GOD = RELATIVISTIC ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE

"George Hammond" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 09:33:45 +0100, "marc"
wrote:

"John Smith" wrote in message
news:fqWPj.11363$aq4.9829@trnddc02...


Odd that you cannot seem to comprehend the contradictive stupidity of
your
own stance.

Language does not posses adequate functionality to articulate what Hammond
cannot comprehend.

Marc


It's retrodictive stupidity, not contradictive stupidity.


"Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) - Cite This Source - Share This
con·tra·dic·tive Audio Help /?k?ntr?'d?kt?v/ Pronunciation Key - Show
Spelled Pronunciation[kon-truh-dik-tiv] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA
Pronunciation
-adjective tending or inclined to contradict; involving contradiction;
contradictory.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Origin: 1620-30; contradict + -ive]

-Related forms
con·tra·dic·tive·ly, adverb
con·tra·dic·tive·ness, noun "


****************************
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/retrodictive
"No results found for retrodictive."

"George Hammond" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 12:46:25 +0100, "Andy F."
wrote:


"George Hammond" wrote in message
. ..
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 01:09:01 +0100, "Andy F."
wrote:


[Andy F.]
There's a human opinion based on sensory perception that the universe
has
been around for billions of years.

[Hammond]
There is overwhelming evidence based on scientific
deduction that *IF* a person existed a billion years ago,
then he would have indeed observed the Universe to exist. I
throughly agree with that and anybody who doesn't is
certifiably either crazy or incompetent.

[Andy F.]
This means the universe existed before
humans did.


[Hammond]
WRONG, DEAD WRONG ANDY.

1) The "existence", of anything, depends entirely on the
sensory perception of Man. There IS NO definition
of the word "existence" that is independent of the
action of a HUMAN observer.
Proof: If all men died tomorrow at 9am, there
would no longer be any way to ascertain at 9:01am
if ANYTHING whatsoever "existed". The word
"existence" has no meaning whatsoever
without the existence of human beings.

2) But what your statement above says, is that
circumstantial evidence indicates (indeed
conclusively) that *IF* a human observer existed
a billion years ago, then he "would have" observed
that the Universe "existed". And I thoroughly
agree with that statement.

An event has to happen BEFORE it can be observed.The light from an object
has to travel to your eyes before you can see it.
If the object is close by, this takes a few billionths of a second.When
you
look at the sun, you're seeing what was there 8 minutes ago.And if you
look
through a powerful telescope, you can observe events which hapened
millions
of years ago.

[Hammond]
Idiocy, the Universe didn't "exist" until the human race
arrived to "make" it exist by seeing it. Makes no
difference that the light took 13 billion years to get here,
it didn't "exist" until the human race arrived to see it.


3) However, in point of fact, no such human observer
did exist a billion years ago, therefore, by paragraph
1 above, the Universe actually did *NOT* "exist"
a billion years ago.... even though it "would have"
if anybody was around to see it.

[Andy F.]
So it's not possible for humans to have created the universe.


[Hammond]
Wrong again.
The above proof demonstrates conclusively that Man
"caused" the Universe to come into "existence" since ONLY A
HUMAN can confirm that anything "exists".
In short, "existence" is a PROPERTY of the human mind. No
people, no existence, of anything!

But a human can't confirm that something exists until after it
exists.Which
would make it logically impossible for anything to come into existence.

[Hammond]
Idiot..... nothing existed until Humans arrived to "make" it
exist by seeing it. You're an imbecile who will never rise
above moronic world games... I suggest you try crossword
puzzles. Moron.


OK. As soon as you've explained how you can 'see' something that doesn't
exist, I'll go and do the crossword.,

On Fri, 25 Apr 2008 02:44:02 +0100, "Andy F."
wrote:


"George Hammond" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 12:46:25 +0100, "Andy F."
wrote:


"George Hammond" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 01:09:01 +0100, "Andy F."
wrote:


[Andy F.]
There's a human opinion based on sensory perception that the universe
has
been around for billions of years.

[Hammond]
There is overwhelming evidence based on scientific
deduction that *IF* a person existed a billion years ago,
then he would have indeed observed the Universe to exist. I
throughly agree with that and anybody who doesn't is
certifiably either crazy or incompetent.

[Andy F.]
This means the universe existed before
humans did.


[Hammond]
WRONG, DEAD WRONG ANDY.

1) The "existence", of anything, depends entirely on the
sensory perception of Man. There IS NO definition
of the word "existence" that is independent of the
action of a HUMAN observer.
Proof: If all men died tomorrow at 9am, there
would no longer be any way to ascertain at 9:01am
if ANYTHING whatsoever "existed". The word
"existence" has no meaning whatsoever
without the existence of human beings.

2) But what your statement above says, is that
circumstantial evidence indicates (indeed
conclusively) that *IF* a human observer existed
a billion years ago, then he "would have" observed
that the Universe "existed". And I thoroughly
agree with that statement.

An event has to happen BEFORE it can be observed.The light from an object
has to travel to your eyes before you can see it.
If the object is close by, this takes a few billionths of a second.When
you
look at the sun, you're seeing what was there 8 minutes ago.And if you
look
through a powerful telescope, you can observe events which hapened
millions
of years ago.

[Hammond]
Idiocy, the Universe didn't "exist" until the human race
arrived to "make" it exist by seeing it. Makes no
difference that the light took 13 billion years to get here,
it didn't "exist" until the human race arrived to see it.


3) However, in point of fact, no such human observer
did exist a billion years ago, therefore, by paragraph
1 above, the Universe actually did *NOT* "exist"
a billion years ago.... even though it "would have"
if anybody was around to see it.

[Andy F.]
So it's not possible for humans to have created the universe.


[Hammond]
Wrong again.
The above proof demonstrates conclusively that Man
"caused" the Universe to come into "existence" since ONLY A
HUMAN can confirm that anything "exists".
In short, "existence" is a PROPERTY of the human mind. No
people, no existence, of anything!

But a human can't confirm that something exists until after it
exists.Which
would make it logically impossible for anything to come into existence.

[Hammond]
Idiot..... nothing existed until Humans arrived to "make" it
exist by seeing it. You're an imbecile who will never rise
above moronic world games... I suggest you try crossword
puzzles. Moron.


OK. As soon as you've explained how you can 'see' something that doesn't
exist, I'll go and do the crossword.,

[Hammond]
Simple: You come into existence, and when you come into
existence anything you see "exists".
3 across is HAMMOND.
=====================================
SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE
http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god
mirror site:
http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com
GOD=G_uv (a folk song on mp3)
http://interrobang.jwgh.org/songs/hammond.mp3
=====================================

"George Hammond" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 25 Apr 2008 02:44:02 +0100, "Andy F."
wrote:


"George Hammond" wrote in message
. ..
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 12:46:25 +0100, "Andy F."
wrote:


"George Hammond" wrote in message
m...
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 01:09:01 +0100, "Andy F."
wrote:


[Andy F.]
There's a human opinion based on sensory perception that the universe
has
been around for billions of years.

[Hammond]
There is overwhelming evidence based on scientific
deduction that *IF* a person existed a billion years ago,
then he would have indeed observed the Universe to exist. I
throughly agree with that and anybody who doesn't is
certifiably either crazy or incompetent.

[Andy F.]
This means the universe existed before
humans did.


[Hammond]
WRONG, DEAD WRONG ANDY.

1) The "existence", of anything, depends entirely on the
sensory perception of Man. There IS NO definition
of the word "existence" that is independent of the
action of a HUMAN observer.
Proof: If all men died tomorrow at 9am, there
would no longer be any way to ascertain at 9:01am
if ANYTHING whatsoever "existed". The word
"existence" has no meaning whatsoever
without the existence of human beings.

2) But what your statement above says, is that
circumstantial evidence indicates (indeed
conclusively) that *IF* a human observer existed
a billion years ago, then he "would have" observed
that the Universe "existed". And I thoroughly
agree with that statement.

An event has to happen BEFORE it can be observed.The light from an
object
has to travel to your eyes before you can see it.
If the object is close by, this takes a few billionths of a second.When
you
look at the sun, you're seeing what was there 8 minutes ago.And if you
look
through a powerful telescope, you can observe events which hapened
millions
of years ago.

[Hammond]
Idiocy, the Universe didn't "exist" until the human race
arrived to "make" it exist by seeing it. Makes no
difference that the light took 13 billion years to get here,
it didn't "exist" until the human race arrived to see it.


3) However, in point of fact, no such human observer
did exist a billion years ago, therefore, by paragraph
1 above, the Universe actually did *NOT* "exist"
a billion years ago.... even though it "would have"
if anybody was around to see it.

[Andy F.]
So it's not possible for humans to have created the universe.


[Hammond]
Wrong again.
The above proof demonstrates conclusively that Man
"caused" the Universe to come into "existence" since ONLY A
HUMAN can confirm that anything "exists".
In short, "existence" is a PROPERTY of the human mind. No
people, no existence, of anything!

But a human can't confirm that something exists until after it
exists.Which
would make it logically impossible for anything to come into existence.

[Hammond]
Idiot..... nothing existed until Humans arrived to "make" it
exist by seeing it. You're an imbecile who will never rise
above moronic world games... I suggest you try crossword
puzzles. Moron.


OK. As soon as you've explained how you can 'see' something that doesn't
exist, I'll go and do the crossword.,

[Hammond]
Simple: You come into existence, and when you come into
existence anything you see "exists".
3 across is HAMMOND.

The clue was - "Biggest asshole in all the news groups".

"George Hammond" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 25 Apr 2008 02:44:02 +0100, "Andy F."
wrote:


"George Hammond" wrote in message
. ..
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 12:46:25 +0100, "Andy F."
wrote:


"George Hammond" wrote in message
m...
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 01:09:01 +0100, "Andy F."
wrote:


[Andy F.]
There's a human opinion based on sensory perception that the universe
has
been around for billions of years.

[Hammond]
There is overwhelming evidence based on scientific
deduction that *IF* a person existed a billion years ago,
then he would have indeed observed the Universe to exist. I
throughly agree with that and anybody who doesn't is
certifiably either crazy or incompetent.

[Andy F.]
This means the universe existed before
humans did.


[Hammond]
WRONG, DEAD WRONG ANDY.

1) The "existence", of anything, depends entirely on the
sensory perception of Man. There IS NO definition
of the word "existence" that is independent of the
action of a HUMAN observer.
Proof: If all men died tomorrow at 9am, there
would no longer be any way to ascertain at 9:01am
if ANYTHING whatsoever "existed". The word
"existence" has no meaning whatsoever
without the existence of human beings.

2) But what your statement above says, is that
circumstantial evidence indicates (indeed
conclusively) that *IF* a human observer existed
a billion years ago, then he "would have" observed
that the Universe "existed". And I thoroughly
agree with that statement.

An event has to happen BEFORE it can be observed.The light from an
object
has to travel to your eyes before you can see it.
If the object is close by, this takes a few billionths of a second.When
you
look at the sun, you're seeing what was there 8 minutes ago.And if you
look
through a powerful telescope, you can observe events which hapened
millions
of years ago.

[Hammond]
Idiocy, the Universe didn't "exist" until the human race
arrived to "make" it exist by seeing it. Makes no
difference that the light took 13 billion years to get here,
it didn't "exist" until the human race arrived to see it.


3) However, in point of fact, no such human observer
did exist a billion years ago, therefore, by paragraph
1 above, the Universe actually did *NOT* "exist"
a billion years ago.... even though it "would have"
if anybody was around to see it.

[Andy F.]
So it's not possible for humans to have created the universe.


[Hammond]
Wrong again.
The above proof demonstrates conclusively that Man
"caused" the Universe to come into "existence" since ONLY A
HUMAN can confirm that anything "exists".
In short, "existence" is a PROPERTY of the human mind. No
people, no existence, of anything!

But a human can't confirm that something exists until after it
exists.Which
would make it logically impossible for anything to come into existence.

[Hammond]
Idiot..... nothing existed until Humans arrived to "make" it
exist by seeing it. You're an imbecile who will never rise
above moronic world games... I suggest you try crossword
puzzles. Moron.


OK. As soon as you've explained how you can 'see' something that doesn't
exist, I'll go and do the crossword.,

[Hammond]
Simple: You come into existence, and when you come into
existence anything you see "exists".

That doesn't explain anything.It just looks like you don't understand the
question.
If the universe doesn't already exist, there's nothing to see.

ShivverMeTimbers wrote:

You are looking at humanity through an electron microscope.

He really did? Whew!, great job...

The only goal of any religion is to control all humanity
on the Earth and if possible the Entire Universe.

;-)

Science is an evolutionary step above Religion
but has been dominated by religion for religious ends.

Above or under (below...)?

Maybe one day Raw Science will recognize the HUMAN as
being a sacred animal then we can eliminate religion
all together and together we can understand
the universe in a nice and comfortable way.

Nice and comfortable way? go on...!

Religion is ancient forms of Government that originated
prior to the Scientific Methodology.
We alive today are doomed to suffer because it will not die easily.
It seeks control by overpopulation as well as force and deception.

You think saecuklaric bishoprics (hehe), seen in many states of europe,
are the better way? ;-) (rip-offs, right radicals, racketeers!)

infecting the human mind and transferred to the
humans with child like minds from one generation to the next.

Pheew.... who knows what you will imagine out of yours more, when such
types as you, will wield the believing-scepter on Earth....

At the time only some persons without religious contact during
the first stage of their lives are immune to being infected.



Whether you call it Christian, Moslum or Jew or Witch
or Hari Khrishna or Scientology or Mental Health.
it is all the same thing to me.

HmHm. Your Me is not You, and I am I!



Best Regards,

Daniel Mandic

Don Stockbauer wrote:

Here's your scientific proof of God, Hammond: God and the Universe
are identical.

Hi Don!


I would not say.

We are rather the minute-hand of Mickey Mouse, cycling around the
minutes and hours, printed on God's Mickey Mouse Watch.

God is the creator. God layed the camp-fire (IMO)....



Best regards,

Daniel Mandic

John Smith wrote:

Heard THAT crap lie before too!.
Have you EVER said anything that wasn't eityher insane, or a lie - or
both?

Well, but you also construct yourself upon him, no matter what, and how
he did the same! I mean.... It's the same you do....

detailing out a bit, where he was insane and where he lied, would help!



Best regards,

Daniel Mandic

Mike wrote:

Listen yo: if man created his own reality he did a bad job. Even a
monkey would have created a betetr reality for its race. This universe
is hostile to poeple, thanks we have Van Allen to protect us and ozone
layer at least for now.

Hi Mike!


We are the product of. Van Allen is only a rotating planet, which
drives forces in (out of) the core, by induction, due to the fluid
consistent and of the high amount of metals.
Ozone might be the Echo of the plants... like, we need someone to ****
out our seeds all over the world, but only we are resistent to UV, yet.
--- given the Apes a Shield ;-)

Even yo would have creaated a better universe. Actually, some belive
that this universe was created by a young God as an experiment and at
that time he only had experience with the Poisson equation and
Gaussian distributions.

Mike

One should not judge God by this world, that was only an attempt, which
did not succeed, but it must be a master, who makes such slips
(amerind: -****ups-).

-Vincent Van Gogh



Kind regards,

Daniel Mandic

On Fri, 25 Apr 2008 10:40:47 +0100, "Andy F."
wrote:


"George Hammond" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 25 Apr 2008 02:44:02 +0100, "Andy F."
wrote:


"George Hammond" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 12:46:25 +0100, "Andy F."
wrote:


"George Hammond" wrote in message
om...
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 01:09:01 +0100, "Andy F."
wrote:


[Andy F.]
There's a human opinion based on sensory perception that the universe
has
been around for billions of years.

[Hammond]
There is overwhelming evidence based on scientific
deduction that *IF* a person existed a billion years ago,
then he would have indeed observed the Universe to exist. I
throughly agree with that and anybody who doesn't is
certifiably either crazy or incompetent.

[Andy F.]
This means the universe existed before
humans did.


[Hammond]
WRONG, DEAD WRONG ANDY.

1) The "existence", of anything, depends entirely on the
sensory perception of Man. There IS NO definition
of the word "existence" that is independent of the
action of a HUMAN observer.
Proof: If all men died tomorrow at 9am, there
would no longer be any way to ascertain at 9:01am
if ANYTHING whatsoever "existed". The word
"existence" has no meaning whatsoever
without the existence of human beings.

2) But what your statement above says, is that
circumstantial evidence indicates (indeed
conclusively) that *IF* a human observer existed
a billion years ago, then he "would have" observed
that the Universe "existed". And I thoroughly
agree with that statement.

An event has to happen BEFORE it can be observed.The light from an
object
has to travel to your eyes before you can see it.
If the object is close by, this takes a few billionths of a second.When
you
look at the sun, you're seeing what was there 8 minutes ago.And if you
look
through a powerful telescope, you can observe events which hapened
millions
of years ago.

[Hammond]
Idiocy, the Universe didn't "exist" until the human race
arrived to "make" it exist by seeing it. Makes no
difference that the light took 13 billion years to get here,
it didn't "exist" until the human race arrived to see it.


3) However, in point of fact, no such human observer
did exist a billion years ago, therefore, by paragraph
1 above, the Universe actually did *NOT* "exist"
a billion years ago.... even though it "would have"
if anybody was around to see it.

[Andy F.]
So it's not possible for humans to have created the universe.


[Hammond]
Wrong again.
The above proof demonstrates conclusively that Man
"caused" the Universe to come into "existence" since ONLY A
HUMAN can confirm that anything "exists".
In short, "existence" is a PROPERTY of the human mind. No
people, no existence, of anything!

But a human can't confirm that something exists until after it
exists.Which
would make it logically impossible for anything to come into existence.

[Hammond]
Idiot..... nothing existed until Humans arrived to "make" it
exist by seeing it. You're an imbecile who will never rise
above moronic world games... I suggest you try crossword
puzzles. Moron.


OK. As soon as you've explained how you can 'see' something that doesn't
exist, I'll go and do the crossword.,

[Hammond]
Simple: You come into existence, and when you come into
existence anything you see "exists".

That doesn't explain anything


[Hammond]
Horse****, it answers your question directly.



It just looks like you don't understand the question.
If the universe doesn't already exist, there's nothing to see.

[
[Hammond]
No... YOU don't understand the question, or the answer.
It's SIMPLE:

1. If Man does not exist, then nothing exists.
2. When Man came into existence 200k yrs ago Time and the
Universe came into existence simultaneously
including it's 13 billion year evolutionary history.


If you're too stupid to understand that, that's YOUR
problem, not mine!
=====================================
SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE
http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god
mirror site:
http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com
GOD=G_uv (a folk song on mp3)
http://interrobang.jwgh.org/songs/hammond.mp3
=====================================