• 12 936 online
  • 1 213 596 medlemmar
  • 62 603 629 inlägg
2019-01-09, 16:33
  #1
Medlem
jm2017s avatar
Hej, tänkte man i denna tråd kan posta och diskutera videor där folk går från total nykterhet gällande CBD ett långt tag, till att röka CBD och filmar effekten.

Börjar med denna vetenskapsvideo där Gud motbevisas vetenskapligt (först utan CBD och sedan med CBD). Vad tycker ni om de 2 olika (om samma sak) presentationerna?

https://youtu.be/IWAy1wGaT54
Citera
2019-01-09, 20:59
  #2
Medlem
Orkar inte kolla 12 min av en ful snubbe som snackar skit, vad är skillnaden menar du?
Citera
2019-01-09, 21:49
  #3
Medlem
jm2017s avatar
Citat:
Ursprungligen postat av kenozoikum
Orkar inte kolla 12 min av en ful snubbe som snackar skit, vad är skillnaden menar du?
Han är snygg och hans motbevis mot gud (vars stödord finns på höger sida av skärmen) är århundradets viktigaste upptäckt. Jag tycker han är mer avslappnad och mogen i andra halvan av videon alltså efter CBD. Men hans meddelande är värt att lära sig / memorera.
Citera
2019-01-09, 21:58
  #4
Medlem
Som-Gjutens avatar
Om stödorden finns med så kan du kopiera allt och posta det här så vi gamla dinosaurier kan läsa också!
Citera
2019-01-09, 22:03
  #5
Medlem
jm2017s avatar
Citat:
Ursprungligen postat av Som-Gjuten
Om stödorden finns med så kan du kopiera allt och posta det här så vi gamla dinosaurier kan läsa också!
"I disprove God's deeds. I have a scientific god/reality-concept which excludes the possibility of a personal (all-knowing, all-powerful etc (human attributes) God.



When one has a scientific reality-worldview its attributes (1, unseeable, infinite, cause for existence) overlaps with God's but is lifeless/non-personal." J.M.

In reality there are a plurality of things. This is an objective fact proven by the truism that a mountain's top exists even if nobody is watching it. The plurality of things is also proven by Descartes' cogito ergo sum, meaning that certain truth is that you think because if you were getting fooled that'd constitute a though-process, and if you were getting fooled you'd certainly exist. The thinker & thought's certain existence means that there are a plurality of things.


At the same time reality is one, it is singular if defined as "that of which all is part". If everything is part of it then it is one.


The plurality of things can be called distinction while it's opposite, that of which all is part being one, can be called anti-distinction. We never see everything as one, which is proved by everyday experience and that thinker & thought - the plurality - always is true.


Can anything represent anti-distinction? No, because even the word re-presents assumes a plurality of representer and representee. In other words: there is a deeper anti-idoletry law of nature than that representee is not representer (that the map is not the territory, the menu is not the meal). Nothing can be singular because if it was it would not be a representation because re-presentation is plurality/distinction.


Yet we - or without us - can let a symbol stand for everything. Reality being anti-distinction (partly and distinction partly) thus is bigger than everything we can represent. Not even an infinite map captures anti-distinction. Another way of making the same point is that in anti-distinction there is no distinct max- or min-sizeborder.


This means that Reality, which we know as a sizerange is infinitey large and infinitely small. There is no center size on the up and down axis. This plays well with the theory of relativity (which says that there’s no absolute center point in space – or every point is a center). Thinking of how sizes justify each other (the macro is the reason for the micro and vice versa) it begins to seem more and more obvious that existence - our everyday world and life - came to be not because "first there was the word and it was God" but rather because sizes justify one another ad infinitum.


The two points coming from distinction-anti-distinction-opposition to the sizerange - namely that there is no min- or maxsize and that even the biggest and most liberal view of representation doesn't let us capture anti-distinction - is an existential theory called "an infinite sizerange of something in nothing (as E=m is energymass and c^2 is a speed (which is distance over time ergo spacetime) in E=mc^2) and distinction-anti-distinction-opposition. An infinite sizerange of something in nothing and distinction-anti-distinction-opposition is a quote one should learn in school.


We've been talking about Reality (that of which all is part) being one, unthinkable (unrepresentable), the cause of existence and all-encompassing ("akbar"), which are all attributes that clash with God's. An infinite sizerange of everything in nothing and distinction-anti-distinction-opposition (the existential theory) does not intervene in day-to-day life, does not hear prayers, does not send prophets etc. It’s not a personal God.


Instead of a personal God (which is divided into 10 000 religions) we get universality - this truth told in this text is near identical on all infinitely many planets on which science is reached.


Atheists believe in Reality (as unrepresentable due to distinction-anti-distinction-opposition, infinite, one and it being the cause of existence). Atheists thus are right and there’s no need for additional religion, though all religions seem to have that which now has been scientifically proven as their foundation.


Since Reality's 4 attributes coincide with God's, it looks like ancient people were trying to make a mountain out of the molehill that is our science, to be able to claim to speak on behalf of Reality to dole out dogmas, rituals and mysticism.




"An infinite sizerange of energymasspacetime and distinction-anti-distinction-opposition"

are 3 ideas that are universal/scientific. It’s the existential theory /

the universal world-view.


God = Reality, because

1) it's one (singular)

2) it's infinite (all-powerful; everywhere)

3) It's the cause for existence

4) It can't be seen/represented (due to distinction-anti-distinction-opposition)
Citera