
about.... the "creation of reality"
100,000 years ago when modern Man
first appeared.... "Adam and Eve" were
simply the first 2 Homo Sapiens sapiens,
and therefore "created reality".
Like I say.... you're a simple minded fool.
whaddau think all those people sitting in Church
are STUPID or something?
========================================
SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE
http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god
mirror site:
http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com
=======================================
Join COSA church (Church of the Scientific Advent)
Send a blank email to
and your email address will be added to the
COSA discussion list (free, no obligation)
===========================
and please ask your news service to add:
alt.sci.relativistic-proof-of-god.moderated
===========================
.
|
|
|
| User: "Stu" |
|
| Title: Re: The Uncaused First Cause |
10 Oct 2005 10:29:37 PM |
|
|
On 2005-10-03 05:52:25 -0700, "tooly" <rdh11@bellsouth.net> said:
You know I was thinking.
Anyway...
I've had a great many moments of epiphony in my life...whereupon, I
look back later as if they were bottled skyrockets in the night; a
brilliance to be mesmerized by, before one goes home to sleep. Sheese,
just think of all the 'periods' we've gone through...just in the last
century. How we have evolved, how we have changed, how many epiphonies
we have gone through...so many. And with each step, we walk ever so
boldly for the moment.
For myself, at this late date, it all seems to just circle back upon
itself leaving one back to where they started...but of course, with a
lot of experience in-between. Just now, at this moment of bottle
rocket epiphony, it just seems that a person can have Faith. Or they
can NOT have Faith. I don't think our choices can be explained any
deeper, any more explicitly. That pretty much says it all.
I am convinced there are no solid answers...I mean, nothing 'certain'
like we all struggle for. Yet, we experience. My Grandmother used to
tell me, as she swung her arms about in a broad sweeping motion,
"Live...Just live", she would say with exuberance.
But damnit all, my brain [the left side I think] will not give me
peace. We need an equation. We will never rest until we find an
equation. Or is it that I have just chosen to NOT have faith?
These two aspect of the human are not mutually exclusive. We slip from
state to state.
The "bottled skyrocket" intuition is not an act of faith but a very
real experience common to all. People dance for the shear joy of
dancing, they are not trying to get somewhere just going about the
dance floor in circles. We play and connect with no real purpose other
then the significance of the activity itself. This is a glimpse of our
wholeness.
In the other state we dissect, analyze, symbolize and compartmentalize
the world. In this state the world is presented as diverse parts.
Though the world in this state appears fragmented and meaningless, it
is divided into smaller portions for shear utility. We need the
equation, recipe or narrative to inhabit the world.
The art of living is concerned with a balance between these two states of mind.
--
~Stu
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
