Is seems religion has an edge on atheism. How does one continue to embellish on unbelief? What new ideas can we pull out of thin air to aggrandize a negative? There are no assumptions to defend, no miracles to fantasize, no mythical beasts or gods to rewrite, revise, conjecture, or expand.
Religion is science fiction with a penalty, where believing the right fiction is coupled with an unlimited license to caricature your wildest dreams into a human right—where making god more better and more powerful than anyone can imagine—right up until someone reimagines it.
God has evolved in my lifetime to incorporate the ontology of science and atheist philosophers. They get it all. Every idea of existence can be attributed to this mythology. You win. I have no deity to defend.
Even the best argument for nothing is laid waist by belief and tradition. Never failing to take credit for solving your existential anxieties—which tend to solve themselves anyway. All bleeding eventually stops. But give god his due. It is you who solves the crisis and always has been. It’s too bad the men of words cannot give credit to you for your own course corrections.
We’ve all heard that general relativity and quantum theory are incompatible, but why? How could two useful theories not be fundamental properties of reality, and why are they so destructive and polluting? Maybe they are askew to the true nature of reality.
Simply put; as reductionism has examined smaller and smaller particles to find the building block of nature, the amount of energy at the Planck level begins to increase. It opens higher and higher levels of energy. And as Einstien noted, energy equals mass and mass equals energy. As we get to the smaller, the amount of energy increases, therefore the mass should be increasing. Things would get bigger as they get smaller. How to reconcile that? As a side note, reductionism has also postulated a mechanism (such as the microtubule) to identify the emergence of consciousness. That too, has failed.
The amount of energy used to dissect such quanta (as in the large hadron collider) at CERN, uses 1.3 terawatt hours of electricity annually to smash these particles. That’s enough power to fuel 300,000 homes for a year.
So we can’t go smaller without getting bigger. At 10/-33cm and 10/-34 seconds, things start getting bigger—as in black hole bigger. On the scale of energy our baseline is zero, which is a tremendous amount of energy where we fit comfortably in. What does that tell us?
A recurring theme is gaining traction and a new boss is slowly taking over. Space and time are no longer fundamental to the nature of reality, yet are themselves emergent properties. The only real thing left is the hard problem of consciousness, which is the one thing which is not a thing. But then again, neither are we.
The best theory of the universe would be the most useful theory; to release us from the quandary of the first three theories of modern science. Since nothing is true of our perceived reality, why not use our imagination to move us where we want to move? That is exactly what gravity, QM, and the religions of a god have done—yet the unforeseen variables of such theories have taken us to the brink of existence.
It appears quanta and space are emergent properties of consciousness. They are adaptive phenomenon of our space-time goggles and a likely construct of the current game module.
Some thoughts on artificial intelligence and consciousness
One thing that can neither be proven nor disproven is that there exists an external mind-independent world. Why does it appear (according to our best science) that we live in a purely physical world devoid of qualities? Erwin Schrödinger–Mind and Matter
I don’t believe we’ll ever have AI without consciousness. If we are simply opening a new portal to consciousness (like having a baby) it will take a mathematical formula that is self examining.
Voluminous computations will not produce a conscious entity. AI would need consciousness to become intelligent. It is quite likely there is only one consciousness and many apertures, many openings into it—Our brains are receivers. If somehow we created a new form of consciousness it would be immiscible and likely catastrophic to it or us.
Just as everything is made of one process (the collapsing wave function) of a single, fundamental phenomenon, adding another form could be catastrophic. Since there is no evidence for a multiple consciousness model vs a single source model, I would think science should err on the side of caution —but I doubt they will.
That science has this vast body of knowledge we draw facts from is a misconception. Science is really about promoting ignorance, but good quality ignorance is what we need—of the curious kind
There is a misconception that science has it mostly figured out. That simply is not the case (not oven fractionally close) because every discovery only compounds the number of questions, but that is really the point. If we accept science has arrived at anything, how will we know what questions to ask?
I think we all know what happens to a body of people when they claim to know the final truth. Rooted, stunted, immovable, and waiting for that truth to unfold—is at odds with the nature of everything. True knowledge is temporary and raises more questions than it answers.
Science is currently the best means we have to improve life by focusing on a narrow band of discovery, drawing from a well of facts where there is always another bucket. But to think we know…that would be the a travesty. Discovery generates more ignorance—and this is the type of ignorance that we celebrate, not willful ignorance of belief, but skillful ignorance of curiosity.
Excerpts and photos from this excellent TED by Stuart Firestein—The Pursuit of Ignorance
Ask any scientist if climate change is man made, what should be the non-pressurized, non-politicized correct response “I don’t know”—because they don’t. Though it’s 97% popular to say so, the pressure to fall in line with this ideology shuts the door on authentic scientific inquiry.
“Based on well-established evidence, about 97% of climate scientists have concluded that human-caused climate change is happening.”NASA. This is the tag line but is it true? Would NASA ever publish findings outside this narrative?
To know makes science a religion. Should I be wary of such religious claims, when those who claim to know, deny the basic premise of scientific inquiry? Is climate change no longer falsifiable? Theory is genuinely scientific only if it is possible in principle to establish that it is false.
Is any “legitimate” climate scientist trying to falsify this premise? So what is the agenda? Is the great resetfunded propagated by SARS cov2 and climate change more political than evidentiary?
According to a May 15, 2020 WEF article, COVID-19 offers an opportunity to “reset and reshape” the world in a way that is more aligned with the United Nations 2030 Sustainable Development Goals (SDG), as climate change, inequality and poverty gained even greater urgency during the pandemic. HERE
Man made climate change is no longer falsifiable, but a religion coupled with shaming and withholding any contrary evidence.
What can science tell us about evidence based reality
What is physical reality and what is it made of? Is it not made of non-physical, theoretical particles? Energy/particles that have yet to be explained? But what exactly is a particle? Nobody knows, and the answer is a charming way of saying so (wink)
Where is the dividing line between theoretical “particles”, waves, and energy that make up physical reality? What level of magnification is acceptable as reality? What we see as the building blocks of life and matter are unreal, non-existent, indescribable ideas of how non-intelligent space manifests as forms. They are words about ideas about how form expands out of space.
According to quantum field theory, particles are excitations of quantum fields that fill all of space. (1) It’s the standard deep answer of people in the know: A clever way of saying I don’t. Particles are “representations” of “symmetry groups,” Hence, particles are theoretical junctions in an excited or energized field that manifests as form. Now form we can relate to, but it isn’t made of any-thing—It is an illustration of nothing (no-thing).
It is a very grey area between math and mysticism. “In positing the existence of these more fundamental fields, quantum field theory stripped particles of status, characterizing them as mere bits of energy that set fields sloshing. Yet despite the ontological baggage of omnipresent fields, quantum field theory became the lingua franca of particle physics because it allows researchers to calculate with extreme precision what happens when particles (phenomenon) interact—particle interactions being, at base level, the way the world is put together. But keep in mind, the particle isn’t real “stuff” as we perceive “real” to be when it shows up to the five senses as form.
So remember—when you see the word particle, that is just to assist the mental imagery. It’s not an actual thing.
Particles can mostly be described as what they are not. Not this, not that, but by a series of negations we form the gist, grasp the idea, comprehend what the physics is trying to tell us. “Chip away the stone to reveal the image”, but that’s not what it is either.
“The correspondence between elementary particles and representations is so neat that some physicists equate them. Others see this as a conflation. “The representation is not the particle; the representation is a way of describing certain properties of the [imaginary] particle,” said Sheldon Glashow, a Nobel Prize-winning particle theorist and professor emeritus at Harvard University and Boston University. “Let us not confuse the two.”
Seems like I already posted this, but on examination it was only deja-vu.
What is deja–vu other than confusion between real-time events passing through the memory cue? It can be an interesting head game feeling you’ve been here before when you know you never have, but what if you have?
Is there more to it than that? Some feel this as something experienced in a prior life, or seen in a dream or astral visit. Some recount vivid experiences with uncanny accuracy. The only time we are aware of our brains is when they misfire—everything is normal right up until it’s not, but along with that is a sense that something isn’t quite right.
Deja-vu “is not only a feeling of familiarity, but also the metacognitive recognition that these feelings are misplaced”.—Dr Akira O’Connor. So how do you explain it when someone recounts an experience in detail and verifies it? I’ll explain…
I booked an Air BnB near the coast to attend a wedding. It was old farmhouse built in the 1920’s on still, heavily wooded acreage. As we walked in the door my wife stops abruptly and says “I’ve been here before”.
She made a list of notes about the previous colors on the wall, the old man and woman that lived there, the library upstairs which was moved from another location, how the old man and woman died, and so on. Details about his medical conditions and that they really cared for the place.
We met with the new owners (married male couple) who lived in a newer house a hundred yards behind the same property. She gave him the paper and his jaw hit the floor. He said everything she said was how it was and how it happened. How did she know? What are your experiences with this phenomenon?
Perhaps the brain was at one time a more useful appendix we’ve lost track of.
The brain as an appendix? Three pounds of useless fat…
Organisms come and go. Brains evolve into minor insignificant blobs—to bilateral synchronization, to the organic state of awareness. Being aware of being aware (the pinnacle of biological evolution) big brains have made humans the “chief mambas” of planet earth. But was this necessary? Is it even true?
In geologic timescale life is but an eye-blink. Upon death one constant remains—consciousness. It is in every thing. It is the background illuminating the foreground. “The entire universe is forever the same as the consciousness that dwells in every atom”—Yoga-Vasistha. When you are gone consciousness remains.
Does consciousness exists without the brain? In recent years that idea has regained traction from some unlikely sources—brain abnormalities and science.
#1. “A new research study contradicts the established view that so-called split-brain patients have a split consciousness. Instead, the researchers behind the study have found strong evidence showing that despite being characterized by little to no communication between the right and left brain hemispheres, split brain does not cause two independent conscious perceivers in one brain”
Split brain is a lay term to describe the result of a corpus callosotomy, a surgical procedure first performed in the 1940s to alleviate severe epilepsy among patients. During this procedure, the corpus callosum (a bundle of neural fibres connecting the left and right cerebral hemispheres) is severed to prevent the spread of epileptic activity between the two brain halves. While mostly successful in relieving epilepsy, the procedure also virtually eliminates all communication between the cerebral hemispheres, thereby resulting in a ‘split brain’. Ref Article
Yet the patients still have one mind. The idea that consciousness originates in the brain has been sideswiped by evidence—that it’s not so clear as that. There’s more…
#2. More than 20 years ago the campus doctor at Sheffield University was treating a student of mathematics for a minor ailment. The student was bright, having an IQ of 126. The doctor noticed that the student’s head seemed a little larger than normal and he referred him to Dr Lorber for further examination.
Dr Lorber examined the boy’s head by cat scan to discover that the student had virtually no brain. The normal brain consists of two hemispheres that fill the cranial cavity, some 4.5cm deep. This student had a layer of cerebral tissue less than 1mm deep covering the top of his spinal column. Ref Article
#3. When a 44-year-old man from France started experiencing weakness in his leg, he went to the hospital. That’s when doctors told him he was missing most of his brain. The man’s skull was full of liquid, with just a thin layer of brain tissue left. Ref Article
With speech and motor coordination intact, normal societal living, average as well as above average intelligence, the above cases are good cases for consciousness existing outside the brain. Even the split brain is a single consciousness.
Where are his memories stored?
Where does thinking occur?
Where is speech and visual acuity learned and stored?
Where is the moral compass and reasoning developed?
Where does this place evolutions larger brain hypothesis to support greater intelligence?
How do the 12 cranial nerves function without a source organ?
I imagine the big brain has something to do with esthetics. A population of pinheads wouldn’t be a real eye catcher— or would it?
Where western science meets eastern mysticism—bootstrapping vs intuition
“All this was familiar to me from my research in high-energy physics, but until that moment I had only experienced it through graphs, diagrams and mathematical theories. As I sat on that beach my former experiences came to life; I saw cascades of energy coming down from outer space, in which particles were created and destroyed in rhythmic pulses; I saw the atoms of the elements and those of my body participating in this cosmic dance of energy; I felt its rhythm and I heard its sound, and at that moment I knew that this was the Dance of Shiva, the Lord of Dancers worshipped by the Hindus— Frifjof Capra, The Tao of Physics
In essence the dance of Shiva, a high speed representation of the atomic level—high energy movements, pulsations, and rhythms.
“I was particularly attracted to the puzzling aspects of Zen which reminded me of the puzzles in quantum theory. At first, however, relating the two was a purely intellectual exercise. To overcome the gap between rational, analytical thinking and the meditative experience of mystical truth, was, and still is, very difficult for me.—Frifjof Capra
Mysticism is utilizing what has been experienced, while physics is theorizing, describing, and viewing the fields behind the instruments of what is probable. They have the same descriptions of matter and energy—one through boot strapped logic and rigorous tests, the other through intuition and the meditative arts.
Yet throughout the ages these displays of the cosmic dance are interpreted differently, based on the available language, technology, and culture. How would Black Elk describe this today? “Crazy Horse went into the world where there is nothing but the spirits of all things. That is the real world that is behind this one, and everything we see here is something like a shadow from that one—Black Elk
Or the Incas and their depiction of Alpa Camasca, meaning “animated earth”, or the Kofan and their ability to “intuitively” read the vibrations of plants and communicate their usefulness in language and practice—through a special process of seeing the cosmic rhythms.
“At the same time, everything is more than it appears, for the visible world is only one level of perception. Behind every tangible form, every plant and animal, is a shadow dimension, a place invisible to ordinary people but visible to the shaman”—Wade Davis, on the people of the Piraparaná, Amazon
So there we have it (there are many more) multiple cultures and even physicists describing a world very different from our normal level of magnification, each pointing to the universe as a unified cosmic dance—a dance without a regulating force.
“In other words I feel, no longer a stranger in the world, but that the external world were my own body…but a very overwhelming feeling that everything that happens, everything that I have ever done, anything anyone else has ever done, is part of a harmonious design—that there is no error at all—Alan Watts
It is probably true quite generally that in the history of human thinking the most fruitful developments frequently take place at those points where two different lines of thought meet—Werner Heisenberg
What about when 10 lines of thought, jungles, and time irrelevant meeting at the doorstep of modern physics? Is that evidence?
Seeing what Christianity has done to indigenous cultures throughout the world as a token of love, spreading while being resisted is more in line with evolution than a loving god.
We had a similar event here this past month. Boasting about a fever and making her way around campus, an adult covid denier (superspreader) made her way around campus, became ill, tested positive, and put 80 students and 9 staff members in two weeks of quarantine.
Not that every staff member took it seriously either, as the self -quarantined can be seen at the grocery store and gas pumps chatting away face to face with whomever.
Who is in charge here, god, the people, or the virus? Spoiler alert! The virus is in charge. You can believe it is not, but evidence suggests otherwise. Resisting is futile.
As humans also continue to spread against all will and reason, it is obvious our agendas are not linked to the outcomes. We are not controlling anything at all, but do what we do thinking thoughts that make us think we’re somehow special, yet march to the beat of chaos on a competing ecosystem functioning to maintain its equilibrium.
The virus has found a foothold in the believers of religion and conspiracy. Operating on belief and others belief as usual, it doesn’t miss a beat. You can do everything to protect yourself—then here comes Cindy…
Truth serum for the soul. Seek and thee shall find…something
How woo, magic, and religion are simply glimpses into non-ordinary neurology. It’s all right here.
It is religion that drives certain men and women to ask real questions and find real answers to how the world operates. Thank you religion. Science has challenged the millennia long status quo—that what is occasionally seen by mystics is merely how the world would look when you mess with the wires.
Those who grew tired of being watched by a persistent deity that had no bearing on life, decided to answer a few questions on their own without postulating a god—but to find out how things actually work.
We have evolved with a certain brain configuration and perceive the world through a specific shaped eye and tactile senses. Alter these receptors any way you want and you can see the spirit world, which is this world in a non-ordinary, alternate perception of reality. This is the religious experience—attempting to maintain that different reality than what evolution has normalized as our current, best chance at survival.
Change the shape of the eye, we all may look like Jabba the Hut, but we’d still be here, and that would be normal. Mess with the optic nerve and flip the left and right lobes and voilet! Things certainly wouldn’t be like they seem now.
Understanding this, that a minor change in physiology and nothing would seem the same. I’m sure the octopus who is born knowing how to hunt and strategize it’s prey, has a completely different perception and hereditary underpinning than a human—but the octopus is still here, just a different set of lenses, and a different reality.
Enter the traumatic event or addiction.
Carry yourself deep into the difficult side of human existence, to the brink of losing family or life itself, or just play around with a little peyote? Activate those adrenals and delve into the hypoxia of a NDE and you can see god. Feel god. Feel your brain reach it’s outer limits to grasp at survival. Those unlucky enough just don’t have enough trauma in their lives, or indoctrination? It is up to them to move the planet beyond belief mode.
Can we truly explain consciousness out of geology, yet deny that same geology is at least part conscious? How could that be? There is a myriad of explanations and footnotes to inculcate a believable mythology* emergent property, yet, the simplest answer may be the correct one. Maybe we should start there?
If we can use this to explain that, we can just as easily describe that with this. That we can identify this mind with those elements, yet deny those elements have part of mind? Reason tells me that one cannot exist without the other. It’s tricky—so observation and testing takes a cold, hard leap-of-faith which has developed into a popular new mythology, but is a very ancient teaching.
The modern world is an extension of human consciousness, and human consciousness is an emergent property of minerals, crystals, and primordialsoup lipids composed mainly of carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen.
“However, “Emergent properties” is a scientific term, eerily similar to Pratītyasamutpāda in Sanskrit, commonly translated as dependent origination, dependent arising, or interdependence, a key doctrine of Buddhist philosophy, which states that all dharmas (phenomena) arise dependent upon other phenomena; “if this exists, that exists; if this ceases to exist, that also ceases to exist”. This is a sound principle. There is no such thing as a one way transaction. It contradicts what transaction implies.
Of course there are two sides of this debate. One is careful to re-coin terms to sophisticate an entirely scientific approach, while the original is a philosophy older than the dirt itself. Science has reinvented the wheel (or borrowed the wheel) from a religion. It is a re-emergent property already known for thousands of years through reason and deduction—and is the least complex answer. Don’t throw the baby out with the bath water. How this all happens will forever be missed as hypothesis continues solidifies into mythology. It is now the common sense of the modern world, yet takes some real mental wrangling to master.
*Mythology: (from the Greek mythos for story-of-the-people, and logos for word or speech, so the spoken story of a people) “is the study and interpretation of tales or fables of a culture known as myths or the collection of such stories which deal with various aspects of the human condition”. The current hypothesis of emergent properties has become the accepted mythology of modern society—again. It is the current story of our people.
The only thing genuine is belief, which is in-genuine. The world as an illusion
Is belief necessary because the world is not real? Believing-in would not be necessary if it was.
Humanity has taken a necessary component of participating in the illusion and made it a dogma—rewarding the creature with promises for correct belief (there are none) Such belief is even considered more important than correct action.
So, why so much attitude when all beliefs have contradictory behaviors as bed-mates?
If you believe our ontology rests in biological evolution and the right mix of minerals creates intelligence, that natural selection leads to the fittest for survival, how can one simultaneously believe that humans are destructive viruses and the world should be changed—that the world would be a better place if humans never existed? We are simply results in a petri of selfish genes—
You are the result of billions of years of imperfect, immutable, unguided change with the best chance of survival. If you believe this, nothing that has ever happened is in error, so why fight it? Why fight anything? There are no mistakes in nature, yet one thinks he can outsmart his own organism. Thats funny!
If you believe that the universe is a self governing organism, that everything that happens happens to “itself” (god) then you must believe things are exactly as they can be, or should be (or you want it to be) so why the division if all this variety is simply an interesting drama?
If you believe there is a an all-wise, all-knowing creator that is in complete control (even ordains our elected officials since “before the world was”) that he will make you a heaven if you simply believe, why all the gun collecting, racism, and nationalism? Why postulate a god and then immediately make it a meaningless assertion? Is he is really in control? Why do you have no faith in your faith? Why choose to believe something that has no bearing on the outcome of anything?
I could go on, but why the fighting when every religion, philosophy, or science, ultimately shows that there is nothing that can be done that is a mistake, or perfectly natural?
If science really believes natural selection is true, religion is a perfectly natural progression of evolution. Science then would be right about their science but wrong to fight religion. If evolution is true, why fight it?
And finally, why is belief so prevalent around the world? Is it because it isn’t real? There is nothing to hold on to. Is it possible the ground of being is strictly illusory? If not, why the need to believe in everything? Why the world of beliefs if there is such a thing as reality?
Beliefs are so important that they are protected by law—is like protecting a spirit with proper documentation.
The world must be believed to be seen…”Belief makes one fight. Fighting makes one strong—the selfish gene is in control after all”
Is it a coincidence that the golden age of physics had this common thread?
Has any religious doctrine ever supplanted a scientific discovery? I used to answer that question with an emphatic no, but I may have been wrong about that. It is highly likely that Newtonian physics was supplanted by the Upanishads—the ideas from Hindu philosophy called quantum mechanics.
What’s different about the Upanishad -vs- say, Christianity, is the Upanishad can be made into math by the most skilled of all scientific minds. It can be tested, and it can be fit into what we know about the nature of duality, consciousness, mind, and matter.
Is it mere coincidence that physics can be so mystical in similarity, that uncertainty is certain, and that through observation we find that waves become particles (matter) and that the “real world” is illusory (not what it appears to be) upon our observation of them?
“The Upanishads describe how reality arises out of consciousness. But consciousness cannot be found inside our bodies as a substance or an organ.” That trying to see the Self (Brahman) with the same electrons and photons as It, the projector only records interference because me are mixing waves of the same substance. What is sought is the seeker—the seeker is the sought.
“Since we haven’t been able to locate or explain this interaction, we’re left with a deceptively simple choice: either consciousness or reality doesn’t exist”—Erwin Schrödinger
But I despise the two choice debate. And as we see psychologically, consciously, physiologically, and every where in between, that consciousness is reality. There is no such thing as experiencing a non-experience. It’s all one thing. Everything is waves—some long and some short. Some last a lifetime while others millennia, but nothing is permanent —so no thing is real but one thing.
Realizing this has boosted physics out of the arena and into space.
On the other hand, the Upanishads uphold an idealist view – that consciousness exists by itself, and that the physical world depends on it. There is no objective reality that exists independently of the observer. Schrödinger supported this view and lamented the aversion for it: “it must be said that to Western thought this doctrine has little appeal, it is unpalatable, it is dubbed fantastic, unscientific. Well, so it is because our science – Greek science – is based on objectivation, whereby it has cut itself off from an adequate understanding of the subject of cognisance, of the mind”
Curious to know what other physicists of the era were influenced by the upanishads?
Werner Heisenberg, Carl Sagan, Robert Oppenheimer, Erwin Schrödinger, Niels Bohr, Nikola Tesla…
The golden age of physics and invention had a common thread that is wont to ignore (customary). The Upanishads and Indian philosophies date back about 5000, years. Their rebirth was witnessed at the turn of the 20th century.
“I do believe that this is precisely the point where our present way of thinking does need to be amended, perhaps by a bit of blood-transfusion from Eastern thought”—Erwin Schrödinger
No religious doctrine has ever supplanted a scientific discovery
Rawgod said, “A bit pedagogic, don’t you think, Jim. Nothing is ever always something.” Isn’t that also a statement of always, btw? But isn’t this true, that no religious doctrine has ever supplanted a scientific discovery?
As much of the world continues to chase its theological tail, more and more are ignoring what can’t be understood to discover things that 100 years ago would be miracles.
Imagine permanent, fully integrated prosthetic limbs and bionic implants being widespread. Scientists are also experimenting with various brain implants that might help restore hearing for the deaf and restore sight for some blind people. All ingenuity being extensions of human consciousness—our extended phenotypes?
The first images from ESA/NASA’s Solar Orbiter are now available to the public, including the closest pictures ever taken of the Sun. (1) Yes, we’re taking a closer look at the sun—the creator, the god of this world.
As we dig our way into the past we are finding humans have been here longer and longer, farther and farther back than we ever imagined.
These contributions all can fuel the betterment of humanity. To reach for understanding that all things are possible, and there is no need to believe anything outside of our own ingenuity.
Thank you to the farmers who have geniusly devised ways to feed this mob with less and less land. Instead of attacking them as co-conspirators poisoning the world with gmo’s, try thanking them for the extra yields that feed your offspring. They are the real miracle workers of the park. Now if we could just get that food to the children…
The biblical theology is that we are made—synthetic, not naturally occurring creatures that have no inherent existence in our own right—placed on this earth and serving in a probationary role as candidates for heaven.
From the clay figurine to the now complex individual, it was all spun into existence billions of years ago, god knowing that through the long and arduous evolutionary process he would eventually get his Adam (about 6000 years ago) through creation of the man shaped from atoms made into clay—now god can finally test his gadget.
But what is an atom? If so, what is Adam made of? Certainly when you break down the figurative clay into molecules and atoms we find the stuff—the foundation of all matter. Yet we don’t. Seems the universe is as infinitely as small, as it is big. The only way adequate way to describe anything is by its form and behavior. Seems to me that makes it the same thing.
The next choice is the that the order in the universe is a fluke—and accident of random collisions producing a spectrum of fungus, feelings, and intelligence. But in the end life is nothing but… This hypothesis has evolved into modern mythology, or imagery, if you will, of how it all began. Both theologies deprecate humanity to nothing but…
Whether you like it or not (until proven otherwise) the earth is a self governing organism that is filled with life. And it doesn’t know how it does it any more than you know how you grow your own hair. Things grow from within—they are made from without. Trees aren’t made out of wood, they are wood, in their own right. No amount of words can change that—and no amount of belief is needed to conclude what is. Whatever the case, it’s all pretty amazing.
The other day a friend of mine posted a question; “if you don’t believe in the christian god, what gives you hope?” I didn’t know I needed any until learning that theology.
The ideas expressed in this post stem from years of accumulated stimuli
Are we making our own choices or just reactions to stimuli?
Imagine a moment you are a lonely nerve ending. All of the sudden something rubs against you—“are you there?” “Yes, I am here”. But it takes another to stimulate relational awareness. Without other there would be no way of identifying self existence. It is said by some that god (or the universe) would not know it is god because there is nothing outside of itself to bring it to awareness of itself.
On the other hand, identifying self by other is also as ambiguous an introspection, because what others think of you rarely adds up to what you think of you. All of us are simply reflections of our external world.
So what is the difference between commenting, hitting the like button, or just moving on? Do you have to agree to appreciate another point of view? I was accused at watchtower of trolling christian blogs. I responded that I only read two, usually hit the like button to appreciate their efforts, yet only comment occasionally if stimulated to do so. But for some the reward is bloviating what stimulation they incurred previously. That is trolling, fanaticism—a self aggrandized irritation.
You may comment or not, but that choice has already been made by the years of stimuli, or not. There may-be freewill, but it was captured in a bottle long ago the moment humans learned the art of civilization.
How one myth is no better than the other—accepting what is, as what cannot be contradicted
“There are two great myths of the universe that lie in the psychological and intellectual backgrounds of all of us”. It is the most common, common-sense of today, but they are simply myths.
One; that the universe wasmade and has a governor. “That we exist only in sufferance as subjects of god, visitors here on probation where we are artifacts made, that do not exist in our own right. God alone exists in his own right, and you exist as a favor”—and you’d better be grateful!
“That you are a subject of the royal Monarch, the King of Kings and the Lord of Lords, an idea inherited from the political structures of the Tigress and Euphrates culture, and from Egypt”. That god is the big boss, who’s authority trickles down to the obedient governed.
The other myth that was popularized in the 19th century—that the universe is a fully automatic, random fluke. That after billions of years consciousness sprang from a special mixture of minerals, with just the right amount of seasoning, hot gas and voilet! You—are simply a result.
But suppose there is a third option—that there is no governor, nor that the world is an accident that spawned nature, “but that the universe is a self-governingorganism that peoples from time to time”, the same way in which an apple tree apples, or a forest grows trees—that life is a symptom of the universe, the same way in which a flower breaks-forth without knowing how or why.
Either the earth is a mechanism of laws, which would either be governed by god, or be a mere spontaneous, automatic fluke with no purpose—or it is an organism—“and organisms are self-governing like your body—and life is a symptom of a universe”.
Not merely a guess as to how consciousness arises through the chain of elements, nor placating the senses by thinking a god who cares, the world as it is seen without contradiction, and the universe is without question, bearing fruit.
Areas in “quotation” compliments of Alan Watts, The nature of consciousness.
Can humans think instinctively? Freedom of choice is precisely the state of not choosing. What is freedom of choice, when choice is the analyzing act of hesitation while making a decision and ignoring the instinctive action that has the backing of evolution?
While being a decisive person is considered someone who doesn’t stop to decide, a paradox in the definition itself which pauses me to examine. Why do humans approach everything backwards, abandoning instinct when they seem to know better? Thinking and words may have us spellbound.
Your mind, brain, and consciousness (whatever you want to call it) arises or evolves of the very stuff your thoughts are trying to analyze. No wonder it is such an impossible puzzle. And to examine what we consider the world outside ourselves becomes equally as frustrating, because it isn’t outside yourself either, although you’re inside it. Until one can release the duplicity of examining the world as separate and hostile, it will be utterly and increasingly futile to segment the universe, matter, and consciousness into words and formulas. Is there a more wholistic approach?
To treat our brain differently from any other organ that functions automatically without thinking, so too, the subconscious mind functions in an amazing way, unless you try to put effort to it—that thinking, the very specific and narrow channel of conscious attention with which we identify ourselves is the most unreliable means of examining anything, because what is, is being analyzed by the most unreliable portion of the human computer.
The scientific and religious approach, from the very beginning assumes we are separate from what we know to be true—that we are stardust, and to examine what you’re made of using what you’re made of, is a daunting task that should cause a laugh with absurdity, but instead causes contention because we fail to scratch beyond the conscious attention. It has to be examined by what we’re not made of—what is not obvious on the surface.
Thinking and what “should be” is a projection of the mind that creates an illusion of separation. Thought takes time; thought is psychological time that distorts the timeless.
“But were human”, you say, “we have to live in the world we have, with the tools we have”, you say, but the very art of approach from our infancy is at odds with logic and reason, combatting instinct and the underlying reality we have been trained to ignore in modern life. Laden with changing fact and pointless claims of progress, infighting, outfighting, constantly choosing from two wrong sides of beliefs that have us exactly and forever where we don’t want to be.
But human behavior without the thinking is most often heroic, while at the same time the hero says (s)he just did what anyone would do—yes, if they didn’t stop to think about it first.
And after analyzing all the data, the best inventions come by luck, not the scientific method at all. It is used much less frequently than it is lauded, and often used in backsplaining the discovery that was made by instinctive awareness–or luck.
If ghosts can walk through walls without disturbing a brick and the ghost is the mind of the living being, how can it lift an arm? Has anyone yet explained how that mind can affect matter when it is impervious to it?
If you push anyone far enough philosophically, they all end up in the same place. If you push politics in similar fashion, the same thing happens. The problem lies in not thinking it through far enough. We all want the same thing, yet hang our hats on intermediate causes and belief.
As science approaches mysticism, we measure finer and finer increments to avoid embarrassing ourselves with woo, infinitely subdividing the process, while religion continues to extend its own goalposts to avoid “fallen” matter and the “spirit” are one process. Nominalism and realism meet full circle, and only beliefs can keep them apart.
If you investigate mind far enough you turn up with matter; if you investigate matter far enough you turn up with mind. If you investigate yourself far enough you discover the external world; if you investigate the external world far enough, you find you. Why would that be?
Finally physicists wanted to know; how are things like when we’re not looking at them? In order to know how electrons behave we have to put them in a process that influences their behavior. So what are they doing when were not looking? It appears knowledge of something is the same thing as action upon it.
The act of knowing changes what you are knowing. Dualism (mind and body) is an illusion of christian mythology and has maintained its rigor only though faith. Because when we explore everything deeply enough, we find its all one process. Now we are at the final point, that life is a bunch of atoms (arranged just right) to form consciousness (not woo) but either way, monism is the final answer, when you push anything to its finality, its all one process.
Knowing is not a passive experience, but all knowing is a measured by its reactions. The illusion is to think you are a separate ego, when in reality you are simply a reaction of various stimuli that creates self identity. And too much of the same stimuli in any given arena, makes one a fanatic—because then, one actually starts to believe it.
How observing yourself is an impossible task—unpacking the bias
After centuries of two opposing (wrong) philosophies, it seems change is just too hard on pride—they will accept anything but this.
Robert Oppenheimer is reported to have said, “If we cannot disprove Bohm, then we must agree to ignore him.”—and ignore him they did. But why? Because Bohm’s theory of quantum potential threw a wrench in the hierarchy of accepted science, unifying physics with what mystics have known for millennia—its all one process. There are no separate events in nature, which means the universe is one organism. This is god—and nothing known or seen or felt is not—which actually means, there is nothing that is not connected, its all one—it’s a process—and you too, are it.
This is not the deity god of traditional misinterpretation—it is the fact that there are no partitions between any event, place, or material—that there are no things, only demarcations on an imaginary line through calculus. Where does one event begin or another end? Only in our attempts to interpret non-existent laws into symbols. Where math and the word becomes the reality instead of the symbol of it. Where Hebrew thought infiltrates science to its core to believe there must be actual laws of nature. But there are none—merely observable regularities through something regular—where clocks and rulers attempt to demarcate a connected process through a specific point of view—then put it into words.
If the Christian is right, then Hindus, Jews, Buddhists, and atheists, are wrong. When so many groups disagree, the majority must be mistaken. And if the majority is misguided on just this one topic, then almost everyone must be mistaken on some issues of great importance.
This is a hard lesson to learn, because it is paradoxical to accept one’s own folly. You cannot at the same time believe something and recognize that you are a chump to believe it. A sucker born every minute, but somehow that sucker is never oneself.
“Building on the interpretation of the quantum theory introduced by Bohm in 1952, David Bohm and Basil Hiley in 1975 presented how the concept of a quantum potential leads to the notion of an “unbroken wholeness of the entire universe” Science will continue to struggle along with this notion that it can observe itself, but you’d have just as much luck observing whats behind your eyes when you’re looking out. It’s the only logical conclusion. Observing a process changes it simply because you—are observing you, and that changes the experiment and it can’t be pinned down. The only way to properly observe the true nature of anything in its static form, is to do it without looking at it—and it can’t be done. But we can at least demarcate the highlights we choose to like, based on the proper stimulus that agrees with our anchoring bias.
“Everything we call real is made of things that can’t be regarded as real”—Niels Bohr
First let me preface, I am an atheist. There are arguments for “something else”, but I don’t know what that means. I am not protective of my atheism (finding what people call god would be a prize winning effort) but I do struggle with the term and how it’s been defined beyond the reach of understanding.
Life itself is some type of illusion (deceived by our own relativity?) What you see on the surface seems so real and tangible (mass) yet is hardly anything tangible at all but energy (what is that?) and According to Einstein, energy and mass are equivalent (that’s the message of E=mc2) But our interpretation of how solid an object is purely relative. How would we know any different than what we are relative to our surroundings (insert puddle analogy) It seems so “there”, but is only a form of energy, which we know little about.
In physics, the kinetic energy (KE) of an object is the energy that it possesses due to its motion. KE= 1/2 mv2. In emergency medicine, we alway want to know how fast the car was going, etc, so the severity of injury and patterns can be predicted. Stopping that motion releases a lot of joules, and how quickly it stops is the difference between life and death.
Earth is energy in form, hurling through orbit at 66,000 mph and spinning—and the energies accumulated to reach that speed it still possesses.
Ideas on the other hand, have no energy. Life has evolved into the lazy mans game, gaining 90% of our knowledge by opinions and papers, instead of experience. There is little horse-sense applied to solving problems, but persuasion turned to belief rules the culture. While utility inspired the idea, now the idea has a life of its own. Man, now disconnected from his environment lives in a life of barriers—and through opinion develops ideas on how to master that environment.
Since the idea has no mass, the end of arguing over beliefs would drown without a whimper—no explosions or mass casualties. It would be like cancelling church during a pandemic. Would anybody have even noticed if it weren’t for a few showmen insistent on keeping there ideas alive for cash flow?
Anyway, Christian influence has the world at odds—because of belief (everyone is compelled to take sides) The appeal to faith also uses no energy, but is the path of least resistance where belief now trumps utility—now the way of the world. The nature that evolved the man no longer exists. There were more sustainable philosophies, but it appears to be too late for that. We are now in the puddle of belief, and for most of the world it’s a perfect fit.
Where do we draw the line between undiscovered knowledge and mysticism? Using tools we don’t yet understand—
Since there are no gods or god as ultimate ruler, controller and creator, what does atheism allow in between? Is there nothing at all in a mystical sense, or just our minds playing tricks on us?
Do we discount the Buddha’s, Yogis and gurus as the pinnacle of religious delusion—yet the antithesis of belief though knowing by deconstructing belief, as a moment of flatlined brain function through meditation? The moment of knowing may be the grand illusion, or is the world simply asleep at the wheel of the cosmos in a form of conscious chicanery? (I know, a lot of questions)
Do we discount evidence of the data stream as the totality of acquired consciousness, where people in their creative zones unknowingly predict the future? Or where ideas come from? (there is evidence ideas arise in your brain long before you are aware of them)
Do we discount the shaman and forms of primitivism as unlearned quackery grasping for explanations, or are they simply more atuned to the energies of the earth because of there primitive form?
Skill and adaptation can come in a variety of ways and disciplines. How the Polynesian navigators traveled thousands of miles from island to island by being in-tune with the ocean currents and reading the ripples and vibrations in the water to know there was land—days away? (Yes they did) Just imagine the level of skill and intuition required. Would it be any less likely that the Kofan could talk to plants, as a well documented Maori could sail to Easter island with no navigation tools but his skill and intuition of the ripples?
Whether hard atheism is simply non belief in god or gods, does it shut out every piece of evidence that points to a strange world where things aren’t what they seem, even after they seem like it?
Abrahamic tradition and western thought that has infiltrated human thinking, has calcified human perception into two camps—god did it and we don’t know how, or the scientific approach where nothing exists that can’t be measured with a tape and a photograph. But…
“For thousands upon thousands of years, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples have navigated their way across the lands and seas of Australia using paths called songlines or dreaming tracks. Songlines will often follow on from one another, creating an intricate oral map of place“—A songline is based around the creator beings and their formation of the lands and waters during the Dreaming (creation of earth)—Australian National Maritime Museum. Is multiple sources of the same storyline from all corners of the world mere coincidence, or is it evidence?
They have proven they can do what they do, but how they got the knowledge…they just fabricated that part, or are lying? The problem with mystical perception is in its evidence—it cannot be measured except by its utility, so is therefore “magic” as some would say, and discounted as metaphysical mumbo. Who are we to know sophisticated when we can’t even find our fucking car?
As many varieties of skill and neuro-potential there are and has been in the world, can you discount everything else because you don’t understand it?
What I am seems so fleeting and intangible, but what I was—is fixed and final.
I am more closely identified with what no longer exists, than with what actually is. This overwhelming feeling that I am not a body, but have a body, is a curious look in the mirror. So who am I—and who are you? Just a skin encapsulated accident of evolution, or is there more to it?
When I became a non-believer, I was certain there was nothing beyond this physical experience—nothing but neurons, senses, hormones, and misinterpreted persuasions and perceptions. What it really was though, was a clean slate to view the world without the bias of belief. I really don’t care which way it is, so I ponder existence, consciousness, and try to find my own answers.
Now I am at a crossroad with nowhere to go, yet I press on daily collecting thoughts on a path of least contradiction. That the physical world too, cannot be explained without using the same abstractions of speech and metaphors, really leads me to wonder if there is any difference in stuff at all. And no one has yet put their finger on what the physical world actually is, generally meeting the requirements of spirit.
In the west we have a limited way with words that do not adequately describe the philosophies of half the world. Bonded by the Hebrew way of a monarchial boss, it is an imagery we can’t escape even when we know it’s crap.
The idea of the absolute god with all authority is a major, cultural catastrophe that set a course of dismissing other lines of thought, rebuttals ready before the sentence is even finished. But there are better ways of being, and we find when we look elsewhere it’s not even special—it never was. Just the only table setting.
One issue I have with hard atheism is it’s own automatic rebuttal feature. Sure, it’s easy to dismiss Christianity, but does that mean there is nothing at all?
With all the hairsplitting of physical and metaphysical jargon, it appears everything is god. We are all tits on the same sow—Alan Watts, and god doesn’t know it’s god anymore than you can identify your own source of thought. You’re it
For those who do not believe there is a spirit world—there is no difference but terminology
Why does examining the physical world still explain nothing about what it is? What is the most likely reason we haven’t identified one single solitary fact of what matter actually consists? Maybe it isn’t “real”? The simplest answer is usually the correct answer? Or Occam may say—”entities should not be multiplied needlessly” But physics is at a loss, as examining the atom we find 99.99999% empty space—We are empty space.
The physical world is the most elusive, evasive topic of all topics, yet at first glance it seems so obvious (here I am) But you can’t identify what stuff is, any more than you can find anything actually existing anywhere at all. You cannot put your finger on it, nor determine the basic physical makeup—of anything, simultaneously fulfilling all the requirements of spirit. Neither science nor religion has any idea what the hell is going on (forget resurrection of matterless matter for the moment)
Matter is all at once here, there, and nowhere. While it’s properties can be manipulated slightly for our imagined benefit, as far as being the real stuff we have hoped to identify as the physical reality, is likened most easily to an image at the end a projector—though you might just as easily identify the physical properties of an image on a movie screen—where there would be nothing seen at all without the background.
The farther we peek into the physical world the less is discovered—there is nothing there. It is empty shells everywhere we look, and the most obvious yet unsettling reality stares us in the face—there is nothing physical to discover. Is life and the physical world (as we assume) merely concentrated patterns of energy—like a dust devil in passing wind, we see its stationary effects but the wind keeps blowing? Whirlpools along a passing stream? Cyclones of organized chaos? Or is matter any more than a concentration of spirit, for lack of a better term? It, the obvious answer is, essentially energy forming a pattern. The other “one thing” we harness but do not understand in the slightest—electricity.
What should be the most obvious and easy to identify—the physical world, turns out to be the most elusive of all examination. We aren’t really even here in the sense of reality we have imagined. And imagine is what we do best, and will continue to do—our existence depends on it. Whatever the case, life is simply amazing to be a part of. It’s amazing!
How abrahamic religion is an artificial belief—made in Israel
If we draw conclusions by simply following evidence that developed naturally from the vast variety of sources (not just our select cultural few) maybe there is something rather than nothing. Let me give you an example.
Is the entire world crazy, or is it reasonable to accept that billions of humans have spiritual needs, unique perceptions, meditations, visions, dreams, and complex neurologies? Then, add the possibility of the data stream, akashic record, or 3D computer simulation, to those skilled in the meditative arts, or the paranormal tendencies of certain neurologies, the worldwide congruent teachings and vision quests of the shaman, the voodoo acolytes, those historically rich in the metaphysical oneness of reality and non-ordinary reality (non ordinary today) they do not even remotely resemble the god of Abraham or any form of omnipotence. Nor does it even remotely resemble Jesus, unless you want to discount every other human experience by creating your own evidence and forcing a lesser way through power.
Perhaps there is more to the story than the judeo-christo-muslim interpretation of the monarchial boss that has NEVER produced the desired results except—add more faith and fight it out. Even physics can merge with spiritual energy and matters of matter, which appears to be just energy anyway.
Viewing all the evidence with a blank slate I could safely say, that if independent research of all these experiences and possibilities were laid on the table, comparing it all without the coercive bias and threat of hell, it does not equal the god of the Bible or Quran (take your pick) and the nearest thing encapsulating science with all the other available information we would find panpsychism—the closest, non-contradictory reality to every idea but one.
“The first peace, which is the most important, is that which comes within the souls of people when they realize their relationship, their oneness with the universe and all its powers, and when they realize that its center is really everywhere, it is within each of us“—Black Elk, Oglala Lakota
“Crazy Horse dreamed and went into the world where there is nothing but the spirits of all things. That is the real world that is behind this one, and everything we see here is something like a shadow from that one“—Black Elk
Christianity is not a naturally occurring religion. It is a foreigner to a strange enough land.
For anyone confused over flat earth theology—debunking conspiracy math
Insisting the earth is flat? It matters where you get your information, but some solutions are frankly simple, and can be done on your own if you choose.
Colorstorm is insisting the earth is flat—that if it was round the Suez Canal would have to be dug out 1666 feet to account for the curvature, and for water to flow 100 miles from sea level to sea level. Without that massive dig the Suez would have to flow uphill, both directions. This is christian-think™️, where belief is steady and the flat earth doesn’t turn.
Because there is a “crest” illustrated by curvature does not mean “uphill” on a gravitational sphere. If your mind is clinging to scientific conspiracy, listen carefully—The surface of the water is equipotential. It has the same distance to the Earth’s center of gravity. It is not necessary to dig 1666 ft in the middle of the Suez Canal, only sea level to sea level and follow the flow.
For something even simpler we look at the Bedford Level Experiment, where six miles of “flat earth” were demonstrated to be curved simply by using three tall platforms the same height, with one structure at the three mile mark. Then using a transit level showing the difference on the pole in the middle, confirming a crest.
Also, did you know gravity is a bit stronger at the poles, where centrifugal force is less than the equator? Yes, the earth is spinning. Did you know you weigh slightly less on mount Everest than at sea level because you’re farther from the gravitational constant? Eventually, as you leave the gravitational pull, away from the core you become weightless like a space probe.
Finally, easily illustrated by things we see every day, the columns on long suspension bridges are level, but not perpendicular to each other. They are closer to each other at the bottom than at the top, tilting slightly away from each other on the sphere.
Belief is merely a guru challenge—a psychological barrier placed before humanity. Until we can transcend it’s limitations, we are not collectively responsible enough to handle the truth, so we occupy our time in endless debate over who has the best imagination.
Apologetics—defending what you failed to think about until you thought about it.
Happy with the surge of new found faith? Give it time. This is just the beginning…
Being carefully guided in belief, we learn what “we believe”, but the group effect has some curious side effects. In order to bend your bullets around corners it takes some clever self-interplay as well, guiding your mind carefully into a non-functioning model of thought conviction with no substance—peace through stagnation and empty promises.
The comfort zone of nonproductive faith includes:
More Handwaving than you anticipated
Answers without substance become natural
Out-thinking your opponent without thinking of your opponent
Increased desire for sin
God is good. Sure, he steadies the hands of the surgeon, but did you know, beforesurgeonsare qualified to operate, they must meet a set of challenging education requirements? These generally include four years of undergraduate study, four years of medicalschoolleading to a Doctor of Medicine (M.D.) degree, and three to eight years ofsurgicalresidency at a hospital.
Not to mention having the guts to do the dirty work—digging around in cadavers and engaging in mastery of human anatomy and physiology.
Don’t thank god, thank thosewho are willing to explore (in any field) People are pretty awesome and there’s no shame in accepting that. If we are going to make it on this rock, we could certainly use some help. But, you may have to set beliefs on the back-burner and engage as passionately in a skill as you do in mere belief.That same belief that has made a lot of claims, yet here we are, having gone nowhere for 2000 years and already hoping and praying it ends? That is the history of faith. Every generation thinks this is it! It isn’t even close.
I believe in the potential of humanity, but first we must discard the biggest problem that holds us in first gear.
The padlocks on this paper show how some things are just way too important to some people—beliefs are no different. There is a better way.
Christianity may be right after all—aligning the quantum mechanics
I have a stone here in my hand made of granite—an igneous, course grained rock formed under intense pressure, composed mainly of quartz and feldspar with minor amounts of mica, amphiboles, and other minerals. What are its components made of?
Breaking it apart, cracking the composition into smaller and smaller fractions to the nth°, we finally find the atom, lay open the pieces and we find nothing—like a Russian Matryoshka doll. Left with an empty shell comprised of .00000001% of “physical matter” in the common understanding.
We are made of barely nothing—a mere projection from the conscious vacuum, gravitational waves, and energy. We are space. We are in fact, energy. The eyes and ears, neurons of our own entity. The whole universe of everything.
Similarly, we find the firm foundation, the rock of ages, the priesthoods, the believers, the fathers of dogmas by errant perception of regionally based experience, and when we break it all down to its core and lay out all the parts we find nothing. It is coated, however, with a large smudge of hope and bullshit.
“The study of theology, as it stands in the Christian churches, is the study of nothing; it is founded on nothing; it rests on no principles; it proceeds by no authorities; it has no data; it can demonstrate nothing; and it admits of no conclusion. Not anything can be studied as a science, without our being in possession of the principles upon which it is founded; and as this is not the case with Christian theology, it is therefore the study of nothing—Thomas Paine
At the core of religion we find it relates to science after all. After peeling back the layers we find nothing. No substance, no proof, no matter, no bliss, but under intense pressure to believe. I’m certain Delusionite™️ is an undiscovered element for the periodic table—we certainly have evidence of its existence.
“the records show ordinary people being naively quite atheistic in their “interviews” with the Inquisitors of the Holy Office of the Inquisition. Apparently they had been counseled by their lying eyes…
Steve Ruis has some excellent insight today on reason and religion. If you don’t already read Steve, see his fantastic analysis on acceptable forms of reasoning HERE.
How religion is a constant reminder of our failures as a species.
Anyone from the Pacific Northwest that has a few years under their belt may remember WPPSS, or as it came to be known—Whoops. The Washington Public Power Supply System, but whats in a name, right? Foresight?
The cooling towers at Satsop still remain, void of any generating equipment or reactors. The budget swelled to over $25B (1970 money, $163B today) and with the three mile island accident eventually sealing the waining public opinion, the project was mothballed.
At 460 feet tall (same as Giza) they are a reminder for miles around of bad ideas and how difficult it is to get rid of them. Not to mention bonds that were to be repaid with future revenue that defaulted. Lots of redesigns “in process” and contractors bilking the system by “business with government as usual” faith Giza is a reminder how hard it is to get rid of a bad idea that has the churches support.
Talking about energy and actually delivering it are quite different at best. Promises to bring power to the region with others money (tithing tax free), Christianity has yet to deliver the promised results (that comes much later) Redesigned components multiple times “in progress”, the perfect idea is the worlds boondoggle and become too unsafe to continue. So much time and thought invested, such visions and reactions promised to them that believe, but waaiitt!!
What we’ve built is an eyesore. You get used to it (or numb) after a while, but these towers are part of my life now. I can’t remember them not being there. Even though the name has changed to Northwest Energy (rebranding) how quickly people forget the origins. Why? To keep their sanity which allows duplicating the hoax again and again even more successful due to the coping mechanisms of human survival.
—Forget because you have to, remember because you need—
And it’ll be there another 5000 years unless someone dismantles it—but the name will survive through rebranding.
Faith has no bearing on if we endure as a species, but it does have an impact on if we don’t. Belief is an arrogant default, distorted, misdirected void of reality, deceptive and skewed observations in favor of overreaching abundance and waste—this latest brand of hominids imagine great and unprovable things.
Somewhere in our past a neuron misaligned or is being used in an untoward affect—a synesthesia or other genetic misfortune hooked to ego and fear, then egotistic salvation and false-worth bred complacency—no one is coming to rescue us.
Unless a change is made the earth will one day be void of the chatter of men, void of human beauty and love—millennia’s of blank pages to be rediscovered in our fossil record by the next batch to rise aboriginal in the resilient and resurgent pools of DNA—life.
Consciousness transudes (1) from the living earth and directs DNA to build hospitable, organic environments driven by various levels of its potential—each one mapping out a resemblance to its capacity. Once an entity is no longer hospitable, the consciousness must leave the organism and death of that body occurs (this is easily observed). Equilibrium and the collage of consciousness recycles itself again and again, often shelved for myriads of time, dissipated into the atmosphere and elements—stored until conditions for organic life are met. Genetic epidemics like autism, cancer, and diabetes bear this out when skewed conscious determination maps a new life into forming with polluted potential.
Now the earth is overflowing with inhabitants struggling over a fixed amount of consciousness, with the dominant energies depleting the earth of its nature—not in its danger, but inflicting ourselves within this delicate, yet massive earth that will once again absorb its most acumen (2) nature shortly after our own bodies are no longer a suitable host to carry its potential—as we change our environment to become inhospitable to life, it will take millions of years to restore the balance for the rise of the next species.
While searching for the meaning of life outside of ourselves has been futile for thousands of years (and worth abandoning) through every rise and fall of hominids, one thing observable is true—the physical earth perpetuates and nurtures lifecycles—but only within a specific balance. We are sickly and getting worse. Is that any wonder?
Phylogeny tells us many lines have existed before. Human-like remains from the late Miocene period and the Pliocene era (7.5 and 5.3 million years ago) are not likely our ancestors, but different lines of hominid civilizations that appeared and disappeared, materializing at different places and times all over the globe—then gone. We too will be fossilized then followed by a resurgent, autonomic force that eminates from this unique speck in the galaxy. With some care we can make this ride last as long as we want—or not. Sapiens 2.0 may get the opportunity sooner than later.
(1) Transudes—to pass through a membrane or permeable substance
(2) Acumen—ability to reason, keenness, depth of perception, discernment, or discrimination especially in practical matters.
Why each person has their own interpretation of spirituality
Competition amongst the gods we imagine leaves an ominous gap in interpretation of existence, nature, and purpose.
Join me along the pier for a quiet mid-week stroll. See the snow-capped mountains in the distance while the gentle waves lap against the pilings. Feel the warmth of the sun washing ashore in a whispering, summery breeze, watching an orca, otter, and bottle-nose dolphin frolicking around a piece of large, weathered driftwood. One might call this a spiritual experience. I may say—god is magnificent; or, the creator certainly knew what he was doing, perhaps, pleased with his creation. We could all agree that together, we saw all those things and experienced them in an emotional, or inspirational way. Beauty is a stimulant that we all appreciate. It stimulates our senses (and hormones) while rendering thoughts of contentment. One thing we would all concede in our discussion is we saw a whale, a dolphin, an otter, and breathtaking scenery.
A discussion might follow; god is great, the master creator, followed by nature is amazing—obviously the god of love made this for us—while the scientist mind may imagine eons of selfish genes, double helixes, cataclysms, and the intricacies of diverse life that evolved from the primordial ooze over millions of centuries in different ecosystems and evolutions.
One of these ideas can be proven.
At once, without warning, the whale thrashes the otter into pieces, shaking it violently, tossing it high above the surf, then swallows it nearly whole.
The excitement stimulates the immediate ecology, and a passing salmon is chomped and swallowed without chewing by the dolphin. Reason would immediately favor the scientist. The religious could then pull-start their apologetic motors whirling about higher purposes, the ways of god are mysterious, or god knows best.
The facts suggest that differing neurologies and experiences create vastly different interpretations and perceptions of everything we view. All of us are different, and that is obvious we create our own belief. Some desire a creator (or succumb to the idea) from their training and influence, then manufacture an ideal that suits their purpose, adding personal touches to make sense of the senseless.
Each congregation has as many beliefs as there are people. Take away the churches, and the same would be true. It is you—not god that has generates purpose. I create my own—the believer inherits purpose through conformity and lives a life of pseudo-reality—by choice. And the evidence that shows how hard it is to escape your past indoctrinations.
Consensus between religion and science is happening, but it’s a one way street.
One of the interesting developments of religion is the attachment to scientific theory and advancement to suit their purposes. Evolution being the largest swing in recent memory, but also shoehorning bits and bobs of the Big Bang—calling out “god did it” and the insistence there had to be a first-cause to set it all in motion. It didn’t, and most likely there never was nothing.
Simple reason can point that out better than a god, and if anyone can display the ultimate in proving a negative—prove there was ever nothing… we obviously have these materials in front of us—more than you could ever say about a god. There’s no magicians trick here. The universe is a brute fact. Myth, however, is the true basis of religion, now making scientific claims using secular reasoning.
Even if per chance the world is a 3D simulation, there also then has to be a supreme all righteous omnipotent god at the helm, right? Purebias is religion staking claims on what they had denied forever. When the curtain is pulled back we would most likely see a fossilized crazy scientist dead in his chair after working himself to the bone trying to fix his experiment that got away. Whatever discoveries man seems to find, religion has god in all his power drip-feeding advances to share his love.
The idea that a god has to be supremely infallible of perfect righteousness is a pipe dream of runaway human imagination. And imagine, is what we do quite well. Simply reading the scriptures shows us through unbelief—their construct of god is a prick—unless you imagine otherwise.
Which brings us to consensus. How many religious points do the atheist agree? None. How many points of science do the religious adopt hijack? Nearly all of them. Its not that hard when you have an actual model that produces results. Creationism Origins is the last puzzle to solve. What then will the believers do with their god? Another claim as part of the masters plan?
How our grinding evolution is a lemming for religious purpose
Peering carefully, cautiously behind every corner…slowly, quietly, intently approaching every closet, while maginations hide under every bed—every time, chills of air send pilos erect, pupils dilate, blood pressures rise. Skin sensitivity doubles…with caution…ready to flee, or to fight, only to hide in worry another night. After arranging the room carefully—so no objects come alive in their darkened states, can a moment of peace descend dreary into sleep.
Why is this acute imagery laying in wait, alive beround every corner? Where did all this ritual come from? Survival. Who is it that survived the ages to become us? Where did we arrive to this overdeveloped sense, particularly at night?
It is this inherent caution, this fear, that is easily manipulated by religion. Playing on millions of years of survival instinct, the preacher paints a picture of a loving father figure to protect you from evil. If you can only imagine…just a bit more
Since the industrial revolution and the formation of modern survival, we have leaped beyond our multi-generational evolution. Changes that took 100’s of thousands of years are now shoehorned into a century. The preachers gold is our lumbering evolution. Fear is still a best seller…
How in our evolution did we become so trusting while raised in societies of liars.
Hard to dispute that belief is a common thread of war, contention, oppression, division, and hate, but I’d have to take two minutes to prove it. Seein’s I only get a minute here, godspeed is of the essence. To scrutinize and thoroughly plow-over any belief based faith is a noble and quite moral thing to do—and easy…
There are those that claim to have found god in their dreams, visions, NDEs, traumas, addictions, and so forth. He’s also been found in G-force testing, neurological studies, chemical enhancements, CO poisoning, anesthesia, seizures, end-zones, and outright lies. This spectral evidence (except for the lying, of course) is the root of all faith, and beliefs based on such evidence are totally unreliable and 100% subjective. To believe them has caused pain and suffering and outright murderous genicide throughout religions storied past. Putting all religion into past-tense would actually be wise—basedon its performance…its own demonstrable evidence.
Humanity’s beauty is our obligatory nature to our fellows in-kind, basically feeling compelled to believe when presented nearly anything—to be compliant, agreeable, simply because we are asked to merely believe and trust. Belief is about the stupidest trait mankind has somehow maximally developed in a society of liars.
To believe based on another’s belief statement, who also heard it from another, who never witnessed anything— is not only foolish, but irresponsible.
Where in our evolution and why, did we become so believing, so trusting, yet raised in a predominantly dishonest society of liars? Raised in deception like it’s a running joke of some kind, how this serves our survival—I just don’t know.
In a nutshell—“if the existence of God is up for debate, he doesn’t exist. Belief/faith in something is not necessary if that something actually exists”—Ben
Religions last chance to prove something is by waiting…
If you do not consider god first in all things, there is no room for god in any thing. If one chooses to give faith the benefit of the doubt, there is no room for reason. Whittled away from what once was, faith has suffered a methodical deconstruct of magnanimous proportions. Philosophies expand, explanations more grand, but supernatural positioning is dwindling to irrelevance. All one has to do is consider—
There are very few second chances in religion—None! If facts and scientific reason are considered and tested firstly, no superstition will ever supplant it. Psychology, Anthropology, Philology, Archeology, Astronomy, Biology, and Neurology, have quite nicely explained and proven—contradicting gods word at in-depth, unprecedented levels as never before. Even neurological experiments can re-create the spiritual experience—without the supernatural.
There is but one animal left to prove. Science has conquered belief every step of the way. Creation will be no different. While religion makes its scientific claim without explanation, it too will fall as the final hope for god. Not with why, but with how. I have faith we’ll get there, but many are hoping we won’t. Maybe they should pray about that too…The cosmological first-cause will be their last call.
What will they do when soon, enough is known to discredit this one last gasp of man’s greatest contrivance? Weeping and wailing tantrums against reality? We are on our own—let’s start acting like it. Physics, anyone?
How the Inverse Square Law predicts the death of religion
The Inverse Square Law of physics adequately and scientifically describes the deterioration process and the impending collapse of monotheistic religion as a principle of sound hypothesis.
The fact that Christianity is no longer practiced anyway—they now have shifted to just reading books and watching videos, the speed of collapse is following the inverse square law, where as the Christian wanders farther from the source of power, the dissipation or weakening of faith and effectiveness is squared.
So, as the field increases, the weakness and scope of the field follows a predictable trajectory.
And as the source energy is diluted, chaos ensues at an accelerated rate as electromagnetic fields dissipate. Miracles have ceased (ITEWO).
As you can currently see, no Christians worship the same god and all have there own “pick and choose” methodology, confirming that the source is no longer relevant or in association with the believer (if it ever was).
Soon, in-identity to the source is inevitable and the second law of thermodynamics is a type and shadow of any dying religion, plant, animal, mineral, or any dogma or idea. The collapse began when it all started, and we are now seeing the signs accelerating toward total entropy. Unless there is a new outside force to influence a reboot, the end is in our sights. Sooner than later I hope.
How humankind is poised to replace natural selection with intelligent design
Since the appearance of life, about a billion years ago, never has a single species changed the global ecology all by itself… Now humankind is poised to replace natural selection with intelligent design, and to extend life from the organic realm into the inorganic.”
Google task force “Calico” (headed by Art Levinson from Genentech) is currently developing a model for people to live productive lives for 500 years (Imagine your family photo with 20-30 generations) Currently Americans generate just over 4 pounds of trash per day. With a 500 year life span that equals just about 785,000 pounds of trash per person.
At current population rates, the first generation of the world that hits a 500 year life span would produce 14Quadrillion pounds of trash, not including industrial waste.
Having been subject to the ravages of environmental and other threats, some of their own making, humans have attained the knowledge, the will, the organization, and the mechanisms to subjugate every other species on the planet to their will. To what end? What’s the point of adding years to life if we have to live in a cesspool to achieve it?
How legislating equality is undermining potential—A better way from within.
“It is not in the shallow physical imitation of men that women will assert first their equality and later their superiority, but in the awakening of the intellect of women—Nicholi Tesla
Nicholi Teslas understanding of the electrical world in which we live gave him vision of the possibilities of progress. From the innermost workings of the human brain to the most basic of elements, everything is electrical. The idea that half the population requires men to allow women equal opportunity is from the get-go an expose’ on how far we have to go. Women’s equality in our societies must be as natural as water rolling down a hill, but to get there, women will have to forge ahead through excellence. Only then will humanity achieve its maximum potential.
Demanding gender equality through legislation is quite possibly the one of the grandest of illusions. In countries with greater gender equality, women decline in science and math. In more oppressive societies women are thought to accelerate in science and math because it is the fastest route to financial independence STUDY
Then of course there is page two
“Peace can only come as a natural consequence of universal enlightenment and merging of races, and we are still far from this blissful realization—Nicholi Tesla
Universal enlightenment will only truly come when all of our senses are activated, of our matters resolved, all of our colors united, and all of our women absolved from their pigeonholed stations in life, not only by men, but by women awakening their intellect.
It may or may not be men’s to give, but it will require continued effort on the part of women that no legislation will evenly compensate.
If a woman has a miscarriage, it is widely considered a normal/natural rejection due to implication from the mother or fetus. In some circles “gods timing” or his wisdom is an unreasonable reason for the inefficiency of human fertility. Of the nine most common causes of miscarriage, eight are a direct result of uterine imbalance or other health issues of the mother or father. One, genetic or chromosomal abnormalities is due to the fetus itself.
When a woman chooses to have an abortion, her mind, inseparable from her body is rejecting a fetus in the interest of mental and physical health. Abortion rates for health reasons could easily hit 25% of all pregnancy to fall in line with other spontaneous abortion. How can you separate the psychological needs from the physical?
If one doesn’t want the fetus, it is only an extension of her physical rejection and cannot be differentiated. Here are the most common reactions to pregnancy;
•Feeling scared and anxious
•A sense of “why wasn’t I more careful”, “How did that happen”, “I thought I’d be ok”.
•Feelings of being alone and isolated.
•Feelings of confusion and guilt.
•A sense of panic, lack of control and feelings of crisis.
•Disappointment and sadness.
•Surprise, happiness, shock and delight. An unplanned pregnancy can also be joyful.
Mental health affects physical well being and physical well being affects the mental. Who should be the judge of what one can tolerate in the name of social acceptance?
When considering the confluence of mind and body and what is best and wholly natural for the individual woman concerning abortion, terminating pregnancy by choice is as natural as miscarriage, with personal reactions to miscarriage, abortion, and pregnancy being nearly identical.
Finding the origins of life on earth is a collaboration of geneticists from around the globe. LUCA, or Last Universal Common Ancestor was a Progenote—2.9 Billion years ago. Massimo Di Guilio of the Institute of Genetics and Biophysics in Naples, Italy states “Progenotes can make proteins using genes as a template, but the process is so error-prone that the proteins can be quite unlike what the gene specified. The crucial point is that LUCA was a progenote, with poor control over the proteins that it made”.
Not to overwhelm with details, but imagine a single-celled organism capable of reproducing, but the shotgun blast of loosely controlled variations eventually filled the oceans in a cooperative sense creating a mega-organism like none seen since, it filled the planet’s oceans before splitting into three and giving birth to the ancestors of all living things on Earth today.
Like a Gish-Gallup of bullshit points in religion (a mythical and destructive form of progenote) starting as a single idea and having no control over the outcomes, spread through the world like a bacteria, or virus. After 3 Billion years we see the apple hasn’t fallen far from the tree, and genetically speaking, religion has lost its way but continues to grow in the outermost regions of third world poverty.
While progenote survived by non-competitive cooperation, religion has survived by destroying all noncompliant life in its path.
“One must not let oneself be misled: they say ‘Judge not!’ but they send to Hell everything that stands in their way”—Nietzsche
I suppose not much is more irritating than a Calvinist evangelical with advanced math, science, and theology degrees—and teaches university New Testament. Enter Vern Poythress..The argument is that mathematical laws, in order to be properly relied upon, must have attributes which indicate an origin in God. They are true everywhere (omnipresent), true always (eternal), cannot be defied or defeated (omnipotent), and are rational and have language characteristics (which makes them personal). Omnipresent, omnipotent, eternal, personal… Sounds like God. Math is an expression of the mind of God”.
I say 7+5=12 irrespective of a god, anywhere, anytime. The idea that we are explaining a completely incomprehensible being that has grown in grandeur to the point the faithful have given up, acquiesced to the level they cannot even comprehend comprehending. It’s a sad state of affairs when a myth overrides the desire to gain knowledge. “We lie when we claim that unexplainable things are in fact explainable. God is transcendent and beyond even the shadowy wisps of imagination in our finite minds. The Trinity, for instance, is not as simple as a metaphor of water (ice, water, steam) or an egg (shell, white, yoke). Sometimes I think we would be better off if we just said, “These ideas are so beyond me that if God did reveal them to me, I am pretty sure my brain would explode.” (1)
The line of reasoning in Christianity is defeat, and here we see the blind assignment of god to the trivial and the true, the obvious and the obscure—just because a unimaginable construct of human minds, that in itself is contradicted the moment we wonder about the nature of god. We disprove this unattainable jargon with imagination, theory, and testing. We have unlimited capacity to learn and understand. They just have no god to actually present. Christian faith promotes self defeatism of knowledge.
“Augustine expressed interest in perfect numbers, which have a curious connection with Mersenne primes. A perfect number has the property that it equals the sum of its proper divisors. For example, the number 6 is perfect because its proper divisors are 1, 2, and 3, and 1 + 2 + 3 = 6.” Therefore, god had to create the earth in six days, not by planning, but because he had to. He had no choice but to be perfect. That is the line of connection faith deludes.
I say 6 is sequentially ordered after five and before seven because it is. Even before the universe came into existence it had “perfect” properties as perfect prime numbers do. There is no magic or god about it.
I can imagine a being so grand he controls billions of light years of space. He travels by mere thought in yonder galaxies checking in from time to time to see see if your burka covers enough or if you cut your hair. He helps when you need to find a contact lens, but turns his back on the hungry. He is deeply concerned if you play with yourself, but condones genocide using “divine command theory” to let his worshippers off the hook. Religion is a huge excuse for the masses to smugly sit back and administer cruelty because god said so. The only math I see that stems from religion is where divisions are multiplied. The mere fact that we can see we have a problem is hope that maybe we can fix it. At least that is on our side.
Titius-Bode Law is a formula that suggests, extending outward, each planet would be approximately twice as far from the Sun as the one before. While the theory sounds intriguing, the six known planets at the time out to Saturn, only loosely followed the law (the theory was presented when there were only 6 known planets).
As more plantes were discovered, it was also discovered that the law didn’t accurately depict correct spacing. Neptune and Pluto, and the discovery of the asteroid belt removed Ceres from the list of planets as well, and the distant planets were way off the mark. It was time to abandoned the old premise and regroup. Turns out some of the planetary spacing is just coincidence and no real pattern is predictable. However, that doesn’t stop some circles from trying to prove its validity.
What was theorized to be true was changed and the journals are no longer accepting papers trying to prove Titius-Bode. I appreciate that about the scientific community. The ability to discover and rediscover in the quest for accuracy is more important than clinging to a false premise.
Religion too, has been superseded by knowledge. What was maybe the best explanation of its day in the life of an ancient sheep-herder, is not the best explanation today. Religion must employ faith and belief and promises they are unable to keep to hold any ground at all. We are at a crossroad, and as every belief in ancient gods has been met and eventually defeated, so too will the current models. Here’s to hoping it’s sooner than later. Just because something sounds good, and you wish it were true, doesn’t make it a reality.
How Christians credit god for scientific advancement.
I’m sure god has already thought of everything, then at the right time to keep up with the needs of his children, he puts the thought “out there” for some laboring scientist heathen to have an “aha moment” of discovery, thus benefiting all mankind and saving the day—But, as always, too late.
So far 25million people have died from aids, and even amidst the prayers of Christian opposition we are making progress towards a cure. But I guess god knows best when to end a life here to spend the rest of the eons in hell. God is compassionate.
Roughly 8million cancer deaths per year, and WHO is anticipating 84million more deaths over the next 10 years. God has revealed the cure bit by bit, but research scientist are just to caught up foray of equations and just don’t get it. More prayer is needed for scientific clarity and also to justify the rise of childhood cancers. But, he knows best—He is kind.
In the 14th century god decided to take a half day off. The plague killed half the worlds population, and the discoveries by Yersin and the Simond led to eventual vaccinations and things stabilized—500 years later—Gods timing is perfect.
“If” there was a god, drip fed scientific advance and drip fed morality based on the demands of secularism is the ultimate in immorality. THE All knowing, all caring, always loving, and always dead last when it comes to human advances, especially in morality—God is just…Just what?
Ask Mel….god is obvious— He’s everywhere!! Yes I say. I see him for what he is, if he were real. Remember, faith NEVER adds up to what it’s propped up to be when you look past the whitewashing
Rubidium is an alkali metal with an atomic weight of 85.4678. The half life of rubidium is 49 billion years, meaning it will take approximately 3 times longer for it to be worth half its value, than the universe itself is old. The universe has been dated by multiple disciplinary studies at 13.799 billion years old, +/- 20 million years has been the consensus of averages. Using observations of decay rates and math, we see how old each element is and can project its duration.
Through new research techniques, rubidium was discovered in 1861 using flame spectroscopy. Prior to then it was unknown. It was found by two men that used multiple techniques to imitially detect and name the unknown element just by looking. -Enter Religion.
Religion has a known objective. Discovering god has been a focus of more people than any other project in the history of the world, Billions of people, including scientists, have sought evidence of god and have come up empty. -Nothing. Yet we can easily find many other elements that were unknown, just by looking. Imagine for a moment that those billions of searchers, were actually applying themselves to reality? Where could we go? Advances have only begun recently, by very few people, pressing forward in spite of religion, and will continue to do so. Religion has had its day and failed. Time to move on to making this world a better world without time waning failed religious oppression.
The periodic table has a new element. Chemist at International Labs London (ILL), have discovered a new compound derived from basic, inert, random samples of ambiguous contradictory neurologic impasses. Failed synapse syndrome, (FSS) has been baffling neuroscience for decades, and removal of this newly discovered element is as easy as flipping a switch in the affected religious parties. Element “B” has an atomic mass and weight of zero, carries no electrons, but has a high affinity to synaptic dead space. Early studies show removal of element B causes instant cognitive restoration, and eliminates test subjects ability to rationalize obvious contradiction.
Test subject volunteers from the Four Square Church and the United States Bible Belt have seen instant results using a osmotic reverse cerebral cleanse, applied in a suppository pill form. Atomizers are currently being developed for nasal administration.
Evangelical chemists at Godwins institute dispute the veracity of the claims, and have directed the institutes science department to consult with Hindu Vedas and Puranas experts to counter the findings. “We know god is in there somewhere”, said one researcher. And, “this Biblio element makes no sense at all” said another. The plea for help dealing with these scientific issues has been ignored.
Mental health experts in co-dependency and Nano-3D printing technology has inadvertently discovered through reverse engineering models of human brains, an isolated cerebral diencephalic, mini-cortex tissue they are calling “the gullible region”. Under intense magnification, scientists have found what appears to be a pointless bridge denoting a cross-configured, double conjectured loop where archaic information is stored and transferred, restricting adrenal output and limiting “fight or flight” capabilities during religious indoctrination. Using accelerated computer models to view time-lapse evolutionary advancement, it was noted in 35% of test subjects that, “thought processes contrary to adhered beliefs actually atrophies the bridge”, allowing the subject to think for himself and gain immediate discernment. As 3D nano printers advance, coupled with microwave synthesis, researchers are certain a co-dependency cure will be forthcoming, and will soon be as routine as a lasix procedure. “Crossing the blood- brain barrier is the next step in nano research”, as for now a small incision is required. “Think of it as an uncircumcision incision, that is much less invasive than the purported benefits”.
This article is sponsored in part, by Poe’s Law, reminding everybody to wink wink for Easter Fools
Trust – reliance on the integrity, strength, ability, surety, etc., of a person or thing; confidence.
Faith- “Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.” Hebrews 11:1 KJV
I do not have an iota of faith in science, but I do place some trust and confidence in science and scientists because of the prior and continued successes all around us. It has a track record of measurable performance. Religion still has none. The paradox of religious faith is also found in scripture. Let this next part soak in a second.
“If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?” John 3:12 KJV
Was Jesus a scientist, or better yet, astrophysicist? The Greek word for heavenly is Ouranos, pronounced (oo-ran-os) meaning – heaven, the visible heavens: the atmosphere, the sky, the starry heavens. I digress.
Monotheistic premise today does not believe the earthly obvious, but holds to faith to explain what is otherwise clearly known.
Fundamental knee jerk resistance to science is holding the religious hostage to faith. If they won’t even admit to proven basics, how will they understand more complex disciplines like physics and evolution?
Maybe Christianity could adapt some scientific principles. They could claim it as gospel like they did paganism and mythology. But I don’t believe the two will ever mix because science is unprejudiced. Don’t forget their core! They are waiting and praying for god to come back and slaughter all the rest of us. That little tidbit says a lot about how they really feel. It’s a religion that is divisive and racist and prejudice to its core, and piety sets dividing lines to fight every step of social equality or scientific advance.
Wurtzite boron nitride is the hardest known natural substance on planet earth. It is also very rare. Scientist are currently using Christian apologist dummy models in an effort to determine density and commercial drilling applications using Wurtzite boring bits. It may also shed light on tapping into the apologist mind, which comprises the strangest of man made mythical substance. The current drill design features a wide, circular counter motion with redundant coupled ambiguous capabilities. The results to date are under study, but the difficulties of getting through are mentionable and require further reasoning. So far only 1% of the dummy heads have been penetrated. Scientist are baffled that the best science, technique, and machinery have not been reliable in tapping through to the mind of the dummies.