That's precisely correct. Human beings, by nature, are generally fascinated with the unknown and the imagination. This is something new that people never really took the time to think through since it's practically ingrained into the human psyche.
I grew up practicing magic, watching it work. Because by nature I am a logical person and a bit of a tinkerer, I need to understand the process for me to succeed at anything. So I made it my business to understand as much as I was able to grasp about the methods at work, and surprise! I found I was dealing with quantum physics. Now, when science makes some "new" discovery, they may express it in more technical jargon than I can, but I find myself giggling and saying "Yeah, I could have told you that."
Hehehe, indeed. I've rejected spirituality altogether though since my high school years and now I'm more inclined to just simply see things as it is. Radical realist is probably a term to define me here.
To me, magic and spirituality are entirely separate things, sort of like cooking and bicycle riding. Magic is a science, it's just a science for which we don't yet have the proper vocabulary, and as a result, over which our control is limited. (Our control is also limited because energy is very dicey stuff to play around with by its very nature) Spirituality is my connection with nature, for me...the way I feel about the mountains, about trees, about other people and animals. Magic is a tool I use to try and guide the odds in my favor in given circumstances.
Your using current knowledge to support the notion that things existed before hindsight being 20/20 and all. 2000 years ago there was NO INSTRUMENTATION to prove that radio waves existed no method to gather data and test it. All I'm saying is its incredibly premature not to mention flat out false to definitely say whether or not there is in fact a God. Maybe we don't understand the nature of God the way humans didn't understand and still don't completely understand the nature of this planet thousands of years ago. Theories change from time to time and one thing that gives my ideas credibility at least to men is that far greater scientific minds than those in this thread combined believed in deity critical think world reknowned minds believe in the existence of a deity. How involved that deity is or has been is a totally different conversation. Fundamentally my argument still holds true. You don't have to be aware nor acknowledge the existence of something in order for it to exist at all.
You're missing the point over and over and over again. For some reason you're not GETTING the prime message here since you're a little slow in understanding the problem with your argument. You're comparing God to radiowaves. God is merely an instrument of the human mind. Radiowaves were something tangible but still based on speculation. There's a big difference between the two and it's clearly evident because we actually have more knowledge about it through the information provided by scholars. There's no science in God, nor it can be held as an empirically proven idea. The day that argument could be presented would be the day that the concept of spirituality as a whole could be expressed in a different form of science which specializes in the supernatural. But as it stands now, you're clearly creating a junk argument that does little for you.
I would think, if there was a god, and s/he/it/they really were omnipotent and omniscient, humans probably would not be capable of grasping s/he/it/their nature.
That, my friend, the bolded part? It's a belief, not a fact. You have no idea whether deity is an instrument of the human mind. For that matter, we know nothing of the human mind, and damned little about the human brain (trust me on that, I have MS - and through that found out just how little we know). We cannot empirically prove anything about deity, or anything about there not being deity. All we can say with assurance is that as of today, we have no specifically scientific proof of deity.
This does bring back my original thought that humans are fascinated with magic and mysticism because we like things or perceive things to be of a greater conscience that cannot be expressed completely. Magic at one point was called Alchemy if I'm not mistaken. But now, we can call magic a lot of things, including physics, chemistry, and other forms. That's how I see it.
Well since you want to call people slow dip shit check this out. Hope you can keep up. Btw this guy has one of the highest IQs recorded in history. Look him up. http://www.ctmu.org/ Radiowaves were not speculation 2000 years ago you fricking liar. Fine since I have to make in clearer for you 5000 years ago when were coming up with a written language the concept wasn't a thought in anyone's head. The point is it still existed regardless just like the cosmology of God/creator might not be understandable to us yet. Is it really that hard to grasp. You're smarter than this act like it.
It's true that we know little of the human mind or perhaps we know some, but not all. But one thing the general populace often overlook is the fact that we're all capable of creating and concocting ideas based on the very thing we are fascinated in: the unknown. I'm hardcore down the line and I find human beings to be a fascinating bunch. We all want to believe in something, despite reality projecting something else entirely. Your World vs. The Reality.
Apparently he doesn't grasp the idea of the evolution of information. Today's knowledge is not gospel. That is the one thing I can't stand about a lot of atheists is how incredibly closed mined they are. They have all the answers because what is proven today is what shall be truth for the rest of existence. Sheesh
Alchemy was specifically the search for the ability to transmute base metals into gold. The secret to alchemy is that this is a METAPHOR and not an actual thing to do. Magic and mysticism, again, not the same thing. You're confusing them because you are used to seeing the two conflated, and in seeing magic as an expression of faith. I'm telling you it's cold, hard science. It's got nothing to do with any kind of mumbo-jumbo or deities or religion or mysticism. It's about as supernatural as baking a cake.
A person's intelligence quotient is irrelevant when discussing certain things. Einstein wasn't the smartest cookie and yet he's a revered mathematician, although his wife was the one who really pulled him from his disarray. And calling me dip shit only demonstrate how illogical you are trying to mesh nonsense. And since you want to be cute in infer that I stated that radiowaves occurred 2000 years ago, may I remind your crazy ass that YOU made that error and since you brought that up, and I felt confidently that you knew what you were talking about, I decided to go along with YOUR WORDS. The only simpleton here is you if you're trying to twist this error of yours on me. That's dishonest and utterly sickening. God is a label and you're proving that to me.
No, we don't all want to believe in something. Some of us actually don't have a fear of death either, and consider if the end of life is it, wink out, no further consciousness, no existence, nothingness...that would be cool as all get out. You're inferring things which are not being implied.
That's the problem I have with most religionists as well. Think about your own life...what you know now is vastly different from what you "knew" at 15. And probably when I'm 80, I'll look back to now and laugh at how little I knew at 52. Nothing is closed. Hell, one of the most fascinating things that has come out of the more recent leaps in science is the discovery that observing an experiment CHANGES it. Consider everything we know "scientifically" in light of that concept. Fascinating stuff.
I do believe in my old post that I did reference that magic nowadays is called by various names. Namely physics and other bits of science enacted.
Einstein had a recorded IQ of 160 Newton 195. I think there's something to it. You implied the idea of radiowaves were speculation 2000 years ago when there's no recorded history of it ever being spoken about and yet IT STILL EXISTED. Of course God is a label just like the word atom or science. What's your point? The idea of God as I've said over and over is the concept of a creator/creators that made the cosmos. That's it nothing more nothing less.
Einstein was only 160? Seriously?? Thats only 10 points higher than my IQ and I don't consider myself anywhere near his level of intelligence.
We don't necessarily have to act on it the way you're probably assuming. Rather, it's more of an unconscious thought.
