15
   

My documentaries, the documentaries that I recommend

 
 
Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Mar, 2023 08:51 pm
Lets warm up and take sometime to look at the scope of the topic of God in its vast formal presentations, this will be the first of a series of videos:
0 Replies
 
Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Mar, 2023 09:23 pm
0 Replies
 
Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Mar, 2023 09:52 pm
0 Replies
 
Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Mar, 2023 10:22 pm
0 Replies
 
Leadfoot
 
  1  
Reply Tue 14 Mar, 2023 06:13 am
@Albuquerque,
Quote:
...in any case we can fluidly debate it right here right now if you are willing and have the patience to disentangle such a hard topic.

Let’s thus start with definitions. Give me yours and start with the attributes of God. We shall proceed from there.

Ah ****, do I have to watch all those videos first? Sorry, I can never pass up a one liner. It’s a flaw.

Yes, we can proceed, I thought we already had.

But to be clear, the question is, is there or isn’t there, is it not? Frank definitely had at least that right.

My definition or premise is, that from a truly objective perspective, regardless of time period or from a young child's to a well educated scientist's, it is obvious that we are living in an intelligently designed environment. And not to dodge the point, the only candidate for that creator would be God. As far as attributes, the only thing one could initially say is 'able to create every animate thing we see, including us'. It is the inspiration behind the question 'Where did I come from mommy?'. And the answer is usually where the lies begin.

And since you have already posited 'Panspermia', I would counter that with 'that is merely kicking the can down the road.' It's begging the question of infinite regress, which let’s be honest, neither of us can begin to address that, so let us move on.

Eagerly awaiting your definition or premise.
Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Tue 14 Mar, 2023 07:54 am
@Leadfoot,
...oh well if you are going to define God as only the Creator, that is the attribute you gave away so far you are not doing any better then what you claim I did with Panspermia...for all that one can deduce you might be calling God the Alien that popped up into existence from vacuum quantum fluctuations and created every other being as a figment of his solipsistic imagination...it has a name in fringe Science it is called a Boltzmann brain.

Want to correct anything or posit any more attributes?.
0 Replies
 
Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Tue 14 Mar, 2023 08:12 am
@Leadfoot,
...as for your implicit observation regarding that there is no difference between a Universe sequence that can regress to Infinity of other previous Big Bangs you are utterly wrong as every possible combination of particles that can happen will happen with 100% certainty.

In sum not good enough I need more attributes.
Unless of course you just want to use the G word because you fancy it, in which case I am all for your freedom of expression.

0 Replies
 
Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Tue 14 Mar, 2023 08:24 am
@Leadfoot,
Going back to Parmenides, yes I am going there because it is important, there is something to be said about the concept itself of Creation when it is absolutely posited as creation ad nihil.
According to Parmenides it is impossible to bring something from Non Being into Being. As non being cannot ever be, and that which can be already IS!

This is an old fashion form of Einstein block Universe.
The point you might wonder? Well the point is that there is no such thing as absolute creation ad nihil. Either things ARE or ARE NOT!

"Imagination" is just a bad human misconcept of common sense languaging within spacetime to define what we experience to be "new stuff". Things like inventing a car or a washing machine. The devil is in the details as all the components that you have in these so called "creations" they all exist geometrically in nature...there is no new Physics going on in a washing machine...to sum up we at best edit stuff that already exists with some other stuff that already exists and pop up some convenient "new" tech gadget.
Leadfoot
 
  1  
Reply Tue 14 Mar, 2023 08:41 am
@Albuquerque,
There were a whole lot of assertions there, yours and various others, but I am interested in your personal reasoning for or definition of what force or principle outside of an intelligent actor is responsible for inanimate matter becoming us. If 'fractals' is what you’ve got, I guess this won’t take long.
Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Tue 14 Mar, 2023 08:41 am
@Albuquerque,
The consequences do not end up there as if we are to take seriously cause and effect, or perfect correlation, depending on your view point being within spacetime or eternal, we did not invent anything, nor anyone did...the Geometry of Reality just UNFOLDED as the Universe "evolved" itself within spacetime.
Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Tue 14 Mar, 2023 08:43 am
@Leadfoot,
Hya good afternoon you are awake good!

To your point there is no becoming, just Being, in my own words Order.
That is my Ultimism! I just don't call God to Parmenides BEING.
In sum and back to beginning of what I said I don't divide Reality in two.
0 Replies
 
Leadfoot
 
  1  
Reply Tue 14 Mar, 2023 08:48 am
@Albuquerque,
Quote:
we did not invent anything, nor anyone did...the Geometry of Reality just UNFOLDED as the Universe "evolved" itself within spacetime.

Oh ****, next you’re going to start reading Desiderata to me.

And good afternoon to you too. Although it’s actually morning here. And the winds are calm, the airplane is calling me and I must go now
Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Tue 14 Mar, 2023 08:52 am
@Leadfoot,
Safe flight we shall continue when you want or can my friend!
0 Replies
 
Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Tue 14 Mar, 2023 09:10 am
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Tue 14 Mar, 2023 09:34 am
Amazing how difficult it is to simply acknowledge that we do not know the stuff we obviously do not know.

Ya gotta go to an Internet forum and listen to the kinds of conversations that are taking place here to see just how difficult it is for some people.
Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Tue 14 Mar, 2023 10:22 am
@Frank Apisa,
...let me be clear Frank I didn't claim to have knowledge over the existence of God I claimed the concept in its usual form does not make sense to me. perhaps I am just stupid. I am often stupid enough...

I've told you once and I will tell you again, when you say you don't know you have to define the terms of what is it that you don't know about. I don't have any recollection of you defining what kind of God you don't know about...for all that I care you might be referring to the God of Pastafarianism...

Say a philosophical Ant noticed me and thought about me as a God, do you not believe I exist? Are you a solipsist? Do you doubt your own phenomenological existence?

Don't take this the wrong way...I think doubting is an healthy exercise...given you have a foot to stand on, an axiom, from which you can launch doubts about everything else around you.

What you can't do for sure is doubt everything as in such you must doubt doubt itself which is a contradiction in terms a reification of the very substance doubting is made as a concept.
Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Tue 14 Mar, 2023 10:37 am
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Tue 14 Mar, 2023 10:51 am
@Albuquerque,
Albuquerque wrote:

...let me be clear Frank I didn't claim to have knowledge over the existence of God I claimed the concept in its usual form does not make sense to me. perhaps I am just stupid. I am often stupid enough...

I've told you once and I will tell you again, when you say you don't know you have to define the terms of what is it that you don't know about. I don't have any recollection of you defining what kind of God you don't know about...for all that I care you might be referring to the God of Pastafarianism...

Say a philosophical Ant noticed me and thought about me as a God, do you not believe I exist? Are you a solipsist? Do you doubt your own phenomenological existence?


Don't take this the wrong way...I think doubting is an healthy exercise...given you have a foot to stand on, an axiom, from which you can launch doubts about everything else around you.

What you can't do for sure is doubt everything as in such you must doubt doubt itself which is a contradiction in terms a reification of the very substance doubting is made as a concept.


Here is what I have said about this issue, Albuquerque. I have said it regularly, often, and consistently.


I do not know if any GOD (or gods) exist or not;
I see no reason to suspect that gods cannot exist…that the existence of a GOD or gods is impossible;
I see no reason to suspect that at least one GOD must exist...that the existence of at least one GOD is needed to explain existence;
I do not see enough unambiguous evidence upon which to base a meaningful guess in either direction on whether any gods exist or not...so I don't.

(When I use the word "GOD or gods" here, I mean "The entity (or entities) responsible for the creation of what we humans call 'the physical universe'...IF SUCH AN ENTITY OR ENTITIES ACTUALLY EXIST.)
Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Tue 14 Mar, 2023 10:57 am
@Frank Apisa,
Finally I can extract something of what is it that you do not know about...never heard it before from you, God the Creator...

Very well, my question to you is why not doubt the meaningfulness of the very concept of Creation...you have to doubt that before you have a frame to doubt about God as the Creator...

My point is how do you arrive at the later doubt without questioning the very concept of Creation first? Why do you frame the measure stick at God the Creator before you question what Creation is to even mean?


...let me be straight forward with you on why I insist in this. I do not really understand how is it wise to divide the realm of what is REAL in two.
I have extreme philosophical difficulty in accepting dividing what is Real in such a way that dualism is to be taken seriously...I can't for the life of me see how such system would communicate information.
Leadfoot
 
  1  
Reply Tue 14 Mar, 2023 11:46 am
I’ve admitted the things I do not know, and I’ve said the things I do.
There are others who know things I don’t. I have no problem accepting that.

I don’t see why 'some people' can’t simply disagree. Why must they insist that others can’t possibly know something that they don’t. I mean, the Hubris!

The flight was glorious by the way!
 

Related Topics

New Propulsion, the "EM Drive" - Question by TomTomBinks
The Science Thread - Discussion by Wilso
Why do people deny evolution? - Question by JimmyJ
Are we alone in the universe? - Discussion by Jpsy
Fake Science Journals - Discussion by rosborne979
Controvertial "Proof" of Multiverse! - Discussion by littlek
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 12/27/2024 at 04:03:51