To be fair you don't need any special sci-fi shield to be protected from most kind of radiation, when you think of cosmic rays you need a high density material to shield you from it since cosmic rays consist of higly energized protons, the problem comes with gamma and x rays and they got a strong dose of that, if i recall corecctly the dose we get standing on the surface of Earth in 1 year they got it in 1 week... nothing lethal anyway..

 

"Billions of years" don't address popping out through evolution. It is just a speed remark. Maybe you popped out slower then.
The time is existing only in imagination as awareness flows from page to page of experiences. The book is there regardless of which page you are aware of now.

Anyway I hoped you'd address the questions from my response to your post;
"Everything is consciousness" (there is no nothing)
Let me try to argue the main theme in a very simplified manner and just from one of endless available angles, a hypothesis as you call it.
Let's start from personal experience of the world, actually the only one we know and can know.
Simple fact is that everything you experience, everything that you know, exists only as representation in your mind, pictures, sounds all sensory data, all impressions based on that, all memories, all body feelings and emotions, imagination, everything. Turn off your consciousness and where is this construction called world now? Wake up and there it is again. This includes all living beings that you know and imagine to be outside of your consciousness. Can you prove they are outside? Can you prove anything is outside of your mind?
Since your mind takes a form of your life-dream and the other part of your consciousness assumes the role of taking action and the other remaining a pure witness of the experiences you simply cannot get out of it and find anything else, therefore I conclude everything is consciousness.
Do you have a different experience and theory and can you prove it?

 

I wonder if you're aware that this line of thought is called Solipsism, and that it's already been refuted.

Simply put, Solipsism is known as a self-refuting idea, since if the brain experiencing the solipsist reality exists, then outside reality exists, at least in some form. Also, a statement of solipsism is self-defeating, because a statement assumes another person to whom the statement is made. This, of course, assumes the solipsist would not communicate with a hallucination. If you really believe this philosophy, why are you wasting your time deliberately talking to a construct of your own mind?

Anyway, do a google search about possible Solipsism refutations. You'll keep yourself busy for days...If you're humble enough to search for information that will contradict your apparently already solidified belief system; Most people are unable to do that. People usually protect their beliefs like a mother protects a baby child.

 

Last edited: Aug 22, 2016

Let's make it psychological again:

I feel good (more energetic) without believing. When someone is a believer, loses more than 50% of his/her own energy and always is obliged to think about it (like a background software that always busy and influence the CPU's full performance).

Let's be sinewy and full of beans and also let this faulty ideation and mind-occupying incogitance go away (or impolitely F**k off ).

 

Last edited by a moderator: Aug 22, 2016

Is the creator of this subject Mr "foster911" now satisfied? Loool. Religion and politics work well for small "Buzz" .

 

I am humble enough to discuss it all here if you are.

We do talk to ourselves all they long (daydreaming), don't you have inner dialog?
Even while dreaming we imagine the world to be real and outside of us.
So even if I believed that others do not exist the discussion with all of them would still go on, there is no alternative.
The constructs of mind are filled with generalization therefore what a typical solipsist might consider tool of knowledge I'd consider as weak generalization far from reality.
I am not saying you do not exists nor that the material world doesn't exist, I am pointing to the process of perception and thinking as a very limited tools.
Some eastern philosophies such as zen and others may be considered solipsism yet they teach that there are different states of mind that enable experiences beyond thought and perception and they use philosophy to inspire you to practice and train your mind to develop different tools.

If some schools of thought solved some philosophical problems that doesn't mean that you solved it too or that you understand it. So if you know a proper way out of my questions use whatever logic and knowledge you have to do so, instead of generalizing the problem to the school of philosophy and believing that the science will eventually find a solution for you for things that you do not know.
Let's go back to my "hypothesis" that consciousness is in everything.
I told you that everything that you know comes to you out of your cognition within your own mind and you don't know as a provable fact anything but the consciousness that takes the form of outside world, thoughts, memories, feelings etc.
Target here is not to disprove a school of philosophy but to prove that you know anything that isn't consciousness.

The reason I am asking you this is because you say that it is up to those who claim that there is Creator to prove it, as if you are not interested in subject and only in holding a position that it is completely unscientific to think that Creator exists (which I agree with but with different attitude towards the question and I also think that thinking itself cannot be scientific as it is based on language which is poor symbol of whatever it tries to describe, thinking is always creative and imaginative adding to the facts or taking away from the facts, science is unscientific most of the time, most of them are paid and sold to protect unscientific interests while you have faith that it will find answers for you, so how is that less scientific or less dogmatic than believing in Creator or Santa).

Since science's position is that there is a material world and it claims that there is no proof of creator of the material world I am challenging you (maybe using a bit of solipsism maybe not) to prove that material world is a fact. So again please do not maneuver around a solipsism using historical data or generalization about the subject, rather use whatever tools are available in your mind or other schools of thought to cut through the questions directly using arguments to dissolve questions.

Challenge: Can you personally prove that you personally know anything besides your mind and consciousness?

 

I see a lot of support for the pro-God groups and a lot of support for those against. The God deniers site a great deal of empirical evidence to support their stance, yet I've not heard anything much more than..... "well, if there isn't a God, how do we exist?".... which is hardly proof or evidence. It is an extraordinary claim to say that a conscious being created everything, so apart from "I believe it to be so" where is the logical, comprehensible undeniable proof?

 

One theory perhaps.

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sumer_anunnaki/anunnaki/anu_27.htm

 

I said:

He said :

I can say why god has not any creator from different aspects

1) the famous reason : if the god has a creator so that creator is the real god & if you continue to infinity you don't reach any where. This is called sequence in philosophy, & infinite sequence in philosophy is impossible.

2) The God should be complete. it means that god shouldn't have any defect, otherwise
that's not God , nobody worship it because that defect. if god had a creator so the god is a creature so it has a defect.

3) if you study mechanics, there is a concept that says things that exist from -infinity doesn't need a creator & reason.

4)if you study physics, You see all the things that physicist say is just a idea.(not proved & just imaginary) & most of the time they reach to a point that they need a creator & reason for the universe to exist. Like Einstein, Hawking ,....

 

Knowledge implies sensorial experience, so this question is impossible to answer, however if you ask
if something may exist outside of our consciousness than the answer for science is yes. If you accept that our universe is expanding according to Hubble's law and you accept special relativity, then there is a whole portion of the universe outside our observable universe that is completely outside our possibility to have any kind of contact even a radio signal travelling at the speed of light will never reach that portion of universe.
Our observable universe is basically a sphere with the Earth in the center and with radius 44 billion light years, beyond that distance the speed of expansion is higher than c. Obviously this is just science and if a person believes in a trascendental god, then he is not subject to these limitation, so again it's just matter of faith, yet it's likely that our counscousness can only reach a minimum part of the universe.
And again there are also limitation in the microscopic that prevent our knowledge, take uncertainty principle for example..

 

as a physicist i can say with good certainty that this point(4) is wrong, anything that is not proven is just an hypothesis, to have a theory you need to actually prove that idea with empirical evidence, you may say that anything physics says is subject to empirical uncertainty and it's never 100% sure, but that is really different from being unproven.
And given that god is not falsifiable then its not a subject for science, then a physicist will never use and never need a creator or a deus ex machina to complete his model, otherwise it would just mean the "theory" is not falsifiable, therefore not scientific.
To be fair it's not uncommon for astrophysicists to think that universe always existed, Sagan, Margherita Hack made that hypothesis many times..
Einstein never worked on that subject, the closets thing you can find in his body of work the subject is when he found out an expanding universe better suited his general relativity (at the time we didnt know universe is expanding) and he changed his equations cause he thought he was wrong, ironically he was right, yet the factor he added to get a static universe is now used as the lambda in our current lambda cdm model and it's accounting for the incresing expansion rate..

To be honest physics already encountered effects without a clear "creator" and never claimed a creator, the fact is accepted even by apologist like William Craig Lane who then shifted from cause and creator to "random cause" wich ironically is what many atheist claim as a cause for the universe

 

Last edited: Aug 23, 2016

In the proposition "if the brain experiencing the solipsist really exists, then outside reality exists," what are you referring to with the term "solipsist"? Do you mean the physical body of the solipsist, his consciousness, or something else? Either way, I'm not sure how that conclusion is proven by the premise. If we just put Solipsism aside and talk about proofs of an external world, then there aren't any that are totally satisfactory.

Descartes' famous line cogito ergo sum--I think; I am--is an intuition that proves the existence of at least one's consciousness, but Descartes' only proof of an external world is what he calls a "clear and distinct" idea of God. Because we have a clear and distinct idea of God, and because God is not a deceiver, we can trust in all of our clear and distinct ideas, including those of the external world. There are many problems with Descartes argument, most notably the famous Cartesian Circle, which he refused to acknowledge in his lifetime.

After Descartes, David Hume addressed the existence of an external world in his "Skepticism Regarding the Senses," and he proposes that we believe in an external world (in his theory, the external world is defined as the continued existence of objects when we aren't observing them through the senses) because objects in the external world retain a certain continuity between one observation and the next. I won't get into the details, but he never provides a proof, instead providing a reason why we believe in an external world when a logical examination can never provide satisfactory proof. He attributes it to the way the imagination works.

In the 19th Century, G.E. Moore rather boldly wrote his "Proof of an External World," yet, in his long winded argument, he essentially says that it would be absurd to believe otherwise. He says he knows his hands exist, and from this "proof" of two separate objects in existence, he infers the existence of all other separate things. He would be right if he could really prove his two separate hands exist, but he doesn't provide any real proof beyond the same intuition we all have about the existence of the external world.

Interestingly, these philosophers and pretty much every person who has ever lived believe in an external world, it's just that there is no way to prove it beyond doubt. Hume actually ended up having a breakdown trying to truly prove the external world, and eventually settled for the intuition all people have about it existing. What I'm trying to say is, you're right when you say that many people refute Solipsism for many good reasons, but there is no absolute proof that the external world exists. If you know of some, I'd love to see it. I'm not saying the external world doesn't exist, just that there's no proof. For myself, I'm not that worried about it, and the only people I know of who have ever lived life as true skeptics are the followers of Pyrrho, an ancient Greek skeptic who is famously said to have ignored the pleas of a drowning friend because he couldn't be entirely sure if his perceptions of a drowning friend were real. It probably isn't true, but it's still funny. It's also said that he had to be steered away from cliffs and fire for the same reason.

 

Last edited: Aug 23, 2016

This topic is the color of teal and is populated by deer. Can anyone give the short answer about whether god is a dumbass? Enquiring minds wanna know.

Also, I wud not want Dr Kraus Lawrence 2 give me a Heimlich, or any other kind of manoeuvre. Although he looks like he enjoys standing behind sluts & squeezing hard. Given the options, he can pray that some dude less nerdy-looking is nearby. With bigger arms. And better hair. I know I wud.

 

Who are you to think you can find answer to God creations? This what God said to Job who was asking him questions :
The Lord Reveals His Omnipotence to Job
38 Then the Lord answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said:

2 “Who is this who darkens counsel
By words without knowledge?
3 Now prepare yourself like a man;
I will question you, and you shall answer Me.

4 “Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth?
Tell Me, if you have understanding.
5 Who determined its measurements?
Surely you know!
Or who stretched the line upon it?
6 To what were its foundations fastened?
Or who laid its cornerstone,
7 When the morning stars sang together,
And all the sons of God shouted for joy?

8 “Or who shut in the sea with doors,
When it burst forth and issued from the womb;
9 When I made the clouds its garment,
And thick darkness its swaddling band;
10 When I fixed My limit for it,
And set bars and doors;
11 When I said,
‘This far you may come, but no farther,
And here your proud waves must stop!’

12 “Have you commanded the morning since your days began,
And caused the dawn to know its place,
13 That it might take hold of the ends of the earth,
And the wicked be shaken out of it?
14 It takes on form like clay under a seal,
And stands out like a garment.
15 From the wicked their light is withheld,
And the upraised arm is broken.

16 “Have you entered the springs of the sea?
Or have you walked in search of the depths?
17 Have the gates of death been revealed to you?
Or have you seen the doors of the shadow of death?
18 Have you comprehended the breadth of the earth?
Tell Me, if you know all this.

19 “Where is the way to the dwelling of light?
And darkness, where is its place,
20 That you may take it to its territory,
That you may know the paths to its home?
21 Do you know it, because you were born then,
Or because the number of your days is great?

22 “Have you entered the treasury of snow,
Or have you seen the treasury of hail,
23 Which I have reserved for the time of trouble,
For the day of battle and war?
24 By what way is light diffused,
Or the east wind scattered over the earth?

25 “Who has divided a channel for the overflowing water,
Or a path for the thunderbolt,
26 To cause it to rain on a land where there is no one,
A wilderness in which there is no man;
27 To satisfy the desolate waste,
And cause to spring forth the growth of tender grass?
28 Has the rain a father?
Or who has begotten the drops of dew?
29 From whose womb comes the ice?
And the frost of heaven, who gives it birth?
30 The waters harden like stone,
And the surface of the deep is frozen.

31 “Can you bind the cluster of the Pleiades,
Or loose the belt of Orion?
32 Can you bring out Mazzaroth in its season?
Or can you guide the Great Bear with its cubs?
33 Do you know the ordinances of the heavens?
Can you set their dominion over the earth?

34 “Can you lift up your voice to the clouds,
That an abundance of water may cover you?
35 Can you send out lightnings, that they may go,
And say to you, ‘Here we are!’?
36 Who has put wisdom in the mind?
Or who has given understanding to the heart?
37 Who can number the clouds by wisdom?
Or who can pour out the bottles of heaven,
38 When the dust hardens in clumps,
And the clods cling together?

39 “Can you hunt the prey for the lion,
Or satisfy the appetite of the young lions,
40 When they crouch in their dens,
Or lurk in their lairs to lie in wait?
41 Who provides food for the raven,
When its young ones cry to God,
And wander about for lack of food?



Remember this from
Proverbs 9:10New King James Version (NKJV)
10 “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom,
And the knowledge of the Holy One is understanding.

 

If we talk about the bible and not about a god outside religion, then who am i to question god? for example i am a person who didn't kill almost the entire humanity, damn i didn't kill a single human being, the same thing can't be said for the god of the bible if the bible is true...

 

Yes. YHWH. But that is my belief. And for all the "Christians" out there...Why do you call him "God" When he has a name? When he asks you to call upon his name you say God....But "God" like "Christ" is a Title. And Jesus is not his name either...for was there even a "J" in the alphabet when he was born? I will be back...

 

Quoting the bible to prove there is a God is like reading Rudolph The Rednose Reindeer to prove there are flying deer.

 

Music theory is even more modern than Bible but did you see what these lovely people did with it? They ripped it with an unbelievable violence. They even totally prohibited me from getting close to it and threatened me if I do that again, my fate would not be better than Steve Faoki.

 

Last edited by a moderator: Aug 23, 2016

I am not a "christian", but you really need to put that crack pipe down.

 

I agree that god isn' his name but given they believe it's the one and only god and that in the beginning it was forbidden saying his name, using god has some ground.
Jesus is just the english translation, as you say Rome instead of Roma, it's common to use translation for latin names, originally anyway i and j were the same letter, think about iulius caesar, the distinction came much much later, but latin was one of the languages of palestine at the time.