Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: January 7, 2025, 5:56 am

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
God: No magic required
RE: God: No magic required
(January 27, 2014 at 4:22 pm)lweisenthal Wrote: There was certainly a time when your ancestors would have felt they had sufficient understanding of the nature of the planet earth to reject all possibility of Skype.

Hehe Smile Awesome!
Reply
RE: God: No magic required
(April 1, 2014 at 3:13 pm)lweisenthal Wrote: Once you've doubled this distance, you've got an exact duplicate of everything that ever existed, including you and me. Explanation defies concise summary; if interested start with the above link and move on from there (additional links are on my website, which I'm not permitted to cite on this forum, as it is considered to be "advertising").

I'm not a moderator, so check with one if you want to be sure. However, after checking the moderator action on your original post, your links were removed because there is a rule that you have to have 30 days of membership, and have posted at least 30 posts, prior to engaging in self-promotion. The links did not appear to have been removed because they were considered "advertising." If this is the case, you are within a few posts of being eligible to post self-promotional links (though not necessarily links that would be considered "advertising"). I suspect this means that once you hit 30 posts, you can include links to your blog. (I note that you don't have an introduction in the 'Introductions' section of the forum. That would be good for a few posts.)
[Image: extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg]
Reply
RE: God: No magic required
(April 1, 2014 at 4:21 pm)rasetsu Wrote:
(April 1, 2014 at 3:13 pm)lweisenthal Wrote: Once you've doubled this distance, you've got an exact duplicate of everything that ever existed, including you and me. Explanation defies concise summary; if interested start with the above link and move on from there (additional links are on my website, which I'm not permitted to cite on this forum, as it is considered to be "advertising").

I'm not a moderator, so check with one if you want to be sure. However, after checking the moderator action on your original post, your links were removed because there is a rule that you have to have 30 days of membership, and have posted at least 30 posts, prior to engaging in self-promotion. The links did not appear to have been removed because they were considered "advertising." If this is the case, you are within a few posts of being eligible to post self-promotional links (though not necessarily links that would be considered "advertising"). I suspect this means that once you hit 30 posts, you can include links to your blog.

He will indeed be allowed to do so. The relevant rules are in place to prevent posters from using AF as a platform for advertising, self-promotion, and/or mirroring. First- (and early-) post links are very frequently of a spammy or hit-and-run nature - and rather than to debate the merit of each one, during the first 30 days and 30 posts of a member's "career" here, they can be summarily removed. It's not personal.

Once the 30 days/30 posts milestones are reached, the rules allow a member to link to their own site so long as they are active participants.

Creating posts solely for the purpose of pushing traffic to a site and/or mirroring site content is still going to be problematic. Be reasonable, and we're reasonable too. Be unreasonable, and we follow suit.
Reply
RE: God: No magic required
Would it be a problem if one of us with the requisite posts and days posts his website in a post here, CD?
Reply
RE: God: No magic required
(April 1, 2014 at 5:02 pm)whateverist Wrote: Would it be a problem if one of us with the requisite posts and days posts his website in a post here, CD?

Short answer: No

Long answer: Most likely not. Ask yourself this. Why are you here? If the answer is "Because I enjoy participating in discussions and being a part of the AF community." then you're going to be fine. If your answer approaches "Because I'm a douche and I like free advertising space." then we start to have a problem.

If one isn't sure which group one most closely identifies with, it may be the latter case. Big Grin
Reply
RE: God: No magic required
(April 1, 2014 at 3:13 pm)lweisenthal Wrote: I now view the existence of God as not only a far out speculative possibility but as a physical science certainty.
I and literally billions of other people regularly talk to God. In my own case, I needed physical science plausibility to make the sincere effort which is required. Most other people simply need simple faith to make the effort. It works -- unquestionably works.

Maybe it works, but that in no way proves the mechanism you claim.

Quote:I personally think that militant denial of God has now become simply another form of neo-luddism.

- Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach CA

I really don't see how you get from A to B. It appears you will latch on to anything and twist it to support your need for there to be 'something'.

I personally think that your presuppositional demand for a god is simply another form of wish-fulfillment.
Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
Reply
RE: God: No magic required
(April 1, 2014 at 3:13 pm)lweisenthal Wrote: It's been two months since my last post. I thought that I'd said all of that which was relevant to the points I was trying to make and that I had reached the point of just going around and around with my various critics.

So I resolved to save bandwidth, until I had something new to offer.

A couple of weeks ago, that which has been termed one of the most important discoveries in the history of science was announced.

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/gues...-now-what/

I now view the existence of God as not only a far out speculative possibility but as a physical science certainty.

Let me emphasize that it's important not to confuse "God" with doctrines or dogmas. For the sake of this conversation, let's discard traditional views of God, which are all wrapped up in doctrines and dogma, and redefine God.

God is not necessarily the creator of all things visible and invisible, though he may or may not be the creator of some things visible and invisible. God is a higher order of sentient consciousness, with whom other sentient beings are capable of communicating, to their great personal benefit. God is not necessarily singular. I think that there probably are plural Gods in the multiverse -- perhaps near infinite numbers of such beings.

I've stated before that I believe there is little or no credible evidence that God answers prayers for physical miracles. I personally believe that praying for peace (or cancer cures) is a fruitless waste of time, for both God and humans. But there is enormous empirical evidence that God routinely and dependably answers prayers for such things as fortitude, solace, liberation from substance abuse, improved personal morality, courage, and perseverance. These latter prayers are of enormous importance and enormous personal benefit, and, by the standards of objective peer review medical research, improve happiness, healthiness, and longevity.

The two leading models of the multiverse, which now appears to be a likely reality are (1) an infinite universe, with the same physical principles of our own, or (2) an infinite number of parallel universes, with different physical principles than our own. Either of these possibilities makes the existence of God(s) a physical certainty.

Once you move out 10^10^29 meters from earth, you have every conceivable arrangement of atoms, both qualitatively and in terms of geometry. Beyond that point, you begin to duplicate things. Once you've doubled this distance, you've got an exact duplicate of everything that ever existed, including you and me. Explanation defies concise summary; if interested start with the above link and move on from there (additional links are on my website, which I'm not permitted to cite on this forum, as it is considered to be "advertising").

The point is, that, in an infinite universe, you will inevitably have super-sentient Boltzmann brains, comprised of both ordinary and dark matter and ordinary and dark energy. It is a mathematical certainty. In infinite parallel universes, you will inevitably have exotic forms of energy, in infinite configurations, also producing Boltzmann brains with powers and capabilities unimaginable on a human scale. This is also a mathematical certainty.

I and literally billions of other people regularly talk to God. In my own case, I needed physical science plausibility to make the sincere effort which is required. Most other people simply need simple faith to make the effort. It works -- unquestionably works.

I personally think that militant denial of God has now become simply another form of neo-luddism.

- Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach CA


Some general comments.

Alan Guth and Andrei Linde, the physicists in the article that you linked... both atheists. As are the overwhelming percentage of physicists.

What are you, a non-physicist, seeing in their work that they are not? Why don't you write a scientific paper for peer review on why they are wrong in not seeing evidence for a god?

Quote: But there is enormous empirical evidence that God routinely and dependably answers prayers for such things as fortitude, solace, liberation from substance abuse, improved personal morality, courage, and perseverance

No, there are studies that show that the belief in a god gives people 'such things as fortitude, solace, liberation from substance abuse, improved personal morality, courage, and perseverance'.

There is no question that people's beliefs can give them comfort, courage, etc. But just because someone has a belief that helps them, does not mean that the subject of their belief actually exists.

Correlation does not equal causation.

You'd believe if you just opened your heart" is a terrible argument for religion. It's basically saying, "If you bias yourself enough, you can convince yourself that this is true." If religion were true, people wouldn't need faith to believe it -- it would be supported by good evidence.
Reply
RE: God: No magic required
Quote:I and literally billions of other people regularly talk to God.


Odd. My impression is that you are talking to yourself.
Reply
RE: God: No magic required
(April 1, 2014 at 5:09 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote:
(April 1, 2014 at 5:02 pm)whateverist Wrote: Would it be a problem if one of us with the requisite posts and days posts his website in a post here, CD?

Short answer: No

Long answer: Most likely not. Ask yourself this. Why are you here? If the answer is "Because I enjoy participating in discussions and being a part of the AF community." then you're going to be fine. If your answer approaches "Because I'm a douche and I like free advertising space." then we start to have a problem.

If one isn't sure which group one most closely identifies with, it may be the latter case. Big Grin

So it wouldn't be a problem for us to link it??

I had a quick Google earlier and didn't find the blog. Plenty other stuff like him swimming in a harbour on YouTube and his professional exploits Sad
Reply
RE: God: No magic required
(April 1, 2014 at 8:28 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: So it wouldn't be a problem for us to link it??

I had a quick Google earlier and didn't find the blog. Plenty other stuff like him swimming in a harbour on YouTube and his professional exploits Sad

http://www.physicalheretic.com/
[Image: extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg]
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  South Dakota Schools required to have "In God We Trust" on their walls Cecelia 16 2248 July 29, 2019 at 6:11 pm
Last Post: Fireball
  Magic: The Gathering KevinM1 12 4669 July 21, 2015 at 4:38 am
Last Post: abaris
  Does God only work through Magic? Drich 89 14727 June 24, 2015 at 6:13 pm
Last Post: ignoramus
  God is god, and we are not god StoryBook 43 14032 January 6, 2014 at 5:47 pm
Last Post: StoryBook
  Is black (or white) magic real? Darkstar 18 8822 December 31, 2012 at 3:56 am
Last Post: Mark 13:13
  Creationism = Pure Freaking Magic Gooders1002 35 16678 May 30, 2012 at 8:19 am
Last Post: Brian37
  Navy atheist required to pray, say “Amen”, and feign hatred of atheists reverendjeremiah 19 9121 February 28, 2012 at 4:00 pm
Last Post: Mister Agenda
  God get's angry, Moses changes God's plans of wrath, God regrets "evil" he planned Mystic 9 7229 February 16, 2012 at 8:17 am
Last Post: Strongbad



Users browsing this thread: 7 Guest(s)