jfoldbar

well. the sign in the museum didnt actually say that. but it would be even more of a shame if someone killed the last one to bring it in for proof. the sign said the prize has been on offer for mayby 30 years and noone has claimed it. so im not holding my breath

well. while we do agree on some things. most of the topics he we disagree on. and that is the basis of a forum. we seam to be going around in circles here. so i will end my discussion in this thread. peacefully.

i was bought up a christian. went my own way in my early 20's. now i am completely neutral simply cause 'the jurys still out'. i tend to lean towards science because i like the thought of something that can be proven rather than just believed. for me, logic overrules feelings. something i sometimes wonder. for me to turn from a strong believer to on the fence, all i had to do was simply read the other side of the story. hear both arguments. why doesnt that work for everyone? sometimes i find things like this http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1211511/Why-born-believe-God-Its-wired-brain-says-psychologist.html https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-people-fly-from-facts/ https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/ulterior-motives/201107/you-end-believing-what-you-want-believe there are so many studies showing that humans generally just believe something or not. and usually if you believe it then no amount of proof will change your belief. so i guess a few things i wonder are. while i was raised a christian and know the bible, how do i know i was not pre wired to believe science and so was easily turned away from my belief. how do we keep ourselfs honest, given that we are all human, and so are all susceptible to believe either way. if i could turn so easily, why cant another person with the same'facts' that turned me. surely a fact is a fact regardless of who the learner or those facts are. are there people out there who have a strong science background, and have suddenly ditched that to believe in god

it seems you are mixing a belief in god, together with science 'supernatural' is defined as "attributed to some force beyond scientific understanding or the laws of nature." or another definition "of or relating to an order of existence beyond the visible observable universe" i think the keyword here is "scientific understanding" what is the benchmark for our understanding of the future? to say with 100% certainty that we can never understand implies you know the future what is the benchmark for "observable universe" in the future? just because we cant see something now, that doesnt default to a meaning of 'we can never see it'. quote "As far as I can tell, no one has claimed the supernatural consists of nothing. I'm not sure why you keep bringing it up" are you then saying that supernatural consists of something? quote " I believe all things are ultimately 'knowable'" "They are saying we cannot do it ever" is this your own contradiction, or is this what you think/believe, or think others believe. or 2 separate statements. things that were classified to be supernatural in the past but were later explained were only misclassified because of hindsight, nothing more. people believing in their god to be not of nature does not constitute proof that he consists of something 'out of this world'. and their book saying it is so is like me saying 'im right because im right'. but i do see your argument from the last paragraph. so lets say, for example, if the Christian god is real as portrayed in the bible. never knowing him would imply that no matter how much our knowledge progressed, even in 1 million years when string and quantum stuff is everyday knowledge, there would always be something smaller that is out of our grasp. and we would always be trying to get there. but, if we can determine that there is nothing else to discover(if this is even possible), what does that mean? does that mean we can dismiss all gods as false?

i hope i can tell my story of what i DID do, rather than what i might do, without judgement. will try to keep it short, so ask for details if you want i am a 40y.o. man. i live in sydney australia. when i was 22 y.o. i started to get sick, very sick. it affected me 24/7. generally a muscle problem (details would go on for hours) went to various doctors who all said it was in my head and there was nothing wrong with me. still getting worse. by 23-24, i was not far off wheelchair. every muscle was shutting down. even going blind. eventually i met 1 doctor who actually believed there was a problem, but had no idea what or how to fix. eventually 2 doctors had told me i had just months (or less) to live. there was one particular day, 1 doctor gave me some antibiotics to kill some bug in my stomach. in the following days i was passing out, and bleeding everywhere. i then spoke with another doc who said "that bug is supposed to be there". i then came to realise that if i wanted to live, the only way was to help myself. so i went to war. every minute of every day i was reading. every medical thing i could get my hands on. and every far fetched theory or idea i could imagine, i tried it. i had already lost all, there was nothing else to loose. researched every chemical and food that was in my life for any ideas. when i discovered tests that could be done, i pleaded with the 1 doctor(by then about 5) who believed me to run those tests. eventually those tests showed an inconsistency that i could work with, to dig myself out of my hole. with a combination of the right herbs(natural stuff),whether by trial and error or by various test, i eventually came good. i didnt really think of myself as 'ok' until i was about 33-34. im now better than ever. anything is possible, if we put our mind to it.

i dont know how to quote a quote of 2 separate posts. so just typing it. raider. yes, i agree with your statement. however that doesnt change that if there is a god, then he must compose of something? whether that is something that we know/dont know is a different story. to simply say that is is 'supernatural' therefore it composes of nothing does not make any sense. this is just a cheapskate way of explaining something we dont understand, as humanity has always done. zapatos not sure what your getting at. 1. by definition this would mean its possible there is no such thing a 'supernatural' there is only 'we dont understand yet' 2 saying 'something is supernatural therefore it consists of nothing' is like saying 'because i cant feel air it does not exist' 3. in the past when they used the word supernatural to explain something they didnt understand, and if we use it now, what is the difference?

there are hundreds, mayby thousands examples of things that used to be supernatural, that are now 100% explained by science. 'not knowing' something (yet) is not the definition of it not existing. and humans throughout history have often used the word 'supernatural' when we couldnt explain it.

but if something is alien made, then this 'something' ,and said 'aliens' would have to consist of something. they could not consist of nothing at all. granted, they could consist of nothing as we know of, but they would still have to consist of something. just because we dont know what they may consist of, that doesnt change that they would have to consist of something

not natural = man made, does it not?

but surely even something that is supernatural must be made up of "something". how can something be made up of "nothing"? since it must be made of something does it stand to reason that eventually we would be able to see it or verify it?

yep. its there. for some reason when i looked a few days ago it wasnt. not sure why. all good. thankyou for pointing that out

i wonder if i may but in on this thread. i asked a question very similar to this on another science forum but was informed by the mods that i was not allowed to discuss this subject. so glad to see it being discussed here. i take it the general idea of this thread is how far human knowledge could go in the future. and what that would mean. something i wonder is, lets say if god or some entity exists, is he made of something? correct me if im wrong. we can see as small as an atom. we have evidence of things as small as quarks. but smaller than that is still just theory at this stage? i really like this htwins.net/scale/ so in the future if we can prove every part of the smallest building blocks would this mean we know everything? but that still leaves other questions, like what if we still cant see god, or ghost or entity. how do we know that what we can see is the smallest building blocks.

really. hhhmmm. i joined about a week ago. i did ask a question like this. but then i couldnt find it anywhere on forum 10 minutes after posting it so i was thinking either it was deleted or i didnt actually post it when i thought i did. can you show me where i posted it before because i cant find it. also thankyou for moving this to the correct place. "introduce yourself" thread.

thankyou for the replies and reassurance. i would hope in this forum, if an uneducated person like myself asks a question that doesnt quite make sense to others, instead of it simply being deleted without explanation, i would ask for help in rewording it so others 'get' what im trying to ask.

hi everyone. im new to this forum. i hope i have posted this in the right place. i could not find a 'welcome' area. i have an interest in most science topics, however i am not what one would call 'educated'. this has been very frowned upon in another forum and am hoping i am welcome here. if people who are not educated are not welcome here i would prefer someone let me know so as to not waste anyones time. thankyou

i was in tasmania over xmas and in some museum (cant remember which one) there is a lot of info and also a declaration that and tasmanian government will give $1.2 million to anyone why can prove this animal exists. this 'prize' has been in place for more than 30 years. according to the museum.

hi all. im new to this forum and hope i can join this place for discussion. while i have an interest in most science subjects, i dont consider myself to be educated (no university) and have had problems on another forum because of this. my experience there was that uneducated people seemed to be unwelcome and so their questions are simply ridiculed and deleted without explanation. my hope is that this forum is a bit friendlier, and more understanding towards people with no uni degree. and if something is not worded correctly, rather than just deleting, please try to discuss. like, why was it deleted, how can i re-word to come across correctly. if discussion from an uneducated person is not welcome here, i would rather someone let me know so as to not waste anyones time. thankyou