Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #595807 > unrolled thread

God created by humans

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity

Contents

  God created by humans beda pietanza <bedapietanza@gmail.com> - 2022-11-20 15:08 -0800
    Re: God created by humans whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2022-11-20 18:06 -0600
      Re: God created by humans patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2022-11-20 16:32 -0800
        Re: God created by humans whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2022-11-20 20:46 -0600
        Re: God created by humans "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2022-11-21 10:40 +0100
          Re: God created by humans beda pietanza <bedapietanza@gmail.com> - 2022-11-21 11:41 -0800
            Re: God created by humans Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-11-21 12:40 -0800
              Re: God created by humans beda pietanza <bedapietanza@gmail.com> - 2022-11-21 12:45 -0800
          Re: God created by humans patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2022-11-21 11:49 -0800
      Re: God created by humans beda pietanza <bedapietanza@gmail.com> - 2022-11-21 02:06 -0800
        Re: God created by humans whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2022-11-21 10:16 -0600
          Re: God created by humans Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-11-21 08:32 -0800
          Re: God created by humans beda pietanza <bedapietanza@gmail.com> - 2022-11-21 12:19 -0800
            Re: God created by humans patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2022-11-21 12:31 -0800
              Re: God created by humans beda pietanza <bedapietanza@gmail.com> - 2022-11-21 12:43 -0800
            Re: God created by humans whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2022-11-21 14:46 -0600
              Re: God created by humans beda pietanza <bedapietanza@gmail.com> - 2022-11-21 14:33 -0800
                Re: God created by humans patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2022-11-21 14:58 -0800
                  Re: God created by humans beda pietanza <bedapietanza@gmail.com> - 2022-11-21 16:28 -0800
                Re: God created by humans whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2022-11-21 23:56 -0600
                  Re: God created by humans Blake Armanni <blea@arrkare.in> - 2022-11-22 13:53 +0000
                    Re: God created by humans whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2022-11-22 12:57 -0600
                    Re: God created by humans Trolidan7 <Trolidan7@eternal-september.org> - 2022-11-22 16:37 -0800
                  Re: God created by humans beda pietanza <bedapietanza@gmail.com> - 2022-11-22 07:26 -0800
    Re: God created by humans "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2022-11-20 17:51 -0800
      Re: God created by humans patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2022-11-20 22:14 -0800
      Re: God created by humans beda pietanza <bedapietanza@gmail.com> - 2022-11-21 02:34 -0800
      Re: God created by humans beda pietanza <bedapietanza@gmail.com> - 2022-11-21 07:53 -0800
        Re: God created by humans "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2022-11-21 10:30 -0800
          Re: God created by humans beda pietanza <bedapietanza@gmail.com> - 2022-11-21 12:32 -0800
    Re: God created by humans Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2022-11-23 13:51 -0600
      Re: God created by humans Trolidan7 <Trolidan7@eternal-september.org> - 2022-11-23 15:00 -0800
        Re: God created by humans Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2022-11-23 21:04 -0600
          Re: God created by humans Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2022-11-23 19:31 -0800
            Re: God created by humans whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2022-11-23 22:28 -0600
              Re: God created by humans Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-11-23 22:34 -0800
            Re: God created by humans patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2022-11-23 20:51 -0800
          Re: God created by humans Forest Vaccaro <asoa@ctrsreca.vr> - 2022-11-24 09:16 +0000
            Re: God created by humans Forest Vaccaro <asoa@ctrsreca.vr> - 2022-11-24 20:05 +0000
              Re: God created by humans Trolidan7 <Trolidan7@eternal-september.org> - 2022-11-24 12:42 -0800
              Re: God created by humans Forest Vaccaro <asoa@ctrsreca.vr> - 2022-11-24 21:50 +0000
          Re: God created by humans Trolidan7 <Trolidan7@eternal-september.org> - 2022-11-24 12:05 -0800
            Re: God created by humans beda pietanza <bedapietanza@gmail.com> - 2022-11-25 12:52 -0800
              Re: God created by humans Trolidan7 <Trolidan7@eternal-september.org> - 2022-11-25 13:23 -0800
      Re: God created by humans beda pietanza <bedapietanza@gmail.com> - 2022-11-23 15:50 -0800
      Re: God created by humans RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2022-11-28 13:59 -0800
        Re: God created by humans The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-11-28 14:44 -0800
          Re: God created by humans The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-11-28 16:49 -0800
    Re: God created by humans "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-11-25 14:03 -0800
      Re: God created by humans "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-11-25 14:05 -0800

Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]

#596124

Paul Alsing wrote:

> You need to look up the actual definition of the word "religion". From
> the Oxford Dictionary...
> 
> [Religion is] "the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling
> power, especially a personal God or gods."
> 
> ... which has fuck-all to do with the universe.

this crackpot takes definitions from elsewhere. That may relate to logic, 
which is math, and since the uppermost is known, be inherited through the 
humans, then yes. But it has nothing to do with humans. If it has, that's 
a satanic religion, which is not a religion, but a movement.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#596105

On 11/23/22 7:04 PM, Tom Roberts wrote:
> On 11/23/22 5:00 PM, Trolidan7 wrote:
>> On 11/23/22 11:51 AM, Tom Roberts wrote:
>>> God is a thought in human minds.
>> 
>> This is an assertion that you have made about the nature of
>> deities.
>> 
> No. It is a clearly-true statement about human beings and the way
> our minds work. Since the only things our minds can process are
> thoughts, anything that occupies our mind, and anything represented
> by a word (symbol), is a thought.

This is the standard 'psychology' confusion.

You are confusing thoughts, with theories about
thoughts, and then assuming that your theories
about thoughts are automatically 'true' because
of 'just so' assertions.

'Psyche' was the wife of Cupid' in Apulius's
'Golden Donkey' which is often included within
the Greco-Roman beliefs, but 'Psyche' has also
been translated as meaning 'soul'.

Do 'souls' exist?  Can these theoretical entities
be studied?  If I did not have a 'soul', could
I still have 'theories'?  Could I still have
have thoughts or ideas?  Could I be possessed
by 'spirits' or 'memes' or false ideas?  If I
pinched myself in a dream and imagined that I
felt pain, would that really prove anything?

A lot of belief systems play semantic games
with the word 'god', however some play with the
word 'soul'.  If I were simply imagined by a
deity, or imagined by by some computer program
some where, such a simulation could imagine
that I have a 'soul'.  But wait. you are
now playing that semantic game and pretending
it is not a 'belief' system, and asserting
it is 'true' without evidence.

Do you really think?  Do you really exist?
That can depend on the meaning of the
words 'think' and 'existence'.  It is more
than possible that I do not either think or
exist.  It is more than possible that you
neither think or exist.  Descartes was full
of baloney.

> When your mind can process something other than thoughts, please let
> us know. (That will be a HUGE challenge, as essentially the only
> mechanism you have for 'letting us know' is words, which are merely
> symbols representing thoughts.)
> 
>> Do your thoughts model what the mind of a deity might model?
> 
> No, I do not waste my time on such useless endeavors -- I have no 
> interest in deities, as they are pure fiction. All too many people
> waste their time thinking about deities; worse, they get so wrapped
> up in their thoughts that they attempt to impose their notions on
> others, often by force -- that is a major tragedy of the human
> experience.

Yes but you do play semantic word games to
bolster your own belief systems.  This could
mean that you do not care about what it
'true' or 'science', potentially by even
whatever definitions you might hold for
such words.

> Tom Roberts

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#596182

Il giorno giovedì 24 novembre 2022 alle 21:05:19 UTC+1 Trolidan7 ha scritto:
> On 11/23/22 7:04 PM, Tom Roberts wrote: 
> > On 11/23/22 5:00 PM, Trolidan7 wrote: 
> >> On 11/23/22 11:51 AM, Tom Roberts wrote: 
> >>> God is a thought in human minds. 
> >> 
> >> This is an assertion that you have made about the nature of 
> >> deities. 
> >> 
> > No. It is a clearly-true statement about human beings and the way 
> > our minds work. Since the only things our minds can process are 
> > thoughts, anything that occupies our mind, and anything represented 
> > by a word (symbol), is a thought.
> This is the standard 'psychology' confusion. 
> 
> You are confusing thoughts, with theories about 
> thoughts, and then assuming that your theories 
> about thoughts are automatically 'true' because 
> of 'just so' assertions. 
> 
> 'Psyche' was the wife of Cupid' in Apulius's 
> 'Golden Donkey' which is often included within 
> the Greco-Roman beliefs, but 'Psyche' has also 
> been translated as meaning 'soul'. 
> 
> Do 'souls' exist? Can these theoretical entities 
> be studied? If I did not have a 'soul', could 
> I still have 'theories'? Could I still have 
> have thoughts or ideas? Could I be possessed 
> by 'spirits' or 'memes' or false ideas? If I 
> pinched myself in a dream and imagined that I 
> felt pain, would that really prove anything? 
> 
> A lot of belief systems play semantic games 
> with the word 'god', however some play with the 
> word 'soul'. If I were simply imagined by a 
> deity, or imagined by by some computer program 
> some where, such a simulation could imagine 
> that I have a 'soul'. But wait. you are 
> now playing that semantic game and pretending 
> it is not a 'belief' system, and asserting 
> it is 'true' without evidence. 
> 
> Do you really think? Do you really exist? 
> That can depend on the meaning of the 
> words 'think' and 'existence'. It is more 
> than possible that I do not either think or 
> exist. It is more than possible that you 
> neither think or exist. Descartes was full 
> of baloney.
> > When your mind can process something other than thoughts, please let 
> > us know. (That will be a HUGE challenge, as essentially the only 
> > mechanism you have for 'letting us know' is words, which are merely 
> > symbols representing thoughts.) 
> > 
> >> Do your thoughts model what the mind of a deity might model? 
> > 
> > No, I do not waste my time on such useless endeavors -- I have no 
> > interest in deities, as they are pure fiction. All too many people 
> > waste their time thinking about deities; worse, they get so wrapped 
> > up in their thoughts that they attempt to impose their notions on 
> > others, often by force -- that is a major tragedy of the human 
> > experience.
> Yes but you do play semantic word games to 
> bolster your own belief systems. This could 
> mean that you do not care about what it 
> 'true' or 'science', potentially by even 
> whatever definitions you might hold for 
> such words. 
beda:
you should be more careful with words and concepts.
from matter to life, from life to intelligent life, from intelligent life to abstract concepts,
from abstract concepts to a stratification of various level of abstractness in which humanity is now,
you cannot jump levels of emergent complexity with impunity, 
existence is at base of all, cannot be questioned, choose the level of your reflection and stay there.
> 
> > Tom Roberts

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#596187

On 11/25/22 12:52 PM, beda pietanza wrote:
> Il giorno giovedì 24 novembre 2022 alle 21:05:19 UTC+1 Trolidan7 ha scritto:
>> On 11/23/22 7:04 PM, Tom Roberts wrote:
>>> On 11/23/22 5:00 PM, Trolidan7 wrote:
>>>> On 11/23/22 11:51 AM, Tom Roberts wrote:
>>>>> God is a thought in human minds.
>>>>
>>>> This is an assertion that you have made about the nature of
>>>> deities.
>>>>
>>> No. It is a clearly-true statement about human beings and the way
>>> our minds work. Since the only things our minds can process are
>>> thoughts, anything that occupies our mind, and anything represented
>>> by a word (symbol), is a thought.
>> This is the standard 'psychology' confusion.
>>
>> You are confusing thoughts, with theories about
>> thoughts, and then assuming that your theories
>> about thoughts are automatically 'true' because
>> of 'just so' assertions.
>>
>> 'Psyche' was the wife of Cupid' in Apulius's
>> 'Golden Donkey' which is often included within
>> the Greco-Roman beliefs, but 'Psyche' has also
>> been translated as meaning 'soul'.
>>
>> Do 'souls' exist? Can these theoretical entities
>> be studied? If I did not have a 'soul', could
>> I still have 'theories'? Could I still have
>> have thoughts or ideas? Could I be possessed
>> by 'spirits' or 'memes' or false ideas? If I
>> pinched myself in a dream and imagined that I
>> felt pain, would that really prove anything?
>>
>> A lot of belief systems play semantic games
>> with the word 'god', however some play with the
>> word 'soul'. If I were simply imagined by a
>> deity, or imagined by by some computer program
>> some where, such a simulation could imagine
>> that I have a 'soul'. But wait. you are
>> now playing that semantic game and pretending
>> it is not a 'belief' system, and asserting
>> it is 'true' without evidence.
>>
>> Do you really think? Do you really exist?
>> That can depend on the meaning of the
>> words 'think' and 'existence'. It is more
>> than possible that I do not either think or
>> exist. It is more than possible that you
>> neither think or exist. Descartes was full
>> of baloney.
>>> When your mind can process something other than thoughts, please let
>>> us know. (That will be a HUGE challenge, as essentially the only
>>> mechanism you have for 'letting us know' is words, which are merely
>>> symbols representing thoughts.)
>>>
>>>> Do your thoughts model what the mind of a deity might model?
>>>
>>> No, I do not waste my time on such useless endeavors -- I have no
>>> interest in deities, as they are pure fiction. All too many people
>>> waste their time thinking about deities; worse, they get so wrapped
>>> up in their thoughts that they attempt to impose their notions on
>>> others, often by force -- that is a major tragedy of the human
>>> experience.
>> Yes but you do play semantic word games to
>> bolster your own belief systems. This could
>> mean that you do not care about what it
>> 'true' or 'science', potentially by even
>> whatever definitions you might hold for
>> such words.
> beda:
> you should be more careful with words and concepts.
> from matter to life, from life to intelligent life, from intelligent life to abstract concepts,
> from abstract concepts to a stratification of various level of abstractness in which humanity is now,
> you cannot jump levels of emergent complexity with impunity,
> existence is at base of all, cannot be questioned, choose the level of your reflection and stay there.

Reasonably, things can mutate into their opposites
through context when you change levels of abstraction.

When it comes to 'relativity' (sci.physics.relativity)
or if say, the speed of light were different with
respect to the frequency of light, then RADAR would
work differently under different scenarios where light
worked differently.

As for quantum mechanics?  I tend to get the idea that
confusion of the terms point - particle - curve - wave
among shifts between mathematics and physics cause
fundamental defects in reasoning, and not just unclear
terminology.

>>
>>> Tom Roberts

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#596050

Il giorno mercoledì 23 novembre 2022 alle 20:51:23 UTC+1 tjrob137 ha scritto:
> On 11/20/22 5:08 PM, beda pietanza wrote: 
> > [...] 
> 
> God is a thought in human minds. Ask yourself: what does that thought model? 
> 
> Tom Roberts
I don't get your question. 
I think God is an abstract emerging idea spread and contaminating people for 
superstitious and propitiatory reasons.
Though a believer is not a minor, he responds for his act not for his believer.
regards
beda

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#596379

On November 23, tjrob137 wrote: 
> God is a thought in human minds. Ask yourself: what does that thought model? 

What thought models thought?

--
Rich

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#596384

Wait a minute here! Wats dis Subject heading?  "God created by
humans"????

Humans don't even know how to use a can-opener! 


wat did you put in your turkeys?? Columbian Gold????









-- 
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
 to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
and challenge
 the unchallengeable.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#596392

The Starmaker wrote:
> 
> Wait a minute here! Wats dis Subject heading?  "God created by
> humans"????
> 
> Humans don't even know how to use a can-opener!
> 
> wat did you put in your turkeys?? Columbian Gold????


God is contained in everybodies DNA...even atheist's dna.

In other words, it's included in the manual when you were born.

Check your manual.

(if you don't have the manual, download it.)


if you cannot find it, check ebay...


Look up the index, and where it sez GOD, it should show page number and
reads: Included with DNA.


In other words...it comes wit it.



-- 
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
 to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
and challenge
 the unchallengeable.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#596193

On 11/20/2022 3:08 PM, beda pietanza wrote:
> 
>>> Either God exists, or He doesn't. One way or another, it's a fact

The FSM disagrees.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#596194

On 11/25/2022 2:03 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> On 11/20/2022 3:08 PM, beda pietanza wrote:
>>
>>>> Either God exists, or He doesn't. One way or another, it's a fact
> 
> The FSM disagrees.

lol:

https://youtu.be/yZbO0314gRo

https://youtu.be/HwIkk9zENcg

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity

csiph-web