Open Minded Agnostic Atheist

[Hollie]

The gods of earlier cultures were quantitatively different from your gods. It's theistic arrogance to suggest earlier cultures confused their Gods with your Gods.

I am not suggesting otherwise. As I have said countless times, God meets us where we are.

Which Gods meet us? If a Hindu meets Gods that are a part of his/her culture, it's certainly possible that you have been misled as to the efficacy of the Judeo-Christian Gods. The Hindu Gods are much older, therefore senior to your Gods.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Hollie, I know you've been involved in (rebutting) "creation science" nonsense here. I gather I've got ding confused with some other nuisance peddling that nonsense here like crazy for a while. Any idea who that was? Fort Fun was around too. If ding wasn't the main culprit he was largely supporting the idiot, I'm sure.

May have been "LittleNipper" prior to changing his name.

 

[ding]

Hollie, I know you've been involved in (rebutting) "creation science" nonsense here. I gather I've got ding confused with some other nuisance peddling that nonsense here like crazy for a while. Any idea who that was? Fort Fun was around too. If ding wasn't the main culprit he was largely supporting the idiot, I'm sure.

May have been "LittleNipper" prior to changing his name.

It's James Bond, and no, I didn't support him. He probably likes me less than you do.

But please do correct me if you can. Please do show us your science prowess. I'd like to see it.

 

[Grumblenuts]

James Bond.. Indeed! Mea culpa. And feel free to continue blowing it out your ass. You're on a roll. Don't let little ol' me stop ya.

 

[ding]

James Bond.. Indeed! Mea culpa. And feel free to continue blowing it out your ass. You're on a roll. Don't let little ol' me stop ya.

 

[Meriweather]

Which Gods meet us? If a Hindu meets Gods that are a part of his/her culture, it's certainly possible that you have been misled as to the efficacy of the Judeo-Christian Gods. The Hindu Gods are much older, therefore senior to your Gods.

Shrug, so I am inferior to Hindus. As I said before, God meets us where we are. He doesn't mind bending down to my level.

 

[BreezeWood]

Maybe instead of looking at turds they should be looking at the fabric of existence to see the signs of a creator.

all that amazing stuff you see in nature are not signs of a creator. our ignorant ancestors thought so but the more we learned the more we realized this world wasn't made for us.

I know you think there must be but there doesn't have to be a god.

So you guys had to make up a book that said god visited you because before that lie you didn't have enough to start an organized religion. You had to lie and say he visited. Then spent centuries cramming that like down our throats until we were brainwashed as a society same way in the middle east.

Then you say you've seen god? Yea, like he visits assholes like you. LOL

How do you know?

Because it's ridiculous. It's like my friends when we were growing up said they saw ghosts. Sure they did.

But I know they weren't lying. You aren't lying either. You're delusional.

What is ridiculous? That consciousness without form created existence from nothing? Why is that ridiculous? How do you know consciousness without form didn't create existence?

I thought you said you were open minded, right?

Show me the peer reviewed scientific research on this theory/hypothesis.

Sure it's possible.

Which part? That space and time were created from nothing? Or that energy cannot be eternal without reaching thermal equilibrium? Or that the presence of energy creates space and time?

Which one do you dispute and why?

I don't know all I know is the stuff you argue about does not prove a god exists. I could ask you abut dark matter and space time continuoms and flux capacitors and your inability to answer my questiions doesn't prove I'm right.

Were space and time really created from nothing? Do you even know what that means? Because I can tell you it doesn't mean what you think it means. Your tiny brain can't fathom the truth and it's clear you make shit up in your head.

So tell me about thermal dynamics and how there can be a realm you call heaven based on any of the dumb shit you say.

I believe it actually does prove God created space and time. How else do you think a universe that was wired to produce beings that know and create popped into existence from nothing 14 billion years ago?

The SLoT precludes an infinite acting universe and it precludes energy being an eternal source for the creating the universe. So matter and energy being created from nothing without violating the FLoT is the only way the universe could have been created. Red shift, cosmic background radiation and Friedman's solutions to Einstein's field equations confirm that 14 billion years ago all of the energy in the universe occupied a tiny space and began to expand and cool until such time that beings that know and create were able to study what was created and conclude that the universe was created from nothing. So you don't find it odd that a universe that was wired to create beings that know and create popped into existence from nothing?

But hey if you want to explain "abut dark matter and space time continuoms and flux capacitors" and how they informed your opinion that there is no God, I am all ears.

As for questions I haven't answered, what do you want to know?

As for heaven, I have no idea about that. I just believe that the universe was created by consciousness without form.

.
you can not equate scientific principles to a creation from nothing - all you are proving is your own brainwashing ... the metaphysical forces of the universe are the flip side of energy and matter and together are eternal. whatever form there is that exists.

 

[ding]

Maybe instead of looking at turds they should be looking at the fabric of existence to see the signs of a creator.

all that amazing stuff you see in nature are not signs of a creator. our ignorant ancestors thought so but the more we learned the more we realized this world wasn't made for us.

I know you think there must be but there doesn't have to be a god.

So you guys had to make up a book that said god visited you because before that lie you didn't have enough to start an organized religion. You had to lie and say he visited. Then spent centuries cramming that like down our throats until we were brainwashed as a society same way in the middle east.

Then you say you've seen god? Yea, like he visits assholes like you. LOL

How do you know?

Because it's ridiculous. It's like my friends when we were growing up said they saw ghosts. Sure they did.

But I know they weren't lying. You aren't lying either. You're delusional.

What is ridiculous? That consciousness without form created existence from nothing? Why is that ridiculous? How do you know consciousness without form didn't create existence?

I thought you said you were open minded, right?

Show me the peer reviewed scientific research on this theory/hypothesis.

Sure it's possible.

Which part? That space and time were created from nothing? Or that energy cannot be eternal without reaching thermal equilibrium? Or that the presence of energy creates space and time?

Which one do you dispute and why?

I don't know all I know is the stuff you argue about does not prove a god exists. I could ask you abut dark matter and space time continuoms and flux capacitors and your inability to answer my questiions doesn't prove I'm right.

Were space and time really created from nothing? Do you even know what that means? Because I can tell you it doesn't mean what you think it means. Your tiny brain can't fathom the truth and it's clear you make shit up in your head.

So tell me about thermal dynamics and how there can be a realm you call heaven based on any of the dumb shit you say.

I believe it actually does prove God created space and time. How else do you think a universe that was wired to produce beings that know and create popped into existence from nothing 14 billion years ago?

The SLoT precludes an infinite acting universe and it precludes energy being an eternal source for the creating the universe. So matter and energy being created from nothing without violating the FLoT is the only way the universe could have been created. Red shift, cosmic background radiation and Friedman's solutions to Einstein's field equations confirm that 14 billion years ago all of the energy in the universe occupied a tiny space and began to expand and cool until such time that beings that know and create were able to study what was created and conclude that the universe was created from nothing. So you don't find it odd that a universe that was wired to create beings that know and create popped into existence from nothing?

But hey if you want to explain "abut dark matter and space time continuoms and flux capacitors" and how they informed your opinion that there is no God, I am all ears.

As for questions I haven't answered, what do you want to know?

As for heaven, I have no idea about that. I just believe that the universe was created by consciousness without form.

.
you can not equate scientific principles to a creation from nothing - all you are proving is your own brainwashing ... the metaphysical forces of the universe are the flip side of energy and matter and together are eternal. whatever form there is that exists.

I am not equating scientific principles to a creation from nothing. I am using scientific principles, scientific findings and logic to show the universe had to have had a beginning and had to have been created from nothing.

You on the other hand are trying to show the universe did not have a beginning that it has always existed which is thermodynamically impossible unless energy keeps getting added to the system.

There are no perfect exchanges from energy to matter or matter to energy. There are no 100% efficient conversions. Usable energy of the system is lost during each exchange. So as time approaches infinity the usable energy of the system approaches zero.

 

[Hollie]

James Bond.. Indeed! Mea culpa. And feel free to continue blowing it out your ass. You're on a roll. Don't let little ol' me stop ya.

Bond was the name that came to mind first. It is difficult to separate the creationists as their arguments all come from identifiable sources.

 

[Hollie]

Which Gods meet us? If a Hindu meets Gods that are a part of his/her culture, it's certainly possible that you have been misled as to the efficacy of the Judeo-Christian Gods. The Hindu Gods are much older, therefore senior to your Gods.

Shrug, so I am inferior to Hindus. As I said before, God meets us where we are. He doesn't mind bending down to my level.

Nothing in my comments suggested you or your Gods were inferior to Hindu Gods. I was making the point that the Hindu Gods like the Mayan Gods (like all Gods), are a reflection of the cultures/societies that formulated those Gods.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Maybe instead of looking at turds they should be looking at the fabric of existence to see the signs of a creator.

all that amazing stuff you see in nature are not signs of a creator. our ignorant ancestors thought so but the more we learned the more we realized this world wasn't made for us.

I know you think there must be but there doesn't have to be a god.

So you guys had to make up a book that said god visited you because before that lie you didn't have enough to start an organized religion. You had to lie and say he visited. Then spent centuries cramming that like down our throats until we were brainwashed as a society same way in the middle east.

Then you say you've seen god? Yea, like he visits assholes like you. LOL

How do you know?

Because it's ridiculous. It's like my friends when we were growing up said they saw ghosts. Sure they did.

But I know they weren't lying. You aren't lying either. You're delusional.

What is ridiculous? That consciousness without form created existence from nothing? Why is that ridiculous? How do you know consciousness without form didn't create existence?

I thought you said you were open minded, right?

Show me the peer reviewed scientific research on this theory/hypothesis.

Sure it's possible.

Which part? That space and time were created from nothing? Or that energy cannot be eternal without reaching thermal equilibrium? Or that the presence of energy creates space and time?

Which one do you dispute and why?

I don't know all I know is the stuff you argue about does not prove a god exists. I could ask you abut dark matter and space time continuoms and flux capacitors and your inability to answer my questiions doesn't prove I'm right.

Were space and time really created from nothing? Do you even know what that means? Because I can tell you it doesn't mean what you think it means. Your tiny brain can't fathom the truth and it's clear you make shit up in your head.

So tell me about thermal dynamics and how there can be a realm you call heaven based on any of the dumb shit you say.

I believe it actually does prove God created space and time. How else do you think a universe that was wired to produce beings that know and create popped into existence from nothing 14 billion years ago?

The SLoT precludes an infinite acting universe and it precludes energy being an eternal source for the creating the universe. So matter and energy being created from nothing without violating the FLoT is the only way the universe could have been created. Red shift, cosmic background radiation and Friedman's solutions to Einstein's field equations confirm that 14 billion years ago all of the energy in the universe occupied a tiny space and began to expand and cool until such time that beings that know and create were able to study what was created and conclude that the universe was created from nothing. So you don't find it odd that a universe that was wired to create beings that know and create popped into existence from nothing?

But hey if you want to explain "abut dark matter and space time continuoms and flux capacitors" and how they informed your opinion that there is no God, I am all ears.

As for questions I haven't answered, what do you want to know?

As for heaven, I have no idea about that. I just believe that the universe was created by consciousness without form.

.
you can not equate scientific principles to a creation from nothing - all you are proving is your own brainwashing ... the metaphysical forces of the universe are the flip side of energy and matter and together are eternal. whatever form there is that exists.

Metaphysics - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Is such a mess. There are extremely alluring aspects for sure, but the more one reads about it the more it can be argued to be (or not to be) anything one wants. It appears to serve a useful purpose at first then soon drifts so far into self-contradiction as to reveal its true nature as only willful distraction. IMO! I certainly don't hold being wrapped up in it against anyone.

 

[Grumblenuts]

There are no perfect exchanges from energy to matter or matter to energy. There are no 100% efficient conversions. Usable energy of the system is lost during each exchange. So as time approaches infinity the usable energy of the system approaches zero.

Dead wrong. All energy exchange involves simply borrowing and returning electrical potentials created through perturbation of "local" Aether. What we have so far perceived of as "the universe" is just that. There could easily be "Big Bangs" going on far beyond the limits of our scientific perception right now. By definition, "the Universe" contains everything. The "observable universe" obviously not. So, for a start,.. stop conflating the two!

 

[Grumblenuts]

In various multiverse hypotheses, a universe is one of many causally disconnected[11] constituent parts of a larger multiverse, which itself comprises all of space and time and its contents;[12] as a consequence, ‘the universe’ and ‘the multiverse’ are synonymous in such theories.

 

[ding]

There are no perfect exchanges from energy to matter or matter to energy. There are no 100% efficient conversions. Usable energy of the system is lost during each exchange. So as time approaches infinity the usable energy of the system approaches zero.

Dead wrong. All energy exchange involves simply borrowing and returning electrical potentials created through perturbation of "local" Aether. What we have so far perceived of as "the universe" is just that. There could easily be "Big Bangs" going on far beyond the limits of our scientific perception right now. By definition, "the Universe" contains everything. The "observable universe" obviously not. So, for a start,.. stop conflating the two!

There are no 100% efficient exchanges between energy to matter or matter to energy conversions. If there were perpetual motion would be possible.

Your comment about the aether has no bearing on thermodynamics whatsoever.

As for your comment about "Big Bangs" going on far beyond the limits of our scientific perception... if you are trying to discuss multi-verses, then each of those universes which are outside of our universe would have also been created from nothing and had a beginning just as ours. So that does not change anything I have said about the thermodynamic reality that energy cannot exist eternally without equilibrating. Or that the presence of energy creates space time. All of which tells us that the cause of the universe is something that is beyond energy and matter as we know it.

We know this because the SLoT precludes an infinite acting universe and it precludes energy being an eternal source for the creating the universe. So matter and energy being created from nothing without violating the FLoT is the only way the universe could have been created. Red shift, cosmic background radiation and Friedman's solutions to Einstein's field equations confirm that 14 billion years ago this universe began.

 

[ding]

In various multiverse hypotheses, a universe is one of many causally disconnected[11] constituent parts of a larger multiverse, which itself comprises all of space and time and its contents;[12] as a consequence, ‘the universe’ and ‘the multiverse’ are synonymous in such theories.

Each multi-verse would have been created from nothing the same as ours. It is literally the only way a universe can be created without violating the SLoT.

 

[Grumblenuts]

You bark a lot. Yes, your precious "SLoT" is largely circular reasoned bullshit. Newton himself never so arrogantly referred to his theorems as "Laws" and, of course, thermodynamics wasn't even a thing yet. Their applicability is also confined to "classical physics".. you obnoxious dope.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Albert Einstein himself, 1922, long after his alleged rejection of the Aether :

we may say that according to the general theory of relativity space is endowed with physical qualities; in this sense, therefore, there exists an ether. According to the general theory of relativity space without ether is unthinkable; for in such space there not only would be no propagation of light, but also no possibility of existence for standards of space and time (measuring-rods and clocks), nor therefore any space-time intervals in the physical sense. But this ether may not be thought of as endowed with the quality characteristic of ponderable media, as consisting of parts which may be tracked through time. The idea of motion may not be applied to it.

 

[ding]

You bark a lot. Yes, your precious "SLoT" is largely circular reasoned bullshit. Newton himself never so arrogantly referred to his theorems as "Laws" and, of course, thermodynamics wasn't even a thing yet. Their applicability is also confined to "classical physics".. you obnoxious dope.

Yes, I do love science. I love it so much that I wouldn't crap on the Laws of science as you just did.

The reality is you can't refute anything I have written because what I have written is true and you don't have any understanding of it.

Do you have a scientific argument to make?

 

[ding]

Albert Einstein himself, 1922, long after his alleged rejection of the Aether :

we may say that according to the general theory of relativity space is endowed with physical qualities; in this sense, therefore, there exists an ether. According to the general theory of relativity space without ether is unthinkable; for in such space there not only would be no propagation of light, but also no possibility of existence for standards of space and time (measuring-rods and clocks), nor therefore any space-time intervals in the physical sense. But this ether may not be thought of as endowed with the quality characteristic of ponderable media, as consisting of parts which may be tracked through time. The idea of motion may not be applied to it.

And what does that have to do with the universe being created from nothing ~14 billion years ago from nothing?

 

[Grumblenuts]

The Aether is not "nothing" you putz. Just because you can't conceive of something doesn't make it nothing. Just because Einstein didn't fully comprehend Maxwell's electrodynamic theories doesn't mean Maxwell didn't. Where Einstein was clever, Maxwell was a genius and a true, experimentally grounded scientist / physicist. Just as Tesla laughed at Einstein in disgust, I now laugh at you and your pathetic attempts to sound open minded and knowledgeable.