Conquer Club

Lionz always was my most successful multi.

Life is all the evidence you need.

by that reasoning: 'war is all the evidence you need'

Asking for evidence has about as much point as asking if this is a vase, or two faces.



Even unintentionally, one's current perception often influences how the evidence is viewed.

Pizza is seriously a good thing, you guys.

your pizza needs more pepperoni and salami

Wow I can't believe this topic is still going. I have been gone for years and here this still is. If any of you have an in with the Mods tell them I need to recover my old account. I don't know how to do it. I don't even remember my user name. I remember some of the players and some of the Mods and have pled them but no answer yet, evil semp,the forgivenone and Achilles, no answer yet, I can identify myself, but not playing yet, don't want the hunters on me saying foul. So any help pm me it will be appreciated. TY

GordonJn wrote:Wow I can't believe this topic is still going. I have been gone for years and here this still is. If any of you have an in with the Mods tell them I need to recover my old account. I don't know how to do it. I don't even remember my user name. I remember some of the players and some of the Mods and have pled them but no answer yet, evil semp,the forgivenone and Achilles, no answer yet, I can identify myself, but not playing yet, don't want the hunters on me saying foul. So any help pm me it will be appreciated. TY

All I can say is file an e-ticket.

http://support.conquerclub.com/

Achilles is pretty good at answering these.

subtleknifewield wrote:Asking for evidence has about as much point as asking if this is a vase, or two faces.



Even unintentionally, one's current perception often influences how the evidence is viewed.

That is neither a vase nor two faces, it's a black and white image of form. Any thought that you can see a face or a vase is only evidence of the psychological phenomena called "pareidolia". Either those who see a vase or those that see faces in such an image are clearly both wrong, as the evidence of this image is only clearly meant to play on the human mind's natural ability to pick out familiar forms from obtuse information.

If I were to show you such:



I could easily tell you that that is indeed a vase; however, the image you have posted is meant to perpetuate an age old conundrum that we have all seen since we were in elementary school.

I can find evidence of vases and faces; however, how is it that evidence for a "creator" is so alluding? A thousand years ago, if I were to tell you about subatomic particles, germ theory, or thermonuclear and quantum physics...you would have branded me mad (yet you still may). But the evidence has been found.

I think the concept of "god" is entirely up to the individual's perspective (and I think this is probably the cusp of your point), but I think science will show us (in the words of the movie 2010) "something wonderful".

The bearded white man in the sky concept is indeed a programmed notion that we (as a whole) have been bombarded with for thousands of years, and to clear the "slate" of perpetual ignorance that has plagued our collective psyches for generations is shocking and many do not want to face or put forth the energy to believe otherwise. They are invariably set in their beliefs and are comfortable with it. I do not condemn them or criticize them for this. It has been the human tendency to create and imagine that there is something greater than themselves and that their is some archetype that can have human-like characteristics and can be invoked to bring us safety, feed us, save us from perceived evil, embrace us as we die, etc...

To realize that the universe is more akin to a giant computer is disturbing, and I am sure those that are religious will disagree with the "evidence" as they have with evolution...the world is a sphere...the earth orbits around the sun, and so on.

If instead of seeing atoms, molecules, quarks, and such as what we perceive them to be; and we begin to see them as the equivalent to mathematical numbers, we would soon realize that the universe is closer to a holographic computer program than anything else. Then you might want to ask "who wrote the program". The evidence for "god" is either all around you or it is always fleeting from our fingertips and understanding. I prefer the mystery of some type of "creator" or "creating force". A force that can have intelligence...that exists but does not exist. That appears and evaporates through dimensions of existence.

As there is a binary code that your computer uses using a system of 1's and 0's...how is it any different if the universe uses the same principal, but instead of 1's and 0's...it uses stars and black holes?

Anyway, the debate will always continue. The evidence will never be satisfactory to those that choose not to believe, and to those that believe the evidence has already been gathered all around us.

If I lose one testicle, my remaining one will grow to twice it's size. If that's not evidence, I don't know what is.

Funkyterrance wrote:If I lose one testicle, my remaining one will grow to twice it's size. If that's not evidence, I don't know what is.

Body of Christ?

Bosons are proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy.

Yes, I always loved Mr Smee.

subtleknifewield wrote:Asking for evidence has about as much point as asking if this is a vase, or two faces.



Even unintentionally, one's current perception often influences how the evidence is viewed.

More like asking if it's a vagina. Only being seriously deluded or desperate could skew the evidence enough for you to see it.

DaGip wrote:

subtleknifewield wrote:Asking for evidence has about as much point as asking if this is a vase, or two faces.



Even unintentionally, one's current perception often influences how the evidence is viewed.

That is neither a vase nor two faces, it's a black and white image of form. Any thought that you can see a face or a vase is only evidence of the psychological phenomena called "pareidolia". Either those who see a vase or those that see faces in such an image are clearly both wrong, as the evidence of this image is only clearly meant to play on the human mind's natural ability to pick out familiar forms from obtuse information.

If I were to show you such:



I could easily tell you that that is indeed a vase; however, the image you have posted is meant to perpetuate an age old conundrum that we have all seen since we were in elementary school.

I can find evidence of vases and faces; however, how is it that evidence for a "creator" is so alluding? A thousand years ago, if I were to tell you about subatomic particles, germ theory, or thermonuclear and quantum physics...you would have branded me mad (yet you still may). But the evidence has been found.

I think the concept of "god" is entirely up to the individual's perspective (and I think this is probably the cusp of your point), but I think science will show us (in the words of the movie 2010) "something wonderful".

The bearded white man in the sky concept is indeed a programmed notion that we (as a whole) have been bombarded with for thousands of years, and to clear the "slate" of perpetual ignorance that has plagued our collective psyches for generations is shocking and many do not want to face or put forth the energy to believe otherwise. They are invariably set in their beliefs and are comfortable with it. I do not condemn them or criticize them for this. It has been the human tendency to create and imagine that there is something greater than themselves and that their is some archetype that can have human-like characteristics and can be invoked to bring us safety, feed us, save us from perceived evil, embrace us as we die, etc...

To realize that the universe is more akin to a giant computer is disturbing, and I am sure those that are religious will disagree with the "evidence" as they have with evolution...the world is a sphere...the earth orbits around the sun, and so on.

If instead of seeing atoms, molecules, quarks, and such as what we perceive them to be; and we begin to see them as the equivalent to mathematical numbers, we would soon realize that the universe is closer to a holographic computer program than anything else. Then you might want to ask "who wrote the program". The evidence for "god" is either all around you or it is always fleeting from our fingertips and understanding. I prefer the mystery of some type of "creator" or "creating force". A force that can have intelligence...that exists but does not exist. That appears and evaporates through dimensions of existence.

As there is a binary code that your computer uses using a system of 1's and 0's...how is it any different if the universe uses the same principal, but instead of 1's and 0's...it uses stars and black holes?

Anyway, the debate will always continue. The evidence will never be satisfactory to those that choose not to believe, and to those that believe the evidence has already been gathered all around us.

Thank you for summing up my point so nicely...well, I can't say summing up, since it was a lot longer than the words I used, but still

Nymeria Stark wrote:

subtleknifewield wrote:Asking for evidence has about as much point as asking if this is a vase, or two faces.



Even unintentionally, one's current perception often influences how the evidence is viewed.

More like asking if it's a vagina. Only being seriously deluded or desperate could skew the evidence enough for you to see it.

Well, looking at it one way you could see it like that, so it's kind of building on my point. Perception can and DOES influence reality.

This is it? This is the BEST evidence for God?