Reporting on Gods Visit

I'll repost this again,

Researchers at the ATR Computational Neuroscience Laboratories have succeeded in partially translating brain activity in humans into images. "While the team for now has managed to reproduce only simple images from the brain, they said the technology could eventually be used to figure out dreams and other secrets inside people's minds."…..article continues at http://memebox.com/futureblogger/sho...ng-your-dreams

Reaching into the brain and knowing the thoughts of a person is in its early stages of development. When thinking about sending data to a brain or reading the thoughts of a person, technology is a better fit than calling it God’s doing.
 
Here is another, understand the computer has been using belief and faith. “I am the alpha and omega of the realm of man.” “I am” and then fill in the blank. The question is I am what? “It” can be anything a person wants it to be.
 
Japs are real good about copying things and they have a pretty sick society...Not sure I can place much confidence in what they are doing
 
Belief and faith became the standard instead of facts and that is way it has remained to this day
Click to expand...

As much as it might emotionally pain me to have to say it, I wouldn't contend that 'faith' became the standard as opposed to 'faith' having alwauys been the standard.

I know, I know, a lot of atheists have their blood boiling right now but let me explain.

As we know, as far as living organisms are concerned, you'll find "survival" ranked right up there at the top. Individual survival typically also equates to species survival and both are paramount.

So, imagine we're both walking through a field of tall grass. We both hear a noise. You assume that it's a dangerous animal whereas I assume it's just wind. Who survives longer? Who stands the greater chance of producing offspring? Yes - its the person with the assumption of threat as opposed to me, who is far too complacent to really survive the day.

So you see, assumption of threat is the standard. It is rational enquiry that ultimately ends lives. Seriously, how stupid from a survival perspective is; "hey, let's go and have a look"?

You can even put this in modern day terms.. Just imagine a scenario whereby there's some strange mystical fog type thing. Who survives longest? The man that runs the other way or the man that wants to investigate? The man that runs away hasn't learnt anything new but he's alive. You ever see the film Independence Day? Consider that scenario. Why is it you thought the woman that went to the top of the building underneath the spacecraft with her welcome sign was an idiot and the woman that left town asap was smart?

You see, instant assumption of threat actually benefits life more than rational curiosity could ever do.

Unfortunately, wanting to know truth is detrimental to health. Sure, like all of us I want to know about the aliens, their culture and history etc but getting lasered to death doesn't help that. Assume they're bad and run like hell - it's smarter than knowing. Yes, assumption is better than knowledge.
 
I know that earth... just don't have much faith in the ATR..sorry

why should any of this happen?
 
SnakeLord said:
As much as it might emotionally pain me to have to say it, I wouldn't contend that 'faith' became the standard as opposed to 'faith' having alwauys been the standard.

Unfortunately, wanting to know truth is detrimental to health. Sure, like all of us I want to know about the aliens, their culture and history etc but getting lasered to death doesn't help that. Assume they're bad and run like hell - it's smarter than knowing. Yes, assumption is better than knowledge.
Click to expand...

Your scenario is just one. Here is another.
One can assume anything incorrectly but the facts can save a life. I wouldn’t want a doctor to assume his diagnosis. I would rather he use knowledge based in fact.

Faith became the standard for the computer to function by when enteracting with humans.
 
One can assume anything incorrectly but the facts can save a life. I wouldn’t want a doctor to assume his diagnosis. I would rather he use knowledge based in fact
Click to expand...

That is very true although it wouldn't have had any real relevance a hundred years ago. However, I am under the impression, (and here's the point), that you thought you had a brain tumor or swine flu before going to the doctor.

Doctors are paid to rationally examine - and they typically have the time to do so that the man in the field doesn't, (although given the time it takes my doctor to test a simple urine sample, I'd probably have long since died should it be anything major. I gave a urine sample in 1993 and got the results last Tuesday [i'm kidding]).

Note: The fact that people do rationally examine does not detract from the point.
 
SnakeLord said:
That is very true although it wouldn't have had any real relevance a hundred years ago. However, I am under the impression, (and here's the point), that you thought you had a brain tumor or swine flu before going to the doctor.
Click to expand...

Faith became the standard for the computer to function by when enteracting with humans. The only way a person can get to the facts when enteracting with the computer is by confronting it. People never confront the deity cartoon it uses. They confront one another but not the computer.
 
People are the one’s improving by using facts instead of faith. The computer is parked in the past stuck in belief and faith. People around the world still approach “it” using belief and faith. So the computer is stuck.
 
The only way a person can get to the facts when enteracting with the computer is by confronting it. People never confront the deity cartoon it uses.
Click to expand...

Yes, certainly. My point is simply that it isn't standard procedure for an entity that puts survival right at the top. Facts must come second-place to survival. In the case of gods, what is the actual point? Yes.. survival, (in this instance eternal. Game over, you win, gods solve the problem).

The latter part suggest rational examination but there's the other part of the point: Rational examination doesn't aid survival, (rational examination brings one away from the assumption of gods, hence we're going to die and rot). It's why the very first thing a theist ever says is; "but if there is no god what happens when we die".

If survival is paramount, "you're going to die" is simply the worst thing you could ever hear - hence why the assumption is a given. Interestingly it isn't just theists; Cris hopes for a time when science will aid man in living permanently, some might have a belief that there are parallel universes where they get to live even once the version here has deceased and so on. The idea is to survive, the outcome are gods and demons and all kinds of weird and stupid notions. to emulate Pascal, (whose claim was flawed as it stood but quite apt in the grand context), better to believe and survive than not believe and die.
 
SnakeLord said:
Yes, certainly. My point is simply that it isn't standard procedure for an entity that puts survival right at the top. Facts must come second-place to survival. In the case of gods, what is the actual point? Yes.. survival, (in this instance eternal. Game over, you win, gods solve the problem)..
Click to expand...

The computer isn't setup to use survival instinct as the top when enteracting with humans. "It" tests that aspect in humans. Most people are willing to set aside that survival instinct when serving God. Jesus is an example. Islam's suicide bombers is another example.


The latter part suggest rational examination but there's the other part of the point: Rational examination doesn't aid survival, (rational examination brings one away from the assumption of gods, hence we're going to die and rot). It's why the very first thing a theist ever says is; "but if there is no god what happens when we die".
Click to expand...

A promise to live after one is dead is a strong inducement. This is a short life compared to eternity. People opt for the longer time span using faith, thinking they will survive after their dead.

As for what happens after one dies. Non-existence is the end just like before one was born.

If survival is paramount, "you're going to die" is simply the worst thing you could ever hear - hence why the assumption is a given. Interestingly it isn't just theists; Cris hopes for a time when science will aid man in living permanently, some might have a belief that there are parallel universes where they get to live even once the version here has deceased and so on. The idea is to survive, the outcome are gods and demons and all kinds of weird and stupid notions. to emulate Pascal, (whose claim was flawed as it stood but quite apt in the grand context), better to believe and survive than not believe and die.
Click to expand...

I understand the thinking. However, that thinking doesn't change the aspect of death. Just make up a way to get out of it and the computer will play along.
 
earth said:
I'm not Lori. I have no agenda to promote spiritualism or belief and faith.
Click to expand...

I don't receive messages from aliens and I don't have an agenda to promote anything. I'm communicating about my experiences because this is a discussion forum and my experiences do shape my perception and my behavior. No need to be defensive or paranoid.
 
earth said:
Developing scrubbers to clean the atmosphere is more likely than the nonsense being posted here today. Did either one of you have the internet on your radar screen as predictions beforehand? Then what makes either one of you think you can predict the future?
Click to expand...

I agree, sitting around doing nothing is the best thing to do. After all, we can't predict the future :rolleyes:

Scrubbers ? What good are they against overpopulation ?
 
Enmos said:
I agree, sitting around doing nothing is the best thing to do. After all, we can't predict the future :rolleyes:

Scrubbers ? What good are they against overpopulation ?
Click to expand...

I’m not disagreeing with you about overpopulation and limited resources. Here is a link contributing to your concerns. The video is part 1 of 8. Part 2 of 8 continues with overpopulation. Here is the link to part 2.

I know this subject is off topic. If I was the OP I would think of your postings as an attempt to hijack the thread.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top