Jump to content

Yahawah, ancient name of God.


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 133
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

See the (well referenced) Wikipedia article on Yahweh. I assumed everyone knew this. And the fact he used to be married!

Same shit, different thread.  What do you think the bible is trying to teach? Let me take a stab at it: For those who understand the message; it teaches people how to be content with li

Eratosthenes showed it was round ca 240 BC by measuring its circumference. The Greeks already knew it was spherical https://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/200606/history.cfm

11 minutes ago, Wulphstein said:

I have proved that it was more reasonable to create an Infinite Intelligence to design a universe, then to do it by brute force using quantum foam, M theory, and no mechanisms.  I have proven there is a large pile of witness testimonial of God and Jesus (sometimes from Muslims).  I have done my part.  You are a moderator.  You can close the thread.

You have proven nothing other then you are totally brainwashed. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Strange said:

Asserted, not proved

Actually, I have demonstrated that there are millions, billions of human beings who are witnesses to God.  That is an established fact.  There are zero scientific experiments that have proven m-theory or quantum foam.  That is a fact. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Wulphstein said:

What's it called when people face reality, when they stop hiding behind "logical fallacies" and absolute physics constants that are set to 1, and actually figure out how the physical universe is being implemented (like what is time, what is space, what causes the invariance of the speed of light, so that they can actually get around to inventing anti-gravity?  Because the practioners of "science" aren't doing it.

The nature of things is metaphysics, not science.

What does antigravity have to do with Yahweh?

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Wulphstein said:

Actually, I have demonstrated that there are millions, billions of human beings who are witnesses to God.  That is an established fact.  There are zero scientific experiments that have proven m-theory or quantum foam.  That is a fact. 

Let me say again, the mind is a tricky thing, and that would apply particularly when someone is near death. Some people also believe they have been kidnapped by Aliens, believe in ghosts, even Bigfoot. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. We have no extraordinary evidence of Bigfoot, ghosts, Aliens or any magical deity that just happens to have been here for eternity. Delusions, illusions and brainwashing plays a big part in what people believe in and what they imagine. Your god and your supposed afterlife may give you a nice cozy warm inner feeling, but that is all it is. 

No we have no direct evidence for any quantum foam, but we have plenty of evidence for the BB and the universe evolving from a hot dense state, and plenty of evidence for your own scientific ignorance. Again your god of the gaps is just that.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, swansont said:

The nature of things is metaphysics, not science.

What does antigravity have to do with Yahweh?

Metaphysics "The nature of things" is the way in which we figure out what kind of experiments can be performed to do important things like:  invent antigravity by testing for it.

You should ask:  "what does Yahweh have to do with antigravity?"

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Wulphstein said:

Metaphysics "The nature of things" is the way in which we figure out what kind of experiments can be performed to do important things like:  invent antigravity by testing for it.

Not in my corner of R&D

Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Wulphstein said:

I have proved that it was more reasonable to create an Infinite Intelligence to design a universe, then to do it by brute force using quantum foam, M theory, and no mechanisms.  I have proven there is a large pile of witness testimonial of God and Jesus (sometimes from Muslims).  I have done my part.  You are a moderator.  You can close the thread.

You didn't listen to Sagan in the video I gave did you? As I illustrated earlier, the need for any magical deity has been pushed back to near oblivion. We at one time saw the need for such an impossible  being, when we were ignorant of the sciences, and how the Sun and stars came to be, and how we evolved to what we are today. We saw such impractical nonsense in near everything around us before science came along....mountains, rivers, Sun, Moon etc

Most of us have moved on now, with the evidence of science.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, beecee said:

Let me say again, the mind is a tricky thing, and that would apply particularly when someone is near death. Some people also believe they have been kidnapped by Aliens, believe in ghosts, even Bigfoot. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. We have no extraordinary evidence of Bigfoot, ghosts, Aliens or any magical deity that just happens to have been here for eternity. Delusions, illusions and brainwashing plays a big part in what people believe in and what they imagine. Your god and your supposed afterlife may give you a nice cozy warm inner feeling, but that is all it is. 

No we have no direct evidence for any quantum foam, but we have plenty of evidence for the BB and the universe evolving from a hot dense state, and plenty of evidence for your own scientific ignorance. Again your god of the gaps is just that.

God of the gaps is such an amazing tool, I was able to figure out how antigravity works in another thread! 

There is where I find atheism to be totally irrational.  Why wouldn't you want a nice cozy warm inner feeling from a deity that ...  was seen again... and now there is an anti-gravity paper. 

5 minutes ago, swansont said:

Not in my corner of R&D

Sorry to hear that.  In the engineering company I work at, anything goes!  If it works, if it solves the engineering problem, then it doesn't matter where the idea came from.

2 minutes ago, beecee said:

You didn't listen to Sagan in the video I gave did you? As I illustrated earlier, the need for any magical deity has been pushed back to near oblivion. We at one time saw the need for such an impossible  being, when we were ignorant of the sciences, and how the Sun and stars came to be, and how we evolved to what we are today. We saw such impractical nonsense in near everything around us before science came along....mountains, rivers, Sun, Moon etc

Most of us have moved on now, with the evidence of science.

It sounds like you're trying to argue that engineering is unnecessary.  Is that correct?  Your argument makes absolutely no sense.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Wulphstein said:

 Sorry to hear that.  In the engineering company I work at, anything goes!  If it works, if it solves the engineering problem, then it doesn't matter where the idea came from.

So you solve all of your problems with metaphysics? That’s extraordinary.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, beecee said:

The ancients saw the so called  evidence of god all around them...in the Sun, the Moon, Mountains, rivers, etc etc. We know better these days and have shown evidence that these things are simply applications of gravitational collapses, supernovas, abiogenesis, and evolution, and we can take those evidence backed solutions back to 10- 43 seconds after the BB. So you see science has logically and reasonably pushed any need for any god explanation back to near oblivion.

 

:wub:

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, swansont said:

So you solve all of your problems with metaphysics? That’s extraordinary.

I solved antigravity with metaphysics. 

I work in the high tech industry. It is always cheaper to solve problems in the design stage.  So you make a product one time, not 10^10^147 times, like atheists do.

The innefiency of the quantum foam falsified it.  Nature would choose a more metaphysical way to design it before setting off the big bang. You'll have to accept the reality that nature is efficient and prompt.  Least action.  Least time.

The innefiency of the quantum foam falsified it.  Nature would choose a more metaphysical way to design it before setting off the big bang. You'll have to accept the reality that nature is efficient and prompt.  Least action.  Least time.

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Wulphstein said:

I solved antigravity with metaphysics. 

 I work in the high tech industry

How many customers have purchased your antigravity solution obtained via metaphysics? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

So atheism is falsified. It was crushed to death by two empirical facts. First, the universe is efficient.  Think of the least action and least time principles. Therefore, quantum foam is falsified. Second, complex systems require engineering. 

Edited by Wulphstein
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Wulphstein said:

So atheism is falsified. It was crushed to death by two empirical facts. First, the universe is efficient

Do you believe atheism is the positive assertion that the universe is inefficient?

23 minutes ago, Wulphstein said:

Second, complex systems require engineering

Do you agree a single counter example shows the flaw in your position?

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, iNow said:

So no, you won’t accept one? You’d prefer to hold your hat on “goddidit” no matter what I say?

You offered a counter example. Let's hear it.

Anyway I didn't understand your other question. 

Edited by Wulphstein
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Wulphstein said:

You offered a counter example. 

Correction. I asked if you agreed that a single counter example would show the flaws in your thinking. Do you?

21 minutes ago, Wulphstein said:

didn't understand your other question

You suggested that an efficient universe demonstrates the atheist position to be invalid. Is this because you think atheists believe in an inefficient universe?

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, iNow said:

Correction. I asked if you agreed that a single counter example would show the flaws in your thinking. Do you?

You suggested that an efficient universe demonstrates the atheist position to be invalid. Is this because you think atheists believe in an inefficient universe?

This universe is very efficient.  That is a fact. Atheists try to justify their atheist argument with quantum foam and 10^10^142 failed attempts.  That is the least efficient way to create our universe.  Therefore, it's false.

Edited by Wulphstein
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Wulphstein said:

This universe is very efficient.  That is a fact.

I’m glad we can agree here. 

4 minutes ago, Wulphstein said:

Atheists try to justify their atheist argument with quantum foam and 10^10^142 failed attempts.  That is the least efficient way to create our universe.  

Which ones? Which atheists?

Atheism simply means not theist. You cannot tell what else a person thinks merely bc they lack a belief in god or gods. In much the same way, you don’t know what hobbies I enjoy if I merely tell you I don’t collect stamps. 

I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and suggest you simply misunderstand atheists, because otherwise you’re just ignorant and arguing against strawman. 

Though, I suppose you can be a foolish ignorant person and have misguided notions of atheism. Your posting behavior doesn’t even come close to ruling this out. 

Now, please stop evading my question

10 minutes ago, iNow said:

I asked if you agreed that a single counter example would show the flaws in your thinking. Do you?

 

Edited by iNow
Link to post
Share on other sites

I made a lot of points, made a lit of statements.  Nobody was able to falsify my statements or tell me fallacy it violated,  other than strawman.  But no understandable argument was made or attempted.  So therefore,  my statements are valid.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Let’s try this again. Evasion wouldn’t please your god. 

 

35 minutes ago, iNow said:

I asked if you agreed that a single counter example would show the flaws in your thinking. Do you?

 

15 minutes ago, iNow said:

How? What precisely is an atheist belief?

 

35 minutes ago, iNow said:

You suggested that an efficient universe demonstrates the atheist position to be invalid. Is this because you think atheists believe in an inefficient universe?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.