Quote (Snyft2 @ Dec 9 2022 05:58am)

okay so first of all, the reason i mentioned the term "personal god" is because unlike simulation theory, that can actually be tested. actually theres already a lot of evidence that quantum realm can be influenced by thought alone (check some work on dean radin), and although it doesnt imply a personal god, it favors it. but you can test if theres a personal god by for example making statistical research on prayer, because thats as personal as it gets. although you have to do it yourself or rely on anecdotal evidence, because you wont get any funds because theres an agenda against religion, as religion is what keeps families and societies together and atheism is what collapses them. either way, you can test if theres a personal god to some extent. also i dont think it matters if you, how to put it, "pray to the wrong one". but you wouldnt understand that :(

also, dont get this as an insult, but hearing "Either way its faith and its not based on REALITY" from someone who believes that simulation theory is anything more than intellectual masturbation, is kinda fucked up :mellow:

as for the scientists saying "we dont know yet" etc and religious people being completely opposite...well now thats not really the case at all :unsure: the reality is this: we all have things we believe in, we are biased towards them, and will react badly and deny it to an extent if we are proven otherwise. and our beliefs are based on our way of thinking, no matter scientists or not. for example einstein needed YEARS to accept quantum theory despite the proof. you know why? because it was counterintuitive to him (which to be fair, it is), because it went against his beliefs. he wanted a world where there was order that everything was supposed to follow and he just couldnt take it :wacko: one of the smartest people in history, succumbed to beliefs. so if the FUCKING EINSTEIN needed 20 years to let go of his belief even despite the shitload of evidence he was introduced with, can you really blame the average joe for believing in god when HE is the one who has more evidence than you do against it? basically we are all biased towards our beliefs, to change someones belief you need a lot of evidence, and you dont have it. so dont put your scientists on a pedestal, they are prone to biases as everyone else. they are just louder with expressing them :wacko: scientists are way worse than religious people because they try to sell themselves as unbiased, and then sell you their bias. someone saying he has no bias is a sure sign of midwit, and i advise ignoring those people in a veeery wide circle :wacko:

as for my religion! im a christian :blush: yes i was born into it ofc, and yes i would probably be another religion if i was born into that one (well except islam probably because that one is just idiotic). but i like christianity :blush: buddism is also nice i think. doesnt really matter which religion you are, but its good to have some religion, otherwise you are heading into inevitable collapse. and i mean personal, familial, and societal collapse. and its not a big secret even, every anthropologist knows it. thats why its being pushed actually

Quote (FantasyWorldII @ Dec 8 2022 07:44pm)

How about other ideas/religions? There are 4000+ of them :)
I hope you pray to all of them just in case! Either way its faith and its not based on "REALITY". Have fun with your personal god.

What annoys me is that scientists always say "we dont know yet" or "we only have theories" while religious people act like they have proof of what they blabber about.

In a science nothing is sure until it has been proven numerous times without failing a single time and even then they still call it a theory (example gravity... even now it is considered a theory and not fact). Religion is simple faith without any connection to reality and yet it appears to be set in stone with you people.

So tell me... What religion do you follow and why? I guess because you were born into it?

Quote (Meanwhile @ Dec 9 2022 06:52pm)

Sounds like D2JSP PARD psychatric hospital opened up a new wing in the " Science, Technology & Nature" departement.... ^_^

Quote (Meanwhile @ Dec 9 2022 09:52am)

Sounds like D2JSP PARD psychatric hospital opened up a new wing in the " Science, Technology & Nature" departement.... ^_^

Quote (Snyft2 @ 9 Dec 2022 20:46)

i cant post in pard with 10% warn so can you really blame me :cry:

Quote (TiStuff @ 9 Dec 2022 21:09)

some credibility to that statement with u being here

Quote (Meanwhile @ Dec 9 2022 09:51pm)

Not you ! :)



:drool:

Quote (Snyft2 @ 9 Dec 2022 22:06)

also i see ur not playing poe :angry:

shit league?

Quote (Snyft2 @ 10 Dec 2022 00:58)

okay so first of all, the reason i mentioned the term "personal god" is because unlike simulation theory, that can actually be tested. actually theres already a lot of evidence that quantum realm can be influenced by thought alone (check some work on dean radin), and although it doesnt imply a personal god, it favors it. but you can test if theres a personal god by for example making statistical research on prayer, because thats as personal as it gets. although you have to do it yourself or rely on anecdotal evidence, because you wont get any funds because theres an agenda against religion, as religion is what keeps families and societies together and atheism is what collapses them. either way, you can test if theres a personal god to some extent. also i dont think it matters if you, how to put it, "pray to the wrong one". but you wouldnt understand that :(

also, dont get this as an insult, but hearing "Either way its faith and its not based on REALITY" from someone who believes that simulation theory is anything more than intellectual masturbation, is kinda fucked up :mellow:

as for the scientists saying "we dont know yet" etc and religious people being completely opposite...well now thats not really the case at all :unsure: the reality is this: we all have things we believe in, we are biased towards them, and will react badly and deny it to an extent if we are proven otherwise. and our beliefs are based on our way of thinking, no matter scientists or not. for example einstein needed YEARS to accept quantum theory despite the proof. you know why? because it was counterintuitive to him (which to be fair, it is), because it went against his beliefs. he wanted a world where there was order that everything was supposed to follow and he just couldnt take it :wacko: one of the smartest people in history, succumbed to beliefs. so if the FUCKING EINSTEIN needed 20 years to let go of his belief even despite the shitload of evidence he was introduced with, can you really blame the average joe for believing in god when HE is the one who has more evidence than you do against it? basically we are all biased towards our beliefs, to change someones belief you need a lot of evidence, and you dont have it. so dont put your scientists on a pedestal, they are prone to biases as everyone else. they are just louder with expressing them :wacko: scientists are way worse than religious people because they try to sell themselves as unbiased, and then sell you their bias. someone saying he has no bias is a sure sign of midwit, and i advise ignoring those people in a veeery wide circle :wacko:

as for my religion! im a christian :blush: yes i was born into it ofc, and yes i would probably be another religion if i was born into that one (well except islam probably because that one is just idiotic). but i like christianity :blush: buddism is also nice i think. doesnt really matter which religion you are, but its good to have some religion, otherwise you are heading into inevitable collapse. and i mean personal, familial, and societal collapse. and its not a big secret even, every anthropologist knows it. thats why its being pushed actually

Quote (FantasyWorldII @ Dec 10 2022 12:37am)

I gave you a random example (simulation theory) implying possibilities are endless if we ignore the need of proof. I never said i believe this is the correct theory. You dont read... you just assume.

Oh please tell me how i can confirm the existence of god so i can be religious too. Or even a personal god... how can i test it? You say it can be tested.

You wrote so much bullshit that i dont have the time to unpack all that rubbish.

Sorry :blush:

So personal god... how can it be tested? You said it could be!

Quote (Snyft2 @ 10 Dec 2022 12:19)

well you did mention it as a theory, which is why i assumed you thought it was a working theory :unsure: sorry about that, my bad :wacko:

as for the other things, yeah it can kinda be tested :blush: ! im not gonna bother much explaining everything to you because you do seem a bit...disagreeable with the entire idea, but i can try to tell you what i think ur doing wrong and what has/can be tested :unsure: !

so what you are doing wrong: you think atheism is more logical. its not. the reason atheism superficially sounds like a reasonable theory is because the idea of a god sounds counterintuitive to many people. and i mean it really does! on the other hand, no god does sound way more intuitive. but you see, in science you cant just say a theory is shit, you need to give a better one. you cant just say "god doesnt exist" and leave the room, oh noo. due to the fine tuning argument you need to actually give a working theory that competes, and the only working one is multiverse theory. now that one doesnt sound intuitive at all, and you as an atheist believe in it with zero proof. multiverse theory is your religion one might say!

about the evidence we have so far: multiple universe theory has no evidence. and no, schrodingers cat is no evidence. if someone tells you schodingers cat is proof of multiverse theory, what you should do is tell him to stop watching kurzgesagt/arvin ash/whatever bullshit, bill gates funded, pseudoscience youtube channel hes watching and lower the soy intake :mellow: also its not a "prediction of inflation theory", ive heard that one as well. on the other hand, creator theory has some evidence. nde appearance is highly statistically relevant evidence, although anecdotal one. there is really no evolutionary explanation for it, and if you want, i can explain why in detail. the only possibility is that everyone with ndes lied, as there are lies that "chain" so to say. still, its some evidence. other evidence is that thought can affect quantum interactions, as you can see in the works of dean radin and a few others. again, if needed, i can explain why his data is scientifically extremely valuable and unlikely to be fake. also its falsifiable so theres that

as for the testing you can do yourself, prayer is a testable thing, although that one you have to do yourself. "science" has a hard agenda against religion (for which, again, i can explain the reasons behind if needed), so peer reviewed studies are useless. but its easy to test and i encourage you to try it :blush: