Mars Sterling Turner

[Smellyoldgit]

That whole page is the biggest collection of fragmented brain fart wank that I've ever wasted my time glancing at. It's the type of drivel one would expect from William Craig or Deepcrack Chopra - cobbled together to impress credulous dolts - all that's missing is "Therefore God" at the end of every paragraph. I'll wager we're one of the few sites that hasn't banned this fucking idiot.

[Hobotronic2037]

Smellyoldgit wrote

...Deepcrack Chopra....

ROFLMAO

[HumbleBeauty]

Hobotronic2037 wrote

It’s crackpot bullshit that proves nothing.

In the first place the author doesn’t even quote the Bible correctly in the first three sentences so why even listen to them on this or any topic.

Elohim means gods

In the second place the circumstantial argument is just pathetic. Lots of little inconsequential and unrelated and things must add up to god.

Sulfur balls. Rofl. They prove that a story in the Bible was true! Even if it were so it doesn’t prove that the Bible is true.

the bible is the only source for what happened

Finally at the end the pathetic appeal to “if Einstein believed something then you should too because Einstein was smarter than you.” Bullshit. Who gives a fuck about Einstein. Fuck Einstein. Fuck him in the ass hard. Fuck the writer of this stupid creationist bullshit too, while you’re at it.

I didn't want you to read the other sections

Why do you feel a need to have scientific proof?

well frankly because atheists ask for it, and the apostle Paul said that it exists

Wise up, dude. Why not just Go get your dick wet, smoke a bowl and enjoy life and believe that pantheistic infinite energy named yohowahoobowwowwangdang helps you make chicks cum and call you god and master when you put on a gold crown and hang out at cosplay conventions.

God told me that man is not ready to have sex until he is 250 years old

[Hobotronic2037]

HumbleBeauty wrote

Elohim means gods



the bible is the only source for what happened



I didn't want you to read the other sections



well frankly because atheists ask for it, and the apostle Paul said that it exists




God told me that man is not ready to have sex until he is 250 years old

Wow. Thank you for this embarrassment of riches to respond to. Emphasis on embarrassment.

1. So now yahowahoyamalamadingdong is plural gods? The energy of the universe is plural gods?

2. The Bible does not mention sulfur balls.

3. Tough shit, bitch. I read what I want.

4a. And you’re doing a pisspoor job of supplying it.

4b. There’s zero historical proof that Paul existed. So you’re fucked there too.

5. He shouldn’t have made that 150 year old pussy so appealing, then.

[HumbleBeauty]

Hobotronic2037 wrote

Wow. Thank you for this embarrassment of riches to respond to. Emphasis on embarrassment.

1. So now yahowahoyamalamadingdong is plural gods? The energy of the universe is plural gods?

2. The Bible does not mention sulfur balls.

3. Tough shit, bitch. I read what I want.

4a. And you’re doing a pisspoor job of supplying it.

4b. There’s zero historical proof that Paul existed. So you’re fucked there too.

5. He shouldn’t have made that 150 year old pussy so appealing, then.

Yahowaho is God's name, Elohim is God's split personality which can talk to each other and us as gods

the bible mentions burning sulfur

even the greatest minds can get confused when taking that much knowledge in

currently only Christopher Langan (ctmu) and Emerson (g-proof) (besides me) are providing it, and I think all three of us are doing a good job at it in our own way

zero evidence save half of the christain text?

[Hobotronic2037]

Energy has a split personality. Cmon man.

The Bible does not mention sulfur balls. Even if there was a place called sodom, and even if it was destroyed by fire and brimstone it still doesn’t prove divine anything. I’m really becoming disappointed in you that you can’t understand this. It’s just a story. Maybe it’s true. Maybe it’s false. But there isn’t a god, dumbass. You are such a disappointment.

I’ll take my chances. I’m not afraid of large quantities of knowledge or reading whatever the fuck I want. You have a small mind to believe that knowledge can harm you. Man up.

You’re all woefully inept.

Zero evidence who wrote what is attributed to Paul. You look dumber by the minute by not recognizing what is required to establish credible provenance.

[hertz vanrental]

Hobotronic2037 wrote

Energy has a split personality. Cmon man.

The Bible does not mention sulfur balls. Even if there was a place called sodom, and even if it was destroyed by fire and brimstone it still doesn’t prove divine anything. I’m really becoming disappointed in you that you can’t understand this. It’s just a story. Maybe it’s true. Maybe it’s false. But there isn’t a god, dumbass. You are such a disappointment.

I’ll take my chances. I’m not afraid of large quantities of knowledge or reading whatever the fuck I want. You have a small mind to believe that knowledge can harm you. Man up.

You’re all woefully inept.

Zero evidence who wrote what is attributed to Paul. You look dumber by the minute by not recognizing what is required to establish credible provenance.

There are 14 Epistles which, it is claimed, Paul wrote.

Scholars, generally accept that 6 were indeed written by Paul. The other 8 are disputed and thought to be forgeries.

[hertz vanrental]

Smellyoldgit wrote

That whole page is the biggest collection of fragmented brain fart wank that I've ever wasted my time glancing at. It's the type of drivel one would expect from William Craig or Deepcrack Chopra - cobbled together to impress credulous dolts - all that's missing is "Therefore God" at the end of every paragraph. I'll wager we're one of the few sites that hasn't banned this fucking idiot.

Yes but I don't think he should be banned. He is entertaining, if nothing else, and a darn sight better than piss pads and android IQ 6.

[HumbleBeauty]

Hobotronic2037 wrote

Energy has a split personality. Cmon man.

Even if there was a place called sodom, and even if it was destroyed by fire and brimstone it still doesn’t prove divine anything.

I’ll take my chances. I’m not afraid of large quantities of knowledge or reading whatever the fuck I want. You have a small mind to believe that knowledge can harm you. Man up.

You’re all woefully inept.

Zero evidence who wrote what is attributed to Paul. You look dumber by the minute by not recognizing what is required to establish credible provenance.

c'mon man... think of yourself, you are made of energy and have a unique personality... just like everyone else; as one we are persons in the Divine

It proves that gods exist

I wrote that page and I speed read Langan's ctmu, so I am just as crazy as you... but when it comes to figuring something out less is actually better

the highest recorded IQ, and a teacher of logic, are woefully inept?

Paul used a scribe to write the text

[Smellyoldgit]

Christopher Langan - Scientists far smarter than my stinking self give me a good feel for his relevance.
A few select gems from quora:

It’s awfully tempting to say “BS” and just move on. But let’s give the man a fair go.
First things first. IQ is irrelevant (IQ testing was devised to identify those with cognitive difficulties; use of the other end of the ‘scale’ is daft extrapolation. And it works poorly). Good mathematicians and physicists achieve their greatness not only through passion about their subject but through fucking hard work.

Summerising a piece of his "work" (look it up on quora is you have hours to waste ....)

This is bullshit. The above condenses to something like:

“Look at how smart I am. Assuming the mind and physical reality are one, I have this strange idea that therefore the universe can continually re-invent itself in a way that transcends any idea of physical laws. Simplistic references to computer science and quantum mechanics make me sound smart (But I provide no way to test my ‘ideas’)

...and again ...

I'm going to offer a quote from Langan himself, about his so called “Cognitive Theoretic Model of the Universe”:

You can prove the existence of God, the soul and an afterlife, using mathematics.

This is, quite simply, horseshit. And trust me — it's been the Cheltenham Races this week, I know horseshit when I see it.

Yes, Langan seems to be a very clever guy, I'm not disputing that. But very clever doesn't mean right about everything. Some absolute intellectual giants in history have believed some pretty crazy stuff in the past — Newton famously believed in Alchemy, for example.

I've not even attempted to read up on the CTMU — because what I have seen is reviews from people far better at physics than I variously describing it as:

Unreadable
Intentionally obfuscating
Infuriating to read, due to the way he redefines common words to his own unique meaning, and then using metaphors in this new “language” to describe physics
Is it possible that he's a genius Physicist and it's just that no-one else on Earth can keep up with this intellectual powerhouse?

Well…maybe.

Is it more likely that a very clever guy has deluded himself, and written a nigh-incomprehensible tome which intentionally obfuscates inconsistencies in his theory?

That seems somewhat more likely.

Why is it more likely?

Well let's examine that quote up there. He's claiming that mathematics can prove the existence of God.

Except, there is a problem. Mathematics is independent of our universe — that is the way we have constructed it. Mathematics does not depend on our universe to be true.

Thus, mathematics, must be able to describe a universe without God — just as it can describe a universe which is composed entirely of shrimp.

Mathematics can describe every single possible reality. You cannot prove statements about reality from mathematics alone — that is not how any of this works.

Physics is, fundamentally, working out which mathematical universe we exist in, by testing the predictions of each universe against the reality we ourselves exist in.

The progression of physics in the last 100 years is basically summed up by the following questions:

Do we live in a universe which obeys classical mechanics?
17th century -18th century: Sure looks like it!
Post Maxwell and Planck: No — but it's a damn good guess!
Do we live in a universe which obeys Quantum Mechanics?
Early 20th century: That's weird, this theory sure does seem to predict a lot of stuff…
~1930s: Hmmmm…maybe not. There's still stuff missing
Do we live in a universe described by Quantum Field Theory?
We know the answer is no (doesn't explain gravity fully), but it's a better guess than the others!
At no point can you prove which universe we exist in without looking at the universe. And as soon as you do that — you’re doing science, not maths.

So it is not possible to prove the existence of God, the afterlife or the soul from mathematics.

Because I can describe an incredibly simple universe without any of those things (I know it's not necessarily the universe we live in, but that doesn't matter, because the existence of a single “possible universe” which doesn't require God means that mathematics does not require a God) means you cannot prove that God exists in all possible universes.

Therefore, you cannot prove that this universe has a God, without first measuring him to be in it (and even then, there's measurement error).

This is something which is incredibly trivial.

Pretty much everyone should know that “proving stuff exists” isn't how physics works — we rule out ideas which do not make accurate predictions. At no point can we make assertions such as “God exists", without overwhelming experimental evidence in support of it.

So given the level of crazy which exists in that single statement, I think it is safe to say that we are no doubt dealing with a very clever bloke — but a very clever bloke who has overstepped the bounds of what he actually can do.

Nothing wrong with a dose of Ad-Hominem, interspersed with a healthy splattering of reality. There's shitloads more where this came from if anybody gives a shit.

As for Emerson .... I suffered a scan through video no.1 ....... never again!!

[Hobotronic2037]

HumbleBeauty wrote

c'mon man... think of yourself, you are made of energy and have a unique personality... just like everyone else; as one we are persons in the Divine

It proves that gods exist

I wrote that page and I speed read Langan's ctmu, so I am just as crazy as you... but when it comes to figuring something out less is actually better

the highest recorded IQ, and a teacher of logic, are woefully inept?

Paul used a scribe to write the text

We are not one. We are individuals. With individual moral agency. There is no divine. Wise up.

A sulfur ball proves jack shit. It’s like saying a lump of coal proves Santa.

Bullshit. The more information you have the more you can figure out. And no you’re not just as crazy as me. You are far more crazy which is why you should get back on the meds and I say that with 100% compassion.

Guess what. I’m way smarter and more logical. Shows you the value of IQ scores and the title “teacher.” Yes. You all are woefully inept. Your appeal to authority bores me. You’re inept at convincing atheists and lots of other things too in life i am sure. Like realizing that the human lifespan is < 250 years. And that waiting that long to have sex would extinct the species, especially as menopause happens a lot earlier than 250 years and sperm motility is bad at a quarter millenia. Sweet motherfuck.

Paul, or Saul of Taraus, quite possibly did not even exist. Like all your gods. If he did: Who gives a shit if he used a scribe or not? I mean what difference would that make? Those epistles are for shit in both form and content. Have you even read Romans 13????? Jesus fuck.

[HumbleBeauty]

Smellyoldgit wrote

Christopher Langan - Scientists far smarter than my stinking self give me a good feel for his relevance.
A few select gems from quora:


Summerising a piece of his "work" (look it up on quora is you have hours to waste ....)

...and again ...



Nothing wrong with a dose of Ad-Hominem, interspersed with a healthy splattering of reality. There's shitloads more where this came from if anybody gives a shit.

As for Emerson .... I suffered a scan through video no.1 ....... never again!!

the ctmu doesn't prove the existence of the soul and afterlife

oops someone has an antithesis without reading his thesis


what do you mean you suffered a scan? hackers attacking Emersons audience?

[HumbleBeauty]

Hobotronic2037 wrote

We are not one. We are individuals. With individual moral agency. There is no divine. Wise up.

A sulfur ball proves jack shit. It’s like saying a lump of coal proves Santa.

Bullshit. The more information you have the more you can figure out. And not you’re not just as crazy as me. You are far more crazy which is why you should get back on the meds and I say that with 100% compassion.

Guess what. I’m way smarter and more logical. Shows you the value of IQ scores and the title “teacher.” Yes. You all are woefully inept. Your appeal to authority bores me. You’re inept at convincing atheists and lots of other things too in life i am sure. Like realizing that the human lifespan is < 250 years. And that waiting that long to have sex would extinct the species, especially as menopause happens a lot earlier than 250 years and sperm motility is bad at a quarter millenia. Sweet motherfuck.

Paul, or Saul of Taraus, quite possibly did not even exist. Like all your gods. If he did: Who gives a shit if he used a scribe or not? I mean what difference would that make? Those epistles are for shit in both form and content. Have you even read Romans 13????? Jesus fuck.

do you know anything about psychic functioning?

strawman fallacy

...

biological immortality, look it up

what is wrong with Romans13?

[Smellyoldgit]

HumbleBeauty wrote

the ctmu doesn't prove the existence of the soul and afterlife

Then why did Langan say that it can?

oops someone has an antithesis without reading his thesis

Can you blame him?

what do you mean you suffered a scan? hackers attacking Emersons audience?

I suffered the agony of watching more than enough of Emerson's nauseating shit - and I have no intention of wasting good wanking time on another second of his crap.

[HumbleBeauty]

Smellyoldgit wrote

Then why did Langan say that it can?
Can you blame him?
I suffered the agony of watching more than enough of Emerson's nauseating shit - and I have no intention of wasting good wanking time on another second of his crap.

he said mathimatics can be used to prove the existence of the soul and afterlife, not the ctmu

do I blame them for creating an argument against a mere claim; why it makes them seem so smart

well you know where to return if you want to learn logic