Fed up of non believers

[skinz]

Could be something to do with, for instance, these:

 

 

Originally Posted by MrSmith View Post

Yes that’s right, so until the term God as a coherent definition I can’t lack a belief in it, because I might not be ignorant of the something that is called God.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by maxmaximus View Post

Without the definition of God it wouldn’t be possible to know that nothing can’t be know about God.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by angos View Post

 

I describe my self as ignostic because whether I believe in God rather depends on the definition of God being used.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by ivanava View Post

The third dimension is I might believe in God, but until you tell me what it is, I can't say whether I believe or not.

 

 

Bang to rights.

[redwhine]

The third dimension is I might believe in God, but until you tell me what it is, I can't say whether I believe or not.

 

= no belief in god. Q. E. D.

[mjw47]

Is this the bit where I start to whine because you are all ganging up on me?

 

 

 

ivanava: you are mrsmith, maxmaximus and angos. You know it and we know it.

 

mjw: look at the insults you are hurling around, the accusations you are making, and then look at the manner in which you are hurling them. Yes, it's like looking in a mirror, isn't it?

 

salsafan: you're just a nutter, love.

 

Brilliant! Salsafan, your just a nutter, love.

 

No sense of irony whatsoever.

 

Still I suppose when you have that much sense of self regard there's not too much room left is there?

 

As for ganging up on people, your the expert in that technique, and as I have stated I think it's hugely amusing, unable to handle someone without PM messages of tactics and support. Priceless

[redwhine]

Or some people wants to be a believer and then try to continue to be a believer and also question those areas when it happens that God fails them so.

 

Or others can only become a none believer until they experienced something in their life such that they have to become a believer. So this is also possible too.

But at any one time, they either believe in or lack belief in god. They never both believe in and lack belief in god at the same time.

[salsafan]

Originally Posted by MrSmith View Post

Yes that’s right, so until the term God as a coherent definition I can’t lack a belief in it, because I might not be ignorant of the something that is called God.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by maxmaximus View Post

Without the definition of God it wouldn’t be possible to know that nothing can’t be know about God.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by angos View Post

 

I describe my self as ignostic because whether I believe in God rather depends on the definition of God being used.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by ivanava View Post

The third dimension is I might believe in God, but until you tell me what it is, I can't say whether I believe or not.

 

 

Bang to rights.

Oh my God.

 

Maybe it is Janie and myself who is on the same wavelength as the OP. If you read what Janie wrote, and if you are able to "abstract" the principle information which she wrote, it boils down to the same logical deduction. (I think someone hit the nail on the head.) Of "what is life" ?

 

To me, I think that the OP had an absolute valid reason to write what she did. She is also in according to the forum rules justified in doing so too. (I also know that sometimes the forum rule catches certain people out, and people tend to follow it blindly, and communicate and write in a specific way.) Is it not obvious that SHE is the fact ? That she experienced seeing ghosts is the fact ? I also straight away wrote that I thought I saw ghostly images when I was a child. I actually believed in it. This was way before I went to school, and I learnt about science, which did do something with me, and it changed my brain, my spirituality and the rest is history. To me, I am the living fact. The forum rule states that either write about your experience, or quote where the factual content lies in a publication. (Experience versus knowledge.) I do not see why the two cannot co-exist when in discussing whether the premise of "ghost" exists or not.

 

I can also see that as much as those forum heavy weights use science and knowledge to stifle others, I have not seen any others ask the very plain question of "why did you see this, and what happened" to question the facts. Not to throw the assumption that there are no facts to begin with. Or that she was plugging something out of the sky.

 

 

I like Dr Emoto's words and how he phrased things. As a scientist, he knows how energy works, but the way he wrote his piece was from a very spiritual angle, which is actually very benefiting towards the Japanese culture overall. Cos they relate everything to humanity, and to humans. Whereas in the UK, we seem to pursuit knowledge for the sake of knowledge and we drop people behind. We drop spirituality, the spirit of kindness, empathy, and all the rest, in search of knowledge for knowledge sake such that, our children now in this generation has become addicts of information, and ADHD is actually more and more common. Basically we lost our morality. We lost that golden rule.

 

There is a price to pay for the pursuit of excellence. It does something to your brain. e.g. neurodegenerative diseases. To me, in spiritual term, it means that the person did not love themselves to back off and to switch off, and marvel at the simplicity of science and what it brings and offer to the world.

 

If you lose morality, then you lose yourself, and you lose yourself off the grid of humanity. Knowledge is just written words with no meaning and people standing behind it otherwise.

 

With regards to Dr Emoto's research, he is trying to raise the awareness of molecular bonding, which in itself is quite exciting because he has managed to prove some first principles and expanded in that area. He is raising more awareness by demonstrating some simple principles, of which it worked. There is no doubt about that. I do not question his understanding of molecular chemistry, or physical chemistry, and nor do I question his understanding of it. From a humanity angle, he is also trying to raise awareness because he wants research to be done in this specific area which is actually quite forefront too. It means raising quality of life overall if the search can reach a very good level.

 

I just teased those of you who do not seem to support ethics but has a brilliant knowledge and mind that, without ethics, and without morality and goals towards preservation of humanity and humans, science is nothing.

[Lockjaw]

Brilliant! Salsafan, your just a nutter, love.

 

No sense of irony whatsoever.

 

Still I suppose when you have that much sense of self regard there's not too much room left is there?

 

As for ganging up on people, your the expert in that technique, and as I have stated I think it's hugely amusing, unable to handle someone without PM messages of tactics and support. Priceless

 

I see you've dropped all pretence of wishing to debate, as per usual.

 

Let me, therefore, steer you back to the discussion.

 

**Dons smoking jacket**

 

The answer is, of course, that, once the temperature had fallen enough it condensed and fell to the ground as water. What do you think happened next?

 

Oh, and it's KS3, 4 & 5 science, by the way - not primary.

[salsafan]

Brilliant! Salsafan, your just a nutter, love.

 

No sense of irony whatsoever.

I actually am a student of philosophy in my private time, and I was a trained chemistry graduate, but I work in IT (because of my analytical brain), and learnt how to deal with mathematical deductive reasoning. At A Level physics, we were already taught how to scrutinise our own theories and deduce the actual validity of what we seek and answer. In IT, we are taught how to abstract data and from nature in a way which we can work and create brilliant solutions. I was not one of those student who was taught to "press a button and see this happen".

 

It is not irony dear, it is experience that I speak of. The heavy weights in logical reasonings and knowledge knows that what I write has some sense to it.

 

You wrote something yourself, and you quoted Bill Bryson, and then you wrote and stated that he is a "travel writer". Well, talk about making something more like a story than relate it to science ! I am sure he is happy that you bought his book, and he is able to abstract and write in a way which makes you wonder and marvel at the world.

 

After working in the actual world and exposing myself to the people who actually did the hard work, I realised how insignificant I myself is. I almost bought the Stephen Hawkins' book once, but now I realised that isn't really my calling.

 

(I am also trying to bridge your understanding to the level that he is at, call me Mother Theresa. But yes, it is quite ironic I guess.)

 

Still I suppose when you have that much sense of self regard there's not too much room left is there?

 

As for ganging up on people, your the expert in that technique, and as I have stated I think it's hugely amusing, unable to handle someone without PM messages of tactics and support. Priceless

Huh.

Edited February 28, 2014 by salsafan

[Lockjaw]

Oh my God.

 

Maybe it is Janie and myself who is on the same wavelength as the OP. If you read what Janie wrote, and if you are able to "abstract" the principle information which she wrote, it boils down to the same logical deduction. (I think someone hit the nail on the head.) Of "what is life" ?

 

To me, I think that the OP had an absolute valid reason to write what she did. She is also in according to the forum rules justified in doing so too. (I also know that sometimes the forum rule catches certain people out, and people tend to follow it blindly, and communicate and write in a specific way.) Is it not obvious that SHE is the fact ? That she experienced seeing ghosts is the fact ? I also straight away wrote that I thought I saw ghostly images when I was a child. I actually believed in it. This was way before I went to school, and I learnt about science, which did do something with me, and it changed my brain, my spirituality and the rest is history. To me, I am the living fact. The forum rule states that either write about your experience, or quote where the factual content lies in a publication. (Experience versus knowledge.) I do not see why the two cannot co-exist when in discussing whether the premise of "ghost" exists or not.

 

I can also see that as much as those forum heavy weights use science and knowledge to stifle others, I have not seen any others ask the very plain question of "why did you see this, and what happened" to question the facts. Not to throw the assumption that there are no facts to begin with. Or that she was plugging something out of the sky.

 

 

I like Dr Emoto's words and how he phrased things. As a scientist, he knows how energy works, but the way he wrote his piece was from a very spiritual angle, which is actually very benefiting towards the Japanese culture overall. Cos they relate everything to humanity, and to humans. Whereas in the UK, we seem to pursuit knowledge for the sake of knowledge and we drop people behind. We drop spirituality, the spirit of kindness, empathy, and all the rest, in search of knowledge for knowledge sake such that, our children now in this generation has become addicts of information, and ADHD is actually more and more common. Basically we lost our morality. We lost that golden rule.

 

There is a price to pay for the pursuit of excellence. It does something to your brain. e.g. neurodegenerative diseases. To me, in spiritual term, it means that the person did not love themselves to back off and to switch off, and marvel at the simplicity of science and what it brings and offer to the world.

 

If you lose morality, then you lose yourself, and you lose yourself off the grid of humanity. Knowledge is just written words with no meaning and people standing behind it otherwise.

 

With regards to Dr Emoto's research, he is trying to raise the awareness of molecular bonding, which in itself is quite exciting because he has managed to prove some first principles and expanded in that area. He is raising more awareness by demonstrating some simple principles, of which it worked. There is no doubt about that. I do not question his understanding of molecular chemistry, or physical chemistry, and nor do I question his understanding of it. From a humanity angle, he is also trying to raise awareness because he wants research to be done in this specific area which is actually quite forefront too. It means raising quality of life overall if the search can reach a very good level.

 

I just teased those of you who do not seem to support ethics but has a brilliant knowledge and mind that, without ethics, and without morality and goals towards preservation of humanity and humans, science is nothing.

 

Eh?

 

...................

[salsafan]

But at any one time, they either believe in or lack belief in god. They never both believe in and lack belief in god at the same time.

See it as a wave.

 

And that sometimes people are affected by what they see, hear, and experience in actual life even if they are a believer. These are the living facts or spiritualness as some people like to call it.

 

Some people quote from books and hold dearly what had been going on before, but others hold dearly what they experience now as facts and question things directly in front of them and not just from a book. It would be great and wonderful if both can exist in daily life. Of that absolute certainty and application.

 

---------- Post added 28-02-2014 at 16:33 ----------

 

I see you've dropped all pretence of wishing to debate, as per usual.

 

Let me, therefore, steer you back to the discussion.

 

**Dons smoking jacket**

 

The answer is, of course, that, once the temperature had fallen enough it condensed and fell to the ground as water. What do you think happened next?

 

Oh, and it's KS3, 4 & 5 science, by the way - not primary.

Ok, maybe this is knowledge bullying.

 

Was my answer not accepted Mr Lockjaw ? Am I going to get a F for my answer ?

[redwhine]

See it as a wave.

 

And that sometimes people are affected by what they see, hear, and experience in actual life even if they are a believer. These are the living facts or spiritualness as some people like to call it.

 

Some people quote from books and hold dearly what had been going on before, but others hold dearly what they experience now as facts and question things directly in front of them and not just from a book. It would be great and wonderful if both can exist in daily life. Of that absolute certainty and application.

I'm sorry, but I have absolutely no idea what that means, or how it is any kind of reply to my post which you quoted before it.