God... Is Time.

[Boss]

No. In fact you have made it clear that the threads you open are for the purpose of proselytizing you own religion of magical spirit realms.

And you've made it clear that you are a god-hating liberal hack who is going to filibuster any thread by any conservative on any topic at any time. I've never seen you make a coherent argument on any topic. I don't think you are all that bright, to be honest.

You're getting angry and emotive. You tend to do that when its pointed out that your posts are one long infomercial as proselytizing for your homemade religion of magical Spirit realms.

I have no reason to hate your gawds or anyone else's gawds. What you find infuriating is that your proselytizing, shrouded under a burqa of pseudo-science and carelessly configured "philosophical" Stuttering and mumbling, is so easily dismantled.

I'm not angry or emotive. I am not infuriated in the least. I am getting bored with you because you're not making any point except to be a totally crazy bitch ranting against God. I've presented sheer physics and nothing more... there has been no proselytizing or philosophical pseudo-science on my part. You only attempted once to challenge my physics argument and I made you look like an idiot who doesn't know a blessed thing about Science. Since that, you've been ranting like a lunatic.

 

[MaryL]

No. In fact you have made it clear that the threads you open are for the purpose of proselytizing you own religion of magical spirit realms.

And you've made it clear that you are a god-hating liberal hack who is going to filibuster any thread by any conservative on any topic at any time. I've never seen you make a coherent argument on any topic. I don't think you are all that bright, to be honest.

LIAR!
Please link to in context quotes from me, you lying scum POS.

Well I will begin with the most recent post where you extracted certain words I said out of context to make an invalid point. I said that we cannot observe the present, we can only observe a perception of it in the past. You dropped "perception" and tried to lie and claim I said we could observe the present. So apparently you think "perception" after the fact is the same thing as directly observing something. You even tried to make that very argument about present time and our observing it in the past.

Why believe in any god at all? When we are just dust and fleeting? Who knows what god is?

 

[Hollie]

No. In fact you have made it clear that the threads you open are for the purpose of proselytizing you own religion of magical spirit realms.

And you've made it clear that you are a god-hating liberal hack who is going to filibuster any thread by any conservative on any topic at any time. I've never seen you make a coherent argument on any topic. I don't think you are all that bright, to be honest.

You're getting angry and emotive. You tend to do that when its pointed out that your posts are one long infomercial as proselytizing for your homemade religion of magical Spirit realms.

I have no reason to hate your gawds or anyone else's gawds. What you find infuriating is that your proselytizing, shrouded under a burqa of pseudo-science and carelessly configured "philosophical" Stuttering and mumbling, is so easily dismantled.

I'm not angry or emotive. I am not infuriated in the least. I am getting bored with you because you're not making any point except to be a totally crazy bitch ranting against God. I've presented sheer physics and nothing more... there has been no proselytizing or philosophical pseudo-science on my part. You only attempted once to challenge my physics argument and I made you look like an idiot who doesn't know a blessed thing about Science. Since that, you've been ranting like a lunatic.

On the contrary, you're infuriated. Your posts are frantic and emotive.

There has been only proselytizing or philosophical pseudo-science on your part. You have no "sheer physics", whatever that is, only your personal biases and some silly attempts at philosophical stuttering and mumbling because you know that there is no "sheer physics" to support your nonsense.

 

[edthecynic]

LIAR!
Please link to in context quotes from me, you lying scum POS.

Well I will begin with the most recent post where you extracted certain words I said out of context to make an invalid point. I said that we cannot observe the present, we can only observe a perception of it in the past. You dropped "perception" and tried to lie and claim I said we could observe the present. So apparently you think "perception" after the fact is the same thing as directly observing something. You even tried to make that very argument about present time and our observing it in the past.

You have no quotes so worthless lying scum that you are, you just keep on lying even after this very lie was corrected!
I extracted NO words, I dropped no words, every word was quoted, I merely highlighted the pregnant words within your entire in context quote that contradicted your lying bullshit.
It was OBVIOUSLY so devastating, in the present, that you know you can only lie, and lie you do!

 

[Boss]

No. In fact you have made it clear that the threads you open are for the purpose of proselytizing you own religion of magical spirit realms.

And you've made it clear that you are a god-hating liberal hack who is going to filibuster any thread by any conservative on any topic at any time. I've never seen you make a coherent argument on any topic. I don't think you are all that bright, to be honest.

LIAR!
Please link to in context quotes from me, you lying scum POS.

Well I will begin with the most recent post where you extracted certain words I said out of context to make an invalid point. I said that we cannot observe the present, we can only observe a perception of it in the past. You dropped "perception" and tried to lie and claim I said we could observe the present. So apparently you think "perception" after the fact is the same thing as directly observing something. You even tried to make that very argument about present time and our observing it in the past.

Why believe in any god at all? When we are just dust and fleeting? Who knows what god is?

That's a really good question, Mary. I can't speak for anyone but myself. I couldn't just have blind faith in God. I realize a tremendous benefit from having a strong spiritual connection to what I call God. If there was no benefit, I would lose faith... it's as simple as that.

 

[Boss]

LIAR!
Please link to in context quotes from me, you lying scum POS.

Well I will begin with the most recent post where you extracted certain words I said out of context to make an invalid point. I said that we cannot observe the present, we can only observe a perception of it in the past. You dropped "perception" and tried to lie and claim I said we could observe the present. So apparently you think "perception" after the fact is the same thing as directly observing something. You even tried to make that very argument about present time and our observing it in the past.

You have no quotes so worthless lying scum that you are, you just keep on lying even after this very lie was corrected!
I extracted NO words, I dropped no words, every word was quoted, I merely highlighted the pregnant words within your entire in context quote that contradicted your lying bullshit.
It was OBVIOUSLY so devastating, in the present, that you know you can only lie, and lie you do!

There were no "pregnant" words... whatever the fuck that is supposed to mean. You highlighted words so you could take what I said out of context. You didn't contradict anything, you haven't shown anything I've said to be a lie, you have only demonstrated the lengths you will go to in order to disagree with someone who doesn't share your political philosophy.

 

[Boss]

No. In fact you have made it clear that the threads you open are for the purpose of proselytizing you own religion of magical spirit realms.

And you've made it clear that you are a god-hating liberal hack who is going to filibuster any thread by any conservative on any topic at any time. I've never seen you make a coherent argument on any topic. I don't think you are all that bright, to be honest.

You're getting angry and emotive. You tend to do that when its pointed out that your posts are one long infomercial as proselytizing for your homemade religion of magical Spirit realms.

I have no reason to hate your gawds or anyone else's gawds. What you find infuriating is that your proselytizing, shrouded under a burqa of pseudo-science and carelessly configured "philosophical" Stuttering and mumbling, is so easily dismantled.

I'm not angry or emotive. I am not infuriated in the least. I am getting bored with you because you're not making any point except to be a totally crazy bitch ranting against God. I've presented sheer physics and nothing more... there has been no proselytizing or philosophical pseudo-science on my part. You only attempted once to challenge my physics argument and I made you look like an idiot who doesn't know a blessed thing about Science. Since that, you've been ranting like a lunatic.

On the contrary, you're infuriated. Your posts are frantic and emotive.

There has been only proselytizing or philosophical pseudo-science on your part. You have no "sheer physics", whatever that is, only your personal biases and some silly attempts at philosophical stuttering and mumbling because you know that there is no "sheer physics" to support your nonsense.

You just want the last word, which is part of your tactics. Rant and rave until the other person gives up and then you can declare victory by default. Sorry to disappoint you dear, I am not budging.

When I state that present time cannot be observed, that is a physics argument, not proselytizing. Sorry you are too stupid to understand the difference.

 

[MaryL]

No. In fact you have made it clear that the threads you open are for the purpose of proselytizing you own religion of magical spirit realms.

And you've made it clear that you are a god-hating liberal hack who is going to filibuster any thread by any conservative on any topic at any time. I've never seen you make a coherent argument on any topic. I don't think you are all that bright, to be honest.

LIAR!
Please link to in context quotes from me, you lying scum POS.

Well I will begin with the most recent post where you extracted certain words I said out of context to make an invalid point. I said that we cannot observe the present, we can only observe a perception of it in the past. You dropped "perception" and tried to lie and claim I said we could observe the present. So apparently you think "perception" after the fact is the same thing as directly observing something. You even tried to make that very argument about present time and our observing it in the past.

Why believe in any god at all? When we are just dust and fleeting? Who knows what god is?

That's a really good question, Mary. I can't speak for anyone but myself. I couldn't just have blind faith in God. I realize a tremendous benefit from having a strong spiritual connection to what I call God. If there was no benefit, I would lose faith... it's as simple as that.

Were is god now? Vacation? I held my dying father in my arms, CPR, I prayed. Like the stones said, cant always get what you want...

 

[Hollie]

No. In fact you have made it clear that the threads you open are for the purpose of proselytizing you own religion of magical spirit realms.

And you've made it clear that you are a god-hating liberal hack who is going to filibuster any thread by any conservative on any topic at any time. I've never seen you make a coherent argument on any topic. I don't think you are all that bright, to be honest.

You're getting angry and emotive. You tend to do that when its pointed out that your posts are one long infomercial as proselytizing for your homemade religion of magical Spirit realms.

I have no reason to hate your gawds or anyone else's gawds. What you find infuriating is that your proselytizing, shrouded under a burqa of pseudo-science and carelessly configured "philosophical" Stuttering and mumbling, is so easily dismantled.

I'm not angry or emotive. I am not infuriated in the least. I am getting bored with you because you're not making any point except to be a totally crazy bitch ranting against God. I've presented sheer physics and nothing more... there has been no proselytizing or philosophical pseudo-science on my part. You only attempted once to challenge my physics argument and I made you look like an idiot who doesn't know a blessed thing about Science. Since that, you've been ranting like a lunatic.

On the contrary, you're infuriated. Your posts are frantic and emotive.

There has been only proselytizing or philosophical pseudo-science on your part. You have no "sheer physics", whatever that is, only your personal biases and some silly attempts at philosophical stuttering and mumbling because you know that there is no "sheer physics" to support your nonsense.

You just want the last word, which is part of your tactics. Rant and rave until the other person gives up and then you can declare victory by default. Sorry to disappoint you dear, I am not budging.

When I state that present time cannot be observed, that is a physics argument, not proselytizing. Sorry you are too stupid to understand the difference.

I'm just not convinced that your "sheer physics" is anything but some invention of yours. Sorry to burst your bubble, sweetie, but your "sheer physics" amounts to nothing more than your usual "..... because I say so", meme. I'm sorry your proselytizing is ineffective and ineffectual. If you're hoping to, at some point, make a coherent argument using something more than your invention of "sheer physics", do so. Otherwise, I'm perfectly confident that real physics, as opposed to your bastardized version, can be used to explore our present perceptions.

 

[Boss]

Were is god now? Vacation? I held my dying father in my arms, CPR, I prayed. Like the stones said, cant always get what you want...

Again Mary, you are not contemplating God in the proper context. You want to view God as some kind of magic genie who grants your wishes and makes things happen that you wish to happen. All I can say is, it's a good thing you don't believe in that God because that God doesn't exist.

I'm not here to tell you what you should believe in or what religion to follow, that's not my deal. I don't even know if you would realize the same benefits from spirituality as I have, I just know what has worked for me.

 

[Boss]

I'm just not convinced that your "sheer physics" is anything but some invention of yours. Sorry to burst your bubble, sweetie, but your "sheer physics" amounts to nothing more than your usual...

Well let's stop here before you tear into another rant. MY argument was that we cannot observe the actual moment of the present time. However you choose to label "present time" is up to you, we still cannot observe it because physics has to happen first, and that takes time. Now, I don't know how to convince someone that light travels at the speed of light or that electrical impulses have to travel to our brains... if you are too illiterate to understand that, I don't know how to explain it or convince you of it if you don't believe it. All I can do is tell you it's sheer physics.

 

[Hollie]

I'm just not convinced that your "sheer physics" is anything but some invention of yours. Sorry to burst your bubble, sweetie, but your "sheer physics" amounts to nothing more than your usual...

Well let's stop here before you tear into another rant. MY argument was that we cannot observe the actual moment of the present time. However you choose to label "present time" is up to you, we still cannot observe it because physics has to happen first, and that takes time. Now, I don't know how to convince someone that light travels at the speed of light or that electrical impulses have to travel to our brains... if you are too illiterate to understand that, I don't know how to explain it or convince you of it if you don't believe it. All I can do is tell you it's sheer physics.

Yes. Let's stop with your pseudo-science. Your version of physics is suffering from a need you have to press your religious agenda. I shouldn't have to convince anyone that an instantaneous perception of the present is what we experience but then again, your version of physics requires an appeal to gawds=time. How you come to that belief is never addressed. I'm afraid this thread is yet another thread of yours intended to gain converts to your new fangled religion but using some twisted pseudo-science you call "sheer physics" is obviously not working.

 

[Boss]

Yes. Let's stop with your pseudo-science. Your version of physics is suffering from a need you have to press your religious agenda. I shouldn't have to convince anyone that an instantaneous perception of the present is what we experience but then again, your version of physics requires an appeal to gawds=time. How you come to that belief is never addressed. I'm afraid this thread is yet another thread of yours intended to gain converts to your new fangled religion but using some twisted pseudo-science you call "sheer physics" is obviously not working.

Hollie you can sit here and post one lying response after another about what I've presented, it's not flying because people can read the thread and see that you're lying. The OP specifically addresses that this is NOT a theological debate. I've made that point patiently to you and others several times. You can keep on claiming it, but you're just flat out lying through your teeth.

I explained the title of the thread in the OP and back on page 1. Your lying and insisting I haven't, isn't going to work because people can read the thread and see who is being honest and who is lying. I'm not trying to convert anyone or promote any religion. My argument has nothing to do with religion or religious beliefs. It's 100% textbook physics that any high school graduate should comprehend.

Nothing we have perception of is instantaneous. You can keep saying it... but it's just not true. Every form of perception we have is bound by the laws of physics and physical nature. Light has to travel, electrical impulses have to travel and it takes time to happen. If it takes time, it's not instant. I've repeatedly challenged you to present some scientific or physics evidence to support your argument and you've failed to do that. Instead, you seem to just want to keep repeating your lies and misleading people about what I've said. I guess you think this is eventually going to pay off, but it isn't because it's not true.

 

[Hollie]

Yes. Let's stop with your pseudo-science. Your version of physics is suffering from a need you have to press your religious agenda. I shouldn't have to convince anyone that an instantaneous perception of the present is what we experience but then again, your version of physics requires an appeal to gawds=time. How you come to that belief is never addressed. I'm afraid this thread is yet another thread of yours intended to gain converts to your new fangled religion but using some twisted pseudo-science you call "sheer physics" is obviously not working.

Hollie you can sit here and post one lying response after another about what I've presented, it's not flying because people can read the thread and see that you're lying. The OP specifically addresses that this is NOT a theological debate. I've made that point patiently to you and others several times. You can keep on claiming it, but you're just flat out lying through your teeth.

I explained the title of the thread in the OP and back on page 1. Your lying and insisting I haven't, isn't going to work because people can read the thread and see who is being honest and who is lying. I'm not trying to convert anyone or promote any religion. My argument has nothing to do with religion or religious beliefs. It's 100% textbook physics that any high school graduate should comprehend.

Nothing we have perception of is instantaneous. You can keep saying it... but it's just not true. Every form of perception we have is bound by the laws of physics and physical nature. Light has to travel, electrical impulses have to travel and it takes time to happen. If it takes time, it's not instant. I've repeatedly challenged you to present some scientific or physics evidence to support your argument and you've failed to do that. Instead, you seem to just want to keep repeating your lies and misleading people about what I've said. I guess you think this is eventually going to pay off, but it isn't because it's not true.

Pontificating isn't going to hide your religious agenda, whether you throw a burqa on it or not. Gawd=time is not a science issue, it's you pressing your religious agenda.

Your argument has nothing to do with physics, at least not any physics known outside of your religious agenda. We certainly do have a perception of the present and none of your pseudo-scientific appeals to gawds=time has done anything to refute that.

Your again, typically, getting incensed that your religious agenda is called for exactly that: you pressing for converts to some gawds you can't define in any meaningful way. You're free to repeat your lies and hope to mislead people with your pseudo-science and appeals to some "sheer physics" you have invented.

Are you surprised you have no converts yet?

 

[Boss]

Yes. Let's stop with your pseudo-science. Your version of physics is suffering from a need you have to press your religious agenda. I shouldn't have to convince anyone that an instantaneous perception of the present is what we experience but then again, your version of physics requires an appeal to gawds=time. How you come to that belief is never addressed. I'm afraid this thread is yet another thread of yours intended to gain converts to your new fangled religion but using some twisted pseudo-science you call "sheer physics" is obviously not working.

Hollie you can sit here and post one lying response after another about what I've presented, it's not flying because people can read the thread and see that you're lying. The OP specifically addresses that this is NOT a theological debate. I've made that point patiently to you and others several times. You can keep on claiming it, but you're just flat out lying through your teeth.

I explained the title of the thread in the OP and back on page 1. Your lying and insisting I haven't, isn't going to work because people can read the thread and see who is being honest and who is lying. I'm not trying to convert anyone or promote any religion. My argument has nothing to do with religion or religious beliefs. It's 100% textbook physics that any high school graduate should comprehend.

Nothing we have perception of is instantaneous. You can keep saying it... but it's just not true. Every form of perception we have is bound by the laws of physics and physical nature. Light has to travel, electrical impulses have to travel and it takes time to happen. If it takes time, it's not instant. I've repeatedly challenged you to present some scientific or physics evidence to support your argument and you've failed to do that. Instead, you seem to just want to keep repeating your lies and misleading people about what I've said. I guess you think this is eventually going to pay off, but it isn't because it's not true.

Pontificating isn't going to hide your religious agenda, whether you throw a burqa on it or not. Gawd=time is not a science issue, it's you pressing your religious agenda.

Your argument has nothing to do with physics, at least not any physics known outside of your religious agenda. We certainly do have a perception of the present and none of your pseudo-scientific appeals to gawds=time has done anything to refute that.

Your again, typically, getting incensed that your religious agenda is called for exactly that: you pressing for converts to some gawds you can't define in any meaningful way. You're free to repeat your lies and hope to mislead people with your pseudo-science and appeals to some "sheer physics" you have invented.

Are you surprised you have no converts yet?

LMAO.. More lies? Hollie, this ain't the Democrat National Convention.

There is no religious agenda here. We do have a perception of the present, never denied this. Our perception is happening in the past, a part of history. Time in the present is ahead of our perception. If physics is true, it's not possible for us to ever observe the present.

 

[Hollie]

Yes. Let's stop with your pseudo-science. Your version of physics is suffering from a need you have to press your religious agenda. I shouldn't have to convince anyone that an instantaneous perception of the present is what we experience but then again, your version of physics requires an appeal to gawds=time. How you come to that belief is never addressed. I'm afraid this thread is yet another thread of yours intended to gain converts to your new fangled religion but using some twisted pseudo-science you call "sheer physics" is obviously not working.

Hollie you can sit here and post one lying response after another about what I've presented, it's not flying because people can read the thread and see that you're lying. The OP specifically addresses that this is NOT a theological debate. I've made that point patiently to you and others several times. You can keep on claiming it, but you're just flat out lying through your teeth.

I explained the title of the thread in the OP and back on page 1. Your lying and insisting I haven't, isn't going to work because people can read the thread and see who is being honest and who is lying. I'm not trying to convert anyone or promote any religion. My argument has nothing to do with religion or religious beliefs. It's 100% textbook physics that any high school graduate should comprehend.

Nothing we have perception of is instantaneous. You can keep saying it... but it's just not true. Every form of perception we have is bound by the laws of physics and physical nature. Light has to travel, electrical impulses have to travel and it takes time to happen. If it takes time, it's not instant. I've repeatedly challenged you to present some scientific or physics evidence to support your argument and you've failed to do that. Instead, you seem to just want to keep repeating your lies and misleading people about what I've said. I guess you think this is eventually going to pay off, but it isn't because it's not true.

Pontificating isn't going to hide your religious agenda, whether you throw a burqa on it or not. Gawd=time is not a science issue, it's you pressing your religious agenda.

Your argument has nothing to do with physics, at least not any physics known outside of your religious agenda. We certainly do have a perception of the present and none of your pseudo-scientific appeals to gawds=time has done anything to refute that.

Your again, typically, getting incensed that your religious agenda is called for exactly that: you pressing for converts to some gawds you can't define in any meaningful way. You're free to repeat your lies and hope to mislead people with your pseudo-science and appeals to some "sheer physics" you have invented.

Are you surprised you have no converts yet?

LMAO.. More lies? Hollie, this ain't the Democrat National Convention.

There is no religious agenda here. We do have a perception of the present, never denied this. Our perception is happening in the past, a part of history. Time in the present is ahead of our perception. If physics is true, it's not possible for us to ever observe the present.

Ah. Gawds=time has no suggestion of a religious agenda. This ain't your bible class, dear.

We of course do have a perception of the present. That perception Is an instantaneous moment in time. I'm afraid that none of your pseudo-science based attempts to press some religious agenda are going to salvage that bankrupt argument you have failed to make, for dozens of pages now.

 

[BreezeWood]

we can't observe the present ....

boy, you are thick - your BODY can not observe the present, by your account of physics ... that does not include the individuals Spirit or God.


are you saying when the physiology perishes and were the Spirit to survive it would be BLIND ?


* your politics is an underlying thread to your conversation, and is a bearing for the final outcome to the Triumph of Good vs Evil and matters but deny it anyways is probably in your best interest.

.

No, YOU are the thick one. Spirits and Gods are not physical properties we can measure with physics. It's pointless to try and have a physical argument for spiritual things because they don't work.

WE cannot observe the present... PERHAPS our SPIRITS can? ....I can't prove that with physics!!!!

And this is not "by my account of physics" it's just by plain physics as humans understand physics... people don't have "accounts" of physics. People can't invent and create their own versions of physics. So how about stop spreading lies about what I've said and grow the fuck up?

And this is not "by my account of physics" it's just by plain physics as humans understand physics... people don't have "accounts" of physics.

WE cannot observe the present... PERHAPS our SPIRITS can? ....I can't prove that with physics!!!!
.

that is exactly what you are doing, using an account of physics - by using the plural we when generalizing what is observable in the present tense and doing so implying all possibilities when in fact you are only speaking about the physiology of an individual and not the cognizance that you state yourself is unknown (to you).

cognizance = time =/= physiology

cognizance does not have a pulse yet you assuredly speak loudly of your own existence ... your account of Physics is short sided.

.

 

[Boss]

Ah. Gawds=time has no suggestion of a religious agenda. This ain't your bible class, dear.

We of course do have a perception of the present. That perception Is an instantaneous moment in time. I'm afraid that none of your pseudo-science based attempts to press some religious agenda are going to salvage that bankrupt argument you have failed to make, for dozens of pages now.

Ah. Gawds=time has no suggestion of a religious agenda.

Perhaps, if that were my argument. But you don't even have the thread title correct, that's how dumb you are.

We of course do have a perception of the present.

Hollie, where are you seeing me post that we don't have a perception of the present?

That perception Is an instantaneous moment in time.

No it's not. Can't possibly be if you believe in physics. Nothing can "happen" instantly, it all takes time.

 

[Hollie]

Ah. Gawds=time has no suggestion of a religious agenda. This ain't your bible class, dear.

We of course do have a perception of the present. That perception Is an instantaneous moment in time. I'm afraid that none of your pseudo-science based attempts to press some religious agenda are going to salvage that bankrupt argument you have failed to make, for dozens of pages now.

Ah. Gawds=time has no suggestion of a religious agenda.

Perhaps, if that were my argument. But you don't even have the thread title correct, that's how dumb you are.

We of course do have a perception of the present.

Hollie, where are you seeing me post that we don't have a perception of the present?

That perception Is an instantaneous moment in time.

No it's not. Can't possibly be if you believe in physics. Nothing can "happen" instantly, it all takes time.

It's convenient that you want to disconnect your religious fundamentalism from the thread context but it's a bit late for that. Perhaps if you didn't make continual references to your version of gawds, you might be taken seriously when you whine about being questioned regarding your obvious motives.

And yes, we certainly do have an instantaneous perception of the present. Lacking a science background, (while pressing your religious agenda), you have difficulty understanding that. You might try reading some material on physics for a better understanding of the subject matter.

Other than that, nothing you have offered so far does anything to support your religious conviction concerning the thread proposal gawds=time.

 

[PostmodernProph]

Why believe in any god at all? When we are just dust and fleeting? Who knows what god is?

/shrug......why believe we are just dust and fleeting?........