Hubble Telescope Finds Deity
 

http://space.newscientist.com/articl...ine-news_rss20

The deity in question is the flying spaghetti monster which has it's noodley
appendages held aloft via the gravity of a black hole and it's own magnetic field.

Hubble's photographs prove beyond any doubt the existence of the FSM.

Hubble is yet to take any pictures of any other gods. Including the Christian god.

There you go. FSM is the answer.

Gonna be some explainin going around on this. :up:

They're looking in the wrong place.:p

Well, even Hubble can't see beyond reality.

I rather suspect that if a god was found in space he/she/it would go the same way as King Kong. Put in a cage and shipped to New York. :hmm:

Who is to define reality? It wasn't that long ago that reality was the Sun revolving around a flat earth:rotfl:

I can totally agree on the second point. Anything mysterious has to be captured and scientifically "analyzed".

Yes, Hubble must be upgraded to see interdimensional.

If you were to put mans knowledge on a scale with 100,000,000,000,000,000 dots representing all of knowledge, we are still at number 1.

Don't worry though. It won't be long till you meet Satan. CERN will find him.

-S

Nah, I don't think that can ever be rightly counted as having been part of reality
and I don't mean in an ontological sense.
For us to count something as reality we must have it as knowledge. For it to be this
we must believe it and be justified in our belief.
Whilst geo-centralism was believed by many for a long time, I don't think that belief
was justified enough to count as knowledge of reality.


WHAT?!

what what??

subman is very anti-cern, as am i. i suspect theres very little to worry about, but recreating something that brought everything into being just doesn't sound like a good idea to me.... "contained" or not.

I love the idea of CERN - so that is not true. Problem is, with the good, you will find bad. You can never stop the progression of technology however because some bad will come out of the good unless it is immoral for some reason.

Are you going to stop CERN because you will have access to anti-matter? Be able to rip open space time? Create anti-matter bombs that will make nukes look liek play toys? Create magnetically suspended singularities? No! You must continue on. Without continuing on, man kind is at its end. Man was created to learn. Learn is what man must do.

-S

Today's "knowledge" is tomorrows fallacy. We think we "know" many things for a fact, but in fact we know practically nothing (good analogy SUBMAN1, but there were probably a few zeros and commas missing from that big number:yep:). There is no reality, there is only what we believe to be reality.

Edit : Once again, I type too slow.:lol:

Is this CERN thing going to be at the DNC convention?:rotfl:

d'uh
\http://jamessabata.files.wordpress.c...03/hillary.jpg

I could only wish that a singularity were accidently dropped on this convention.

-S

We certainly march ever further away from ignorance. (some of us anyway.)

Belief is no guarantee of truth, unlike solid and rational justification of belief.

My point was not to infer that belief = truth = reality. My point is also just as irrelevant as any attempt at "solid and rational justification" of anything without all the facts (which we will certainly never attain).

Ouch! That was a good one! :up::up::up:

-S

Well, this:
Did seam to infer that you considered reality and belief to be the same thing, but I shall put that down to a mix up of words/meanings if that is not what you meant.


I agree that we can have no direct experience of external reality and any
knowledge about an external, non-phenomenal/non-nominal reality requires a
blind acceptance of several axioms needed to provide a foundation for any other
useful "facts". I would also agree with you if you put it to me that many of the
axioms that are taken most for granted (i.e. that our senses are effected by
an ontological world or that space exists in three or more dimensions) are
arbitrary and no more than beliefs as is anything that is built upon them as you
pointed out.
However, I claim there is one foundation we must take as given; our rationality:
our ability to process information in a way that corresponds to reality to some
extent. Of course, you could deny that we can take our rationality for granted or
claim that it has no correspondence to reality, but to do so with a rational
argument would be more than a little ironic, if not paradoxical.
Given that we posses rationality and can apply it to our arbitrary or
hypothesizes, we are able to determine which of those beliefs is most rational
and therefore which corresponds best to reality. In this way our undeniable
rationality gives more (although not, I concede, perhaps total) justification for
the beliefs we hold wich stand up to it.

Where did you find that graphic? I have a co-worker who would love that on her desk

:eek::eek:FOOLS!!! It is the Great Old One Cthulhu!!! He lives in the depths of his dark spaghetti lair beneath the dark stars!!!:eek::eek: Believe in Him and surrender to a squishy spaggetti-tentacled death!!!!:D