Science is a tool that can be abused!

[_Maksutov]

The most hilarious part of Franktalk's last post is this:

This took years and as a result my ego diminished and the cares of this world evaporated. Now ask yourself if truth should set you free or should it rule over you?

Diminshed ego my Aunt Thelma's fundament! He thinks his inner, unsupported convictions Trump all the best evidence and reason accumulated over the centuries by the most brilliant scientists and thinkers who ever lived, and then claims to have a diminished ego! On the contrary! His is one of the most colossally inflated egos I have ever heard of!

I'm wondering if "he" has anything to do with this book:

http://www.amazon.com/Frank-Talk-Book-C ... 1505427509

Sounds like somebody in the Franktalk business:

..............

Tracy is a professional Psychic Medium, Channel, Psychic Development instructor, Certified Infinite Possibilities Trainer, motivational speaker and part of the Wise Women 4U, a group offering inspiring programs and retreats. She is also the author of Frank Talk: A Book of Channeled Wisdom.

Services include intuitive readings and counseling both in person and via phone, Skype or email. Tracy also provides mediumship events known as Spirit Galleries, psychic reading gatherings, channeled messages from a spirit collective known as Frank, workshops, lectures, classes, motivational speaking and presentations.

...............

[_spotlight]

FT,
I accept that there is an exterior reality that the brain trains itself to interact with if that is what you call a belief on par with religious nonsense. The two are not anything alike nor are they anywhere near being equal. I already gave you a way to prove that your avatar beliefs were invalid. You did not address it.

Now ask yourself if truth should set you free or should it rule over you?

The truths discovered by science are those which rule over us by definition. If you think you can violate physics please demonstrate that fact to us or walk off of a cliff to convince yourself. You don't get to demand what you want like a spoiled kid in a candy shop Frank. Reality doesn't bend to what you think it should be or how you think it should treat you. Like Gunnar, I have never met a larger manifestation of EGO online than what you present.

Now if you understand the laws of physics you can do some things that before were indeed impossible, like flying for instance. It is made possible in accord with the laws of nature, by harnessing the laws of nature and not by violating those laws. In this manner science sets us free or relatively more so than we were previous to the discovery of those laws.

[_spotlight]

Certified Infinite Possibilities Trainer

[_Franktalk]

The truths discovered by science are those which rule over us by definition.

What a shame it is to allow oneself to be ruled by the world. To reject free will and become part of a collective. For me the most important thing I can learn is to know who I am. But for many they toss even the idea that we can be an individual. I hope you are happy with your choice.

[_spotlight]

The truths discovered by science are those which rule over us by definition.

What a shame it is to allow oneself to be ruled by the world. To reject free will and become part of a collective. For me the most important thing I can learn is to know who I am. But for many they toss even the idea that we can be an individual. I hope you are happy with your choice.

Show me you can defy the law of gravity Franktalk.

[_spotlight]

Let's see if your word salad can be matched.

In order to exist you must do so within some framework that constitutes the laws by which which you exist.
Subject: Proof that reality exists
1. We perceive things.
2. If we perceive things, those perceptions are due to either entities or an illusion.
3. If perceptions are due to either entities or illusions, either entities or illusions exist (or both).
4. If entities exist, truth exists (because if entities exist, the fact of their existence is true).
5. If truth exists, reality exists (because truth requires a reality to be true about).
6. If illusions exist, falsehood exists (because illusions are false by definition).
7. If falsehood exists, reality exists (because falsehood requires a reality to be false about).

So, illusions can only exist in comparison to reality. If an illusion is all there is, then it's not an illusion: it is reality!

You see, medieval arguments such as you are fond of can be made to support the existence of reality. So we are on equal turf there. But when it comes to evidence my side wins. Sorry. I gave you evidence that disproves your avatar scenario. You did not address it nor refute it. You lose. Your views have been disproved. I claim victory over this dung hill.

[_Franktalk]

You see, medieval arguments such as you are fond of can be made to support the existence of reality. So we are on equal turf there. But when it comes to evidence my side wins. Sorry. I gave you evidence that disproves your avatar scenario. You did not address it nor refute it. You lose. Your views have been disproved. I claim victory over this dung hill.

Good for you. I am so glad you feel good about yourself.

[_Gunnar]

One of FrankTalk's main problems is that he actually seems to think that having to rely on evidence is a weakness, and that the more supporting evidence we have on our side, the greater is our inherent weakness and the less credible our position. It is as if he thinks that only falsehood requires evidentiary support. He apparently can't stand to have his convictions constrained by anything external to himself--especially reality. He is the ultimate example of backfire effect, because he actually seems to think backfire effect is a virtue or a valid means to discern truth.

[_Franktalk]

One of FrankTalk's main problems is that he actually seems to think that having to rely on evidence is a weakness, and that the more supporting evidence we have on our side, the greater is our inherent weakness and the less credible our position. It is as if he thinks that only falsehood requires evidentiary support. He apparently can't stand to have his convictions constrained by anything external to himself--especially reality. He is the ultimate example of backfire effect, because he actually seems to think backfire effect is a virtue or a valid means to discern truth.

You have this all wrong. I embrace evidence in the form of raw data. What I object to is the projection of man as to what the data means. This is the arena of theory. Here I think man has overreached and with only partial information has made a belief system called science. In time with enough data the system will correct itself. But as it stands today I do not trust the overreach and the beliefs that science holds. In my view reality is way more complex than science is willing to admit. So the whole system of beliefs in science is based on partial information at best. When man discovers doorways to alternative realities then he will have what the mind already has. The mind has a portal to another layer of reality. But of course man has not been able to detect the portal and using its belief system refuses to even try and find it. I am fine with this. We are not made to find the man behind the curtain which would spoil this layer of reality. In time it will all become clear. Just have the patience of the Saints.

But feel free to mock me and mischaracterize what I believe if it makes you feel good.

[_Themis]

But as it stands today I do not trust the overreach and the beliefs that science holds.

You don't know enough about science to know if there is any overreach. It's just more beliefs you want to believe. Educate yourself first.