Why do people believe in god?
- Thread starter LuckAse
- Start date
So some physical object moved with no normal cause like a wind gust, etc. Please tell more details of what moved, etc.
Also why were others with you and observing this? Do/did they give written support for your claim? How if at all were they related to you? How many others and are they children or adults? (Children often will make such claims, tell their imaginary friend is real and made things move or that it was they who broke the glass etc.)
sounds like you are looking for something to fight against..
oh here we go...
it was stationery. i had written (actually channeled) a letter in the form of a poem and was planning to send it. i had the stationery, and the address written on a piece of paper sitting on my coffee table. the piece of paper that had the address on it morphed. it's texture changed...started from the edges, and moved inward towards the center, and as it did, the paper wadded itself into a ball. the envelopes were in some cellophane packaging, with one end open, and the packaging began to shrink, became striated as it stretched around the envelopes, until they began to come out the open end.
as far as i know the people were there because they needed help and were trying to prove something. some of them are artists that i can readily identify because their work details what happened to me. i don't claim to understand how they do what they do, but my best guess is that they can astral project. so they were there observing what was happening to me, and interacting with me, though i could not see them with my eyes, or hear them with my ears. i do not know, nor have ever met these people in person.
see? it's the scapegoat. hook, line, and sinker.
no, they were there.
and i've never been diagnosed with, or treated for, any mental disorder, so you may want to stop lying about me in writing and in public.
No, only curious. When someone claims to have physical evidence of some movement, not caused by some material force I am interested to know more.
You see I have a Ph.D in physics and think that would be a miracle as normally there is no acceleration without a force applied (F= ma, etc.) and an “equal and opposite force” acting on the applying body; (Newton’s laws), however; Lori's co-witnesses were not even visible to her she states, so all her "evidence” could be, and probably is hallucination. For the person having them, hallucinations often are indistinguishable from physical reality. I have an impossible memory which is as real to me as any of my other memories. I flew, just with my waving arms, out over the back yard and even up over the roof. All this is very clear in detail. I later learned that such a memory of flying is not very rare.
I was hopping her evidence was more like she quickly picked up a video camera and made a record of the unforced movement. Unfortunately her “evidence” is, like her schizophrenic symptoms, more easily explained by mental constructions, which are very common.
In fact I am firmly convinced that the accepted theory of perception as the neural computational transformation thru many stages of neural processing in the brain until “perception emerges” is just a “hand waving explanation” (not any explanation at all) and completely wrong.
Instead EVERYTHING we perceive is an internal construction of brain, very likely executed in the parietal brain. I call this the Real Time Simulation, RTS. I have a huge amount of real evidence supporting my POV and have explained why the RTS should be expected to have evolved as man did.
The RTS simply explains many mysteries, such as why one small group of hominids “exploded out of Africa” and dominated the world, including the Neanderthals who were bigger brained and much stronger. To mention just one other supporting fact, it explains why your perception of the world in front of you is equally sharp and clear over a wide angle compared to the less than one degree of high resolution your fovea provides as the detailed input data. If perception “emerged” after neural processing of the sensory data then only about a one degree field of view would be perceived as sharp and clear.
Dozens of other facts are very consistently explained by the RTS, but inconsistent and in strong conflict with the accepted theory of perception. To understand the basic problem with the standard theory of perception read this brief post:
http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2502342&postcount=12
Then to learn some of the others facts supporting the RTS, please read more about the RTS, here:
http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=905778&postcount=66 but be warned this second post is a careful presentation of the facts and argument, spanning 8 pages if printed.
This longer post is basically an argument that Genuine Free Will, GFW, is possible – I.e. not inconsistent with known neuro-physics, which states that neurons obey physical laws, so every discharge of all your nerves is deterministically controlled by the laws of chemistry and physics. In that link I argue that the RTS has a stronger claim to reality than the physical reality, which we only infer to exist from our perceptions. It may not as Bishop Berkeley consistently argued more than 300 years ago. I differ from his POV only in that I have the RTS creating my perceptions (and “me”) but he had God doing that.
Last edited by a moderator:
granted..but it is still no excuse for you to be unprofessional. i mean she is entitled to her beliefs, even if you think she is wrong, it is our responsibility to share what we know to be true..not to convince her you are right and she is wrong. that decision is for her to make.
IOW say what you need to say..no-more...no-less..
the slams and insults just distract from any point you have to make.
(and usually just encourage her to slam back..)
as far as the rest of that..readers digest version please..
It all has to do with consciousness.
The scientists, or at least the honest ones, in the world today, that are figuring that out, understand this. I've named three in previous posts on this forum. One worked with and was a colleague of Carl Sagan and has traveled into space. Another has worked at CERN.
In our dimension, the human mind/spirit has the ability to alter physical reality on the quantum level, or to some how communicate and travel through time space dimensions.
In my opinion, great prophets, telepaths, and spiritual leaders in human history have "tapped" into this consciousness and written many texts, treatises, scriptures, what have you. . . and less spiritually evolved and intellectually sophisticated humans can more easily describe this presence as a personalized "God" presence.
Unfortunately, ruling elites through out history have used these same texts of enlightenment, which also contain some dreadful passages of barbaric dogma, backwards bigotry, cruel ignorance, etc. to control the freedom of spirit which is necessary for the liberation of the individual.
Consequently, the atheists have logically deduced that "religion" is now more dangerous and inefficient and all the spiritual texts have no "truth" in them, only "science" is of any value. And rightly so. The media manipulators started their science and their art back with Nazis in WWII.
But this is what the controllers of the current scientific paradigm desire. It is one based on profit and production, competition and greed. Not cooperation and abundance. If more "apples" from the tree of knowledge were shared with the people than they are currently sharing, I think a much large and grander picture of reality would dawn on human kind.
The Jews would quit fighting the Muslims. The Christians would accept in the logical reality of evolution and quit trying convert everyone. And the simple and obvious reality that we are all bound together by a wonderful and grand consciousness, whose only desire is that we fully experience our existence in the third dimension, no matter who or what that is, in all it's right or wrong, evil or good, atheist or christian, democrat or republican, etc. to just be who you are while you are here, would be accepted by everyone, including the atheists.
And if you believe? The more you believe, the more it will manifest, that is the way it works. It doesn't matter WHICH tradition you follow. Hell, even if you're a scientist you know the more strict you follow the scientific method, the better your results are going to be and the tighter your theories are going to be, right?
The scientists, or at least the honest ones, in the world today, that are figuring that out, understand this. I've named three in previous posts on this forum. One worked with and was a colleague of Carl Sagan and has traveled into space. Another has worked at CERN.
In our dimension, the human mind/spirit has the ability to alter physical reality on the quantum level, or to some how communicate and travel through time space dimensions.
In my opinion, great prophets, telepaths, and spiritual leaders in human history have "tapped" into this consciousness and written many texts, treatises, scriptures, what have you. . . and less spiritually evolved and intellectually sophisticated humans can more easily describe this presence as a personalized "God" presence.
Unfortunately, ruling elites through out history have used these same texts of enlightenment, which also contain some dreadful passages of barbaric dogma, backwards bigotry, cruel ignorance, etc. to control the freedom of spirit which is necessary for the liberation of the individual.
Consequently, the atheists have logically deduced that "religion" is now more dangerous and inefficient and all the spiritual texts have no "truth" in them, only "science" is of any value. And rightly so. The media manipulators started their science and their art back with Nazis in WWII.
But this is what the controllers of the current scientific paradigm desire. It is one based on profit and production, competition and greed. Not cooperation and abundance. If more "apples" from the tree of knowledge were shared with the people than they are currently sharing, I think a much large and grander picture of reality would dawn on human kind.
The Jews would quit fighting the Muslims. The Christians would accept in the logical reality of evolution and quit trying convert everyone. And the simple and obvious reality that we are all bound together by a wonderful and grand consciousness, whose only desire is that we fully experience our existence in the third dimension, no matter who or what that is, in all it's right or wrong, evil or good, atheist or christian, democrat or republican, etc. to just be who you are while you are here, would be accepted by everyone, including the atheists.
And if you believe? The more you believe, the more it will manifest, that is the way it works. It doesn't matter WHICH tradition you follow. Hell, even if you're a scientist you know the more strict you follow the scientific method, the better your results are going to be and the tighter your theories are going to be, right?
so the collective conscience is what you are saying is what ppl refer to as god?
(i posted something like that awhile back..)
(i posted something like that awhile back..)
I have not been "unprofessional" - give an example of that if you can.
I have not denied her her beliefs - give an example of that if you can.
In fact I have explained that all perceptions, hers and mine, are constructs of the brain, most likely the parietal section, And furthermore have a better claim to being real for the perceiver than the "real physical world" we only INFER to exist from these more basic perceptions or experiences.
I have not said she is wrong. In fact I said that no one can prove she is -in bold type.* As I believe all perceptions are internal constructions of the brain I think hers are too. I have suggested or noted that her reports are typical of people with schizophrenia - a simple statement of fact. I have never said is is suffering from Schizophrenia as I have no way to know that. I have sometimes referred to her reports as Schizophrenia like symptoms and that too is simple accurate statement of fact.
I have made no "slams and insults" - give an example of that if you can.
I am sorry you have neither time nor interest to read a complex idea and its support - some things can not be converted into a sound bite or "readers digest version" without lose of their essence. Several have read my longer post and more than one has accepted my POV as more likely to be correct that the POV of most cognitive scientists.
SUMMARY: EVERY ONE of your assertions attacking me is false and unsupported, so I can only assume you it is you who is looking for something to "fight against."
* Footnote:
Last edited by a moderator:
Not exactly. But close, yes. It is from the collective unconscious that all different cultures and spiritual traditions come. Hell, all music, literature and art, even the manifestation for scientific research emanates from the "consciousness." Experience itself! So to restrict this element to what is talked about in this thread as "god," I think restricts it to just too little, don't you?
It is after all what is behind the discussion in just about EVERY thread, whether we accept it or not. Go ahead, pick one. Any one. lol I could relate it back to this consciousness, I'm sure. You'd probably think me a nut job, but my faith is such.
In fact, it is why Sci-forums exists at all. What was the feeling inside the mind, inside the spirit of that computer whiz that created Sci-forums? Where did that kernel of inspiration start? Don't you see? It is that consciousness of existence that starts. . . they call it Genesis actually. lol And what compelled each one of us to be here, to read this? What feeling, what need? :shrug:
It is after all what is behind the discussion in just about EVERY thread, whether we accept it or not. Go ahead, pick one. Any one. lol I could relate it back to this consciousness, I'm sure. You'd probably think me a nut job, but my faith is such.
In fact, it is why Sci-forums exists at all. What was the feeling inside the mind, inside the spirit of that computer whiz that created Sci-forums? Where did that kernel of inspiration start? Don't you see? It is that consciousness of existence that starts. . . they call it Genesis actually. lol And what compelled each one of us to be here, to read this? What feeling, what need? :shrug:
billy T..
sorry if i come across a little OCD..but it really bugs me when i percieve someone as attacking another..there is so much understanding that is lost when one is focused on defending oneself..i know i have been aggressive with this OCD..but i think the intention is honorable..
sorry if i come across a little OCD..but it really bugs me when i percieve someone as attacking another..there is so much understanding that is lost when one is focused on defending oneself..i know i have been aggressive with this OCD..but i think the intention is honorable..
yes. in spirit, like ghosts.
it wasn't a hallucination. i was completely sober...middle of the afternoon. after all i had been through up to that point, as this experience lasted for quite a while, i honestly wasn't even shocked enough to try to document it (though i don't own a video camera). i certainly had never seen anything like that before and thought it was unusual, but like i said, after all that had led up to that point, it was really no big deal. i was a little tired. i had been channeling (transcendental writing is what i think they call it) for a couple of days (not without sleep at all of course), so i went upstairs to take a nap. i slept for several hours and when i woke up the stationery was still the same way i had left it. it wasn't a hallucination. something didn't want me to send the letter. the letter was what i (not i ) had been writing.
Your "penance" could be to read my longer link and tell me what you think of my "crackpot" POV about how perception works / is achieved.
You might also spell out what OCD is for me.
To some extent that depends upon what you understand by "hallucination." By that term I mean a perception of something that is not possible by the physical laws, but is perceived to be real in the external world.
If you read my longer link you will see that I think EVERYTHING we perceive (hallucinations and things that are possible / in accord with the physical laws) is achieved by exactly the same brain process, (Taking place in the parietal brain, almost certainly except when we are in deep dreamless sleep). Most dreams are in some sense hallucinations as they often contain perceptions that are in conflict with the physical laws.
When we dream, the exact same process in the parietal brain section is creating our perceptions (a parietal simulation of a world) as when we are awake, but in dreams, this simulation is not constrained to be of possible physical realities.
When we are awake, the simulation is constrained, normally, to be a quite accurate model of real world events. Often there are minor discrepancies, which we call "illusions." For example, two identical curve sticks, placed side-by-side are perceived as if one were longer than the other. If we don't know that they are identical, that is not only what we perceive, but what we believe also. Thus one is not aware that the illusion is not real unless they have prior experience with it and know it is only an illusion. For example, the appearance of a distant lake of shimmering water in a desert is recognized as an illusion only because of prior experience that shows you cannot go there and drink.
All this is the same, true, for the more complete illusions we call "hallucinations." They too are perceptions created in the parietal brain simulation of the external world, that happen to be in much stronger disagreement with what is physically possible than mere illusions are.
As I said at the start, whether or not you had a hallucination depends upon your definition of that term. By the definition I suggested, you did have a hallucination. The fact that it was very real to you does not change that. Often, like illusions (which are really minor hallucinations) they will seem to be accurate perceptions of the external world.
Now if your self crumpling letter was a real world event and not a hallucination, then by definition a miracle occurred. I, and most, I think, define a miracle as a violation of the physical laws. As I have noted in posts here and the longer link my POV about perception is very similar to that of Bishop Berkeley - the only difference being that I have a parietal brain simulation creating my perceptions and he had God giving them to him. (For him, there was no real world existing and I can only infer it does, not prove that it does.)
For him, the fact that the real world he perceived did follow regular laws was a little strange - why could it not be more dreamlike since it was just God's creation in "real time"? For example, water could run up hill, if that happened to be God's fancy one day and downhill the next.
His answer to the question as to why the world seemed to be governed by physical laws was very clever, IMHO. He reasoned, correctly, that if there were no rules (the laws of physics) normally describing / governing the perceived "real world" then God could never work a miracle! I.e. miracles are by definition a violation of the physical laws.
Your self crumpling letter may have been a miracle but it does seem strange to me that God (assuming he exists and made this miracle) would be concerned with such trivial things and not, for example, have made Hitler die before he could kill 6 million Jews and about as many Romani, mental defectives, Homosexuals, etc. as he "purified" the "master race."
Last edited by a moderator: