Al Klein wrote:
> On Wed, 01 Nov 2006 15:07:47 GMT, Meltdarok
aol.com> wrote:
> >> Al Klein wrote:
>
>
>>> No one claims that a picture is the actual land. Christians claim
>>> that God is an actual god.
>
>> Yes, that God may be "merely" an entity is a difficult concept for some
>> of them to accept.
>
> What's even more difficult for them to accept is that gods are merely
> ideas.
>
I notice that you have a deep seated need to keep referring to "gods" in
you arguments and have yet to allow the readers to consider that the
larger Cosmos may simply be a larger body.
>
>>>> Sorry, but your ignorance is showing here. Because of our freedom and
>>>> availability of this information leads 7you to believe that it was
>>>> always so. Well, these things were originally the secret knowledge of a
>>>> few extremely well educated elite men. Did I say well educated? Yes I
>>>> think I did.
>
>>> Educated as far as knowledge available 3,500 years ago. We've
>>> advanced a little since then. You haven't.
>
>> I haven't? That is laughable. You will have to specify exactly what you
>> mean by that for that statement to hold any weight at all.
>
> You still think that gods are more than the fantasies of children.
>
See? You *keep* saying "gods"!
The only thing that is quite clear here is an obvious fear you have.
>>>> Uh, the assertion that the Cosmos exists, and it gave you life and
>>>> consciousness needs evidence?
>
>>> Not that it exists, but that it "gave" anything, in the sense that you
>>> give a beggar money, yes.
>
>> How come?
>
> Because there's no directed design, whether you call the designer God,
> the cosmos or anything else.
And here is the crux of your argument.
The real truth is that YOU DON'T KNOW!
See? You don't really know, yet you continue to make your assertions as
if you had some authority any more than I do-- which you don't.
You can say that you would like more evidence, which is fine, but don't
try to tell me that you are doing anything more than speculation.
>
>>>> Oh yes, you mean that you *believe* that
>>>> your own consciousness originated from absolutely nothing but non-living
>>>> matter floating around in outer space--right?
>
>>> Not mine directly, but life? If you contend that there's a
>>> consciousness that created it, that assertion begs evidence.
>
>> That is rational to want harder evidence. But other than that, we are
>> all just speculating, and one should be able to admit that up
>> front--whatever the *belief* happens to be.
>
> My belief happens to be that I won't accept assertions without
> evidence. And that's not just speculation.
Your belief is speculation yes.
But don't try and act if I cannot ask the same thing of you.
Just how did your consciousness arise out of the "lifeless" matter that
is floating in outer space? You don't know. What is the root and ground
of your consciousness? How come it evolved on this planet? You don't
know these things, no one does. But we can speculate can't we?
>
>> My question is, "Could there be a
>> non-electromagnetic wavicle that can be emitted and detected by human
>> neurons?" Would such a thing be as easy to detect as say gravity waves?
>
> Sure, if neurons worked on anything other than electricity and
> chemistry. But we know that no one's pouring chemicals unto our
> neurons, so it would have to be electrical, and we can already detect
> signals weaker than those that could affect the brain. (There's a
> minimal threshold voltage needed for synaptic firing.)
>
"so it would have to be electrical"-- That statement is pure speculation
and you know it, don't you? You can only say what they have told you
that they have found out. You don't know if that's all that is going on
even if you were a bio-chemist. You can only say, "that is what we
assume so far is happening." Don't even try to pretend that there is more.
>> I also wonder about having ongoing monitoring equipment in the sleeping
>> quarters of the monastic devout.
>
> Tried and finished. We already know which part of the brain is
> involved in religious experience.
Uh, I'm not referring to the *people* here.
