Jealous of the Ned Flanders?

Grrrrr · 18 Sep 2008 at 23:51

p4radox said:
There's no way to scientifically establish the fact, no.

I don't agree with the Schroedinger analogy though. Are you suggesting there are an infinite number of parallel existences, each with or without a God?

Yes, yes i do! Not really, i subscribe to the exist in both forms simultaneously theory

But seriously though i didn't mean anything significant by it, just an interesting thought/interpretation

Greenlizard0 · 18 Sep 2008 at 23:52

Maybe you should concentrate on other things.

Tefal · 18 Sep 2008 at 23:52

I love these debates we're all do dim and too poor to ever prove one way or the other.

Nice reasoning excerpting though

p4radox · 18 Sep 2008 at 23:53

Gilly said:
Nice selective quoting.

Alright:

Snakedoctor said:
There is no god, at least no god which we know of and to blindly follow faith is a fools errand.

How can you claim there is no God, with a proviso that we might not know of one? Surely the clearer way to put that would be "we don't know if there's a God". In which case, saying there isn't one is a bit of a stab in the dark.

Greenlizard0 · 18 Sep 2008 at 23:53

Tefal said:
I love these debates we're all do dim and too poor to ever prove one way or the other.

Nice reasoning excerpting though

Wait are you drunk like me?

Gilly · 18 Sep 2008 at 23:55

p4radox said:
Alright:

How can you claim there is no God, with a proviso that we might not know of one? Surely the clearer way to put that would be "we don't know if there's a God". In which case, saying there isn't one is a bit of a stab in the dark.

Quite possibly because like me he believes that there is no god, but understands that this cannot be proven. At this juncture you would be arguing semantics, nothing more.

p4radox · 18 Sep 2008 at 23:56

Gilly said:
Schrodinger shows us only that the state of the cat is at once both alive and dead. Where does infinity and/or parallel universes come into it?

I follow the Everett's many-worlds interpretation, which is what best explains it for me.

edit:

Tefal said:
huh? Schroedinger's cat is just you can;t tell if it;s alive or dead, and so it is effectively both alive and dead at the same time.

what's that got to do with dimensions?

Or have I missed something?

Nothing to do with dimensions. See above.

Gilly · 18 Sep 2008 at 23:58

p4radox said:
I follow the Everett's many-worlds interpretation, which is what best explains it for me.

Whilst that is fine, and it has a weak link with Schrodinger's cat in that they are both interpretations of quantum mechanics, they really have nothing to do with one another.

Tefal · 19 Sep 2008 at 00:00

Greenlizard0 said:
Wait are you drunk like me?

Not drunk

but inebriated yes

Hence a lot of miss reading >.<

Grrrrr · 19 Sep 2008 at 00:00

Gilly said:
Whilst that is fine, and it has a weak link with Schrodinger's cat in that they are both interpretations of quantum mechanics, they really have nothing to do with one another.

I interpreted his comments as saying rather than the cat exists in all possible outcomes in the box in this universe, the cat exists in 1 way in this box in this universe and in every other possible way in an infitine number of other universes.

My brain

p4radox · 19 Sep 2008 at 00:01

Gilly said:
Whilst that is fine, and it has a weak link with Schrodinger's cat in that they are both interpretations of quantum mechanics, they really have nothing to do with one another.

It's a valid interpretation of the Schroedinger's cat thought experiment...

Besides, as Grrrr admitted, it was pretty much what he meant anyway.

Nitefly · 19 Sep 2008 at 00:01

Wouldn't it be weird if it turns out Frosted Nipple was god?

On topic - I feel happy for those that benefit from their faith. I only feel jealous when people go out of their way to help people through their faith. Charity work, or something similar.

Its like, shouldn't I be doing that regardless?

Greenlizard0 · 19 Sep 2008 at 00:01

Tefal said:
Not drunk

but inebriated yes

Hence a lot of miss reading >.<

Excellent. *HIGH FIVE!!!!*

p4radox · 19 Sep 2008 at 00:05

Nitefly said:
Its like, shouldn't I be doing that regardless?

The interesting thing is this:

Are you tempted by charity work:

A: to get the laydeeeees
B: to benefit civilisation as a whole, which would in some small way benefit you as en "end user" of it
C: because you were taught as a child to do charity work, and things you learned as a child still rule your life
D: you just feel like you should.

edit: yes, I believe FrostedNipple is God. There's no denying it.

Snakedoctor · 19 Sep 2008 at 00:06

p4radox said:
Alright:

How can you claim there is no God, with a proviso that we might not know of one? Surely the clearer way to put that would be "we don't know if there's a God". In which case, saying there isn't one is a bit of a stab in the dark.

There is no proof of a God or of Multiple Super beings which control the weather, the sea, the Sun so on. It is our primative thoughts trying to rationalise things which were beyond us. God is now used and created by people to control people, make them do things the way they want them done or risk the wrath. Basically, put up with crap all your life because in the afterlife you will be rewarded. No, I wont.

If there were a God there would be no Janet Street-Porter

p4radox · 19 Sep 2008 at 00:08

Snakedoctor said:
There is no proof of a God or of Multiple Super beings which control the weather, the sea, the Sun so on.

This isn't the point I was making. Of course there isn't

It is our primative thoughts trying to rationalise things which were beyond us. God is now used and created by people to control people, make them do things the way they want them done or risk the wrath.

Prove it.

If there were a God there would be no Janet Street-Porter

This has been the biggest challenge to my faith yet.

Nitefly · 19 Sep 2008 at 00:09

p4radox said:
The interesting thing is this:

Are you tempted by charity work:

A: to get the laydeeeees
B: to benefit civilisation as a whole, which would in some small way benefit you as en "end user" of it
C: because you were taught as a child to do charity work, and things you learned as a child still rule your life
D: you just feel like you should.

I can't think of any other reason than its just good to be nice. We should all go out of our way to do something kind with no wish of reward. Even when its giving up a seat for an old lady on a bus. It makes a big difference to your day when someone does something nice for you.

edit: yes, I believe FrostedNipple is God. There's no denying it.

Snakedoctor · 19 Sep 2008 at 00:13

I think you will find the large events of 11/9/2001 were carried out (if you believe the media) in the name of some God or another. Anyway, for me this is a discussion for another day.

Tefal · 19 Sep 2008 at 00:15

p4radox said:
The interesting thing is this:

Are you tempted by charity work:

A: to get the laydeeeees
B: to benefit civilisation as a whole, which would in some small way benefit you as en "end user" of it
C: because you were taught as a child to do charity work, and things you learned as a child still rule your life
D: you just feel like you should.

edit: yes, I believe FrostedNipple is God. There's no denying it.

The interesting thing is he doesn't do it though

While it would be "good" the gain isn't worth the effort.

Tefal · 19 Sep 2008 at 00:16

Snakedoctor said:
I think you will find the large events of 11/9/2001 were carried out (if you believe the media) in the name of some God or another. Anyway, for me this is a discussion for another day.

1: why even bring it up then?

2:

(if you believe the media)

oh dear...