Prove there's a god.
God Is Love

Richmond, IN

#618588 Apr 20, 2013
I believe there is a God and I live a life of peace and serenity and do not have to prove that to anyone, it is an individual thing, if you don't believe..... WHO CARES.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#618589 Apr 20, 2013
AriaJames wrote:
<quoted text>Aerobatty, I couldn't find the post to which you were referring, but I am truly sorry that your daughter didn't have a happy ever after with her mate. Life isn't perfect. Hope she doesn't let it get her down. Also, her success or lack thereof shouldn't be blamed on you or anything. Sometimes people work out and sometimes they don't.:)
It wasn't my post, but thank you anyway.

“Truth is beyond wavelength ”

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#618590 Apr 20, 2013
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>I don't follow this logic. To me, again, it's like saying that we can't reasonably assume that mass is involved in gravity because we don't understand the mechanism of gravity.
I'm not saying molecules are not involved with consciousness; I'm saying that this involvement is not enough to consider that consciousness is a product of these molecules rather than of the quantum reality that makes up those molecules.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#618591 Apr 20, 2013
M H Ss wrote:
Oh Thank God ... Boston can exhale. Trapped in their homes with scared children right up to adults of mature age.

Wow! You can hear them letting out war hoots of jubilation. Now we'll hang back and see how the details unravel and we learn how such a thing is possible. The USA is so complacent.

Many injuries and shattered spirits, but few dead in comparison as to how bad it could have been.

Prayers to the survivors.

Good Night Topix
Latest news is that they had embraced Islam.

“Truth is beyond wavelength ”

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#618592 Apr 20, 2013
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>Who knows? There are many interesting ideas as to how that happened. You're talking about the jump from consciousness to self awareness, right?
Jesus dude. Consciousness and awareness is part of the same package. At least that's what *I* mean when I say 'consciousness'. That includes self awareness. Would you be comfortable if awareness came from quantum reality while consciousness (the ability to respond to stimulus) came from quantum?

I'm talking about going from 'non-aware' to 'aware'. Do you people read anything? I wrote that already.

“Truth is beyond wavelength ”

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#618593 Apr 20, 2013
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>Well, there is a difference between awareness of self and awareness. My dog is certainly aware, but she has no sense of self as far as I know.
How the heck do you know? Besides, if we are self aware why wouldn't your dog be? That's crazy. You're nuts. You try to 'standing jump' the grand canyon but then you deny this. Unreal

“Truth is beyond wavelength ”

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#618594 Apr 20, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
Quite to the contrary it it you who is resorting to childish tactics and is exhibiting the psycho behavior. Yes the amount of awareness IS exactly the point, at the very lowest levels of awareness it is hardly conscious awareness and more a repetitive event triggered by the fundamental forces, it is the ability to hold memory and sense that sparks a more complicated level of awareness called conscious.
All this BS because you can't admit that there is no way that science can approach the question of how groups of molecules ever became aware of themselves. You deserve some good name calling but I'll let it slide.

“Truth is beyond wavelength ”

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#618595 Apr 20, 2013
[QUOTE who='timn17"]
.
I don't know if a transition from nothingness to somethingness is possible, and I don't know what this has to do with the discussion. As I understand it, the current line of thinking is that if the universe did start with a "big bang" from "nothing," that it wasn't really an "ex nihilo" situation, but a singularity that spawned via a virtual particle in a negative field causes by the curvature of spacetime.[/QUOTE] So IOW something existed. You are referring to "things" when you say 'spacetime' and 'virtual particles'. Nothing is nothing. How can something come of nothing? Therefore there probably always was energy.
Anyways, I'm not following the logic anyway, because while I could agree that maybe energy always was, it doesn't follow that consciousness always was. Are you suggesting that consciousness is a fundamental force of the universe?
Yea same as it doesn't follow that consciousness is molecular just because it appears that a person cannot respond to a stimulus when brain matter is compromised. Consciousness is only molecular when you can show how groups of molecules became aware of themselves during abiogenesis. You can't no one can even approach it.
That's an interesting idea, and it's actually something I have thought about - that maybe in the same way that say, a magnet works because of the electromagnetic force; that maybe brains work because they are arranged in the right way to "tap" into a force of consciousness. This is, however, not much more than a pipe dream, an interesting thought that I have no way to substantiate at all.
Yea just like you cannot substantiate how groups of molecules ever became aware of themselves during abiogenesis. Pipe on.
Moving on. No one is really saying that consciousness evolved "by chance," it is an evolutionary adaptation. I don't know how the ability to store information first emerged, but since we have no evidence of some eternal conscious will, there is no reason to think that it happened because of this will as opposed to an adaptation.

I don't follow your last point about information, I don't even recall saying anything about that. Anyways, I don't necessarily agree that information is meaningless in the absence of consciousness. For example, going back to the slime mold I brought up earlier - a slime mold is not conscious as far as we can tell, but it does appear to somehow store, or at least communicate information about food sources. So it's possible for information to be utilized without any conscious awareness of the information itself. Perhaps this is how the framework for consciousness was established - with simple collections of cells that gained the ability to communicate useful information.
But storing and even sharing information means nothing without being able to show how groups of molecules can become aware of themselves. Is the repetition sinking in? Surely not. This will go on forever and I may not be able to keep up this BS too long.

“Truth is beyond wavelength ”

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#618596 Apr 20, 2013
timn17 wrote:
want.
Calm down. You really do enjoy getting worked up and name calling like a child.
Not worked up. Just that you are not getting the point that without knowing what consciousness/awareness is, we can't assume things like you are doing.
You are failing to explain why, since everything is reducible, that it necessarily follows that every single phenomena is also necessarily reducible to quantum phenomena. The macro world does not necessarily follow the same rules as the quantum world, or else you might blink out of existence at any moment.
n/a
"IF" the brain is "just hardware," then alzheimers means nothing. That's a big if, and you are still missing the point I am trying to make. I am not talking about the simple fact that people with alzheimers have trouble responding appropriately to a stimulus, I am pointing out the inherent problems with your approach that are illuminated by a disease like alzheimers. I want to know what happens to the consciousness of an alzheimers patient
Still not getting the point. Nothing happens to a consciousness in alzeimers people IF consciousness is of quantum origin; it only appears that consciousness is limited because there is limited hardware to work with; the hardware is damaged, not the consciousness.

See you are arbitrarily defining consciousness to be a 'response to a stimulus' but that doesn't mean that is all consciousness is. We can still be aware of our own being when in a coma or when experiencing alzheimers.

Cmon, think.

If this quantum consciousness is the source of our sense of being, then why would physical damage negatively affect the ability to experience and express this sense of being?
Don't make me name call you again. It's like a car. The motherboard/computer we'll call the consciousness of the "vehicle". If the steering linkage fails then you cannot steer the car but you still have a fully functioning motherboard. WTF? How hard is that to understand?
Finally, I know that we can't define consciousness, I agree with you there, as I have said many times. This does not discount the fact that we can correlate conscious thought with electrical activity in the brain. Not knowing the exact mechanism does not render meaningless all observations on the relationship between the brain and consciousness. That's like saying that since we don't know exactly how gravity is "communicated," that all observations on the relationship between gravity and mass are meaningless.
Where there are molecules there is quantum reality also. You first have to establish what consciousness is. Dang dude how hard is that to understand? Sure it correlates, but correlation means nothing when you don't know what it is you are correlating to.

We call it consciousness but we have no idea what gives rise to it. Here's the thing, if you can explain how groups of molecules became aware of themselves during a supposed abiogenesis (rather than just reacting to their environment as per usual) then you correlate all you want.

“Truth is beyond wavelength ”

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#618597 Apr 20, 2013
[QUOTE who='timn17"]What do you mean? What would qualify as "seeing the origin" of a thought? As I said earlier, experiments have found that they can see unconscious processes associated with a certain action occur in the brain before the participants became aware of choosing to do this action. Does this count as "seeing the origin?"[/QUOTE]That's part of why consciousness is beyond the scope of science right now.

“Truth is beyond wavelength ”

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#618598 Apr 20, 2013
timn17 wrote:
Which makes your proposition nothing more than god of the gaps dressed up in scientific language. If you create these scenarios in which you allow for a hypothetical piece of evidence to be suggestive of a brain emergent consciousness, and then immediately rule out its relevance because "something deeper" could be going on, you are making your position meaningless. If your position is simply "well, you can't rule it out," then it's no position at all.
Uhhh, it's not that "there could be something deeper", it's what you keep eternally purposefully ignoring; it's that you need to establish a mechanism for consciousness/awareness in the first place so that you know what you are dealing with before you try acting like you know what it is by assuming that you are affecting consciousness by blending up the brain.

Awareness is part of consciousness. And being aware of your own being might be quite different than being able to show someone else (objectively) that you are aware, as in being able to respond to stimulus.

“Truth is beyond wavelength ”

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#618599 Apr 20, 2013
Ooops I wrote, "Would you be comfortable if awareness came from quantum reality while consciousness (the ability to respond to stimulus) came from quantum? "

I meant would you be comfortable if awareness came from quantum reality and consciousness from molecular?
youtube

AOL

#618600 Apr 20, 2013
.

100% PROOF Pope Francis is ANTICHRIST_______



.

“THE LORD IS MY SHEPHERD;”

Since: Apr 09

Location hidden

#618601 Apr 20, 2013
Just Think wrote:
<quoted text>
Which is what makes religion such a great con...
I would agree the majority of the world use it for a con, wealth and greed! Send a thousand and u will be blessed hogwash, those knock me down tv evangalist. God doesnt ask you for money, your home , your car give all you have stuff. He only ask that you believe in Him and his Son.

Im talking about God not religion. Religion has nothing to do with who created this world or.

OCB

“What a GLORIOUS day!!!”

Since: Apr 12

Orlando but NYC born & raised

#618602 Apr 20, 2013
psalms 23 wrote:
<quoted text>
I would agree the majority of the world use it for a con, wealth and greed! Send a thousand and u will be blessed hogwash, those knock me down tv evangalist. God doesnt ask you for money, your home , your car give all you have stuff. He only ask that you believe in Him and his Son.
Im talking about God not religion. Religion has nothing to do with who created this world or.
I agree to your last points- god and religion are two separate things and all religions are man made- including the religion you believe in.

The god and the Jesus you believe in are the basis of the organized religion of Christianity so your believe is not only in a god, but in a specific god and in a god that not everyone believes in as billions of people in this world believe in a god, but not the god of the bible.

The god of the bible is a god borne of the beliefs of an organized religion.

About you saying the god you believe in does not ask for your stuff....no, of course, he is not asking you to give your stuff to him- however this is what is said about one's possessions:

"Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me."

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#618603 Apr 20, 2013
psalms 23 wrote:
<quoted text>
wow,, thats a blessing to still have your mom, and singing at that age in the choir.. Long line of faith for sure..
I wasnt raised in church at all, niether parent went. Father passed when i was 13, and mother passed when i was 19.
I just found out lately that all of my dads side was from canada, they come here from ireland back in the 1600s. So i guess im a little Canadian myself...lol
It you are American now, then that applies to many in your country. I lived for several years 4 miles from where Walt Disney's father and grandfather lived before moving to the USA from Canada.

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#618604 Apr 20, 2013
psalms 23 wrote:
<quoted text>
Ive always wonderd what evidence one would want from a supernatural being?
A signed letter of authinticity? An audiable voice from heaven? The Holy Bible which i know is a myth to you, But it says one must have faith, and there shall be no sign giving.
So the only (personal) proof,evidence i ever got from God was when i put my faith and trust into him with my whole heart, its more then just a decision with the brain but a commitment from the heart. I sought God ( not religion, not mans doctrines, denominations and such, but God..
I know its hard to believe in something you cant see touch or feel, i have been right there in that position. His words describes the ''only way to know of him, so i would think if one doesnt come that way. Well, then he will never have that proof he seeks.
welp time for bed, gonna ride 4 wheelers morrow..
Have a good one boots!
I understand what you are saying, but all that a human being experiences is processed through our brains, whether that be touch, audio, sight, dreams, visions, feelings, God. We take in info through our various senses and nerves, the impulses travel to the brain, if they don';t originate there, and the brain interprets them. So regardless, IMO, as to how one perceives or sees God, it is his own brain that is deciphering that information.

I would though, sometime be interested in someone explaining to me what they think they mean, when they state that they "saw" or "knew" or whatever they use to make that statement, when they found the "only way to know of Him" as you have stated.

No offence intended [usually when a person says no offence intended he is actually going to offend the other person], but my understanding, or rather my opinion of people who claim to know God and that they know Him because they have followed the necessary steps to get to know Him, is their usuing a technique to cover for their lack of proof to convince the other person, because the other person cannot see into their mind, so he cannot "prove" that the person did not have that experience.

So those who cannot see get to feel someone handicapped because they obviously don't have what it takes to "find God".

With respect I can't accept that God cannot be proved without these kinds of tactics, if He exists, and also to use how Jesus describes how He Himself can been seen is begging the question, because assuming Jesus doesn't exist then His words are meaningless.

“ad victoriam”

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#618605 Apr 20, 2013
Pokay wrote:
<quoted text>I'm not saying molecules are not involved with consciousness; I'm saying that this involvement is not enough to consider that consciousness is a product of these molecules rather than of the quantum reality that makes up those molecules.


You just used magic and reduced your pet theory because...
With that statement you transformed all of the physical into the "quantum reality".

So now we know when we talk about the physical with you.
We have to call it quantum .

“ad victoriam”

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#618606 Apr 20, 2013
Pokay wrote:
<quoted text>All this BS because you can't admit that there is no way that science can approach the question of how groups of molecules ever became aware of themselves. You deserve some good name calling but I'll let it slide.

No all this is your bull sjit because.
Groups of molecules never became aware of themselves.
Cells may have become somewhat aware of themselves, but not at a level we can call conscious. So your whole scheme is wrong, and you call me crazy. If you want to say science is still puzzling
out the mystery of life, then say it.
But molecules aren't alive or aware of themselves and defining life as a collection of molecules is ridiculous.
You are really asking how did organic matter become living organisms .

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#618607 Apr 20, 2013
timn17 wrote:
RR, it's up to you and zeus if you want to to know of his glory. Seriously man. You just don't wanna believe in zeus.
Zeus? What happened to xenu?
You need to stop with that cop out. People ask for proof because it is a claim that requires proof.
What?! Why?

Why does MY belief in God require proof to YOU?
They don't ask for proof so you can fire back with stupid, irrelevant, totally nonsensical comments about hands. It is totally astounding that you think it's impossible to "prove hands." And it's even more astounding that you think the claim "I have hands" is even remotely on the same level as the claim 'there is a god."
Well if you can't prove you have hands, I'll just assume its a myth.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 3 min Robert F 672,828
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 16 min New Age Spiritual... 104,448
About Times and Laws 26 min harvey plunkett 1
Why I’m no longer a Christian (Jul '08) 54 min New Age Spiritual... 445,837
Gay/bi Skype Sex ? (Mar '14) 2 hr Mylilsexcrete 19
Dem Libs Has Need Of Gay Rabbits 2 hr WTF 1
News Michael Jackson's doctor: 'I told the truth' (Aug '09) 2 hr Spotted Wee 388
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 5 hr Choir Loft 286,298
More from around the web