Probality of God

[scratchrobot]

I am sure this story will get both the ateists the faithers upset if they happen to read the above story, but that's just what one should expect, isn't it?


Gwandau

I did not know about lucid dreaming very interesting but i don't belief dreaming can bring you to another dimension.
You know if there were also animals at the transit or only humans?

[hoptoad]

I did not know about lucid dreaming very interesting but i don't belief dreaming can bring you to another dimension.
You know if there were also animals at the transit or only humans?

As an atheist, I'm not upset with Gwandau's story. Having already survived 3 near death experiences in my lifetime, including being "clinically" dead for about 5 minutes before revival on the operating table, I have had my own "transit room" experience.

The memory of that experience is still crystal, clear - and at first I was completely convinced that it was a spritual experience. However, after years of reading about other's experiences, and talking to some who have also had similar experiences, I'm now not so sure. The mind is more complicated than we imagine - and the sub concious takes in more information about the world around us than we are consciously aware of.

Whilst you may think that certain information is new to your conscious brain, the sub conscious has already often processed that information and filed it in to deep memory, ready and waiting for the conscious mind to access it.

My experience did not include the presence of animals of any sort.

Cheers

[WilbyInebriated]

i think all this discussion about 'how many angels can dance on the head of a pin' is a waste of precious time...  you only get a hundred years... if you're lucky.  how about being a little more concerned with the HERE AND NOW?

The world is like a ride at an amusement park. And when you choose to go on it, you think that it's real because that's how powerful our minds are. And the ride goes up and down and round and round. It has thrills and chills, and it's very brightly coloured, and it's very loud and it's fun, for a while. Some people have been on the ride for a long time, and they begin to question - is this real, or is this just a ride? And other people have remembered, and they come back to us. They say 'Hey! Don't worry, don't be afraid, ever, because, this is just a ride.' And we...kill those people. Ha ha ha. 'Shut him up! We have a lot invested in this ride. SHUT HIM UP! Look at my furrows of worry. Look at my big bank account and family. This just has to be real.' It's just a ride. But we always kill those good guys who try and tell us that, you ever notice that? And let the demons run amok. But it doesn't matter because: it's just a ride. And we can change it anytime we want. It's only a choice. No effort, no work, no job, no savings, and money. A choice, right now, between fear and love. The eyes of fear want you to put bigger locks on your doors, buy guns, close yourselves off. The eyes of love, instead, see all of us as one. Here's what you can do to change the world, right now, to a better ride. Take all that money that we spend on weapons and defence each year, and instead spend it feeding, clothing and educating the poor of the world, which it would many times over, not one human being excluded, and we could explore space, together, both inner and outer, for ever, in peace. -- the inimitable Bill Hicks

rest in peace bill, you are missed.

[Trino Cularoid]

how about being a little more concerned with the HERE AND NOW?

Doesn't that describe a state of consciousness? Wouldn't that be outside the framework of science (as of yet)?

If "NOW" would be an interval smaller than the Planck interval, wouldn't then 'HERE' possibly include everywhere (or 'HERE' smaller than the Planck length possibly include everywhen for 'NOW')?

(As far as I know, we also cannot find out whether our time is really continuous or is in discrete states that change at a rate of the Planck frequency or higher.)

[WilbyInebriated]

Doesn't that describe a state of consciousness? Wouldn't that be outside the framework of science (as of yet)?

If "NOW" would be an interval smaller than the Planck interval, wouldn't then 'HERE' possibly include everywhere (or 'HERE' smaller than the Planck length possibly include everywhen for 'NOW')?

(As far as I know, we also cannot find out whether our time is really continuous or is in discrete states that change at a rate of the Planck frequency or higher.)

now you want me to waste my time with some asinine variation of zeno's arrow paradox?     i got better shit to do trino...