It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Explain How and Why the Universe Exists

page: 5
6
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 6 2019 @ 09:46 AM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake

According to what and who
Sunday school?




posted on Oct, 6 2019 @ 09:49 AM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake
The joke is that there is a belief there that you did something....
No one ever did anything.
There is nothing separately doing anything.

What is happening is what there is.....



posted on Oct, 6 2019 @ 09:50 AM
link   
a reply to: Raggedyman

Nope, according to common sense nevermind physics.

Then again the Bible did not cover much to do with physics.

Neither did Sunday school for that matter.



posted on Oct, 6 2019 @ 09:54 AM
link   
a reply to: Itisnowagain

I think i know where the joke lies mate and its not im my belief system.

Anyhoo, how can there even be a joke if everything is one and nothing is separate?

Wheres the humor there?

Something is always happening Itisnowagain cause and effect being the colour of our day, at least at our maco scale.

edit on 6-10-2019 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 6 2019 @ 09:56 AM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake
No thing is appearing to happen.
Emptiness is forming.



posted on Oct, 6 2019 @ 09:58 AM
link   
a reply to: Itisnowagain




Not sure what the first sentence means.... should it have began with 'we'? Or was that a mis-spell?


To quote you "just words on a screen, what does it matter"

or your other nonsense " who is doing the seeing"

The only way you can logically interact with ATS under your "system" is to remain silent.



posted on Oct, 6 2019 @ 09:59 AM
link   
a reply to: Itisnowagain

Aye guaranteed at the bottom of the pint im off to find.


Have a good Sunday Itisnowagain.

Canny goes wrong with that advice, appearances or otherwise.



posted on Oct, 6 2019 @ 10:01 AM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake

All you do is stagger
www.rebelscience.org...
In ignorance

But that wasn’t an answer to my direct question, you deflected, good idea

Let’s return to my earlier question please andy
You keep commenting on the bible like you understand it
You ad admit youndont, why?



posted on Oct, 6 2019 @ 10:01 AM
link   
a reply to: tgidkp



there is no doubt that you have answered the OP's questions.... i am hoping that your answers are deceptively simple, rather than merely simple or outright empty. i say this because as i look over your writings (at the links provided), i feel i have come away with nothing.


I understand your initial reaction to my description of what's a very simple and extremely primitive default ramification event, and as I admitted in that section of my book, I had the same initial take on it. Like most people, I've been culturally programmed to seek a much more significant, perhaps even majestic, description of any event that launches such a profound ramification structure. The event that I describe in that excerpt certainly doesn't rise to a level that our culture could ever embrace as being either significant or majestic in nature. It sure doesn't feature a cataclysmic explosion of a micro-dot containing literally every material thing that our universe consists of within itself.

That said, if what we're looking at is the potential-to-actual initiating genesis of physical reality [and not just our one universe as the physical/contextual confine that it is] once we start really examining the very concrete factor confluence requirements of such a change/event [no material structure or physically actual actors, agencies, or participants can possibly be involved] and toss in the very real requirement that whatever it was that happened, it must still be something that persists as integral to the ongoing progressive development of all that physically exists [system coherence demands the ongoing presence of that same potential-to-actual process of physical emergence] as well as the logical requirement that actuality be limited to the Relative Being State [physical existence is defined as the existent IT “standing out” from that which isn’t IT], we find ourselves increasingly restricted to a very small arrangement of plausible explanations.

I know that our society’s ruling scientific paradigm flatly rejects the actuality of non-material physical reality, and that my own belief in the necessary existence of information as a true [if not material] physical substrate certainly violates that specific tenet. That said, if material structure is only relative densities of ongoing entangled spatial change [which is what's been universally embraced as a true and proven definition of matter and material structure] then the property set and nature of the substrate that allows/requires that spatial change entanglement has yet to be defined by anyone. I accept that the label I chose to use as reference to the component nature of that physical substrate [Residual Fact Sets] might be a point of controversy, but my description of the extremely simple and primitive requirements inherent with any change/event that could've launched the first ever emergence of physical actuality can only be controversial if it challenges ones personally held view of how reality's emergence should have occurred.

I'm not troubled by the fact that you didn't find that description compelling. Believe me when I confess that all I've encountered since publishing [in Sept 2015] has been blank looks and a few yawns here and there. Yes, my little ToE doesn't reveal anything magnificent or miraculous, but then my own realization has been that physical reality is not mysterious, bizarre, or "weirder that we can ever imagine". Still, it makes perfect sense with all that’s been proven to be true; all the magic having been stripped away from how that genesis instant has been defined by our many human cultures. Physical reality is not miraculous. It's not impossible to know. And the whole of physical reality certainly isn't limited to the ramification structure that is thermodynamics. The whole of physical reality is pretty damn simple, even if the structural complexity of necessary ramification can appear to be overwhelming when examined.

It's a hard question. I don't expect a simple, primitive answer to be readily embraced and I’m okay with that.



posted on Oct, 6 2019 @ 10:03 AM
link   
a reply to: Raggedyman

You abuse other posters with your language, why am i not surprised you failed to understand my post.

Its not all about your JC God construct.

Funny thing is you've done exactly the same thing here as you accuse others of when you wade in evolution threads. Hypocrite much?



posted on Oct, 6 2019 @ 10:03 AM
link   
Many very smart people believe that we are living in a simulation.



posted on Oct, 6 2019 @ 10:07 AM
link   
a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight
Words and writing appear to happen..... doesn't mean there is a separate thing doing them.

Nothing matters.... no matter how that is interpretated.

Nothing is appearing..... and there is no one it could matter to.


edit on 6-10-2019 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 6 2019 @ 10:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight
a reply to: Raggedyman


You abuse other posters with your language, why am i not surprised you failed to understand my post.

Its not all about your JC God construct.

Funny thing is you've done exactly the same thing here as you accuse others of when you wade in evolution threads. Hypocrite much?



I didn’t reply to your post, didn’t see it and wasn’t relevant to me.
Nothing related to you, nothing of interest to me

Ok, but I am not pretending to be mr altruism
Dont deny anything
And I thought it was the atheist fundamentalist who waded into creation threads with their atheist, Stalin, Mao construct
If you don’t want the argument, step out

I figured when I commented it was with people who were prepared to give and take, not cry foul and moan, I don’t
Hypocrite, much?


edit on 6-10-2019 by Raggedyman because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 6 2019 @ 10:27 AM
link   
a reply to: Raggedyman

Hey you're the one who keeps attacking - you're lack of understanding doesn't excuse your poor form

I'll give you an example.
www.abovetopsecret.com...


And they have gill slits as well... Lizard hands, what next? It was a chicken like in an egg as evidence it was a bird once



posted on Oct, 6 2019 @ 10:29 AM
link   
a reply to: Itisnowagain

Silence is your best answer




posted on Oct, 6 2019 @ 10:31 AM
link   
a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight
That's just an opinion happening.

Have you anything other than attacks??


Lack of understanding does not excuse poor form.
edit on 6-10-2019 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 6 2019 @ 10:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: AyinSof

No I havnt because it’s not Christianity, it’s stupid
God is neither male or female

God identifies as male because culture back when the bible was written was male dominated
In many parts of the bible God identifies in the feminine

claudemariottini.com...

I don’t hug trees




And trinity makes sense somehow?



posted on Oct, 6 2019 @ 10:34 AM
link   
a reply to: AyinSof
The seer the seen and seeing..... 3 in 1.



posted on Oct, 6 2019 @ 10:39 AM
link   
a reply to: Itisnowagain

Saying "silence is your best answer" is not an attack but the logical escape from your conundrum.



posted on Oct, 6 2019 @ 10:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: AyinSof

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: AyinSof

No I havnt because it’s not Christianity, it’s stupid
God is neither male or female

God identifies as male because culture back when the bible was written was male dominated
In many parts of the bible God identifies in the feminine

claudemariottini.com...

I don’t hug trees




And trinity makes sense somehow?



What, the Quadricity you mentioned does?
You are just playing games



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join