Jump to content

Roel van Houten

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


0 Neutral
  1. There must be a way to lure actual time travelers to this forum :) I was thinking. The John Titor story is still all over the internet after all these years. Surely time travelers in the future will learn about this hoax as a way to cover up their time travel activities. I can imagine a lecture in a 2036 time travel class: "Y'all just mention an IBM 5100 and everybody will be convinced that you're not a time traveler." Anyway, belated happy 2012 to everyone! :)
  2. Hello fellow time travel enthusiasts... I hereby want to express my sincere apologies for leaving the forum so sudden and I hope you will all welcome me back. I see that quite a few people are still active on the forum and I hope I can engage in discussion again. Kind regards, Roel
  3. I think it's disturbing that the death of the pope is getting so much attention. While 400 to 500 people were dying in Indonesia as the result of an earthquake, people at pretty much every newsstation decided that the (upcoming) death of an 84 year old man was more significant. Sad! People need to get their priorities straight. I hope they find a more sensible successor. One that - for instance - promotes the use of condoms, instead of discouraging people to use them. Roel
  4. Shapes are a human concept. If we have to look at the universe as some kind of shape, I'd suggest we take simplest the shape we can imagine. The more complex you make it, the more human it becomes...
  5. Mmmh, funny, a friend of my mother mentioned this particular year. She said this year will be a year where we will transcend to a higher level. She practices Reikki. Roel
  6. judgmential :) Lets talk English here guys! Much easier for everyone to understand.
  7. Still, if you would be so kind to use one thread instead of 10, it would be greatly appreciated. Thanks. Roel
  8. Wow... I wonder what's keeping me from moving this thread to the Time Travel Claims forum. Probably just laziness. Nothing to worry about folks ;)
  9. Re: Fallacies About God & Life Once you die, there's nothing left to process the information with. Think about the oil example I gave earlier in this thread. Once the oil flows from the pipe into the sea, the oil looses its original function. Information flows into the sea of energy and loses its coherence and significance along the way. So yes, I do believe that in some way our physical form is an essential part of our selfawareness. No, not at all. The reason why I do not wish to read "Conversations with God" is because of the apalling self-righteous tone that was very present in the excerpt. I consider myself open-minded, but at the same time very down to earth. I refuse to unthinkingly accept ideas that are contrary to my believes. Especially when the writer, in this case, thinks he knows it all. The title sounds more promising to begin with, so - after reading the interview - I might give this one a try. :) Fair enough. Same applies to me though. You can say it's there, but as long as I don't experience it, you can't expect me to believe you. Basically, yes. But let me rephrase that. In 28 years, none of my senses have been able to even sense a slight indication of what you claim is there. Although you might think differently, your argument is just as strong or weak as mine. All you do is provide valid scientific facts or theories and blindly throw them in the blender along with some spiritual ingredients. And when I disagree, you'll just say something like "It doesn't matter what you think, I'm right anyway.. you'll find out someday". It's not a choice. I just don't experience it. Also, it's not limiting at all... You are limiting yourself to the hallucination you have tricked yourself into believing. Kind regards, Roel
  10. Re: Fallacies About God & Life Uhm, that's hardly torture, is it? I don't think you and Ray are being ridiculed any more than I am. :) Soon, soon :)
  11. Re: Fallacies About God & Life True. And I don't think that will ever happen. I'm simply not capable enough to debunk any of your scientific or mathematic descriptions. BUT, you haven't been able to demonstrate that your science is inextricably linked to the existence of a self-aware creator. That's what I mean when I'm talking about "the thin thread between science and spirituality". You will find an answer for anything in the Quabalah, but that's only because you are so eager to find it there. Your theory will stand, even if you take Quabalah out of the equation. If you reread the paragraph you will notice that I am trying to get across that scientific knowledge is being shared. So although you might claim that many scientific facts can be found in ancient texts, they never gather new facts with help of these texts. It was definitely not my intention to talk about tensor mathematics or how comprehensible it is. It is ironic though that you managed to give a very simple and rudimentary definition of tensors. If that's what you think I am saying, you haven't been reading. Sure, there is a creative force in me. My brain allows me to create and manipulate things. Other people can do the same and affect my 3D-timeline. I'm simply stating that there was no self-aware creator that created life as we know it. During our lives we consume energy to do certain things. The construction of our brain, for instance, allows us to process information and to store it in our memory. When we come to the point where we are unable to consume energy, our brain loses its function and the information in it is lost. Even if this information can leave our brain, it will be useless without something to process it with. I like to compare it to an oil pipe that ends in the middle of a sea. The oil flows out and becomes useless because there is nothing to process it with. Just as sure as you are certain that they can escape. So now I am the one taking statements too literally? ;) Yes, but we also have a common sense of what's right and what's wrong. Anyway, the statement does not seem very significant to me. It's even a bit silly if you ask me. Replacing "right" and "wrong" with different descriptions is only making things unecessarily complicated. Or perhaps there is no creator. If someone wants me to learn Chinese, the best thing he can do is communicate in Chinese. But at some point he will have to give me some translations in English or Dutch, or else I will never understand the language. Instead of making up excuses why I am unable to communciate with our so-called creator, why don't you explore the possibility that this creator might not exist? Wrong. There's an infinite number of sides I can assign to concepts, only in this case I decided to assign only two. I could have come up with 1 or 3 sides, but the fact that there are two sides is based solely on a coincedence. Obviously not. If god "wants" to communicate with me, he's clearly not getting things his way. I have always considered god a big zero. :) Zero is also the number of gods that actually exist. Either that, or you've been walking the wrong path all along. The problem is that you think you're already there, which - regardless of what you believe - probably narrows YOUR scope. Even if that really were the case, it would only be because you behave no different from the guy that wants to convert me when I'm waiting for my tram on Central Station. It's really quite staggering how a smart man like yourself can lower his standards by saying "no matter what you believe, I'm right anyway". Because that's what you've been doing the entire thread. I'm still quite busy finishing my new place, hence the late hour postings ;) As soon as I allow myself some time to take pictures, you'll be the first to know. Kind regards, Roel
  12. Re: Fallacies About God & Life Oh yes, I agree. The most common misconception about god is that people actually believe he exists. The most common misconception about life is that god created it. Sure... These are indeed fallacies about god. Why? Because, in my view, he doesn't exist in the first place. That's not really a fallacy. We are seperate from each other. The fact that we are all part of this "sea of energy" we've been discussing, does not mean we are not seperate. It's the way that energy is "molded" into different "shapes" that makes us seperate from eachother. That's a fallacy indeed. There is enough, but it is unequally divided. It depends on how you look at things. There are two sides to this concept: For instance, I consider myself to be a much better human being than Hitler. Ironically that is - in a way - the same mistake he made. So yes, in a way it is a fallacy to think that some human beings are better than other human beings. After all people who believe in god are just as good as people who don't believe ;) If anyone or anything is capable of creating an entire universe, is it too much to ask to communicate in such a way that I can sense it? Even a dog does a better job communicating with me. So lets change this statement to: God does not exist and is only real to those who want to believe. I did not reply to some of the other statements, either because I agree or I don't find them interesting. However, this statement is obviously NON-FUNCTIONAL and therefore wrong ;) Think of it... if there is no right and wrong, how can there be fallacies????? Geesh. Not on my shift ;) Your personality and knowledge are in your brain. In my view, that's the only place they can reside. When you die, your brain no longer holds this information and consequently your knowledge and personality are lost. Let's not try, shall we? ;) Yet, I can create and achieve things, I can give and receive love and I can be happy... All that without the help from a (non-existent) creator. Sigh. There's the thin thread between science and spirituality again. At least scientific knowledge is shared in a comprehensible way. What new facts have we learned from the Quabalah that haven't already been discovered by science? If the Quabalah really holds so many mystical truths, then why don't the people who understand these ancient texts share this information so that we can all learn from it. The answer is probably "patterns". Whenever a scientist makes a new discovery, a Quabalist will find a matching pattern somewhere and say "oh look, it was here all the time, right under our nose". I might be wrong in thinking so, but you haven't been able to paint a different picture for me.
  13. Re: Fallacies About God & Life Okay, there are two sides to this story. 1) If we look at the classic image of god, we can easily say he's never made an attempt to communicate with me. God in the traditional sense is supposed to be omnipotent. Therefore any attempt he makes, is succesful by definition. I've never noticed anything whatsoever, so obviously he has never tried. 2) You could argue that the classic image of god is inaccurate and that he did try to communicate with me, but somehow failed. That means he's (1) incapable of communicating, (2) doesn't wish to communicate with me, or (3) he demands an effort from me. In all three cases he did not make an attempt to actually communcicate with me. Roel
  14. Re: Fallacies About God & Life I was on my way to a nice warm bed, but I had to reply to this particular passage in your post. I'll reply to the rest of the post later this week. Anyway. I know for certain that god has never made any attempt whatsoever to communicate with me. That's a plain, simple and irrefutable fact.
  • Create New...