oliver [no rush]whenever god moves you to reply]
on another matter
re your quote
''and, understand that with age regression hypnosis the patient, “confabulates”. That is say you taken back to your age seven birthday. Because information has been lost you might build a story using your 5th , 6th , 7th and 8th birthdays. Its not a lie, rather a mild delusion''
This is a fertile field , witnesses at trials reveal the same phenomina, they overlay movies and fears and precomditioned bias over their testimony ,in fact everything in life when recanted can be thus poluted [thus the need to write things down[written text etc as or as near to them occuring]

Point being even seeing/hearing/sense/thought involves 5 or more chemicals interacting between neurons into vision, the gaps nessisarilly need to be joined together to form a basiclly logical sense of what we are seeing and hearing
[implies a logus somewhere that joins the dots and fabricates the logic be it faith in science or faith in words, vision,sound etc]

[Think man is unique in evolving words and writing[reading and conceptual speach]ammoung all the beasts, despite science stating man evolved from ape vairiosly 65 to 100,000 years ago

Noting the evolutionary time for ape to evolve into ape in our evolution vairiously covered 65 /125 MILLION years to evolve one ape into another ape [no real point to it but isnt that an amasing outliner in evolutionary time scaling progression to those doudting the timmings of ''science theory][recall ape-man was more ape than man for millions of years]

One under God,

May point was we "do" confabulate.

[I don't practise Psychology and I think would need to do do an honours year to register for practice. My postgrad. works are in different fields, primarily related to culture and business studeies.
-One God Under Neurons?-

Cheers

CJ.,

Hello.

I lost my post to you in a time-out. It contain links to Hubble's COBE photography, going further back, technical details on "fossile radiation; and, before, the Big Bang, admittedly more spectulative Roger Penrose's presentation to the Issac Newton Institute.

The first is a photo of the creation-in-progress and the second like an x-ray inside the expansion.

We don't have a photo of God, nor do we have data about God itself. The closest thing is ID, but that is not of God, its an explanation for the universe.

I am asking how do you explain God's existence?

Matter can be destroyed. E=mc2 is a conservation law, relating conservation of charge and angular momentum. Durac has demonstrated the existence of anti-matter. Were an election to meet a positron both would destroyed - cancelled out. Mass is perhaps a better term than matter, as mass incorporates the reality of inertia. Enormous energy is required to have matter to approach c, wherein mass increases. It would take infinite enegery to move matter to c., achieving infinite mass.

Dear Boazy,

I can't comment on Jesus - The Man. I haven't read it. But I have read some Thiering's work. Her academic work is more on the Dead Sea Scrolls than Peshers.

What have you read of her work that concerns you?

Boazy, and, welcome, Foxy;

The notion of the establishment of the House of David I came to without ever reading Thiering. The dead sea scrolls state and I quote with gaps. These are fragments, remember:

(2) a Davidic descendent on the Throne shall not cease. For the Staff is the Covenant of the Kingdom. [3] The leaders of Israel are the feet until the Messiah of Richeousness, the Branch of (4) David comes to him and HIS SEED [my emphasis] was given the Covenant pf the KIngdom of His people people in PERPETUITY [my emphasis]. (4Q252, plate 5)

The above -translated directly from Aramaic- to me suggests that the Messiah was to establish a "perpetual" King of God under the House of David. This would have The of the old coventant obsolete. The feet [Genisis 49.10] in history, he who come is the first in the second dynasty of David. The re-establishment of the House of David. The Temple Christ, methinks, is the Second Genesis:

"The septre will not depart from Judah, nor the ruler's staff, UNTIL (my emphasis) he [Heli, Joseph, Jesus/James]comes TO WHOM IT BELONGS (my emphasis)." [Genesis 49.10]

I interpret the Dead Sea Scrool plus Genesis 49.10/11, to say the staff of leadership is passed to a new coverentant under, a new leader [of the House of David] - the New Genesis. A sew start.

Taken with the Gospel of Thomas: It means churches and priesthoods are obsolete! All sin is atoned for.

The folks at Nicaea did not have all this documentation, and, if they, did, it would have been destroyed.

In the context of Thiering "his seed" suggests Jesus and/or James were expected to have children.

p.s. I have The Bible [New International] and a translation from Arimaic [Eisenman/Wise] of the Dead Sea Scrolls on my desk.

He seems to be cobbling together a variety of cognitive functions with the God thing the most laterally related. Perhaps it is hard to ignore that God thing.(To be nice to the author and because I'm a Christian I'll prefer that explanation to considering it might be needed to sell books that noone would otherwise read).

“In a situation where we lack evidence or a logical explanation — when contemplating the reason for our existence, say — we are driven to invent one, even if it leads humanity to appeal to a supernatural, godly power.”

Or contemplating the reason to reject belief in God say even if it leads to appeal to anomaly?

The human brain does seem to function rather well for a cobbled together mess. It is all very well to observe functional aspects of the brain at a micro level and say neuronal transmission isn’t as quick as electrical transmission in some mechanical devices but to argue that the general structure is a cobbled up mess or even unnecessary coherently can I presume he designed a better brain capable of biological production? (One that functions more quickly and effectively but otherwise the same as a human brain but lacks dreams, memories, and belief in God)

To confidently bridge the gap he must have more justification for considering the brain a cobbled up mess than the speed of electrical transmission. I might not like gravity because it has made me fall over and might think it should be milder and gentler but for knowing that I wouldn’t be here without it. I don’t believe neuroscience has been around as long as physics so I suspect they haven’t previously determined whether or not brain structure is necessary. Perhaps I should check with my sibling who has a PhD in that. Perhaps his breakthrough explaining the premise for his theory is in his book.

So if our long childhood explains our memories why do other species with brief childhoods also seem to recollect past experiences? Does he have evidence that they don’t have memories?

CONT

“I have three years of Psych. From Sydney U., and, understand that with age regression hypnosis the patient, “confabulates”. That is say yiu taken back to your age seven birthday. Because information has been lost you might build a story using your 5th , 6th , 7th and 8th birthdays. Its not a lie, rather a mild delusion. This phenomenon is better known than the above and supports Linden’s general hypothesis.”

The fact that we know that people have brains in their heads and that it is comprised of neurons also supports it but his theory is a long leap from all these facts.

“I have haven’t read the Book.”

Perhaps in fairness to the author it is hard to do justice to it without doing so.

“Mjpb, I am not a fan of Dawkins outside of genetics. He should have edited an anthology with subject experts: Less money for him, no doubt.”

What if Dawkins is really an unethical theist just seeking to make money from books and that explains why he doesn’t worry about those types of things. Atheist fundamentalists give him money in exchange for ego stroking pretentious assertions and theists hold firmer to their faith. Perhaps all those that make sport of his arguments are not as clever as they think they are. They never get embraced and promoted by the secular mass media so the authors don’t make a mint as their books sit in obscurity read only by fanatical Christians. Just a thought. (I hope no conspiracy theorists are reading this)

"What if Dawkins is really an unethical theist just seeking to make money from books and that explains why he doesn’t worry about those types of things." -mjpb

Wouldn't that be a laugh! ;-)

Every sighted person is deluded by the brain ever day. We see images right way-up, when the eye receives images up-side-down. Actually, it has been shown. if a person closes their eyes and lead right-way-up letters are transmitted in the x-ray spectrum [with backlighting], the delusion system does not work, the letters are perceived by the brain, correctly, up-side-down.

Trivia: We a Trichomats. Turtles are Septochomats. Image how incredible their colour vision. Some scientists have speculated that dolphins hear in 3-D.

Reverting back to Dawkins, I recall Michael Ruse suggesting that most copies were sold to US evangelicals. Dawkins should stay within his own area of expertise, he is a lay person, when it comes to History and Cultural Anthropoly, and, it is obvious. See, I am not biased, I admit it if I see a flat-spot in atheist comment.

If one wants to read non-technical about the first century try Gibbon, Toynbee, Wells, Quigley and McNeil.

I still unsure that the Theist have explained God to any where near the precision that Science has explained the Universe. Similiarly, many Christians, take an a priori position on Jesus, without study alternative gods or properly evaluating the ontological arguments relating to the Creation. They start at step ten. Poor methodology, risking the retort; methodology becoming mythology.

With infinite regress when pressed many-a-theist will respond addressing "Faith", but, as we have seen, "Faith" as we use it today, is only six hundred years old.

Peace and happiness,

O.