Thread: But It Defies The Laws Of Physics!

At the risk of further violating the "useless post" rule, I feel it's always proper to show respect to those that give it, so:

Thanks to both of ya!

Now I'll give it a rest until I find something else to contribute with, so we can get this thread back on track.

i have transcended that of the god head and am so far thus beyond around this being

my existence is amazing

i need no beliefs, for i am of them and they of me and i feel for you all, as for those of you spending time posting on this thread

at least you are trying

but perhaps thou should try and not let them hold you back no?

Originally posted by Gus
i have transcended that of the god head and am so far thus beyond around this being
my existence is amazing
i need no beliefs, for i am of them and they of me and i feel for you all, as for those of you spending time posting on this thread
at least you are trying
but perhaps thou should try and not let them hold you back no?

That makes little sense to me Gus. Could you elaborate so I can feel as liberated as you?
My existance is amazing as well. Thus I wonder!

I guess what Gus means is it (Alan Watts style).

alas i do not know

i mean simply this, i am
i wish i could point you further, but hell i dont care anymore

im havin fun though

Originally posted by Gus
i have transcended that of the god head and am so far thus beyond around this being

my existence is amazing

i need no beliefs, for i am of them and they of me and i feel for you all, as for those of you spending time posting on this thread

at least you are trying

but perhaps thou should try and not let them hold you back no?

Are you talking about Existentialism? or maybe the fact that anything is possible in your subjective viewpoint (but not objective)? or both?

Here is my interpretation of Gus' post: Our current understanding of God is terribly wrong. I am using the Catholic version, because that's what I was taught, and I feel the same way. It is filled with flaws, if we just throw it all away we will be much happier. I am with Gus on this one.

Religion seriously limits one's belief system, and Gus has conquered it. He is free from such thinking and able to enjoy life and death as they truly are, not how most believe. He says kudos to those searching for the truth instead of sticking to religion. He's inviting those stuck to religion to come see things from a new perspective. People will be much happier if they join him.

After a discussion with Oneironaut and the other mods, this is to be moved to Extended Discussion.
He also requested a sticky, which was voted against however.

I think the problem with people's ignorance when discussing the infallability of science of that they think laws are like the ten commandments , rules which may never be broken . The view one should have , IMO , is to keep and open mind about everything BUT dont let yourself get carried away with something you want to be true when in reality you yourself know there is little chance of it being true .

Even scientific theories should be questioned and not taken as gospel truth , as they are but an explaination or viewpoint of a human , no matter how well supported . If there is something you think may be so , and you start researching it , you may well be able to provide enough evidence for people to take your idea seriously , but always remember that that theory came from your brain , you searched for evidence that matched the findings , there may be more than one explaination which can return the same evidence but for a completely different reason . When man looks at the world around him , he only considers what he can see or sense , but there may be more there . Take radiation for example , noone can see it (not the visible spectrum i mean) yet its there and has always been and only through our understanding of the world and the way particle physics is thought to work could we unlock its potential .

I think what im trying to say is , as other people have said , science is progressive and must be for it to be the ultimate search for truth , because its only our percived truth . So we must always build upon what previous generations have taught and discovered , and when evidence is found to be in violation of those laws we have governed to be most likely truth we should go back to the beggining and take a better look with the new evidence and try to think of other explainations which seem to validate the evidence . But the new theories must be in agreement with all data . Thats one thing i dont like about modern day physics , when anomalous evidence is found , they alter the specific theory they are investigating instead of looking back and thinking , we need to look at this from another direction . Im not saying everyone does this , but when a theory is altered to fit evidence simply by adding a constant or some abstract value it just seems like a bandaid to fix the theory not a cure . But then , all a theory is is an explaination of data so to many it might not matter of the actual theory , only that it fits the data .

Well said, Darkmatic.

A pretty good report from the Boundary Institute:
http://www.boundaryinstitute.org/articles/rngma.pdf

[Edit: And another good one, dealing with time-reversed experiments:
http://www.boundaryinstitute.org/articles/...imereversed.pdf ]

More double-posting from the man that's made it an artform! (Sorry mods! At least I confine it to this thread! :sweat1: )

"Consciousness as a Sub-Quantum Phenomenon"
(I don't care who you are or what you believe, this is interesting stuff! )

http://www.cfpf.org.uk/articles/rdp/caasqp/caasqp.html

There's a book you might like--- How Quantum Physics Proves the Existence of a Soul.

Personally, the book started with a good idea and then threw it into the toilet, but it gets you thinking nevertheless. I'll try to find the author next time I'm at the library.

I'd appreciate that. If you find it, I'll definitely check it out.

Wonder if any of the skeptics want to try to debunk Bohm's "baseless" Implicate/Explicate Order theory?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Implicate_and...Explicate_Order

And as for the "Quack's" credentials?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Bohm

I found the whole McCarthyism thing interesting, not familiar with the term, before now. I think that mentality has actually evolved.



I heard about this a while ago. Wonder if there's anything to it:
http://www.nbc10.com/news/5455548/detail.html

"the more convinced you are that a certain point of view is right, the more determined you should be to find proofs that it is wrong" ~~ aleister crowley

Originally posted by dream yogi
"the more convinced you are that a certain point of view is right, the more determined you should be to find proofs that it is wrong" ~~ aleister crowley

I agree, wholeheartedly.
Though, that profound quote does work both ways, for closed-minded skeptics and closed-minded believers, alike. I'm not sure which side of the spectrum you were commenting to, if any. Was that addressed To Me, or simply for the sake of being said?

Pseudoskepticism and Scientific Suppression: Well-stated perspectives

http://amasci.com/weird/vindac.html
http://www.blavatskyarchives.com/possiblev...susprobable.htm
http://www.amasci.com/freenrg/arrhenus.html
http://www.anomalist.com/commentaries/claim.html
http://www.tcm.phy.cam.ac.uk/~bdj10/psi/do...sregoodtxt.html
http://www.alternativescience.com/scientif...-censorship.htm

More on our good friend Wiseman:
(Experimenter of the Psychic Dog Trial mentioned earlier.)
http://www.skepticalinvestigations.org/who...who/O'Neill.htm

And, as is only fair, Wiseman's rebuttal:
http://www.skepticalinvestigations.org/who...who/Wiseman.htm

More from where the last two links came from: (Haven't been through the whole site, yet.)
http://www.skepticalinvestigations.org/home.htm

Haven't had a chance to read these yet, either, just posting so I don't forget.
(May or may not remove depending on my impressions after reading.)
http://dharma-haven.org/science/dispelling...cal-science.htm
http://alex.edfac.usyd.edu.au/methods/scie...nce%20(McComas)

A little insight into the workings of the Parapsychological Association:
http://paranormal.se/topic/parapsychologic...ssociation.html

This proves whatever I believe

I am so right! LOOK AT MY REFRENCES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


www.thislookslikeitagreeswithme.com
www.ilook-likeiknoweverythingposting-this.com
www.hopefully-has-something-I-Agree.com
www.the-more-infothebetterI-look.com
http://www.I-maynot-agree-withthison...feellikeit.com.
www.lookhowprofessionalthisoneis.com
www.havenotreadthisbutheadinglookedgood.com
www.excellent-info-icouldnot-evenunderstand.com
www.something-icouldnotthinkup-butsoundsgod.com

SO> In conclusion.
True physics are not wrong.
but true physics are true

WONG PHYSICS ARE WRONG
and as a result wrong physics are not true

......I'm sorry but.....what the hell was the point of that?

Oneironaut . I wasn't having a go at you btw. not at all.

but I am having a go at people who use scientific knowledge to say stuff they do not even know what they are talking about.

just think about it and you'll know what I am talking about

He's just being Nirvana.

I was being humorous.

But there was a purpose to what I just said. If you look very closely or think (that can hurt sometimes if you dont do that alot) it is possible to find

Hehe @ ITM.

"Jenkins": I understand the Meaning behind what you posted, but there was no Point demonstrated. Only reason I bring it up is that posts like that are somewhat counter-productive to the whole concept of this thread. It is often speculated that there is no intelligent foundation for claiming anything that goes against scientific dogma. Unfortunately, it is posts like that that do nothing but fuel that side of the debate.
If you wanna contribute to the cause it's best to take the time to present something that is going to actually provoke thought and reflection, ya know? Just tryin' to keep the rhetoric to a minimum, from both sides.

Thankya.

Hehe @ ITM.[/b]

what is hehe? I love humour. I wish I got this joke.you didnt get mine by the looks

"Jenkins": I understand the Meaning behind what you posted, but there was no Point demonstrated.[/b]

Only reason I bring it up is that posts like that are somewhat counter-productive to the whole concept of this thread.[/b]

you mean counter-fun

It is often speculated that there is no intelligent foundation for claiming anything that goes against scientific dogma. Unfortunately, it is posts like that that do nothing but fuel that side of the debate.[/b]

i didn't know there was a debate that has being fueled by my joke sorry.

If you wanna contribute to the cause it's best to take the time to present something that is going to actually provoke thought and reflection, ya know?Just tryin' to keep the rhetoric to a minimum, from both sides.[/b]

thank you for being so civil about it. it's quite diplomatic of you.

Good job

The debate is the universal debate on whether or not it's right to bash and demean the intelligence of people that advocate paranormal possibility. I'm sure you're already aware of it, as you've come in with your opinion on it. My point is that I'm just tired of seeing this type of an issue fall into empty rhetoric, as it often does. I give 'skeptics' a hard time when they try to state their case with empty rhetoric and do the same for 'believers,' equally.
Even though I think that those that believe in paranormal Possibility have more of a case than people that say it 'just plain doesn't exist,' I take seriously that people should state their cases with some conviction and thought. Doing anything less, from either side, 'counter-fun' though it may be, does nothing but make your perspective on the issue much more difficult to take seriously. That's all.

And I'm assuming you were being genuine at the end, so Thanks.