Godfree's Law of Galaxy motion

[Godfree]

Yes I thought so , you are on my thread to try and discourage me ,
to suggest that it's not scientific or proper philosophy that I present ,
like your the authority here , and an expert on these subjects ,
is your name AMod ,??? or where do you get the idea that your the judge ,, ...

A fucking BA(Hons) Degree in Philosophy and a MSc degree in AI is where I get my arrogance to judge you dipshit! Where do you get yours?

So Arising , are you agnostic , or religious , and could this be why ,
you just attempt to undermine everything I post , cos I'm god free ,
your thread , Do you believe that we have a soul , as in spirit , ghost ,
or since the thread failed to generate any interest,
tell me here , are you a christian , seeking the "proof" the maths ,??
your using science to try and prove religion,,???
and you think I'm confused ,,???

I think you the most confused dipshit I've chatted to on this forum for a long time. And that is saying something.

for someone with the degrees you claim , you don't talk much science ,
I have repeatedly asked you questions about the bbt etc ,
and have found you very reluctant to engage in the debate ,
you would not respond to my claims we can see galaxies older than the bang,
why not , if you are soooo qualified it should be easy to explain ,
and while your at it mister BA ,[hon] and MSc
try a little honesty about your belief system , what do you believe ,
my brother in law has a hon degree in maths , and he presented a pack of cards one day , thought it rather clever that he could mathmaticaly ,
work out how to stack the pack so you put one card down and one card under the pack work your way through and it lays out the cards in suits ,
I wasn't impressed and came back to him on another day with the pack stacked so you put one card down and two under , with no maths ,
I won that battle , he never tried to impress me with his maths again,
I am surrounded in my life with friends and family with degrees ,
of various kinds , and my dad was a teacher
so I repeat , are you a christian or agnostic , I'm picking agnostic ,

[Notvacka]

So Arising , are you agnostic , or religious , and could this be why ,
you just attempt to undermine everything I post , cos I'm god free ,
your thread , Do you believe that we have a soul , as in spirit , ghost ,
or since the thread failed to generate any interest,
tell me here , are you a christian , seeking the "proof" the maths ,??
your using science to try and prove religion,,???

The problem with your line of reasoning, highlighted by these questions to Arisising, is that you wear your atheism like a religion and treat scientific issues like matters of religious dogma.

Since you are coming from that angle, let me approach this discussion from that same angle:

The physical properties of our universe have no bearing on the existence of God and there is no necessary connection between our universe having a beginning and notions of God and creation, because before the big bang equals outside the universe. God is supposed to be the creator of our physical universe (reality). In order to create reality, God must exist outside reality. But science is only concerned with reality and has absolutely nothing to say about God.

As the creator of time and space, limited by neither, God might create a limited or unlimited amount of either.

The existence of God can't be proved or disproved from within reality, and it's a fool's errand to try.

[chaz wyman]

If god is outside reality then he is not real.

QED god does not exist.

Case closed.

[Arising_uk]

for someone with the degrees you claim , you don't talk much science ,
I have repeatedly asked you questions about the bbt etc ,
and have found you very reluctant to engage in the debate ,
you would not respond to my claims we can see galaxies older than the bang,
why not , if you are soooo qualified it should be easy to explain ,
and while your at it mister BA ,[hon] and MSc ...

Its because I have those qualifications that I don't discuss science that I haven't studied in the vain belief that I'm actually contributing to some 'debate' about the issues in that subject. As I've tried to inform you, you are doing a form of metaphysics that philosophy now eschews as a waste of thought. Why? Because the philosophical metaphysicians left long-ago to produce science and physics, with apparently great results. You wish to discuss your issues with their thoughts and results, go become a mathematical astro-physicist, until then you are blowing in the wind if you think you are doing anything other than pumping your own mistaken personal metaphysic about religion, science and politics.

try a little honesty about your belief system , what do you believe , my brother in law has a hon degree in maths , and he presented a pack of cards one day , thought it rather clever that he could mathmaticaly , work out how to stack the pack so you put one card down and one card under the pack work your way through and it lays out the cards in suits , I wasn't impressed and came back to him on another day with the pack stacked so you put one card down and two under , with no maths , I won that battle , he never tried to impress me with his maths again, I am surrounded in my life with friends and family with degrees , of various kinds , and my dad was a teacher so I repeat , are you a christian or agnostic , I'm picking agnostic ,

And this is exactly why I think your thoughts should be in the metaphysics or religious section and not under phil of science. As what relevance would this have to the issues you raise? Other than allowing you to find some reason to dismiss what I say to you.

Still, from my perspective, and unlike you, I'm a true atheist as I have no belief system related to finding a meaning to existence from either the religions nor the sciences. But I do listen to the sciences when it comes to how things work, I just don't think they will ever answer why things are in the sense of supplying some meaning that I need from 'life'. You on the other hand obviously have such a need and from my perspective are not much different from the religious you decry.

Oh! And like your father I also hold a teaching qualification.

(although I do regret that I was in my cups and wrote boastfully and in anger about my qualifications in response to your post. But your thoughts do piss me of as Philosophy has a bad enough reputation amongst the sciences as being basically waffle and a waste of thought and I think you are a good example of why they think this. You are obviously fairly thoughtful, why not try thinking about things that can be usefully just thought about. Try Phenomenology, its still a fairly undefined field in Philosophy and open to contributions.)

[Godfree]

So Arising , are you agnostic , or religious , and could this be why ,
you just attempt to undermine everything I post , cos I'm god free ,
your thread , Do you believe that we have a soul , as in spirit , ghost ,
or since the thread failed to generate any interest,
tell me here , are you a christian , seeking the "proof" the maths ,??
your using science to try and prove religion,,???

The problem with your line of reasoning, highlighted by these questions to Arisising, is that you wear your atheism like a religion and treat scientific issues like matters of religious dogma.

Since you are coming from that angle, let me approach this discussion from that same angle:

The physical properties of our universe have no bearing on the existence of God and there is no necessary connection between our universe having a beginning and notions of God and creation, because before the big bang equals outside the universe. God is supposed to be the creator of our physical universe (reality). In order to create reality, God must exist outside reality. But science is only concerned with reality and has absolutely nothing to say about God.

As the creator of time and space, limited by neither, God might create a limited or unlimited amount of either.

The existence of God can't be proved or disproved from within reality, and it's a fool's errand to try.

Let me explain why we keep disagreeing ,
The physical properties have no bearing on god , yes I agree , theres no god ,
thats what that statement says to me ,
before the bb equals outside the universe , disagree ,
in a steady state universe, ie non expanding , we go back for infinity ,
so regardless of wether you imagine a bb or not , I see infinity ,
Science has nothing to say about god , because there is NO indication ,
from ANY studies that its real or worth their time ,
I consider the concept of god to be an insult to anybody with a brain ,
can't prove or disprove god , disagree , god is impossible ,,prove me wrong,

[Godfree]

Arising , I like to pick peoples brains ,
and would enjoy you explaining the graduates view ,
but because my father was a teacher , I am not impressed by authority ,
that I look at my teacher like my dad , just another dick head with ,
just as much ignorance and shortcomings as the rest of us ,
my preference was not to be a specialist , but see the whole picture ,
to know a little about it all , and that is the only way I see to know reality ,
to take any piece of knowledge in isolation , becomes like ,
Einsteins theory of relativity , knowledge needs to agree with it'self ,
we have so many theories and beliefs , that obviously , it's not all true ,
if a religious scholar came up with some science for the bb ,
I would be suspicious and presume , agenda and a deliberate attempt to ,
prove their belief system has science .
I'm sure you are crossing all the t's and dotting all the i's ,
I don't , but I do apply my intellect , I work hard at obtaining knowledge ,
just look at the hours I spend here , trying to get a debate going
Einstein frustrated his teachers , was a poor student ,
I too am a poor student , while I plot to overturn science ,,!!!!!!!

[Godfree]

If god is outside reality then he is not real.

QED god does not exist.

Case closed.

careful Chaz , you might start to sound like me ,
if god is outside reality , how does religion claim to know it ,
if it is the great unprovable , wouldn't that make dedicating one's life ,
to such a unknowable a little bit irrational , wars have been started ,
just look at the crusades , they killed all those people ,
because of something they can't prove , isn't real , and can't know ,
this is why I say , the belief in god is a form of mental illness,
and one day in the future they will realize this ,
I look forward to that day , but sadly at our current rate of progress,
it might take a thousand years or more ,,!!!

[Arising_uk]

Arising , I like to pick peoples brains ,
and would enjoy you explaining the graduates view ,
but because my father was a teacher , I am not impressed by authority , ...

And yet you quote them and take them as the base of your thoughts?

that I look at my teacher like my dad , just another dick head with ,
just as much ignorance and shortcomings as the rest of us ,
my preference was not to be a specialist , but see the whole picture ,
to know a little about it all , and that is the only way I see to know reality ,
to take any piece of knowledge in isolation , becomes like ,
Einsteins theory of relativity , knowledge needs to agree with it'self ,
we have so many theories and beliefs , that obviously , it's not all true ,
if a religious scholar came up with some science for the bb ,
I would be suspicious and presume , agenda and a deliberate attempt to ,
prove their belief system has science .
I'm sure you are crossing all the t's and dotting all the i's ,
I don't , but I do apply my intellect , I work hard at obtaining knowledge ,
just look at the hours I spend here , trying to get a debate going
Einstein frustrated his teachers , was a poor student ,
I too am a poor student , while I plot to overturn science ,,!!!!!!!

Basically you are saying you can't apply yourself and you know a little about much but bugger all about something.

Over the years I've noticed that many use this Einstein story to justify their own lack of academic achievement, what they fail to understand is that Einstein went away and studied hard to bring his standard up and then passed and enrolled into a European Polytechnic, if you don't understand what an achievement this is go think of the highest academic academies in your country and then imagine a place were the best of those best go.

That you think you can "plot to overturn science" just shows how far from reality you live.

[chaz wyman]

If god is outside reality then he is not real.

QED god does not exist.

Case closed.

careful Chaz , you might start to sound like me ,

I don't think so.
You see, what I am doing here is simply extending another's thoughts to their logical conclusion, if you had not noticed.
This is not what you do.


if god is outside reality , how does religion claim to know it ,

Religion is not saying that Novatchka is.
You see- that is the trouble with you - you do not know the boundaries.

if it is the great unprovable , wouldn't that make dedicating one's life ,
to such a unknowable a little bit irrational , wars have been started ,
just look at the crusades , they killed all those people ,

And what is your excuse for your position?

because of something they can't prove , isn't real , and can't know ,
this is why I say , the belief in god is a form of mental illness,
and one day in the future they will realize this ,
I look forward to that day , but sadly at our current rate of progress,
it might take a thousand years or more ,,!!!

[SpheresOfBalance]

SpheresOFBalance only in blue

So Arising , are you agnostic , or religious , and could this be why ,
you just attempt to undermine everything I post , cos I'm god free ,
your thread , Do you believe that we have a soul , as in spirit , ghost ,
or since the thread failed to generate any interest,
tell me here , are you a christian , seeking the "proof" the maths ,??
your using science to try and prove religion,,???

The problem with your line of reasoning, highlighted by these questions to Arisising, is that you wear your atheism like a religion and treat scientific issues like matters of religious dogma.

Since you are coming from that angle, let me approach this discussion from that same angle:

The physical properties of our universe have no bearing on the existence of God and there is no necessary connection between our universe having a beginning and notions of God and creation, because before the big bang equals outside the universe.
Not knowledge, but presumption, based upon archaic belief systems, not thinking outside the box provided by primitives.

God is supposed to be the creator of our physical universe (reality).
Finally an inkling of truth (see red highlight above), pointing to the fact that it's not knowledge, but presumption, based upon archaic belief systems, not thinking outside the box provided by primitives.

In order to create reality, God must exist outside reality.
Not knowledge, but presumption, based upon archaic belief systems, not thinking outside the box provided by primitives.

But science is only concerned with reality and has absolutely nothing to say about God.
Not true, on a PBS documentary, Michio Kaku, an American theoretical physicist, the Henry Semat Professor of Theoretical Physics in the City College of New York of City University of New York, a co-founder of string field theory, that Stephen Hawking supports, saying that 'he believes that string theory is a step toward the correct fundamental description of nature.' said that recently physics pertaining to cosmology has been turned upside down such that some leading physicist's have looked to creationism (God) for answers.

As the creator of time and space, limited by neither, God might create a limited or unlimited amount of either.
Not knowledge, but presumption, based upon archaic belief systems, not thinking outside the box provided by primitives.


The existence of God can't be proved or disproved from within reality, and it's a fool's errand to try.
Not knowledge, but presumption, based upon archaic belief systems, not thinking outside the box provided by primitives.

[SpheresOfBalance]

If god is outside reality then he is not real.

QED god does not exist.

Case closed.
Not closed, empty headed!

Not knowledge, but presumption, based upon archaic belief systems, not thinking outside the box, as provided by primitives.

Assuming our reality is the only thing there is, is just that! What are you, a God, Chaz?

[Godfree]

Spheres ,,
"some leading physicists have looked to creationism for answers"
now that doesn't sound like you Spheres , god,? answers from god ,?
come on get real , tell me the truth ,
do you look to creationism for answers,???
do you look to god for answers Spheres,????
if so I have miss-judged you completely ,,!!!

[SpheresOfBalance]

Spheres ,,
"some leading physicists have looked to creationism for answers"
now that doesn't sound like you Spheres , god,? answers from god ,?
come on get real , tell me the truth ,
do you look to creationism for answers,???
do you look to god for answers Spheres,????
if so I have miss-judged you completely ,,!!!

Don't try to read anything into what I say. I do not necessarily buy into anything that I post. I simply see error in ones thinking (statements), and in this particular case, it's one that opposes you, I have done the same in the past, and could likewise do so in the future, with your assertions, which is to merely point out the error in the body of a particular assertion.

The goal for all would be philosophers, is to uncover truth, the actualness of things, and that is not to argue by stating obvious falsehoods.

I see that we can attest to those things that we have empirical evidence of, but it is a falsehood to to do so with those things that we do not.

Sometimes, which is this particular case, I'm merely saying that one cannot say that, something, without empirical evidence either way, can be said to exist or not exist, such that I'm not arguing for the opposite of what's being said, just that what's being said cannot be said with any certainty in truth. Logic, pure and simple!

[SpheresOfBalance]

Spheres ,,
"some leading physicists have looked to creationism for answers"
now that doesn't sound like you Spheres , god,? answers from god ,?
come on get real , tell me the truth ,
do you look to creationism for answers,???
do you look to god for answers Spheres,????
if so I have miss-judged you completely ,,!!!

I've told you before, though you seem to easily forget, "I HATE MAN'S GOD!"

But I believe in the possibility of a creator, whatever it's nature. I hate labeling but the closest one to my beliefs is agnostic.

[Notvacka]

Not knowledge, but presumption, based upon archaic belief systems, not thinking outside the box provided by primitives.
Not knowledge, but presumption, based upon archaic belief systems, not thinking outside the box provided by primitives.
Not knowledge, but presumption, based upon archaic belief systems, not thinking outside the box provided by primitives.
Not knowledge, but presumption, based upon archaic belief systems, not thinking outside the box provided by primitives.

Do you think repeating that phrase over and over is somehow clever? (I remember somebody mentioning parrots before. )

Besides being annoying, it shows that you have not understood me. I don't believe in knowledge and I don't make presumptions, only assumptions, if you can appreciate the difference. And I'm not trying to "think outside the box" here, I'm trying to provide a box. (Not the kind of box you are talking about, thouh. )