Jump to content

Alfa String


alfa

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 443
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I got the same feeling recently in his other thread when he basically compared the "communist Jews" to the Nazis, which would have been the perfect chance to invoke Godwyn's law. I'm not a fan of cens

Just my 2 cents... Faith. Faith is belief in the unseen or unproven. Knowledge on the other hand comes from proof or eveidence. I don't know how well the following analogy will go in places were do

I am REALLY tempted to abuse my temporary moderator privileges and kill this thread. Of course then I'd probably be accused of being a member of Mossad or a prostitute or an animal or a thief or a ca

The Katha Upanishad describes the path to enlightenment as narrow—as narrow as a razor’s edge. It says that to traverse the path, one’s intelligence needs to be fully awake.

How I calculated in my book only 1 in 1300 has the 'intelligence fully awake' and 98% of population are at animal level. People need time to evolve, around 5000 years.

Because 98% of population are electing politicians, presidents...the 'intelligence fully awake' is not an issue for them.

Link to post

QUOTE (alfa @ Sep 3 2008, 03:11 AM)

...

Because 98% of population are electing politicians, presidents...the 'intelligence fully awake' is not an issue for them.

IQ tests to qualify to vote were outlawed in the US. That would be like having an IQ test to participate in a mob (See Plato's Republic).

I think the question that really matters is "Can they field dress a moose?" (Fred Thompson, 2-Sep-2008)

Ben

Link to post

QUOTE (alfa @ Sep 3 2008, 03:11 AM)

How I calculated in my book only 1 in 1300 has the 'intelligence fully awake' and 98% of population are at animal level. People need time to evolve, around 5000 years.

By saying that 98% of people are at animal level do you want to hint in any way that you are not part of those 98%?

By making you stand out from the rest you would do really only one thing: pleasing and strengthening your ego. And that makes one being further away from any form of enlightment than any "intelligence on animal level".

Rolf Kalbermatter

Link to post

QUOTE (neB @ Sep 3 2008, 08:06 AM)

IQ tests to qualify to vote were outlawed in the US.

:) I'm not sure that alfa would agree that IQ and his calculations aren't exclusive.

(how's that for a double negative!)

Link to post

Doesn’t mater where I am or where you are; it’s important the theory, the facts and how we will use it to change the future.

Were a lot of high level people before us, but they didn’t gave us such a theory they left us in the dark. If I knew my theory when I was 15 years old my life today would be different.

The IQ test is related to mind not to intelligence.

You can ask for presidents, politicians with the 'intelligence fully awake' in USA and maybe the rest of the world will follow(difficult to do it in these post communist countries).

Link to post

QUOTE (alfa @ Sep 4 2008, 12:05 AM)

Doesn't mater where I am or where you are; it's important the theory, the facts and how we will use it to change the future.

It certainly matters where you are (and I am SO interested in finding out what percentile you fall into...).

If you came up with the idea the only 1 in 1300 people are fully awake, did you manage to do that while not being fully awake? Aren't you inherently including with this theory that you are one of the blessed few? If you are then congratulations are in order. But as Rolf already pointed out, your ideas don't exactly encourage people to congratulate you.

Though if about 1300 people read this thread, then you may help the enlightenment of a blessed soul.

Link to post

I calculated that percentage, 98%, in 2003 when I had 0$ income (now I don’t have a job too). From that day I’m repeating almost each day that percentage because life among low level people (98%) is not easy. In my view theirs intelligence is not fully awake, they are not fully developed and interacting with them (I don’t say theirs ego) is not easy.

People don’t accept that they are from animals, the Christian, Muslims, Jews… follow the Bible(OT)…low level people were created by God. If the religious leaders don’t understand that people are from animals I don’t think they are able to understand God. If you don’t see the animal for sure you don’t see God.

Anyway if the religious leaders are right(OT) I can burn my book I AM CREATING GOD; but if I am right the religious leaders have to go home because are far away from God.

Link to post

Alfa,

if you have a theory, does it fit the following definition of theory within a scientific sense? Or is it just conjuncture and speculation?

QUOTE (Wikipedia)

In science a theory is a testable model of the manner of interaction of a set of natural phenomena, capable of predicting future occurrences or observations of the same kind, and capable of being tested through experiment or otherwise verified through empirical observation. For the scientist, "theory" is not in any way an antonym of "fact". For example, it is a fact that an apple dropped on earth has been observed to fall towards the center of the planet, and the theories commonly used to describe and explain this behavior are Newton's theory of universal gravitation (see also gravitation), and the general theory of relativity.

In common usage, the word theory is often used to signify a conjecture, an opinion, a speculation, or a hypothesis. In this usage, a theory is not necessarily based on facts; in other words, it is not required to be consistent with true descriptions of reality. True descriptions of reality are more reflectively understood as statements which would be true independently of what people think about them.

A scientific theory must be falsifiable. There must be a defined set of circumstances which could be practically used to prove a theory false or true. What would this look like in your case?

On a different level your comment

QUOTE

low level people were created by God

confuses me. Who made the other 2% of the population?

Shane.

Link to post

QUOTE (shoneill @ Sep 5 2008, 06:56 AM)

On a different level your comment

>> low level people were created by God

confuses me. Who made the other 2% of the population?

I think that goes over his book. How to create God. So those 2% are not created by God but do create it/him/her. An idea I would not completely dismiss but in the way he brings it it is not something I like very much.

Rolf Kalbermatter

Link to post

QUOTE (rolfk @ Sep 5 2008, 02:17 PM)

I think that goes over his book. How to create God. So those 2% are not created by God but do create it/him/her. An idea I would not completely dismiss but in the way he brings it it is not something I like very much.

Rolf Kalbermatter

But that's just silly. It's confusing the metaphysical with the religious and with the physical.

So the question remains: who created the 2%?

Shane.

Link to post

QUOTE (shoneill @ Sep 5 2008, 08:44 AM)

But that's just silly. It's confusing the metaphysical with the religious and with the physical.

So the question remains: who created the 2%?

Shane.

And who created the begin of all? :rolleyes:

It's by definition an unanswerable question.

Rolf Kalbermatter

Link to post

QUOTE (rolfk @ Sep 5 2008, 03:48 PM)

And who created the begin of all? :rolleyes:

It's by definition an unanswerable question.

Rolf Kalbermatter

I agree, not only unanswerable but totally illogical. I will stop as I fear of sparking off one of those intolerable "origin" discussions.

Shane.

Link to post

QUOTE (alfa @ Sep 3 2008, 10:11 AM)

How I calculated in my book only 1 in 1300 has the 'intelligence fully awake' and 98% of population are at animal level. People need time to evolve, around 5000 years.

how are you going to prove that "scientific theory"? :unsure: how do you measure animal IQ level?

are you going to live for 5000 years to do your measurements? :shifty:

Link to post

QUOTE (rolfk @ Sep 5 2008, 09:48 AM)

And who created the begin of all? :rolleyes:

It's by definition an unanswerable question.

Rolf Kalbermatter

I think it was "Goedel Escher Bach, The Eternal Golden Braid" that when addressing the nature of intelegence (for a clue as to what artifical intelegence is) that observed that the ability to recognize an endless loop (Old kids joke a index card has written on the front "How do you keep an idiot entertained? (flip over)" with the same text on the back) and break out same. I view the "God answer" as a break out of that endless philosophical loop.

Ben

Link to post

In the communist countries God didn’t exist for communists; they were right because how I calculated only 1 in 1300 has a connection with God.

Anyway in all countries the jobs, research…are related to mater; money only for low level research…

Link to post

Pollux,

how you saw this week, are a lot of prostitutes(informers) priests

Like I said only 1 in 1300 connection with God; only few priests have a connection with God, the rest of population are far away from God and in the middle ages was the same.

People can’t go back to the spiritual side because the majority is at animal level, 98% of them.

At CERN will not come the end of the world because the energy of a particle in the LHC is smaller than the energy of a fly.

Link to post

QUOTE (alfa @ Sep 11 2008, 10:09 AM)

Pollux,

how you saw this week, are a lot of prostitutes(informers) priests

http://www.mediafax.ro/engleza/romanian-se...ml?6966;3157607

Like I said only 1 in 1300 connection with God; only few priests have a connection with God, the rest of population are far away from God and in the middle ages was the same.

People can't go back to the spiritual side because the majority is at animal level, 98% of them.

At CERN will not come the end of the world because the energy of a particle in the LHC is smaller than the energy of a fly.

sorry,

I didn't realise you are serious about the subject. :o

Link to post

QUOTE (alfa @ Sep 12 2008, 12:36 AM)

Why I'm wrong, where I'm wrong?

I'm waiting for years for somebody to prove it.

What you write about is not scientific and therefore there is no way to proof in a scientific way that you are right or wrong. It's something everyone has to find for his/her own and where nobody can really tell anyone how it is.

Therefore you should take my comment with a big grain of salt. It is my subjective feeling and made as a subjective comment.

One thing I often feel in your posts is a bitterness about the world not giving you what you think you deserve. Work on that and you will see that the world has no obligations towards you. It only gives back what you seed.

Rolf Kalbermatter

Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.