Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
markdohle

Why this scientist believes in GOD

25 posts in this topic

[media=]

[/media]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting point of view, but it changes nothing about my own. I can see why he came up wanting about his own views before he believed and how that convinced him to change. As a lot of people say, scientists can be religious as well as atheists. It's why it bothers me when the religious say 'only atheists think evolution is real'.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Evolution is not real until proven real.It is noticed that atheists often are arrogant people who know so little yet dismiss many things and the relegious are often under confident people who wan't security.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Evolution is not real until proven real.It is noticed that atheists often are arrogant people who know so little yet dismiss many things and the relegious are often under confident people who wan't security.

:sleepy: Evolution has been proven thousands of times. Regardless of your blatant disregard of such evidence.

Until you study some real science, I have nothing else to say to you.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because he is a human with personal beliefs.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Evolution is not real until proven real.It is noticed that atheists often are arrogant people who know so little yet dismiss many things and the relegious are often under confident people who wan't security.

this post is of that of ummm stupid. Right out of the book of bull crap lol did you go to school or

Edited by The Silver Thong
3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate religions but I still believe that there has to be some God. I just don't believe that he is neither good nor nice.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

:sleepy: Evolution has been proven thousands of times. Regardless of your blatant disregard of such evidence.

Until you study some real science, I have nothing else to say to you.

Most people in life arent going to go to university and gain a degree in physics or engineering. The majority of people dont study science past high-school yet they assume what they were taught is correct. Thats why a lot of people think science can explain how the universe works without the need for a God.

People are not robots, our brains are not computers, you dont live in a clockwork universe and at its most fundamental level the universe is undeterministic. Everything in Quantum Mechanics indicates a 100% subjective reality not an objective one. In English the only thing that actually exists is your mind.

On the New Scientist website you can click on the stories such as 'Reality: Is matter real?' or 'Reality: The future' or some of the others on the page I'm linking you to - http://www.newscient...on/physics-math

They take you to a screen where you create a free membership giving you trial access for a few days. They explain to you why Quantum Physicists believe that only the mind exists. The guy in the video who says he studied quantum mechanics is either lying or wasnt able to see past the maths.

Needless to say as atoms arent objectively real all science based on them is bull including evolution.

Edited by Mr Right Wing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

They take you to a screen where you create a free membership giving you trial access for a few days. They explain to you why Quantum Physicists believe that only the mind exists. The guy in the video who says he studied quantum mechanics is either lying or wasnt able to see past the maths.

Except they don't. *Some* Quantum Physicists believe the mind only exists, clearly you aren't familiar with the MWI. Is Stephen Hawking and Michio Kaku liars?
Needless to say as atoms arent objectively real all science based on them is bull including evolution.

/facepalm

Any luck walking through a brick wall?

Edited by Rlyeh
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Except they don't. *Some* Quantum Physicists believe the mind only exists, clearly you aren't familiar with the MWI. Is Stephen Hawking and Michio Kaku liars?

/facepalm

Any luck walking through a brick wall?

I know you dont understand Quantum Mechanics and refuse to let anyone tell you anything that goes against how you see the world. I shall try one final time with you. Please start by actually reading the topics I linked people to and really listening to what they say.

Now in Quantum Mechanics we have several possible explanations for how reality works - Extra dimensions, parallel universes, a matrix reality, a holographic universe and some more. The reason why there are several explanations is because they all amount to the same thing. When you peer into them and look at their mechanics they all mean the same thing.

There I cant put it much simplier than that but no you wont want to listen yet again despite my letters after my name.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know you dont understand Quantum Mechanics and refuse to let anyone tell you anything that goes against how you see the world. I shall try one final time with you. Please start by actually reading the topics I linked people to and really listening to what they say.

Please read what I wrote and not what you pretended I wrote. If you aren't going to bother addressing what I wrote, save your time and don't respond.
Now in Quantum Mechanics we have several possible explanations for how reality works - Extra dimensions, parallel universes, a matrix reality, a holographic universe and some more. The reason why there are several explanations is because they all amount to the same thing. When you peer into them and look at their mechanics they all mean the same thing.
Thats where we agree but your conclusions of QM saying only the mind exists is false as I already have shown. MWI, superstring theory, etc, rejects it. Edited by Rlyeh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting point of view, but it changes nothing about my own. I can see why he came up wanting about his own views before he believed and how that convinced him to change. As a lot of people say, scientists can be religious as well as atheists. It's why it bothers me when the religious say 'only atheists think evolution is real'.

I agree, I am a Christian and have always believed that evolution in some form happened. Even in Darwin's time many more christian accepted this that was believed.

peace

mark

Evolution is not real until proven real.It is noticed that atheists often are arrogant people who know so little yet dismiss many things and the relegious are often under confident people who wan't security.

The theory is sound, how it happened may change as more information comes in, but it is a reality.

peace

mark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate religions but I still believe that there has to be some God. I just don't believe that he is neither good nor nice.

I hope live gets better for you, you deserve a good live, a happy one.

peace

Mark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please read what I wrote and not what you pretended I wrote. If you aren't going to bother addressing what I wrote, save your time and don't respond.

Thats where we agree but your conclusions of QM saying only the mind exists is false as I already have shown. MWI, superstring theory, etc, rejects it.

I read what you wrote and in return you got told that all interpretations of QM amount to the same thing. Whats the problem?

You have been on these forums long enough to know that without measurement only the non-dual state called a wavefunction exists. If you want to insist something is objectively real then you either dont understand QM or, and I know this one is the case from many of our discussions, you choose not to believe in anything against your worldview.

What is also bizarre is your belief that blinding yourself to truth makes your worldview real. Whats even more bizarre is that you seem to think people out there have your problems. We dont and anyone interested in truth just needs to go to the bookshop and pick up a decent book on Quantum Mechanics or Philosophy to discover materialism is deeply flawed.

Edited by Mr Right Wing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read what you wrote and in return you got told that all interpretations of QM amount to the same thing. Whats the problem?

No problem, you just got refuted that's all. I gave QM theories that reject your conclusion, now what is the problem?
You have been on these forums long enough to know that without measurement only the non-dual state called a wavefunction exists. If you want to insist something is objectively real then you either dont understand QM or, and I know this one is the case from many of our discussions, you choose not to believe in anything against your worldview.
This proves you don't understand all the interpretations then. For instance in the MWI, even natural phenomena causes the "worlds" to split, the mind/observer actually plays no special role.
What is also bizarre is your belief that blinding yourself to truth makes your worldview real. Whats even more bizarre is that you seem to think people out there have your problems. We dont and anyone interested in truth just needs to go to the bookshop and pick up a decent book on Quantum Mechanics or Philosophy to discover materialism is deeply flawed.

Haven't you been corrected on your narrow world view enough?

Please don't give me a youtube video, try a scientific paper.. oh wait you don't have any that support your quantum quackery..

Edited by Rlyeh
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No problem, you just got refuted that's all. I gave QM theories that reject your conclusion, now what is the problem?

This proves you don't understand all the interpretations then. For instance in the MWI, even natural phenomena causes the "worlds" to split, the mind/observer actually plays no special role.

Haven't you been corrected on your narrow world view enough?

Please don't give me a youtube video, try a scientific paper.. oh wait you don't have any that support your quantum quackery..

Keep telling yourself that

Edited by Mr Right Wing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep telling yourself that

Educate yourself; http://www.hedweb.com/manworld.htm

Not only does MWI remove the observer dependent wave-collapse (rather interaction causes the world split), it doesn't propose this solipsism nonsense you are constantly spouting.

Edited by Rlyeh
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Scientists believe in God because everything arround us is too compex to explain it only scientificaly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Scientists believe in God because everything arround us is too compex to explain it only scientificaly.

No. You are incorrect. Please study the relevant sciences before making sweeping generalizations that are completely unsupported.

Here's a good place to start: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/ICsilly.html

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Educate yourself; http://www.hedweb.com/manworld.htm

2. Not only does MWI remove the observer dependent wave-collapse (rather interaction causes the world split)

3. It doesn't propose this solipsism nonsense you are constantly spouting

1. I've got an engineering degree and know all the interruptations.

2. Quantum Mechanics is the same under all interruptations. I'll put it in simple terms - The formulas do not change its peoples opinions as to what they mean that change. The mechanics of 'measurement' and 'interaction' are 100% identical to each other. Its not an opinion that it means materialism is wrong its the mechanics which are at odds with materialism.

3. Who says it does? Its non-duality not solipsism.

Why wont you read the New Scientist articles?

Why wont you watch the video?

Why do you keep posting such tosh?

I know why you keep posting such tosh. You're someone that seeks materialism not truth. You're biased.

Edited by Mr Right Wing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. I've got an engineering degree and know all the interruptations.

2. Quantum Mechanics is the same under all interruptations. I'll put it in simple terms - The formulas do not change its peoples opinions as to what they mean that change. The mechanics of 'measurement' and 'interaction' are 100% identical to each other. Its not an opinion that it means materialism is wrong its the mechanics which are at odds with materialism.

3. Who says it does? Its non-duality not solipsism.

1. I guess you know how to perform brain surgery too then.

2. The "interpretations" address the behavior observed in QM. Some have taken this to meaning only our mind exists, but to say all physicists believe that is a blatant lie, in fact I named 2 famous ones who don't.

Your conclusion the mind only exists is an opinion, there is no formula or math that asserts this.

BTW materialism is the belief all is made of matter/energy. Superstring theory proposes everything is made of oscillating 1 dimensional strings. Perhaps materialism isn't that wrong after all.

3. BS by any other name.

Why wont you read the New Scientist articles?

Why wont you watch the video?

Why do you keep posting such tosh?

Because they aren't credible.

New Scientist isn't peer-reviewed. If it states physicists believe only the mind exists, then it is no better than a creationist site that claims most scientists are creationists.

I could post a video of a scientist saying the earth is only 6000 years old. YouTube videos have no inherent credibility.

Edited by Rlyeh
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder what makes it special that a scientist beehives in G*D, that a scientist believes in some of the crap certain religions are trying to spoon feed us would be much more remarkable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. I guess you know how to perform brain surgery too then.

2. The "interpretations" address the behavior observed in QM. Some have taken this to meaning only our mind exists, but to say all physicists believe that is a blatant lie, in fact I named 2 famous ones who don't.

Your conclusion the mind only exists is an opinion, there is no formula or math that asserts this.

BTW materialism is the belief all is made of matter/energy. Superstring theory proposes everything is made of oscillating 1 dimensional strings. Perhaps materialism isn't that wrong after all.

3. BS by any other name.

4. Because they aren't credible. New Scientist isn't peer-reviewed. If it states physicists believe only the mind exists, then it is no better than a creationist site that claims most scientists are creationists. I could post a video of a scientist saying the earth is only 6000 years old. YouTube videos have no inherent credibility.

1. My brain surgery understanding is as good as your QM understanding.

2. When atoms stop being particles (no measurement) then materialism is wrong.

3. The wavefunction is non-duality. Look at its maths and you'll discover its the unification of all possibilities.

4. When you start dismissing the New Scientist you have a problem.

Hang on I'll be back later after some alcohol. I'll give you a list of articles from Scientific American to CERN. We can watch in amazement as you dismiss them all without a clue what you're going on about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. My brain surgery understanding is as good as your QM understanding.

2. When atoms stop being particles (no measurement) then materialism is wrong.

3. The wavefunction is non-duality. Look at its maths and you'll discover its the unification of all possibilities.

4. When you start dismissing the New Scientist you have a problem.

1. Not surprising then you know little of either.

2. This is called a straw man, I've already given the definition of materialism. You're using some definition that not even materialists today use.

3. Baseless assertion, where is the mind represented in the wavefunction?

If you did know all the interpretations, you'd know not all treat the wavefunction in the same manner. But haven't we already been over the fact mathematics is an approximation when dealing with the universe? I'm pretty sure others pointed this out to you.

4. Look what it did to you.

Hang on I'll be back later after some alcohol. I'll give you a list of articles from Scientific American to CERN. We can watch in amazement as you dismiss them all without a clue what you're going on about.

Just make sure to read them first, we all know what happened when you tried to prove color was subjective. Edited by Rlyeh
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. My brain surgery understanding is as good as your QM understanding.

2. When atoms stop being particles (no measurement) then materialism is wrong.

3. The wavefunction is non-duality. Look at its maths and you'll discover its the unification of all possibilities.

4. When you start dismissing the New Scientist you have a problem.

Hang on I'll be back later after some alcohol. I'll give you a list of articles from Scientific American to CERN. We can watch in amazement as you dismiss them all without a clue what you're going on about.

Mr Wing...you pontificate and talk about things you do not know a damn thing about(google aside)...shut up and stop being a fool....!!!

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.