"Fredxxx" wrote in message
news
On 22/06/2017 02:15, bm wrote:
"Fredxxx" wrote in message
news
On 21/06/2017 21:52, Rod Speed wrote:


"Bill Wright" wrote in message
news On 21/06/2017 20:57, Rod Speed wrote:

My spiritual beliefs aren't silly ****.

All spiritual beliefs are mindless silly ****. There are no gods.
We evolved from pond slime. It really is that simple.

They are a practical philosophy.

Nope, just crutches for pathetically inadequate 'minds'
that just can't accept that there is no purpose for life,
we are born, we do various things and we all die.

Maybe you need such a philosophy.

Nope, don't need a mental crutch.

I think you're confusing 'spiritual' with 'supernatural'.

You're wrong. Try a dictionary.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spirituality

Spiritual people seem to be well adjusted. Ones that poo-hoo
spirituality
seem to have a chip on their should and become abusive to those around
them.

Ohhh, you mean like bigot Dave?

No, I don't see 'Dave' being abusive to others

Only because you have wanked yourself completely
blind with his endless abuse to leavers alone.

In article ,
Fredxxx wrote:
Spiritual people seem to be well adjusted. Ones that poo-hoo
spirituality seem to have a chip on their should and become abusive to
those around them.

Think the basis of spirituality is that you realise no human no matter how
clever etc is omnipotent.

Religions, on the other hand, can claim their God is better than any
other. Thus introducing the human pecking order to where there is none.

--
*Work is for people who don't know how to fish.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Wed, 21 Jun 2017 21:45:19 +0100, Bill Wright
wrote:

On 21/06/2017 17:25, Mark wrote:
On Wed, 21 Jun 2017 12:54:28 +0100, Bill Wright
wrote:

On 21/06/2017 04:46, Rod Speed wrote:
Bill Wright wrote
Rod Speed wrote

Religion doesnt matter much when so few are religious anymore.

Many more are spiritual than religious.

Sure, but those dont matter so much because they mostly
just believe in some silly **** and hardly ever try to convince
anyone else about the silly **** they believe in and certainly
dont usually kill others who believe in some other silly ****.

My spiritual beliefs aren't silly ****. They are a practical philosophy.
Maybe you need such a philosophy.

The point is that you don't kill people for not believing in your
"silly ****" or "philosophy".

You've exposed your own gross generalisation.

So you think not murdering people because they don't believe the same
as you is a "gross generalisation".

On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 02:09:39 +0100, Fredxxx wrote:

On 21/06/2017 21:52, Rod Speed wrote:


"Bill Wright" wrote in message
news
On 21/06/2017 20:57, Rod Speed wrote:

My spiritual beliefs aren't silly ****.

All spiritual beliefs are mindless silly ****. There are no gods.
We evolved from pond slime. It really is that simple.

They are a practical philosophy.

Nope, just crutches for pathetically inadequate 'minds'
that just can't accept that there is no purpose for life,
we are born, we do various things and we all die.

Maybe you need such a philosophy.

Nope, dont need a mental crutch.

I think you're confusing 'spiritual' with 'supernatural'.

You're wrong. Try a dictionary.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spirituality

Spiritual people seem to be well adjusted. Ones that poo-hoo
spirituality seem to have a chip on their should and become abusive to
those around them.

Now that is a gross generalisation (and completely wrong). Some
so-called "spiritual people" commit terrorist acts and what could be
more abusive than that?

On Wed, 21 Jun 2017 16:34:36 +0100, Capitol wrote:

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Bill Wright wrote:
On 20/06/2017 23:10, Rod Speed wrote:

Religion doesn€˜t matter much when so few are religious anymore.

Many more are spiritual than religious.

Spiritual is generally accepted as simply believing there is some higher
power than man. Not necessarily any one of the accepted gods.


Ridiculous, man is the supreme being!

No, it's Woman. ;-) Are you not married?

On Wed, 21 Jun 2017 23:02:49 +0100, Capitol wrote:

Mark wrote:
On Wed, 21 Jun 2017 07:06:29 +0100, "Richard"
wrote:

"Steve Walker" wrote in message news
On 20/06/2017 22:30, Richard wrote:
"newshound" wrote in message
o.uk...

On 6/19/2017 3:37 PM, Richard wrote:
"newshound" wrote in message
o.uk...

On 6/19/2017 11:52 AM, Bill Wright wrote:
This morning we are given the news that someone has driven a van into
a crowd of people outside a Mosque, killing one and injuring many.

For some time now I've feared that the UK is heading for a period of
sectarian warfare, similar in some ways to the situation that
prevailed in Northern Ireland in the 60s and 70s.

The lesson of history is that when two identifiable communities share
the same land there's a good chance of strife. The reasons are a
mystery but it could be that the innate tribalism of the species is
at least partly responsible. In the case of Northern Ireland the
cultural differences between the communities were small; but in the
case of the UK now the cultural differences are very large, with one
community happily accepting behaviours that the other one condemns.

The troubles of the 60s started when a few people on one side started
a series of relatively small attacks on the other side. You might
want to categorise those people as 'hotheads' or 'psychopaths' or
'terrorists' or 'freedom fighters'. Take your pick; it doesn't
matter.

What matters is that the other side retaliated. Then the whole thing
escalated until there were large scale indiscriminate attacks.

In the UK at present the Muslim community is about 3% of the total.
The demographics show that the figure will rise to something between
20 and 40% during the next fifty years. If the (tiny) proportion of
all UK Muslims who are waging war on the rest of society remains the
same then there will be more and more attacks. It seems certain that
a (tiny) proportion of the indigenous population will retaliate.

I fear that we might be approaching a very unhappy period of our
nation's history.

Bill

Don't believe your demographics figure. I bet it comes from a very
dubious source.

Well, I did a quick search for you and made sure that no "right wing"
source was being quoted. This paints a (depressing, from my point of
view) picture which may help you and it's quite old:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2000/sep/03/race.world

Quote from this article (2000)

In Britain, that is almost certain to happen in London, and in the
relatively near future. 'At the moment ethnic minorities are about 40
per cent in London. The demographics show that white people in London
will become a minority by 2010,' said Jasper.

Here we are in 2017, I have heard a figure that claims the current
London figure is about one third, but I rather doubt that this applies
all the way out to the M25.

OK
https://data.london.gov.uk/dataset/2...on-projections
But the future is not white.

Whether it is white or not matters much less than whether it is Christian
or Aethiest with a broadly Christian background or another religion. Colour
is of much less importance than culture.

It all matters, given circumstances.
If an extra-terrestrial threat actually did occur, all religious and ethnic
barriers would come down in an attempt to jointly overcome the threat. Of
course, every faction would attempt to ensure priority of self in the long
term.

Ain't gonna happen. The probability that an alien specious that
exists now, and lives close enough to travel to the Earth is
negligable.


No, fairies exist. I just know it!

I believe you do.

Mark wrote:
On Wed, 21 Jun 2017 16:34:36 +0100, Capitol wrote:

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Bill Wright wrote:
On 20/06/2017 23:10, Rod Speed wrote:

Religion doesn€˜t matter much when so few are religious anymore.

Many more are spiritual than religious.

Spiritual is generally accepted as simply believing there is some higher
power than man. Not necessarily any one of the accepted gods.


Ridiculous, man is the supreme being!

No, it's Woman. ;-) Are you not married?


To admit that would be suicidal and undo years of training

On 22/06/2017 02:09, Fredxxx wrote:

I think you're confusing 'spiritual' with 'supernatural'.

You're wrong. Try a dictionary.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spirituality

Spiritual people seem to be well adjusted. Ones that poo-hoo
spirituality seem to have a chip on their should and become abusive to
those around them.

I think it's just a matter of finding a personal philosophy and then
living to it as far as you can.

Bill

On 22/06/2017 03:29, Rod Speed wrote:
Bill Wright wrote
Rod Speed wrote

I think you're confusing 'spiritual' with 'supernatural'.

You're wrong. Try a dictionary.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spirituality

which says, "There is no single, widely agreed definition of
spirituality."

So your original 'thought' is just plain wrong.

And it goes on to say that its basically just mindless silly ****, as I
originally said.

A logical error on your part. The fact that there is no single, widely
agreed definition of
spirituality doesn't prevent you from confusing your interpretation of
the word with belief in the supernatural.

Bill

On Wednesday, 21 June 2017 17:28:02 UTC+1, Mark wrote:
On Wed, 21 Jun 2017 07:06:29 +0100, "Richard"
wrote:

"Steve Walker" wrote in message news

On 20/06/2017 22:30, Richard wrote:
"newshound" wrote in message
o.uk...

On 6/19/2017 3:37 PM, Richard wrote:
"newshound" wrote in message
o.uk...

On 6/19/2017 11:52 AM, Bill Wright wrote:
This morning we are given the news that someone has driven a van into
a crowd of people outside a Mosque, killing one and injuring many.

For some time now I've feared that the UK is heading for a period of
sectarian warfare, similar in some ways to the situation that
prevailed in Northern Ireland in the 60s and 70s.

The lesson of history is that when two identifiable communities share
the same land there's a good chance of strife. The reasons are a
mystery but it could be that the innate tribalism of the species is
at least partly responsible. In the case of Northern Ireland the
cultural differences between the communities were small; but in the
case of the UK now the cultural differences are very large, with one
community happily accepting behaviours that the other one condemns.

The troubles of the 60s started when a few people on one side started
a series of relatively small attacks on the other side. You might
want to categorise those people as 'hotheads' or 'psychopaths' or
'terrorists' or 'freedom fighters'. Take your pick; it doesn't
matter.

What matters is that the other side retaliated. Then the whole thing
escalated until there were large scale indiscriminate attacks.

In the UK at present the Muslim community is about 3% of the total.
The demographics show that the figure will rise to something between
20 and 40% during the next fifty years. If the (tiny) proportion of
all UK Muslims who are waging war on the rest of society remains the
same then there will be more and more attacks. It seems certain that
a (tiny) proportion of the indigenous population will retaliate.

I fear that we might be approaching a very unhappy period of our
nation's history.

Bill

Don't believe your demographics figure. I bet it comes from a very
dubious source.

Well, I did a quick search for you and made sure that no "right wing"
source was being quoted. This paints a (depressing, from my point of
view) picture which may help you and it's quite old:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2000/sep/03/race.world

Quote from this article (2000)

In Britain, that is almost certain to happen in London, and in the
relatively near future. 'At the moment ethnic minorities are about 40
per cent in London. The demographics show that white people in London
will become a minority by 2010,' said Jasper.

Here we are in 2017, I have heard a figure that claims the current
London figure is about one third, but I rather doubt that this applies
all the way out to the M25.

OK
https://data.london.gov.uk/dataset/2...on-projections
But the future is not white.

Whether it is white or not matters much less than whether it is Christian
or Aethiest with a broadly Christian background or another religion. Colour
is of much less importance than culture.

It all matters, given circumstances.
If an extra-terrestrial threat actually did occur, all religious and ethnic
barriers would come down in an attempt to jointly overcome the threat. Of
course, every faction would attempt to ensure priority of self in the long
term.

Ain't gonna happen. The probability that an alien specious that
exists now, and lives close enough to travel to the Earth is
negligable.

So is the existance of this planet in the universe having life as we know it

In article ,
Mark wrote:
No, fairies exist. I just know it!

I believe you do.

Quite. Capitol is away with them for much of the time, proving they exist.

--
*Being healthy is merely the slowest possible rate at which one can die.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 11:09:01 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

Think the basis of spirituality is that you realise no human no matter how
clever etc is omnipotent.

Religions, on the other hand, can claim their God is better than any
other.

I like Ricky Gervais's POV on the matter:

"There are about 3,000 Gods to choose from. You don’t believe in
2,999 Gods, and I don’t believe in just one more.” ;-)

Cheers, T i m

In article ,
T i m wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 11:09:01 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

Think the basis of spirituality is that you realise no human no matter how
clever etc is omnipotent.

Religions, on the other hand, can claim their God is better than any
other.

I like Ricky Gervais's POV on the matter:

"There are about 3,000 Gods to choose from. You don’t believe in
2,999 Gods, and I don’t believe in just one more.” ;-)

Although we may have a fair few educated guesses as to how the universe
started (big bang or whatever) there is still the problem of what existed
before then. Which is far beyond my pay grade.

--
*Middle age is when work is a lot less fun - and fun a lot more work.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Bill Wright wrote
Fredxxx wrote

I think you're confusing 'spiritual' with 'supernatural'.

You're wrong. Try a dictionary.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spirituality

Spiritual people seem to be well adjusted. Ones that poo-hoo spirituality
seem to have a chip on their should and become abusive to those around
them.

I think it's just a matter of finding a personal philosophy and then
living to it as far as you can.

Thats not spiritual, thats a personal philosophy.

We have different words for a reason.

And you dont even need a personal philosophy
either, you are free to do what you feel like at
the time too with stuff like chuggers etc or even
when someone asks you for assistance etc.

Bill Wright wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Bill Wright wrote
Rod Speed wrote

I think you're confusing 'spiritual' with 'supernatural'.

You're wrong. Try a dictionary.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spirituality

which says, "There is no single, widely
agreed definition of spirituality."

So your original 'thought' is just plain wrong.

And it goes on to say that its basically just
mindless silly ****, as I originally said.

A logical error on your part.

Nope.

The fact that there is no single, widely agreed definition
of spirituality doesn't prevent you from confusing your
interpretation of the word with belief in the supernatural.

I havent confused anything. You need a dictionary.

"Richard" wrote in message
news
"Mark" wrote in message
...

On Wed, 21 Jun 2017 07:06:29 +0100, "Richard"
wrote:

"Steve Walker" wrote in message news
On 20/06/2017 22:30, Richard wrote:
"newshound" wrote in message
o.uk...

On 6/19/2017 3:37 PM, Richard wrote:
"newshound" wrote in message
o.uk...

On 6/19/2017 11:52 AM, Bill Wright wrote:
This morning we are given the news that someone has driven a van
into
a crowd of people outside a Mosque, killing one and injuring many.

For some time now I've feared that the UK is heading for a period
of
sectarian warfare, similar in some ways to the situation that
prevailed in Northern Ireland in the 60s and 70s.

The lesson of history is that when two identifiable communities
share
the same land there's a good chance of strife. The reasons are a
mystery but it could be that the innate tribalism of the species
is
at least partly responsible. In the case of Northern Ireland the
cultural differences between the communities were small; but in
the
case of the UK now the cultural differences are very large, with
one
community happily accepting behaviours that the other one
condemns.

The troubles of the 60s started when a few people on one side
started
a series of relatively small attacks on the other side. You might
want to categorise those people as 'hotheads' or 'psychopaths' or
'terrorists' or 'freedom fighters'. Take your pick; it doesn't
matter.

What matters is that the other side retaliated. Then the whole
thing
escalated until there were large scale indiscriminate attacks.

In the UK at present the Muslim community is about 3% of the
total.
The demographics show that the figure will rise to something
between
20 and 40% during the next fifty years. If the (tiny) proportion
of
all UK Muslims who are waging war on the rest of society remains
the
same then there will be more and more attacks. It seems certain
that
a (tiny) proportion of the indigenous population will retaliate.

I fear that we might be approaching a very unhappy period of our
nation's history.

Bill

Don't believe your demographics figure. I bet it comes from a very
dubious source.

Well, I did a quick search for you and made sure that no "right
wing"
source was being quoted. This paints a (depressing, from my point of
view) picture which may help you and it's quite old:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2000/sep/03/race.world

Quote from this article (2000)

In Britain, that is almost certain to happen in London, and in the
relatively near future. 'At the moment ethnic minorities are about 40
per cent in London. The demographics show that white people in London
will become a minority by 2010,' said Jasper.

Here we are in 2017, I have heard a figure that claims the current
London figure is about one third, but I rather doubt that this
applies
all the way out to the M25.

OK
https://data.london.gov.uk/dataset/2...on-projections
But the future is not white.

Whether it is white or not matters much less than whether it is
Christian
or Aethiest with a broadly Christian background or another religion.
Colour
is of much less importance than culture.

It all matters, given circumstances.
If an extra-terrestrial threat actually did occur, all religious and
ethnic
barriers would come down in an attempt to jointly overcome the threat. Of
course, every faction would attempt to ensure priority of self in the
long
term.

Ain't gonna happen. The probability that an alien specious that
exists now, and lives close enough to travel to the Earth is
negligable.

So, having ruled out the common enemy of mankind we will continue as we
have done for millennia.

Islam is the religion allegedly followed by the enemies of my culture.

No evidence of any 'culture'

It is that threat which I and others face.

Your problem, as always.

YMMV.

It does.

On 22/06/2017 11:47, Mark wrote:

Now that is a gross generalisation (and completely wrong). Some
so-called "spiritual people" commit terrorist acts and what could be
more abusive than that?

They aren't spiritual, they're religious.

Bill

In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
Although we may have a fair few educated guesses as to how the universe
started (big bang or whatever) there is still the problem of what
existed before then. Which is far beyond my pay grade.

The concept is that there was no "before".

Can't get my head round that one.

Just as there is nowhere
north of the north pole.

Hardly a decent metaphor.

--
*We waste time, so you don't have to *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...

In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
Although we may have a fair few educated guesses as to how the universe
started (big bang or whatever) there is still the problem of what
existed before then. Which is far beyond my pay grade.

The concept is that there was no "before".

Can't get my head round that one.

Time and space had not started until the big bang occurred.
Simple enough?



Just as there is nowhere
north of the north pole.

Hardly a decent metaphor.

On 23/06/17 00:33, Bill Wright wrote:
On 22/06/2017 11:47, Mark wrote:

Now that is a gross generalisation (and completely wrong). Some
so-called "spiritual people" commit terrorist acts and what could be
more abusive than that?

They aren't spiritual, they're religious.

Bill

Yep. A working definition of spiritual is that one regards the world of
te senses and seeming materiality as 'not all there is'.


Quantum physics is in a sense a form of spirituality.


Religious people believe they know what it is, howevere, and that this
gives them the right etc etc.



--
Any fool can believe in principles - and most of them do!

On 22/06/17 19:35, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:

In article ,
T i m wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 11:09:01 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

Think the basis of spirituality is that you realise no human no
matter how
clever etc is omnipotent.

Religions, on the other hand, can claim their God is better than any
other.

I like Ricky Gervais's POV on the matter:

"There are about 3,000 Gods to choose from. You don€št believe in
2,999 Gods, and I don€št believe in just one more.€° ;-)

Although we may have a fair few educated guesses as to how the universe
started (big bang or whatever) there is still the problem of what existed
before then. Which is far beyond my pay grade.

The concept is that there was no "before". Just as there is nowhere
north of the north pole.

Yep. Space and time/causality are qualities that are properties of the
universe when observed by a human mind.They do not exist independently
of either.

This is the essence of the 'problem of consciousness' - people cant get
over thinking otherwise.

--
Any fool can believe in principles - and most of them do!

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
news

On 22/06/17 19:35, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:

In article ,
T i m wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 11:09:01 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

Think the basis of spirituality is that you realise no human no
matter how
clever etc is omnipotent.

Religions, on the other hand, can claim their God is better than any
other.

I like Ricky Gervais's POV on the matter:

"There are about 3,000 Gods to choose from. You don€št believe in
2,999 Gods, and I don€št believe in just one more.€° ;-)

Although we may have a fair few educated guesses as to how the universe
started (big bang or whatever) there is still the problem of what
existed
before then. Which is far beyond my pay grade.

The concept is that there was no "before". Just as there is nowhere
north of the north pole.

Yep. Space and time/causality are qualities that are properties of the
universe when observed by a human mind.They do not exist independently of
either.

One has to believe that, or that an omnipotent entity done it.
There is no third option.


This is the essence of the 'problem of consciousness' - people cant get
over thinking otherwise.

On Thursday, 22 June 2017 17:48:02 UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
T i m wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 11:09:01 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

Think the basis of spirituality is that you realise no human no matter how
clever etc is omnipotent.

Religions, on the other hand, can claim their God is better than any
other.

I like Ricky Gervais's POV on the matter:

"There are about 3,000 Gods to choose from. You dont believe in
2,999 Gods, and I dont believe in just one more.€� ;-)

Although we may have a fair few educated guesses as to how the universe
started (big bang or whatever) there is still the problem of what existed
before then. Which is far beyond my pay grade.

Another problem is what is 'before' then if time as we know it was created with the universe then we have the problem of not knowing what before was at that point in time of creation because time didnlt exist.

"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...

On Thursday, 22 June 2017 17:48:02 UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
T i m wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 11:09:01 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

Think the basis of spirituality is that you realise no human no matter
how
clever etc is omnipotent.

Religions, on the other hand, can claim their God is better than any
other.

I like Ricky Gervais's POV on the matter:

"There are about 3,000 Gods to choose from. You dont believe in
2,999 Gods, and I dont believe in just one more.€� ;-)

Although we may have a fair few educated guesses as to how the universe
started (big bang or whatever) there is still the problem of what existed
before then. Which is far beyond my pay grade.

Another problem is what is 'before' then if time as we know it was created
with the universe then we have the problem of not knowing what before was
at that point in time of creation because time didnlt exist.

Forgetting about the lack of understanding, why would either of those two
"problems" actually be a problem?

T i m wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 11:09:01 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

Think the basis of spirituality is that you realise no human no matter how
clever etc is omnipotent.

Religions, on the other hand, can claim their God is better than any
other.

I like Ricky Gervais's POV on the matter:

"There are about 3,000 Gods to choose from. You dont believe in
2,999 Gods, and I dont believe in just one more.€� ;-)

Cheers, T i m


Michel de Montaigne, way back in the 16th century:

"Man is certainly stark mad; he cannot make a worm, and yet he will be
making gods by dozens."

On Monday, 26 June 2017 12:36:00 UTC+1, Richard wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...

On Thursday, 22 June 2017 17:48:02 UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
T i m wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 11:09:01 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

Think the basis of spirituality is that you realise no human no matter
how
clever etc is omnipotent.

Religions, on the other hand, can claim their God is better than any
other.

I like Ricky Gervais's POV on the matter:

"There are about 3,000 Gods to choose from. You dont believe in
2,999 Gods, and I dont believe in just one more.€� ;-)

Although we may have a fair few educated guesses as to how the universe
started (big bang or whatever) there is still the problem of what existed
before then. Which is far beyond my pay grade.

Another problem is what is 'before' then if time as we know it was created
with the universe then we have the problem of not knowing what before was
at that point in time of creation because time didnlt exist.

Forgetting about the lack of understanding, why would either of those two
"problems" actually be a problem?

Before requires time to have existed and it didn't before it was created.

It's like asking what number comes before zero.

"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...

On Monday, 26 June 2017 12:36:00 UTC+1, Richard wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...

On Thursday, 22 June 2017 17:48:02 UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
T i m wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 11:09:01 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

Think the basis of spirituality is that you realise no human no
matter
how
clever etc is omnipotent.

Religions, on the other hand, can claim their God is better than
any
other.

I like Ricky Gervais's POV on the matter:

"There are about 3,000 Gods to choose from. You dont believe in
2,999 Gods, and I dont believe in just one more.€� ;-)

Although we may have a fair few educated guesses as to how the
universe
started (big bang or whatever) there is still the problem of what
existed
before then. Which is far beyond my pay grade.

Another problem is what is 'before' then if time as we know it was
created
with the universe then we have the problem of not knowing what before
was
at that point in time of creation because time didnlt exist.

Forgetting about the lack of understanding, why would either of those two
"problems" actually be a problem?

Before requires time to have existed and it didn't before it was created.

There wasn't a before.


It's like asking what number comes before zero.

minus something

On Monday, 26 June 2017 13:11:18 UTC+1, Richard wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...

On Monday, 26 June 2017 12:36:00 UTC+1, Richard wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...

On Thursday, 22 June 2017 17:48:02 UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
T i m wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 11:09:01 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

Think the basis of spirituality is that you realise no human no
matter
how
clever etc is omnipotent.

Religions, on the other hand, can claim their God is better than
any
other.

I like Ricky Gervais's POV on the matter:

"There are about 3,000 Gods to choose from. You dont believe in
2,999 Gods, and I dont believe in just one more.€� ;-)

Although we may have a fair few educated guesses as to how the
universe
started (big bang or whatever) there is still the problem of what
existed
before then. Which is far beyond my pay grade.

Another problem is what is 'before' then if time as we know it was
created
with the universe then we have the problem of not knowing what before
was
at that point in time of creation because time didnlt exist.

Forgetting about the lack of understanding, why would either of those two
"problems" actually be a problem?

Before requires time to have existed and it didn't before it was created..

There wasn't a before.


It's like asking what number comes before zero.

minus something

No minus doesn't come before zero.

"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...

On Monday, 26 June 2017 13:11:18 UTC+1, Richard wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...

On Monday, 26 June 2017 12:36:00 UTC+1, Richard wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...

On Thursday, 22 June 2017 17:48:02 UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
T i m wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 11:09:01 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

Think the basis of spirituality is that you realise no human no
matter
how
clever etc is omnipotent.

Religions, on the other hand, can claim their God is better than
any
other.

I like Ricky Gervais's POV on the matter:

"There are about 3,000 Gods to choose from. You dont believe in
2,999 Gods, and I dont believe in just one more.€� ;-)

Although we may have a fair few educated guesses as to how the
universe
started (big bang or whatever) there is still the problem of what
existed
before then. Which is far beyond my pay grade.

Another problem is what is 'before' then if time as we know it was
created
with the universe then we have the problem of not knowing what before
was
at that point in time of creation because time didnlt exist.

Forgetting about the lack of understanding, why would either of those
two
"problems" actually be a problem?

Before requires time to have existed and it didn't before it was
created.

There wasn't a before.


It's like asking what number comes before zero.

minus something

No minus doesn't come before zero.

Please explain why.

On Monday, 26 June 2017 13:29:22 UTC+1, Richard wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...

On Monday, 26 June 2017 13:11:18 UTC+1, Richard wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...

On Monday, 26 June 2017 12:36:00 UTC+1, Richard wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...

On Thursday, 22 June 2017 17:48:02 UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
T i m wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 11:09:01 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

Think the basis of spirituality is that you realise no human no
matter
how
clever etc is omnipotent.

Religions, on the other hand, can claim their God is better than
any
other.

I like Ricky Gervais's POV on the matter:

"There are about 3,000 Gods to choose from. You dont believe in
2,999 Gods, and I dont believe in just one more.€� ;-)

Although we may have a fair few educated guesses as to how the
universe
started (big bang or whatever) there is still the problem of what
existed
before then. Which is far beyond my pay grade.

Another problem is what is 'before' then if time as we know it was
created
with the universe then we have the problem of not knowing what before
was
at that point in time of creation because time didnlt exist.

Forgetting about the lack of understanding, why would either of those
two
"problems" actually be a problem?

Before requires time to have existed and it didn't before it was
created.

There wasn't a before.


It's like asking what number comes before zero.

minus something

No minus doesn't come before zero.

Please explain why.

Please explain why you think it does what does minus actually mean.
If I asked you to shown me a pieces of wood say 10cm long or 4 inches long I'm pretty sure you could manages to now show me a piece of wood -10cm or -4 inches long ?

On 26/06/17 12:35, Richard wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...

On Thursday, 22 June 2017 17:48:02 UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
T i m wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 11:09:01 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

Think the basis of spirituality is that you realise no human no
matter how
clever etc is omnipotent.

Religions, on the other hand, can claim their God is better than any
other.

I like Ricky Gervais's POV on the matter:

"There are about 3,000 Gods to choose from. You dont believe in
2,999 Gods, and I dont believe in just one more.€� ;-)

Although we may have a fair few educated guesses as to how the universe
started (big bang or whatever) there is still the problem of what
existed
before then. Which is far beyond my pay grade.

Another problem is what is 'before' then if time as we know it was
created with the universe then we have the problem of not knowing what
before was at that point in time of creation because time didnlt exist.

Forgetting about the lack of understanding, why would either of those
two "problems" actually be a problem?

well that depends on your definition of a problem of course.

Rendering a Universe into human terms will always provide and incomplete
and inadequate description, but its still a more sophisticated one than
a worm has.

Socialism excepted.



--
If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will
eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such
time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic
and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally
important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for
the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the
truth is the greatest enemy of the State.

Joseph Goebbels

On 26/06/17 13:29, Richard wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...

On Monday, 26 June 2017 13:11:18 UTC+1, Richard wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...

On Monday, 26 June 2017 12:36:00 UTC+1, Richard wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...

On Thursday, 22 June 2017 17:48:02 UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:
In article ,
T i m wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 11:09:01 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

Think the basis of spirituality is that you realise no human no
matter
how
clever etc is omnipotent.

Religions, on the other hand, can claim their God is better
than
any
other.

I like Ricky Gervais's POV on the matter:

"There are about 3,000 Gods to choose from. You dont
believe in
2,999 Gods, and I dont believe in just one more.€� ;-)

Although we may have a fair few educated guesses as to how the
universe
started (big bang or whatever) there is still the problem of what
existed
before then. Which is far beyond my pay grade.

Another problem is what is 'before' then if time as we know it was
created
with the universe then we have the problem of not knowing what
before
was
at that point in time of creation because time didnlt exist.

Forgetting about the lack of understanding, why would either of
those two
"problems" actually be a problem?

Before requires time to have existed and it didn't before it was
created.

There wasn't a before.


It's like asking what number comes before zero.

minus something

No minus doesn't come before zero.

Please explain why.

Why not?


--
"The great thing about Glasgow is that if there's a nuclear attack it'll
look exactly the same afterwards."

Billy Connolly

"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...

On Monday, 26 June 2017 13:29:22 UTC+1, Richard wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...

On Monday, 26 June 2017 13:11:18 UTC+1, Richard wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...

On Monday, 26 June 2017 12:36:00 UTC+1, Richard wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...

On Thursday, 22 June 2017 17:48:02 UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:
In article ,
T i m wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 11:09:01 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

Think the basis of spirituality is that you realise no human
no
matter
how
clever etc is omnipotent.

Religions, on the other hand, can claim their God is better
than
any
other.

I like Ricky Gervais's POV on the matter:

"There are about 3,000 Gods to choose from. You dont believe
in
2,999 Gods, and I dont believe in just one more.€� ;-)

Although we may have a fair few educated guesses as to how the
universe
started (big bang or whatever) there is still the problem of
what
existed
before then. Which is far beyond my pay grade.

Another problem is what is 'before' then if time as we know it was
created
with the universe then we have the problem of not knowing what
before
was
at that point in time of creation because time didnlt exist.

Forgetting about the lack of understanding, why would either of
those
two
"problems" actually be a problem?

Before requires time to have existed and it didn't before it was
created.

There wasn't a before.


It's like asking what number comes before zero.

minus something

No minus doesn't come before zero.

Please explain why.

Please explain why you think it does what does minus actually mean.
If I asked you to shown me a pieces of wood say 10cm long or 4 inches long
I'm pretty sure you could manages to now show me a piece of wood -10cm
or -4 inches long ?

I could not, as the pieces with a negative value could not exist. However, I
could show you a piece of wood that was -4 inches long in comparison to a 10
inch piece of wood.

You asked about a NUMBER coming before zero.
For your benefit:
It does not necessarily have to be a negative value to come before zero.
Example a) -5, -4, -3, -2, -1, 0 result -1 comes before zero
Example b) 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, 0 result 1 comes before zero

With the big bang and time:
BANG! 1st pico second

'nuff.

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
news

On 26/06/17 12:35, Richard wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...

On Thursday, 22 June 2017 17:48:02 UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
T i m wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 11:09:01 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

Think the basis of spirituality is that you realise no human no
matter how
clever etc is omnipotent.

Religions, on the other hand, can claim their God is better than any
other.

I like Ricky Gervais's POV on the matter:

"There are about 3,000 Gods to choose from. You dont believe in
2,999 Gods, and I dont believe in just one more.€� ;-)

Although we may have a fair few educated guesses as to how the universe
started (big bang or whatever) there is still the problem of what
existed
before then. Which is far beyond my pay grade.

Another problem is what is 'before' then if time as we know it was
created with the universe then we have the problem of not knowing what
before was at that point in time of creation because time didnlt exist.

Forgetting about the lack of understanding, why would either of those two
"problems" actually be a problem?

well that depends on your definition of a problem of course.

Rendering a Universe into human terms will always provide and incomplete
and inadequate description, but its still a more sophisticated one than a
worm has.

All relative. An incomplete and inadequate description in real speak is "we
really don't have a ****ing clue".


Socialism excepted.
Whereas with socialism, they really don't have a ****ing clue.

In article ,
Dan S. MacAbre wrote:
Michel de Montaigne, way back in the 16th century:

"Man is certainly stark mad; he cannot make a worm, and yet he will be
making gods by dozens."

I like that. ;-)

--
*Why don't you ever see the headline "Psychic Wins Lottery"?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Monday, 26 June 2017 14:04:04 UTC+1, Richard wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...

On Monday, 26 June 2017 13:29:22 UTC+1, Richard wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...

On Monday, 26 June 2017 13:11:18 UTC+1, Richard wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...

On Monday, 26 June 2017 12:36:00 UTC+1, Richard wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...

On Thursday, 22 June 2017 17:48:02 UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:
In article ,
T i m wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 11:09:01 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

Think the basis of spirituality is that you realise no human
no
matter
how
clever etc is omnipotent.

Religions, on the other hand, can claim their God is better
than
any
other.

I like Ricky Gervais's POV on the matter:

"There are about 3,000 Gods to choose from. You dont believe
in
2,999 Gods, and I dont believe in just one more.€� ;-)

Although we may have a fair few educated guesses as to how the
universe
started (big bang or whatever) there is still the problem of
what
existed
before then. Which is far beyond my pay grade.

Another problem is what is 'before' then if time as we know it was
created
with the universe then we have the problem of not knowing what
before
was
at that point in time of creation because time didnlt exist.

Forgetting about the lack of understanding, why would either of
those
two
"problems" actually be a problem?

Before requires time to have existed and it didn't before it was
created.

There wasn't a before.


It's like asking what number comes before zero.

minus something

No minus doesn't come before zero.

Please explain why.

Please explain why you think it does what does minus actually mean.
If I asked you to shown me a pieces of wood say 10cm long or 4 inches long
I'm pretty sure you could manages to now show me a piece of wood -10cm
or -4 inches long ?

I could not,

exactly.


as the pieces with a negative value could not exist. However, I
could show you a piece of wood that was -4 inches long in comparison to a 10
inch piece of wood.

But that's relative to another where was this other universe when ours went big bang the older universe will then be seconds older than the new emerging one, but that;s the only refernce point you have.


You asked about a NUMBER coming before zero.
For your benefit:
It does not necessarily have to be a negative value to come before zero.
Example a) -5, -4, -3, -2, -1, 0 result -1 comes before zero
Example b) 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, 0 result 1 comes before zero

With the big bang and time:
BANG! 1st pico second

'nuff.

Like yuo can have minus energy befire the big bang.
what is minus energy ?
At the time of the big bang temerature was created there's no minus temperature at the time and thens no now if yuo use the corresct scale of the Kelvin you get absolute zero, no energy no, minus energy no minus kelvin temeratures why is that ?

On Monday, 26 June 2017 14:42:53 UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Dan S. MacAbre wrote:
Michel de Montaigne, way back in the 16th century:

"Man is certainly stark mad; he cannot make a worm, and yet he will be
making gods by dozens."

I like that. ;-)

Well it's the lostes we;ve got to DIY for a while ;-)


make yuor own GOd I'm sure we'll all have the same designs



--
*Why don't you ever see the headline "Psychic Wins Lottery"?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Monday, 26 June 2017 12:57:45 UTC+1, whisky-dave wrote:
On Monday, 26 June 2017 12:36:00 UTC+1, Richard wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...

On Thursday, 22 June 2017 17:48:02 UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
T i m wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 11:09:01 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

Think the basis of spirituality is that you realise no human no matter
how
clever etc is omnipotent.

Religions, on the other hand, can claim their God is better than any
other.

I like Ricky Gervais's POV on the matter:

"There are about 3,000 Gods to choose from. You dont believe in
2,999 Gods, and I dont believe in just one more.€� ;-)

Although we may have a fair few educated guesses as to how the universe
started (big bang or whatever) there is still the problem of what existed
before then. Which is far beyond my pay grade.

Another problem is what is 'before' then if time as we know it was created
with the universe then we have the problem of not knowing what before was
at that point in time of creation because time didnlt exist.

Forgetting about the lack of understanding, why would either of those two
"problems" actually be a problem?

Before requires time to have existed and it didn't before it was created.

It's like asking what number comes before zero.

Minus one/-1.

On 26/06/2017 13:51, whisky-dave wrote:
On Monday, 26 June 2017 13:29:22 UTC+1, Richard wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...

On Monday, 26 June 2017 13:11:18 UTC+1, Richard wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...

On Monday, 26 June 2017 12:36:00 UTC+1, Richard wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...

On Thursday, 22 June 2017 17:48:02 UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
T i m wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 11:09:01 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

Think the basis of spirituality is that you realise no human no
matter
how
clever etc is omnipotent.

Religions, on the other hand, can claim their God is better than
any
other.

I like Ricky Gervais's POV on the matter:

"There are about 3,000 Gods to choose from. You dont believe in
2,999 Gods, and I dont believe in just one more.€� ;-)

Although we may have a fair few educated guesses as to how the
universe
started (big bang or whatever) there is still the problem of what
existed
before then. Which is far beyond my pay grade.

Another problem is what is 'before' then if time as we know it was
created
with the universe then we have the problem of not knowing what before
was
at that point in time of creation because time didnlt exist.

Forgetting about the lack of understanding, why would either of those
two
"problems" actually be a problem?

Before requires time to have existed and it didn't before it was
created.

There wasn't a before.


It's like asking what number comes before zero.

minus something

No minus doesn't come before zero.

Please explain why.

Please explain why you think it does what does minus actually mean.
If I asked you to shown me a pieces of wood say 10cm long or 4 inches long I'm pretty sure you could manages to now show me a piece of wood -10cm or -4 inches long ?

Being pedantic, I can. Based on origin and direction of the measuring
point. Just as I can walk 10 steps South of my starting point and have
measured -10 steps North. We both know that I have travelled 10 steps (a
positive value), but stating the direction and reference makes it a
negative one. Although it would be most odd to measure a piece of wood
this way, it is not prohibited by an mathematic or physical laws.

SteveW

On Monday, 26 June 2017 21:06:43 UTC+1, Steve Walker wrote:
On 26/06/2017 13:51, whisky-dave wrote:


No minus doesn't come before zero.

Please explain why.

Please explain why you think it does what does minus actually mean.
If I asked you to shown me a pieces of wood say 10cm long or 4 inches long I'm pretty sure you could manages to now show me a piece of wood -10cm or -4 inches long ?

Being pedantic, I can. Based on origin and direction of the measuring
point. Just as I can walk 10 steps South of my starting point and have
measured -10 steps North. We both know that I have travelled 10 steps (a
positive value), but stating the direction and reference makes it a
negative one. Although it would be most odd to measure a piece of wood
this way, it is not prohibited by an mathematic or physical laws.

SteveW

It's called a vector.