OT is here an evolution or the God ? - Sinclair

This is a discussion on OT is here an evolution or the God ? - Sinclair ; Bohus Král wrote: > > The losers get the big foot from above, the winners get an up to > > date supa dupa ZX Spectrum with God like capabilties. > > It has been predicted in Nanic Miner game ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 70

Thread: OT is here an evolution or the God ?

  1. Re: OT is here an evolution or the God ?

    Bohus Král wrote:

    > > The losers get the big foot from above, the winners get an up to
    > > date supa dupa ZX Spectrum with God like capabilties.

    >
    > It has been predicted in Nanic Miner game over sequence.
    >
    > B


    It's stomping the pre-made effigy, showing the Miner Willy beyond Level
    20 ;-)

    God's chastisement, for doing an effigy of yourself before efforts...



    Best regards,

    Daniel Mandic

  2. Re: OT is here an evolution or the God ?

    Calum wrote:

    > Primax wrote:
    >
    > > Actually you want to know what I really think?
    > >
    > > This is all one gigantic universal ZX Spectrum game to see who wins
    > > and who don`t.

    >
    > Can't be. Too many colours.


    errrrm...
    Who needs a Pen, making different colors all the time?

    Speccy do have all needed Colours. The rest is pure Logic ;-), as not
    even the best computer can make a show like the scene when Gandalf
    enters the Horses-King Castle in the Rocks for the first time (third
    part, 'Return of the King', or so).

    As efficient as possible is the task for a computer. That second-hand
    ware today (e.g. Digital TV) isn't jerking me out from the stool
    (unsatisfying, and only beaten by the combined flat-tv's with cheesy
    cam-moves. Only satisfying in still pictures, and they are alot with
    a dig-tuner). Quad-crap! Well! As the former PAL... but now really four
    times aside



    Best regards,

    Daniel Mandic

  3. Re: OT is here an evolution or the God ?

    Daniel Mandic did eloquently scribble:
    > Calum wrote:
    >
    >> Gravity. Because Newton said so


    > ah, you make it yourself too easy :-)
    > Who and where is this Mr. or Mrs. Gravity?


    > Is it possible to make it somehow visible at least, like the
    > iron-shavings in a magnetic-field. Or is it just that, as it looks like
    > (circling planets etc.)!?


    If you mean can you observe a visual effect, you can.
    But you have to do it from a great distance.
    Gravity bends light, so you can watch a star and observe its light bend when
    something massive passes in front of it. It's one of the methods they use to
    find extrasolar planets.

    No, you can't use an iron filing trick, it affects all matter, not just
    magnetic iron/cobalt alloys. And gravity is very very weak compared to all
    the other forces.

    Gravity also bends spacetime, and this can be observed by the simple use of
    2 atomic clocks, one at hight altitude and one at ground level. They move
    out of sync. (actually, the light bending thing is part of bending spacetime
    too).
    --
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    | spike1@freenet.co.uk | Windows95 (noun): 32 bit extensions and a |
    | | graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit |
    |Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)| operating system originally coded for a 4 bit |
    | in |microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that|
    | Computer Science | can't stand 1 bit of competition. |
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------

  4. Re: OT is here an evolution or the God ?

    Duncan Snowden did eloquently scribble:
    > Ian Rawlings wrote:


    >> On 2007-11-24, Primax wrote:
    >>
    >>> Why not blame the devil or satan or what ever name fits your culture?
    >>> Why does he never get any blame?
    >>>
    >>> You see religion is there again, mind control over the ages for the week
    >>> willed.

    >>
    >> Blimey will you lot can it? It's like watching pensioners fight.
    >> You're making me want to burn my computer.


    > More like schoolkids.


    > "This is you: 'Wawawawawawawa'!"
    > "Yeah? And this is you: 'Googoogooogoogooorrrrghhh!'"
    > "Says you."
    > "Says me and all my mates."
    > "Well all my mates say you smell. And so do the teachers, no ner."
    > "So? What do they know? They smell more than anything. Fatty."


    "You... see that vomit on the pavement outside the pub?"
    "I have observed such a phenominon"
    "That's you that is... That's your lunch. You go out at midnight looking for
    it because it's the most delicious thing you can afford..."

    > ...and so on ad nauseam.


    quite.
    --
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    | spike1@freenet.co.uk | Windows95 (noun): 32 bit extensions and a |
    | | graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit |
    |Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)| operating system originally coded for a 4 bit |
    | in |microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that|
    | Computer Science | can't stand 1 bit of competition. |
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------

  5. Re: OT is here an evolution or the God ?

    Yawn.

    Brian

    --
    Brian Gaff - briang1@blueyonder.co.uk
    Note:- In order to reduce spam, any email without 'Brian Gaff'
    in the display name may be lost.
    Blind user, so no pictures please!
    "Daniel Mandic" wrote in message
    news:47492362$0$21929$91cee783@newsreader02.highwa y.telekom.at...
    > Bohus Král wrote:
    >
    >>
    >> napísal
    >>
    >> > It's all just superstition. It would've probably died out long ago
    >> > if we didn't have churches around to perpetuate the myths even
    >> > further.

    >>
    >> My friend Roman is faithfull, if I ask him "Why did I born ill ?(or
    >> anybody else)", he says "God is testing you". This is obligatory
    >> answer of church prominents. It's totally out of scope ! It's
    >> nonsense. When I move it to animals, for example a little deer: If a
    >> little deer borns without legs, what is it supposed to ? God is
    >> testing it ? It dies within 2 weeks, because it couldn't even lift
    >> and suck mother milk. It is just evolution, which says : The one, who
    >> hasn't luck and health won't survive. The church is trying to find
    >> behind everything some sign of higher might, that something must be
    >> behind it.
    >>
    >> B

    >
    > Hi Bohus!
    >
    >
    > But the main is using at least one time the word church, for proposing
    > new modern (and better, he/she thinks....) words.
    >
    > If you know it better, let the church and anything associated behind.
    >
    > When negative church prayer know it better, they should do so, but
    > please with own words.
    > The same story as Mirkosoft... the more you cry negative about, the
    > more are going to buy :-|
    >
    >
    > Why is it always the minority being attacked???
    > Church and religion is not the motor of the World today. World is
    > rather controlled by Army, Governments, bad and better politicians,
    > Documents like Passport etc. (noone accepts your church-documents, if
    > you have some), etc etc etc, etc!
    >
    > Yes yes.... always on the minority...
    >
    >
    > Well, as for me.... just play Major, I play Minor, too (I don't like
    > the today Major and I can find much more negative things in the Major
    > as you can count ngative things about the today church. Forget the
    > past..... if you do so, I'll count in AtomBombs and the massacre on the
    > red-place in China [Tanks vs. light weared ppl, etc.])
    >
    >
    >
    > Best regards,
    >
    > Daniel Mandic
    >
    > P.S.: 1000ppl die every month in New York by starvation! Every
    > quarterly Year, the known and died Twin Tower head-count.
    >
    > Only the mission ppl (some kind of church activators, I guess), help
    > them by giving thick soups and big pieces of bread.




  6. Re: OT is here an evolution or the God ?

    "Bohus Král" wrote in message
    news:47487e5b$0$90271$14726298@news.sunsite.dk...
    >>

    > These are examples at almost molecular basis, but we do not see it on
    > human base.


    That's where you're wrong. Just recently I saw a documentary about how a
    small number of children were being born with genetic abnormalities that
    gave them special abilities lacking in normal humans. These abilities
    allowed them to...

    No, wait - sorry, I was thinking of X-Men.

    Len
    --
    If replying, my address after the @ should
    be replaced with freeserve then .co.uk


  7. Re: OT is here an evolution or the God ?

    Llama-Wax Len did eloquently scribble:
    > "Bohus Král" wrote in message
    > news:47487e5b$0$90271$14726298@news.sunsite.dk...
    >>>

    >> These are examples at almost molecular basis, but we do not see it on
    >> human base.


    > That's where you're wrong. Just recently I saw a documentary about how a
    > small number of children were being born with genetic abnormalities that
    > gave them special abilities lacking in normal humans. These abilities
    > allowed them to...


    > No, wait - sorry, I was thinking of X-Men.


    Ah, thought you were talking about heroes...
    --
    | |What to do if you find yourself stuck in a crack|
    | spike1@freenet.co.uk |in the ground beneath a giant boulder, which you|
    | |can't move, with no hope of rescue. |
    |Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)|Consider how lucky you are that life has been |
    | in |good to you so far... |
    | Computer Science | -The BOOK, Hitch-hiker's guide to the galaxy.|

  8. Re: OT is here an evolution or the God ?

    On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 08:32:49 +0000, spike1@freenet.co.uk wrote:

    >Duncan Snowden did eloquently scribble:
    >> Ian Rawlings wrote:

    >
    >>> On 2007-11-24, Primax wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Why not blame the devil or satan or what ever name fits your culture?
    >>>> Why does he never get any blame?
    >>>>
    >>>> You see religion is there again, mind control over the ages for the week
    >>>> willed.
    >>>
    >>> Blimey will you lot can it? It's like watching pensioners fight.
    >>> You're making me want to burn my computer.

    >
    >> More like schoolkids.

    >
    >> "This is you: 'Wawawawawawawa'!"
    >> "Yeah? And this is you: 'Googoogooogoogooorrrrghhh!'"
    >> "Says you."
    >> "Says me and all my mates."
    >> "Well all my mates say you smell. And so do the teachers, no ner."
    >> "So? What do they know? They smell more than anything. Fatty."

    >
    >"You... see that vomit on the pavement outside the pub?"
    >"I have observed such a phenominon"


    do do do do


    /me runs

  9. Re: OT is here an evolution or the God ?

    spike1@freenet.co.uk wrote:

    > If you mean can you observe a visual effect, you can.
    > But you have to do it from a great distance.
    > Gravity bends light, so you can watch a star and observe its light
    > bend when something massive passes in front of it. It's one of the
    > methods they use to find extrasolar planets.


    Hi Spike!


    Ah. We cannot even see Pluto good enough. All other is highly
    theoretically, actually.

    Even Mars, that we have in shape and detail, will not unhide its
    mysteries till Human will go there and dig for fossils, to say at
    least, hey - there was life

    > No, you can't use an iron filing trick, it affects all matter, not
    > just magnetic iron/cobalt alloys. And gravity is very very weak
    > compared to all the other forces.


    I hear that very often in the late time.

    > Gravity also bends spacetime, and this can be observed by the simple
    > use of 2 atomic clocks, one at hight altitude and one at ground
    > level. They move out of sync. (actually, the light bending thing is
    > part of bending spacetime too).


    Gravity might be a weaker force by its elemental name, but as you say
    good, it can even bend Light, and what is more accurate than
    light-speed, actually?

    I think time is independent to materie.... it's just a thinking of us,
    probably, as we like that two-thing stories...



    Best regards,

    Daniel Mandic

  10. Re: OT is here an evolution or the God ?

    Rather than talking about "dark matter", there are two good examples of
    science coming up with something that had qualities described before it was
    actually discovered.

    (I apologise for the vagueness of what I'm about to say - perhaps someone
    more learned about these topics can fill in the gaps)

    The first would be the periodic table - the regularity of it meant that the
    qualities of several elements were predicted long before they were
    discovered.

    The second would be antimatter - a negative term was found in the equations.
    Rather than simply leaving it at that, this negative term was explored and
    led to the discovery of particles with the same mass but negative charge.
    Antomatter was later discovered.

    Returning to dark matter; this is not a modern day God. It has been invented
    as an explanation for certain observations in the universe. However, if
    these could be explained in a different manner and enough evidence were
    found for that evidence then the theory of dark matter would either be
    dropped or modified.

    Dark matter is a provable / falsifiable theory. God is not.

    "Ian Rawlings" wrote in message
    news:slrnfkghii.8a7.news06@desktop.tarcus.org.uk.. .
    > On 2007-11-24, spike1@freenet.co.uk wrote:
    >
    >> Let's not forget that, although they don't know what dark matter actually
    >> IS, they can detect it through secondary effects. (gravitational lensing
    >> and
    >> such)

    >
    > Sure, but that's an illustration of the point I was trying to make,
    > they can't know for sure that it's there, and even gravitational
    > lensing doesn't demonstrate that it's there, just that the effect
    > matches the models that incorperate "dark matter" so it's a useful
    > stopgap until it's proven or some other better explanation comes
    > along. It's similar to the chemical models based around electrons and
    > protons before quantum physics came along, they were accurate enough
    > to be going on with and were the accepted explanation until a better
    > more accurate one came along to explain some of the discrepancies.
    >
    > Again, the above subject to me being a computer nerd not a physicist!
    >
    > --
    > Blast off and strike the evil Bydo empire!



  11. Re: OT is here an evolution or the God ?

    Nick Aldridge wrote:

    > Dark matter is a provable / falsifiable theory. God is not.


    Of course it's pretty much impossible, as things stand, to prove that
    God doesn't exist. But all it would take would be for him to show his
    face on Earth tomorrow, doing the sorts of things that only God could
    do, to prove that he did. Moving mountains around, that sort of thing.
    Where would all us athiests be then?

    The troubling thing about the universe is that there's only one of them.
    So when it comes to answering the Really Big Questions, we have no other
    universes we can observe, to find common patterns or otherwise
    extrapolate theories about our own universe from.

    All we can do is keep working away on the theories we've been refining
    for the past few centuries, because they do a reasonable job of
    explaining the behaviour of the tiny pocket of the universe we can see
    from our position on the inside. But who knows what we haven't yet
    discovered, or what could happen tomorrow, that would fundamentally turn
    all those theories on their heads?

  12. Re: OT is here an evolution or the God ?

    Calum did eloquently scribble:
    > Nick Aldridge wrote:


    >> Dark matter is a provable / falsifiable theory. God is not.


    > Of course it's pretty much impossible, as things stand, to prove that
    > God doesn't exist. But all it would take would be for him to show his
    > face on Earth tomorrow, doing the sorts of things that only God could
    > do, to prove that he did. Moving mountains around, that sort of thing.
    > Where would all us athiests be then?


    > The troubling thing about the universe is that there's only one of them.


    Tell that to the quantum physicists.

    Think you mean only one we know about.
    --
    __________________________________________________ ____________________________
    | spike1@freenet.co.uk | |
    |Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)| "ARSE! GERLS!! DRINK! DRINK! DRINK!!!" |
    | in | "THAT WOULD BE AN ECUMENICAL MATTER!...FECK!!!! |
    | Computer Science | - Father Jack in "Father Ted" |
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  13. Re: OT is here an evolution or the God ?

    Nick Aldridge wrote:

    > Rather than talking about "dark matter", there are two good examples
    > of science coming up with something that had qualities described
    > before it was actually discovered.


    Hi Nick!


    Wonderful English!

    > (I apologise for the vagueness of what I'm about to say - perhaps
    > someone more learned about these topics can fill in the gaps)


    There are no gaps.

    > Returning to dark matter; this is not a modern day God. It has been
    > invented as an explanation for certain observations in the universe.
    > However, if these could be explained in a different manner and enough
    > evidence were found for that evidence then the theory of dark matter
    > would either be dropped or modified.


    However. If a dying Star and thus (not always, white dwarf, Neutron
    Star, etc.) the black-hole is a room in a room (our Space, Universe,
    the all...), like a pocket (pouch) hanging on a (plain! [IMO]) wall
    where you could grip into. Where is it then? Scientists say something
    about time... and it is time, IMHO.

    The most spectacular black-holes are in the centre of a Galaxy, so far,
    IMO. Like a portal to somewhere... who is craying out there

    > Dark matter is a provable / falsifiable theory. God is not.


    Your Words in Gods Ears



    Kind regards,

    Daniel Mandic

    P.S.: is it just a connection to a higher level organism and we are the
    power source, errrrrm, I mean the suns etc., but what are we then....
    ;-) (are we so meaningless?)

  14. Re: OT is here an evolution or the God ?

    Calum wrote:

    > Nick Aldridge wrote:
    >
    > > Dark matter is a provable / falsifiable theory. God is not.

    >
    > Of course it's pretty much impossible, as things stand, to prove that
    > God doesn't exist. But all it would take would be for him to show
    > his face on Earth tomorrow, doing the sorts of things that only God
    > could do, to prove that he did. Moving mountains around, that sort
    > of thing. Where would all us athiests be then?


    Ah. All precalcualted stuff ('still sun at twelve for some minutes' and
    other abnormities in human time....... who knows how many planets
    teared at Earth at that specific moment.)

    > The troubling thing about the universe is that there's only one of
    > them. So when it comes to answering the Really Big Questions, we have
    > no other universes we can observe, to find common patterns or
    > otherwise extrapolate theories about our own universe from.


    We are not bad in time, but too weak (undeveloped) to see the future
    (that what makes all endlessly).

    > All we can do is keep working away on the theories we've been
    > refining for the past few centuries, because they do a reasonable job
    > of explaining the behaviour of the tiny pocket of the universe we can
    > see from our position on the inside. But who knows what we haven't
    > yet discovered, or what could happen tomorrow, that would
    > fundamentally turn all those theories on their heads?


    Indeed. (!)



    Kind regards,

    Daniel Mandic

  15. Re: OT is here an evolution or the God ?

    spike1@freenet.co.uk wrote:

    > Calum did eloquently scribble:


    > > The troubling thing about the universe is that there's only one of
    > > them.


    > Tell that to the quantum physicists.
    >
    > Think you mean only one we know about.


    Hi spike1@freenet.co.uk!


    You think the nebulaes from one universe warp to an other universe?

    That would be as a fart that leads to a foreign stomach and makes the
    body puh as the former carbon-unit made puh. :-)
    Something goes into a foreign world, as that.

    How is this possible?

    It's not digital, so much I can say so far



    Kind regards,

    Daniel Mandic

  16. Re: OT is here an evolution or the God ?

    spike1@freenet.co.uk wrote:
    > Calum did eloquently scribble:
    >> Nick Aldridge wrote:

    >
    >>> Dark matter is a provable / falsifiable theory. God is not.

    >
    >> Of course it's pretty much impossible, as things stand, to prove that
    >> God doesn't exist. But all it would take would be for him to show his
    >> face on Earth tomorrow, doing the sorts of things that only God could
    >> do, to prove that he did. Moving mountains around, that sort of thing.
    >> Where would all us athiests be then?

    >
    >> The troubling thing about the universe is that there's only one of them.

    >
    > Tell that to the quantum physicists.
    >
    > Think you mean only one we know about.


    Well, by definition, there can only be one universe; it comprises
    everything that was, is and ever can be. I would argue that if there
    are multiple 'universes', visible, invisible, co-existent, theoretical
    or otherwise, then the union of all those things is still *the*
    universe. And thus there needs to be another word for all those other
    things, because they aren't really universes at all

  17. Re: OT is here an evolution or the God ?

    Calum wrote:

    > Well, by definition, there can only be one universe; it comprises
    > everything that was, is and ever can be. I would argue that if there
    > are multiple 'universes', visible, invisible, co-existent,
    > theoretical or otherwise, then the union of all those things is still
    > the universe. And thus there needs to be another word for all those
    > other things, because they aren't really universes at all



    Hi Calum!



    hmmmm.... I think..., if we would know ALL, we would die immediately



    Best regards,

    Daniel Mandic

    P.S.: (I hope it's still OT )

  18. Re: OT is here an evolution or the God ?

    On Nov 27, 11:35 pm, Calum wrote:
    > Nick Aldridge wrote:
    > > Dark matter is a provable / falsifiable theory. God is not.

    >
    > Of course it's pretty much impossible, as things stand, to prove that
    > God doesn't exist. But all it would take would be for him to show his
    > face on Earth tomorrow, doing the sorts of things that only God could
    > do, to prove that he did. Moving mountains around, that sort of thing.
    > Where would all us athiests be then?


    It's funny how some people expect us to believe that an omnipotent,
    omniscient god used to be really into proving its existence, and that
    somewhere along the line it just lost interest in that and started
    demanding faith in its unproven existence.

    Actually, on second thoughts, it's not funny at all.

    Nathan

  19. Re: OT is here an evolution or the God ?

    Nat Cross wrote:

    > It's funny how some people expect us to believe that an omnipotent,
    > omniscient god used to be really into proving its existence, and that
    > somewhere along the line it just lost interest in that and started
    > demanding faith in its unproven existence.
    >
    > Actually, on second thoughts, it's not funny at all.
    >
    > Nathan



    Hi Nat!


    It remains to analogies. As people like to play with elements....

    (I think this guy who said, all light is coming out of our eyes is
    right :-))



    Best regards,

    Daniel Mandic

    P.S.: do the test: prove your own words.....

  20. Re: OT is here an evolution or the God ?

    On Nov 28, 2:12 am, "Daniel Mandic" wrote:
    > Nat Cross wrote:
    > > It's funny how some people expect us to believe that an omnipotent,
    > > omniscient god used to be really into proving its existence, and that
    > > somewhere along the line it just lost interest in that and started
    > > demanding faith in its unproven existence.

    >
    > > Actually, on second thoughts, it's not funny at all.

    >
    > > Nathan

    >
    > Hi Nat!
    >
    > It remains to analogies. As people like to play with elements....
    >
    > (I think this guy who said, all light is coming out of our eyes is
    > right :-))
    >
    > Best regards,
    >
    > Daniel Mandic
    >
    > P.S.: do the test: prove your own words.....


    I don't think I understand a word you're saying. But to clarify my own
    position - I think religion is not only wrong, but the concept right
    now threatens to drag us into another dark age. I also think that it
    would be a complete waste of my time to try to convince a true
    believer that they are wrong. There are quite enough informed,
    articulate people that are being completely ignored by true believers
    without my adding to their ranks.

    Or did you just mean to ask if I'd ever tried to believe?

    Nathan

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast