Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

My first guess......shocker.....Obama!
yours?

Ron Paul.

wow. whats your reason?

Originally posted by punkkaveman
My first guess......shocker.....Obama!
yours?

The Antichrist is mythical, and does not exist in reality. That is what I think.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
The Antichrist is mythical, and does not exist in reality. That is what I think.

I don't think so personally. I think it is very realistic but it is all about your personal religious beliefs on this one

Originally posted by punkkaveman
I don't think so personally. I think it is very realistic but it is all about your personal religious beliefs on this one

The idea of the Antichrist comes from a book called the bible. The bible was written by humans. That means the idea of the Antichrist is man made.

Originally posted by punkkaveman
I don't think so personally. I think it is very realistic but it is all about your personal religious beliefs on this one

you think it is realistic to think that Obama is evil incarnate on earth?

lol, you can't think of a single person who might better represent Satan at this point?

A serial child rapist perhaps?

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
The idea of the Antichrist comes from a book called the bible. The bible was written by humans. That means the idea of the Antichrist is man made.

Well christian belief states that the bible is the written word of God. so again it is all about you personal beliefs

Originally posted by inimalist
you think it is realistic to think that Obama is evil incarnate on earth?

lol, you can't think of a single person who might better represent Satan at this point?

A serial child rapist perhaps?

They say that we all have that evil in us. But if you look at the signs he is a nice match to the Antichrist

Originally posted by punkkaveman
They say that we all have that evil in us. But if you look at the signs he is a nice match to the Antichrist

yes, we all have evil in us, we are all not evil incarnate.

I think any signs of an anti-christ that are not inclusive of unquestionably evil acts are probably imaginary, set up by which ever faith it is you belong to in order control you politically.

Originally posted by punkkaveman
Well christian belief states that the bible is the written word of God. so again it is all about you personal beliefs

However, belief doesn't always stack up against logic. The bible claims to be the word of god, and the koran claims to be the word of god. How can they both be the word of god?

Originally posted by punkkaveman
They say that we all have that evil in us. But if you look at the signs he is a nice match to the Antichrist

I do not believe that we all have evil in us. Evil is a path that we can take at any time.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
The idea of the Antichrist comes from a book called the bible. The bible was written by humans. That means the idea of the Antichrist is man made.

While I agree with the basic premise that logic is rather poor, considering it can be used to refute even things that are pretty clearly real.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
While I agree with the basic premise that logic is rather poor, considering it can be used to refute even things that are pretty clearly real.

I see, I should have said that the idea of the Antichrist is man made with no physical evidence to support the claim that it is the word of god.

Originally posted by punkkaveman
I don't think so personally. I think it is very realistic but it is all about your personal religious beliefs on this one

Well no, it's not really about personal religious belief because either he/she/it exists or he/she/it doesn't. Belief has nothing to do with it.

Wow, I would love to know these so called signs?

Originally posted by punkkaveman
My first guess......shocker.....Obama!
yours?

Hugo Chavez? Is that you?

I'm your biggest fan, dude. Ignore all the anti-you bastards! Seriously, as far as politicians go, you're my fave. Well you Putin and Nigel Farage. Wooot!

I think Jesus is the antichrist.

Beat that.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I see, I should have said that the idea of the Antichrist is man made with no physical evidence to support the claim that it is the word of god. you are proving his point by saying the things you say and asking the things you ask.


you must be the antichrist

Originally posted by BackFire
I think Jesus is the antichrist.

Beat that.

God is the antichrist.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Hugo Chavez? Is that you?

I'm your biggest fan, dude. Ignore all the anti-you bastards! Seriously, as far as politicians go, you're my fave. Well you Putin and Nigel Farage. Wooot!


lol

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
God is the antichrist.

thats absurd

Originally posted by punkkaveman
thats absurd

If god is all things and is in all places and everything that happens is part of the great plan life is (as Pratchet and Giaman put it) one big game of solitaire. God is both sides. Good and evil.

Originally posted by punkkaveman
My first guess......shocker.....Obama!
yours? Wouldnt surprise me. The moment they try to implant a microchip under my skin, I a gonna run for the hills. No mark of the beast for me, man.

Personaly I don't believe in the Antichrist.
I think more than anything it gives people a reason to keep looking for the enemy.
It's like finding the devil under every rock.

Originally posted by punkkaveman
thats absurd

Really is no more absurd or stupid than your pick. Or any pick, because the idea is stupid to begin with.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Wouldnt surprise me. The moment they try to implant a microchip under my skin, I a gonna run for the hills. No mark of the beast for me, man.


I'm with you

Originally posted by BackFire
Really is no more absurd or stupid than your pick. Or any pick, because the idea is stupid to begin with.

I don't know man. say and think what you will

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Wouldnt surprise me. The moment they try to implant a microchip under my skin, I a gonna run for the hills. No mark of the beast for me, man.

Even if it has obvious benefits?

Originally posted by Mairuzu
you are proving his point by saying the things you say and asking the things you ask.


you must be the antichrist

What?

Originally posted by Bardock42
Even if it has obvious benefits?


i'd rather b castoff then sell out

there will be Luddites in every generation

Originally posted by inimalist
there will be Luddites in every generation

screw it i'd rather be safe than sorry

Originally posted by punkkaveman
screw it i'd rather be safe than sorry

patriot act?

God is all things and created of all things so yes God is the Antichrist as well.

So how is Obama supposed to be the Antichrist???

All I have to say is...

http://www.godlikeproductions.com/sm/qsdmpnqf.gif

Originally posted by inimalist
patriot act?

significance?

Originally posted by punkkaveman
significance?

you'd rather be safe than sorry, so you would clearly accept the violation of your personal rights with the patriot act for the security it gives you.

OR, if you are against it, you see that there are appropriate times to risk things for the overall benefit.

So, a cure for paralysis from a brain chip might be worth the risk of having a brain chip, much like individual liberty might be worth the risk of people abusing that in order to murder you.

You should believe in all religions or find the one that has the worst fate of them all if you don't believe so that if it turns out to be false then the others will not be as bad.

Mr. Furley

http://www.sitcomsonline.com/photopost/data/932/18113Mr_Furley_at_the_Reagle_Beagle.jpg

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
God is the antichrist.

Romans are the antichrist

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
The Antichrist is mythical, and does not exist in reality. That is what I think.

I don't know...I can think of several corporate CEO's that might fit the bill.

Originally posted by Doom and Gloom
I don't know...I can think of several corporate CEO's that might fit the bill.


I can't disagree with that.

The antichrist is the complete and total opposite of Jesus the Christ; flat on its face, the antichrist refers to the opposite of good -- God's law and person. The opposite of good -- antichrist virtue -- sums to the destruction of man, not to mention God's creation. Label it whatever you want, but the effect is very, very real. And you know this! Virtually all religions (on the face of the planet) convey struggle between good and evil. This is nothing new. Human beings are all deserving of judgement, but Jesus the Christ interjected (for man). We know this "inherently." We are made in the image of God; we are not robots merely calculating external stimulus. We have souls, and therefore, are able to "experience" life. Such points to a non-physical realm.

I've noticed, over the years, that your dead-bent on Christianity; you despise it! You embrace Buddhism because it creates a scape-goat for escaping -- in your mind -- accountability. Well, let me tell you, my friend, that is the beauty of Christ Jesus. He loves you for who you are, but He wishes that you live life more abundantly -- according to His will. God is Holy -- perfect! Jesus summed up the 10 commandments, in so many words, by stating, "Treat thy neighbor as thyself." It ain't magic, and it ain't word-play. It's real life!! Face the music, bro.

Originally posted by ushomefree
You embrace Buddhism because it creates a scape-goat for escaping -- in your mind -- accountability.

No he just likes the semantics.

Originally posted by ushomefree
The antichrist is the complete and total opposite of Jesus the Christ; flat on its face, the antichrist refers to the opposite of good -- God's law and person. The opposite of good -- antichrist virtue -- sums to the destruction of man, not to mention God's creation. Label it whatever you want, but the effect is very, very real. And you know this! Virtually all religions (on the face of the planet) convey struggle between good and evil. This is nothing new. Human beings are all deserving of judgement, but Jesus the Christ interjected (for man). We know this "inherently." We are made in the image of God; we are not robots merely calculating external stimulus. We have souls, and therefore, are able to "experience" life. Such points to a non-physical realm.

I've noticed, over the years, that your dead-bent on Christianity; you despise it! You embrace Buddhism because it creates a scape-goat for escaping -- in your mind -- accountability. Well, let me tell you, my friend, that is the beauty of Christ Jesus. He loves you for who you are, but He wishes that you live life more abundantly -- according to His will. God is Holy -- perfect! Jesus summed up the 10 commandments, in so many words, by stating, "Treat thy neighbor as thyself." It ain't magic, and it ain't word-play. It's real life!! Face the music, bro.

thank God for you my friend!

can I get like, a point-by-point case for Obama as the anti-christ?

Originally posted by ushomefree
The antichrist is the complete and total opposite of Jesus the Christ; flat on its face, the antichrist refers to the opposite of good -- God's law and person.

Originally posted by ushomefree The opposite of good -- antichrist virtue -- sums to the destruction of man, not to mention God's creation. Label it whatever you want, but the effect is very, very real. And you know this!


Originally posted by ushomefree Virtually all religions (on the face of the planet) convey struggle between good and evil. This is nothing new. Human beings are all deserving of judgement, but Jesus the Christ interjected (for man).


Originally posted by ushomefree We know this "inherently." We are made in the image of God; we are not robots merely calculating external stimulus. We have souls, and therefore, are able to "experience" life. Such points to a non-physical realm.


Originally posted by ushomefree I've noticed, over the years, that your dead-bent on Christianity; you despise it! You embrace Buddhism because it creates a scape-goat for escaping -- in your mind -- accountability. Well, let me tell you, my friend, that is the beauty of Christ Jesus. He loves you for who you are, but He wishes that you live life more abundantly -- according to His will. God is Holy -- perfect! Jesus summed up the 10 commandments, in so many words, by stating, "Treat thy neighbor as thyself." It ain't magic, and it ain't word-play. It's real life!! Face the music, bro.

And stop writing is such large text; it makes you look like an F'n two year old. If you want to be treated like a man and taken seriously then act like one.

what the HELL?! dont people know better than to create threads like this anymore?

Originally posted by leonheartmm
what the HELL?! dont people know better than to create threads like this anymore? And the answer to your question would be

Originally posted by ushomefree
You embrace Buddhism because it creates a scape-goat for escaping -- in your mind -- accountability. Correct me if I'm wrong Skaky but Buddhism is all about accountability with Karma, you do bad things and bad things will happen to you as well as doing good. This will happen in your life time not after you are dead.

Originally posted by Da Pittman
Correct me if I'm wrong Skaky but Buddhism is all about accountability with Karma, you do bad things and bad things will happen to you as well as doing good. This will happen in your life time not after you are dead.

Not how Karma works. It hits you in the next life, which Shaky doesn't believe in.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Not how Karma works. It hits you in the next life, which Shaky doesn't believe in. I thought that it would hit you in this life as well?

Just reading up on it a bit but I see what you are saying but they do have Karma that effect you in this life "Immediately Effective (ditthadhammavedaniya) Karma"

http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/karma.htm

Originally posted by Da Pittman
I thought that it would hit you in this life as well?

Only in pop-culture, afaik.

Originally posted by Da Pittman
Correct me if I'm wrong Skaky but Buddhism is all about accountability with Karma, you do bad things and bad things will happen to you as well as doing good. This will happen in your life time not after you are dead.

That is correct. In Buddhism, we learn to take responsibility for all things in our lives, even if they seem to not be our responsibility.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Not how Karma works. It hits you in the next life, which Shaky doesn't believe in.

You don't understand Karma.

You should read this thread.

http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=447678

Also, I believe in reincarnation, so don't go say what i believe or don't believe.

hmm, i always thought it was more like everything YOU do affects/changes you, and if you allow things outside yourself to influence you, than you are responsible for that choice too and its part of what YOU do, and intentions are very important in the affect that your actions have. and the change in your own self is good or bad, depending on those actions or karma. or so i understood sumwhere.

Originally posted by leonheartmm
hmm, i always thought it was more like everything YOU do affects/changes you, and if you allow things outside yourself to influence you, than you are responsible for that choice too and its part of what YOU do, and intentions are very important in the affect that your actions have. and the change in your own self is good or bad, depending on those actions or karma. or so i understood sumwhere.

You are on the right track.

Originally posted by inimalist
can I get like, a point-by-point case for Obama as the anti-christ?


Can't provide it. It's just a guess.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
You don't understand Karma.

You should read this thread.

http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=447678

"Mahayana Buddhism holds that the sum of actions and experiences of the present and previous lifetimes are accumulated and stored as karma in the depths of life and will form the framework of individual existence in the next lifetime."

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Also, I believe in reincarnation, so don't go say what i believe or don't believe.

I could have sworn you said you didn't believe in reincarnation. Maybe it was a defensive thing?

Originally posted by punkkaveman
Can't provide it. It's just a guess.

sounds like a bad guess then

also, terrible thread

Originally posted by inimalist
sounds like a bad guess then

also, terrible thread

You're clearly an Obamaniac. I mean seriously, how brainwashed do you have to be to think he isn't the antithesis of all good in the universe?

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
"Mahayana Buddhism holds that the sum of actions and experiences of the present and previous lifetimes are accumulated and stored as karma in the depths of life and will form the framework of individual existence in the next lifetime."



I could have sworn you said you didn't believe in reincarnation. Maybe it was a defensive thing?

There are just as many types of Buddhists as there are types of Christians. If you wish to know what I believe then go here:
http://www.sgi-usa.org/buddhism/buddhismofnichirendaishonin.php

I have said that I believe in Simultaneous Incarnation because Reincarnation is basically flawed. However, to keep things simple, I tell people I believe in Reincarnation. Most people don't know the difference between Simultaneous Incarnation and Reincarnation.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
You're clearly an Obamaniac. I mean seriously, how brainwashed do you have to be to think he isn't the antithesis of all good in the universe?

blah, saw a kid at my school yesterday with an Obama t-shirt on, and like, ok, black identity politics and all, but he really isn't our president.

that and he wants to re-negotiate economic deals so that we just end up sucking America's cock and giving them softwood lumber as payment.

or, i mean, BARAK THE VOTE!!!!!11 Obama is like the greatest president of all time, I saw his inaugural address, and he was like, so, ummm, dark skinned, I was so wrapped up in how different he was, physically, and how he personally embodied the change I know will come from his cabinet picked of old guard washington insiders.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
There are just as many types of Buddhists as there are types of Christians. If you wish to know what I believe then go here:
http://www.sgi-usa.org/buddhism/buddhismofnichirendaishonin.php

I have said that I believe in Simultaneous Incarnation because Reincarnation is basically flawed. However, to keep things simple, I tell people I believe in Reincarnation. Most people don't know the difference between Simultaneous Incarnation and Reincarnation.

I sort of assumed you would have summarized the type of Buddhism that you follow.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
I sort of assumed you would have summarized the type of Buddhism that you follow.

I have many times. I even have a Thread on the top.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I have many times. I even have a Thread on the top.

http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=386032

Sinful man. Notice, that no explanation is required. I apologize ahead of time, the embed was not available. Click on the hyperlink below, please.

The video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lWqVIdq9NH8



Yes, people do choose their own paths; hence, free will. But until you have general knowledge of sin (and the effects of such), I believe we are at a loss. To be sure, answer me this: What do you think, with all your knowledge concerning Buddhism, do you think the man (in the hyperlink above) resides to such nonsense? When explaining, reach the root of the issue. And do this without referring to your consciousness.



Evil path? On the contrary, judgement of one's actions is righteous! Failure to do so, otherwise, is evil. Regarding the reality of God's judgement, man inherently, has knowledge of this truth; such is the reason you reject Christianity. You substitute reality at the price of your own philosophy -- what "you" feel is right and/or comforting.



Snatch a toy away from a child, and it will scream and shout. Such actions were not taught. Human beings are made in the image of God. You can teach the value of money and/or hard work to a child, but they already value themselves, fresh out of the womb. Again, we -- you and I -- are not robots, merely calculating external stimulus; we are aware of ourselves, not to mention our value. It's the beauty of life itself, and it's a gift from God. Physical matter, being non-conscious in nature, cannot bring about consciousness. More directly, super-computers and/or the best artificial intelligence (AI) produced by man, will never complain about having to work.



Super-computers, robotics, and AI have proved to be a tremendous advancement for man in coping with everyday life, but such will never be aware. The technology is limited in scope. Again, non-consciousness will never produce consciousness! Frankly, I find it border-line insane that you question it.



Such was a result of "their" actions, not the Bible! The bottom line is accountability.



Not to toot my own horn, but I once drew a picture of a duck, that won me four (4) gold stars in elementary school! Who cares?! The point is, you reject Christianity in accordance with self-imposed philosophy. You despise accountability. Period. And for the record, just like anything else, people who make claims about themselves are not necessarily true, arbitrarily! Having saving faith in Christ is no different.



The Bible was written by man; but it was inspired by God (through works of the Holy Spirit). Jesus Christ confirmed His deity by the act of resurrection. Jesus Christ, in doing so, also confirmed Holy Scripture as the truth -- the only divine message to man. Shakyamunison, God loves you tremendously, but you continue running away from Him. Pride and fear come to mind.



Absolutely true, and that is why I'm trying to help you. I care, and I was once clueless when it came to the message/works of Christ Jesus. I pray that you start being honest with yourself and embrace a (saving) relationship with Christ -- the promised Messiah.

If interested, read: What is the plan of salvation/way of salvation?

Originally posted by ushomefree
More directly, super-computers and/or the best artificial intelligence (AI) produced by man, will never complain about having to work.

WHAT DO YOU BASE THAT IDEA ON?

Symmetric Chaos-

Please allow me to address the issue in the form of a question, since, after all, it is inter-linked with human characteristics. Do you think super-computers will ever feel the need to reproduce? If so, please explain why machines crunching binary code, would find each (and of themselves) attractive. Or maybe, on a lighter note, you could explain why super-computers would ask for a raise in pay for their efforts. Heck, maybe they'd want vacation and sick leave too?!

Originally posted by ushomefree
Please allow me to address the issue in the form of a question, since, after all, it is inter-linked with human characteristics.

I HAVE NO INTENTION OF LETTING YOU DODGE MY QUESTION.

Originally posted by ushomefree
Super-computers, robotics, and AI have proved to be a tremendous advancement for man in coping with everyday life, but such will never be aware. The technology is limited in scope. Again, non-consciousness will never produce consciousness! Frankly, I find it border-line insane that you question it. Why do you like being such a childish A-Hole??

First off can you define what a consciousness is? Second in the next 5 to 10 years we will have developed a computer that has more processing power then the human brain and you don't think that an AI in the future couldn't think for themselves?

Buddha
Karl Marx
Satan
Richard Dawkins
Christopher Hitchens
Yahweh
Brahman
Rev. Moon
Muhammad
Allah
Aleister Crowley
Adolf Hitler
Technology



All of the above are anti-Christ.

Originally posted by ushomefree
Sinful man. Notice, that no explanation is required. I apologize ahead of time, the embed was not available. Click on the hyperlink below, please.

The video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lWqVIdq9NH8



Yes, people do choose their own paths; hence, free will. But until you have general knowledge of sin (and the effects of such), I believe we are at a loss. To be sure, answer me this: What do you think, with all your knowledge concerning Buddhism, do you think the man (in the hyperlink above) resides to such nonsense? When explaining, reach the root of the issue. And do this without referring to your consciousness.



Evil path? On the contrary, judgement of one's actions is righteous! Failure to do so, otherwise, is evil. Regarding the reality of God's judgement, man inherently, has knowledge of this truth; such is the reason you reject Christianity. You substitute reality at the price of your own philosophy -- what "you" feel is right and/or comforting.



Snatch a toy away from a child, and it will scream and shout. Such actions were not taught. Human beings are made in the image of God. You can teach the value of money and/or hard work to a child, but they already value themselves, fresh out of the womb. Again, we -- you and I -- are not robots, merely calculating external stimulus; we are aware of ourselves, not to mention our value. It's the beauty of life itself, and it's a gift from God. Physical matter, being non-conscious in nature, cannot bring about consciousness. More directly, super-computers and/or the best artificial intelligence (AI) produced by man, will never complain about having to work.



Super-computers, robotics, and AI have proved to be a tremendous advancement for man in coping with everyday life, but such will never be aware. The technology is limited in scope. Again, non-consciousness will never produce consciousness! Frankly, I find it border-line insane that you question it.



Such was a result of "their" actions, not the Bible! The bottom line is accountability.



Not to toot my own horn, but I once drew a picture of a duck, that won me four (4) gold stars in elementary school! Who cares?! The point is, you reject Christianity in accordance with self-imposed philosophy. You despise accountability. Period. And for the record, just like anything else, people who make claims about themselves are not necessarily true, arbitrarily! Having saving faith in Christ is no different.



The Bible was written by man; but it was inspired by God (through works of the Holy Spirit). Jesus Christ confirmed His deity by the act of resurrection. Jesus Christ, in doing so, also confirmed Holy Scripture as the truth -- the only divine message to man. Shakyamunison, God loves you tremendously, but you continue running away from Him. Pride and fear come to mind.



Absolutely true, and that is why I'm trying to help you. I care, and I was once clueless when it came to the message/works of Christ Jesus. I pray that you start being honest with yourself and embrace a (saving) relationship with Christ -- the promised Messiah.

If interested, read: What is the plan of salvation/way of salvation?

you can be SUCH A JACKASS!!!!!!!!





the VAGINA is the ANTICHRIST!!!

Originally posted by Da Pittman
First off can you define what a consciousness is? Second in the next 5 to 10 years we will have developed a computer that has more processing power then the human brain and you don't think that an AI in the future couldn't think for themselves?

However, at the level you are talking about, the computer metaphor of the brain no longer holds.

While we might be able to produce something more powerful, intelligence is not a byproduct of power, but mass interconnectivity of specifically designed neurological systems.

The human brain is, with the exception of the galaxy itself, the most complex thing in the milky way. Intelligence lies in the hundreds of billions of connections between individual neurons, and cracking that code is probably not going to happen within 5-10 years.

However, there is a lot of interesting research being done in the field, so maybe I'll have egg on my face.

(not to go totally off topic)

Originally posted by inimalist
However, at the level you are talking about, the computer metaphor of the brain no longer holds.

While we might be able to produce something more powerful, intelligence is not a byproduct of power, but mass interconnectivity of specifically designed neurological systems.

Like some sort of . . . interwoven net?

Originally posted by inimalist
However, at the level you are talking about, the computer metaphor of the brain no longer holds.

While we might be able to produce something more powerful, intelligence is not a byproduct of power, but mass interconnectivity of specifically designed neurological systems.

The human brain is, with the exception of the galaxy itself, the most complex thing in the milky way. Intelligence lies in the hundreds of billions of connections between individual neurons, and cracking that code is probably not going to happen within 5-10 years.

However, there is a lot of interesting research being done in the field, so maybe I'll have egg on my face.

(not to go totally off topic) However the main limitation is memory right now, once we have storage capacity to store all of the human brain and have the processing power to run it you could and can make a computer model to duplicate the brain. After all the brain is nothing more (taking out the mystical properties) but a biological computer.

Originally posted by Da Pittman
However the main limitation is memory right now, once we have storage capacity to store all of the human brain and have the processing power to run it you could and can make a computer model to duplicate the brain. After all the brain is nothing more (taking out the mystical properties) but a biological computer.

that is actually my point, it is not.

There are allusions one can make, Working memory as Ram, BUS speed as some type of gating mechanism between memory and attention, but the degree of interconnectedness and the importance of these back and forth connections between say, the visual cortex and emotional centers is not a matter of how fast and powerful the connections are, but of how robust and interconnected they are.

Instead of thinking of it as 1 huge computer, it is better envisioned as millions of even "morse code" powerful computers.

We might be able to simulate certain functions in other ways, and I would largely say looking to the human brain for inspiration for AI is barking up the wrong tree (the human brain evolved for certain functions, we could produce far more efficient intelligence systems designed for specific tasks), but to simulate human style intelligence is not going to be a matter of having enough processor speed.

The caveat to this is, I guess, if you are using software to simulate these billions of connections as I have heard of being done with mouse brain simulations.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Like some sort of . . . interwoven net?

probably a better analogy, but there is a funny trend in neuroscience to try and explain the brain through analogy to dominant technologies of the time. Years ago it was to pneumatics.

The whole analogy business is something I want to try and avoid, because it predisposes people to certain interpretations of the results. It may help in explaining things, but I could reference the use of "top-down" and "bottom-up" processes in psychological literature as a recurrent and persistent form of dualism that is sort of becoming more evidently limited in its ability of explaining things.

Originally posted by inimalist
that is actually my point, it is not.

There are allusions one can make, Working memory as Ram, BUS speed as some type of gating mechanism between memory and attention, but the degree of interconnectedness and the importance of these back and forth connections between say, the visual cortex and emotional centers is not a matter of how fast and powerful the connections are, but of how robust and interconnected they are.

Instead of thinking of it as 1 huge computer, it is better envisioned as millions of even "morse code" powerful computers.

We might be able to simulate certain functions in other ways, and I would largely say looking to the human brain for inspiration for AI is barking up the wrong tree (the human brain evolved for certain functions, we could produce far more efficient intelligence systems designed for specific tasks), but to simulate human style intelligence is not going to be a matter of having enough processor speed.

The caveat to this is, I guess, if you are using software to simulate these billions of connections as I have heard of being done with mouse brain simulations. Basically you are duplicating the process of the brain, we currently do not have the memory space or processing power that they brain does but we can already map parts of the brain and duplicate or mimic the functions of this area. We can not as of yet do this for the entire brain because of the current limits of speed and memory. We can already have a two way street of a computer communicating to and from the brain and each one learning how each other responds and will change its "programing" in turn.

I don't think your analogy works for multiple computers, the eyes are just a port for information to be sent to the brain such as a mouse, keyboard or camera but the brain or hard drive still does all of the computing of this new data.

So for the sake of the thread I could see an AI being the Antichrist more than anything else. Go T-100000000000000

Originally posted by inimalist
sounds like a bad guess then

also, terrible thread

you just proving my guess is true with your unconditional devotion to him. thats why i think he is because ppl follow him and love him but do not know him. and i think he may just be full of s***

Originally posted by inimalist
blah, saw a kid at my school yesterday with an Obama t-shirt on, and like, ok, black identity politics and all, but he really isn't our president.

that and he wants to re-negotiate economic deals so that we just end up sucking America's cock and giving them softwood lumber as payment.

or, i mean, BARAK THE VOTE!!!!!11 Obama is like the greatest president of all time, I saw his inaugural address, and he was like, so, ummm, dark skinned, I was so wrapped up in how different he was, physically, and how he personally embodied the change I know will come from his cabinet picked of old guard washington insiders.


those are just shots at him being black tho and to that i am offended

Originally posted by Da Pittman
Basically you are duplicating the process of the brain, we currently do not have the memory space or processing power that they brain does but we can already map parts of the brain and duplicate or mimic the functions of this area.

No, I misunderstood you at first, you are totally right about the simulations. There are various labs around the world attempting this in different ways. Some are trying to build actual physical recreations of the brain, but most do go for the simulation.

I think I took it too literal when you mentioned making a computer fast enough to make it smarter than a human.

Originally posted by Da Pittman
We can not as of yet do this for the entire brain because of the current limits of speed and memory.

I would disagree. The rate limiter right now might be memory and speed, but we certainly don't understand enough about the function of intelligence and neuro connectivity to make sense of it.

Obviously it would be a remarkable tool, but there are theoretical limits to how helpful this simulation would be. For instance, each individual brain is formed in response to incoming stimuli from the world. A simulation of a visual cortex on a computer is useless unless you are also simulating all of the photons in the environment that are interacting with the cones and rods in the eyes. You might say that inputs like a keyboard or a mouse could be equivalent, but they are not. Even if keystrokes (a mixture of visual/abstract/somatic signals) could be broken down into "stimulus input", the researchers are now forced to build a new type of sensory cortex to interpret it, and somehow integrate this into a simulation of a human brain in such a way that it is still applicable for research purposes.

This is compounded with local plasticity in neuro functioning as well. The visual pathway is constantly rearranging the connections it makes in response to stimuli contrasts. This reorganization of cortical space is essential in our perception. A simulation would have to account for this. Obviously we don't have the power to do that computationally, but we also have no clue about how or why it works in the way it does. We can talk about the effects of pruning down pathways for efficiency, and constancy of certain types of stimuli, but we do not know, neuron for neuron, what is happening in the brain, which would be necessary for these types of simulations, especially once you try to simulate plasticity as I have mentioned, or incorporate new forms of stimuli.

Originally posted by Da Pittman
We can already have a two way street of a computer communicating to and from the brain and each one learning how each other responds and will change its "programing" in turn.

indeed, but the programmer will be at a loss when attempting to program various essential neurological functions right now.

I get that the purpose of simulating the brain is a form of near reverse engineering, but the "any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic" idea is applicable here, imho.

Originally posted by Da Pittman
I don't think your analogy works for multiple computers,

I agree, I just think it is better than the comparison of the brain to a single computer

Originally posted by Da Pittman
the eyes are just a port for information to be sent to the brain such as a mouse, keyboard or camera but the brain or hard drive still does all of the computing of this new data.

This is entirely untrue. The cones and rods in the eyes each provide specific visual information to the visual system. Patterns of cone and rod activation can send signals of motion and other "featural" information to the visual system before it has been processed by any brain areas. Immediately preceding the eye, retinal ganglion cells interpret and send a variety of signals, contrast (blue-yellow, red-green, black-white) sensitive, through a pathway to the LGN, which has constantly reorganizing pathways of communication with the visual cortex. Another reason the computer metaphor fails is because of its conceptualization of information processing as being this passive and localized process. Every cell, every pathway, is essential in building a representation. Your eye is certainly no less involved in vision than your visual cortex is.

Originally posted by Da Pittman
So for the sake of the thread I could see an AI being the Antichrist more than anything else. Go T-100000000000000

****, I can write 12 thousand pages about perception, but a witty comeback, HA

this thread is good as s*** also so any1 who differs can suck on it

Originally posted by punkkaveman
you just proving my guess is true with your unconditional devotion to him. thats why i think he is because ppl follow him and love him but do not know him. and i think he may just be full of s***

I'm not an American but I wouldn't have voted for Obama.

However, I could give you probably 5-10 reasons why I would be absolutely against his domestic and foreign policies. You couldn't give me one reason why you think he is the anti-christ.

Originally posted by punkkaveman
those are just shots at him being black tho and to that i am offended

if you don't think Obama being black was crucial to his election, you are retarded. His skin colour was a physical manifestation of "change", it is why the message was so powerful. For instance, all politicians promise change, McCain promised change, but for Obama, people perceived it as real. Why? Because he represented, physically, the change that had been fought for during the 60s. That his policies wont do anything to create actual change for black communities is moot, because he is a physical manifestation of those ideas, not the actual change they were looking for.

There are T-shirts at our local Zellers (basically a K-mart/Target) that have Obama and MLK with "dream realized" or some other BS written under them. I am certainly not the one who is racializing the Obama presidency.

also, be less sensitive.

Originally posted by inimalist
I'm not an American but I wouldn't have voted for Obama.

However, I could give you probably 5-10 reasons why I would be absolutely against his domestic and foreign policies. You couldn't give me one reason why you think he is the anti-christ.



if you don't think Obama being black was crucial to his election, you are retarded. His skin colour was a physical manifestation of "change", it is why the message was so powerful. For instance, all politicians promise change, McCain promised change, but for Obama, people perceived it as real. Why? Because he represented, physically, the change that had been fought for during the 60s. That his policies wont do anything to create actual change for black communities is moot, because he is a physical manifestation of those ideas, not the actual change they were looking for.

There are T-shirts at our local Zellers (basically a K-mart/Target) that have Obama and MLK with "dream realized" or some other BS written under them. I am certainly not the one who is racializing the Obama presidency.

also, be less sensitive.


That was a major grip of his election but still BS if you think that that's why he won. Its deeper than that. And as an American I see ppl's reaction to him and it is way to much devotion. They see him as a savior of sorts and it is unhealthy. Do your research about the interpretation of the book of Revelations and then tell me I'm completely wrong. I may not be right but you cannot say I'm wrong.

Originally posted by punkkaveman
And as an American I see ppl's reaction to him and it is way to much devotion. They see him as a savior of sorts and it is unhealthy.

Then again that is also good evidence that Obama is really Jesus . . .

Originally posted by inimalist
No, I misunderstood you at first, you are totally right about the simulations. There are various labs around the world attempting this in different ways. Some are trying to build actual physical recreations of the brain, but most do go for the simulation.

I think I took it too literal when you mentioned making a computer fast enough to make it smarter than a human.



I would disagree. The rate limiter right now might be memory and speed, but we certainly don't understand enough about the function of intelligence and neuro connectivity to make sense of it.

Obviously it would be a remarkable tool, but there are theoretical limits to how helpful this simulation would be. For instance, each individual brain is formed in response to incoming stimuli from the world. A simulation of a visual cortex on a computer is useless unless you are also simulating all of the photons in the environment that are interacting with the cones and rods in the eyes. You might say that inputs like a keyboard or a mouse could be equivalent, but they are not. Even if keystrokes (a mixture of visual/abstract/somatic signals) could be broken down into "stimulus input", the researchers are now forced to build a new type of sensory cortex to interpret it, and somehow integrate this into a simulation of a human brain in such a way that it is still applicable for research purposes.

This is compounded with local plasticity in neuro functioning as well. The visual pathway is constantly rearranging the connections it makes in response to stimuli contrasts. This reorganization of cortical space is essential in our perception. A simulation would have to account for this. Obviously we don't have the power to do that computationally, but we also have no clue about how or why it works in the way it does. We can talk about the effects of pruning down pathways for efficiency, and constancy of certain types of stimuli, but we do not know, neuron for neuron, what is happening in the brain, which would be necessary for these types of simulations, especially once you try to simulate plasticity as I have mentioned, or incorporate new forms of stimuli.



indeed, but the programmer will be at a loss when attempting to program various essential neurological functions right now.

I get that the purpose of simulating the brain is a form of near reverse engineering, but the "any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic" idea is applicable here, imho.



I agree, I just think it is better than the comparison of the brain to a single computer



This is entirely untrue. The cones and rods in the eyes each provide specific visual information to the visual system. Patterns of cone and rod activation can send signals of motion and other "featural" information to the visual system before it has been processed by any brain areas. Immediately preceding the eye, retinal ganglion cells interpret and send a variety of signals, contrast (blue-yellow, red-green, black-white) sensitive, through a pathway to the LGN, which has constantly reorganizing pathways of communication with the visual cortex. Another reason the computer metaphor fails is because of its conceptualization of information processing as being this passive and localized process. Every cell, every pathway, is essential in building a representation. Your eye is certainly no less involved in vision than your visual cortex is.



****, I can write 12 thousand pages about perception, but a witty comeback, HA While I do understand what you are saying but I disagree, yes the eye plays a critical part as to how we see the world but so does a camera or lens attached to the computer. It receives the information and transmits it to the computer which then process the information but the eye just as the camera is not needed. If the information is passed directly to the brain or hard drive it can still process that information and both will "see" what it was given. Even in a hard drive it is not just a single processor, just like the brain there are different parts that do different functions. A sector of a drive can go bad but the computer still work just as the brain can.

In many ways even when we duplicate a brain and all of its functions and abilities it may very well be smarter than what was copied. What I mean is that unlike the brain the computer doesn't forget, it will have the total sum of all the memories and everything that it has ever learned where the human brain can only hold so much information at any time.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Then again that is also good evidence that Obama is really Jesus . . .

All the more to prove the point that he is the Anti-christ because the Bible states that Jesus never really died because he was Resurrected and then taken straight up to Heaven. So there is no way that he would come in the form of another man other than himself. Plus it also says he won't return until the moment of Judgement so again your just proving my point more and more

Originally posted by punkkaveman
All the more to prove the point that he is the Anti-christ because the Bible states that Jesus never really died because he was Resurrected and then taken straight up to Heaven. So there is no way that he would come in the form of another man other than himself. Plus it also says he won't return until the moment of Judgement so again your just proving my point more and more

Do you really think that Obama is the Antichrist? Do you believe everything in the bible?

If you answer yes, then you should check out this web site:

http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/

Originally posted by punkkaveman
All the more to prove the point that he is the Anti-christ because the Bible states that Jesus never really died because he was Resurrected and then taken straight up to Heaven. So there is no way that he would come in the form of another man other than himself. Plus it also says he won't return until the moment of Judgement so again your just proving my point more and more

You've seen Jesus? How do you know he didn't look like Obama?

So the all powerful god can only be in one form???

Originally posted by Da Pittman
So the all powerful god can only be in one form???

He is a very limited god.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
He is a very limited god.

He can do anything . . . except the things he can't do.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
He can do anything . . . except the things he can't do.

Just being a "he" shows how limited he is.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Just being a "he" shows how limited he is.

Or perhaps how limited language is. There is no concise word for someone/thing that contains all possible everythings.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Or perhaps how limited language is. There is no concise word for someone/thing that contains all possible everythings.

Yes, the problem is us. But you know what that means, don't you? It means the bible can't be taken literally. Because it is just as flawed as our understanding of a god that we cannot understand.

Originally posted by punkkaveman
That was a major grip of his election but still BS if you think that that's why he won. Its deeper than that.

I don't want to resort to someone else's authority on this, but I'm taking a course on the African Diaspora, and I asked my prof, a person who has studied black culture for like 12 years, about this.

We had a good conversation about it, but essentially it boiled down to the fact he was black, in her opinion as well.

This isn't to say people were like "I'm going to vote for the black man", it is sort of 2 things. The more that the failure in America has become so associated with "rich-white-men", he symbolized the opposite of this in the most drastic of ways. It didn't matter that other democrats in the race had more leftist or progressive views than Obama, or that Obama constantly chose old time Washington vets (hardly the image of change) to be his policy advisors, people, especially youth, began to associate him with their beliefs. Political commentators have often said that there is going to be a day of realization when the people who most expected the change from Obama are going to be disappointed that he is as mainstream of a politician as he is.

The other reason is that, for the older generation, who lived through the civil rights era, he represented a long held dream. To see a black president. Tupac has lyrics about it, it is a symbol that, for a portion of society, means something just in the fact that it happened. This is likely the more important reason of the two, as mass youth sort of celebrity worship can't get you everywhere, ie: Ron Paul.

I think you might be buying too much into this change rhetoric my friend.

Originally posted by punkkaveman
And as an American I see ppl's reaction to him and it is way to much devotion. They see him as a savior of sorts and it is unhealthy.

Indeed, but there was also a minority of people who believed that George W Bush was ordained by God to be president.

There are crazies all around

Originally posted by punkkaveman
Do your research about the interpretation of the book of Revelations and then tell me I'm completely wrong.

no, that isn't how it works. I don't have to prove your points for you. You opened the thread, I asked you to explain what you meant, and you have since begun hurling accusations at me about nonsense (ie. "devotional... unconditional", you know).

It is your burden to at least explain what it is you are presenting. Obama is the anti-christ, I'm all ears.

Originally posted by punkkaveman
I may not be right but you cannot say I'm wrong.

I don't really care to, I'm genuinely curious how you come to this conclusion.

Originally posted by Da Pittman
While I do understand what you are saying but I disagree, yes the eye plays a critical part as to how we see the world but so does a camera or lens attached to the computer. It receives the information and transmits it to the computer which then process the information but the eye just as the camera is not needed. If the information is passed directly to the brain or hard drive it can still process that information and both will "see" what it was given. Even in a hard drive it is not just a single processor, just like the brain there are different parts that do different functions. A sector of a drive can go bad but the computer still work just as the brain can.

yes, that works on the level you are explaining it at, but not when it comes down to the actual neurological representation of information.

like all good analogies, there is a point where the computer metaphor breaks down. The retina in the eye, literally, is processing visual information, at a cellular level, in the exact same way that the visual cortex is. The plasticity of neural connections also is not accounted for, a computer does not rearrange its connections based on incoming stimuli.

I don't deny, a powerful computer could run software that simulates the billions of neurons in a brain (to some degree, though as I pointed out above, there is reason to think this is going to be very difficult), but that computer is really nothing like a brain as far as the processing of information is concerned.

Originally posted by Da Pittman
In many ways even when we duplicate a brain and all of its functions and abilities it may very well be smarter than what was copied. What I mean is that unlike the brain the computer doesn't forget, it will have the total sum of all the memories and everything that it has ever learned where the human brain can only hold so much information at any time.

I tend not to speculate on this kind of stuff...

If the history of the future has told us anything, we probably don't get the most obvious things (cure for cancer, flying cars, robot butlers)

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Yes, the problem is us. But you know what that means, don't you? It means the bible can't be taken literally. Because it is just as flawed as our understanding of a god that we cannot understand.

Perhaps nothing can be taken literally.

Originally posted by inimalist
yes, that works on the level you are explaining it at, but not when it comes down to the actual neurological representation of information.

like all good analogies, there is a point where the computer metaphor breaks down. The retina in the eye, literally, is processing visual information, at a cellular level, in the exact same way that the visual cortex is. The plasticity of neural connections also is not accounted for, a computer does not rearrange its connections based on incoming stimuli.

I don't deny, a powerful computer could run software that simulates the billions of neurons in a brain (to some degree, though as I pointed out above, there is reason to think this is going to be very difficult), but that computer is really nothing like a brain as far as the processing of information is concerned.



I tend not to speculate on this kind of stuff...

If the history of the future has told us anything, we probably don't get the most obvious things (cure for cancer, flying cars, robot butlers) A computer doesn't need to rearrange itself because it is not biological but it can still process the information, what is the difference from a camera taking a picture then being saved to memory? It takes the information from the lens and converts it to data that can be stored on the memory card. Yes it does it differently then a human eye and brain but the result is still the same, information taken in and stored however the information that is stored on the computer doesn't change over time and can be accessed down to the binary level for recall and detail.

Originally posted by Da Pittman
A computer doesn't need to rearrange itself because it is not biological but it can still process the information, what is the difference from a camera taking a picture then being saved to memory? It takes the information from the lens and converts it to data that can be stored on the memory card. Yes it does it differently then a human eye and brain but the result is still the same, information taken in and stored however the information that is stored on the computer doesn't change over time and can be accessed down to the binary level for recall and detail.

I can't disagree with that, I think I might be being a little too specific.

Yes, Obama is antichchrist, but not "thee" antichrist! I can explain, if necessary.

Originally posted by ushomefree
Yes, Obama is antichchrist, but not "thee" antichrist! I can explain, if necessary. antichchrist

So he is against Christ is he now

on the normal size text

Originally posted by ushomefree
Yes, Obama is antichchrist, but not "thee" antichrist! I can explain, if necessary.

Why don't you read and answer the question I asked you? I did reply to your insulting post. I deserve an honest answer from you.

Q7JH6e7BpHg

Name one place they lied.

doods, they've been predicting who the antichrist "is supposed to be" since the whole "jesus ressurection" thing.
the catholic church had the man who came up with the number zero executed be because zero meant nothing and that means it was an evil number because if nothing is nothing, than god cannot be there, and so the number zero is evil and so it the person who created it.

and the whole Galileo thing, where it was all "no we all revolve around the sun i tell you!" he was thought to be the antichrist because he went against the Church's opinion.

There's a new "Antichrist" theory about every three seconds.

It's just not worth the brain power...

Originally posted by leonheartmm
Q7JH6e7BpHg

"...If America was a Christian nation..."

jesus, where the **** have they been

It scares me that there are people who think the line between church and state in America hasn't been crossed enough since the 80s.

You realize it's a very very very blatant parody of fundamentalist Christianity, right?

apparently not blatant enough

EDIT: I couldn't have watched more than a minute though...

The "heaven is getting too many prayers and outsourcing to India" should have been the obvious tipping point. The comments on YouTube are pretty funny in light of that, especially all the ones about how Christians really think this way or that the makers needed to make the parody easier to notice.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
The "heaven is getting too many prayers and outsourcing to India" should have been the obvious tipping point. The comments on YouTube are pretty funny in light of that, especially all the ones about how Christians really think this way or that the makers needed to make the parody easier to notice. At first I was thinking they were real until that bit, God can't handle so many requests

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
The "heaven is getting too many prayers and outsourcing to India" should have been the obvious tipping point. The comments on YouTube are pretty funny in light of that, especially all the ones about how Christians really think this way or that the makers needed to make the parody easier to notice.

lol, no, I didn't make it that far

I just got to what I posted about and was like "idiot Christians with a martyr complex, aside from the obvious one "