The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
As opposed to a bunch of geeks that aren't quite human and aren't quite mikmen making up theories based on possibilities.
God, being the greater being, not particularly from any religion. Although one of the hindu gods is a four-armed elephant-man. Just thought i'd let you know...
God, being the greater being, not particularly from any religion. Although one of the hindu gods is a four-armed elephant-man. Just thought i'd let you know...
Page:
I believe something created us, and I know it wasn't some big bang. Some person/creature created us, whether it is still alive i do not know, what it was i do not know.
davyboy wrote:
>
> hmmmmm so l=MC2 could be totally false because time increases the
> faster you go towards light ;0)
Looks totally false to me - should that not be E=MC2 by any chance ??
>
> hmmmmm so l=MC2 could be totally false because time increases the
> faster you go towards light ;0)
Looks totally false to me - should that not be E=MC2 by any chance ??
===SONICRAV---> wrote:
> Edgy wrote:
>
> Ah, but it's perfect only in our eyes. I'm sure there are many flaws
> in the Universe, many of which we'll never be able to comprehend.
>
> So true...
>
> Although the one that really gets me (as a Mathematician) is that
> Maths cannot be proved to be self consistant! To do so would mean
> proving arithmetic self consistent, and to do that has been proved
> impossible. Everything I've learned in Maths could be wrong!
>
> Sonic
hmmmmm so l=MC2 could be totally false because time increases the faster you go towards light ;0)
> Edgy wrote:
>
> Ah, but it's perfect only in our eyes. I'm sure there are many flaws
> in the Universe, many of which we'll never be able to comprehend.
>
> So true...
>
> Although the one that really gets me (as a Mathematician) is that
> Maths cannot be proved to be self consistant! To do so would mean
> proving arithmetic self consistent, and to do that has been proved
> impossible. Everything I've learned in Maths could be wrong!
>
> Sonic
hmmmmm so l=MC2 could be totally false because time increases the faster you go towards light ;0)
Edgy wrote:
> Ah, but it's perfect only in our eyes. I'm sure there are many flaws
> in the Universe, many of which we'll never be able to comprehend.
So true...
Although the one that really gets me (as a Mathematician) is that Maths cannot be proved to be self consistant! To do so would mean proving arithmetic self consistent, and to do that has been proved impossible. Everything I've learned in Maths could be wrong!
Sonic
> Ah, but it's perfect only in our eyes. I'm sure there are many flaws
> in the Universe, many of which we'll never be able to comprehend.
So true...
Although the one that really gets me (as a Mathematician) is that Maths cannot be proved to be self consistant! To do so would mean proving arithmetic self consistent, and to do that has been proved impossible. Everything I've learned in Maths could be wrong!
Sonic
Lawless Fever wrote:
> In the beginning there was the big bang, the creation of OUR universe.
> There, at the same time, were also an infinite number of other big
> bangs elsewhere in the multiverse.
This is nonsense. Physics has almost completely removed this theory from it's study, and people like you continue to quote it. What happened was that science was asked "well, how come our Universe is perfect enough to support life". Their answer was that "well, there must be infinite universes, each slightly different". Which begs the question "Why should there be infinitely many". In fact, physics has now shown that if Schrodinger's wave equation for the Universe can be proven then the whole idea of a multiverse is laughable.
The multiverse is a fluid medium in
> which our, and many other universes float. Our universe is likely to
> be donut-shaped, but as we have no scientific proof, and never will
> have, this can never be proved.
1) It can't be donut shaped because a donut is 3 dimensional
2) It could be ANY closed shape, a torus is just one of these.
I was aboput to go on critising your argument until I realised it's copied form the science vs religion room. If you go in there, you'll see that almost every point made is rubbish.
Especially laughable is your arrogance to religion. You think that christians still believe the world was made in 6 days. The do not. They accept the big bang, as well as any other scientific principal inc. evolution. It is you who is arrogant of religion, not them who are arrogant of science.
Now, if you want the full explaination, go to the science vs religion room, and you will see a massive pot by me (And others) explaining what relgion actually says.
Oh, and before you say I'm just being defensive... I'm not remotely religious. I'm just not arrogant.
Sonic
> In the beginning there was the big bang, the creation of OUR universe.
> There, at the same time, were also an infinite number of other big
> bangs elsewhere in the multiverse.
This is nonsense. Physics has almost completely removed this theory from it's study, and people like you continue to quote it. What happened was that science was asked "well, how come our Universe is perfect enough to support life". Their answer was that "well, there must be infinite universes, each slightly different". Which begs the question "Why should there be infinitely many". In fact, physics has now shown that if Schrodinger's wave equation for the Universe can be proven then the whole idea of a multiverse is laughable.
The multiverse is a fluid medium in
> which our, and many other universes float. Our universe is likely to
> be donut-shaped, but as we have no scientific proof, and never will
> have, this can never be proved.
1) It can't be donut shaped because a donut is 3 dimensional
2) It could be ANY closed shape, a torus is just one of these.
I was aboput to go on critising your argument until I realised it's copied form the science vs religion room. If you go in there, you'll see that almost every point made is rubbish.
Especially laughable is your arrogance to religion. You think that christians still believe the world was made in 6 days. The do not. They accept the big bang, as well as any other scientific principal inc. evolution. It is you who is arrogant of religion, not them who are arrogant of science.
Now, if you want the full explaination, go to the science vs religion room, and you will see a massive pot by me (And others) explaining what relgion actually says.
Oh, and before you say I'm just being defensive... I'm not remotely religious. I'm just not arrogant.
Sonic
No rising to any of the stupid comments in this thread - Lawless why dont you post in your own tread instead of trying to start the same debate again here ?
Of course I believe in God, I dont just believe I know. It's nothing to do with a brief piece of personal happiness, it's alway there.
Of course I believe in God, I dont just believe I know. It's nothing to do with a brief piece of personal happiness, it's alway there.
This is just my opinion on some stuff. Which side do you favor - scientific or religious route? Foreword: This, which I am about to type isn’t science-fiction nonsense. Much of what is written is based on scientifically proven fact, and the rest is my opinion. Using a combination of the two, a reasonably non-contradictory explanation can hopefully be created. Right.
In the beginning there was the big bang, the creation of OUR universe. There, at the same time, were also an infinite number of other big bangs elsewhere in the multiverse. The multiverse is a fluid medium in which our, and many other universes float. Our universe is likely to be donut-shaped, but as we have no scientific proof, and never will have, this can never be proved. The multiverse cannot be defined; it is a place where “god” exists. Here he/she/it created all the universes, possibly simultaneously. He DID create everything we know, but in a random manner. Each universe is similar to at least one other universe, but with one single tiny difference in the laws of physics. For every possible outcome that could arise, there is a universe for each possibility (hence parallel universe. But this is actually lies because if it was a parallel universe then everything would be the same and it’s not, there is one difference in each one). Our universe is almost infinitely large, and is expanding, at an almost infinite rate. (Again not 100% scientific fact but this is what is generally believed to be happening)
The universe is several billion years old, this IS scientific fact and flatly contradicts the Bible, which claims the earth is a mere 5000 years old, but the earth is also several billion years old. It could be ¼ the age of the universe or perhaps even less. But still, that is substantially more than 5000 years. If the bible is wrong on such a scale, such a massive fact then surely other, more minor facts must also be incorrect. The bible clearly has a lot of truth. And it also has many valid points, and thus should be followed. But, in my opinion, whether you follow it or not, has no effect on the “afterlife”, more on this later.
The earth was formed in space over millions or billions of years, due to the accumulation of dust and particles in space, formed by a destroyed star or the creation of the universe itself. The gravity of all the little bits pulled together to form a large planet. There was extreme heat here because of all the forces acting upon the planet, during its creation. Here it sat and boiled for a while, until it got smacked by a super-massive asteroid, and this caused bits of it to fly off. These bits went into orbit around the earth and formed the moon. Earth now is kind of cooling down, and sort of becoming habitable. Life will soon form, but there are two possible ways in which this could happen.
1. Bits of stuff, proteins etc congealed in a pool, by chance formed an organism and this organism then decided it was a plant. And thus life on earth arose due to its own volition.
2. There was already life elsewhere in the universe, which is highly likely due to the place’s age, 5 billion years+ is likely to form life (as stated in 1.), and a meteor or whatever struck this planet. Some bacteria or plant material was transported through space in/on the asteroid. It landed on our humble planet, escaped and started up here.
If either of these are true, which they could well be, does it not occur to you that life is just a big bunch of random proteins and stuff congealed together, by luck/chance, and evolution have culminated, on this planet at any rate, in humans. Look at really basic life: an amoeba. It clearly has no intelligence; it simply isn’t capable of it. Don’t say it does, because it simply cant think, it lives, breeds etc on genetic instinct built into it. It has no choice, it has no ethics, and it has no ‘spirit’. Eat or not eat. Divide or not divide. That’s about the limit of its choices. Then look at us: are we any different? NO. Our brains are just 2 lbs of gray mush that has been formed over millions of years of natural selection. The brain is really great. It’s quite smashing. It can do millions of things per second; it’s faster than ANY computer. It controls electrical signals generated in our brain, generally by external stimuli. Sight, smell etc. these electrical signals go to glands or whatever, send out hormones, and stuff.
Personality is just a bonus, a side effect of the brain. Look at dolphins, or sharks, or snakes, or mice. Not stupid animals, they have personalities, just like any one of us. But would you say they have a “spirit”? Do they have a god? In the literal sense, yes they do as god is (potentially) an omnipotent being who created the universes. But do they go to heaven when they die? Do the dolphins go to a massive sea in the sky with as many hoops, balls and fish as they want? To the mice go to cheese-land? No. How? Because there is no such place, there is no such thing as “spirits,” or “your soul”. There is the person inside oneself, but that is primarily defined at conception, then later, after birth, formed through external influences. It may sound heartless but it is, in my opinion, the truth.
So, what happens when we die? Where do we go, what happens to our consciousness? It simply stops. There is nothing there; you simply don’t exist (other then your dead body). Whatever thoughts, feelings or whatever you had on your dying day will be stored there still, in your deceased brain, until it degrades, the memory cells die and THEN, you are gone. So in a way you do exist after death, if only briefly. But of course you are dead, there is no heart action, thus no brain function, therefore it is the end.
If you disagree with any of my points, feel free to criticize. So no, I don't believe in god :P
LF.
In the beginning there was the big bang, the creation of OUR universe. There, at the same time, were also an infinite number of other big bangs elsewhere in the multiverse. The multiverse is a fluid medium in which our, and many other universes float. Our universe is likely to be donut-shaped, but as we have no scientific proof, and never will have, this can never be proved. The multiverse cannot be defined; it is a place where “god” exists. Here he/she/it created all the universes, possibly simultaneously. He DID create everything we know, but in a random manner. Each universe is similar to at least one other universe, but with one single tiny difference in the laws of physics. For every possible outcome that could arise, there is a universe for each possibility (hence parallel universe. But this is actually lies because if it was a parallel universe then everything would be the same and it’s not, there is one difference in each one). Our universe is almost infinitely large, and is expanding, at an almost infinite rate. (Again not 100% scientific fact but this is what is generally believed to be happening)
The universe is several billion years old, this IS scientific fact and flatly contradicts the Bible, which claims the earth is a mere 5000 years old, but the earth is also several billion years old. It could be ¼ the age of the universe or perhaps even less. But still, that is substantially more than 5000 years. If the bible is wrong on such a scale, such a massive fact then surely other, more minor facts must also be incorrect. The bible clearly has a lot of truth. And it also has many valid points, and thus should be followed. But, in my opinion, whether you follow it or not, has no effect on the “afterlife”, more on this later.
The earth was formed in space over millions or billions of years, due to the accumulation of dust and particles in space, formed by a destroyed star or the creation of the universe itself. The gravity of all the little bits pulled together to form a large planet. There was extreme heat here because of all the forces acting upon the planet, during its creation. Here it sat and boiled for a while, until it got smacked by a super-massive asteroid, and this caused bits of it to fly off. These bits went into orbit around the earth and formed the moon. Earth now is kind of cooling down, and sort of becoming habitable. Life will soon form, but there are two possible ways in which this could happen.
1. Bits of stuff, proteins etc congealed in a pool, by chance formed an organism and this organism then decided it was a plant. And thus life on earth arose due to its own volition.
2. There was already life elsewhere in the universe, which is highly likely due to the place’s age, 5 billion years+ is likely to form life (as stated in 1.), and a meteor or whatever struck this planet. Some bacteria or plant material was transported through space in/on the asteroid. It landed on our humble planet, escaped and started up here.
If either of these are true, which they could well be, does it not occur to you that life is just a big bunch of random proteins and stuff congealed together, by luck/chance, and evolution have culminated, on this planet at any rate, in humans. Look at really basic life: an amoeba. It clearly has no intelligence; it simply isn’t capable of it. Don’t say it does, because it simply cant think, it lives, breeds etc on genetic instinct built into it. It has no choice, it has no ethics, and it has no ‘spirit’. Eat or not eat. Divide or not divide. That’s about the limit of its choices. Then look at us: are we any different? NO. Our brains are just 2 lbs of gray mush that has been formed over millions of years of natural selection. The brain is really great. It’s quite smashing. It can do millions of things per second; it’s faster than ANY computer. It controls electrical signals generated in our brain, generally by external stimuli. Sight, smell etc. these electrical signals go to glands or whatever, send out hormones, and stuff.
Personality is just a bonus, a side effect of the brain. Look at dolphins, or sharks, or snakes, or mice. Not stupid animals, they have personalities, just like any one of us. But would you say they have a “spirit”? Do they have a god? In the literal sense, yes they do as god is (potentially) an omnipotent being who created the universes. But do they go to heaven when they die? Do the dolphins go to a massive sea in the sky with as many hoops, balls and fish as they want? To the mice go to cheese-land? No. How? Because there is no such place, there is no such thing as “spirits,” or “your soul”. There is the person inside oneself, but that is primarily defined at conception, then later, after birth, formed through external influences. It may sound heartless but it is, in my opinion, the truth.
So, what happens when we die? Where do we go, what happens to our consciousness? It simply stops. There is nothing there; you simply don’t exist (other then your dead body). Whatever thoughts, feelings or whatever you had on your dying day will be stored there still, in your deceased brain, until it degrades, the memory cells die and THEN, you are gone. So in a way you do exist after death, if only briefly. But of course you are dead, there is no heart action, thus no brain function, therefore it is the end.
If you disagree with any of my points, feel free to criticize. So no, I don't believe in god :P
LF.
RM18 wrote:
> I always thought that the honour 'Saint' was bestowed by reilgious
> institutions.
>
> How contradictory...
--
Yup, religious institutions too. You're annoyed about the rod up behind comment, aren't you? ;)
> I always thought that the honour 'Saint' was bestowed by reilgious
> institutions.
>
> How contradictory...
--
Yup, religious institutions too. You're annoyed about the rod up behind comment, aren't you? ;)
Stryke, strange how you are so decidly anti-religion, yet your tagline refers to you as 'Saint' SmugGit.
I always thought that the honour 'Saint' was bestowed by reilgious institutions.
How contradictory...
:D
I always thought that the honour 'Saint' was bestowed by reilgious institutions.
How contradictory...
:D
Ant wrote:
>
> That's our fault, not religion's.
--
Really? To roughly quote Rufus in Dogma - "I just think it's better to have ideas. You can change an idea, you can't change a belief. People die for it."
> If you think my happiness is only 'temporary', and if you think I'm
> being 'dillusional', then I'm afraid you are terribly wrong, as you
> shall find out.
--
Well, we won't, because we'll both probably cease to exist the second we die. God could exist, I'm not completely closed, and if he does I imagine I'll be smug beyond belief.
>
> That's our fault, not religion's.
--
Really? To roughly quote Rufus in Dogma - "I just think it's better to have ideas. You can change an idea, you can't change a belief. People die for it."
> If you think my happiness is only 'temporary', and if you think I'm
> being 'dillusional', then I'm afraid you are terribly wrong, as you
> shall find out.
--
Well, we won't, because we'll both probably cease to exist the second we die. God could exist, I'm not completely closed, and if he does I imagine I'll be smug beyond belief.
Page: