The Singularity has Arrived but it’s not what everyone thought..

You stay away from magnets!

And toggles!

I gotta. I have a pace maker implant...so...no magnets.

Sabine stirring up the waters as usual, take a look:

Nah, Frank is more 'live for today' than any hippie ever was.

Guessing is a different matter. I would not choose the pure guess either.
But Frank seems to reject even the concept of ‘educated guess'. I don’t see how you could function in life if you actually refused to.

You asked me if you can 'be thankful'. Be thankful to whom? Someone you only hope exists? Yes. You can do that, but I would not recommend it.

Yeah, I think Sabine gets the real core and potential of this GPT AI.
'Language' is one key, the same thing I sometimes try to get across in my protein argument. The significance is completely lost on most. 'Language, that's just talking, so what.' is the reaction.

Edit: But at the end, I think Sabine made the same error as the ‘gobbledygook scientists' she is usually critical of. She ended with: “The brain is just a lot of logical synapses like the circuits in a computer, so if we can be conscious, then so could a computer.”. She went beyond any real science there.

I guess on many things...including educated guesses.

I simply refuse to guess on "Is there at least one god?" mostly because it would be a totally blind guess. I just think blind guesses are worthless.



As for "HOPE"...well, I do plenty of that. I am a GIANTS fan...and that is not an easy thing to be without an infusion of a LOT of hope. In fact, I HOPE that the NY on their helmets stands for New York...rather than what some think..."Next Year."

Guess I should have said I was addressing the only subject we have ever semi seriously engaged in.

So you refuse to make educated guess only when it comes to theology then. Or is it that you think 'God' is something one can never gain education on? Is that limited to yourself or is it a universal condition?

If you were serious, better luck on the table than I had on the last go round. If I hadn’t just been gifted with a new toy to play with, I’d let the old ticker stop any time now. The heavenly bastard keeps me hanging on here for some reason.

**** the Giants et al. I’ll never understand the passion for it. It crowds out room for things worthy of passion.

Sure, you can be thankful to a God that you hope exists.

I’m more interested in why a Perfect God (1) would want to become Imperfect (0).

I’ll stretch a little and give you that. But can you actually love that hoped for God with all your heart, mind, soul and strength? I cannot stretch that far.

There was a time when I took your approach to seeking a mate. The results were horrendous. I doubt the results for a hoped for God would be any better.

But I am mellowing on that. The steps He sets in place for a seeker of God, can be and often are so radically different as to defy rigid definition. Who knows, this + & - thing may be necessary for you. Maybe 'no guessing ever' is necessary for Frank. He said his interest is genuine and if so, that must give him his best shot.


Who mentioned anything about an imperfect God? Or wanting one? Or suggesting that God wanted to become so.

Strange, painful and rigorous as it is, I cannot imagine a more perfect scenario than what we are experiencing for achieving His goals. I’m in awe of it every time I contemplate it. And him for conceiving of it. Admittedly, I didn’t always see it that way.

I would suggest that it is possible to love a hoped for God as you describe.Why not?Nobody has been able to disprove the existence of a God.

I use + and - to explain different interpretations of dualistic thinking Leadfoot.

I suggest that there is more than one interpretation of the + and - equation.

I have looked at what I would suggest is the widely accepted and foundational formula for all the sciences today which is +=- and -=+ and have suggested an alternative formula as +/-= +/- because everything vibrates in the cosmos or (toggles) as I call it.

I know that the widely accepted science has its interpretation of why everything vibrates but this unbalanced scientific explanation doesn’t do it for me.Balanced science makes more sense and electromagnetic processes provides that balance.

On the morality issue, accepted sciences stance is that as absolutes cannot be defined then we need to guess that good is bad and bad is good or (+=- and -=+).At the scientific level this is also interpreted in electromechanical processes as a + force = - force and a - force = + force.

However,as the only way to balance the 4 off electromagnetic force interactions -/-…..-/+….+/-….+/+ in nature is by balancing a + and - with a + and - giving the formula +/-=+/- (this formula being measurable) then why isn’t this formula used as the foundational formula for the sciences? Especially as this formula provides the vibratory balance that is observed throughout the cosmos and confirms that + and - are not cancelled out.

I would hope that a God is perfect.The alternative being a hope in an imperfect God.

Once again perfect/imperfect or +/-.

As you have to balance a +/- with +/- in nature,I would suggest that an alternative name would be required other than + or - to describe this God that might exist.

Just to touch on fundamental philosophical logic.

If there are two unknowns like we have with absolutes. I would suggest that it is not sound philosophy to compare one with the other and GUESS that they are the same as we have with the presently accepted +=- and -=+ formula.

I would suggest that if there are two unknowns and you want to develop a sound BALANCED formula then the two unknowns need to balance with the two unknowns which gives the formula + and - = + and - .I would suggest that science/nature would then need to concur with this formula.

Why not marry an imaginary wife?

What if the wife exists and is not imaginary?

You exist Leadfoot because you have expressed an opinion.

Even those that claim they don’t exist do exist.

How is it possible to claim that one doesn’t exist if one doesn’t exist?…lol…

That wasn’t the question, but what if the desired non-imaginary wife cannot be found, or worse yet, is not what you hoped for?

Why not an imaginary wife instead?

PS: I note that ChatGPT AI is much better at staying on point than most humans.

That is because Chat GPT is way dumber...people are experts on missing the point to moot any non conformal viewpoint...fallacies are the bred and butter of culture!

I’m not missing any point at all Albuquerque.All sciences are interconnected.

There are many people that have reached their singularity philosophically and concluded that they don’t exist.

They still give their opinion though.How can you claim you don’t exist when you don’t exist?

What singularity?

Hya!
Goodbye!

I would suggest that many confuse the philosophical singularity with a cancelling. Its not a cancelling. Its a balancing.

The real thing is better Leadfoot. You just need to test whether it is the real thing and can be trusted.