THE DERAILING ROOM

A place to relax and socialize - to muse, think aloud and suggest
Post Reply
Alfie
Member
Posts: 109
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2012 9:25 pm

Re: The 'cold' of space and our Universe that isn't.

Unread post by Alfie » Sat Sep 29, 2012 1:58 pm

Image

Andrew1484
Banned
Posts: 94
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2012 4:03 pm

Re: The 'cold' of space and our Universe that isn't.

Unread post by Andrew1484 » Sat Sep 29, 2012 2:17 pm

alex_ro wrote:
fbenario wrote:I'm so glad you joined us here.
Thank you.
fbenario wrote:I particularly love that you think God's Creation may actually be what happened.
No, I don't think that it MAY be what happened. There is one thing (and one alone) that I am absolutely certain (beyond 100% if that would be possible): the Bible. And that includes the Literal Bible (i.e. when addressing literal, not spiritual, things).

Science has come closer to what the Bible tells us.
True science though (I believe) only has uncertain "theories" about the nature of reality. There is no 100% certainty (or beyond 100% certainty) in scientific thinking. In a way I think that kind of 100%+ certainty that you have, must be very comforting for you. Scientific theory, with complete uncertainty, best guess thinking (for me) is probably a little less psychologically comforting.

From a "philosophical point of view" (Philo - Love, Sophia - Goddess of Wisdom) I wonder if you have ever wondered about the origins of the bible?

I mean, have you ever thought about things like that "science suggests" that it had several authors over a long period of time and that the roots of the allegorical tales appear to go back further in time than the “original” OT or NT bible texts (possibly) out of the Levant, texts that were originally in various different languages (Aramaic, Greek, Latin, Coptic, Egyptian etc.). Eventually ending up translated in English. The King James version in "English" was possibly influenced by British Rosicrucians (Sir Francis Bacon et al.) who may have introduced some of their own spin and distortion to the text.

Is the modern English bible really a faithful translation of a Middle Eastern bronze age OT text? Would it matter if the bible had changed in meaning and description over the centuries? Perhaps the various translations over the centuries were being telepathically channeled to the translating scribes, who may have reinterpreted older texts in different languages, so because they were communing with “the spirit of the universe” (AKA “source” and “great architect of the universe”) any changes will have been “authorised” changes?

On the "age of the world" of course "scientific thinking" has a great many reasons to think that the "less than 6000 years old" concept is an error.

I wonder if this (science alleged) "concept error" --- perhaps --- is not simply a misreading of ancient texts? If we look at religion from the "astrological point of view" then there have historically been several "ages of religion" ---- and the age of Aries the Ram (Jehovah Moon God worship) supplanted the previous Age of Taurus the Bull that started around 6000 years ago. So perhaps "the calendar was simply reset" at that time. The current Age of Pisces (the Jesus Fish) is ending, to be replaced by the New Age of Aquarius ---- so if a new religion is introduced for this New Age of Aquarius then the controllers of that new religion might reset the calendar clock back again to zero. Like they did with BC and AD ---- or, as they put it these days --- politically correctly --- Common Era and Before Common Era --- rather hinting at the idea that they might want people to start to forget about BC & AD, Before Christ and Anno Domini (In the Year of our Lord, the Sun-God Jesus).


"The Ages" are in reverse order to the normal "Zodiac" due to the 2,000-year odd cycle of the "precession of the equinoxes":


Leo –10,000 to –8,000 BC/BCE the Lion Sphinx in Egypt looked at the Leo constellation at the Spring Equinox, "As Above, So Below".
Image
Cancer –8,000 to –6,000 BC the Lion Sphinx in Egypt looks at Cancer

Gemini–6,000 to –4,000 BC
Image
Taurus–4,000 to –2,000 BC End of the Age of the Hindu Sacred Cow, The Minoan Sacred Bull etc. Mithras fought the Bull. Moses fought the Golden Calf.
Image
Aries –2,000BC to AD0 or AD1 since Zero concept had not yet been invented. "Anno Domini". "In the Year of Our Lord". So the Age of Judaism, The Age of the Sacred Ram Ends and the Age of the Sacred Fish God Starts.
Image
Pisces AD 0 or rather AD 1 to +AD2,000/2,001 or Winter Equinox 21st December 2012 perhaps? End of the Age of Christianity and the Sacred Fish God, of the Pisces Fish Age.
Image
Aquarius AD+2,000 or AD2012 to about +4,000 the dawning of the "New Age of Aquarius"

Capricorn AD+4,000 to +6,000

Sagittarius AD+6,000 to +8,000

Scorpio AD+8,000 to +10,000

Libra AD+10,000 to +12,000

Virgo AD+12,000 to +14,000 Washington DC appears to have been dedicated to Virgo.

Back to Leo and start again.
Last edited by Andrew1484 on Sat Sep 29, 2012 3:37 pm, edited 2 times in total.

hoi.polloi
Administrator
Posts: 5061
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: The 'cold' of space and our Universe that isn't.

Unread post by hoi.polloi » Sat Sep 29, 2012 3:29 pm

And all this strange manipulation of people's beliefs is based on the children's game "connect the dots", I guess?

Well, not exactly. If you read about ancient magic beliefs, the models "in the stars" are forced representations of archetypes felt by ancient people. In other words, imagined or fantasized about based on an emotional relationship to the world and people. I don't think we can discuss much of that without going into annoying God talk that doesn't really belong on this forum, but yeah - just agreeing with Andrew1484 that the "age of Earth" in some "scientific" models somewhat relates to purely non-scientific belief.

fbenario
Member
Posts: 2231
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 1:49 am
Location: Atlanta, GA
Contact:

Re: The 'cold' of space and our Universe that isn't.

Unread post by fbenario » Sat Sep 29, 2012 7:00 pm

Andrew1484 wrote:I mean, have you ever thought about things like that "science suggests" that it had several authors over a long period of time and that the roots of the allegorical tales appear to go back further in time than the “original” OT or NT bible texts (possibly) out of the Levant, texts that were originally in various different languages (Aramaic, Greek, Latin, Coptic, Egyptian etc.). Eventually ending up translated in English. The King James version in "English" was possibly influenced by British Rosicrucians (Sir Francis Bacon et al.) who may have introduced some of their own spin and distortion to the text.
...
I wonder if this (science alleged) "concept error" --- perhaps --- is not simply a misreading of ancient texts? If we look at religion from the "astrological point of view" then there have historically been several "ages of religion" ---- and the age of Aries the Ram (Jehovah Moon God worship) supplanted the previous Age of Taurus the Bull that started around 6000 years ago. So perhaps "the calendar was simply reset" at that time. The current Age of Pisces (the Jesus Fish) is ending, to be replaced by the New Age of Aquarius ---- so if a new religion is introduced for this New Age of Aquarius then the controllers of that new religion might reset the calendar clock back again to zero. Like they did with BC and AD ---- or, as they put it these days --- politically correctly --- Common Era and Before Common Era --- rather hinting at the idea that they might want people to start to forget about BC & AD, Before Christ and Anno Domini (In the Year of our Lord, the Sun-God Jesus).
Andrew, I'd really like to know what you think of Velikovsky's revised chronology. Further, I'd like to know how you think we can legitimately disprove it, so that our standard mainstream historical timelines might still be right.

Please don't bail-out on me here by making some passing reference to carbon-14 dating, it can purposely misused just like all other scientific methods.

(Andrew, in case you still have any doubts about my good faith to you, I trust you can see by now that I am taking you seriously and trying to make some sense of your overly voluminous number of posts (for a new member). Please just try to avoid insulting comments about long-term members, who have built credibility over years of posts. I and others won't put up with it, since it lowers the forum's tone and serious intent into backbiting and name-calling. Thank you.)

fbenario
Member
Posts: 2231
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 1:49 am
Location: Atlanta, GA
Contact:

Re: The 'cold' of space and our Universe that isn't.

Unread post by fbenario » Sat Sep 29, 2012 7:07 pm

alex_ro wrote:
fbenario wrote:It would mean an awful lot to me if you would post everything you know that might objectively prove the timeline of the Bible. Thank you very, very much.
The timeline of the Bible? You mean, to prove that Adam lived for 900 and then some years? I can't.

If instead you meant how the Universe can be less than 6000 years old, that I can.
Sorry for being unclear; I didn't mean Adam or Methuselah, et. at., I was focused on the geologic timeline of earth and the cosmos. That subject is one of my main interests, since I believe that until 'science' clearly explains how the absolute void existing in the millisecond before creation transitioned into atoms and other matter, we are left with God as the motive force/power behind the begininng of all of everything.

No, quantum is not the answer. Until quantum theories are reproducible, they remain a philosophy, not a science, and thus CAN'T explain Creation - whereas God could very easily do it by snapping his fingers.

Andrew1484
Banned
Posts: 94
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2012 4:03 pm

Re: The 'cold' of space and our Universe that isn't.

Unread post by Andrew1484 » Sun Sep 30, 2012 7:46 am

hoi.polloi wrote:And all this strange manipulation of people's beliefs is based on the children's game "connect the dots", I guess?

Well, not exactly. If you read about ancient magic beliefs, the models "in the stars" are forced representations of archetypes felt by ancient people. In other words, imagined or fantasized about based on an emotional relationship to the world and people. I don't think we can discuss much of that without going into annoying God talk that doesn't really belong on this forum, but yeah - just agreeing with Andrew1484 that the "age of Earth" in some "scientific" models somewhat relates to purely non-scientific belief.
Well this forum does seem to be interested in the way that the minds of the "common masses" are routinely misled by the "powers that be" ---- or (put another way) perhaps by the somewhat in control 1% ---- and how that (often malign and parasitic) 1% controls and feeds on the energy supplied by the cognitively, spiritually and physically enslaved 99%.

I don't want deeply to question an individual mind that may derive some psychological comfort in an absolute certainty that an English translation of an ancient OT and NT text is the only true religion and that all other religions, or ways of looking at "WTF is going on" (like scientific thinking) could be wrong. For some minds it could be that the English bible provides an "anchor for their sanity" and it would be very unfriendly of me to interfere with anybody trying to deal with the somewhat scary "WTF is going on?" question by messing with their anchor.

On the connecting the dots issue (where the ground marker points to a connected dot constellation in the sky), there appears to be a deep belief (by some) in "recurring cycles" in our universe. Long cycles and short cycles. There are 13 Moon Cycles in a Solar Year, 28 X 13 = 364 + 1 = 365, "A Year And A Day" for example. Female human menstruation may be naturally linked to the moon cycle ---- although modern lighting, at night, may throw many women off any synchronised rhythm these days.

We can see some cycles quite easily, like the sun-spot cycle of about 11 years. Solar output may well have an effect on farming and weather of course. Economics may run in cycles. The world (or Northern Hemisphere at least) was warmer than now 1,000 years ago, then there was a cooling period, the River Thames in London would freeze in winter until about 200 years ago. Now it is (naturally) getting a bit warmer again. Or the Venus cycle that draws a pentagram star shape in the night sky over 8 years. These are cycles that can be seen up there in the sky.

So the sky patterns (arbitrary constellation dot joining) apparently moves in relation to a fixed pointer on the ground. The current 12 Houses of the Zodiac moving slowly (24 to 26 thousand years as a complete "Great Year Cycle") across the sky in relation to a fixed ground marker are really only like 12 numbers painted on a 12 hour clock face, revolving around a fixed hour marker. This is just a cycle measuring system, a lot of different "clocks" running at different speeds ---- some running very slowly indeed.

Their mantra (for believers) is "As Above, So Below!" These sky cycles may also have much longer periods as well. This is "their" belief system anyway. Which is why they have arranged for new religious cults for the 99% to believe in (derive comfort in a simplistic "answer" to the ageless question "WTF is going on?") every two thousand years or so, for (apparently) at least the last 12,000 years.

So if the Jesus Fish Sun God of the Age of Pisces is about to be retired ---- which sky god will they choose to be the basis of a hypothetical New Age of Aquarius religious cult, over the next two hundred years or so? Well they had God the Father the Moon God with the Age of Aries. Then they had God the Son with the Sun God for the Age of Pisces. I think that they should go with the Mother Goddess this time. I vote for the Divine Feminine Goddess of Venus-Lucifera, The Bearer of Light and Bringer of Enlightenment. The Statue of Liberty Enlightening the World. The Columbia Pictures Goddess.

In their allegorical tale of King Arthur (Our Thor, Thursday, Jove, Jupiter) married to Guinevere (Fair Venus) we saw the allegorical temporary death of the divine feminine with the Lady of the Lake etc. and I suspect that they may want her back again, for this Aquarian cycle. I may be completely wrong of course. This is just my best guess, on the evidence available to me for now.

Andrew1484
Banned
Posts: 94
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2012 4:03 pm

Re: The 'cold' of space and our Universe that isn't.

Unread post by Andrew1484 » Sun Sep 30, 2012 9:29 am

fbenario wrote:
Andrew1484 wrote:I mean, have you ever thought about things like that "science suggests" that it had several authors over a long period of time and that the roots of the allegorical tales appear to go back further in time than the “original” OT or NT bible texts (possibly) out of the Levant, texts that were originally in various different languages (Aramaic, Greek, Latin, Coptic, Egyptian etc.). Eventually ending up translated in English. The King James version in "English" was possibly influenced by British Rosicrucians (Sir Francis Bacon et al.) who may have introduced some of their own spin and distortion to the text.
...
I wonder if this (science alleged) "concept error" --- perhaps --- is not simply a misreading of ancient texts? If we look at religion from the "astrological point of view" then there have historically been several "ages of religion" ---- and the age of Aries the Ram (Jehovah Moon God worship) supplanted the previous Age of Taurus the Bull that started around 6000 years ago. So perhaps "the calendar was simply reset" at that time. The current Age of Pisces (the Jesus Fish) is ending, to be replaced by the New Age of Aquarius ---- so if a new religion is introduced for this New Age of Aquarius then the controllers of that new religion might reset the calendar clock back again to zero. Like they did with BC and AD ---- or, as they put it these days --- politically correctly --- Common Era and Before Common Era --- rather hinting at the idea that they might want people to start to forget about BC & AD, Before Christ and Anno Domini (In the Year of our Lord, the Sun-God Jesus).
Andrew, I'd really like to know what you think of Velikovsky's revised chronology. Further, I'd like to know how you think we can legitimately disprove it, so that our standard mainstream historical timelines might still be right.

Please don't bail-out on me here by making some passing reference to carbon-14 dating, it can purposely misused just like all other scientific methods.

(Andrew, in case you still have any doubts about my good faith to you, I trust you can see by now that I am taking you seriously and trying to make some sense of your overly voluminous number of posts (for a new member). Please just try to avoid insulting comments about long-term members, who have built credibility over years of posts. I and others won't put up with it, since it lowers the forum's tone and serious intent into backbiting and name-calling. Thank you.)
I am never intentionally trying, gratuitously, with malice aforethought, to insult anybody and if I have ever reacted too negatively to any hostility from others, then I apologise. I should try to control my own internal emotional state better, even if somebody else says something that I might regard as gratuitously provocative, insulting and hostile towards me. I may have erroneously thought once or twice, early on, (first few posts) that somebody else was effectively, maliciously, "kidding" with an argument or theory, so my responses back then might have been rather ill judged. Sorry.

I only really post stuff "in volume" if it is stuff that I have previously thought about over the years and I have probably previously written about and theorised about elsewhere. Like on the now defunct and destroyed AOL Message Boards. I try to create plausible sounding arguments and theories and responses ---- and sometimes that might make a post a bit long I suppose.

We are all, probably, very honestly trying to figure out WTF is going on. If I detect an internally inconsistent flaw in an argument that suggests "a thought error" to me, then I think that it is quite OK to point that out, it should not be taken as an insult. It should be taken as a helpful observation that may help to refine an argument or theory to appear to be more plausible, to third party observation. If I have not made an error in comprehension myself of course.

I don't pretend to know much (if anything really) about "Velikovskyism" but I agree with you that a so-called "scientific" technique like Carbon 14 might indeed be misused.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immanuel_Velikovsky
Like all of the DNA testing stuff, I worry that Carbon 14 can be an easily misused science.

I quite like tree ring dating --- or "dendrochronology" --- which appears to take us back at least 10,000 years, through overlapping tree generation samples. Perhaps researchers in this field are also lying, but it seems to me to be a rather more easily provable or disprovable "empirical way" of dating stuff, for the average person. Ice core data is a related (Annual Layer) method of recreating historical timelines with regard to weather, atmospheric composition, catastrophic dust filled air from volcanic action or impact events etc. Similarly rock layers also hint (to me) at very long time lines indeed.

I am not quite sure what you mean by "our standard mainstream historical timelines might still be right" as these timelines may well change in the future. I doubt that 200 years ago many people thought that this planet was about 4.5 thousand million years old, yet many people seem to think that right now, as a "standard mainstream" historical timeline. I have absolutely no idea how old this planet REALLY is and/but it would not surprise me in the slightest if a commonly held "standard mainstream" timeline belief about the age of the planet could be quite different again in AD 2400.

Andrew1484
Banned
Posts: 94
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2012 4:03 pm

Re: The 'cold' of space and our Universe that isn't.

Unread post by Andrew1484 » Sun Sep 30, 2012 10:18 am

fbenario wrote:
alex_ro wrote:
fbenario wrote:It would mean an awful lot to me if you would post everything you know that might objectively prove the timeline of the Bible. Thank you very, very much.
The timeline of the Bible? You mean, to prove that Adam lived for 900 and then some years? I can't.

If instead you meant how the Universe can be less than 6000 years old, that I can.
Sorry for being unclear; I didn't mean Adam or Methuselah, et. at., I was focused on the geologic timeline of earth and the cosmos. That subject is one of my main interests, since I believe that until 'science' clearly explains how the absolute void existing in the millisecond before creation transitioned into atoms and other matter, we are left with God as the motive force/power behind the beginning of all of everything.

No, quantum is not the answer. Until quantum theories are reproducible, they remain a philosophy, not a science, and thus CAN'T explain Creation - whereas God could very easily do it by snapping his fingers.
An anthropomorphic "God" with snapping fingers? Isn't that a bit of a risky (ie dead-end) "materialistic" (matter before mind) sounding line of thought? So who made any hypothetical God etc. as a divine omnipotent entity with that kind of whimsical power of creation? Creating what anyway? Matter as a "solid thing" is apparently an illusion. Everything is fundamentally energy.

The idea of a (quantum theory probably helps here) "mind before matter" multi-dimensional universe means that "we" (individually) have many more things to wonder about and research before we get anywhere close to a question like "where/how/what/when/why" might anything have started (or potentially end etc.) in our current (apparently 3D) dimension or realm. Or in higher dimensions. We are thinking, we are part of creation, we are part of the architecture of a thinking universe. I think, therefore, I am.

Neil Kramer - Guerrilla Psychonautics

full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1afhJ9i2Qnk

Heiwa
Banned
Posts: 1062
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 6:20 pm
Contact:

Re: The 'cold' of space and our Universe that isn't.

Unread post by Heiwa » Sun Sep 30, 2012 12:37 pm

Andrew1484 wrote: Matter as a "solid thing" is apparently an illusion. Everything is fundamentally energy.
I just look at the last 10 billion years in nearby Universe and matter doesn't seem to have changed much then from my perspective. And matter or mass is just a form of energy, it seems, we all agree. It cannot be destroyed so ... it cannot be created. It was always there. I like that. :P :rolleyes:

hoi.polloi
Administrator
Posts: 5061
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: The 'cold' of space and our Universe that isn't.

Unread post by hoi.polloi » Sun Sep 30, 2012 2:46 pm

So the sky patterns (arbitrary constellation dot joining) apparently moves in relation to a fixed pointer on the ground. The current 12 Houses of the Zodiac moving slowly (24 to 26 thousand years as a complete "Great Year Cycle") across the sky in relation to a fixed ground marker are really only like 12 numbers painted on a 12 hour clock face, revolving around a fixed hour marker. This is just a cycle measuring system, a lot of different "clocks" running at different speeds ---- some running very slowly indeed.

Their mantra (for believers) is "As Above, So Below!" These sky cycles may also have much longer periods as well. This is "their" belief system anyway. Which is why they have arranged for new religious cults for the 99% to believe in (derive comfort in a simplistic "answer" to the ageless question "WTF is going on?") every two thousand years or so, for (apparently) at least the last 12,000 years.
Yes, that is sort of what I'm getting at. I wanted to point that out - it's "their" system.

On the other hand, I wanted to leave room for the possibility that we humans somewhat biologically or otherwise "naturally" developed these 12 (or 13?) thing-a-ma-whatsits, out of our inherent human-ness, whatever that might be.

That is to say, it may be "their" system but they is us, so maybe it's more like "just another one of our many conflicting, contradictory, intertwined, interconnected sub-systems" of the WTF you refer to.

Andrew1484
Banned
Posts: 94
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2012 4:03 pm

Re: The 'cold' of space and our Universe that isn't.

Unread post by Andrew1484 » Sun Sep 30, 2012 3:17 pm

hoi.polloi wrote:
So the sky patterns (arbitrary constellation dot joining) apparently moves in relation to a fixed pointer on the ground. The current 12 Houses of the Zodiac moving slowly (24 to 26 thousand years as a complete "Great Year Cycle") across the sky in relation to a fixed ground marker are really only like 12 numbers painted on a 12 hour clock face, revolving around a fixed hour marker. This is just a cycle measuring system, a lot of different "clocks" running at different speeds ---- some running very slowly indeed.

Their mantra (for believers) is "As Above, So Below!" These sky cycles may also have much longer periods as well. This is "their" belief system anyway. Which is why they have arranged for new religious cults for the 99% to believe in (derive comfort in a simplistic "answer" to the ageless question "WTF is going on?") every two thousand years or so, for (apparently) at least the last 12,000 years.
Yes, that is sort of what I'm getting at. I wanted to point that out - it's "their" system.

On the other hand, I wanted to leave room for the possibility that we humans somewhat biologically or otherwise "naturally" developed these 12 (or 13?) thing-a-ma-whatsits, out of our inherent human-ness, whatever that might be.

That is to say, it may be "their" system but they is us, so maybe it's more like "just another one of our many conflicting, contradictory, intertwined, interconnected sub-systems" of the WTF you refer to.
Perhaps some of us might wish that more of "them" thought that "they is us" or that "they" are like us.

Yes quite, on the 13 thing-a-ma-whatsits thing - Ophiuchus - The Snake.
Image
In a way 13 X 28 day Months (Moonths) per Solar year with 13 Houses --- and 13 X 2000 year Houses in a 26,000 Great Year would look so much "neater" of course.

fbenario
Member
Posts: 2231
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 1:49 am
Location: Atlanta, GA
Contact:

Re: The 'cold' of space and our Universe that isn't.

Unread post by fbenario » Mon Oct 01, 2012 2:21 am

Andrew1484 wrote:An anthropomorphic "God" with snapping fingers? Isn't that a bit of a risky (ie dead-end) "materialistic" (matter before mind) sounding line of thought? So who made any hypothetical God etc. as a divine omnipotent entity with that kind of whimsical power of creation? Creating what anyway? Matter as a "solid thing" is apparently an illusion. Everything is fundamentally energy.

The idea of a (quantum theory probably helps here) "mind before matter" multi-dimensional universe means that "we" (individually) have many more things to wonder about and research before we get anywhere close to a question like "where/how/what/when/why" might anything have started (or potentially end etc.) in our current (apparently 3D) dimension or realm. Or in higher dimensions. We are thinking, we are part of creation, we are part of the architecture of a thinking universe. I think, therefore, I am.
Until someone produces a theory that explains creation, the image of God snapping his fingers is the best idea the world has. Of course you all have to admit that God might exist. He has told us that he is outside-of-time (meaning eternal, with no beginning or end) and is immaterial (not composed of matter). If he in fact exists, he could very easily have 'snapped his fingers' to commence the instantaneous creation of matter in a form which we can somewhat understand.

As an example, I'm pretty darn sure that I am actually sitting on a chair, and typing on a keyboard.

What say you?

P.S. Since I am now beginning to respect your judgment, and you agree that carbon-14 can't be used to prove the age of anything, I'd like to ask you to spend a little bit of time on Velikovsky and tell me what you think about etc., such as the 'never-happened' Dark Ages.

Andrew1484
Banned
Posts: 94
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2012 4:03 pm

Re: The 'cold' of space and our Universe that isn't.

Unread post by Andrew1484 » Mon Oct 01, 2012 7:38 am

fbenario wrote:
Andrew1484 wrote:An anthropomorphic "God" with snapping fingers? Isn't that a bit of a risky (ie dead-end) "materialistic" (matter before mind) sounding line of thought? So who made any hypothetical God etc. as a divine omnipotent entity with that kind of whimsical power of creation? Creating what anyway? Matter as a "solid thing" is apparently an illusion. Everything is fundamentally energy.

The idea of a (quantum theory probably helps here) "mind before matter" multi-dimensional universe means that "we" (individually) have many more things to wonder about and research before we get anywhere close to a question like "where/how/what/when/why" might anything have started (or potentially end etc.) in our current (apparently 3D) dimension or realm. Or in higher dimensions. We are thinking, we are part of creation, we are part of the architecture of a thinking universe. I think, therefore, I am.
Until someone produces a theory that explains creation, the image of God snapping his fingers is the best idea the world has. Of course you all have to admit that God might exist. He has told us that he is outside-of-time (meaning eternal, with no beginning or end) and is immaterial (not composed of matter). If he in fact exists, he could very easily have 'snapped his fingers' to commence the instantaneous creation of matter in a form which we can somewhat understand.

As an example, I'm pretty darn sure that I am actually sitting on a chair, and typing on a keyboard.

What say you?

P.S. Since I am now beginning to respect your judgment, and you agree that carbon-14 can't be used to prove the age of anything, I'd like to ask you to spend a little bit of time on Velikovsky and tell me what you think about etc., such as the 'never-happened' Dark Ages.
I honestly don’t think that we can achieve a genuine “meeting of minds” over this “Deity” issue --- because we are (I think) looking at subjective “reality” from completely different points of view.

Since, as a child, I was “educated” (brainwashed) in boarding schools and I compulsorily attended Protestant Christian Church a lot, was baptised as an infant & later endured the entire “confirmation” brainwashing process, I do know a bit about the Christian “Trinity” Deity issue --- The Holy Family of God the Father, God the Son & The Holy Ghost Mother Goddess. I found the whole attempt at systematically brainwashing me for years, at physically beating my body with bamboo canes to inflict pain and attempting mind-control over me and “domesticating me” and programming my mind, as a child (8 to 17), a very irritating and violating experience. Sorry if I sound so hostile to religious brainwashing, but actually I am pretty hostile to all religions (to any systematic mind-programming regime) and especially to the loathsome (my point of view) Judeo-Christian stuff.

Yes it appears to “me” (an apparent discrete thinking entity, my POV) that I am sitting on a chair, typing on a keyboard, viewing a screen, communicating with another discrete mind/body entity thousands of miles away. My “body” (from my point of view) is only a vehicle, a container for my mind (soul) ---- rather like a driver sitting inside a car. There are rules that govern the way that my body vehicle can operate under the control of my mind. Rather like the rules of the road for a car --- violate the “rules of the road” for a car at your peril. Violate the rules of the body for “life on this apparently 3D planet” at your peril as well. At some point in “time” the “body vehicle” will die and my mind will exit this “body” --- rather like a driver exiting a car that has broken down. “Thinking” (quantum coherence) will continue as the “ghost” leaves the “machine” of the body.

Energy exists. Thought is energy. Energy is not destroyed. I think therefore I am. Matter is an illusion. The rules of the “energy game” in this apparently 3D dimension or realm are not an illusion. These rules constrain and govern how thinking entities (like me) --- in a thinking universe --- can manifest any kind of subjectively perceived (and apparently shared) “reality” as an “apparently material” manifestation.

If you like, you could say that the “energy rules of this dimension” are “God” ---- but I don’t think that really helps us in thinking about the problem of “WTF is going on” at all. It gets “me” nowhere anyway. So “God” made the rules and who made “God” to make the rules? Traditionally some of these rules, or laws, have been expressed by concepts in (the mind-programming language of) “English” like: The law of attraction. The law of deliberate intent. The law of allowance. The law of balance. We really need (ought to try) to comprehend the meaning of all of these 4 laws --- not just the first, which is what some people apparently want us to do!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

“I’d like to ask you to spend a little bit of time on Velikovsky and tell me what you think about etc., such as the 'never-happened' Dark Ages.”

I can sympathise with taking a “psychological approach” to certain subjects, having studied psychology and philosophy for several decades. In general I worry though that Khazars like Velikovsky often seem to have a somewhat distorted perception of reality. Their apparent propensity towards showing signs of “mental illness” might be from centuries of very deliberate inbreeding. Of failing to assimilate genetically into the local population when they are moving around the world as a tribe. They often seem to have an inability to come to terms with their own Eastern European Khazarian Tribal history, so if they try to start telling Western Europeans stuff, about a period of history from say AD400 to AD900, I start to wonder why. I feel like asking them to go away and start to write about their own tribal history first; honestly for a change.

The concept that the Roman Empire period, up to say AD400, was all sweetness and light (the Light Side of “White” Astrological Witchcraft) and that the Celtic/Nordic culture period in Western Europe was all Dark Side of “Black” Astrological Witchcraft, for several hundred years, sounds completely silly to me. More filthy lying Christian propaganda. The Roman Empire was not all wonderful and enlightened and the “Celtic/Nordic culture” that followed was not all “bad” Dark side Astrological Witchcraft either.

We may not have much surviving written history for Western Europe between AD400 and AD900 and England especially may have been in a bit of a mess with the Romano-British seeing Angles, Saxons, Vikings, Danes etc. moving to and settling in England. That does not necessarily mean that England must have been a complete blood-soaked hell-hole for several hundred years. It looks to me like (archaeology) that the tribal cultures could have blended, melded and intermarried fairly peacefully for the most part. It might be that a catastrophe (disease, famine, climate change?) hit the Western Europeans during this period, severely reducing the population (bottle-neck event), traumatising the survivors and creating a kind of cultural amnesia.

The Eastern Roman Empire, centred on Byzantium, trundled on OK through the “Dark Ages” without any apparently deeply traumatising period of history.

The rise of Islam also had a period of Enlightenment and learning at around that time ---- centred on the Semitic parts of the old Southern and Eastern parts of the Roman Empire. Plus Spain. Fortunately for Western Europe, as the Muslim culture preserved the written records of the Greek and Roman periods, that might have been lost had historical “record keeping” been left to the Christian cultural barbarians that had infested Northern and Western Europe. Who only apparently had any real interest in just one book, the Bible, in Latin.

Too bad that the Muslim culture, science and love of learning started to collapse just as Western European culture started to recover from the damage that the Christian cultural barbarians had done to them. The whole evil “Crusades” thing against Islam was of course utterly disgusting. As is this current attack on Islam by the insane Zionist Khazars who illegally invaded and occupied Palestine and their subservient so-called “Christian armies” (of Khazarian fake fiat money enslaved, mindless zombie, North Atlantic Terrorist Organisation) soldiers.

hoi.polloi
Administrator
Posts: 5061
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: The 'cold' of space and our Universe that isn't.

Unread post by hoi.polloi » Mon Oct 01, 2012 7:51 am

Hi. As fbenario has been here longer, I will allow one more "rebuttal"/comment or whatever from him if he wants it, but please let's stick to science (i.e.; repeatable observations) in this topic from now on. Isn't that pretty fair?

The topic is going to be moved away from the edge of science and back more toward the "middle" of science:

- The dynamics of our solar system
- The physics of our Earth and the physics of our system
- The physics of space

Thank you. And I appreciate your perspectives, but we have to move on from this theological stuff. Feel free to bring this to the CHATBOX.

fbenario
Member
Posts: 2231
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 1:49 am
Location: Atlanta, GA
Contact:

Re: The 'cold' of space and our Universe that isn't.

Unread post by fbenario » Wed Oct 03, 2012 10:55 pm

Andrew1484 wrote:
fbenario wrote:P.S. Since I am now beginning to respect your judgment, and you agree that carbon-14 can't be used to prove the age of anything, I'd like to ask you to spend a little bit of time on Velikovsky and tell me what you think about etc., such as the 'never-happened' Dark Ages.
I honestly don’t think that we can achieve a genuine “meeting of minds” over this “Deity” issue --- because we are (I think) looking at subjective “reality” from completely different points of view.
I think you might actually have misunderstood me here. I never thought you agreed with me about God. What did I post that led you to such a conclusion?

Velikovsky's alternate historical timeline is quite possibly the area and intellectual question that most excites me. You posted above at great length on Velikovsky, but you didn't actually comment on that alternate timeline's legitimacy.

1. Since we agree that carbon-14 can't be used as proof of any event or item, what scientific tools do you think can actually be used as dating methods? Do you think dendrochronology is a legitimate dating tool? If not, why? Ice core samples? Can ANY historical dating method be used with authority? If not, does that render all of history invalid?

2. Do you think Velikovsky's alternative historical timeline is legitimate? If you do, which historical eras and events, specifically, do you think might never have occurred at all?

Andrew, since Hoi wants this thread to return to its central theses on the solar system, planets, NASA, and the earth, please quote the entirety of this post of mine as part of your response; then make that forthcoming response of yours on this issue the very first post in a new thread called something like 'The Problems With Historical Dating Methods'.

In advance, thank you so, so much for your time on this question! It means a lot to me - both your time and this question!

Post Reply