FLRW

Now do you believe my theory on brain lesions?

I think you are right. I just asked God that if he was real to give me a sign. Then I just heard on TV that Rush Limbaugh died.

There Is A God!

The end goal of all such projects is the same: To apply the principles of the human brain to computing, so that machines can work faster, use less power, and develop the ability to learn. Diesmann hopes that with the advent of exascale computing—processing power 1,000 times greater than currently exists—within the next decade, we might be able to better understand how the brain works. IBM is hoping that its new form of chip will help it to “build a neurosynaptic chip system with 10 billion neurons and 100 trillion synapses, all while consuming only one kilowatt of power and occupying less than two liters of volume.” But a fully working simulation of the brain, Diesmann thinks, is still a decade or two away.

I pray you find Humanism.

Death is required for one reason and that is evolution.

We can all think of many, many cases where two negatives don’t make a positive. Rain on your wedding day plus grand larceny on your wedding day does not make for a winning combination, despite what “two negatives make a positive” would suggest. I can see why you believe in God.

Well stated, there are plenty of self-help books available to point you in the right direction.

Well stated.

You aren't Dr. Rick  from Progressive Insurance are you?

I base my figures on the fact  the simplest theorized self-replicating peptide is only 32 amino acids long. The probability of it forming randomly, in sequential trials, is approximately 1 in 10^40.

OMG, you need to talk to ebuc.

To date, no quantum mechanical or other explanation has gained widespread acceptance in the scientific community. We are dealing with a time travel paradox that illustrates reverse causality (i.e., effect precedes cause), where the effect of measuring a photon affects its past behavior. This simple high-school-level experiment continues to baffle modern science. Although quantum physicists explain it as wavefunction collapse, the explanation tends not to satisfy many in the scientific community. Irrefutably, the delayed-choice experiments suggest the arrow of time is reversible and the future can influence the past.

Humans couldn’t evolve until fish evolved bones that let them crawl onto land. Bones couldn’t evolve until complex animals appeared. Complex animals needed complex cells, and complex cells needed oxygen, made by photosynthesis. None of this happens without the evolution of life, a singular event among singular events. All organisms come from a single ancestor; as far as we can tell, life only happened once.
Curiously, all this takes a surprisingly long time. Photosynthesis evolved 1.5 billion years after the Earth’s formation, complex cells after 2.7 billion years, complex animals after 4 billion years, and human intelligence 4.5 billion years after the Earth formed. That these innovations are so useful but took so long to evolve implies that they’re exceedingly improbable.

Maybe this simulation was developed by 10,000 technicians that sell tickets to ride in the minds of rich stupid people like Donald Trump and Jeffery Epstein.

Why are there 300 sextillion stars. Was it design or chance that one planet of these stars would evolve life?

I say it was chance, and because of that there is no other human life in the Universe other than that on Earth.

The first part of the book addresses the relationship between God and the universe. Spinoza was engaging with a Tradition that held: God exists outside of the universe; God created the universe for a reason; and God could have created a different universe according to his will. Spinoza denies each point. According to Spinoza, God is the natural world. Spinoza concludes the following: God is the substance comprising the universe, with God existing in itself, not somehow outside of the universe; and the universe exists as it does from necessity, not because of a divine theological reason or will.

Let's face it: the Old Testament God was a deity who really needed to rip the amphetamine drip out of his celestial arm. Although the New Testament gave us a kinder, gentler God with a bellyful of butterflies who only wants humanity to surround him in one big group hug, the Old Testament God comes across as a guy who'd sooner kill you than look at you. In his capacity for inflicting cataclysmic acts of murderous violence upon the soft, helpless animals in his charge, the Old Testament God is best compared to a pre-pubescent psychopath with an ant farm.

Tou·ché

Remember that  the Bible is a collection of venerable but still rather primitive legends.

I can't figure out if you are a  Substantivalist or a Relationalist.

Substantivalists believe that spacetime and its parts are fundamental constituents of reality. Relationalists deny this.

ebuc, I would say that you are a Relationalist and that zedvictor4, 3RU7AL and myself are Substantivalists.  Substantivalists believe that spacetime and its parts are fundamental constituents of reality. Relationalists deny this, claiming that spacetime enjoys only a derivative existence.

Please read, Pooley, Oliver (2012) Substantivalist and Relationalist Approaches to Spacetime.

He states: I move on to consider and reject two recent antisubstantivalist lines of thought. The interim conclusion is that the best argument for relationalism is an appeal to Ockham's razor. However, for this to be successful there must be genuine relationalist theories that share the theoretical virtues of their substantivalist rivals but without the additional ontological commitment. The bulk of the paper is therefore an investigation of various concrete relationalist proposals. I distinguish three options for the relationalist in the face of the success of Galilean invariant physics and trace how these generalise to relativistic physics. One of the options (Barbour's Machian approach to dynamics) is particularly promising but, since its basic objects end up being spacetime points, this does not help the prospects of relationalism as traditionally conceived. I end with some reflections on the fate of substantivalism in the aftermath of the Hole Argument, concluding that we have as yet to be given good reasons to abandon the natural, substantivalist interpretation of current physics.

Go stand in front of a tornado and see if it is non-physical.

Let's see what the smartest Jew  to ever live has to say. “The word 'God' is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honorable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation, no matter how subtle, can (for me) change this.”- Albert Einstein 1954

I am one of the 275,000 lifetime members.

Pi Kappa Alpha is composed of more than 275,000 lifetime members, 220 chapters and 150 alumni associations in North America.

I told you that I am a Pike.

God spoke to me when I was 12. He said that he was killing my 7 year old cousin with leukemia and there was nothing I could do about it.

Yes, he is my brother too.  Are you my brother?

A baby born without eyes, a nose and missing parts of his skull has been discharged from hospital after 40 days despite doctors predicting he would only survive a matter of hours.

Can't we all agree this is a poorly designed world?  Shouldn't God loose his God license?

Why doesn't God appear on the Jim Bakker Show in a burning bush?

The fetus is not human because it cannot breathe. For you religious people remember that  God gives you the breath of life.

No I don't.

 The majority of experts say it is constitutional to have an impeachment trial after an official has left office, said Brian Kalt, a law professor at Michigan State University and leading impeachment scholar.
Kalt was part of a bipartisan group of roughly 150 lawyers who signed a letter arguing that Trump can still be convicted in an impeachment trial.
Signatories of the letter included the co-founder and other members of the Federalist Society, a legal group that wields influence in conservative politics.
“We differ from one another in our politics, and we also differ from one another on issues of constitutional interpretation,” said the Jan. 21 letter. “But despite our differences, our carefully considered views of the law lead all of us to agree that the Constitution permits the impeachment, conviction, and disqualification of former officers, including presidents.”

I also have another question. Has anyone else been to the Brit Club in Diego Garcia?

OK,OK, I didn't think this was very complicated. I am a brother of the fraternity Pi Kappa Alpha (Pikes).

All the other people I listed are also brothers of Pi Kappa Alpha.

Did God have a purpose for Elon Musk? He is worth $210 billion. Musk doesn’t claim to have any religious beliefs. In an interview with Rainn Wilson (Dwight from the US version of The Office) when asked if science and religion can coexist, Musk replied, “Probably not”. To the next question, “Do you pray?”, he answered, “I didn’t even pray when I almost died of malaria.”

OK, here's another clue. Karl Rove and Dabo Swinney are also my brothers.

I know there is someone smart enough to get this.

Tim McGraw and Jim Parsons. What am I?

Article 1, Section 3, Clause 6 of the United States Constitution states: "The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present."
The Constitution requires the involvement of the chief justice only when the president is on trial. Since Trump no longer is president, there is no requirement for the chief justice to be involved.

I had a OBE when I was in college and took LSD. I never had one since.

Well, remember that Albert Einstein said that the Bible was a collection of venerable but still rather primitive legends.

Maybe NDE's only occur in people with numerous brain lesions. In a recent prejudicially skeptical review, Mobbs and Watt (2011) provided a synthetic outline of possible neurobiological mechanisms of NDEs, concluding that there is nothing paranormal about them. This statement implies a clear-cut incompatibility between science and parapsychology, which is at least partly questionable. In fact, parapsychology may be defined as the study of physical phenomena beyond those presently understandable (Morris, 2001)—a matter that in itself does not imply any incompatibility with science and its methodologies. Instead, it only tracks the border between what is actually known/understandable and what is still to be understood/redefined, while facts by themselves can only be true or false, not paranormal. 

 A study published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences found that by getting 70,000 participants in 42 countries to respond to sacrificial moral dilemmas — the largest study of this kind to date — an international team of psychologists was able to show how culture influences moral decision-making.  The study has important implications for how we understand our moral decisions. They don’t arise out of some universal, ahistorical, hermetically sealed realm of pure reason; rather, they’re shaped by cultural norms. Hence, morals are subjective.

Wow, they must have huge brain lesions.