UFO'S: A possible explanation

[leafman91]

First, I'd like to say there is a difference between "God" & "god(s)". At least that is the distinction I'm trying to draw. What really 'is', isn't what we think...

The sport of the ancients, isn't the same game we play today. And I'd include that in the set of instructions. Competition is a big party now, and no one dies. There's IS a lot of sex in olympic village, I hear.

What we foolishly do is fail to connect the dots between ALL of the ancient sources we have. Religion, art, history, ALL of it says there's something in the heavens, that we've referred to as "God/god(s)", and people still say they've seen it/them, today.

And it is all ignored or misinterpreted in the name of scientific certainty.

Forgive the sarcasm, I meant only a little jest.

Missing the point there too, but only slightly this time, which is alright.

You have failed to see that I was referring to aliens with the live sacrifice bit.
You have also managed to ignore the original question.

That is where missing the point ends.

Your view on our 'foolish failure', however, is a load of garbage. Religion, art, history, all have something to say on God. This is not to say that religion, art and history thought that God was extraterrestrial. The UFO sightings are a bit like all the fairy sightings back in the 1800's. There is probably a glimpse of truth in the sightings, but that has been drowned out by the noise of red herrings.

Though an alien intro to kick off the Olympics would be epic, I really don't see it happening.

 

[King of the Americas]

You were saying?

That "1+1=ed ONE", then they split back into their original "1" singular forms.

Imagine 2 lego pieces that you stick together, and then take apart.

The pieces didn't shatter upon combination and disjunction.

 

[King of the Americas]

Are you sure you wouldn't want to do it by prayer instead? It would be cheaper(and quicker,too).

Phelps can launch into space by himself, can't he?

Prayer is only 50% effective.

AT&T offers 3 G's for $60 a month, and you get you're messages almost 100% of the time.

 

[leafman91]

And it's still inaccurate. If you can't 'positively' identify something, you CAN'T identify it.

Yes, you can. This is the whole point. This little gem comes from the wiktionary definition of 'identity':
"A name or persona—the mask or appearance one presents to the world—by which one is known."

I spelled it right, I meant "deified". Once something is endowed with god-ishness/deified, it becomes w/o limits. But 'the things in heaven', HAVEN'T been positively identified, weighed and measured, they are an unknown.

Why? Why does something need to be measured to be w/o limits(omnipotent)? How well do we need to know someone before we can recognize they have power?

Maybe...Yes, I would say they identified, although misnamed, the river.

Good. Now let's revisit the thought experiment. Now the outside world has established peaceful contact with our tribe, after some brief confusion ('We come in peace' roughly translates to 'Let me rape all your women' in their language). When asked about their religion, they are first a bit muddled (seeing as 'religion' translates to 'moss'), but after the question has been communicated across they reply, saying they do not have an answer. They do mention that they worship something, however. When asked about the nature of their God, they reply with the usual 'he is all powerful and benevolent', which 3 major religions herald as proof of their God's existence (as well has 1356 very local based religions and quite a few parody religions to boot). They produce a statue, meant to represent their god. This is also claimed by several religions to be replica's of their god.When asked the name of their God, they reply 'Amy Winehouse' and bow their heads to the statue.It is noticed that their English is getting better. They clearly do not realise that Amy Winehouse is a singer, as the statue is that of a male.This fact is well recieved by the comedic community. Have they identified God?

Some other fun questions with this scenario are:'Are the comedic community being politically incorrect? and Should we have interfered and pointed out what the actual meanings of the words are, seeing as it is now slowly destroying their language?

I mean, that everything has an edge, an ending, a 'limit'. The Universe is w/o limits, and to 'me' that's "God". Let there be light/Big Bang, everything starts...that's limitless. But the "god(s)", is what we've been seeing, they DO have edges, limits. They're not "omni".

Would you be drawing evidence for these limits on the fact that natural disasters occur and kill people, but nothing is done about it?

I would call that a limit. However, would it count if you allowed me to propel the stone to keep it airborne?

No. I apologize, for I read 'Nothing isn't limitless'...

What 'I' saw wasn't w/o borders. They weren't 'everywhere' and everything.

Referring to God(s) here, not your encounter.

 

[King of the Americas]

Yes, you can. This is the whole point. This little gem comes from the wiktionary definition of 'identity':
"A name or persona—the mask or appearance one presents to the world—by which one is known."

Why? Why does something need to be measured to be w/o limits(omnipotent)? How well do we need to know someone before we can recognize they have power?

Good. Now let's revisit the thought experiment. Now the outside world has established peaceful contact with our tribe, after some brief confusion ('We come in peace' roughly translates to 'Let me rape all your women' in their language). When asked about their religion, they are first a bit muddled (seeing as 'religion' translates to 'moss'), but after the question has been communicated across they reply, saying they do not have an answer. They do mention that they worship something, however. When asked about the nature of their God, they reply with the usual 'he is all powerful and benevolent', which 3 major religions herald as proof of their God's existence (as well has 1356 very local based religions and quite a few parody religions to boot). They produce a statue, meant to represent their god. This is also claimed by several religions to be replica's of their god.When asked the name of their God, they reply 'Amy Winehouse' and bow their heads to the statue.It is noticed that their English is getting better. They clearly do not realise that Amy Winehouse is a singer, as the statue is that of a male.This fact is well recieved by the comedic community. Have they identified God?

Some other fun questions with this scenario are:'Are the comedic community being politically incorrect? and Should we have interfered and pointed out what the actual meanings of the words are, seeing as it is now slowly destroying their language?


Would you be drawing evidence for these limits on the fact that natural disasters occur and kill people, but nothing is done about it?

No. I apologize, for I read 'Nothing isn't limitless'...


Referring to God(s) here, not your encounter.

I'll concede to your first point, and refer to your definition.

To your thought experiment, I'd say they may have identified "god", but NOT "God".

God is everything, not one thing, or several things. Those are "gods", depending on your perspective...

Jordan was a basketball god, but not "God".

I don't know what todays "sky gods" are purposed to do, but apparently, it ISN'T to warn/save us from natural disasters...

 

[realpaladin]

God is everything, not one thing, or several things.

Why not call everything just..."everything"? Or is that too simple a thought?
If so, why?

 

[King of the Americas]

Why not call everything just..."everything"? Or is that too simple a thought?
If so, why?

Attaching the label of "God" to it, offers us the potential that there is some 'order' to it all. Like it isn't a series of random events at all...

Not to mention 'something' made the first move, caused the Big Bang, brought forth the light.

 

[makaya325]

Not to mention 'something' made the first move, caused the Big Bang, brought forth the light

Not exactly. Asking what happened before the big bang is the same as asking what is north of the north pole: Nothing. It is the ONLY thing in the universe that is free from cause and effect.

 

[TjW]

The Olympic Invitation thing is new...

I could just as easily accuse your skeptic naysayers of using old music, as well, 'moderator'.

Why would you expect different answers to the same questions?

 

[makaya325]

King, the main topic here was to consider some ufo cases being unknown natural phenomona, not gods or your beliefs.

 

[King of the Americas]

Not exactly. Asking what happened before the big bang is the same as asking what is north of the north pole: Nothing. It is the ONLY thing in the universe that is free from cause and effect.

The singularity, is NOT 'nothing'.

It was most certainly something, a VERY dense, very small, singular ball of matter...then it brought forth light...

14 billion years later, here we are.

 

[King of the Americas]

Why would you expect different answers to the same questions?

I am here hoping to make 'connections' where there are gaps in understanding or 'mis'-interpretations...

Your answers are insufficient, so I'll ask other people these questions.

 

[King of the Americas]

King, the main topic here was to consider some ufo cases being unknown natural phenomona, not gods or your beliefs.

So, humans, and their written history isn't a part of nature, and the sky gods that we've all seen wouldn't be considered a "phenomena"?

Interesting.

 

[TjW]

I am here hoping to make 'connections' where there are gaps in understanding or 'mis'-interpretations...

Your answers are insufficient, so I'll ask other people these questions.

Ah. I see. The strategy is to ask the question until you get an answer you like.
You're probably asking in the wrong place.

 

[realpaladin]

Attaching the label of "God" to it, offers us the potential that there is some 'order' to it all. Like it isn't a series of random events at all...

It makes you feel warm and fuzzy?

I am pretty happy with the random mish-mash view on things.

Not to mention 'something' made the first move, caused the Big Bang, brought forth the light.

You are the love-child of Yrreg and Kurious Kathy?

 

[realpaladin]

So, humans, and their written history isn't a part of nature, and the sky gods that we've all seen wouldn't be considered a "phenomena"?

Interesting.

Oi! I have seen no Sky Gods!

 

[King of the Americas]

It makes you feel warm and fuzzy?

I am pretty happy with the random mish-mash view on things.



You are the love-child of Yrreg and Kurious Kathy?

It's what was written... I'm inclined to believe my chronicling brethren.

I don't know who those people are.

 

[King of the Americas]

Oi! I have seen no Sky Gods!

But many of us have...

 

[King of the Americas]

Ah. I see. The strategy is to ask the question until you get an answer you like.
You're probably asking in the wrong place.

No, the goal is to reach s common ground of understanding...through discusson.

 

[makaya325]

No, the goal is to reach s common ground of understanding...through discusson.

I am having a battle with some other guys on a different thread, but king:

What is it that you want to accomplish on this thread?