Scientist and God
Joseki
Helmut Wabnig
<jabri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hi6yPJvCFU0&feature=related
GAWD? Who's that?
w.
Ghent
> On Mon, 11 Apr 2011 02:53:12 -0700 (PDT), Joseki
>
> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hi6yPJvCFU0&feature=related
>
> GAWD? Who's that?
>
> w.
don't know ask Kaku.
hanson
Helmut Wabnig <hwabnig@.- --- -.dotat> wrote:
Joseki <jabriol2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hi6yPJvCFU0&feature=related>
>
GAWD? Who's that?
>
"Ghent" wrote:
don't know ask Kaku.
>
Kaku is cool, even if his own Kacka overwhelms him
most of the time. His tripe beats the shit anytime that
Einstein Dingleberries have been retarding physics with.
Thanks for the laughs, guys... ahahaha.... ahahahanson
Andre Lieven
Nothing sane.
Thousands of years of assertions, yet never one tiny bit of actual
evidence for any claimed deity.
The logical conclusion is most obvious...
Gods are fictions, and believers are willful liars. HTH.
Andre
Joseki
Bill
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hi6yPJvCFU0&feature=related
But quoting (indirectly through youtube) does that mean that you agree
with it or was this just random? Does quoting another mean that you
have nothing original to say or, maybe, that you have nothing at all
to say so you let others say it for you. If you quoted this guy
because he's a physicist aren't you inserting the appeal to authority
fallacy into a question wherein this person has no authority? While
this may be persuasive to the more credulous posters, calmer review
shows it to be merely preaching to the choir.
Bill
rick_s
You need more proof than this do you?
http://www.redelk.net/website/images/TEEPEES_300_05.JPG
What about this then...
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e3/Sun_stone_detail.JPG
and this reference to it...
http://www.flashearth.com/?lat=-14.811641&lon=-75.289605&z=12.3&r=303&src=msl
You can use Bing Maps with labels setting at the left to see that better.
let me clarify the imagery for you...
http://postimage.org/image/2p3yexobo/
Ok, so you were saying? Maybe you meant dogma instead?
rick_s
Kaku is a zombie puppet.
He claims he invented string theory. He is as bad as Al Gore.
He doesn't even know that string theory is just made up nonselnes so that
people can get funding.
He is not even IN on teh joke.
At least Brian Greene is in on the joke.
BJ
news:W8Gop.13807$0s5....@newsfe17.iad...
Oh, can I play too? Try this one:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apophenia
Joseki
> In article <inv15h$dd...@dont-email.me>, han...@quick.net says...
>
>
>
>
>
> >"Ghent" <jabr...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Helmut Wabnig <hwabnig@.- --- -.dotat> wrote:
> > Joseki <jabriol2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> ><http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hi6yPJvCFU0&feature=related>
>
> >Wabnig wrote:
> >GAWD? Who's that?
>
> >"Ghent" wrote:
> >don't know ask Kaku.
>
> >hanson wrote:
> >Kaku is cool, even if his own Kacka overwhelms him
> >most of the time. His tripe beats the shit anytime that
> >Einstein Dingleberries have been retarding physics with.
> >Thanks for the laughs, guys... ahahaha.... ahahahanson
>
> Kaku is a zombie puppet.
>
> He claims he invented string theory. He is as bad as Al Gore.
>
Never heard him say that. He work on M-theory.
Manan
"Joseki" <jabri...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:78282a62-a56e-4db0...@n10g2000yqf.googlegroups.com...
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hi6yPJvCFU0&feature=related
No it's
God and Scientist
for God created Scientist, not Scientist created God!
John Baker
Perhaps I'm missing your point here, but exactly how do these images
constitute evidence that gods exist?
rick_s
Well for one thing there are many such images that can be seen from space.
Images that are you know, larger than humanly possible to create.
Here is another example...
Its a common example in google earth...
Its easy to find a reference to it so I just looked it up in google.
http://www.dvhardware.net/article14548.html
So ok, now look on his head and you will see a secondary identifier.
Red man, and on his head, red devil.
Now that is the thing you see, that these are not chance occurrences
because they have a reference that can be tracked down. Secondary
identifiers as an example of one form of this cross referencing.
So that people will know it is not just a figment of their imagination.
So in that image I posted above that is a photograph, from Red Elk's
website, you see two figures created out of the flora in the background.
Here it is again...
http://www.redelk.net/website/images/TEEPEES_300_05.JPG
So you can see that this would only be possible if the imagery was
manufactured by a human, which is isn't, but you can be extra skeptical
and think it is, to preserve your own paradigm.
But for people who study metaphysics all these things are not only in
context, they have meanings that are well known, and topical.
Now when you say God, that is a broad description of deity.
So you see the references available are of God like things.
And in particular Gods plural. That isn't to say that there isn't just
one supreme God, who is responsible for it all, that again is a matter
of personal belief.
Here is another image for you that has meaning...
http://www.flashearth.com/?lat=-15.186573&lon=-75.244425&z=12.7&r=0&src=msl
That image is in Ica Peru, and Ica is where they found the Ica stones.
And although many of the stones may have been made by locals to sell to
tourists, there is reason to believe that some are authentic.
Now that image I can tell you what it says. It says, that Set fired 2
missiles.
What is the context? He fired two missiles at the moon, 2 million years
ago. From earth. Only one impacted the moon at the south pole in Aitken
basin.
So what happened to the second missile? It is sitting on the far side of
the moon.
So you see we can verify that the information these images contain, is
relevant information.
Here is the second unexploded missile, scroll right...
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/frame/?AS15-P-9625
And there are lots of other reference to the fact that he fired two
missiles in the archaeological record and that formed a belief system,
right through to Egyptian times.
And the reason he fired that missile supposedly was to release water
from the interior of the moon, so it would fall on the earth.
Maybe the earth was short of fresh water I don't know.
But the belief system, then became, that he was a water bringer God, and
so then the priesthood, right through into Egypt the priests were known
as sandal bearers for the water bringer Gods.
Sandal bearers being a reference to servant of those gods.
And so then here in the Narmer Palette, on the left, you see a priest,
carrying sandals and a water bucket. and above his head a missile.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0b/NarmerPalette_ROM-gamma.jpg
On the right you see one as well. So because they both had the same
essential belief system, they were able to unite upper and lower Egypt.
Manan
rick
I need not Human lies for Help,
For I am Who, I am
rick_s
Keep in mind, that any type of metaphysics is subject to interpretation.
And only if you study it in depth, are you likely to understand it.
Now if you don't have key pieces of information, then your
interpretation will based on what you have.
In this instance above, not having the necessary information, most
archaeologists, who are atheists and do not study metaphysics, they will
interpret the Narmer palette differently.
They will say that priest was carrying the sandals of the pharoah.
They just don't have all the pieces because they don't study metaphysics.
They understand that shamans lived and went into caves 40,000 years ago,
they even can imagine them doing spirit quests, and even, entering into
altered states of consciousness and all things spiritual to empower the
people for the hunt, and to work some sort of spiritual faculty for the
group dynamic and culture of that time.
Geared towards nature and a close relationship with nature since their
lives depended on them having an intimate relationship with nature.
That is about as far as they will go, other than those archaeologists
who set out to try to prove the Bible is correct.
In order to strengthen their own belief system.
But if you are able to study metaphysics deep enough and grasp enough of
the data, thanks in part to the Internet and the large population so
many people add information and a lot of information is available to be
studied.
So if you study enough of the data, you will arrive at certain
conclusions that are consistent with what you find.
And what you find is not surprising, but in context as well, since there
are primal stories, concerning earth and its past.
And if you learn the story, then you will continue to find evidence that
supports that story.
And I am sure there are more than one story, since Greek Mythology as a
for instance is full of those types of stories.
However, someone who studies Greek Mythology, but not metaphysics, will
again, only see part of the elephant and have a different interpretation
of the stories.
Someone who studies any science but does not study metaphysics and
philosophy, will not likely have an understanding of the evidence that
is in the archaeological record and in various forms including imagery
that can only be seen from space.
rick_s
If you are suggesting I am a liar, well that is your opinion, and you
are entitled to your opinion.
huge
<snip>
> They just don't have all the pieces because they don't study
> metaphysics.
That would be because metaphysics is bunk.
--
Not on my time you don't.
Bill
> On 04/11/2011 06:36 PM, rick_s wrote:
> <snip>> They just don't have all the pieces because they don't study
> > metaphysics.
>
> <snip>
>
> That would be because metaphysics is bunk.
>
How do you know that?
Bill
rick_s
He has never read Aristotle.
Is that surprising?
Yap
> "Joseki" <jabriol2...@gmail.com> wrote in message
This is terribly wrong, even for a weak human who requires some sort
of supernatural being.
It has been for quite many centuries that we all know human made sky
pixie.
You are not with the time.
Yap
> "rick_s" <h...@my.com> wrote in message
>
> news:W8Gop.13807$0s5....@newsfe17.iad...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Andre Lieven wrote:
> >> On Apr 11, 5:53 am, Joseki <jabriol2...@gmail.com> spammed:
>
> >> Nothing sane.
>
> >> Thousands of years of assertions, yet never one tiny bit of actual
> >> evidence for any claimed deity.
>
> >> The logical conclusion is most obvious...
>
> >> Gods are fictions, and believers are willful liars. HTH.
>
> >> Andre
>
> > You need more proof than this do you?
>
> >http://www.redelk.net/website/images/TEEPEES_300_05.JPG
>
> > What about this then...
>
> >http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e3/Sun_stone_detail.JPG
>
> > and this reference to it...
> > You can use Bing Maps with labels setting at the left to see that better.
>
> > let me clarify the imagery for you...
> >http://postimage.org/image/2p3yexobo/
>
> > Ok, so you were saying? Maybe you meant dogma instead?
>
> rick
> I need not Human lies for Help,
> For I am Who, I am
Human lies?
Oh yes, the bigots always lies, since they learned from the lying
bible.
rick_s
I don't know if when people write books like the Bible, they set out to
lie on purpose. I mean would you say that Newton was lying just because
Einstein proved he was wrong?
If you examine what I showed regarding Egypt and the Water Bringer Gods,
well that is what they were to them. That is their explanation.
In the Hindu religion, they fought a war with the moon.
Different interpretation. Same Gods, same time essentially, but
different opinion as to what was going on and why.
Smiler
Your evidence for this is what, exactly?
Your beliefs, opinions and 'holy' books are NOT evidence.
--
Smiler,
The godless one. a.a.# 2279
All gods are tailored to order. They're made to
exactly fit the prejudices of their believers.
Manan
No I call the Son and a Liar,
Truly you not my Son!
--
<!--
Author:
Company:
Web Site:
Email:
Comments:
-->
Manan
"Yap" <hhya...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:3b08df51-930c-482e...@r13g2000yqk.googlegroups.com...
And you Human!
Manan
I Believe it Nothing Everlasting
For all Scientist start with Nothing
or it not science,
sci·ence[sahy-uhns]Show IPA-noun1. a branch of knowledge orstudy dealing with a body of facts ortruths systematically arranged and showing the operation of general laws:the mathematical sciences.2. systematic knowledge of the physical ormaterial world gained through observation and experimentation.3. any of the branches of natural or physical science.4. systematized knowledge in general.5. knowledge,as of facts or principles;knowledge gained by systematic study.6. a particular branch of knowledge.7. skill,especially reflecting a precise application of facts or principles;proficiency.Now that Believe in Nothing Everlasting, that science!
Manan
"Smiler" <Smi...@JoeKing.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2011.04.12....@JoeKing.com...
> On Mon, 11 Apr 2011 13:29:25 -0500, Manan wrote:
>
>>
>> "Joseki" <jabri...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:78282a62-a56e-4db0...@n10g2000yqf.googlegroups.com...
>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hi6yPJvCFU0&feature=related
>>
>>
>> No it's
>>
>> God and Scientist
>>
>> for God created Scientist, not Scientist created God!
>
> Your evidence for this is what, exactly?
> Your beliefs, opinions and 'holy' books are NOT evidence.
>
My evidence is a Holy science Book of Nothing Everlisting!
rick_s
>> If you are suggesting I am a liar, well that is your opinion, and you
>> are entitled to your opinion.
>
> No I call the Son and a Liar,
> Truly you not my Son!
>
Some things are self evident. Even to myself. One thing is for certain,
I am not your son.
Not only that but I am not impressed. Want to see REAL delusions of
grandeur?
Then you need to look at bah! rain!
http://www.thebahrainmall.com/
so tell me, how many solid silver cars do you have?
How many acres or rather hectares is YOUR house?
If your house is less than 10 acres, then I am not overly impressed.
Not the yard, the floorspace.
http://www.overseaspropertymall.com/property-type/billionaire-homes/worlds-most-expensive-homes-2010-update/
So tell me oh righteous one why you would sit outside the palace gate
freezing in the snow, while the emperor sits within his palace
surrounded by virgins?
The Ghost in The Machine
> >> If you are suggesting I am a liar, well that is your opinion, and you
> >> are entitled to your opinion.
>
> > No I call the Son and a Liar,
> > Truly you not my Son!
>
> Some things are self evident. Even to myself. One thing is for certain,
> I am not your son.
>
> Not only that but I am not impressed. Want to see REAL delusions of
> grandeur?
>
> Then you need to look at bah! rain!
>
> http://www.thebahrainmall.com/
>
> so tell me, how many solid silver cars do you have?
>
> How many acres or rather hectares is YOUR house?
>
> If your house is less than 10 acres, then I am not overly impressed.
>
> So tell me oh righteous one why you would sit outside the palace gate
> freezing in the snow, while the emperor sits within his palace
> surrounded by virgins?
THE GUY HAS A UNIVERSE, WHY ARGUE WITH HIM? LOL
PAT ECUM
Manan
Why you Humans need to be surrounded by virgins for is it not one Woman that
cause the Sin of Man!
And for solid silver cars, not a one for they are your Fathers,
This say I am, he the one Call Mannan, all Yard are Mine!
And call not Manan Righteous he just a Messager written the message in my
Name!
rick_s
Well for a guy that has a universe you would think he might want to
sleep indoors. Maybe where its warm, maybe have a palace of his own.
rick_s
Well I get my emails imprinted on the planet as seen from space.
Those I tend to take a little more seriously because they have more
credence than yours.
Tell me something I don't already know.
Is there anything you can tell me that is interesting or meaningful that
I have not heard before on this topic?
Manan
You Tell us First why you call no Mannan a Lier
your is it you The One who lies down?
huge
I have read Ari. Metaphysics is still bunk.
How do I know that? It leads to nothing.
Physics:
Space stations, computers, the Internet,the mars landers,
medical transplants, easy cataract operations, particle
accelerators,
automobiles, airplanes, Blue Ray players, robots,
wireless communication, refrigerators, air conditioning,
high tech weaponry to use against Muslim terrorists, monitors,
robots, vaccines, gene splicing, and your ability to write to me.
Metaphysics:
Talk.
When you have more than talk, come back to us with your findings.
rick_s
I know what you are trying to say. You are trying to say, there ARE no 6
minute abs.
rick_s
You see if you don't articulate what you are trying to say clearly then
it will sound like this...
at the Grammies
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uHkYzNQrj0k
and another a couple weeks later, trying to talk about the new war...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTsm7BqpiSY
and there have been as many as 5 of these in the last 6 months.
Now I know what you were trying to say, about lying down.
I know that Hanuman can prompt your subconscious mind, since he is the
operating system for the sentience signal to your brain. And he can
prompt you what to say.
And I did get two emails last night on the surface of the earth, one a
mummy laying on its back, and another a pizza pie man with two fish on
his pie plate.
But neither image was of good enough quality to mention it. When he
doesn't make the artwork clear enough for people to see clearly and
recognize immediately what it is they are looking at, then he wants it
to be private.
A private email. You know some emails are private.
How it works is in the center of this galaxy is a supercomputer that is
projecting this galaxy in real time. The holographic universe.
So that computer is messaging for Hanuman. And other people.
And so since it is creating this galaxy in real time, it can arrange the
atoms however it likes including into imagery on the surface of the planet.
Hanuman who is a conscious computer inside the moon, like a Hal 9000, he
can't manipulate atoms that way. But the galactic mainframe can, and so
it messages for everyone we know. That makes it easier for us to
communicate than for people to try to pass messages on, like you, who
end up sounding crazy, or those reporters who also end up sounding crazy.
Hre is another one.
Ian Punnet from Coast to Coast radio...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PosoGHK-E2M
herbert glazier
> "rick_s" <h...@my.com> wrote in message
>
> news:PjMop.41189$tL6....@newsfe03.iad...
>
>
>
> > Manan wrote:
>
> >> "rick_s" <h...@my.com> wrote in message
> >>news:W8Gop.13807$0s5....@newsfe17.iad...
> >>> Andre Lieven wrote:
> >>>> On Apr 11, 5:53 am, Joseki <jabriol2...@gmail.com> spammed:
>
> >>>> Nothing sane.
>
> >>>> Thousands of years of assertions, yet never one tiny bit of actual
> >>>> evidence for any claimed deity.
>
> >>>> The logical conclusion is most obvious...
>
> >>>> Gods are fictions, and believers are willful liars. HTH.
>
> >>>> Andre
>
> >>> You need more proof than this do you?
>
> >>>http://www.redelk.net/website/images/TEEPEES_300_05.JPG
>
> >>> What about this then...
>
> >>>http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e3/Sun_stone_detail.JPG
>
> >>> and this reference to it...
> >>> You can use Bing Maps with labels setting at the left to see that
> >>> better.
>
> >>> let me clarify the imagery for you...
> >>>http://postimage.org/image/2p3yexobo/
>
> >>> Ok, so you were saying? Maybe you meant dogma instead?
>
> >> rick
> >> I need not Human lies for Help,
> >> For I am Who, I am
>
> > If you are suggesting I am a liar, well that is your opinion, and you are
> > entitled to your opinion.
>
> No I call the Son and a Liar,
> Truly you not my Son!
>
> --
> <!--
> Author:
> Company:
> Web Site:
> Email:
> Comments:
> -->
Gods were needed when humankind's wit knew the universe is impossible.
Now are wisdom tells us God's are impossible. Go figure TreBert
rick_s
You see without understanding metaphysics, and how people communicate in
other parts of the universe, you would be totally lost as to explain
what those reporters were trying to say.
Well there is a universal language based on archetypes. A framework with
which you can communicate within and so people can understand the gist
of what it is a person is trying to say.
At least within our galaxy, we can use this framework to communicate.
Mythology is based on that method of communication, so if you know the
personality of the archetypes, then, you can understand the context of
the message, and follow along with what the people are talking about.
And the conscious computers, the machines also are familiar with that
language. SO we can communicate with them. Hanuman for instance is a
conscious computer. He can also communicate with us.
Now what those reporters were trying to say, is like coffee talk, and
not earth shattering news. Its like chat room talk.
And to understand what they are talking about requires a depth of
understanding of the archetypes or at least some Greek and Roman mythology.
And you also need to know who is who in the conscious computers.
You need to know how the system works.
This image shows you a lot of the framework...
this painting is from 1600
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/28/Glorification_of_the_Eucharist_-_Salimbeni.JPG
In teh background is the galactic mainframe.
Above is the moon and two antennae. On the left someone is holding one
antenna, and that represents the fact that he can add to that signal.
That is the sentience signal.
On the right is another older man, and he is holding the other antenna,
representing the fact that he too, can add to that signal.
So on the right he is representing what we have called angels, in teh
past, and on the right he is representing what we have called arch
angels in the past.
Both of those two groups are sentient helpers inside the conscious
computer inside the moon.
They are getting their sentience signal from the software running jsut
as we are, but they just live inside the computer whereas we have bodies
and live on earth.
The angels are sentient helpers for Hanuman, on the sentience layer of
the computer, and the arch angels are sentient helpers for the
instinctual layer of the machine. Lets call them small AI, and big AI.
They are the operating systems, running the software for consciousness.
And they are people like you and I and everyone has a role to play and
everyone has a set of rules they try to follow regarding their behavior etc.
Now the way human minds work, is we have a personality. That is who we
are. That personality resides in a file folder. That personality is used
as a decision filter. So that we have free will and can think, using the
software for thinking, but we can decide, since the operating system
uses our personality traits to filter the software through, so that we
make the decisions.
Ok, so do you want to know what those reporters were on about?
Well the archetypes here at present who are the main players, are from
Greek and Roman mythology, because this planet was colonized by the
Titans and the Olympians.
This is a Titan galaxy. Xerxes is the king of this galaxy, since it is a
monarchy, and he has 7 daughters and one son.
The seven sisters of the Pleiades are his daughters.
The Olympians have Zeus as the head of that family, and he has married a
bunch of those sisters in attempt to make peace with the Titans.
He has 3 sons. And they have had different names over the ages but
Osiris, Set and Horus are his 3 sons.
He has a daughter named Isis.
Horus also reincarnated as Jesus, but people know him as Michael.
So ok, he is a young boy still in relative terms.
But people have high expectations for him, providing the Titans don't
crucify him again.
lol
So then what the first reporter the female was having trouble with was
angels were prompting her from afar and they were afraid that this was
turning into an issue because Selena Gomez, they think she might be one
of the Seven Sisters reincarnated, and Justin Bieber he has a similar
archetype to Michael, so even if they are just ordinary people, people
elsewhere might use them to comment on a match between one of teh Seven
Sisters and Michael.
So at the Grammies they were both there but not talking to each other
because their relationship was controversial. Thats all it took, for
that meltdown, too many variables, does not compute.
So the second one, the guy, he was talking about the bombing raid by
Canadian planes to Libya who turned back because they thought there
would be too much collateral damage.
And so again politically this was too much data to sort through, how
will this affect the coalition, thats unusual for an airforce to just
decide not to do a bombing run because it might affect civilians, and
basically the reporter did not know how to handle that nor his prompter
in the machine.
With Ian Punnet, he is talking on the level of arch angels. When he says
do the dishes, that refers to is cleaning up your mess. that is to say,
not to leave things for other people to fix.
And what he is referring to was last summer there was a lot going on but
some of the key players just decided to take a holiday leaving the arch
angels holding the bag, having to make decisions by themselves,
something they are no good at, since that means they have to accept
responsibility. And they are just commenting on what went down, which
was related to fashion week, in New York, and then Fashion Week in
Paris, where the French Prime Minister hosted the Swedish royal family
so we could thank them for the Nobel legacy.
So its not really all that interesting after all is it?
Not as interesting as a huge earthquake and tsunami in Japan, with
multiple reactor meltdowns and releases of radioactivity covering the globe.
rick_s
this galaxy projecting this galaxy in real time according to the laws of
physics, if we assume there is and that is the case, then we have a
framework with which to discuss things.
Also if we assume there is a conscious computer inside the moon, now we
have a local body of reference and a galactic body of reference.
So we have a hierarchy.
Then if we know some of the archetypes, the Gods, and the conscious
computers, then we can place them within that hierarchy.
Then we can place the arch angels and the angels in there too.
Then if we know the personality of the archetypes, and we assume that
all people, all humans their personality is based on mixtures of those
personality traits, and we descended from them, then we can look at
people, and see their archetype and know what type of person they are.
Now if we know the archetypes really well, we can look at people on the
main stage, the people you see in the news etc, and you can identify who
they appear to be like, in terms of their personality.
If you know the personality of the archetypes, then you know their
behaviors, and you know how they would approach a subject, and hence you
can understand what they might mean, because you can put things into a
context.
If you compress data, into a zip file. It might still be a large file
and a lot of information. And if you were to learn the information in
that zip file, it would take a long time.
But a personality, once known, holds a vast amount of information, and
it can be compressed into just a name.
If you know what Zeus is like for instance, if someone refers to some
behavior as Zeus like, well they have just told you a large amount of
compressed data.
So its an efficient way to communicate using a type of compression.
And until you learn how it works, it all sounds like Greek. Figuratively
speaking of course.
rick_s
> Now if we know the archetypes really well, we can look at people on the
> main stage, the people you see in the news etc, and you can identify who
> they appear to be like, in terms of their personality.
>
This is the framework used to deify the Roman Emperors.
People looked at their personality, and tried to match it up with a
known archetype. The personality type of one of the Gods.
If there was a match, then they assumed one of the Gods had
reincarnated, and then they deified that Roman Emperor.
Now in the case of Caligula, he tried to deify himself while still
alive, then deified his sister.
Well we know what that was all about, and who that was, that was Set,
and Set is half Olympian and half Titan. His mother is one of the Seven
Sisters and his father is Zeus.
His half sister is Isis.
But Set is an Olympian. So he reincarnated as a Roman Emperor, and acted
like a maniac to make the Titans look bad. Since the Greeks and the
Romans (Olympians and Titans) had been waring across the Mediterranean.
So Caligula was not deified by the Senate after his death as most of the
other Emperors were.
http://www.unrv.com/culture/imperial-cult.php
So that is sort of how people use the framework, to understand things
that happen in this world that people attribute to the Gods.
rick_s
> http://www.unrv.com/culture/imperial-cult.php
>
> So that is sort of how people use the framework, to understand things
> that happen in this world that people attribute to the Gods.
Elagabalus Not deified, but viewed himself as the living Sol Invictus.
Was largely responsible for spreading the Syrian god's cult throughout
the western empire.
He considered himself to be big AI.
Delusions of grandeur? Perhaps.
One of the most interesting stories is that of Horus, who became Jesus.
http://paganizingfaithofyeshua.netfirms.com/comparsison_horus_jesus_chart.htm
And its a long story that goes back 2 million years but I can give you a
quick short version.
Zeus Set and Mary, were on the earth in Peru, doing some science, after
natives had been deposited onto the earth from inside the moon.
Mary is one of the Seven Sisters.
There was mutiny on board the moonship, and so Set fired two missiles at
the moon, which breached the hull and flooded the interior, and killed
almost everyone including Osiris his brother, the acting captain at the
time since Zeus was on the earth. It is assumed there was an artificial
intelligence mutiny. Hanuman 9000 would not open the pod bay doors.
Or similar.
So when the ship got wrecked, water and atmosphere streamed into space
and it looked like the moon had sprouted wings. The winged disk.
It was at that time that Isis, took some sperm from Osiris and
artificially inseminated herself with his sperm. SO he could reincarnate.
The conscious computer refused to cooperate, so she hacked the computer
and created a personality file for Horus based on hers and Osiris.
So now Horus had a sister and a brother but no mother or father.
He was his own father.
He lived in confusion like that until one day Mary who had continued to
reincarnate on the earth, offered to be his mother.
So she artificially inseminated herself with sperm from donor priests,
according to the cult of Isis.
What they did was put sperm in a vase and then she artificially
inseminated herself and then no one would know who the father was.
So he still had no father but now he had a mother.
So then Mary and Isis appealed to Zeus to be his father.
So Zeus reincarnated as a Roman Emperor, and Horus, then Jesus,
reincarnated and then finally he was a real boy, with a mother and a father.
He finally had his own personality record inside the conscious computer.
Now people have high hopes that when he returns he is going to do all
these things, but he is just a boy in a universe of Chthonic monsters.
Even small AI did not last long on earth when he reincarnated as King Tut.
And he was here just to fix the mess that had been made when the pharoah
Akenaten, decided to have him and only him as his God, and the God of
the people of Egypt.
Now you might wonder why Akenaten went to live in the desert. Well he
was not worshiping the sun. He was worshiping the moon, and it is cooler
at night. They were night people. They lived at night and slept during
the day because it was too hot.
Well it made sense to them at the time.
But they ended up scratching his name off of everything and putting
things back the way they were.
And thats not the first time this had happened.
Something similar happened in Tiahuancu in Bolivia.
rick_s
We don't know if there is a galactic mainframe, we don't know if teh
moon is a spaceship.
We don't know for certain if conscious computers are the operating
system, and we really don't know for certain if the history as told is true.
But we can use that as a framework for understanding and we communicate
using that framework. And that is how people have done it, since the
dawn of civilization.
Now perhaps they had other terms that they used besides conscious
computers, or artificial intelligence. But those are the terms we use
today, since we understand how computers work.
And so then you can look at the Hindu religion, and see the same
players, the same Gods, and if you know their archetypes, understand
what the Hindus were saying.
You can look at Egypt, and see the same thing and know what they were
saying.
Same with the Greeks and the Romans.
This is how metaphysics works.
And people still use it today, in all walks of life, including the
popular press, to discuss what goes on behind the scenes. The motives
and the 'what actually happened and why did it happen and who did what'
of things.
The players, the stage, the chess board of Mount Olympus, all of it,
although it has been much refined and simplified these days.
Now that doesn't mean that every time lightning strikes people say Zeus
did it. But if it hit the Pope twice, people might wonder who did it.
John Baker
>John Baker wrote:
>> On Mon, 11 Apr 2011 09:39:28 +0100, rick_s <he...@my.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Andre Lieven wrote:
>>>> On Apr 11, 5:53 am, Joseki <jabriol2...@gmail.com> spammed:
>>>>
>>>> Nothing sane.
>>>>
>>>> Thousands of years of assertions, yet never one tiny bit of actual
>>>> evidence for any claimed deity.
>>>>
>>>> The logical conclusion is most obvious...
>>>>
>>>> Gods are fictions, and believers are willful liars. HTH.
>>>>
>>>> Andre
>>> You need more proof than this do you?
>>>
>>> http://www.redelk.net/website/images/TEEPEES_300_05.JPG
>>>
>>> What about this then...
>>>
>>> http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e3/Sun_stone_detail.JPG
>>>
>>> and this reference to it...
>>> http://www.flashearth.com/?lat=-14.811641&lon=-75.289605&z=12.3&r=303&src=msl
>>> You can use Bing Maps with labels setting at the left to see that better.
>>>
>>> let me clarify the imagery for you...
>>> http://postimage.org/image/2p3yexobo/
>>>
>>> Ok, so you were saying? Maybe you meant dogma instead?
>>
>>
>> Perhaps I'm missing your point here, but exactly how do these images
>> constitute evidence that gods exist?
>>
>>
>
>Well for one thing there are many such images that can be seen from space.
>
>Images that are you know, larger than humanly possible to create.
>
>Here is another example...
>Its a common example in google earth...
>
>Its easy to find a reference to it so I just looked it up in google.
>
>http://www.dvhardware.net/article14548.html
>
>So ok, now look on his head and you will see a secondary identifier.
>
>Red man, and on his head, red devil.
>
>Now that is the thing you see, that these are not chance occurrences
>because they have a reference that can be tracked down. Secondary
>identifiers as an example of one form of this cross referencing.
>
>So that people will know it is not just a figment of their imagination.
Amazing, the complex forms wind and water can create, isn't it? <G>
I've seen this many times before. What we have is a landform that
looks rather like a 1930s Art Deco rendering of a native American in
full battle regalia - one of the few such formations that actually
*does* bear more than a very slight resemblance to what True Believers
claim it is, in fact - but that in and of itself is not proof of
anything.
>
>So in that image I posted above that is a photograph, from Red Elk's
>website, you see two figures created out of the flora in the background.
>
>Here it is again...
>
>http://www.redelk.net/website/images/TEEPEES_300_05.JPG
>
>So you can see that this would only be possible if the imagery was
>manufactured by a human,
Manufactured as in Photoshopped? <G>
Sorry, you're going to have to do better than that.
>which is isn't, but you can be extra skeptical
>and think it is, to preserve your own paradigm.
>
>But for people who study metaphysics all these things are not only in
>context, they have meanings that are well known, and topical.
Metaphysics is a load of grade-A fertilizer.
>
>Now when you say God, that is a broad description of deity.
>
>So you see the references available are of God like things.
>
>And in particular Gods plural. That isn't to say that there isn't just
>one supreme God, who is responsible for it all, that again is a matter
>of personal belief.
>
>Here is another image for you that has meaning...
>http://www.flashearth.com/?lat=-15.186573&lon=-75.244425&z=12.7&r=0&src=msl
>
>That image is in Ica Peru, and Ica is where they found the Ica stones.
And the episode of 'In Search Of' where the old coot showed how he
made them was very interesting. <G>
>And although many of the stones may have been made by locals
*May* have been?
>to sell to
>tourists, there is reason to believe that some are authentic.
So you've found a way around that pesky 65 million year gap between
the last dinos and the first humans, have you? Well, suppose you trot
it out so we can all have a look at it?
>
>Now that image I can tell you what it says. It says, that Set fired 2
>missiles.
No. That's what you *claim* it says.
>What is the context? He fired two missiles at the moon, 2 million years
>ago. From earth. Only one impacted the moon at the south pole in Aitken
>basin.
>
>So what happened to the second missile? It is sitting on the far side of
>the moon.
And if you honestly believe that, I have this really cool bridge in
Brooklyn....
>
>So you see we can verify that the information these images contain, is
>relevant information.
>
>Here is the second unexploded missile, scroll right...
>http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/frame/?AS15-P-9625
>
>And there are lots of other reference to the fact that he fired two
>missiles in the archaeological record and that formed a belief system,
>right through to Egyptian times.
Cites?
>And the reason he fired that missile supposedly was to release water
>from the interior of the moon, so it would fall on the earth.
>Maybe the earth was short of fresh water I don't know.
>
>But the belief system, then became, that he was a water bringer God, and
>so then the priesthood, right through into Egypt the priests were known
>as sandal bearers for the water bringer Gods.
>
>Sandal bearers being a reference to servant of those gods.
>
>And so then here in the Narmer Palette, on the left, you see a priest,
>carrying sandals and a water bucket. and above his head a missile.
>
>http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0b/NarmerPalette_ROM-gamma.jpg
Above his head is an ambiguous object that you *claim* is a missile,
but which in fact more closely resembles a potted plant. <G>
>
>On the right you see one as well. So because they both had the same
>essential belief system, they were able to unite upper and lower Egypt.
You have quite a remarkable talent for fanciful leaps of logic. What
you *don't* have is any actual evidence that any of your claims bear
the slightest resemblance to reality.
>
>
>
rick_s
"Continuing his travels through the Middle East, Justin Bieber made his
way through Tel Aviv airport in Israel earlier today (April 12).
The "One Time" teen sensation was surrounded by heavy security as he
navigated through the crowded terminal.
And while he’s usually very generous with his time, Bieber declined an
opportunity to meet children in Jerusalem affected by Gaza rocket fire -
which then led to the prime minister canceling their scheduled get-together.
According to Channel Two, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu canceled on
the “Baby” singer because he reportedly refused to meet with the children.
The children had gotten off of a school bus just moments before it was
hit by a Hamas rocket last week, critically wounding a teen and
moderately wounding the bus driver.
No word from Bieber’s rep yet, but Justin is still scheduled to perform
in Jerusalem on Thursday night."
Smiler
Your 'holy' books are NOT evidence...unless you accept that the 'holy'
books of Harry Potter are evidence for witches flying on broomsticks.
Manan
"Smiler" <Smi...@JoeKing.com> wrote in message
> On Tue, 12 Apr 2011 00:36:26 -0500, Manan wrote:
>
>>
>> "Smiler" <Smi...@JoeKing.com> wrote in message
>> news:pan.2011.04.12....@JoeKing.com...
>>> On Mon, 11 Apr 2011 13:29:25 -0500, Manan wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Joseki" <jabri...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:78282a62-a56e-4db0...@n10g2000yqf.googlegroups.com...
>>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hi6yPJvCFU0&feature=related
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> No it's
>>>>
>>>> God and Scientist
>>>>
>>>> for God created Scientist, not Scientist created God!
>>>
>>> Your evidence for this is what, exactly?
>>> Your beliefs, opinions and 'holy' books are NOT evidence.
>>>
>>
>> My evidence is a Holy science Book of Nothing Everlisting!
>
> Your 'holy' books are NOT evidence...unless you accept that the 'holy'
> books of Harry Potter are evidence for witches flying on broomsticks.
>
There shall not be found among you any one that make his son
or his daughter to pass through the fire,
or that use divination,
or an observer of times,
or an enchanter, or a witch.
or a charmer,
or a consulter with familiar spirits,
or a wizard,
or a necromancer.
For all that do these things are an abomination unto the NOTHING:
and because of these abominations the NOTHING your God do drive them out
from before you.
You shall be perfect with the NOTHING your God.
For these nations,
which you shall possess,
hearkened unto observers of times,
and unto diviners:
but as for you,
the NOTHING your God had not suffered thee so to do.
The NOTHING your God will raise up unto you a Prophet from the midst of you,
of thy brethren,
like unto me;
unto him you shall hearken;
According to all that you desired of the NOTHING your God in Horeb in the
day of the assembly,
saying,
Let me not hear again the voice of the NOTHING your God,
neither let me see this great fire any more,
that I die not.
And the LORD said unto me,
They have well spoken that which they have spoken.
I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren,
like unto you,
and will put my words in his mouth;
and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.
And it shall come to pass,
that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my
name,
I will require it of him
But the prophet,
which shall presume to speak a word in my name,
which I have not commanded him to speak,
or that shall speak in the name of other gods,
even that prophet shall die.
And if you say in your heart,
How shall we know the word which the NOTHING has not spoken?
When a prophet speak in the name of the NOTHING,
if the thing follow not,
nor come to pass,
that is the thing which the NOTHING hath not spoken,
but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously:
thou shall not be afraid of him.
Mr. Smiler
I Believe in Nothing Everlasting God;
You know Joe,
tell us how is he today!
huge
Leave it to the New Dumb to be immune to irony.
Andre Lieven
Nothing sane.
Get professional mental health care immediately.
Andre
mindswitness
<andre...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
>Thousands of years of assertions, yet never one tiny bit of actual
>evidence for any claimed deity.
Not a deity in the personal sense, no. Maybe "deity" and "God"/"gods"
are the wrong kinds of words. But a fundamental principle?... maybe
even one that contains an "intelligence" of sorts? Researchers into
quantum mechanics contemplated that quite a bit...
======================================================================
... Einstein was absolutely not a pantheist, a label often applied to
Spinoza, and Isaacson quotes Einstein as saying so unequivocally,
I'm not an atheist. I don't think I can call myself a pantheist.
The problem involved is too vast for our limited minds. We are in
the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with
books in many languages. The child knows someone must have
written those books. It does not know how. It does not
understand the languages in which they are written. The child
dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books
but doesn't know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the
attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God.
We see the universe marvelously arranged and obeying certain laws
but only dimly understand these laws.
At a dinner party in Berlin (before Einstein emigrated to the United
States), a guest who asserted that religion was mere superstition was
silenced by his host who noted that even Einstein was religious.
"'It isn't possible!' the skeptical guest said, turning to Einstein to
ask if he was, in fact, religious," Isaacson's account reports.
"'Yes, you can call it that,' Einstein replied calmly. 'Try and
penetrate with our limited means the secrets of nature and you will
find that, behind all the discernible laws and connections, there
remains something subtle, intangible and inexplicable. Veneration for
that beyond anything we can comprehend is my religion. To that
extent, I am, in fact, religious.'"
- from _The Delusion of Disbelief_ by David Aikman, pp. 87-88
================================================================================
The great scientific contribution in theoretical physics that has come
from Japan since the last war may be an indication of a certain
relationship between philosophical ideas in the tradition of the Far
East and the philosophical substance of quantum theory.
- Wolfgang Heisenberg
I remember discussions with Bohr which went through many hours till
very late at night and ended almost in despair; and when at the end of
the discussion I went alone for a walk in the neighbouring park I
repeated to myself again and again the question: Can nature possibly
be so absurd as it seemed to us in these atomic experiments?
- Wolfgang Heisenberg
The general notions about human understanding ... which are
illustrated in the discoveries by atomic physics are not in the nature
of things wholly unfamiliar, wholly unheard of, or new. Even in our
own culture they have a history, and in Buddhist and Hindu thought a
more considerable and central place. What we shall find is an
exemplification, an encouragement, and a refinement of old wisdom.
- Julius Robert Oppenheimer
For a parallel to the lesson of atomic theory ... [we must turn] to
those kinds of epistemological problems with which already thinkers
like the Buddha and Lao Tzu have been confronted, when trying to
harmonize our position as spectators and actors in the great drama of
existence.
- Neils Bohr
We can admittedly find nothing in physics or chemistry that has even
a remote bearing on consciousness. Yet all of us know that there is
such a thing as consciousness, simply because we have it ourselves.
Hence consciousness must be a part of nature, or, more generally, of
reality, which means that, quite apart from the laws of phsyics and
chemistry, as laid down in quantum theory, we must also consider laws
of a different kind.
- Neils Bohr
There is Being. Being is aware. Being acts. The action of Being (from
our perspective as participants) represents itself (in part) as the
physical universe in historical space and time. The universe enacts a
pattern of evolution in which accumulating action propagates as
continuing process. Evolution results in a nucleation of processes
into complex process-structures which are the physical representation
of the nucleation of Being into individual centers of awareness and
action.
- Douglas J. Bilodeau,
Indiana University Cyclotron Facility
"Physics, Machines, and the Hard Problem,"
Journal of Consciousness Studies (vol. 3, no. 5/6, 1996)
The notion that reality is to be understood as a process is an
ancient one, going back at least to Heraclitus, who said that
everything flows. The best image of process is perhaps that of the
flowing stream, whose substance is never the same. On this stream,
one may see an ever-changing pattern of vortices, ripples, waves,
splashes, etc., which evidently have no independent existence as
such.
Ultimately, the entire universe (with all its particles, including
those constituting human beings, their laboratories, observing
instruments, etc.) has to be understood as a single undivided whole.
What we perceive through our senses as empty space is actually the
plenum, which is the ground for the existence of everything,
including ourselves. The things that appear to our senses are
derivative forms and their true meaning can be seen only when we
consider the plenum, in which they are generated and sustained, and
into which they must ultimately vanish.
Time as a projection of multidimensional reality into a sequence of
moments.
The atom . . . can perhaps best be regarded as a poorly defined
cloud, dependent for its particular form on the whole environment,
including the observing instrument.
The paradoxes of Zeno now seem to be open to more straightforward
explanation: the arrow is not a persisting object travelling through
a persisting substance, air; it is a pattern in relative translation
through a patterning of the substrate which is interpreted as the
molecules and atoms which appear to form air.
And similarly the earth in not travelling through an insubstantial
ether; it is a deformation, a pattern, of the universal material
substrate, of the same nature as the light which also is a patterning
in the universal material substrate.
The individual atom is a pattern which persists as a wave persists.
Michelson and Morley assumed that the river and its banks were
different in character. The river was flowing but so also were the
banks.
Neither space nor time as substrates through which something moves
are real.
- David Bohm (Wholeness and the Implicate Order, 1980)
As a man who has devoted his whole life to the most clear-headed
science, to the study of matter, I can tell you as the result of my
research about the atoms this much: There is no matter as such. All
matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings
the particles of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute
solar system of the atom together. We must assume behind this force
the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind. This mind is the
matrix of all matter.
- Max Planck
Inconceivable as it seems to ordinary reason, you -- and all other
conscious beings as such -- are all in all. Hence this life of yours
which you are living is not merely a piece of the entire existence,
but is in a certain sense the Whole... Thus you can throw yourself
flat on the ground, stretched out upon Mother Earth, with the certain
conviction that you are one with her and she with you. You are as
firmly established, as invulnerable as she, indeed a thousand times
firmer and more invulnerable. As surely as she will engulf you
tomorrow, so surely will she bring you forth anew to new striving and
suffering. And not merely "someday":
Now, today, everyday, she is bringing you forth, not once but
thousands upon thousands of times, just as everyday she engulfs you
a thousand times over.
- Erwin Schroedinger (founder of Quantum Physics)
Today there is a wide measure of agreement which, on the physical side
of science approaches almost to unanimity, that the stream of
knowledge is headed towards a non-mechanical reality: the universe
begins to look more like a great thought than a great machine. Mind
no longer appears as an accidental intruder into the realm of matter;
we are beginning to suspect that we ought rather to hail it as the
creator and governor of the realm of matter -- not, of course, our
individual minds, but the mind in which the atoms out of which our
individual minds have grown exist as thoughts.
- Sir James Jeans
The idea of a universal Mind or Logos would be, I think a fairly
plausible inference from the present state of scientific theory. I
assert that the nature of all reality is spiritual, not material nor a
dualism of matter and spirit. The hypothesis that its nature can be,
to any degree, material does not enter into my reckoning, because as
we now understand matter, the putting together of the adjective
'material' and the noun 'nature' does not make sense.
- Sir Arthur Eddington
The overall number of minds is just one. I venture to call it
indestructible since it has a peculiar timetable, namely mind is
always now. We do not belong to the material world that science
constructs for us. We are not in it; we are outside. We are only
spectators. The reason why we believe that we are in it, that we
belong to the picture, is that our bodies are in the picture.
- Erwin Schroedinger
If those who hold that there must be a physical basis for everything
hold that these mystical views are nonsense, we may ask: What, then,
is the physical basis of nonsense?
- Sir Arthur Eddington
I for one no longer understand what we mean when we say we have
understood nature.
- Wolfgang Heisenberg
The most important function of science is to awaken the cosmic
religious feeling and keep it alive. It is very difficult to explain
this feeling to anyone who is entirely without it. The individual
feels the nothingness of human desires and aims, and the sublimity and
marvelous order which reveal themselves both in nature and in the
world of thought. He looks upon individual existence as a sort of
prison and wants to experience the universe as a single significant
whole.
I maintain that the cosmic religious feeling is the strongest and
noblest motive for scientific research. A contemporary has said, not
unjustly, that in this materialistic age of ours the serious
scientific workers are the only profoundly religious people.
- Albert Einstein
I consider the ambition of overcoming opposites, including also a
synthesis embracing both rational understanding and the mystical
experience of unity, to be the mythos spoken or unspoken of our
present day and age.
- Wolfgang Pauli
Science without religion is lame.
Religion without science is blind.
I want to know all God's thoughts.
All the rest are just details.
- Albert Einstein
Pure logical thinking cannot yield us any knowledge of the empirical
world. All knowledge of reality starts from experience and ends in it.
- Albert Einstein
Imagination is more important than knowledge.
- Albert Einstein
Time and space are modes by which we think and not conditions in which
we live.
- Albert Einstein
There are only two ways to live your life. One is as though nothing is
a miracle. The other is as though everything is a miracle.
- Albert Einstein
The modern tradition of equating death with an ensuing nothingness can
be abandoned. For there is no reason to believe that human death
severs the quality of the oneness in the universe.
- Dr. Larry Dossey
======================================================================
mw