On May 28 2009 04:19 Bebop Berserker wrote: it is pointless to talk about things we have NO proof for
yea fuck the scientists who make up theories or do any kind of research! fuck religion and fuck the weather forecast!
Theories that are based on observations, not just plucked out of the air because they conform to your beliefs.
On the contrary, most of modern science is based on beliefs, if you think Newton, Planck, Einstein, Maxwell, Darwin and countless others didn't tap their faith to put forth theories, then you know very little about science
God and however or how many variations of faith is very much relevant to science up until the Atomic Era.
On May 28 2009 04:19 Bebop Berserker wrote: it is pointless to talk about things we have NO proof for
yea fuck the scientists who make up theories or do any kind of research! fuck religion and fuck the weather forecast!
Theories that are based on observations, not just plucked out of the air because they conform to your beliefs.
On the contrary, most of modern science is based on beliefs, if you think Newton, Planck, Einstein, Maxwell, Darwin and countless others didn't tap their faith to put forth theories, then you know very little about science
God and however or how many variations of faith is very much relevant to science up until the Atomic Era.
Well darwin's and einstein's variation of faith (which is not having any in the religious sense) are still prevalent in science up to today. Newton on the other hand, appears to have believed in god (wikipedia), but of course that might not have influenced him in the slightest as far as which ideas he came up with, which were quite contrary at that time to the beliefs of the church (sun orbiting around the earth). And i almost forgot maxwell. I'm not so familiar with this name that i know who it refers to. I see on wikipedia's list of known persons with that name however no scientists, and one theologian?
On May 28 2009 04:19 Bebop Berserker wrote: it is pointless to talk about things we have NO proof for
yea fuck the scientists who make up theories or do any kind of research! fuck religion and fuck the weather forecast!
Theories that are based on observations, not just plucked out of the air because they conform to your beliefs.
On the contrary, most of modern science is based on beliefs, if you think Newton, Planck, Einstein, Maxwell, Darwin and countless others didn't tap their faith to put forth theories, then you know very little about science
God and however or how many variations of faith is very much relevant to science up until the Atomic Era.
Well darwin's and einstein's variation of faith (which is not having any in the religious sense) are still prevalent in science up to today. Newton on the other hand, appears to have believed in god (wikipedia), but of course that might not have influenced him in the slightest as far as which ideas he came up with, which were quite contrary at that time to the beliefs of the church (sun orbiting around the earth). And i almost forgot maxwell. I'm not so familiar with this name that i know who it refers to. I see on wikipedia's list of known persons with that name however no scientists, and one theologian?
Maxwell is considered by many physicists to be the nineteenth century scientist with the greatest influence on twentieth century physics. His contributions to the science are considered by many to be of the same magnitude as those of Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein.[3] In the end of millenium poll, a survey of the 100 most prominent physicists saw Maxwell voted the third greatest physicist of all time, behind only Newton and Einstein.[4] On the centennial of Maxwell's birthday, Einstein himself described Maxwell's work as the "most profound and the most fruitful that physics has experienced since the time of Newton."[5] Einstein kept a photograph of Maxwell on his study wall, alongside pictures of Michael Faraday and Newton.[6]
Makes me wonder if religion could stop using science to backup their retarded claims.
Do you even know what the fourth dimension is? Do you have a thorough knowledge of manifolds and vector calculus and tensor calculus? Can you explain to me how YOU came up with the idea that "god" is living in the 4th dimension? why not the 5th dimension? what makes the 4th so pleasant for god?
Some people believe god is everywhere, some people believe god is living in the sky, some people believe god is outside of space-time some people have no clue what they are talking about.
just FYI, go and check the timecube.com site again. Apparently the guy is fucking nuts and is a hardcore racist.
Insanity aside, I do not understand the guy's argument that there are ONLY 4 simultaneous days in one earth rotation. Aren't there infinitely many simultaneous days?
On May 28 2009 05:07 Hippopotamus wrote: So reading the first post by Un4Seen I got this feeling "hmm, that's kinda cranky". By the 4th one, there is no more doubt. This a crank on TL.net trying to convince us of some bullshit he thought up in his spare time.
It isnt bs it is the future of quantum physics, quantum physics supports the concept of God and exposes the lies of religion, the closest religion to truth is 'buddism' but even it is flawed so it best to just understand God from the 'scientific' point of view.
On May 28 2009 05:07 Hippopotamus wrote: So reading the first post by Un4Seen I got this feeling "hmm, that's kinda cranky". By the 4th one, there is no more doubt. This a crank on TL.net trying to convince us of some bullshit he thought up in his spare time.
It isnt bs it is the future of quantum physics, quantum physics supports the concept of God and exposes the lies of religion, the closest religion to truth is 'buddism' but even it is flawed so it best to just understand God from the 'scientific' point of view.
what the fuck are you talking about, quantum physics doesnt support any concept of god and there is no such thing as the closest religion to truth, science does not acknowledge any god nor concept of it.
On May 28 2009 05:07 Hippopotamus wrote: So reading the first post by Un4Seen I got this feeling "hmm, that's kinda cranky". By the 4th one, there is no more doubt. This a crank on TL.net trying to convince us of some bullshit he thought up in his spare time.
It isnt bs it is the future of quantum physics, quantum physics supports the concept of God and exposes the lies of religion, the closest religion to truth is 'buddism' but even it is flawed so it best to just understand God from the 'scientific' point of view.
what the fuck are you talking about, quantum physics doesnt support any concept of god and there is no such thing as the closest religion to truth, science does not acknowledge any god nor concept of it.
On May 28 2009 05:07 Hippopotamus wrote: So reading the first post by Un4Seen I got this feeling "hmm, that's kinda cranky". By the 4th one, there is no more doubt. This a crank on TL.net trying to convince us of some bullshit he thought up in his spare time.
It isnt bs it is the future of quantum physics, quantum physics supports the concept of God and exposes the lies of religion, the closest religion to truth is 'buddism' but even it is flawed so it best to just understand God from the 'scientific' point of view.
what the fuck are you talking about, quantum physics doesnt support any concept of god and there is no such thing as the closest religion to truth, science does not acknowledge any god nor concept of it.
Yes it does, have you not heard of the 'God particule'? Quantum physics not only does it support the Idea of God it has found evidence of how God could be a omipresent being. In your perception there is no such thing as closest religion to truth but science does acknowledge the possibility "even famous physicians have had faith".
This does not mean that the christian or any other dominate religion is considered truth it just means that there is evidence of the potentional of a omipresent force which fits the description giving by the bible, In my own view religions are corruption and do not represent God at all, in fact they give it a bad name.
I just can't let this statement be left unchallenged.
from wikipedia you moron.
The Higgs boson is sometimes referred to as "the God particle," after the title of Leon Lederman's book for lay readers.[15] The term mistakenly implies that the Higgs boson would complete our understanding of physics. In fact, while the discovery of the Higgs boson would be a groundbreaking stage in the story of electroweak unification, it would leave remaining the question of unification with Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD), gravity, and the ultimate origins and early evolution of the universe. Being an atheist, Peter Higgs dislikes the epithet "God particle".[16] The term is rarely used by particle physicists when discussing the Higgs Boson; its prevalence is primarily due to its usage in popular media.
revolution wikipedia is not best idea to understand what the 'God particle' means only lazy low IQ people use that as only resource tool, everything I have said is accuate if you had the means to experiment and check for yourself you would be proven that it is right.
Another thing you should be aware of is that the prophercys spoken are occuring now and that the last event will be arrival of a gravity wave, many scientists are becoming spiritual because evidence is mounting to the exsistance of the spirit.
On May 29 2009 01:02 Un4Seen wrote: revolution wikipedia is not best idea to understand what the 'God particle' means only lazy low IQ people use that as only resource tool, everything I have said is accuate if you had the means to experiment and check for yourself you would be proven that it is right.
Another thing you should be aware of is that the prophercys spoken are occuring now and that the last event will be arrival of a gravity wave, many scientists are becoming spiritual because evidence is mounting to the exsistance of the spirit.
The only reason this author used the term "God particle" is for amusement only, do you understand that, or is it too hard to stray away from your dogmatism?
Your last paragraph simply tells me that you are a crackpot I will stop now, lmao prophecies + god particle = disguised fundamentalist
On May 29 2009 01:02 Un4Seen wrote: revolution wikipedia is not best idea to understand what the 'God particle' means only lazy low IQ people use that as only resource tool, everything I have said is accuate if you had the means to experiment and check for yourself you would be proven that it is right.
Another thing you should be aware of is that the prophercys spoken are occuring now and that the last event will be arrival of a gravity wave, many scientists are becoming spiritual because evidence is mounting to the exsistance of the spirit.
Perhaps if you realized there were footnotes that revealed the sources of those statements in the Wikipedia article you would be more privy to the fact that your generalizing Wikipedia users as "lazy low IQ people," is the most preposterously retarded notion since a person once contended that it is accurate to say angels are 4th dimensional beings.
The grammatical structure of your sentences is also haphazard leading me to believe you are either young, uneducated, or "lazy," like Wikipedia users apparently are. However, unlike Wikipedia, you cite absolutely nothing to back up your prophecies about "gravity waves."
Quit smoking crack please.
By the way, to those saying that the 4th dimension is time, it is important to qualify a 4th spatial dimension is being discussed.
EPT
