Grace Is The Knowledge Of Inseparability, And Of Us.

[mymistake]

 

 

 

Since you perceived the ICP process, this means what you saw is subjective (your definition of subjective), is it?

Yes

 

 

 

Yet you perceived it from something . . . so doesn't that mean the object of your perception is objective?

 

That we could see it as it is. The thing is we all see it differently.

 

 

 

I'm not talking about your perception.   Rather I am talking about the cosmos that is the object of said perception.  Whether or not we see it perfectly is irrelevant to the question of is there an objective reality.

[duderonomy]

E3,

 

There might be a "God" somewhere that we can't perceive, but since we haven't perceived it yet, why should we believe in it?

 

You seem to be advocating for a God that is beyond our understanding and outside of our view of reality. Good for that God, and good for you if it makes you happy, but sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

[mydisplayname]

 

 

 

Relative objective meaning, i.e. meaning between objects is stupid without perception....Prof.

Ah, another ad hominem.  You're getting good at these, End3.

 

So, you are suggesting that the squirrel doesn't perceive the danger presented by the hawk swooping down upon it and therefore will not try to save it's own meaningless life (its life being meaningless because it does not perceive itself to be alive).

 

I can see that biology is not your strong suit.

 

You were the one who started....'be a good little Christian". I'm certain you can carry on a conversation without the little attacks.

 

If you would like the squirrel to have it's own relative meanings, it's ok with me....but the squirrels perception will be subjective too.

 

 

Atheists hide behind evolution as a defence, after all when the Pope tells the world that the Evolution and the Big Bang are valid scientific truths then that is all the prove they need right there.

I mean 5 billion years seems like a lot of time but when it takes i tens of thousands of years for just one random mutations to occur and then multiply by the hundred of thousands of time it would if require to form the  vast diversity of living matter it couldn't be done in 20 billion years.   But anyone that going to believe that any definitive principle can be based upon a series of random events then they are going to believe anything.    

 

Like the burning bush, they can't see the that which in front of them since they think the LORD spoke to Moses out of the light of the fire from a tree that didn't burn,   But the scriptures never says that the LORD spoke to Moses out of the light of the fire..  One the see one in nature then they will get it but they might never see it since they is no reason to look if it does not exist.

LINK

 

I wonder if they actually calculated the number of tens of thousands of years that each random mutation would be required to even produce the of variance necessary to result with just a varying degree of change and number of  times the of these occurrence would have been required, like hundred of thousands of thousands and have had at least some 7.5 trillion years.    I wonder if they know how long it takes light to produce a particle of mass?  But if I am not mistaken they have a rule that says mass can can not be created nor destroyed, it only changes form.  

 

Don't take the insults personal, remember that they are just a light that is growing that the lights shine on.

 

 

I believe we're having a meaningful discussion here. Not myself, because this thread mostly goes over my head, but I do follow and find the conversation fascinating. Why don't you start a new thread in which you can continue telling us what we think.

 

Also, once again, please proofread before posting. You'll see that Ends posts are structured and spell checked. Thanks.

[Fweethawt]

MASS cannot be created or destroyed?????

 

MASS only changes form?????

 

BWAHAHAHAHAAAAAA!!!!!

 

 

"That's funny right there. I don't care who you are. That's funny right there" -- Larry The Cable Guy

[rain]

I have followed this whole thread.

End3 seems to be saying that everything is subjective.

therefore

god is not objective= god does not exist outside of ones perception.

god is subjective= god only exists if one perceives god.

 

the world revolves around end3. Everything is subject to end's perception in order for it to exist.

Interesting!

[Justus]

 

There might be a "God" somewhere that we can't perceive, but since we haven't perceived it yet, why should we believe in it?

 

 

You are exactly right.     [Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. 1 Thess 5:21]  

 

 

 

“Infidelity does not consist in believing, or in disbelieving; it consists in professing to believe what he does not believe.” ― Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason

[Justus]

MASS cannot be created or destroyed?????

 

MASS only changes form?????

 

BWAHAHAHAHAAAAAA!!!!!

 

 

"That's funny right there. I don't care who you are. That's funny right there" -- Larry The Cable Guy

is not all mass considered matter? 

 

http://www.physicalgeography.net/fundamentals/6e.html

 

In its simplest form, the First Law of Thermodynamics states that neither matter nor energy can be created or destroyed. The amount of energy in the universe is constant – energy can be changed, moved, controlled, stored, or dissipated. However, this energy cannot be created from nothing or reduced to nothing. Every natural process transforms energy and moves energy, but cannot create or eliminate it.This principle forms a foundation for many of the physical sciences. - See more at: http://www.allaboutscience.org/first-law-of-thermodynamics-faq.htm#sthash.JthVwanY.dpuf

[Fweethawt]

 

MASS cannot be created or destroyed?????

MASS only changes form?????

BWAHAHAHAHAAAAAA!!!!!

"That's funny right there. I don't care who you are. That's funny right there" -- Larry The Cable Guy

 

is not all mass considered matter? 

 

http://www.physicalgeography.net/fundamentals/6e.html

 

In its simplest form, the First Law of Thermodynamics states that neither matter nor energy can be created or destroyed. The amount of energy in the universe is constant – energy can be changed, moved, controlled, stored, or dissipated. However, this energy cannot be created from nothing or reduced to nothing. Every natural process transforms energy and moves energy, but cannot create or eliminate it.This principle forms a foundation for many of the physical sciences. - See more at: http://www.allaboutscience.org/first-law-of-thermodynamics-faq.htm#sthash.JthVwanY.dpuf

I'm not sure how that wiki article relates to proving that mass is matter. Prolly cuz it doesn't.

 

Mass is a measurement of how much matter a thing has.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

 

 

MASS cannot be created or destroyed?????

MASS only changes form?????

BWAHAHAHAHAAAAAA!!!!!

"That's funny right there. I don't care who you are. That's funny right there" -- Larry The Cable Guy

is not all mass considered matter? 

 

http://www.physicalgeography.net/fundamentals/6e.html

 

In its simplest form, the First Law of Thermodynamics states that neither matter nor energy can be created or destroyed. The amount of energy in the universe is constant – energy can be changed, moved, controlled, stored, or dissipated. However, this energy cannot be created from nothing or reduced to nothing. Every natural process transforms energy and moves energy, but cannot create or eliminate it.This principle forms a foundation for many of the physical sciences. - See more at: http://www.allaboutscience.org/first-law-of-thermodynamics-faq.htm#sthash.JthVwanY.dpuf

I'm not sure how that wiki article relates to proving that mass is matter. Prolly cuz it doesn't.

 

Mass is a measurement of how much matter a thing has.

 

That's just Justus copying and pasting sciencey stuff in order to appear intelligent enough to understand it.  

[Fweethawt]

That's just Justus copying and pasting sciencey stuff in order to appear intelligent enough to understand it.

Oh! He's one of THOSE, eh? Thanks. :-)

[Fweethawt]

You are exactly right.     [Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. 1 Thess 5:21]

Do you realize that if the church/christianityingeneral even remotely adhered to this simple principle, there would be no church and there would be no debate?

 

Fascinating, ain't it?

[mymistake]

 

You are exactly right.     [Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. 1 Thess 5:21]

Do you realize that if the church/christianityingeneral even remotely adhered to this simple principle, there would be no church and there would be no debate?

 

Fascinating, ain't it?

 

 

It's a perfect formula for atheism and humanism.  Prove all things and hold on to what is good.  *Poof* all religion is gone but we are going to do good without religion and without gods.

[Orbit]

 

MASS cannot be created or destroyed?????

 

MASS only changes form?????

 

BWAHAHAHAHAAAAAA!!!!!

 

 

"That's funny right there. I don't care who you are. That's funny right there" -- Larry The Cable Guy

is not all mass considered matter? 

 

http://www.physicalgeography.net/fundamentals/6e.html

 

In its simplest form, the First Law of Thermodynamics states that neither matter nor energy can be created or destroyed. The amount of energy in the universe is constant – energy can be changed, moved, controlled, stored, or dissipated. However, this energy cannot be created from nothing or reduced to nothing. Every natural process transforms energy and moves energy, but cannot create or eliminate it.This principle forms a foundation for many of the physical sciences. - See more at: http://www.allaboutscience.org/first-law-of-thermodynamics-faq.htm#sthash.JthVwanY.dpuf

 

No. Matter is not mass. Matter HAS mass.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

 

That's just Justus copying and pasting sciencey stuff in order to appear intelligent enough to understand it.

Oh! He's one of THOSE, eh? Thanks. :-)

 

Yeah, he gets himself in trouble all the time with BAA due to his limited understanding of The Big Bang, Cosmology, and... well, basically the universe in general.  He also can't seem to understand the concept of evolution through natural selection, despite me offering my assistance (an offer he has, so far, neglected to make use of).

[sdelsolray]

Back to the OP (and away from theEnd3 derail), here's another random text generator that's quite comical:

 

Intelligent Design Creationist Bots

 

http://www.lulzcode.com/idbots.html

[FreeThinkerNZ]

 

End you keep changing the subject.

1. You claim no reality exists outside of your perception. This has been refuted by BAA, by me, and others. Gravity and radio waves are good examples of why you are wrong.

 

2. Why do you want to have a "relationship" with an ExC? So you can convert them? What are you doing?

I come here to pass the time of day. Conversations, discussions, etc.. Not many folks here in my area that find this level of conversation fun.

 

I've bookmarked this to refer to in future threads.  End is obviously too lazy to look for other discussion forums.

[Guest end3]

 

 

End you keep changing the subject.

1. You claim no reality exists outside of your perception. This has been refuted by BAA, by me, and others. Gravity and radio waves are good examples of why you are wrong.

 

2. Why do you want to have a "relationship" with an ExC? So you can convert them? What are you doing?

I come here to pass the time of day. Conversations, discussions, etc.. Not many folks here in my area that find this level of conversation fun.

 

I've bookmarked this to refer to in future threads.  End is obviously too lazy to look for other discussion forums.

 

No I just love y'all.

[FreeThinkerNZ]

 

 

 

End you keep changing the subject.

1. You claim no reality exists outside of your perception. This has been refuted by BAA, by me, and others. Gravity and radio waves are good examples of why you are wrong.

 

2. Why do you want to have a "relationship" with an ExC? So you can convert them? What are you doing?

I come here to pass the time of day. Conversations, discussions, etc.. Not many folks here in my area that find this level of conversation fun.

 

I've bookmarked this to refer to in future threads.  End is obviously too lazy to look for other discussion forums.

 

No I just love y'all.

 

Your idea of love is the same as your non-existent deity's.  

[StillLooking]

 

 

 

End you keep changing the subject.

1. You claim no reality exists outside of your perception. This has been refuted by BAA, by me, and others. Gravity and radio waves are good examples of why you are wrong.

 

2. Why do you want to have a "relationship" with an ExC? So you can convert them? What are you doing?

I come here to pass the time of day. Conversations, discussions, etc.. Not many folks here in my area that find this level of conversation fun.

 

I've bookmarked this to refer to in future threads.  End is obviously too lazy to look for other discussion forums.

 

No I just love y'all.

 

 

End3, can you please answer my question on post #550? I really want to know what you answer is.

Today is the last day I can be in the forum for this week so if you reply after today I have to get back at you next week.

[StillLooking]

I am reposting this for End3.

End3, would you please kindly answer my question?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Since you perceived the ICP process, this means what you saw is subjective (your definition of subjective), is it?

Yes

 

Then per your definition the moses' image that you think you saw in the plasma is faulty. IOW you can be wrong when you perceived god thru chemistry or physics.
Yes or no? Your answer can only be yes if you are consistent.

 

I didn't see Moses face in the plasma. I'll explain tomorrow.

 

 

It doesn't matter what you saw / perceived in the plasma. What matters is you perceived it, so per your definition what you saw became subjective. Yes or no.

 

[FreeThinkerNZ]

Just pasting this here to show he was reading the thread, in case he doesn't answer SL's question today:

 

(s) are reading this topic

2 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

 

• ♦ FreeThinkerNZ ♦, end3

[TheRedneckProfessor]

4 user(s) are reading this topic

2 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users

• ☆ TheRedneckProfessor ☆, end3

 

Backing you up FTNZ.

[Guest end3]

 

 

 

 

End you keep changing the subject.

1. You claim no reality exists outside of your perception. This has been refuted by BAA, by me, and others. Gravity and radio waves are good examples of why you are wrong.

 

2. Why do you want to have a "relationship" with an ExC? So you can convert them? What are you doing?

I come here to pass the time of day. Conversations, discussions, etc.. Not many folks here in my area that find this level of conversation fun.

 

I've bookmarked this to refer to in future threads.  End is obviously too lazy to look for other discussion forums.

 

No I just love y'all.

 

 

End3, can you please answer my question on post #550? I really want to know what you answer is.

Today is the last day I can be in the forum for this week so if you reply after today I have to get back at you next week.

 

Was saying SL that Moses gave off light when he came down off the mountain after being in the presence of God was analogous to a sample passing through the plasma.... Didn't see any images in the plasma.....just "light"/radiation....Moses glowed.

[Fweethawt]

 

 

 

 

End you keep changing the subject.

1. You claim no reality exists outside of your perception. This has been refuted by BAA, by me, and others. Gravity and radio waves are good examples of why you are wrong.

 

2. Why do you want to have a "relationship" with an ExC? So you can convert them? What are you doing?

 

I come here to pass the time of day. Conversations, discussions, etc.. Not many folks here in my area that find this level of conversation fun.

I've bookmarked this to refer to in future threads.  End is obviously too lazy to look for other discussion forums.

No I just love y'all.

Your idea of love is the same as your non-existent deity's.

... In that, a large group of people ask you questions and you simply ignore them!

 

 

Yep! God-like he certainly is!

[FreeThinkerNZ]

 

 

 

 

 

End you keep changing the subject.

1. You claim no reality exists outside of your perception. This has been refuted by BAA, by me, and others. Gravity and radio waves are good examples of why you are wrong.

 

2. Why do you want to have a "relationship" with an ExC? So you can convert them? What are you doing?

I come here to pass the time of day. Conversations, discussions, etc.. Not many folks here in my area that find this level of conversation fun.

 

I've bookmarked this to refer to in future threads.  End is obviously too lazy to look for other discussion forums.

 

No I just love y'all.

 

 

End3, can you please answer my question on post #550? I really want to know what you answer is.

Today is the last day I can be in the forum for this week so if you reply after today I have to get back at you next week.

 

Was saying SL that Moses gave off light when he came down off the mountain after being in the presence of God was analogous to a sample passing through the plasma.... Didn't see any images in the plasma.....just "light"/radiation....Moses glowed.

 

Nice dodge of a Yes/No question.  

 

There's no need to wait for SL to ask you again.  I'm doing it on her behalf.  Try again, End.