Originally posted by jaden101
So you DO think that your "God" is somehow superior to ancient Gods? Why?...Is it because the general population doesn't believe in those Gods any more so they suddenly cease to exist?...Would the same thing not apply to the Christian "God"?
Superior? Yeah, that's an odd way of putting it, but I guess so. In that I believe the God of the Bible is real, and those other ones weren't. So no, I don't think not believing in Him would make Him cease to exist.
Originally posted by TacDavey
How does being perfect mean you can't want something?
want v.
[list=1][*]to be deficient by the absence of some part or thing, or to feel or have a need
[*]to have need
[*]to be in a state of destitution, need, or poverty
[*]to be lacking or absent, as a part or thing necessary to completeness[/list]
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
[b]want v.[list=1][*]to be deficient by the absence of some part or thing, or to feel or have a need
[*]to have need
[*]to be in a state of destitution, need, or poverty
[*]to be lacking or absent, as a part or thing necessary to completeness[/list] [/B]
Being perfect doesn't mean you have everything. I could be a perfect being, but that doesn't mean I would automatically own every car. Thus, I have the ability to want a car if I don't have one, while still being perfect.
Or, for something not physical. I could be perfect and WANT their to be peace on earth. Being perfect does not automatically make the world peacful, thus, I can be perfect and still want something.
Originally posted by Mindship
(Which brings me to a sidenote: how come ESP is being listed as a possible explanation for God's voice? It's not like ESP has such a great evidence track record.)
I've actually found an experiement which specifically deals with meditation and psi. It stated that the experiments prove that meditation does actually increase psi.
I just want to have a good look at it first before I post it. I also don't even understand the math they're using. 🙁
Originally posted by DeadlineCool. I look forward to reading it. Now I'm also wondering: I had recently found an article where meditation was empirically confirmed to increase cortical thickening in areas of the brain involved in attention, introception and sensory processing (there are a few links: basically, one can google up "meditation" with "cortical thickening"😉.
I've actually found an experiement which specifically deals with meditation and psi. It stated that the experiments prove that meditation does actually increase psi.I just want to have a good look at it first before I post it. I also don't even understand the math they're using. 🙁
So now it would be interesting to see if there's a link between psi and being thick-brained. 😉
(Btw, a Greek friend of mine recently told me the correct way to pronounce "psi" is not "sigh" -- which I always thought -- but "psee". Go figure).
Originally posted by Deadline
I've actually found an experiement which specifically deals with meditation and psi. It stated that the experiments prove that meditation does actually increase psi.I just want to have a good look at it first before I post it. I also don't even understand the math they're using. 🙁
I'd be more interested to see some peer reviews in scientific journals. As your comments rightly allude to, none of us are fully qualified to make an accurate assessment of a lone experiment or paper.
Originally posted by Digi
I'd be more interested to see some peer reviews in scientific journals. As your comments rightly allude to, none of us are fully qualified to make an accurate assessment of a lone experiment or paper.
I think today's xkcd is more apt.
When you do 300 experiments and one of them gets significant results that's not evidence that you're on to something. In fact it's very good evidence that you're wrong.
Originally posted by TacDavey
Being perfect doesn't mean you have everything. I could be a perfect being, but that doesn't mean I would automatically own every car. Thus, I have the ability to want a car if I don't have one, while still being perfect.Or, for something not physical. I could be perfect and WANT their to be peace on earth. Being perfect does not automatically make the world peacful, thus, I can be perfect and still want something.
A being that is deficient or incomplete is not perfect.
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
I think today's xkcd is more apt.When you do 300 experiments and one of them gets significant results that's not evidence that you're on to something. In fact it's very good evidence that you're wrong.
At any rate Sheldrake has done loads of experiements and got repeatable results.
http://www.sheldrake.org/Articles&Papers/papers/telepathy/index.html
http://www.sheldrake.org/Articles&Papers/papers/staring/index.html
Originally posted by Digi
I'd be more interested to see some peer reviews in scientific journals.
Are you assuming it isn't? I don't know I think I already posted some of Sheldrakes.
http://www.scientificexploration.org/journal/jse_22_4_sheldrake.pdf
Anyway heres what I'm talking about. It's from a peer reviewed journal and according to the paper its already been proven in another experiment, however details where not given out.
http://www.scientificexploration.org/journal/jse_22_2_roney-dougal.pdf
Originally posted by Digi
As your comments rightly allude to, none of us are fully qualified to make an accurate assessment of a lone experiment or paper.
I mean't I don't understand their mathematics.
Originally posted by Mindship
Cool. I look forward to reading it. Now I'm also wondering: I had recently found an article where meditation was empirically confirmed to increase cortical thickening in areas of the brain involved in attention, introception and sensory processing (there are a few links: basically, one can google up "meditation" with "cortical thickening"😉.So now it would be interesting to see if there's a link between psi and being thick-brained. 😉
(Btw, a Greek friend of mine recently told me the correct way to pronounce "psi" is not "sigh" -- which I always thought -- but "psee". Go figure).
What the hell here it is anyway.
http://www.scientificexploration.org/journal/jse_22_2_roney-dougal.pdf
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
I think today's xkcd is more apt.When you do 300 experiments and one of them gets significant results that's not evidence that you're on to something. In fact it's very good evidence that you're wrong.
ah taking a look at the staring experiment again that addresses that cartoon from what I understand. Staring was above chance and not staring wasn't. You'll have to read the sense of being stared at experiment to get my point.
Originally posted by TacDavey
You have not shown it to be evil. Giving it a harsh sounding label does not make it evil.
Untrue. And its not a harsh sounding label. Its a descriptive.
To unnecessarily, unconsentually and preemptively, attempt to hinder the child's future sexual enjoyment, physical appearance when they are later an adult, to actually cut them, making them bleed, making them sore for all the time of their 'recovery', forever and irrevocably modifying their body BASED ON SOMEONES BELIEF IN AN UNPROVEN SUPERSTITIOUS BEING is as evil as it is stupid.
Its child abuse.
...more so, especially when the child's penis is sucked by an adult, even if under claims of hygeine..as Rabbis do/did under the banner of religion.
http://www.come-and-hear.com/editor/br_4.html
If you cannot recognise evil done under the banner of religion, here, you'll most likely never, ever recognise it.
🙁
Like how you can't recognize that some are utterly convinced that God is real? 😛 They are automatically wrong because they believe in an entity you can't understand or prove. There's no objective "evil" so you claiming to have one is nothing more than being close-minded.
They do what they believe in their hearts to be right and good. How can't you recognize that? Evil is a motive, not an action.
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
I think today's xkcd is more apt.When you do 300 experiments and one of them gets significant results that's not evidence that you're on to something. In fact it's very good evidence that you're wrong.
I think this xkcd fits the thread nicely.
They do this without a shred of proof to the rest of us though.
The child might not hold that opinion when they grow up.
Thats encroachment on their personal freedom to not have their gentals mutilated....if its done preemptively as a kid.
Who says I cant understand the descriptions that man gives of it?
I disagree. Every schizo who has ever killed due to their delusions in the world could have their actions justified under that tennet.
When you have decency, a free mind and conscience, that lets you know.
And child sex abuse IS evil. Do you not feel that way?
Originally posted by dadudemon
I think this xkcd fits the thread nicely.
😛
"Fools assert stuff like that as fact with no shred of proof"
Show me some evidence, evidence and evidence 38:19
😛
Thanks for proving the point of the original post:
Originally posted by 0mega Spawn
not to offend the sore religious peoplebut why is the concept of evidence so hard to understand?
any given site ANY someone says "evidence please" and people quote scriptures on & on. sigh... its a frustrating loop -_-its the equivalent of someone telling someone there is no hogwarts full of wizards & in response they start reading the dam spells 😆