What is logic?

[Little Rik]

Lack of a belief in a creator (not deities) is a dogma for itself.

Atheism is a lack of a belief in any deity/god, creator? It is probably possible to hold to some non-deity creator and be atheist, as was demonstrated in one of my threads.

Gee Atheo I am very very puzzled.  
How can a creator that create such a huge and incredible universe not be some sort of God?
Please At help LR to understand.  

Reality and also the science that you believe so much tell us that there is no way that something pop up from nowhere so it obvious that the universe has been created by a creator.

What does something "popping" up from nowhere have to do with atheism?

Atheists do not believe in a God that create the universe so if nobody create the universe then come obvious to think that the universe pop up by magic.
But wait a minute At.
You were saying that some non deity creator may have created the universe.
Gee, the puzzle become more and more complicated by the minute.  

I got bad news for you At.

Science so far hasn't discovered yet where the universe come from.

Yes, but it was previously believed in came from a deity, however, no deity fits the data, which is why you don't hear professional Cosmologists talking about any god in their conferences/meetings and studies.

Most cosmologists study physical science and this science is bound by the physical aspect of the universe.
God goes well behind the physical aspect that is why for a cosmologist with a materialist attitude is next
to impossible to understand how the system works.
LR however give a big big tip to all these folks that think that thinking in physical-material term is possible to understand God.
Follow this system guys.
Take the fundamental factor that make up the universe.
Start from the bottom.
Start from the matter and then go up to the water the light-energy the air and the space and then go a bit further in the mind.
Follow your body-mind.
The matter is at the bottom (yes the waste material is matter).
The water little bit up (urine and sperm)
Then up again (yes the stomach create energy and energy can turn into light)
Up again where your lungs deal with air.
Up again At at the throat level where there is space.
And then what?

Easy At.
As the body is made of these aspect it also has a mind.

I guess you never thought about that At, did you?  
From here it is clear that as we are made from the same element that compose the universe
such universe must have a controlling mind and if there is a mind behind this universe these materialists
cosmologists need to get their shining backside up and realize how stupid they are.  

You bring evidence that science know for sure where the universe come from and I will cover you in
solid gold.  

I am sure you wouldn't accept the universe being explained without a god

I follow logic At not materialistic bullshit.  

NDEs are not hallucination BECAUSE a dead brain doesn't produce hallucinations.   

But the brains that produce NDEs are not dead. You keep telling me they are, but that is incorrect.

Wrong again At.
Doctors declared these people who experienced an NDE dead.
Do you believe in doctors or not?
Doctors practice the very science that you believe in.
You got to make up your mind At.
One moment you say that you believe in science.
The next moment you contradict yourself by deny that science is able to understand something.
Are you a cherry picker?  

You don't get At, do you?   

The consciousness that experienced the NDE so to speak left the body-brain to then come back in the body-brain once the experience end.
It is like if you stop your vehicle for sometime and then go back inside the vehicle and resume your journey.

But you can't give me evidence for that, because its pseudo-science and religious dogma. All you can do is plug your ears and yell "GUESSES, GUESSES" and refuse to listen to evidence that NDEs occur from brain functions.

The evidence is that the brain was dead as declared by doctors so NDEs can not come from a dead brain.

Religions by the way don't even talk much if at all about the pineal gland and the consciousness.

The teachings about these things by spiritual minded beings are now totally forgotten so don't bother to talk about religions.

Today, religion is still at large.

The original teaching from Jesus and others has been lost that is why religions do not talk about NDEs.
Are you obsessed with religions At?

Atheists are really stuck in the belief that when you die is the end for you.

Again, atheism is simply the lack of a belief in any god/deity. It doesn't tell you anything about the afterlife (if there is one) or whether they believe in an afterlife (some atheists do). I don't believe in a soul or the afterlife because I find no reason to, there is no evidence for consciousness being something that is separable from the body and the afterlife is the invention of religions. If I am wrong and some god/deity does exist and we have souls and are predetermined to go to an afterlife, then I guess I will find that out, but I am pretty sure that this was a religious invention, and have found no plausible reasons to accept the existence of any god.

Wrong again At.
Most people who experienced an NDE were people that didn't much care whether there was a God or not
and after their NDE they all believe in the existence of God so I wouldn't say that the believe in God only come from religious people.

That is where the consciousness lie and without consciousness you do not exist so by understanding about
this topic you understand the connection between limited and unlimited.

This Descartes nonsense was mistaken, the Pineal Gland is one part of the brain that has a completely different function than previously thought, a gland that produces melatonin which influences patterns of sleep.

That is what science has so far discovered.
Give time At and sooner or later even science will discover what the pineal gland is there for.

---

1) No wonder that my post become non logic.
You take a sentence from here one from there and another one from somewhere else and it all become
something out of context and non logic.

2) On top on taking my words out of context you also make a terrible confusion about peace of mind.
As far as people keep on searching for something there can not be any peace of mind.
Peace of mind only come when the search end and the microcosm become macrocosm but this point I guess is a bit too much for you to understand.

It is all so simple to understand this point but you make it so so complicated.
In this way the microcosm keep on staying microcosm for crores of years.  

But your posts aren't about logic. All it is is a collection of random superstitious nonsense decorated with incredibly vague wording. Such as this "microcosm become macrocosm" you speak of that, fancy as it sounds, is utterly meaningless.

If you really believe in all the things you have posted in this thread, that's your privilege, but you should take a moment or two to understand why others won't find you convincing at all.

I follow your suggestion Ma by taking a moment or two ........ to understand why others won't find me convincing at all.......and guess what?
I arrived at the same conclusion that I had before which is that most folks do not follow logic.
Not only that but they don't even follow the same science that they glorify all the time.
This science tell us that an effect must have a cause or an action must have a reaction that is why
by following science you should understand that the universe is an effect to a cause therefore there can not be any magic in it so if there is no magic a creator must be there.
This is science Ma but atheists contradict themselves by saying that they follow science.  

---

But by activate the gland you not only keep it in top health but you go over.

This is pure garbage.  There is no way of knowing if your pineal gland is "activated" as it has no sensing nerves.  So this is pure baseless assertion.

I beg your pardon.
No nerves?


The third possibility was that information
about lighting was transmitted
to the pineal by nerves. Fortunately
Arisns Kappers had just identified the
nerve connections of the rat pineal as
coming from the sympathetic nervous
system. We found that if the sympathetic
pathway to the pineal was interrupted
by the removal of the superior
cervical ganglion, the ability of melatonin-forming
activity to be altered by
light was completely lost. Thus it appeared
that light was stimulating the
retina and then information about this
light was being transmitted to the pineal
via sympathetic nerves. Within the
pineal the sympathetic nerves probably
released neurohumors (noradrenaline or
serotonin), which acted on pineal cells
to induce (or block the induction of)
HIONIT; this enzyme in turn regulated
the synthesis of melatonin.


http://web.mit.edu/dick/www/pdf/40.pdf