Oh sure, the old quantum foam gambit, is it? Until I decode the rest
of your message, I will simply agree, out of hand. But I still think
we're part of a massive ejaculation. Just think of the shock of all
the little old prudes when they find out that we are nothing more than
a virus living on flecks of sperm.
But I remain open to your scientific gobbledegook.
Carl Jarvis
On 7/22/15, R. E. Driscoll Sr <llocsirdsr@xxxxxxx> wrote:
As I have said - many times - "One of two things will happen. It will
either be a success or it will be a failure."
On 7/21/2015 8:54 PM, Roger Loran Bailey (Redacted sender
rogerbailey81@xxxxxxx for DMARC) wrote:
Carl, if you pay attention to research being done in cutting edge
physics and cosmogeny you will see that the very question of where the
universe came from is being worked on. The current thinking is that it
may have been a part of the quantum foam that is made up of quantum
fluctuations in the vacuum, that is, in nothingness, and one of those
fluctuations kind of ran away with itself. But, of course, you then
get the question of why is there a quantum foam. With every single
question, without exception, that is answered you get two things, new
questions and a complete failure for any question to be answered with
a supernatural explanation. The problem with superstitious thinking is
that the superstitious thinker cannot stand to admit ignorance.
Whether it is a bump in the night or the existence of the entire
universe whenever the answer to a question is we don't know the
superstitious thinker always interjects, aha! then you admit that it
must be supernatural. No, saying I don't know is not an admission of
the supernatural. It is only an admission of ignorance. It is
extremely interesting to keep abreast of this scientific research
being done on the origin of the universe, on trying to learn why there
is something rather than nothing, but I suspect that ultimately the
final answer will never be found, only many, many answered questions
that will spawn many new questions. Just remember, with all these
answered questions and newly spawned questions not even one answer has
ever been a supernatural answer, not one.
On 7/21/2015 1:15 AM, Carl Jarvis wrote:
Far be it for me to try putting thoughts in Nietzsche's mind. This
was a man who could talk circles around me with his tongue tied behind
his ear. To my humble, straight forward thinking, we have here two
different questions. First, do I, as an avowed Agnostic, have any
vague feelings that there just could be a God Guy?
And as I have said before, the answer is, Yes! I can prove that God
exists in the Holy Books written by Men, and in their mouths. But I
see no proof of any of their Gods hanging around Planet Earth.
The second question is, given my lack of belief in Man's Created Gods,
Who or What did bring this vast splattering of stars and planets into
being?
Are we the bright fire given off from some mammoth child's sparkler,
or are we looking out at the super sperm rushing wildly from the
groins of some vast giant of a monster, rushing to impregnate his
equally humongous partner?
In Man's current inability to understand such an unfathomable
question, the answer is a loud and clear, "I don't know".
This universe came from somewhere, and it is most definitely going
somewhere. And it's going there very fast. But it's not going to get
there anytime soon, and most likely not during the existence of Man.
Science has picked around the edges, despite all sorts of roadblocks
thrown down by religions, national interests, and milling millions of
people who want very much to promote their own beliefs in order to
comfort themselves and hold for themselves the belief in eternal life
of some sort or another.
While I know that there is a great deal of stuff going on all around
us, stuff our humble senses are unable to detect, I have no inkling of
an idea as to where notions of Eternal ife came from. Except as a
defense by Man, against the knowledge of his own mortality.
All of the proof I see tells me that I am living my one life. I need
to do those things I believe are important, because I have no proof
that there is any other existence beyond this one.
Carl Jarvis
On 7/20/15, Alice Dampman Humel <alicedh@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
So by this definition, Nietsche was to an atheist, because he
claimed that
God was dead, not that he didn’t exist in the first
place…interesting...
On Jul 20, 2015, at 12:57 PM, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
from Google
Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a
lack of
belief in gods. Older dictionaries define atheism as "a belief that
there
is
no God."
Atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the
existence of
deities.[1][2] In a narrower sense, atheism is specifically the
position
that there are no deities.inclusively, atheism is the absence of
belief
that
any deities exist.[
It seems to me that this describes your belief. That is why I say
that
you
are not an agnostic.
Miriam
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com
