261

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Who created god?

« on: December 20, 2018, 11:47:05 PM »

I’ve had full psychedelic experiences sober and with the aid of hallucinogenic drugs. But none of that means that alternate realities or extra dimensions exist unless you happen to think that humans have perfect cognition in regards to their sensory perception. What you are saying is absolutely pseudoscience as you are trying to make something with no substantiation sound credible by using scientific terms. Don’t get me wrong, I think that anything that diminishes your sense of self-importance or gives you intuitive glimpses in to other perceptions is extremely powerful and profound. I just wouldn’t make the mistake of calling it anything concrete.

I'm not claiming that alternate realities exist like in the TV series "Sliders" (which is an awesome show, btw!), but as far as dimensions go, it has been theorized by the scientific community that other dimensions do, in fact, exist - this is not pseudo-science. It is scientific theory until proven wrong. However, this is also not what I am talking about. I didn't blast off into an alternate reality or an alternate dimension. I don't know where I was, consciously. I know that time did not exist. I am pretty sure that "I" did not exist. I know that I did not physically change or teleport to some other reality. It was an experience in my brain. Much like a chemically induced coma. Your physical presence remains, but your conscious existence dies. My conscious existence died and was replaced by something unexplainable - at least in that moment. I'm not sure if that happens for coma patients, but if it did, what a trip that would be. Instead of experiencing myself, I seemed to be experiencing everything else. No body. No time. Nothing but a universe. What a trip!

262

Science & Alternative Science / Re: Chemtrails

« on: December 20, 2018, 06:51:22 PM »

My whole take of the issue is that pollution exists, it is being dealt with, and that is all we can do.

If there really was chemtrails they would have, by now given the length of time of their supposed existence, had a deleterious effect on all of society. Any attorney filing suits for environmental damages, animal and human deaths, etc. (such as Erin Brockovich) would have surely picked up the cause and won the case by now.

That makes sense. Whatever chemical they are spraying would probably have been found and analyzed.

Isn't this sort of a moot point?

With or without chem trails, we are putting enough toxins in the air through factories, cars, crop dusters, jet fuel, etc., etc.... Unless they are spraying cyanide or some other biochemical agent into the air, there are far more pressing issues to worry about that have attainable solutions.

As for whether or not I believe in chem trails, I don't necessarily believe they exist, but I also wouldn't be surprised if there was some truth to it.

Regarding the 'clouds' that are often formed from jets and airliners, this can be scientifically validated as condensation which turns into ice crystals at that altitude and forms a lingering cloud. Whether or not this phenomenon occurs is a factor of air pressure, temperature, and altitude (also related to air pressure). It is not due to deliberate cloud seeding technology or chemicals (other than bi-products of combusted jet fuel).

263

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Who created god?

« on: December 20, 2018, 06:30:18 PM »

I know it sounds superstitious or crazy

That is exactly what it sounds like. More specifically, it sounds like someone's mind looking for excuses that'll make it feel better in response to an unexplained event.

So when I say it is "not really explainable", you interpret that as an excuse to explain something un-explainable? This, my friend, is circular reasoning.

And trust me, 6 years after the 'event', my mind still doesn't "feel better" about it.


P.S. - Please, PLEASE, don't assume that I am some kind of bible-thumping, religious, evangelical.... I most certainly am not! Although I have respect for those who are... unless you are a west burrow baptist... then we got beef!

264

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Who created god?

« on: December 20, 2018, 05:56:27 PM »

Speaking of the limited human mind, it seems odd to assume multiple hidden dimensions.  All that is required to literally blow our mind is to be able to move freely through our single time dimension.  I know it feels good to feel like you are tapping in to a deeper mystery in the universe, but the extra dimension stuff is way too much like Deepak Chopra who uses pseudo-scientific talk to sound "deep".

If you have ever lost 'yourself', your consciousness, while still being awake, you can "get a taste" of a dimension outside our perception. It's not really explainable by science, and it's not a psuedo-science. There are forces out there that are not knowable with our senses and mind. I know it sounds superstitious or crazy, but until you have had an "out-of-body" experience, I'm not so sure you have a leg to stand on.

265

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: December 20, 2018, 01:46:10 PM »

Yeah, I think Rushy is assuming a level of education on the issues that most of his base, most any voter really, frankly doesn’t have. It’s more likely that people liked him for reasons such as, “He speaks like I do!” or that they believed he would boost manufacturing jobs back.

I don't want to insult anyone or be presumptuous about someone's intelligence, but since I spend the majority of my waking life surrounded by intellectuals (professors, scientists, etc.), I feel confident in saying there is a statistical significance correlating educated people with being anti-trump. That isn't to say uneducated people tend to support trump, but it does say that educated people tend NOT to support trump.

One should also consider other factors, however, such as having the means to watch television and pay attention to media. Educated people may be more likely to be in a situation to observe media and be suckered into it, for instance.

266

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Who created god?

« on: December 20, 2018, 01:17:36 PM »

I was with you until you said "God is nothing" immediately after a list of things "God is".

Was that one just waxing lyrical?

'Nothing' is still 'something'

The absence of anything is still a thing. Everything is not complete without nothing.

267

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Who created god?

« on: December 19, 2018, 09:58:21 PM »

But the answer was for Dad and Lord Dave, not you.

Clearly not for you, given your last response.

I've had a similar enlightenment, and I realized that to say there is a god, is to assume God is something comprehendible. God is not comprehendible, at least not by our 3-dimensional perspective.

What I realized is that God is all. When God says "I am that I am", it means God just is. No further definition needed. God isn't a puppeteer in outer space controlling the universe. God IS the universe. God is us. God is everything. God is nothing.

268

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: December 19, 2018, 09:31:21 PM »

Trump is doing so many things right that even Fox has started to hate on him quite a bit. I love it. I love anyone that each media channel absolutely despises, because clearly they're doing something right.

As much as I hate to admit it (since, well, you and I never agree  ), I tend to agree with this philosophy. Media isn't just about free speech, and "freedom of the press"... They have an agenda, and they mean to persuade their viewers. This makes it hard to put stock into any politician since, the most genuine, honest, politicians aren't heard of - the media doesn't get good ratings by talking about honesty.

269

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: December 19, 2018, 07:53:58 PM »

My question is: why do conservatives support Trump?

What is conservative, or even republican, about Donald Trump? The fact that he hates immigrants, poor people, women, and has probably never had to worry about paying his electric bill does not make him some kind of conservative saint that will "Make America Great Again". Republicans are fooling themselves into thinking Trump will bring some sort of magical change to the political climate, or put a stop to careless spending of our government, or bring some sort of republican value back to American culture.

He's a misogynistic bigot who hates foreigners - he's a showboat. Just because he has an attractive European wife doesn't make him inclusive. His wife won't even hold his hand in public. It's appalling that in the midst of a "me too" movement with dozens of famed, wealthy people being fired, or jailed, that Trump gets to sit at the top with his high-hat on and is untouchable - even though Trump has personally admitted to being the instigator of multiple "me too" allegations.

Is Trump the example we want our children to follow? Allowing him to be in power says that it is.

The sad thing is, it's not just Trump who is creating this destructive image.... it's all of the politicians who sit up there in washington bickering back and forth. It's all the media outlets spewing ruthless tales. It's us common folk who aren't paying attention.

Why are republicans voting against their own interests? Trump is not a conservative. Trump doesn't know about the struggles of a common farmer - Trump has enacted policies that hurt farmers, yet they vote for him. Trump doesn't know about inner-city marginalization - poor and unprivileged. Trump doesn't know the thousands of families he has personally divided by his "executive orders" to deport and isolate immigrants. Immigrants who work jobs that Trump probably doesn't even know exist - the worst of the worst kinds of jobs.

Furthermore, I cannot trust a word he says. Trump blatantly lies, or just spouts nonsense because he doesn't know what else to say. I am embarrassed for Trump when he speaks. Worse, I am embarrassed to be an American. Is this the great America republicans voted for?... I certainly hope not. I am not conservative, nor liberal. Not republican nor democratic. I am for freedom, liberty, justice, peace, and union. Trump has proven that he is capable of taking away all of these things. No, Trump does not want to MAGA. Trump wants to MA his, and he is on his way to doing just that.

270

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: November 23, 2018, 03:36:47 AM »

So democracy doesn't work when the guy you don't like gets elected?

First off, majority of America voted the other way... yet somehow this neanderthol gets elected? Did democracy really work? The same thing happened when George W was elected. Popular vote, and even final electoral vote went to Al Gore.... I wonder how different our policies on energy and conservation would be if Gore had won (been allowed the title)...

Second off, sometimes democracy fails. It's a theory, same as anything else, it will sometimes produce bad results. That doesn't mean it doesn't work.

P.S. - Please do not mistake me for an anarchist. I still vote, and follow law and order even IF I do not believe in the leadership that has overtaken this great country.

271

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: November 23, 2018, 03:02:31 AM »

This human being called Donald Trump will never be my president... except that somehow that is the title he has been declared worthy of by the country I call home. How shall I call this my home when it has declared a head-of-house whom I cannot recognize? One whom I cannot morally or ethically accept even though it is my patriotic duty to do so. What is this blasphemy we call "Trump"? MAGA??? What in the name of god have we done?

272

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Free Will disproved

« on: November 23, 2018, 02:55:36 AM »

There's an uncertainty principle at work in our existence. There's a point so far away in any combination of distance, size and time that there's a sort of wave form collapse into pure potentiality. For us to measure it, we have to artificially pin down one aspect to measure any other. There's a limit to what we can know so beyond that limit we get to make up what ever we want.


If determinism really freaked me out I would take comfort in the opposite, more new age ideology that the observer is part of the observed. That consciousness is relative and without it, nothing manifests either backward or forward in time. These people say that not only do we have free will but the world around us is actually a quantum mechanical manifestation of our own.

As an experiment, we could get 200 determinists and 200 followers of Deepak Choprah fight in a melee armed with short pieces of pipe to beat the crap out of each other. If the determinists win, it shows the outcome was predestine from the beginning of time. If the Choprah followers win, it proves they manifested their outcome from consciousness. It works with our religions, the one with the most resources and followers gets to declare universal truth.


I think my post also proves the existence and role of Useless Tautology in our universe. Useless Tautology ( abbreviated UT) is the force that accelerates the flat earth upward creating the gravity and physics we experience.

Damn, I like it.

273

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: The US Northeast is Too White

« on: November 17, 2018, 12:48:50 AM »

Isn't all of America too white, though?

I don't follow the logic in saying a society is "too" anything. That's no different than saying Africa is too black, or china is too asian. Nebraska is too "corn and tractor", West Virginia is too "hill-billy". Earth is too human...

274

Flat Earth Theory / Meteorites and the dome

« on: November 04, 2018, 10:25:02 PM »

I could not find anything in the wiki about this, so I'm curious; how does FET explain the existence of meteorites and the event of meteor showers?

From my observation, a meteor, as it enters our atmosphere/plane explodes with tremendous force and burns up into nothing.

What is going on with the dome as this happens? Do meteorites come from above the dome and poke holes in it just before they plunge into earth, or do they somehow form underneith the dome and plummit downwards suddenly for some unknown reason?

Is there another explanation?

275

Science & Alternative Science / Re: Do you trust your senses?

« on: October 28, 2018, 01:39:42 PM »

I don't trust my hearing at all.  After an inner ear hemorrhage many years ago, I hear auditory hallucinations on a daily basis.  All my research on the subject, and confirmed by the doctors that checked me out, say that all the strange sounds are being generated by my brain.  My ear doesn't respond to sounds at all anymore and since all the normal auditory inputs are now gone the brain just generates random sounds.  It's maybe kind of like the process of interpolation where the brain is trying to make some sense out of nothing.  Kind of like I try to do here.  At least my 'disability' can be useful when communicating with my wife.  It's easy to claim that I didn't hear her say to 'take out the garbage'.

Thank you for sharing! That's quite interesting. There is a similar effect that causes the sensation known as "seeing stars". It's when the part of the brain that interprets visual input starts firing randomly, producing apparent light spots in our vision, but we all know the "stars" aren't really there.

276

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: The US Northeast is Too White

« on: October 26, 2018, 11:54:13 PM »

Rushy, there is a key difference between saying biology is a factor, and saying biology is "the only" factor. I did not say biology was the only factor as I have repetedly said in previous post - here's another example of you straw manning and attempting to get me to debate what I never claimed. Congrats, you succeeded. And here we are again of topic, thanks.

Thork, you said "accept people" in a previous post. Meaning don't reject them, that is what I based my assumption on when I said I agreed and you were right.

Perhaps you meant "except people"?

Either way, I stand by my regards.

By definition, the only factor in race is biological, that's what makes it a race. If whatever you're describing isn't biological in nature, it's an ethnicity. This is why you confused "African American" with a race in your previous posts, because you still haven't figured out the difference between ethnicity and race. Any race can sit inside an ethnicity and sometimes the two correlate, but they're not the same thing.

Okay, maybe we can meet half-way... Is it fair to say that our assignments of race are based on society and culture, while the racial terms themselves are an attempt to segregate our biology?

277

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: The US Northeast is Too White

« on: October 26, 2018, 06:28:53 PM »

You could also argue that we all descended from apes. Or that we all descended from sea creatures. But I like to think I am a little different to a sea slug. We are not all the same. No hard data claims that we are.

Correct. This further illustrates the ambiguity of racial classifications, and close examination of history will lead to the conslusion that our racial categories as we know them are based upon social discrimination as we have tried to define our biology through ethnocentric eyes. Hence, race is more about society and culture than it is about biology.

Furthermore, studies have shown there are actually more biological differences within a given "race" than there are between "races".

278

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: The US Northeast is Too White

« on: October 26, 2018, 05:50:28 PM »

Now, an African male and European female meet and have a baby. What "race" is this baby? Are they caucasoid? Negroid?

Half caucasoid and half negroid, mixed race.
Are you playing dumb on purpose?

No need for insults here, we're all adults, aren't we?

In this sense, we are all "mixed" any more... Unless maybe if you belong to the royal family... They might be all inbred.

That makes it awefully hard to identify race doesn't it? So then race classification becomes quite arbitrary and subject to bias. Some will say you are x race based on y percentage of genes. Others will say, oh no, their skin is too white to be negroid.

I believe if you go back in history far enough, you will find that we are all decendence from Africa. Does this make us all negroid? If it's strictly about biology then I'd say our racial categories are pretty far off from our origins.

P.s. - I'm assuming that people who read this will understand that if we all descended from Africa our biology would have been very similar, and there was less biological differences back then.

279

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: The US Northeast is Too White

« on: October 26, 2018, 02:32:03 AM »

Rushy, there is a key difference between saying biology is a factor, and saying biology is "the only" factor. I did not say biology was the only factor as I have repetedly said in previous post - here's another example of you straw manning and attempting to get me to debate what I never claimed. Congrats, you succeeded. And here we are again of topic, thanks.

Thork, you said "accept people" in a previous post. Meaning don't reject them, that is what I based my assumption on when I said I agreed and you were right.

Perhaps you meant "except people"?

Either way, I stand by my regards.

280

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: The US Northeast is Too White

« on: October 25, 2018, 09:00:44 PM »

If someone's race can change depending where they live, how is it solely based on biology when biology does not change?

The name for their biology can change, their biology cannot. You can't swap from white to black just by moving to another country. You can't become another race merely by traveling.

Race classifications are inherently determined by biological characteristics, this is indeed true, and I am not disputing this. The assignments of those classifications can and do change, however. The assignments of race that we give people is determined by society, which is why a person can be considered "white" in one geographical region, and "black" in another region. It is not the physical characteristics that are changing, but rather societies determination of what we call someone with certain biological characteristics that can change. In this regard, a person's race is determined by a multitude of factors, not just biology.

Therefore, a person's race can change, and it is more than just biology.

Thork and Junker are right, if we just accept the "human race", we wouldn't be having this discussion, and racism would quite likely be non-existent as we could consider everyone equally human. It would be silly to say that one human race is greater than another human race.