trolls like him (idiots that actually believe the bullshit they're saying) are better off being ignored... you can't argue with illogical idiots that firmly believe in their rightiousness. It's better to simply ostrisize them.
by InquirerWhy do you continue to ignore what I am telling you?
False. I replied to everything you wrote. You never answered any of my questions though.
You can't compare human-made objects with non-human-made objects and think the same comparison can be done on the whole universe.
But I did compare them, though I kept it within Earth's boundries. The Universe itslef is even more staggering. Another reminder, I claim that an unconscious force cannot out do a conscious force. That is how it works now, why believe the ONLY time it happend is when the Universe supposidly created itself from nothing, then by some freak accident a planet was put in place while these amazing machines ( us and countless creatures ) were formed into a harmonious system of borrowing and recycling, and we enjoy the benefits of vision and sound and other things simply because there exists light and sound.
You have no idea how the 'world' looks like outside of our universe, and so you cannot really say what is and what is not created by design.
But Inquirer, everything we have been talking about, including us as yet another species, has a design. Like everything else, when you see a cat, it is clearly a cat.
What you are basically saying is that the idea of an 'unconscious force' creating everything simply seems too improbable to you, so you choose to believe in something else.
Not really. The concept of an unconscious force force creating in general strikes me as stupid. Damn Inquirer, it is stupid.
Give me an example of the inanimate creating something, something other than failtfully believing all of this came from the inanimate to begin with. Can you even tell me that, or will that request go ignored like my other questions ?
I get that, and I don't have any proof that'll invalidate your belief, but in the end it still isn't anything more than common faith. You have no concrete, tangible evidence for what you believe and until you do I'm going to believe what I deem to be the default case, which is that there is no God.
I told you. Evidence is fragmented. If it wasn't, these kind of debates wouldn't exist. On top of that, you discard everything I've told you so far, moving on would be pointless in that case. But I'll say it again. Evidence is fragmented. There are breadcrumbs, that can be found in modern society, in ancient scripture ( How did they know ), what has been said, what has been done, what is happening. It can be found in sacred geometry, especially the sacred geometry that contains structure for all the elements that even science concurs with.
We have structure and functionality, the Sun and the bodies in the solar system has structure and functionality, the visible universe itself is a network. They are finding siamese galaxies that are said to obstruct the big bang theory, I'm not all that surprised to be honest.
These are things you don't preech and never will as long as your ego supports your original image. They are not enough to convince you, however, they are debunking your defaults, and they are real, by scientific standards.
He is still the only person here to make me lose my temper on these forums. Quite embarassing, but that does take some level of natural talent.
On topic, Jung's attempts at understanding might as well be a faith of it's own (but I guess that could call to question where that isn't the case).
by Spatial Mindby InquirerWhy do you continue to ignore what I am telling you?
False. I replied to everything you wrote. You never answered any of my questions though.
No, Spatial. You are completely ignoring what I am trying to tell you and you do it over and over again, tracing all the way back to our first discussion on the old forum.
You can't compare human-made objects with non-human-made objects and think the same comparison can be done on the whole universe.
But I did compare them, though I kept it within Earth's boundries. The Universe itslef is even more staggering. Another reminder, I claim that an unconscious force cannot out do a conscious force. That is how it works now, why believe the ONLY time it happend is when the Universe supposidly created itself from nothing, then by some freak accident a planet was put in place while these amazing machines ( us and countless creatures ) were formed into a harmonious system of borrowing and recycling, and we enjoy the benefits of vision and sound and other things simply because there exists light and sound.
It doesn't matter that you're comparing them because it's not interesting in light of this discussion. You can see the difference between a pile of stones and a brick wall (one is design and one isn't) but to the universe they both look all the same. Just because you are amazed by nature's intricate patterns and pretty colors, it doesn't mean that they are 'freak accidents' given the laws that this universe operates within.
You have no idea how the 'world' looks like outside of our universe, and so you cannot really say what is and what is not created by design.
But Inquirer, everything we have been talking about, including us as yet another species, has a design. Like everything else, when you see a cat, it is clearly a cat.
True, but this is just semantics. I was talking about a concious design, not DNA.
What you are basically saying is that the idea of an 'unconscious force' creating everything simply seems too improbable to you, so you choose to believe in something else.
Not really. The concept of an unconscious force force creating in general strikes me as stupid. Damn Inquirer, it is stupid.
Give me an example of the inanimate creating something, something other than failtfully believing all of this came from the inanimate to begin with. Can you even tell me that, or will that request go ignored like my other questions ?
Yes, really. You are simply rewording what I said with words that sounds like they support your cause better. You think it is stupid because it strikes you as very improbable, no?
The sand at a beach in the Caribbean was created by an unconscious force (waves <- wind) grinding and eroding stone with the patience of, well... with extreme patience. Isn't this an example of the inanimate creating something else?
I get that, and I don't have any proof that'll invalidate your belief, but in the end it still isn't anything more than common faith. You have no concrete, tangible evidence for what you believe and until you do I'm going to believe what I deem to be the default case, which is that there is no God.
I told you. Evidence is fragmented. If it wasn't, these kind of debates wouldn't exist. On top of that, you discard everything I've told you so far, moving on would be pointless in that case. But I'll say it again. Evidence is fragmented. There are breadcrumbs, that can be found in modern society, in ancient scripture ( How did they know ), what has been said, what has been done, what is happening. It can be found in sacred geometry, especially the sacred geometry that contains structure for all the elements that even science concurs with.
We have structure and functionality, the Sun and the bodies in the solar system has structure and functionality, the visible universe itself is a network. They are finding siamese galaxies that are said to obstruct the big bang theory, I'm not all that surprised to be honest.
These are things you don't preech and never will as long as your ego supports your original image. They are not enough to convince you, however, they are debunking your defaults, and they are real, by scientific standards.
There is no evidence, fragmented or not, that supports what you claim without the shadow of a doubt. You are projecting your own wishes and desires onto what you see and read, and consequently jumping to conclusions. Also, this has nothing to do with my ego, so just drop that. When I see proof enough to support what you claim, I'll simply reconsider. You bringing up my ego at every chance you get is an indication that it's a problem you seem to battle on your own.
by Spatial MindI'm curious Edvard. Are you an Atheist ? I see you representing yourself as a priest, and you keep the Jesus account in your keep respectively.
What I want to know is, would you really go against someone speaking for God for the sake of fulfilling your selfish desires against me ?
You aren't speaking for God, you narc. You're speaking for yourself, and are doing a piss poor job too. Your attempt to defend your beliefs through "logical" arguments sucks, because your logic sucks. Faith is something personal and has nothing to do with the golden ratio and whatever the fuck else you say.
Well I wasn't even going to bring up the Golden ratio this time, Edvard. Inquirer brought that. But since it's being brought up again.
Did you know that God instructed Moses and Noah to build those Arks using golden ratio measurements ? What a silly question, of course you never knew that, But yes Ed, It's in the Bible. God wanted things done his way.
You will say my logic sucks or anything negative about me. Contain yourself Burd, this makes you out to be like a raging animal with no self control, to the point where you'd go dunce just to feed the narcissism that has you so. I'm not trying to insult you, but I know I can write a masterpiece and you'd come and rip it to shreads, so I urge you to raise your potential.
Actually, my grand gestures usually reap reward in these parts. Before your heart became black toward me, you rejoiced at some of what I've done here. Now you just kick and scream in anger. Everything you have to say to me is done with profanity with the narcissist label.
It's not what goes into a man, but what comes out of him that defiles him in the presance of others.