Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  > Reincarnation - Have you ever felt like you've known/met someone befo      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 lyinjovan
Joined: 4/3/2017
Msg: 51
Reincarnation - Have you ever felt like you've known/met someone before?Page 3 of 5    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5)
^^^^ stating facts about you is not ad hominem....facts are facts whether you accept them or not. So sad. :-

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jcvc0fyb1ow
 lyinjovan
Joined: 4/3/2017
Msg: 52
Reincarnation - Have you ever felt like you've known/met someone before?
Posted: 5/11/2017 4:09:15 PM
Meet Christopher Langan, one of the smartest guys in the world who says he believes he can prove the existence of God through Math. But I'm sure Lying Jovan, et. al. is smarter than Mr. Langan and his 195 IQ

http://superscholar.org/interviews/christopher-michael-langan/

http://www.megafoundation.org/CTMU/Q&A/Archive.html

Q: Does the CTMU allow for the existence of souls and reincarnation?

A: From the CTMU, there emerge multiple levels of consciousness. Human temporal consciousness is the level with which we're familiar; global (parallel) consciousness is that of the universe as a whole. The soul is the connection between the two...the embedment of the former in the latter.

In the CTMU, reality is viewed as a profoundly self-contained, self-referential kind of "language", and languages have syntaxes. Because self-reference is an abstract generalization of consciousness - consciousness is the attribute by virtue of which we possess self-awareness - conscious agents are "sublanguages" possessing their own cognitive syntaxes. Now, global consciousness is based on a complete cognitive syntax in which our own incomplete syntax can be embedded, and this makes human consciousness transparent to it; in contrast, our ability to access the global level is restricted due to our syntactic limitations.

Thus, while we are transparent to the global syntax of the global conscious agency "God", we cannot see everything that God can see. Whereas God perceives one total act of creation in a parallel distributed fashion, with everything in perfect superposition, we are localized in spacetime and perceive reality only in a succession of locally creative moments. This parallelism has powerful implications. When a human being dies, his entire history remains embedded in the timeless level of consciousness...the Deic level. In that sense, he or she is preserved by virtue of his or her "soul". And since the universe is a self-refining entity, that which is teleologically valid in the informational construct called "you" may be locally re-injected or redistributed in spacetime. In principle, this could be a recombinative process, with the essences of many people combining in a set of local injections or "reincarnations" (this could lead to strange effects...e.g., a single person remembering simultaneous "past lifetimes").

In addition, an individual human sublanguage might be vectored into an alternate domain dynamically connected to its existence in spacetime. In this scenario, the entity would emerge into an alternate reality based on the interaction between her local level of consciousness and the global level embedding it...i.e., based on the state of her "soul" as just defined. This may be the origin of beliefs regarding heaven, hell, purgatory, limbo and other spiritual realms.

 LOLTrump
Joined: 3/7/2017
Msg: 53
Reincarnation - Have you ever felt like you've known/met someone before?
Posted: 5/11/2017 6:14:02 PM

Meet Christopher Langan, one of the smartest guys in the world who says he believes he can prove the existence of God through Math. But I'm sure Lying Jovan, et. al. is smarter than Mr. Langan and his 195 IQ


Smart people can believe crazy things.

Either way, if he did it we would not be having this conversation so clearly he just has a an unproven theory.
 TheRevenant2017
Joined: 5/5/2017
Msg: 54
Reincarnation - Have you ever felt like you've known/met someone before?
Posted: 5/11/2017 7:44:26 PM



Sorry flman, if the math was that clear, then science would be able to prove the non-existence of god...
It can and it does. What it cannot do is make people understand the proof. That's up to every individual to understand. Another thing it cannot do is make people _accept_ a proof.


We can all agree though there is likely no personal god.
Evidently, I agree with that. Now, given that you believe there is no personal god, I must point out a contradiction in your thinking. That is, whatever "form" of god you believe in, must be endowed of will so it can _decide_ to create the universe. The presence of a will leading to the making of a decision indicates a level of anthropomorphization which turns that god into a personal god to some extent.

Only a personal (to an extent) god can _decide_ to create the universe. If the god isn't personal then, it doesn't have will and, it becomes the "default" definition, god is energy, in which case, might as well call it energy since that is what it is.

Of course, the most damaging contradiction in the belief of any god is the claim that "god has neither a beginning nor an end" to solve the problem of "who created god" but, the contradiction is, people accept that their god has no beginning and no end but, cannot accept that existence itself has no beginning nor end. That's unfounded cherry-picking.

In any argument that proposes the existence of a god that creates something there exists one of more contradictions that invalidate the argument. No way around it. No logically correct argument can be made for the existence of a god.

The only logically sustainable argument for god is that of a god which isn't in any way responsible for creating what exists. In that case, god usually ends up being everything that exists.... every human, tree, galaxy, star, sandwich, hamburger, pulsar, etc... IOW, everything, literally everything or, god is a superfluous construct which has no effect on the system therefore does not exist.


@
0=0

There I just proved that god does not exist.
Got to say, not quite. :-)


@
he believes he can prove the existence of God through Math
The existence or non-existence of god cannot be proved mathematically. What can be proved mathematically is that god isn't necessary for existence. The non-existence of god can and has been proved logically. Any argument that includes god contains contradictions that invalidate the argument. Similar to any argument that posits that primes are finite contains a contradiction or any argument that the square root of 2 is rational contains a contradiction which demonstrates the argument to be logically incorrect.


@
In that sense, he or she is preserved by virtue of his or her "soul".
That cannot happen. Awareness, what a lot of people call "soul", is the result of the unique constantly changing brain structure of an individual. Quantum Mechanics No-cloning theorem makes reincarnation impossible and, that is not the only theorem that would be violated by reincarnation, quite a few proven theorems are.


 lyinjovan
Joined: 4/3/2017
Msg: 55
Reincarnation - Have you ever felt like you've known/met someone before?
Posted: 5/11/2017 8:28:01 PM
I have to hand it to you for your presence in actually sounding like you know what you are talking about...but when you talk in the absolutes you are fond of....the existence of God would violate the law of thermodynamics or reincarnation "cannot happen"..
establishes you are whistling in the dark because you could not possibly know, for example, whether reincarnation is possible or not.

A non-personal god to me simply means a god who does not concern himself with mankind.

As for whether the existence of God can actually be proven through math, take it up with Lanham. My math abilities don't go that far and I'm pretty sure yours don't also.
 LOLTrump
Joined: 3/7/2017
Msg: 56
Reincarnation - Have you ever felt like you've known/met someone before?
Posted: 5/11/2017 8:42:45 PM

As for whether the existence of God can actually be proven through math, take it up with Lanham. My math abilities don't go that far and I'm pretty sure yours don't also.


personal incredulity

Because you found something difficult to understand, or are unaware of how it works, you made out like it's probably not true.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/personal-incredulity
 lyinjovan
Joined: 4/3/2017
Msg: 57
Reincarnation - Have you ever felt like you've known/met someone before?
Posted: 5/11/2017 8:44:39 PM
Frank...talking about yourself again...I'm beginning to worry about you. Lol
 lyinjovan
Joined: 4/3/2017
Msg: 58
Reincarnation - Have you ever felt like you've known/met someone before?
Posted: 5/11/2017 8:48:48 PM
This guy says quantum mechanics proves reincarnation. .

https://www.sott.net/article/271933-Scientists-claim-that-Quantum-Theory-proves-consciousness-moves-to-another-universe-at-death
 lyinjovan
Joined: 4/3/2017
Msg: 59
Reincarnation - Have you ever felt like you've known/met someone before?
Posted: 5/11/2017 8:59:58 PM
Does the soul exist?

Yep...According to this scientist...

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/biocentrism/201112/does-the-soul-exist-evidence-says-yes
 LOLTrump
Joined: 3/7/2017
Msg: 60
Reincarnation - Have you ever felt like you've known/met someone before?
Posted: 5/11/2017 9:03:43 PM
Biocentrism Demystified: A Response to Deepak Chopra and Robert Lanza’s Notion of a Conscious Universe
December 14, 2009
by Vinod Wadhawan

0. Conclusions

Let us recapitulate the main points:

(a) Space and time exist, even though they are relative and not absolute.

(b) Modern quantum theory, long after the now-discredited Copenhagen interpretation, is consistent with the idea of an objective universe that exists without a conscious observer.

(c) Lanza and Chopra misunderstand and misuse the anthropic principle.

(d) The biocentrism approach does not provide any new information about the nature of consciousness, and relies on ignoring recent advances in understanding consciousness from a scientific perspective.

(e) Both authors show thinly-veiled disdain for Darwin, while not actually addressing his science in the article. Chopra has demonstrated his utter ignorance of evolution multiple times.

Modern physics is a vast and multi-layered web that stretches over the entire deck of cards. All other natural sciences – all truths that exist in the material world- are interrelated, held together by the mathematical reality of physics. Fundamental theories in physics are supported by multiple lines of evidence from many different scientific disciplines, developed and tested over decades. Clearly, those who propose new theories that purport to redefine fundamental assumptions or paradigms in physics have their work cut out for them. Our contention is that the theory of biocentrism, if analysed properly, does not hold up to scrutiny. It is not the paradigm change that it claims to be. It is also our view that one can find much meaning, beauty and purpose in a naturalistic view of the universe, without having to resort to mystical notions of reality.


http://nirmukta.com/2009/12/14/biocentrism-demystified-a-response-to-deepak-chopra-and-robert-lanzas-notion-of-a-conscious-universe/
 lyinjovan
Joined: 4/3/2017
Msg: 61
Reincarnation - Have you ever felt like you've known/met someone before?
Posted: 5/11/2017 9:28:41 PM
Thanks for proving my point...nobody has the answers. Juse opunions.. Nobody....we don't even understand consciousness so save me your nonsense about whether consciousness survives death....all guesswor right now.
 TheRevenant2017
Joined: 5/5/2017
Msg: 62
Reincarnation - Have you ever felt like you've known/met someone before?
Posted: 5/11/2017 9:52:37 PM

the existence of God would violate the law of thermodynamics or reincarnation "cannot happen"..
It does violate the laws of Thermodynamics. As an example, the first law of Thermodynamics states, energy is neither created nor destroyed, it is transformed anything that creates, be it god or something else, obviously violates that law.

Reincarnation violates the second law of thermodynamics. It presumes there is no entropy. Souls, the same thing. It also violates quite a few other laws but, one is enough to demonstrate it is not possible.


you could not possibly know, for example, whether reincarnation is possible or not.
It is most definitely possible to know and I am far from being the only one who understands why reincarnation is simply not possible.


A non-personal god to me simply means a god who does not concern himself with mankind.
Ok but, one inevitable contradiction remains. That is, you choose to believe that god has no beginning nor end while refusing to consider that existence has no beginning nor end. That is a choice no believer can logically justify. They simply choose to believe what they want to believe, correctness or incorrectness has nothing to do with the choice made.

There is another problem with the non personal goal claim. What were god's intentions in creating the universe ?... was he just bored and had nothing better to do ? since supposedly god is all powerful, is the universe the best he can do ? ... if yes, his abilities are limited, if no then what is the rational for creating something that is less than his best ?

Why is there one god and not two ? or three ? or n ? what explains that ?

Any argument for god's existence is filled with logical contradictions. What it clearly shows is how human god is.

The most someone can do is point a person in the right direction... show the inevitable problems with the presumption that god exists... show the contradictions in math, logic and physics but, that's all anyone can do. Acquiring the knowledge, analyzing it and reaching the inevitable conclusion remains personal.

The math that I have presented is downright trivial. It is so simple anyone can see it is correct. It doesn't prove the non-existence of god but, it proves that a god isn't necessary for existence to be. god is a trivial, superfluous, and erroneous concept, it is mathematically unnecessary and logically contradictory.

What neither math nor logic can do is convince someone to choose the correct answer. That choice remains personal and it is not always determined by the correctness or incorrectness of the answer chosen. For many, it is simply an emotional choice devoid of logic. That is the seed of countless problems. Too many choices are made that way (an example of that is in the W.H today... incorrect choices tend to be harmful for the one making the choice and unfortunately others as well.)


https://www.sott.net/article/271933-Scientists-claim-that-Quantum-Theory-proves-consciousness-moves-to-another-universe-at-death
Like the many "proofs" around of squaring the circle with compass and straightedge.

It looks like we'll have to agree on disagreeing about the non existence of god(s).
Reincarnation - Have you ever felt like you've known/met someone before?
Posted: 5/12/2017 3:03:27 AM
This particular one:

http://superscholar.org/interviews/christopher-michael-langan/

I haven't read all of it yet, so part of how I feel so far may change or be wrong...

...I don't like the idea of this being characterized as proving god, because that argument changes a lot in the sense of 'moving goal posts'. If there is some kind of 'higher universal consciousness' dynamic to reality, that is not the same thing as arguing about the existence of god per a religion with a religious apologist. Very different thing altogether. In fact, I've occasionally said that the problem with contemplating the existence of god is screwed up by religion and including religious approaches, and wished that the question could be considered legitimate but pursued in a proper way, scientifically...

...However, I think that I like what this guy is saying. I think that I understand where he's going. I think that his framework and approach is appropriate and may be fruitful. I have some thoughts in this particular ballpark and some ways of thinking about it which I'd like to be able to expound. But it's too hard to just make a singular presentation post. Instead, some interactive dialogue would be a good vehicle by which to spin it out, and am hoping that some in here are game for such, without too much sabotaging trollish crap.
 lyinjovan
Joined: 4/3/2017
Msg: 64
Reincarnation - Have you ever felt like you've known/met someone before?
Posted: 5/12/2017 8:44:03 AM

the existence of God would violate the law of thermodynamics or reincarnation "cannot happen"..
It does violate the laws of Thermodynamics. As an example, the first law of Thermodynamics states, energy is neither created nor destroyed, it is transformed anything that creates, be it god or something else, obviously violates that law.


This is a poor argument. It assumes many things... it assumes God is subject to the law of Thermodynamics... It assumes the law of Thermodynamics exists throughout the Universe... and there are now some indications that the laws of physics are NOT uniform throughout the Universe, it assumes God is "energy"...and it assumes, as I have postulated, that if God created the Universe through the big bang.. that the laws of Thermodynamics would exist before the creation of the Universe... and yes. I am assuming the Universe is not eternal as scientists, based on evidence, put the age of the Universe at about 14.7 Billion years.


Reincarnation violates the second law of thermodynamics. It presumes there is no entropy. Souls, the same thing. It also violates quite a few other laws but, one is enough to demonstrate it is not possible.


Well... I point you to the links where physicists far smarter than you or I have proposed that the soul is an independent form of energy that may well have been in existence since the birth of the Universe, or that alternatively... it is energy that can be transferred through space time. The problem we all have is defining exactly what the soul is. We don't know. We don't know what consciousness is. We can only guess... the existence of Consciousness itself lends credibility to the argument of God... creating consciousness so that it could observe the beauty of the Universe. Take a look at some of the links.....at the quantum level observation creates reality.


A non-personal god to me simply means a god who does not concern himself with mankind.
Ok but, one inevitable contradiction remains. That is, you choose to believe that god has no beginning nor end while refusing to consider that existence has no beginning nor end. That is a choice no believer can logically justify. They simply choose to believe what they want to believe, correctness or incorrectness has nothing to do with the choice made.


I choose to believe nothing about God. I make no effort to define God, whether he is a being from another Universe... whether he always existed or not.... nor is your level of logical thinking possibly applicable to the existence or not of God....there are no inevitable contradictions... only unknowns and mysteries.


There is another problem with the non personal goal claim. What were god's intentions in creating the universe ?


How can any of us know God's intentions.. you are giving God human characteristics. We could never know God's intentions or if God had any intentions.


Why is there one god and not two ? or three ? or n ? what explains that ?


We don't know this either.... but asking this question is attempting to objectify God... another impossibility.


Any argument for god's existence is filled with logical contradictions. What it clearly shows is how human god is.


You are conflating the God of the bible... a God created in man's image... and the God of the Universe....an explanation for the existence of the Universe itself, its mathematical and precise underpinnings that allow for life.... because everything on the physical level is exactly how it must be for the Universe to exist and welcome life.



The most someone can do is point a person in the right direction... show the inevitable problems with the presumption that god exists... show the contradictions in math, logic and physics but, that's all anyone can do. Acquiring the knowledge, analyzing it and reaching the inevitable conclusion remains personal.


You are simply assuming contradictions in math, logic and physics when there are none... for there to be any evidence of contradictions, we would have to know a lot more than we know right now.



The math that I have presented is downright trivial. It is so simple anyone can see it is correct. It doesn't prove the non-existence of god but, it proves that a god isn't necessary for existence to be. god is a trivial, superfluous, and erroneous concept, it is mathematically unnecessary and logically contradictory.


Yes... Hawkings took that position in his book.... but again we get to the astronomical probabilities of all of this from nothing....I simply am not buying it. No way . No day.


What neither math nor logic can do is convince someone to choose the correct answer. That choice remains personal and it is not always determined by the correctness or incorrectness of the answer chosen. For many, it is simply an emotional choice devoid of logic. That is the seed of countless problems. Too many choices are made that way (an example of that is in the W.H today... incorrect choices tend to be harmful for the one making the choice and unfortunately others as well.)


Well... you are certainly free to believe as you choose... but you are in no position to state what is truth... the truth is hidden from us. All of the things that have to pan out, all of the correct assumptions you have to make to be accurate.... highly unlikely you are even in the ball park....but I may not be in the ballpark either. We just don't know.
 lyinjovan
Joined: 4/3/2017
Msg: 65
Reincarnation - Have you ever felt like you've known/met someone before?
Posted: 5/12/2017 8:50:12 AM

If there is some kind of 'higher universal consciousness' dynamic to reality, that is not the same thing as arguing about the existence of god per a religion with a religious apologist. Very different thing altogether. In fact, I've occasionally said that the problem with contemplating the existence of god is screwed up by religion and including religious approaches, and wished that the question could be considered legitimate but pursued in a proper way, scientifically...


I agree with this thinking. Religion was created simply as a method to try to understand God, and it has hardly changed with the advancement of scientific thought. We still essentially worship objects and idols...... because we understand nothing about the mysterious forces that created our Universe or created our consciousnesses. I am beginning to believe that we are all part of a Universal Consciousness and that our individual awareness is simply a subset of that large consciousness. The universal consciousness is evidence of God....whoever or whatever he is.
 lyinjovan
Joined: 4/3/2017
Msg: 66
Reincarnation - Have you ever felt like you've known/met someone before?
Posted: 5/12/2017 9:21:43 AM

there is plenty of evidence the Universe we are in was in fact 'created" through the big bang,
I'm pleased you placed the word "creation" in quotes because, the big bang was a transformation not a creation. Nothing was created as a result of the big bang, a very large number of "things" resulted from its transformation.


Really.... can you explain where all of the matter and energy in this "transformation" came from...because to opine it was transformed from the "big bang", than you have to assume it existed prior to the "big bank" and was contained within the singularity......and what possible evidence do you have of this?


there is no reason to believe any of our Universal Rules or laws were applicable before that creation.
Actually, there is. The big bang is the result of the passage of time. The passage of time is what caused the big bang to happen, and the elasticity of time is what makes the laws of physics remain constant.


The big bang is the result of the passage of time? We don't even know if there is such a thing as time existing before the big bang... in fact even now, many scientists say time is an "illusion"... that everything that ever happened or will happen is static and part of a never ending collage of moments and "nows" We also don't know what preexisted the Big Bang. All we can say is that the Universe expanded dramatically at the instant of the singularity event creating us. Everything I have read suggests time and space itself was created with the big-bang. My question to you Flman/Reverant is where you come up with this stuff?


In addition to that, Einstein's GR predicts the existence of the Big Bang singularity. That's where the Big Bang theory originated (George Lemaitre). Some people like to speculate that the laws of physics may have changed during the Big Bang but, there is no good foundation for that belief other than, it happened a long time ago and we cannot "back" measure exactly what happened then. What is very likely (actually, a certainty) is that there are laws of physics we don't know about that influenced how the Big Bang happened.


You contradict yourself by saying how people are speculating based on no good foundation.... but then you do exactly that by stating what is very likely. In truth... we have no idea if there were any laws of physics preexisting the big bang because we don't know what preexisted the big bang in the least.


The problem is that you are still convinced that the universe was created. The universe wasn't created. Even nothingness is something. Creation is unnecessary, making god an explanation for something that didn't happen.


Gobbledygook. If the Singularity is responsible for the Universe, than the Universe was created at that moment. That's not really an issue open for debate.
 Jo van
Joined: 5/23/2009
Msg: 67
Reincarnation - Have you ever felt like you've known/met someone before?
Posted: 5/12/2017 10:13:09 AM

Meet Christopher Langan, one of the smartest guys in the world who says he believes he can prove the existence of God through Math. But I'm sure Lying Jovan, et. al. is smarter than Mr. Langan and his 195 IQ


You're obsession with other people's intelligence, and your desperation to appear intelligent yourself, is slightly marred by your choice of an "ad-hominem" user name.
No intelligent person would ever do that.

You mention me, every time you post, regardless of the subject, and if it weren't enough for you to be displaying your hysterical obsession with your choice of username, you then mention me again, in the body of the post.

Whatever it was that I said, which 'triggered' such obvious psychopathy,
it must have stung you good, because you can't seem to forget it.

You have turned yourself into a laughing stock, and consequently, very few people will take your demented ramblings seriously.
(If they ever did, in any of your previous incarnations.
Bang on-topic there!)

Reincarnation, or the endurance of an alleged "soul" after death is simply the "blanky", for people who are emotionally incapable of facing the truth about our finite mortal existence.
It's supreme egotism to suppose that the collection of atoms, currently arranged as a person, is of such great significance to the cosmos, that once arranged in that fashion, it must somehow endure.

Consciousness is merely the collected experiences and memories contained in the cpu that is a brain, and the subjectively decided relationship between the outside world, and the almost randomly and infinite number of ways which that data can be interpreted and correlated, before deciding to interact (or not) with its immediate environment.
We all make decisions, but they're not unpredictable.

Your man, Mr Langan, begins from the premise that:
"Mind Equals Reality".
That's all I really need to know, to know that he's talking bullshit.

Your insistence that you don't believe in a "personal god" undermines the very basis for "israel's" existence.
You cling to "Spinoza's god", as if that were some sort of vindication for the stupidity displayed by nodding "settlers".
It isn't.
These primitive, shitty beliefs are responsible for millions of deaths, and the ongoing injustice in Palestine.
"God" doesn't exist, so all their claims are just bullshit.

Your insistence that science "disproves" something, that's completely made-up, anyway, just shows that you don't know much about science, or how it works.
What a dummy.

Trying to use science, and applying it to something which was invented in the complete absence of any science, or evidence, or proof, or rational thought, is truly laughable.
It's just superstition.

Humans look for patterns everywhere.
It's like seeing a "face" in a cloud, and then, because that "face" in the cloud can only be seen, from your particular vantage point, and at that precise moment in time, and because of that precise set of circumstances being necessary to see it, then convincing yourself that "it must be a sign,"
Attaching "meanings" to things is just another form of "pattern recognition", based on the subjective data gathered before.
Pure superstition, sprinkled with fear, and egotism.

When you're dead, you're dead.
Sorry to break that to you.
Fact.
You didn't exist before you were born, and you will cease to exist again, after your demise.

The world existed before you did, it will continue to exist, even after you are no longer able to observe its existence.
Reality exists without "mind".
Trees do fall in forests, they do make sound, and other creatures do hear it, even if there were no humans present.

You don't need a high "IQ", just an open mind.
And to be objective.
-YOU never can be, because you try to "shoehorn" everything into "israel was justified".

I may change my username to:
Truthful Jovan
My "mission":
"Defeating silliness, wherever I find it".
Every post of yours acknowledges my awesomeness..
 lyinjovan
Joined: 4/3/2017
Msg: 68
Reincarnation - Have you ever felt like you've known/met someone before?
Posted: 5/12/2017 10:50:41 AM

Meet Christopher Langan, one of the smartest guys in the world who says he believes he can prove the existence of God through Math. But I'm sure Lying Jovan, et. al. is smarter than Mr. Langan and his 195 IQ

You're obsession with other people's intelligence, and your desperation to appear intelligent yourself, is slightly marred by your choice of an "ad-hominem" user name.
No intelligent person would ever do that.

You're obsession with other people's intelligence, and your desperation to appear intelligent yourself, is slightly marred by your choice of an "ad-hominem" user name. No intelligent person would ever do that.


You are losing it Lying Mad Dog Jovan. So sad.


You mention me, every time you post, regardless of the subject, and if it weren't enough for you to be displaying your hysterical obsession with your choice of username, you then mention me again, in the body of the post.


You give yourself far more importance than you deserve. I simply use you as an example of the Village Fool.


Whatever it was that I said, which 'triggered' such obvious psychopathy,
it must have stung you good, because you can't seem to forget it.


And yet here you are... again posting to me and telling me everything you think of me... not the other way around


You have turned yourself into a laughing stock, and consequently, very few people will take your demented ramblings seriously. (If they ever did, in any of your previous incarnations. Bang on-topic there!)


If so, that is really no concern of yours is it?


Reincarnation, or the endurance of an alleged "soul" after death is simply the "blanky", for people who are emotionally incapable of facing the truth about our finite mortal existence.
It's supreme egotism to suppose that the collection of atoms, currently arranged as a person, is of such great significance to the cosmos, that once arranged in that fashion, it must somehow endure. Consciousness is merely the collected experiences and memories contained in the cpu that is a brain, and the subjectively decided relationship between the outside world, and the almost randomly and infinite number of ways which that data can be interpreted and correlated, before deciding to interact (or not) with its immediate environment.
We all make decisions, but they're not unpredictable.


Now we get to the Crux of the matter. You are such a fuked up guy... you leave no possibility in your pin sized brain that you might be wrong and you can't stand it that others disagree with your simple, ignorant views of the world.


Your man, Mr Langan, begins from the premise that:
"Mind Equals Reality".
That's all I really need to know, to know that he's talking bullshit.


Because he is talking far over your pin sized brain does not mean he's talking bullshit. It means you have relative to his own, the intellect of a Goldfish, who also is clueless about what is going on around him.


Your insistence that you don't believe in a "personal god" undermines the very basis for "israel's" existence.
You cling to "Spinoza's god", as if that were some sort of vindication for the stupidity displayed by nodding "settlers".
It isn't.
These primitive, shitty beliefs are responsible for millions of deaths, and the ongoing injustice in Palestine.
"God" doesn't exist, so all their claims are just bullshit.


No you never understood either my opinions or the basis for Israel. Israel's legitimacy comes not from the bible, but from its historical ties to the land, to the culture of the people and from the absolute fact, which you refuse to concede, that they legally were awarded the former ottoman empire land by the United Nations...i.e.... the people of the world. You just don't like facts that interfere with your rabid hatred of Jews.


Your insistence that science "disproves" something, that's completely made-up, anyway, just shows that you don't know much about science, or how it works.
What a dummy.


Pure ignorance in action here, which is nothing more than you believe something to be true... therefor anybody who does not agree is a dummy.


Trying to use science, and applying it to something which was invented in the complete absence of any science, or evidence, or proof, or rational thought, is truly laughable.
It's just superstition.


In your opinion... and you are conflating the all too human God of the Bible with the God of the Universe. Pity you cannot differentiate between the two.. but you have to be smarter than a goldfish to do so.


Humans look for patterns everywhere.
It's like seeing a "face" in a cloud, and then, because that "face" in the cloud can only be seen, from your particular vantage point, and at that precise moment in time, and because of that precise set of circumstances being necessary to see it, then convincing yourself that "it must be a sign,"
Attaching "meanings" to things is just another form of "pattern recognition", based on the subjective data gathered before.
Pure superstition, sprinkled with fear, and egotism.


This has nothing to do with what humans perceive and everything to do with the existence of reality and the Universe.


When you're dead, you're dead.
Sorry to break that to you.
Fact.
You didn't exist before you were born, and you will cease to exist again, after your demise.


Its really something very telling about your character that you get all huffy when people don't see things the way you see them.


The world existed before you did, it will continue to exist, even after you are no longer able to observe its existence.
Reality exists without "mind".
Trees do fall in forests, they do make sound, and other creatures do hear it, even if there were no humans present.


Obviously, you do not understand the quantum world and its meaning for all of us at the macro level.


You don't need a high "IQ", just an open mind.
And to be objective.


You have proven in your rant the exact opposite. You do need a high IQ to get it. Goldfish will never be at that level.


-YOU never can be, because you try to "shoehorn" everything into "israel was justified".


You are the first person to bring Israel into this thread... Because your number one obsession is Israel... which is why I suspect you see yourself as a victim of Israel.... on the Palestinian line.


I may change my username to:
Truthful Jovan
My "mission":
"Defeating silliness, wherever I find it".
Every post of yours acknowledges my awesomeness.


Go ahead. It would make my day to know you were so angry about my username that you changed your own.
 TheRevenant2017
Joined: 5/5/2017
Msg: 69
Reincarnation - Have you ever felt like you've known/met someone before?
Posted: 5/12/2017 10:57:59 AM



it assumes God is subject to the law of Thermodynamics
There are two problems with that claim. The first one is that before you can claim that god isn't subject to the laws of thermodynamics, you have to prove there is a god. After that you need to prove that it isn't subject to the laws of thermodynamics.


It assumes the law of Thermodynamics exists throughout the Universe
That one is very easy to dispatch... time dilation and contraction is what ensures that the laws of physics, including thermodynamics, are immatuble. Therefore, they are the same anywhere in the universe. Also, if they weren't, that fact would be readily observable.


there are now some indications that the laws of physics are NOT uniform throughout the Universe
What supports that statement ?


I am assuming the Universe is not eternal as scientists, based on evidence, put the age of the Universe at about 14.7 Billion years.
Think larger than the universe. Think existence as a whole. And even if you don't want to think about it that way, 14.7 billion years ago, the universe existed as a singularity. A change in "shape" isn't creation, just a transfornation.


I point you to the links where physicists far smarter than you
There are several problems with that statement. 1.) I don't know how smart I am and neither do you. 2.) Neither I nor you know how smart those physicists are. 3.) It doesn't make any sense at all to compare unknown quantities, in this case, my unknown smarts with their unknown smarts.


The problem we all have is defining exactly what the soul is.
You admit no one knows what a soul actually is yet, you speculate about characteristics of the soul when neither the soul nor any of its characteristics have ever been observed or measured.


We don't know what consciousness is.
While there isn't a definition that is all encompassing, some parts of it are well defined and those are sufficient to demonstrate that consciousness isn't something that is going to survive death. This wikipedia article has some good information about it, particularly the part about "measurement".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consciousness#Animal_consciousness


the existence of Consciousness itself lends credibility to the argument of God
Consciousness is the result of chemical processes in the brain. god has nothing to do with that.


creating consciousness so that it could observe the beauty of the Universe.
Sounds like everything other than humans got a raw deal since we seem to be the only ones - from our limited perspective - to be able to observe the beauty of the universe.


.I simply am not buying it. No way . No day.
That is quite clear.


but you are in no position to state what is truth
That is a claim you cannot make. The math that shows that god is unnecessary and superfluous is simple and incontrovertible. There is no reasonable justification to doubt the laws of thermodynamics and physics in general. Questioning them to make room for a god is neither logical nor justified.


the truth is hidden from us.
The facts are right in front us. There is nothing hidden. It's all there, we understand some things, we don't understand others. The only reasonable conclusion is that there are things we are not smart enough to understand. Concluding the existence of a god because there are things we do not understand is totally devoid of logic.


can you explain where all of the matter and energy in this "transformation" came from
Refer back to the bit of math I presented earlier, particularly the line "X - X = 0".


because to opine it was transformed from the "big bang", than you have to assume it existed prior to the "big bank" and was contained within the singularity......and what possible evidence do you have of this?
Fairly simple. If the particle had not existed, the big bang would not have taken place. The universe as we know it is a transformation resulting from that singularity. There is plenty of evidence of that.


We don't even know if there is such a thing as time existing before the big bang...
Yes, we do. Time is the result of changes. Without changes (or more accurately, motion) there is no time. Just the fact that the singularity "exploded" is proof that time elapsed. Unfortunately, Hawking chose the phrase "the beginning of time" as the point when the singularity expanded but, that's only the beginning of transformation that produced the universe as we know it today. It wasn't the physical beginning of time. Time has always existed. It's one of those things that has no beginning nor end.


many scientists say time is an "illusion"
That's completely incorrect. That "illusion" is the reason that GPS satellites have to be constantly recalibrated in order for them to operate properly. Time for those satellites elapses more slowly than time on earth making the adjustment/recalibration necessary. Time is no illusion.


We also don't know what preexisted the Big Bang.
That is correct.


All we can say is that the Universe expanded dramatically at the instant of the singularity event creating us.
We are the result of that transformation. There was no creation.


Everything I have read suggests time and space itself was created with the big-bang.
Time wasn't "created" with the big bang. The rest I'm not sure about but, it wasn't creation, it was transformation.


Flman/Reverant is where you come up with this stuff?
Around 40 years of studying that and many other things.


we have no idea if there were any laws of physics preexisting the big bang because we don't know what preexisted the big bang in the least.
It is a fact that we don't know what was there before the Big Bang but, the laws of physics were there otherwise the Big Bang would not have happened. The laws of physics are what caused the Big Bang, without them there would not have been a Big Bang.


If the Singularity is responsible for the Universe, than the Universe was created at that moment. That's not really an issue open for debate.
That's nonsense. A transformation took place, nothing was "created" anymore than freezing water "creates" ice. I agree, that is not open for debate.

Anyway, as I stated in the first post, I have neither the desire nor the intention of convincing anyone that god(s), soul(s) and supernatural realms do not exist. They don't. I have done my best to show why but, my best isn't sufficient, it also takes the best of the individual who is getting the information.

We'll conclude the discussion by agreeing to disagree.


 lyinjovan
Joined: 4/3/2017
Msg: 70
Reincarnation - Have you ever felt like you've known/met someone before?
Posted: 5/12/2017 11:15:35 AM
^^^^

We'll conclude the discussion by agreeing to disagree.


I suppose so. To take your truths at face value would be to accept that your assumptions are all accurate... and that is something that we will continue to disagree on. We even disagree on creation vs. transformation.

You are right... I don't know how smart you are... but I too have been reading about the Universe from the smartest people in the world, who often are published in Scientific American. and I am not just coming up with this stuff out of my azz... I am simply repeating what they have postulated... although they do so in a much more scientific and detailed manner. I'm not the one who says time started with the singularity... these brilliant men are. I'm not the one who talks about time being an illusion...some of the smartest scientists of the day say so... as did Einstein himself.

I think there are very, very few people who are smart enough to understand the science that these brilliant theoretical physicists understand. Maybe you understand the basics of String Theory. I don't. I only know how it has been explained in these publications... but although they try to talk down to us lay people...they can't but help refer to concepts far above the ability of ordinary mortals to understand.

What I do know are there are a lot of mysteries out there... a lot even these brilliant men cannot explain... a lot of suppositions and theories which may or may not be proven true as time goes on. A lot about the quantum world which turns reality on its head. In the end... our perception of the world around us is very limited... especially at the level of the ordinary mortal. I do not accept that the quantum world and all of the manifestations of that world as reflected in our reality... just exploded into existence out of nothing.

That there are extremely high IQ individuals who believe in a God like entity...or who believe in some sort of Universal Consciousness is good enough for me to assume that no matter what is said on this board... no matter how dogmatic a person is in his own viewpoints.... that we just don't know the truth. And my truth is there is more out there than meets the eye. This did not just all happen randomly... No way. No day.
 LOLTrump
Joined: 3/7/2017
Msg: 71
Reincarnation - Have you ever felt like you've known/met someone before?
Posted: 5/12/2017 11:35:01 AM

That there are extremely high IQ individuals who believe in a God like entity...or who believe in some sort of Universal Consciousness is good enough for me to assume that no matter what is said on this board... no matter how dogmatic a person is in his own viewpoints.... that we just don't know the truth. And my truth is there is more out there than meets the eye. This did not just all happen randomly... No way. No day.


Congratulations on your fail.

As all you have done is proven your bias towards things that you believe.

Once again, smart people can believe crazy things.
 lyinjovan
Joined: 4/3/2017
Msg: 72
Reincarnation - Have you ever felt like you've known/met someone before?
Posted: 5/12/2017 11:36:58 AM
^^^

LOLAHOLE, I was talking to the adults in the room... who get that some smart scientists out there see things...based on mathematical principals... the rest of us don't see. Sorry but not surprised this concept is over your head. Sad indeed.
 LOLTrump
Joined: 3/7/2017
Msg: 73
Reincarnation - Have you ever felt like you've known/met someone before?
Posted: 5/12/2017 11:53:13 AM

I was talking to the adults in the room... who get that some smart scientists out there see things...based on mathematical principals... the rest of us don't see. Sorry but not surprised this concept is over your head. Sad indeed.


So I guess that is why you did not bother to respond to the article that proved that the mathematical principal you claimed was based on junk science and is bunk.

Because for one, you do not understand what you are posting and two the only reason you believe it is because it confirms your bias.

So keep posting laughable science and I will keep pocking hole in it and then you can go back to deflecting and tossing out the Ad hominems.
 Jo van
Joined: 5/23/2009
Msg: 74
Reincarnation - Have you ever felt like you've known/met someone before?
Posted: 5/12/2017 12:31:49 PM

You give yourself far more importance than you deserve.

You give me importance with every post.
Your username is an "as-hominem" fallacy.
Every post begins with you spitting your dummy out.
And then you talk about "intelligence".


And yet here you are... again posting to me and telling me everything you think of me... not the other way around

If you wrote nothing in your post, your username shows your obsession with me.
It's flattering.
It shows I bested you, and you can't stand it.
What a dimwit.

Now we get to the Crux of the matter. You are such a fuked up guy... you leave no possibility in your pin sized brain that you might be wrong and you can't stand it that others disagree with your simple, ignorant views of the world.

I'm never wrong.
Whereas you always seem to be wrong.
I can see why that would anger you.
All you need to do, is to stop being stupid.

Because he is talking far over your pin sized brain does not mean he's talking bullshit. It means you have relative to his own, the intellect of a Goldfish, who also is clueless about what is going on around him.

"One thing only I know, and that is, that I know nothing". ~Socrates.
See how clever I am?
Whereas you will forever remain "nearly intelligent".
Bad luck.

No you never understood either my opinions or the basis for Israel. Israel's legitimacy comes not from the bible, but from its historical ties to the land, to the culture of the people and from the absolute fact, which you refuse to concede, that they legally were awarded the former ottoman empire land by the United Nations...i.e.... the people of the world. You just don't like facts that interfere with your rabid hatred of Jews.

"Jews" is an imaginary category, you might just as well claim that I hate "unicorns". (I don't, btw)

You cant "legally give" something, unless it "legally belonged to you", in the first place.
The arabs never agreed to the "partition plan", the land already belonged to them, they were perfectly entitled to resist, under UN rules.
"Israel" is a 70-year-old "occupation" of Palestine, and completely illegal.
"Israel" has ignored some 170 UN resolutions.

Pure ignorance in action here, which is nothing more than you believe something to be true... therefor anybody who does not agree is a dummy.

Well, D'uh

In your opinion... and you are conflating the all too human God of the Bible with the God of the Universe. Pity you cannot differentiate between the two.. but you have to be smarter than a goldfish to do so.

Nope.
YOU are doing that, to try and justify establishing a theological theme park, based on "god", which involved murdering lots of people, who didn't believe in your primitive drivel.

his has nothing to do with what humans perceive and everything to do with the existence of reality and the Universe.

Well then, why post some new-age drivel, which insists that "reality= mind" ?
You're such a dummy, aren't you?

Its really something very telling about your character that you get all huffy when people don't see things the way you see them.

I must try and stop those petulant, demented, hysterical outbursts, like changing my name, just because I got owned.
No....wait....that was YOU!!!

You are the first person to bring Israel into this thread... Because your number one obsession is Israel... which is why I suspect you see yourself as a victim of Israel.... on the Palestinian line.

Yes, I'm a Jewish, catholic Palestinian.
Why are you so dim??

Go ahead. It would make my day to know you were so angry about my username that you changed your own.

It makes my day, every time you post with that name,
it shows me how angry, and frustrated you are that I keep making you look so silly.

You're just another religiotard, screaming "YOU TAKE THAT BACK!!!! YOURE A BIG FAT LIAR!!! THERE IS TOO A gOD!!!!"

You're very funny.
In a sad sort of way, obviously. :16
 lyinjovan
Joined: 4/3/2017
Msg: 75
Reincarnation - Have you ever felt like you've known/met someone before?
Posted: 5/12/2017 1:34:58 PM
^^^^^^^^ you are deteriorating before our very eyes. You hate the fact that people choose to believe in a God whom, for some reason...you reject and despise. ... explain to us why you care so much whether people exercise freedom of thought and exercise their fundamental right to believe in a God they choose?

I have never come across a person like you before, anywhere in real life or on the web... who so much rails against others who choose to believe in God. Because you do so is evidence to me you are a mentally ill sik fuk.... and you are an authoritarian...you demand people see things the way you see them... and when they don't...you go ballistic, as evidenced in this very thread. So sad Lying Mad Dog Jovan.
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  > Reincarnation - Have you ever felt like you've known/met someone before?