"Spooky action at a distance" What did he mean?

[danshawen]

Whilst I hold to the anthropic principle generally speaking I see great value in working as if I do not. It allows one to look at the universe from the outside so to speak and prevents the presumption of anything.
Like asking yourself is there any other visual colors other than that which we commonly refer to in our typical visual color spectrum. Is there a color "bling" for example or "blong" etc... as absurd as it may seem this method allows one to appreciate the colors we do have for what they are more so than if we simply presume that what colors we observe are all there is.

However in essence I tend to agree with the anthropic principle as we humans are only imitators (mirrors) of what we observe about ourselves and around us so therefore we have evolved to do just that...which then logically follows on to the anthropic principle.
I do see your need to keep pushing the boundary though and it is one worth maintaining IMO.

On another blog, someone has pointed out that the anthropic principle is nothing more or less than a veiled excuse for intelligent design. That would explain the dim bulb factor discussed above. If the universe is so dang hospitable to anthropoid life like us, why is it that 99.999999 % of the environment of the universe at large deadly to our form of life? Even the anthropoid friendly Earth so hospitable to us now was not nearly so hospitable about 4 billion years ago. That's the real "gottcha" that speaks to the idea that the anthropic principle serves no purpose other than to posit a place for God to sit and tweak the universe so that it eventually produces us.

IDers want nothing to do with an Earth or a universe that old or inhospitable to us. Perhaps the floods, fire and brimstone G-d of the Old Testament was closer to the mark after all.

 

[Quantum Quack]

On another blog, someone has pointed out that the anthropic principle is nothing more or less than a veiled excuse for intelligent design. That would explain the dim bulb factor discussed above. If the universe is so dang hospitable to anthropoid life like us, why is it that 99.999999 % of the environment of the universe at large deadly to our form of life? Even the anthropoid friendly Earth so hospitable to us now was not nearly so hospitable about 4 billion years ago. That's the real "gottcha" that speaks to the idea that the anthropic principle serves no purpose other than to posit a place for God to sit and tweak the universe so that it eventually produces us.

IDers want nothing to do with an Earth or a universe that old or inhospitable to us. Perhaps the floods, fire and brimstone G-d of the Old Testament was closer to the mark after all.

I have argued a case for an intelligent universe that innately leads to the notion of intelligent design ( no need for a God as such). That our human intelligence is only an imitation of that which we observe.

Sort of like "Oh that's clever " which then makes the observer as clever, due to having observed something as being clever.

The evolution towards sustainable success (E.O.S.S) certainly appears to be from a human perspective an intelligent phenomena. (Especially the cleverness of our own genetic makeup, DNA etc)

There are many theoretical presumptions that lead to contradiction in claims associated with human evolution , this planet and this universe. I am not attempting to push the creation-alist barrow with this either.. it is just that science has yet to get it's act together sufficiently enough to fully quantify, qualify the nature of human evolution on this planet and evolution universally generally. IMO

For example if the universe is found to be eternal both past and future then human (humanoid) existence may also be considered as eternal in the various states that it may move through.

The paranoid references to "God must have done and did it" are just religio-phobic sentiments being expressed by those who fear a return to the dark ages of superstition and religious blindness. IMO

 

[Quantum Quack]

Now this one is really interesting (as well as spooky):

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread1029974/pg1

When I did have top secret security clearance, I worked with Ground Penetrating Radar systems, and was somewhat dismayed that it was not possible to image something that was smaller than about 1/3 of a wavelength, and for the frequencies we were using, sometimes that meant we couldn't detect buried objects smaller than about a meter.

Something like the system imaging the outline of a cat applied to GPR, making such systems detect smaller objects than otherwise possible with a given frequency bandwidth would be much more useful than just an entertaining parlor trick.

hmmm interesting and further evidence that the "humble" photon is more mysterious than science would wish it to be...

 

[danshawen]

I have argued a case for an intelligent universe that innately leads to the notion of intelligent design ( no need for a God as such). That our human intelligence is only an imitation of that which we observe.

Sort of like "Oh that's clever " which then makes the observer as clever, due to having observed something as being clever.

The evolution towards sustainable success (E.O.S.S) certainly appears to be from a human perspective an intelligent phenomena. (Especially the cleverness of our own genetic makeup, DNA etc)

There are many theoretical presumptions that lead to contradiction in claims associated with human evolution , this planet and this universe. I am not attempting to push the creation-alist barrow with this either.. it is just that science has yet to get it's act together sufficiently enough to fully quantify, qualify the nature of human evolution on this planet and evolution universally generally. IMO

For example if the universe is found to be eternal both past and future then human (humanoid) existence may also be considered as eternal in the various states that it may move through.

The paranoid references to "God must have done and did it" are just religio-phobic sentiments being expressed by those who fear a return to the dark ages of superstition and religious blindness. IMO

For a while, I tried arguing te case for ID ( and better than most IDers IMHO). But somehow there really was no guarantee that human beings would continue to evolve in the direction of increased intelligence. Now I understand, that isn't the direction it seems to be going. Worse, there isn't very much we can really do about it, any more than we could change the way life consumes itself to continue to survive. There isn't really all that much about this particular design that I would consider intelligent. If you should ever meet your maker, you may tell whatever it is I said so. Most likely, IT which must not be angered already knows this, and could care less, which is fine. But you may be drowned or burned for speaking YHO.

 

[Quantum Quack]

I find your comments sad and yet so common.
I used to say to myself years ago after initially recovering from a self inflicted stress related stroke that if I was even close to 10% as clever as the body, I am, then I would be not only be the most clever human on this planet but probably the most clever human in history.

I feel most people underestimate the self inflicted damage they have inherited and have done and are currently doing to themselves terribly. I do not mean superficial damage but very deep damage both to the genome and to their bodies and minds. ( probably over 10's of thousands of years or more...)

With all due respect, and no insult is intended,

Your opinion that you are superior enough to your own body to make your statement is highly indicative and typical IMO to what the main problem is. That being that we humans like to think we can do better than what was already perfect, and in doing so egoistically make a claim of superiority and seek to control and manipulate ourselves into an early and inferior grave.

Planetary environmental devastation, AGW and climate change, chronic violence, war, over population, and massive global health issues are all good examples of mankind's egoistical claim to being superior to himself and how that is such a deluded state.

There isn't really all that much about this particular design that I would consider intelligent.

This statement is very telling and demonstrates my point quite well I feel. You and others claim superiority yet your state of superiority is a delusion. You can not be superior to yourself after all... yet that is what most people seem to believe of themselves. ( Otherwise referred to as hubris - pride)

Humans have the incredible power of choice, and not many have learned how to manage that power in a way that actually benefits them. Those that do are trapped in a situation where their surrounding environment and genome are so badly compromised that death occurs well before they have the time to change it. IMO

So if any thing was supposedly "wrong" with the human form, it is the greatest ability it has and that is it's capacity to exercise free choice. Now what good is a human with out volition or self determination?
Of course it is not the ability (power of choice) that is the problem but how it is used and well ... history speaks volumes about that...

"We're so enchanted by how clever we are" ~ J Lennon.

..sorry for the rant...

 

[danshawen]

I find your comments sad and yet so common.
I used to say to myself years ago after initially recovering from a self inflicted stress related stroke that if I was even close to 10% as clever as the body, I am, then I would be not only be the most clever human on this planet but probably the most clever human in history.

I feel most people underestimate the self inflicted damage they have inherited and have done and are currently doing to themselves terribly. I do not mean superficial damage but very deep damage both to the genome and to their bodies and minds. ( probably over 10's of thousands of years or more...)

With all due respect, and no insult is intended,

Your opinion that you are superior enough to your own body to make your statement is highly indicative and typical IMO to what the main problem is. That being that we humans like to think we can do better than what was already perfect, and in doing so egoistically make a claim of superiority and seek to control and manipulate ourselves into an early and inferior grave.

Planetary environmental devastation, AGW and climate change, chronic violence, war, over population, and massive global health issues are all good examples of mankind's egoistical claim to being superior to himself and how that is such a deluded state.



This statement is very telling and demonstrates my point quite well I feel. You and others claim superiority yet your state of superiority is a delusion. You can not be superior to yourself after all... yet that is what most people seem to believe of themselves. ( Otherwise referred to as hubris - pride)

Humans have the incredible power of choice, and not many have learned how to manage that power in a way that actually benefits them. Those that do are trapped in a situation where their surrounding environment and genome are so badly compromised that death occurs well before they have the time to change it. IMO

So if any thing was supposedly "wrong" with the human form, it is the greatest ability it has and that is it's capacity to exercise free choice. Now what good is a human with out volition or self determination?
Of course it is not the ability (power of choice) that is the problem but how it is used and well ... history speaks volumes about that...

"We're so enchanted by how clever we are" ~ J Lennon.

..sorry for the rant...

I do not claim superiority nor did I mean to imply that I (or anyone else) could do any better with the design of an intelligent being than nature has. I'm just saying, this form is one that if we are not very careful, forces choices on us that are not the greatest. For starters, why couldn't animals have retained some limited ability to do photosynthesis themselves, rather than depend on consuming plants or other animals that eat those plants? We already use most of our available energy resources growing crops to feed a human population that is overburdening our global ecosystem, and that energy will eventually run out. Something that is part plant and part animal and also intelligent might be able to figure out a way to water itself when the greenhouse gasses turn the surface of this planet into desert.

If cannibalism or death were your only choices, which would you choose? The fact that there are humans alive who HAD PLENTY OF OTHER CHOICES AVAILABLE, but chose the former speaks volumes. And I'm not talking about the Donner party, whose choices were considerably more limited.

That's just a sample. Human beings make plenty of other poor choices, many of them worse, and many better alternatives existed and were rejected thanks to free will. Take a harder look at that bell curve. To paraphrase George Carlin, half of the people are dumber than 'average', and there are an awful lot of them.

Many humans choose ignorance and superstition over knowledge and science, of their own free wills as well. But the long term prospects of life Earth looks very bright indeed if you happen to be a bacterium or a worm. The anthropic principle is not going to be very meaningful to whatever is left.

So, we're pretty much on the same page then?

 

[danshawen]

Let's get back briefly to the discussion in another forum which started this, if you don't mind.

QQ said (in another forum thread):

"I do not consider the ISIL phenomena as "normal" for many reasons.

Nor do I consider the massive increase in suicide rates amongst returned soldiers from the Middle East as 'normal' ".

You seem talking about this:



You are right that something is wrong here, but it isn't mind control. A doctor friend of mine had a traumatic couple of experiences in the South with clinics prescribing narcotics to veterans with PTSS associated with their tours of duty. She reported what she saw in terms of prescription abuse, and systematically left each clinic each time the issue of prescribing narcotics for this condition came up. Recently those prescriptions for medicines like Onxycontin have been met with a program that restricts them from being dispensed like narcotic goodies from a broken candy machine. The downside to narcotic withdrawal is sometimes suicide even without PTSS. When you combine the two risk factors, you get something that looks like that wall shown in the picture. Statistically, drug abuse issues account for about 65% of those suicides by our veterans.

As far as I can tell, young men joining ISIL has very little to do with Islam, but I haven't figured out what the deal is. Perhaps as an inducement to join, they are promised thirty virgins or something. This scam would be an easy one to pull off on the Islamic equivalent of a dating website, now wouldn't it? What young Islamic man could resist such a temptation? Check out their breeding and fertility statistics in Europe. Alarmist? Perhaps, but still…

Social networking of all sorts has gone over the top in Islam. If you wish to blame someone for the huge uptick in ISIL wannabes, blame Marc Zuckerberg.

It's mind control of a sort, I suppose. They used to call it advertising, but in certain cultures there seems to be near zero sales resistance, particularly if the sales pitch has anything whatsoever to do with sex. You expected there would be no downside?

Nothing "spooky" in any of this. Disgusting, yes, "spooky", no.

 

[Quantum Quack]

The downside to narcotic withdrawal is sometimes suicide even without PTSS. When you combine the two risk factors, you get something that looks like that wall shown in the picture. Statistically, drug abuse issues account for about 65% of those suicides by our veterans.

Interesting post.. Would you say that the number of soldiers suffering severe depression ( Not necessarily leading to suicide) would be considerably more than the norm as well?
For every suicide how many are severely depressed? ... sort of rhetorical question.

The PTSS situation pertains not only to Iraq but Afghanistan and other deployments in the Middle East as well. Or to put it more pointedly, any deployment that involves hostility towards Muslim fundamentalists. Especially but not restricted to just the Middle East regions.

I have a friend who has returned from 2 tours in Afghanistan (all honorable service medals awarded), been discharged on medical grounds and is currently vegetating in front of a TV screen playing video games. ( invariably involving virtual warfare or violence) suffering severe PTSS.

The use of the global PTSS diagnosis is, IMO, over generalizing the situation to the point of rendering it's use ineffective.
The over supply of medications, and use of other narcotics, IMO, is indicative of a military force that is attempting to escape the nightmare it has been placed in. A nightmare that, IMO, is well beyond that which would be anticipated in a pseudo conventional warfare sense.

The current and recent explosion of ICE addiction in the West is also very telling of this need to escape. (Though not necessarily directly related to radical Islam (*?))

The unprecedented and massive exodus of refugees to Europe via the Mediterranean is also indicative of this incredibly strong and suicidal need to escape.

You already know that I consider all humans to be entangled, that it is this collective entanglement that provides humanity with it's racial identity, social cohesiveness and so on.

I also consider that this entanglement is being subjected to deliberate abuse ( Particularity in the Middle East ) in a way that immediately effects a persons sense of mental freedom, thus leading typically to severe depression and the inevitable and strong desire to escape ( through suicide, use of narcotics or massive migration as refugees towards the West and or incredible brutality and extreme violence ).
* see my post #54 for background on deliberate abuse.

It is also especially effective in combination with slick media use when recruiting. ( Especially those recruits that are already suffering severe depressive states and suicidal tendencies )

 

[Quantum Quack]

and I might add you are correct when you say that social networking ( INTERNET ) has much to do with it.. As the depth of entanglement experienced normally over the internet and with the use of the internet is greatly increased.

 

[Quantum Quack]

For what I consider a classic entanglement scenario please extend your boundaries and do some research in to the "Black Stone" of Islam.

Located in Mecca and within the theosophical heart of Islamic fundamentalism. The Black Stone is attached to a corner of the Kaaba

Not only is it most likely an extra terrestrial object (meteorite) it is worshiped and prayed to by over 23% of the worlds population between 2 and 5 times a day.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Stone

Look at the design of the Kaaba and draw your own conclusions...

 

[Sarkus]

For what I consider a classic entanglement scenario please extend your boundaries and do some research in to the "Black Stone" of Islam.

Located in Mecca and within the theosophical heart of Islamic fundamentalism. The Black Stone is attached to a corner of the Kaaba

Not only is it most likely an extra terrestrial object (meteorite) it is worshiped and prayed to by over 23% of the worlds population between 2 and 5 times a day.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Stone

Look at the design of the Kaaba and draw your own conclusions...

First, you linked to wiki regarding the black stone, and even here it says that the meteoritic hypothesis of the black stone "is now viewed by geologists as doubtful" yet you say "not only is it most likely an extra terrestrial object (meteorite)..."
Care to support your assertion with something other than a link that actually suggests that geologists dispute it?

Second, what does the design of the Kaaba have to do with entanglement? What does the black stone have to do with entanglement, for that matter?

Are you not merely linking anything and everything to do with group-think, marketing, advertising, peer pressure et al (i.e. anything that results in a large number of people believing the same thing) to your notion of entanglement?
If so, at least provide something other than your wishful thinking that demonstrates that link.

 

[danshawen]

For what I consider a classic entanglement scenario please extend your boundaries and do some research in to the "Black Stone" of Islam.

Located in Mecca and within the theosophical heart of Islamic fundamentalism. The Black Stone is attached to a corner of the Kaaba

Not only is it most likely an extra terrestrial object (meteorite) it is worshiped and prayed to by over 23% of the worlds population between 2 and 5 times a day.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Stone

Look at the design of the Kaaba and draw your own conclusions...

I know next to nothing about Islamic mysticism, nor do I wish to. I already left one religion (yours, I'm guessing) because of its increasing intolerance of other faiths and intense interest in the interminable replay of the book of Revelations.

I want no part of any self-fulfilling prophetic assurance that history must endlessly repeat itself in terms of religious wars, nor any religion that teaches its followers that this is the way it must be, mandated by G-d himself. I can't conceive of a sicker and OCD inappropriate use of a religion.

I do not believe in the occult or mysticism, I also don't believe the right to religious freedom in this country should extend to cults, but evidently it's too late to stop that nonsense before it has already been taken to the point of overshadowing other guaranteed rights. Scientology getting tax exempt status was just the beginning. The Supreme Court has an opportunity right now to knock those all for a loop. Do you think they will? Not if G-d has anything at all to do with it. And they still swear witnesses in using what sacred religious text?

Yes, mind control of that sort has been around far too long. Just because the first followers of a religion learned to read from a sacred text is no reason to make it or anyone other than G-d himself that is mentioned within into idols. If you do that, you have already broken the first commandment. Reading comprehension was never the strong suit of the most devout followers of any religion, unfortunately for themselves and their neighbors whom they are supposed to love.

 

[Quantum Quack]

First, you linked to wiki regarding the black stone, and even here it says that the meteoritic hypothesis of the black stone "is now viewed by geologists as doubtful" yet you say "not only is it most likely an extra terrestrial object (meteorite)..."
Care to support your assertion with something other than a link that actually suggests that geologists dispute it?

I really do not wish to get into a detailed assessment of the Quran and associated Hadiths . ( for as you know like all religious discussions ultimately end up heated and inconclusive and I am by no means expert enough to do so)

**Note: for those readers who are devoted to Islam, I apologize in advance if anything I have naively mentioned below, is in any way offensive or seen as derogatory towards the prophet or Allah. As this is certainly not intended.

However for the sake of discussion:

Apparently there has been no detailed assessment/analysis by science of the stones, due to their religious sensitivities.

On that basis the geologists skepticism is totally unqualified. We are left only with historical religious text that may suggest it's origins.

There are many references made in various religious text(s) that states the object supposedly fell from heaven, was a gift of God, and other similar veined descriptions.
There are many discourses published that presume that the stone was delivered from the heavens, and that it fell from the sky.

As you would not give credit to any support I might offer you will need to do the research yourself if interested.

All references regardless are to be considered scientifically dubious given the religious context.

Further:
There are apparently, absolutely no references made to the kissing of the stone in the Quran itself and relies on ancillary 2nd tier religious text support (some referred to as Hadiths)

There is one quote that I can offer as insight into the influential nature of this "religious artifact".
A Hadith often used to support the requirement for Muslims to "Kiss " the stone:

Narrated 'Abis bin Rabia:


'Umar came near the Black Stone and kissed it and said "No doubt, I know that you are a stone and can neither benefit anyone nor harm anyone. Had I not seen Allah's Apostle kissing you I would not have kissed you."

Apparently there is no rational need to kiss the stone by the Prophet and this is stated by subsequent devotees. Yet kiss it they did and currently do.
The very idea that Kissing a stone with out even an attempt at rational reason to do so is in itself a strong indicator of extreme "spooky" influence IMO

So technically there is not religious duty to kiss the stone except that it is considered a way to support the prophet's action which supposedly according to the Hadith(s) involved kissing the stone, with out any religious or other explainable reason for doing so.

What makes this intriguing is that the worship of the stone appears to be compelling and in some cases superior to the worship of Allah. ( A form of Idolatry that has in some ways according to some corrupted the true message of the prophet as given in the Quran.)

Second, what does the design of the Kaaba have to do with entanglement? What does the black stone have to do with entanglement, for that matter?

a better set of questions would be:
What does the design of the Kaaba have to do with Islam?
What does the Black stone have to do with Islam?
and most importantly:

Why is it a requirement for all Muslims to pray towards Mecca and not the heavens or them selves up to 5 times a day depending on the Islamic sect that they belong to.
( apparently the actual requirement is for 3 prayers although some would dispute this and declare only two to be the authorized Quran requirement.)

Essentially it is easy to draw the conclusion that would read something like " Whom ever controls the Kaaba ( the stone) controls Islam." by virtue of what appears on the surface to be an irrational and non-Quran-ic requirement.
Of course the Saudi Royals and their religious Governors control Mecca, the Kaaba and thus the stone. The Saudi version of Islam is extreme and abhorrent to many Muslims (Wahhabism). It is the same version being espoused by ISIL except that ISIL maintains no political correctness in it's activities where as the Saudi Royals may be obliged to, due to international commercial pressures. (Oil)

There also appears to be no Quran-ic requirement that prayers be directed towards Mecca. This is again apparently sourced from secondary texts such as the Hadith(s)

So essentially I am suggesting that the influence of the Stone and the Kaaba actually have little to do with the Quran and that the worship seen in Mecca and towards Mecca defies proper rational explanation. ( even if wrapped up in pseudo religious logic)

Because there is no justification for what is observed, even in pseudo religious terms, to me, this indicates an influence that is beyond that which would normally be expected.

There are many other reasons for my concern in this regard but these are not about to be published.
(eg. There were other events that occurred that immediately preceded ISILS move into attempting to establish a caliphate in Iraq.)

Are you not merely linking anything and everything to do with group-think, marketing, advertising, peer pressure et al (i.e. anything that results in a large number of people believing the same thing) to your notion of entanglement?
If so, at least provide something other than your wishful thinking that demonstrates that link.

Firstly I would not wish this situation upon any one, as even my worst enemy deserves the sanctuary of his own mental freedom.
Secondly, it should be no surprise that when one looks at the universe holistically one does not practice exclusion of one aspect over another so of course what you refer to as typical or normal media use of NLP, Subliminal messaging and other manipulative contrivances are occurring simultaneously with everything else.

The example of the Black Stone of Islam is only an example of what I consider to be classic entanglement that underpins the extremes of what we are and have been observing in the Middle East and around the world recently.

You will no doubt be disappointed by the above for you are asking me to supply empirical evidence for something that can only be evidenced circumstantially and anecdotally.
Sorry about that.... I only mention the above to indicate, in brief and in part, why I feel the way I do. I certainly do not expect or intend to persuade any one to agree with me. That you can only do for yourself.

 

[Quantum Quack]

I know next to nothing about Islamic mysticism, nor do I wish to. I already left one religion (yours, I'm guessing) because of its increasing intolerance of other faiths and intense interest in the interminable replay of the book of Revelations.

Sorry but your guess would be incorrect. My bent towards worship if there is one is Pantheistic. (briefly: The holistic worship of everything including self)
I empathize with your opinion.

I lost interest in Christianity when there appeared to be an over emphasis on violent sacrifice by a G-d that was severely limited in communication skills. Also the behavior of a male pastor/priest at an exclusive private school I was attending at the time ( age 12ish) indicated a serious betrayal of trust that I could not reconcile then nor am I able to now.
As a consequence I developed a strong interest in Buddhism then Brahma-ism and so on and developed an interest in Eastern epistemology and metaphysics which then after many years led to a more Pantheistic form of personal philosophy.

 

[Sarkus]

However for the sake of discussion:

Apparently there has been no detailed assessment/analysis by science of the stones, due to their religious sensitivities.

On that basis the geologists skepticism is totally unqualified. We are left only with historical religious text that may suggest it's origins.

Utter nonsense. While there may be no detailed analysis, there is plenty of analysis from what is written about it, what is observed about it, and interpreting those words and observations is what geologists are rather good at when it comes to the nature of the rock.
For example, we know that the stone is fractured, which geologists would suggest virtually rules out the possibility of it being a nickel-iron meteorite.
"Through rubbing, it has developed an almost mirror-like polish which indicates that it is an aphanitic and probably a mono-mineralic rock rather than a porphyrytic rock (e.g., granite or gabbro) or one which is easily cleaved." - Kaaba Stone: Not A Meteorite, Probably an AGATE; Dietz, R.S. & McHone, J.

There are many references made in various religious text(s) that states the object supposedly fell from heaven, was a gift of God, and other similar veined descriptions.

And there are many descriptions in religious texts of miracles (turning water into wine, rising from the dead etc). Do you believe all those?

There are many discourses published that presume that the stone was delivered from the heavens, and that it fell from the sky.

Presumption does not make it true. Quantity of discourses do not make it true. Or even necessarily likely. How many of those discourses have been by geologists, by people who actually know how to analyse rocks, how to interpret what is said about rocks to establish likely composition, origin etc?

As you would not give credit to any support I might offer you will need to do the research yourself if interested.

Typical cop out, QQ. You fail to adequately support your claims, and then require that other people do your work for you.

All references regardless are to be considered scientifically dubious given the religious context.

And yet you seem willing to ignore, no, not just ignore but deliberately throw out, any analysis by geologists on what is written? You would rather believe religious texts at face value than the information science can offer through scrutinising those texts, and through using what can be observed about the stone to further understanding.
I sincerely hope you don't ever call yourself a scientist or an adherent of the scientific method, QQ, as either would be woefully wide of the mark.

Further:
There are apparently, absolutely no references made to the kissing of the stone in the Quran itself and relies on ancillary 2nd tier religious text support (some referred to as Hadiths)

There is one quote that I can offer as insight into the influential nature of this "religious artifact".
A Hadith often used to support the requirement for Muslims to "Kiss " the stone:

Narrated 'Abis bin Rabia:


'Umar came near the Black Stone and kissed it and said "No doubt, I know that you are a stone and can neither benefit anyone nor harm anyone. Had I not seen Allah's Apostle kissing you I would not have kissed you."

Apparently there is no rational need to kiss the stone by the Prophet and this is stated by subsequent devotees. Yet kiss it they did and currently do.
The very idea that Kissing a stone with out even an attempt at rational reason to do so is in itself a strong indicator of extreme "spooky" influence IMO

So technically there is not religious duty to kiss the stone except that it is considered a way to support the prophet's action which supposedly according to the Hadith(s) involved kissing the stone, with out any religious or other explainable reason for doing so.

Why? What is so weird or "spooky" about it? There IS a rational reason (at least to them) to do so, and you have provided the reasoning in the Hadith you quoted: it is because the Prophet Muhammad did it, so they too wish to do so, the same way that people have always tried to do the same things that those they worship have done.
So you provide the reasoning, and then dismiss it for not constituting a religious duty? Do reasons have to be religious duties in order to compel people?
You talk of people doing things with no rational reason, yet it is your arguments that seem to fall short of such.

a better set of questions would be:
What does the design of the Kaaba have to do with Islam?
What does the Black stone have to do with Islam?
and most importantly:

Why is it a requirement for all Muslims to pray towards Mecca and not the heavens or them selves up to 5 times a day depending on the Islamic sect that they belong to.
( apparently the actual requirement is for 3 prayers although some would dispute this and declare only two to be the authorized Quran requirement.)

I asked a specific question, so please answer the one I asked, rather than try the politician's method of deflecting, which is nothing but a sign that you are unable to answer.
So I repeat: what does the design of the Kabaa have to do with entanglement?

So essentially I am suggesting that the influence of the Stone and the Kaaba actually have little to do with the Quran and that the worship seen in Mecca and towards Mecca defies proper rational explanation. ( even if wrapped up in pseudo religious logic)

Because there is no justification for what is observed, even in pseudo religious terms, to me, this indicates an influence that is beyond that which would normally be expected.

You confuse "proper rational explanation" with strict adherence. People try do things their idols have done. Always have, always will. Religious or otherwise. Yet you dismiss this as insufficient reasoning, and thus them doing it as evidence of "spooky" action, or as you see it, evidence of "entanglement".

Yet while I clearly have issue with the lack of rigour and rationality in your arguments thus far, you still fail to show how quantum entanglement is linked to this, how it is evidence of entanglement, other than it is evidence of a lot of people doing the same thing. Is this all you have? Is this what you see entanglement resulting in?

Ignoring examples for now, just please show me how entangled quantum particles can actually drive people to do the same thing. And why the entanglement is limited to those that read the same things, hear e same things, are brought up in the same way... Which rather suggest that it is those things, and the general makeup of their being, that leads them to act the way they do... I.e. Through group-think, peer pressure, following the herd mentality etc.

Firstly I would not wish this situation upon any one, as even my worst enemy deserves the sanctuary of his own mental freedom.
Secondly, it should be no surprise that when one looks at the universe holistically one does not practice exclusion of one aspect over another so of course what you refer to as typical or normal media use of NLP, Subliminal messaging and other manipulative contrivances are occurring simultaneously with everything else.

So you think quantum entanglement is something that is practiced?? The same way one uses NLP, subliminal messaging (which I don't believe is as widespread as you make out with the term "normal" - but please do support your claim)???

The example of the Black Stone of Islam is only an example of what I consider to be classic entanglement that underpins the extremes of what we are and have been observing in the Middle East and around the world recently.

And I maintain that you are using the term entanglement merely to reflect that people think the same things when you can't otherwise understand why, and your reason that they think the same: "entanglement"!
At no point have you explained how quantum entanglement achieves this, as you rely solely on the nature of an entangled pair being linked. You seem to also rely on the notion that the entanglement compels a certain course of action, whereas all entanglement really means, simplistically speaking, is that if you measure the pair in the same way and at the same time, they will be the same. This does not happen with people: the timing of measurements is never the same, and how likely do you think it is that the method of measurement is the same for all humans?

So all you have here is an attempt to conflate what you see as "spooky" ways that people act in the same way with some scientific term that you can't (or at least have not so far to date) explain how it relates in any meaningful way.

You will no doubt be disappointed by the above for you are asking me to supply empirical evidence for something that can only be evidenced circumstantially and anecdotally.

Then this is simply a matter of belief, and not worth even of the pseudoscience forum.

Sorry about that.... I only mention the above to indicate, in brief and in part, why I feel the way I do. I certainly do not expect or intend to persuade any one to agree with me. That you can only do for yourself.

It's just a pity you can't sense for yourself the drivel you come up with, and that you can't apply critical thought enough to stop your brain latching on to it as a belief.

 

[danshawen]

Sorry but your guess would be incorrect. My bent towards worship if there is one is Pantheistic. (briefly: The holistic worship of everything including self)
I empathize with your opinion.

I lost interest in Christianity when there appeared to be an over emphasis on violent sacrifice by a G-d that was severely limited in communication skills. Also the behavior of a male pastor/priest at an exclusive private school I was attending at the time ( age 12ish) indicated a serious betrayal of trust that I could not reconcile then nor am I able to now.
As a consequence I developed a strong interest in Buddhism then Brahma-ism and so on and developed an interest in Eastern epistemology and metaphysics which then after many years led to a more Pantheistic form of personal philosophy.

As long as you find a religious tradition that is complete enough in terms of providing a sense of community and a general moral template, most will serve, and there is no shame in looking elsewhere if you don't find what you need in the one you are in.

 

[Quantum Quack]

Presumption does not make it true. Quantity of discourses do not make it true. Or even necessarily likely. How many of those discourses have been by geologists, by people who actually know how to analyse rocks, how to interpret what is said about rocks to establish likely composition, origin etc?

well ,,,as you have just said presumption does not make it true nor does quality of discourse....

 

[Quantum Quack]

Lets just take this bit of arguing and assess it shall we and see if you claim of "utter nonsense" stands up...

Utter nonsense. While there may be no detailed analysis, there is plenty of analysis from what is written about it, what is observed about it, and interpreting those words and observations is what geologists are rather good at when it comes to the nature of the rock.
For example, we know that the stone is fractured, which geologists would suggest virtually rules out the possibility of it being a nickel-iron meteorite.
"Through rubbing, it has developed an almost mirror-like polish which indicates that it is an aphanitic and probably a mono-mineralic rock rather than a porphyrytic rock (e.g., granite or gabbro) or one which is easily cleaved." - Kaaba Stone: Not A Meteorite, Probably an AGATE; Dietz, R.S. & McHone, J.

or perhaps it is made of epoxy resin and was manufactured in Tokyo...in 1879 before epoxy was considered as epoxy and patented as such...or any such nonsense...
You see what you are suggesting as a counter to utter nonsense, is equally nonsense.
The scientists you mentioned are applying a virtual scientific method to an object they have never actually been able to assess properly.
The rock could have the general appearance of terrestrial rock and yet not be actually terrestrial in origins...It does not have to conform to expectations of what a meteorite normally meets. So we deal only with probability therefore their skepticism is unqualified and mere guess work.
There is also mention that the rocks were in fact one rock at some time in history, white in color and floated on water.

 

[Quantum Quack]

Sarkus
By understanding that at any single zero point moment in time the universe is zero in dimension you can understand that all things are entangled via the zero point. (center of gravity or mass)

which then helps explain the philosophical and physical value in ancient statues such as this:

Statue of Brahma.
​

which were developed as were most versions of Gods, when mankind didn't have the scientific tools to explain what he intuitively knew to be true.

Therefore one can conclude that all humans share a single zero point smack bang in the center of their heads ( between the ears):

Which is positioned at what is commonly thought of as regions of the brain that support consciousness ( Thalamus ) and indirectly imagination.
is that pseudo scientific enough for you?
Is that spooky enough for you?
So if we assume the above to be founded what happens when a couple of billion people world wide focus their attention as "supplicants" on a single point on a corner of a building in Mecca?
What happens if someone knows what is happening and seeks to capitalize on this focus and abuse the ignorance of those supplicants?

*supplicant : a person who asks for something in a respectful way from a powerful person or God
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/supplicant

 

[Quantum Quack]

As to the design of the Kaaba I would not at all be surprised to find that this man (or his replacement) has taken up residence inside it.

Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi: religious leader of ISIL