Time Travel Isn't Possible…Or Is It?

What does make the world turn?
Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26561
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Time Travel Isn't Possible…Or Is It?

Postby Matthew Ellard » Thu Oct 19, 2017 10:08 pm

Matthew Ellard wrote:You just destroyed your own "philosophy" again.
Matthew Ellard wrote:A photon created and destroyed does not have to be observed by any consciousness to actually exist. We can measure it in other ways...after the event plus photons, electrons and protons aren't conscious

Confidencia wrote: Rightly so, nevertheless there must be consciousness whichever method you use you have to use memory.
No. No one has to have a memory of the photon, for the photon to actually exist. The photons in the early Big bang simply had to exist or we wouldn't be here today.

Let me laugh at you some more. Are you claiming there were no photons in the early universe because you, 13.6 billion years later, can't remember them?
:lol:

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26561
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Time Travel Isn't Possible…Or Is It?

Postby Matthew Ellard » Thu Oct 19, 2017 10:14 pm

Confidencia wrote:The consciousness is not the observer. It is merely the medium in which the observations take place. The observed, observer and its observation are mental constructs. .

You just destroyed your own religion again! :lol:

If there were no living things making mental constructs in the early Universe does that mean photons, electrons and protons didn't exist? Then how did complex molecules form later, that allowed for living things to arise?

Your religion makes no sense and has logic holes a truck can drive through.
:lol:

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8183
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Time Travel Isn't Possible…Or Is It?

Postby Poodle » Thu Oct 19, 2017 10:22 pm

Confidencia wrote:
Poodle wrote:Confidencia, you appear to be insisting that the universe could not exist without a consciousness to observe it. Is that an accurate summation of your views?


The consciousness is not the observer. It is merely the medium in which the observations take place. The observed, observer and its observation are mental constructs. You can observe the observation and the object of observation but not the observer.

OK. No point at all in asking you a question in the vague and distant hope of a meaningful response. You're a waste of time. Confidencia. Mine and yours.

User avatar
salomed
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1245
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2011 4:18 pm
Custom Title: Cartesian Skeptic

Re: Time Travel Isn't Possible…Or Is It?

Postby salomed » Fri Oct 20, 2017 4:19 pm

Nikki Nyx wrote:Correction: I know nothing about you except the arguments you have proffered in this forum on a number of issues.


Actually, you will find, I have not proffered any arguments, at least since you have been on this forum. Long long ago I realised that even if you stumbled upon something of the magnitude and indubitability as the identity of indiscernibles the naysaying, adhominem , derailing and distraction would still be subsumed in the thick swamps of ego, entrenchment and closed mindedness. Yes, I really think it is that:) But its great for getting legwork done for you!

I agree with you that time travel to the past is not possible, although my reasoning differs from yours.


I think there are other reasons too. The simple fact of changing the past entailing a contradiction. And in terms of the cosmology of it it seems that even of a machine were possible the energy requirements would be too much for the universe... or require exotic matter....wormholes!

What is your reason for thinking it is impossible?

But what about to the future? Do you infer contradictions arising when time traveling to the future?


No not at all. Relativity makes it a certainty. There must be nonrelativistic theories too.... wormholes... into the future! etc. But I dont know about those and haven't really thought about them.

Cheerio!
Comment savez-vous que vous ne parlez pas bollox?
Sur internet: http://bit.ly/14A0n9H

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8183
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Time Travel Isn't Possible…Or Is It?

Postby Poodle » Fri Oct 20, 2017 8:58 pm

!
"something of the magnitude and indubitability as the identity of indiscernibles "
Sheer artistry, Salomed. Nice to see you again.

Confidencia
Poster
Posts: 308
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 9:43 am

Re: Time Travel Isn't Possible…Or Is It?

Postby Confidencia » Sun Oct 22, 2017 8:38 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:Confidencia

You fail to understand the importance of empirical testing, and the fallacy of logic and thought.


What you take to be real is purely mental. This real world you talk of is a mental formation. What do you think is at the root of your testing? Is it not a thought process? Does not the thought precede the test? However which way you look at it you have got to think about something which essentially cannot be thought about. That's what thought is, it is a compensatory process that allows you to envisage that which cannot be seen. When you see the sun, you don't think about it, you see it! You cannot image the real; it is not an experience although it can be experienced. It has nothing to do with the process of thought or logic; only in terms of simplicity. What is real is illogical, counterintuitive.
You are continually contradicting yourself because you are on flimsy grounds and you have not really understood because you are steep in acquisition.

Humanity suffered a hiatus in all scientific progress for 2,000 years because of the influence of the Greek philosophers, and the Christian church, both of which denied the importance of empiricism, and emphasized logic (the Greeks) and authority (the church).


Simple logic is undeniable, it is only when you start talking about the principles of reason that problems arise. Reasons are many and under the influences of desire and fear; absolutes are not to be discussed, they must be experienced
Your error is in your belief that there is an objective world. The truth is objective in the sense that it is uninfluenced by personal bias and prejudice but the world is purely subjective. Truth is external to and independent of the mind. What appears to you is actually a rendition of brain consciousness.

Anyone who does what you are doing, and relies on some kind of mental inspiration in trying to find the truth, is doomed to error.


You are speaking for yourself here. It is you that's relying on mental inspiration, I've already told you, what is real cannot be imagined or thought about. Truth is simple but you continually complicate it by insisting on some sort of empirical data that could not arise unless thought about. Observation is one thing but to continually refer to the memory of observation is something else. Please look in your dictionary for the meaning of the word contradiction.

Truth is loving and lovable, it includes all, accepts all and purifies all. It is untruth that is difficult and the source of error. By all means do some testing and make some observations but by putting too much emphasis on the outcome you miss the point of evaluation. You learn to expect and demand as opposed to accepting and understanding. A false notion by its very nature is empty and for this reason it is always in search of confirmation and reassurance. It is afraid of being exposed as being untrue thus identifies itself with any support however weak and momentary. Whatever it get it loses and asks for more. Nothing you can see, feel or think is so. And this is the problem with you people, your awareness is limited to its reflection in consciousness, you are conscious of your thoughts and feelings but you are not aware that you are conscious. You put too much trust in the conscious, then accuse me of relying on mental inspiration.
Testing is only a means to an end, it is not the end; for each discovery opens up new dimensions for more discovery.

The last 500 years of solid scientific progress has shown that, without empirical testing and objective results, it all all garbage.


Again the world that you think of is subjective, only truth is objective.
The last 500 year of empirical testing have simply pushed the goal posts further afield. What you think to be objective is loosely woven within the realms of the subjective mind. And it is to this end why science, philosophy or religion has not really tackled the problem of suffering and the ending of suffering. In this vein humanity is in the same position now as it was back then; in fact if anything the suffering has become more acute and on a much larger scale. So your argument about Greek philosophy Christian authority is a moot and contradictory one to say the least.

Confidencia
Poster
Posts: 308
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 9:43 am

Re: Time Travel Isn't Possible…Or Is It?

Postby Confidencia » Sun Oct 22, 2017 8:51 am

Poodle wrote:
Confidencia wrote:
Poodle wrote:Confidencia, you appear to be insisting that the universe could not exist without a consciousness to observe it. Is that an accurate summation of your views?


The consciousness is not the observer. It is merely the medium in which the observations take place. The observed, observer and its observation are mental constructs. You can observe the observation and the object of observation but not the observer.

OK. No point at all in asking you a question in the vague and distant hope of a meaningful response. You're a waste of time. Confidencia. Mine and yours.


Unless the understanding of what you are asking has come from your own understanding there is absolutely no point whatsoever. But you are right in your summation, no consciousness, no universe.

Confidencia
Poster
Posts: 308
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 9:43 am

Re: Time Travel Isn't Possible…Or Is It?

Postby Confidencia » Sun Oct 22, 2017 9:23 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:
Confidencia wrote:The consciousness is not the observer. It is merely the medium in which the observations take place. The observed, observer and its observation are mental constructs. .

[color=#000080]You just destroyed your own religion again! :lol:

If there were no living things making mental constructs in the early Universe does that mean photons, electrons and protons didn't exist? Then how did complex molecules form later, that allowed for living things to arise?


Ive already told you. The light of life and consciousness was already the case, then you thought about it and the creation process ensued. Don't ask how, there is no end to reason; you will be better off asking why? The answer here will be final if your investigations are thorough.

Light was there in the beginning and it will be all that is left of the universe in the end. Consciousness is pure in the beginning, it is also pure in the end; it is only in the middle that it gets contaminated with the idea things.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
True Skeptic
Posts: 10033
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Time Travel Isn't Possible…Or Is It?

Postby Lance Kennedy » Sun Oct 22, 2017 7:21 pm

I suspect, Confidencia, that you are a lost cause. Your messages are nonsense.

For example, take your religious faith in logic. Logic has been described as the perfect way to make horrendous mistakes with perfect confidence. Logic has been the basis for horrible mistakes throughout history. For example, in medieval times, a man dying of blood loss from wounds would be bled to treat him, thus accelerating the death. There was a perfectly "logical " reason for this shocking process.

Only when empiricism replaced logic did this situation improve.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26561
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Time Travel Isn't Possible…Or Is It?

Postby Matthew Ellard » Sun Oct 22, 2017 9:51 pm

Confidencia wrote: Ive already told you.
Yes you keep repeating your same errors over and over again.

Your silly religion is predicated on photons, electrons and protons being conscious yet you can't explain why you think that, or supply an iota of evidence that this is the case.

You are just another confused religious follower seeking attention from normal people.
:lol:

User avatar
Major Malfunction
Has No Life
Posts: 11387
Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 6:20 am
Custom Title: Dérailleur Énigmatique

Re: Time Travel Isn't Possible…Or Is It?

Postby Major Malfunction » Mon Oct 23, 2017 6:53 pm

Particles (I say that just for the laymen) do contain information and seem to 'remember' it. Like bits and bytes.

But no way I'd say they contain singular intelligence.

Photons can't steer for {!#%@}. They can only go in straight lines, unless something else gets in the way.
This being was produced using the same process as other beings, and therefore, may contain traces of nuts.

Confidencia
Poster
Posts: 308
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 9:43 am

Re: Time Travel Isn't Possible…Or Is It?

Postby Confidencia » Mon Oct 23, 2017 8:34 pm

Matthew Ellard wrote:
Matthew Ellard wrote:You just destroyed your own "philosophy" again.
Matthew Ellard wrote:A photon created and destroyed does not have to be observed by any consciousness to actually exist. We can measure it in other ways...after the event plus photons, electrons and protons aren't conscious

Confidencia wrote: Rightly so, nevertheless there must be consciousness whichever method you use you have to use memory.
No. No one has to have a memory of the photon, for the photon to actually exist. The photons in the early Big bang simply had to exist or we wouldn't be here today.


This is painful. When I said my concern is not with the little nuances of the mind and its extraneous details, I meant all this labelling. The word photon does not relate, it is only a label that has been assigned to a piece of consciousness. It could have just as well have been labelled "ellards dung filled brain" so let me rephrase that last sentence for your tiny little mind. Consciousness (not photons) had to exist or we wouldn't be here today. If there is no consciousness there is no world. No world means no ideas of photons, electrons or any other ons you care to mention.

Let me laugh at you some more. Are you claiming there were no photons in the early universe because you, 13.6 billion years later, can't remember them? :lol:


I've already told you. All is contained in the consciousness. But let me put it a little more simply since you seem to be struggling to comprehend. Light has always been the case prior to its forms. If it wasn't there could be no possibility of any form of it to exist.

Now answer my question: If consciousness wasn't there then where did the memory of 13. 6 billion years come from? Memory is recognition, recognition is an awareness that something has been perceived before which to all intent and purpose implies consciousness prior to the count of 13.6 billion years.

Memory implies material, material implies consciousness.

Confidencia
Poster
Posts: 308
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 9:43 am

Re: Time Travel Isn't Possible…Or Is It?

Postby Confidencia » Mon Oct 23, 2017 8:39 pm

Matthew Ellard wrote:
Confidencia wrote: Ive already told you.
Yes you keep repeating your same errors over and over again.

Your silly religion is predicated on photons, electrons and protons being conscious yet you can't explain why you think that, or supply an iota of evidence that this is the case.

You are just another confused religious follower seeking attention from normal people.
:lol:


It's ironic that you talk of light but not yet switched on your own. :lol: :lol: :lol:
Last edited by Confidencia on Mon Oct 23, 2017 9:36 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Confidencia
Poster
Posts: 308
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 9:43 am

Re: Time Travel Isn't Possible…Or Is It?

Postby Confidencia » Mon Oct 23, 2017 9:35 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:I suspect, Confidencia, that you are a lost cause. Your messages are nonsense.


If you are stuck in a mental groove anything beyond that will appear nonsensical. Why are you still going on about logic when I've already told you that what is real is beyond logic? I only infer logic to express the simplicity of reality.

For example, take your religious faith in logic. Logic has been described as the perfect way to make horrendous mistakes with perfect confidence.
Logic has been the basis for horrible mistakes throughout history. For example, in medieval times, a man dying of blood loss from wounds would be bled to treat him, thus accelerating the death. There was a perfectly "logical " reason for this shocking process.


You are confused lance, what you are describing here is stupidity. Simple logic is simple logic. Like you wouldn't use a feather to hammer a nail into a piece of wood. Like I said when you start to delve into the principles of reason, basically exchanging stupid ideas, problems such as the one you describe above arise.

Only when empiricism replaced logic did this situation improve.


There is still a logic to your empiricism. The only difference is that now you have more knowledge to apply it to. As a whole you are still demonstrating the same stupidity as they did back then. People maybe living longer, but the problem of suffering and the ending of suffering has not be addressed.

What do think I meant when I said: You cannot image the real; It has nothing to do with the process of thought or logic; only in terms of simplicity. What is real is illogical, counterintuitive. ????

Empiricism is merely a form of logic it is deductive reasoning. You cannot reason out the unreasonable.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
True Skeptic
Posts: 10033
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Time Travel Isn't Possible…Or Is It?

Postby Lance Kennedy » Mon Oct 23, 2017 9:42 pm

Confidencia

I am not surprised at Matthew's messages. Your ideas are nonsense. There is no need for consciousness for a record to be left. If a paleontologist digs up a fossil, and deduces information about the past, that does not require the fossil to be conscious. It's mere presence carries data.

Empiricism is the key. You claim the problem of suffering still exists. Sure, but it is a lot less than it used to be. That reduction in suffering comes from the scientific revolution and the enlightenment it brought. For example, torture is no longer used in the western world as a means of extracting truth, because scientific thinking revealed that it did not. We no longer execute witches because scientific thinking showed that witches did not exist. I could list numerous such examples of how scientific thinking has destroyed practices causing human suffering. Simple logic was used for thousands of years, and brought nonsense to the world. Empiricism is the basis of science, and it brings truth and a reduction in human suffering.

Simple logic requires assumptions. If those assumptions are wrong the conclusion is wrong. Only empirical testing can reveal errors in assumptions, and without it, you are doomed to make mistakes.

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8183
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Time Travel Isn't Possible…Or Is It?

Postby Poodle » Mon Oct 23, 2017 9:51 pm

If I stand in a corner and cover my eyes and ask someone to rearrange the furniture, I'll hear all of the furniture-rearranging sound effects but I'll be safe in the knowledge that I am not visually conscious of the new furniture arrangement and, therefore, it never happened - the furniture is exactly where it was before I stood in the corner.
That's OK, then - all's well with the world. No - wait. It isn't, is it?
Oh - just a minute - it's because I can't see it that it doesn't exist, even though the person who did all of the shifting CAN see it. The shifter and I are in a strange duality of semi-real furniture arrangements, each knowing that our personal realities possess large variations albeit within the same physical space. Ah - at last I see the actuality.
I wish I'd known all of this earlier in my life - I could have been a professional Gooroo. Or a writer of highly speculative pseudoscience. What's the word I'm looking for?

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26561
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Time Travel Isn't Possible…Or Is It?

Postby Matthew Ellard » Mon Oct 23, 2017 10:21 pm

Confidencia wrote:This is painful.
Yes. Your spammed religious mantras are painful. :lol:

Confidencia wrote: The word photon does not relate, it is only a label that has been assigned to a piece of consciousness.
No. A photon is a photon. It is not "a piece of consciousness" otherwise it would not have interacted with other matter to allow the universe to be created.

You can't get around that mega -hole in your religion. If photons, electrons and protons were not real things, the universe would not be here. Your computer would not work.

Are you so stupid you think your consciousness makes your computer work even when you don't know what's inside of it?
:lol:

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26561
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Time Travel Isn't Possible…Or Is It?

Postby Matthew Ellard » Mon Oct 23, 2017 10:30 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:There is no need for consciousness for a record to be left.
Spot on.

A computer works because an extremely large numbers of photons and electrons do massively complex activities as they are real things . No consciousness can simulate and aggregate all those activities and magically create an observed result of a working computer.

Therefore Confidencia's religion is proven to be complete nonsensical religious bull-shit.

(Now watch Confidencia change the subject again into a useless Chopra expression and hide from this clear argument
:lol:

Confidencia
Poster
Posts: 308
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 9:43 am

Re: Time Travel Isn't Possible…Or Is It?

Postby Confidencia » Thu Oct 26, 2017 7:19 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:
Confidencia wrote: The word photon does not relate, it is only a label that has been assigned to a piece of consciousness.
No. A photon is a photon. It is not "a piece of consciousness" otherwise it would not have interacted with other matter to allow the universe to be created.


Matter interacts regardless of name sake, it was able to create a universe for precisely that reason. Consciousness creates the universe when it interacts with itself out of the love to be. Just as you interact with yourself when you are pulling on your little weener out of the love for sensory experience. :lol: :lol:

Consider the chemical element Gold. Now let's us say you have a block of this elemental gold, you melt it down to form a gold coin. Now fundamentally is there any difference between the block of gold and the newly formed coin? No! Of course not because in essence they are identical, in substance they differ only in regards to name and shape which incidentally have been invented by the mind. Just to illustrate a point; the gold coin is still gold. The names and shape is there for your convenience, not for the gold. Now the word "coin" just as the word "gold" are labels that have been projected onto the consciousness.

There are numerous forms of gold that you can derive out of gold, just as there are numerous names you can give to the forms but essentially it is gold. All forms can be melted down and reformed. Chuck them all into a furnace and they disappear. What is left ellard? Unless the gold is there where is the gold coin? Similarly out of consciousness all forms arise,,unless consciousness is there to begin with where is the photon? A photon is a form of consciousness, the element gold is a form of consciousness, the air we breath is a form of consciousness. The list is exhaustive because fundamentally it is all consciousness.


You can't get around that mega -hole in your religion. If photons, electrons and protons were not real things, the universe would not be here. Your computer would not work.



I just have, the question is have you the ability to comprehend it? The universe is here because of you not the photon. You as consciousness invented the photon. A real thing is a derivative of the real, just as a gold coin is a derivative of gold. All things in consciousness, including consciousness itself have a source. Unlike consciousness the source of a thing in the consciousness is consciousness. In other words the source of all things made of gold is obviously gold the source of all forms in the consciousness is obviously consciousness. But the source of consciousness cannot be an object in the consciousness because consciousness is of an higher order than that of a thing in the consciousness; it is beyond consciousness. If you are alert and in full awareness this is regarded as simple science, simple logic; ABC stuff.


Are you so stupid you think your consciousness makes your computer work even when you don't know what's inside of it? :lol:


Without my consciousness there is not even the computer much less a working one.
Do you know what's going on inside your own body at any given moment? Does not knowing impair the functionality of your body? Consciousness as a whole makes it work, you need not have to know how. Are you so stupid as to deny the obvious?

Now, you have not yet answer the question:

If consciousness wasn't there then where did the memory of 13. 6 billion years come from?

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8183
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Time Travel Isn't Possible…Or Is It?

Postby Poodle » Thu Oct 26, 2017 11:38 am

You keep asking this fatuous question, Con. I wonder why?
Let's go for it and watch you wriggle. There are records of, but no memory of, the last 13.6 billion years. Or are you redefining the word memory?
Go.
(FYI, my reference is the OED).

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26561
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Time Travel Isn't Possible…Or Is It?

Postby Matthew Ellard » Thu Oct 26, 2017 10:58 pm

Matthew Ellard wrote:No. A photon is a photon. It is not "a piece of consciousness" otherwise it would not have interacted with other matter to allow the universe to be created.
Confidencia wrote:Matter interacts regardless of name sake
I see....so matter does not have to be observed to exist. This is in direct conflict with all your earlier posts.

Do you think at all before posting?
:lol:


Confidencia wrote:Consciousness creates the universe when it interacts with itself out of the love to be.
How many bongs did you pull before posting that load of gibberish? You are now claiming the Big Bang was in love with itself! :lol:


Matthew Ellard wrote: You can't get around that mega -hole in your religion. If photons, electrons and protons were not real things, the universe would not be here. Your computer would not work.
Confidencia wrote: The universe is here because of you not the photon. You as consciousness invented the photon.
No. The electrons were already here and in my computer when I bought it. My computer works in the same way for the factory that tested it, for myself and anyone else who uses it. Therefore the electrons inside it cannot be a creation of our individual consciousness.

You have destroyed you own religious framework yet again. This is getting too easy.
:lol:

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26561
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Time Travel Isn't Possible…Or Is It?

Postby Matthew Ellard » Thu Oct 26, 2017 11:03 pm

Confidencia wrote: If consciousness wasn't there then where did the memory of 13. 6 billion years come from?
The evidence the universe is 13.6 billion years old comes from the scientific measurement of the cosmic microwave background from the big bang. Consciousness could be enirely missing from the entire universe and yet that evidence would still be there.

You have destroyed your own religious framework again.
:D

(I wonder if Confidencia is trying to appear incredibly stupid on purpose? )

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8183
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Time Travel Isn't Possible…Or Is It?

Postby Poodle » Thu Oct 26, 2017 11:11 pm

No - even with great actors, there's always something to give the game away. Con's representation of stoopid is just about perfect - it can't be an act.

User avatar
Phoenix76
Poster
Posts: 317
Joined: Fri Jun 09, 2017 7:16 am
Custom Title: Phoenix76
Location: Qld, Australia

Re: Time Travel Isn't Possible…Or Is It?

Postby Phoenix76 » Fri Oct 27, 2017 7:38 am

Well I did start this thread with the hope of getting some interesting discussion. And yes I did get that - at the start. I guess it's like many threads, they start off on subject but lose the track shortly thereafter.

Look, I think I'm a reasonably intelligent being, although some may dispute that, but when I read Confidencia's comments, all I see is dribble. And I have read Con's dribble, not only on this thread.

In fact, reading Con's dribble gives me a headache, my eyes start going in circles, and I just have to go and get another beer so that I can finish reading the garbage.

I have no idea, whatsoever, who the hell Confidencia is. Male, female, other?? Hmm, perhaps other, because no legitimate male or female would consider writing this crap. Oh, sorry, there is one other, Gorgeous! But perhaps this is all too deep for he, she or it.

But I guess we have to expect these type people invading the normally intelligent discussion, or even banter, that we have on this skeptics forum. I mean, skepticism invites different opinions, but one should always be open to other ideas. Whether you accept those ideas or not is not really relevant. But to persistently post the type of drivel that Con and Gorg love to impose upon us, sadly displays a lack of educated skill in debating and discussion. Oh well, I'll just wait for Con's next load of diatribe refuting my opinion.

User avatar
Major Malfunction
Has No Life
Posts: 11387
Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 6:20 am
Custom Title: Dérailleur Énigmatique

Re: Time Travel Isn't Possible…Or Is It?

Postby Major Malfunction » Fri Oct 27, 2017 8:45 am

Matt and Poodle need their chew toys and kitten paws to keep them entertained. Don't deny them. :P
This being was produced using the same process as other beings, and therefore, may contain traces of nuts.

User avatar
Abdul Alhazred
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2693
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 9:08 pm
Custom Title: Yes that one.
Location: Chicago

Re: Time Travel Isn't Possible…Or Is It?

Postby Abdul Alhazred » Fri Oct 27, 2017 4:25 pm

The End of Eternity by Isaac Asimov.

The unspoken implication is if time travel is possible, it will never be discovered, because ...

Spoiler:
A bunch of do-gooder time travelers keep messing around with history.

The final "edit" prevents time travel from being invented so we can fulfill our destiny -- that being the Foundation universe or something.
Scientists don't know everything, therefore my favorite flavor of stoopidz is true.

Confidencia
Poster
Posts: 308
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 9:43 am

Re: Time Travel Isn't Possible…Or Is It?

Postby Confidencia » Sat Oct 28, 2017 10:52 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:Confidencia

I am not surprised at Matthew's messages. Your ideas are nonsense. There is no need for consciousness for a record to be left.


You talk as though you have proof of a world beyond your own consciousness. Which in itself is just as ridiculous as the notion that there need not be any consciousness for a record to be left. Every moment of every waking hour the consciousness creates, records and stores images. it is painfully obvious consciousness is the record and you are the proof of it.

If a paleontologist digs up a fossil, and deduces information about the past, that does not require the fossil to be conscious. It's mere presence carries data.


No of course not, nobody said it did. However the palaeontologist, the fossil and its information
requires a conscious observer to recall the data that has previously been recorded.
You are forgetting one thing lance the past and future tenses are not real, they are ideas in the mind; they are mental constructs under the observation of a conscious observer. The information about the past is already a potential in the future, it could not have been brought into the now if it were not already the case. Consciousness contains that potential. Unless there is consciousness that data cannot exist.

Empiricism is the key. You claim the problem of suffering still exists. Sure, but it is a lot less than it used to be. That reduction in suffering comes from the scientific revolution and the enlightenment it brought.


The truth of it is that the scientific revolution has brought about nothing but more suffering. Whichever way you look at it the human problem of suffering and the ending of suffering still exists, it has done so since the dawn of time. No amount of scientific revolutionary enlightenment can bring about a change, this is mere wishful thinking on your part. If you look more closely you will see that on the whole suffering increases along with the expansion of time. Everything is on the increase exponentially. But if you are indifferent to your own suffering you will not see the full extent of the suffering as a whole.

For example, torture is no longer used in the western world as a means of extracting truth, because scientific thinking revealed that it did not. We no longer execute witches because scientific thinking showed that witches did not exist. I could list numerous such examples of how scientific thinking has destroyed practices causing human suffering.


I'm sure you can but we need not have to go to such length to see the obvious. If you are sensitive enough looking in your own back yard will paint a good enough picture of the dire situation of human suffering. It is in mans power to put an end to suffering caused by ignorant stupidity and greed. Of course unless man matures in love and understanding history will simply repeat itself. A future left to itself merely repeats the past. Again, simple logic.

Simple logic was used for thousands of years, and brought nonsense to the world.


Logic was used, not simple logic, there is a difference. You do not create needless suffering through simple logic you eradicates it. For example if a particular experience caused you to suffer, simple logic would tell you not to repeat the experience so as to avoid the suffering that it caused.

Empiricism is the basis of science, and it brings truth and a reduction in human suffering.


Your obsession in testing and evaluating will not allow you to see the full extent of it. But to say that it brings truth is a gross misunderstanding besides the fact that empiricism has nothing to do with truth. It may solves problems in regards to existence on a short term basis but for every problem solved another is created. Your flapping about on the surface prevents you from seeing the bigger picture. You are not really going to grasp what I'm telling you because you are locked into your own little world make believe.

Simple logic requires assumptions.


Simple logic requires experience, it is belief that is based on assumption.

If those assumptions are wrong the conclusion is wrong. Only empirical testing can reveal errors in assumptions, and without it, you are doomed to make mistakes.


Mistakes are made every moment of every waking hour, such is the nature of the self conscious mind. But if you are busy trying to shape life you may as well wear blinkers. Consciousness is a play of opposites between mutually destructive discrepancies. The process of elimination and creation is ongoing even when you are not. No matter what the level of empirical testing it cannot stop the test of time. Through empirical testing and evaluation Newton believed in absolute time and space. Einstein with the same approach prove him wrong. Consciousness is of change, truth does not contradict.

Confidencia
Poster
Posts: 308
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 9:43 am

Re: Time Travel Isn't Possible…Or Is It?

Postby Confidencia » Sat Oct 28, 2017 11:14 pm

Matthew Ellard wrote:A computer works because an extremely large numbers of photons and electrons do massively complex activities as they are real things . No consciousness can simulate and aggregate all those activities and magically create an observed result of a working computer.


There is no such thing as a real thing. Photons, an electrons are imaginary. There is only light and on this light you stick your labels.

Therefore Confidencia's religion is proven to be complete nonsensical religious bull-shit.

(Now watch Confidencia change the subject again into a useless Chopra expression and hide from this clear argument [/color] :lol:


There is no clear argument, only you waffling on about your book findings. But it would be nice if you could exercise some clear thinking for yourself and show some intelligence whilst you are at it.

Have you answered my question? I bet you haven't.

Confidencia
Poster
Posts: 308
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 9:43 am

Re: Time Travel Isn't Possible…Or Is It?

Postby Confidencia » Sat Oct 28, 2017 11:55 pm

Matthew Ellard wrote:
Confidencia wrote: If consciousness wasn't there then where did the memory of 13. 6 billion years come from?
The evidence the universe is 13.6 billion years old comes from the scientific measurement of the cosmic microwave background from the big bang. Consciousness could be enirely missing from the entire universe and yet that evidence would still be there.


Not if you insist on your measurements, this implies memory of past experience. To all intent and simplicity the Big Bang is a memory of an explosion? The memory of it implies consciousnesses however which way you look at it.

You have destroyed your own religious framework again. :D


No ellard it's just you acknowledging another level of your nuclear grade stupidity.

(I wonder if Confidencia is trying to appear incredibly stupid on purpose? )


You are doing too much of that as it is, perhaps you should do some clear thinking instead. Not that it will help you much.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26561
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Time Travel Isn't Possible…Or Is It?

Postby Matthew Ellard » Sun Oct 29, 2017 12:04 am

Confidencia wrote:You talk as though you have proof of a world beyond your own consciousness.
He does. Evidence of various nature, accumulates and more than one person can share that same evidence. You don't know this as you don't have any friends.

You just destroyed your own religious framework again.
:lol:

Confidencia wrote:The truth of it is that the scientific revolution has brought about nothing but more suffering.
Science eliminated polio and numerous childhood diseases, introduced anti-biotics, has increased our lifespans by decades and so on and so on.....

Do you have polio Shaka?
:lol:

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26561
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Time Travel Isn't Possible…Or Is It?

Postby Matthew Ellard » Sun Oct 29, 2017 12:07 am

Matthew Ellard wrote: The evidence the universe is 13.6 billion years old comes from the scientific measurement of the cosmic microwave background from the big bang. Consciousness could be entirely missing from the entire universe and yet that evidence would still be there.
Confidencia wrote:Not if you insist on your measurements, this implies memory of past experience.
No. It is what it means. I can measure the cosmic background radiation as it still exists today. :lol:

Confidencia
Poster
Posts: 308
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 9:43 am

Re: Time Travel Isn't Possible…Or Is It?

Postby Confidencia » Sun Oct 29, 2017 12:07 am

Phoenix76 wrote:Well I did start this thread with the hope of getting some interesting discussion. And yes I did get that - at the start. I guess it's like many threads, they start off on subject but lose the track shortly thereafter.

Look, I think I'm a reasonably intelligent being, although some may dispute that, but when I read Confidencia's comments, all I see is dribble. And I have read Con's dribble, not only on this thread.

In fact, reading Con's dribble gives me a headache, my eyes start going in circles, and I just have to go and get another beer so that I can finish reading the garbage.

I have no idea, whatsoever, who the hell Confidencia is. Male, female, other?? Hmm, perhaps other, because no legitimate male or female would consider writing this crap. Oh, sorry, there is one other, Gorgeous! But perhaps this is all too deep for he, she or it.

But I guess we have to expect these type people invading the normally intelligent discussion, or even banter, that we have on this skeptics forum. I mean, skepticism invites different opinions, but one should always be open to other ideas. Whether you accept those ideas or not is not really relevant. But to persistently post the type of drivel that Con and Gorg love to impose upon us, sadly displays a lack of educated skill in debating and discussion. Oh well, I'll just wait for Con's next load of diatribe refuting my opinion.



If you can't hold your beer, you shouldn't drink.

Confidencia
Poster
Posts: 308
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 9:43 am

Re: Time Travel Isn't Possible…Or Is It?

Postby Confidencia » Sun Oct 29, 2017 12:27 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:
Confidencia wrote:You talk as though you have proof of a world beyond your own consciousness.
He does. Evidence of various nature, accumulates and more than one person can share that same evidence. You don't know this as you don't have any friends.


Of course everyone is at the mercy of everyone else. Good sheeple always follow the prescribed consensus.

You just destroyed your own religious framework again. :lol:


Look again ellard.


Confidencia wrote:The truth of it is that the scientific revolution has brought about nothing but more suffering.
Science eliminated polio and numerous childhood diseases, introduced anti-biotics, has increased our lifespans by decades and so on and so on.....

Do you have polio Shaka?
:lol:


If you look beyond your tiny little mind you may see a difference picture. Get some more new book ellard you are missing some information.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26561
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Time Travel Isn't Possible…Or Is It?

Postby Matthew Ellard » Sun Oct 29, 2017 12:37 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:He does. Evidence of various nature, accumulates and more than one person can share that same evidence. You don't know this as you don't have any friends.
Confidencia wrote:Of course everyone is at the mercy of everyone else.
No. It means different people can look at the same evidence separately and the evidence remains constant.

This destroys your religion's childlike claim that an individual's consciousness makes up all evidence, yet again
:lol:



Confidencia wrote:The truth of it is that the scientific revolution has brought about nothing but more suffering.
Matthew Ellard wrote: Do you have polio Shaka? :lol:
Confidencia wrote:If you look beyond your tiny little mind .........
Soooooo....you can thank science that you don't have polio. :lol:

Confidencia
Poster
Posts: 308
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 9:43 am

Re: Time Travel Isn't Possible…Or Is It?

Postby Confidencia » Sun Oct 29, 2017 12:37 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:
Matthew Ellard wrote: The evidence the universe is 13.6 billion years old comes from the scientific measurement of the cosmic microwave background from the big bang. Consciousness could be entirely missing from the entire universe and yet that evidence would still be there.
Confidencia wrote:Not if you insist on your measurements, this implies memory of past experience.
No. It is what it means. I can measure the cosmic background radiation as it still exists today. :lol:


It means there is an implication of past experience. The measurements of cosmic background radiation is based on the memory of the image. As long as you exist the memory and the image will too.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26561
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Time Travel Isn't Possible…Or Is It?

Postby Matthew Ellard » Sun Oct 29, 2017 12:41 am

Matthew Ellard wrote: No. It is what it means. I can measure the cosmic background radiation as it still exists today. :lol:
Confidencia wrote:It means there is an implication of past experience.
No. The evidence still exists today.

Let us all laugh at you some more....... :lol:

Why do you think thousands of scientists can independently and currently observe cosmic background radiation?

Are you denying cosmic background radiation exists?
:lol:

Confidencia
Poster
Posts: 308
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 9:43 am

Re: Time Travel Isn't Possible…Or Is It?

Postby Confidencia » Sun Oct 29, 2017 12:52 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:
Matthew Ellard wrote:He does. Evidence of various nature, accumulates and more than one person can share that same evidence. You don't know this as you don't have any friends.
Confidencia wrote:Of course everyone is at the mercy of everyone else.
No. It means different people can look at the same evidence separately and the evidence remains constant.


When all individuals exist under the same realm of consciousness they will see what in common parlance become the accepted norm. Sheeple do not think for themselves, instead they have to be spoon fed in order to keep the consistency constant.

This destroys your religion's childlike claim that an individual's consciousness makes up all evidence, yet again :lol:


Individual consciousness is an illusion. Learn to read to understand ellard. The part cannot be greater than the whole. This is simple logic.



Confidencia wrote:The truth of it is that the scientific revolution has brought about nothing but more suffering.
Matthew Ellard wrote: Do you have polio Shaka? :lol:
Confidencia wrote:If you look beyond your tiny little mind .........
Soooooo....you can thank science that you don't have polio. :lol:

I can thank science that I haven't turned out like you.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
True Skeptic
Posts: 10033
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Time Travel Isn't Possible…Or Is It?

Postby Lance Kennedy » Sun Oct 29, 2017 12:58 am

We thank science, Confidencia, that there are not too many like you. Belief systems like yours have kept humanity in the darkness of ignorance for far too long. Great men, like Newton and Einstein have used rational thinking to lift us out of the mire that your thoughts create.

Confidencia
Poster
Posts: 308
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 9:43 am

Re: Time Travel Isn't Possible…Or Is It?

Postby Confidencia » Sun Oct 29, 2017 1:04 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:
Matthew Ellard wrote: No. It is what it means. I can measure the cosmic background radiation as it still exists today. :lol:
Confidencia wrote:It means there is an implication of past experience.
No. The evidence still exists today.


Past experience is evidential and the memory of it is brought into the now.

Let us all laugh at you some more....... :lol:


You will be inadvertently laughing at yourself

Why do you think thousands of scientists can independently and currently observe cosmic background radiation?


Because all scientists are seen in the one consciousness by the one observer. Remember ellard, there is only seeing, the seer and the seen are mental constructs.

Are you denying cosmic background radiation exists? :lol:


You could just as well call it something else. There is only consciousness, the idea of a universe and its cosmic background radiation is a mental formation projected onto the consciousness.

Confidencia
Poster
Posts: 308
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 9:43 am

Re: Time Travel Isn't Possible…Or Is It?

Postby Confidencia » Sun Oct 29, 2017 1:14 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:We thank science, Confidencia, that there are not too many like you. Belief systems like yours have kept humanity in the darkness of ignorance for far too long. Great men, like Newton and Einstein have used rational thinking to lift us out of the mire that your thoughts create.


Einstein did not condone the type of stupidity which you go along with. He knew there was much more science could not comprehend, hence the reason he got frustrated during that latter part of life. Nevertheless it has always been the case. When it concerns truth there are only few takers. The ignorant masses are too afraid to move beyond the safety of the crowd. They stay huddled to prevent loss of interest.


Return to “Science, Technology, and Mathematics”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest