Scientists actually do know everything about the universe.

[godnotgod]

More lame ad-hom attacks, and more hollow rhetoric.

All a smoke screen to avoid addressing the criticisms made of your pseudo-science in the Wiki article and the other articles I posted. Further evidence that you are here to prosletyse and not to debate.

We can talk about that once I have an opportunity to read them more thoroughly, although I must tell you that I have already found flaws in at least one of the papers premises.

For the meantime, please answer unanswered questions:

1. You claim I am advancing a pseudo-scientific view. Did you watch the video I provided from Nassim Haramein, which is science, and not pseduo-science?

2. Show me the doctrine you claim I espouse as a 'new age prophet'.

3. If the universe is the outcome of causation, as you claimed the BB was, what is the causation of the causation?

4. I posted evidence to contradict your criticism of Chopra's idea that the mind causes aging. What have you to say about that?

 

[godnotgod]

More lame ad-hom attacks...

I made an analysis of how you see things, based upon your overall presentation. It is not an ad hominem attack, such as 'You are an idiot', but an observation based upon what you have written, such as: 'You are a legalist', because you want rational answers to something that is not a product of rational thought to begin with.

 

[godnotgod]

..... you are here to prosletyse and not to debate.

Again, if that is the case, please provide the doctrine about which I am proselytizing.

(BTW, that is proselytize, and not prosletyse. I believe you are thinking of the word proselyte.)

 

[godnotgod]

All a smoke screen to avoid addressing the valid criticisms made of your pseudo-science ...

No, simply observations about how you approach things which show your premises to be erroneous from the get-go.

Those 'criticisms' are ill-founded as well. Besides, I do not present pseudo science to support the mystical view. Besides, the mystical view was around long, long before science ever came around. It is science that is a half-crocked view, while the mystic's view is holistic, embracing science, but doing so within the context of Reality, and not the other way around, as science would have it. Vive la difference!

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Those 'criticisms' are ill-founded as well.

You haven't actually addressed them yet. You just want to sweep criticisms of quantum mysticism under the carpet, you cannot cope with anything which challenges the new-age flap-doodle you are so attached to. Your Precious.

Acknowledging the validity of these criticisms would mean admitting that your DIY religion is a house of cards, and that is something you will never be able to do.

Besides, I do not present pseudo science to support the mystical view.

You do it all the time, like your hero Deepak Chopra. It is all smoke and mirrors.

 

[godnotgod]

You haven't actually addressed them yet. You just want to sweep them under the carpet because they present a serious challenge to the new-age flap-doodle you are so attached to. Your Precious.

The reason they do not present a serious challenge is simply because their authors have never had a mystical experience. They are looking at the mystical experience via the intellect, making things up about it that fit the workings of the conceptual mind, when the mystical experience is beyond all concepts. Having said that, the mystic, OTOH, sees no conflict between science and the mystical experience, but instead of attempting to make Reality fit into some conceptual scientific model, he interprets the findings of science within the greater context of Reality. Non-mystics who call mystical knowledge 'woo woo' have their noses pressed up against the window pane, looking in with their heads filled with their own intellectual baggage, much like yourself.

You do it all the time, like your hero Deepak Chopra.

Are you going to sit there and bald-faced LIE about the SCIENTIFIC information in the video I presented by Hassim Haramein, a SCIENTIST?

Deepak Chopra collaborates with many scientists to add support to and confirm his ideas, such as in the following:

Now are you going to LIE again and try to tell me this is pseudo-science?

You are like so many other prickly types who try to block non-scientists from Quantum Physics by trying to tell them they do not understand because they are not credentialed in the field of Quantum Physics. We don't need math to understand the nature of the Quantum Field and what it does. We now understand that sub-atomic particles are virtual, and that they can only exist via the field which creates them. (In fact, you do exactly the same thing with Your Precious, Buddhism, which you don't even understand yourself. You are a MATERIALIST-LEGALIST, not a Buddhist.)

Stop ignoring my questions and please answer the following left-over unanswered questions:

1. You claim I am advancing a pseudo-scientific view. Did you watch the video I provided from Nassim Haramein, which is science, and not pseduo-science?

2. Show me the doctrine you claim I espouse as a 'new age prophet'.

3. If the universe is the outcome of causation, as you claimed the BB was, what is the causation of the causation?

4. I posted evidence to contradict your criticism of Chopra's idea that the mind causes aging. What have you to say about that?

ADDED BONUS QUESTION WORTH 100 POINTS: WHERE DOES YOUR CONSCIOUSNESS LEAVE OFF AND THE UNIVERSE BEGIN?

(In case some are wondering, yes, we are still on topic. so not to worry.)

 

[Rick O'Shez]

You STILL haven't responded to the criticisms of quantum mysticism in the articles that I referenced.

Your attempts at distraction here are laughable and pathetic.

 

[godnotgod]

You STILL haven't responded to the criticisms of quantum mysticism in the articles that I referenced.

Your attempts at distraction here are laughable and pathetic.

Sure. Answer my questions first, as I presented them before you posted your sources, who don't know what they're talking about, and running off at the mouth, just like you.

So until you can intelligently respond to my questions posted above, this 'discussion' is over. Kaput!

 

[godnotgod]

You STILL haven't responded to the criticisms of quantum mysticism in the articles that I referenced.

Your attempts at distraction here are laughable and pathetic.

OK, so it looks like you are refusing to answer questions which in fact relate to your original comments, while demanding that I answer yours which came afterwards. Then again, this is typical of your MO throughout the forum, always looking to others to do your thinking for you, but as I have pointed out several times to you in the past, it's not gonna happen here. All you 'know' is what the materialist paradigm has indoctrinated you with. This even extends into your Buddhism, in which you fail to realize the Universal Consciousness with which the Buddha had insight into Self-View and ultimately into Sunyata.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

I posted articles which debunked your Precious, quantum mysticism, and you have STILL not provided a coherent response to those criticisms. Instead you played your usual cheap tricks of trying to distract with counter questions, and using lame ad homs.

Further evidence that you have no interest in genuine debate, you are only here to preach the Chopra-inspired babble you have grown so attached to.

 

[godnotgod]

I posted articles which debunked your Precious, quantum mysticism, and you have STILL not provided a coherent response to those criticisms. Instead you played your usual cheap tricks of trying to distract with counter questions, and using lame ad homs.

Further evidence that you have no interest in genuine debate, you are only here to preach the Chopra-inspired babble you have grown so attached to.

Now you are exposed for the fraud that you are and for all to see. The only one playing cheap trix are the ones you play when you try to portray my ORIGINAL questions as 'counter' questions. Next you will be telling all of us that your articles were posted before my questions. What is clear is that you simply don't have the insight to answer my questions, and so you post a plethora of junk arguments by people who don't know what they're talking about in order to shift attention away from the little man behind the curtain in the Land of Oz.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Your counter questions were prompted by my posting of the articles debunking quantum mysticism, a cheap trick to avoid addressing the criticisms of your Precious. You probably haven't even read the articles, as from previous experience you simply cannot cope with anything which challenges your weird ideas. As for a "plethora of junk arguments", that is YOUR speciality.

You repeatedly hijack threads and fill them with your Chopra-inspired babble. It is boring.

If you want to preach then start a blog.

 

[godnotgod]

Further evidence that you have no interest in genuine debate, you are only here to preach the Chopra-inspired babble you have grown so attached to.

A perfect example of honest to goodness ignorance of the knee jerk variety: I post a video of Chopra in collaboration with a mathematical physicist and still you persist with your silly stereotype of Chopra. Come now, O'Shez: the jig's up. There's nothing more to hide behind. You've been exposed.

Now go to your room and weep.

This semblance of a 'debate' is now over.

 

[godnotgod]

Your counter questions were prompted by my posting of the articles debunking quantum mysticism, a cheap trick to avoid addressing the criticisms of your Precious. You probably haven't even read the articles, as from previous experience you simply cannot cope with anything which challenges your weird ideas. As for a "plethora of junk arguments", that is YOUR speciality.

You repeatedly hijack threads and fill them with your Chopra-inspired babble. It is boring.

If you want to preach then start a blog.

Once again, genius: you started by alluding to 'the cause of the Big Bang' as you may recall somewhere back in the cobwebs of your mind, to which I then asked the question: 'What is the cause of the cause?' Would you like to try again? Now, is this a junk argument? First things first, you know. If you can answer this question, which is based upon YOUR assertion, maybe we can move on, instead of your juvenile attempt to hijack this thread and holding it hostage. Ready? Go!

 

[Rick O'Shez]

...simply because my bottom line is that the BB was/is an event in Consciousness.

Chopra-inspired babble. Relevance to the OP, "Scientists actually do know everything about the universe"?

 

[Rick O'Shez]

The consciousness involved is non-local and universal. IOW, the consciousness by which you see the world is the same consciousness that everyone else sees it by, even though each individual may have differing but fictional self-views.

Chopra-inspired babble. Relevance to the OP, "Scientists actually do know everything about the universe"?

 

[Rick O'Shez]

*"The spiritual experience is the merging of the observer, the observed, and the entire process of observation into a single Reality"

Deepak Chopra

Pure babble and nothing to do with the OP.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Once again, genius: you started by alluding to 'the cause of the Big Bang' as you may recall somewhere back in the cobwebs of your mind, to which I then asked the question: 'What is the cause of the cause?'

We currently know nothing about "prior" to the big bang, it is all speculation. We don't even know whether cause and effect existed "before" that event, since causality is a feature of space-time.

So go on, tell us what your answer is, and DO use plain English.

You claimed earlier that the big bang was an event in consciousness, what does that actually mean?
It is something to do with your Precious, "Cosmic Consciousness"?

 

[Rick O'Shez]

“We live in illusion and the appearance of things. There is a reality. We are that reality. When you understand this, you see that you are nothing, and being nothing, you are everything. That is all.”
Kalu Rinpoche

Relevance to the OP, "Scientists actually do know everything about the universe"?

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Brahman is manifesting ITSELF AS the Universe, in the same way that gold chain is still pure gold. The illusion that is the world is none other than Brahman. While they are indeed one and the same, however, the world, put on by Brahman, comes and goes, while Brahman ITSELF does not. There is only Brahman.

Relevance to the OP, "Scientists actually do know everything about the universe"?

I guess you were going through another one of your Hindu "phases", though it is difficult to keep up with all your personas. I suppose Chopra's charlatan babble sort of resembles Hinduism, but with a load of flap-doodle pseudo-science mixed in.