'God' is Impossible

Summary of Existence:

The Why of existence: Nothing cannot remain as such because it must be perfectly unstable plus there is no other source. Nothing cannot be, so something has to be, and it is here, not nothing, which can’t be found anywhere. Seen in a cylinder drained of everything (‘sum-things’ form as somethings). The forever basis.

The How of existence: No other option for nothing but for a positive/negative balance emitted and summing to zero. Quantum uncertainty/tunneling/fluctuation. Opposite charge and opposite matter states cancel; the energy of stuff vs. that of gravity cancel.

The What of existence: Weak force vs. Strong force opposition as stability vs. changeability and electric to and from magnetic forces transition, one into the other. Gravity is secondary, the blend of the forces.

The Where of existence: Anywhere and everywhere. Infinity. Space. No special place.

The When and Then of existence: Any time. Eternity. No special time.

The Who of existence: Life forms. Metabolism.

The Product of existence: Any and all things and events, time and time again, everywhere.

The Being of Existence: It becomes of a clear and separated space vs. matter opposition and the movement of appearances granting the transition of time from past to now to future as time. The spark of life is the blend of all. Further combination of these fields of what, where, then, and when give rise to the further aspects of being, such as where and when forming wishes, where and then forming remembrance, what and when forming progression, what and then forming history, and so on, on up, combining the latest fields. such as history and progression leading to a change-in-structure, remembrance and wishes leading to a change-in-outlook, remembrance and history leading to learning, progress and wishes leading to vision, up onto further combinations leading to direction in life, creating, growth, and planning since creativity is brought forth from learning combined with a change in structure; direction results from learning and a change of outlook; growth is the vision for a change of outlook; planning is the vision for a change in structure.

Finally, creating, direction, growth, and planning compose one’s being. Thus, the necessary human condition.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

The liviating duds immediatly lubberdutch making contaste and togethatee slip temperance and expandasutatity. A reflection into ocean corrisponse who is perverts supercredity multiveratury equation E=2r... I'll say that again, E=2r. Where R is the radiency of a homemade measure of the vultry affect and I find that in the pervinity stems of the parishilton reserdity overleshes the rihanheteramervan to and effect so as to neglectance of nomad of prosperaty super contraction causes structurmention

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Perhaps others will understand it, as shown by those who already have.

Is the Gigantic Light growing dim?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

The light was never on.

Can't expect them to grasp such higher concepts.

 

Perhaps you will take further scripting advice from John Cleese

Are you interested in actually participating in discussions or do you just copy paste whatever weirdness comes into your head?

 

I wrote it outright in the present.

Perhaps you have nothing to offer personally, which is fine.

 

the reductionist equivalent of automatic writing it seems ...

You have nothing personal to offer.

Your posts are tirades of inner dialogue

Its like you just escaped from the pseudoscience forum.

 

I'll take it that you can't counter anything and will try any ploy to get out of it.

Hasta la vista.

 

Just drop us a link for the peer review journals when they get lined up, k?

 

Drop us a link to the peer reviewed journal that proves god exists.

 

When ever you are ready to apply yourself, drop me a line.

BTW the lack of peer reviewed journals for atheism should tell you something ...

 

:worship:

 

Which is the result of an attempt to marry dualism with monism and deal with the incompatibility simply by stating that they are compatible in an incomprehensible way (or in other words that a system is compatible with something that is not a system in an incomprehensible way).

Good one.

 

The same could be asked of you, given your propensity to set up strawmen and then drop a discussion altogether when you get called out on it.

 

no more incompatible and incomprehensible than the sun being distinct from the sunshine

 

But we conceptualize things in this mixture of dualism and monism on a daily basis anyway:
- there is the many times mentioned sun and sunhine;
- flowers and their smell;
- a clean room and the person who cleaned it.

IOW, we notice how there is a thing and how there is something related to this thing; or how there is a person and the things they do, the effects of their activities that we can observe (such as noticing that the room has been cleaned).

To some extent, we can think of the two as separate; but we also notice the necessary connection between them making them seem like one.

Noticing this is not artificial or something that would otherwise require tremendous effort on our part. If anything, we tend to take it for granted.

 

You've gone back to playing down the extent of the difference again. A far more relevant comparison would be one between a holistic sun (that is not a physical system) and sunlight.

 

I rarely say this - but I do think you are unnecessarily complicating things.

Do the examples I gave above make sense to you?

 

Atheism is a logical default. Doesn't need proving LOL.

If the writer is writing without the assumption god exists then it could be interesting/entertaining.

 

Rav. Don't get sucked into the head-fuck . . . :S