Should God be replaced? Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Should God be replaced?

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: LLCF who wrote (23245)	3/25/2006 10:40:19 PM
From: Solon	Read Replies (1) of 28931

"Well, you're not looking very hard." en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org I guess the point I have been trying to lead you to is that this indeterminacy exists whether or not there are humans to attempt measurement on the atomic scale. All humans could be dead (or incapable of sub-atomic physics) and the indeterminacy would still exist. Attempting to measure something which is indeterminate simply confirms the existence of this uncertainty. So your statement that “Science is showing that observing or putting your attention on something changes it“ is quite nonsensical and shows a loose grip on the matter. Actually, there are situations where measurement results in interference with the object. This “observer effect” (as stated in these two links) is incorrectly confused with the Uncertainty Principle of QM. "The Heisenberg uncertainty principle is frequently, but incorrectly, confused with the "observer effect", as it relates precision in measurements related to to changes in velocity and position of certain particles relative to the perspective the observer takes on them. "As for hodgepodge... well, look, we're looking for god," Well, you're not looking very hard. "putting me on ignore is probably the proper thing to do" I can ignore anything idiotic you might say without any magic buttons. Better still--I can help educate you. "No, the fish and swimming was NOT comparable to a thought encompassing it's own substrate" You entirely misunderstood the analogy. Your statement that thinking had limitations was stupid puffery. All things are conditional. "Here's a tought: Those PEOPLE represent a grave danger to the world (as you say)... if their conduit wasn't religion, it would be something else" The shepard may change but the sheep will always follow. It might be worth your while to consider that the shepard is the true danger. Many people do seem to need to be given values and meaning that they are too gutless or too confused to apply their own thoughts to. There are a great number of great people past and present we can turn people on to without putting raciast religious leaders or racist Socialist leaders--or anybody evil on a platform.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next