If you don't know what this is, click here to get the 411!
Ok, as an agnostic, I gotta say: OH MAN!!! Just coincidence? Just the mind's need and tendency to find patterns in the most random of things (i.e. everything)? Possibly.
OR
perhaps we snapped a pic of God itself- or one of his minions- engaged in the creative process!
Either way...HOW FUCKING COOL!!!!
David
Posts
49 comments:
My mind sometimes drifts off to think that our God is our ruler and other universes have a different God maybe one more relieving or tyrant like. I think I might've been reading Lord of the Rings too much I guess. But you gotta wonder.
Wow, Thats just amazing, I strongly believe that this is not just some coincidence
I often wonder if and when mankind will witness such awesome beauty with our own naked eyes. I consider myself fortunate to have seen the aurora and Comet Hale-Bopp, a small glimpse into an ocean of wonder.
It's a coincidence/pattern you notice because you want to. You know how you can see the virgin Mary in that one slice of toast? The eyes of Jesus in a wood-grain pattern in a door?
How is this any different?
VG- this is why I posted that at the start of my post. I am fully aware of our brain's need/desire to do this. I am also fully aware that the very need for our brain to do this could be a pure instinctual survival mechanism. I am ALSO aware that it could also be the hand of God moving about in the universe.
I need to do a post soon about how this latest crop of atheists and agnostics (to butcher Inherit the Wind) gets on my nerves because they fail see that just because science can explain the how does not mean the question of why has come even close to being addressed, let alone answered.
plz mr. jaffe make a vid about those atheists and agnostics. i wanna hear ur opinion on this topic. the creationists/atheists are going ape shit on utube. btw sweet pic i got something like that as my background on my comp
I have this one:
http://www.nela.in/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/eye-of-god_1.jpg
Just Marvelous.
Thanks a bunch for posting this.
That's fucking awesome, Dave.
Thanks, man.
Amazing, really.
Your comment regarding the aspect of science explaining how and not the why is rather profound, I find, as I have said this before, and I very much agree. Science has absolutely nothing to do with religion.
wow David, that is awesome... I'm an atheist so I'm leaving this as just a random coincidence... Very very cool though...
nice pic...it really does look a lot like a hand, heh
On the topic of Agnosticism/Atheism/Believing, I like to say that I'm an Agnostic in theory and an Atheist in practice.
"Agnostic in theory" means that when it comes to answering the "is there a god/higher power/supernatural being?" question, the ultimate answer is "I don't know"
"Atheist in practice" is how I live my everyday life: when I'm in those everyday situations where a believer would normally recognize a higher power, I normally don't.
I'm one of those "I'll believe it when I see it" kinda people. I won't rule it out as a possibility, but until it's proven, it's kinda hard to believe. :)
Okay, why would God have a hand ? Like, with fingers and all ? It's beautiful to see a hand on this picture, but to me this is where the poetry stops. If you look at that picture and go "this cannot be a coincidence", then you are delusional.
@David Jaffe:
The "why" is a purely human conception. In the universe, there is no such thing as a need for things to make sense or a reason for them to happen. Science never claimed to be able to tell "why". Science explains HOW, period. "Why", is 100% human, so is the urge to find "meaning".
It is a really hard and long mental fight to be able to imagine and finally accept the possibility of no "meaning" in the universe or in "things". One that many people aren't capable of.
Why do you say that "as an agnostic"? Christians and atheists are both mostly agnostics, it isnt a very useful term.
"because they fail see that..."
No, you're just ignorant. There is no answer to the why question, we will never have one, end of. It's not important, we make our own meaning through family and friends and enjoying our life.
The "new atheists" acknowledge this and I'm utterly sick of seeing the same straw men arguments trotted out to derise them that they have addressed countless times. You're clearly not as intelligent as I thought you were as you feel the need to criticise others when you're the one who should be criticised for your uninformed opinion.
To take a quote from the qu'ran, just because I happen to have read it recently:
3:66 Lo! ye are those who argue about that whereof ye have some knowledge: Why then argue ye concerning that whereof ye have no knowledge?
Oh boy, now you've done it. Religious flamewars incoming!
but both of the last anon comments are based on assumptions.
This:The "why" is a purely human conception. In the universe, there is no such thing as a need for things to make sense or a reason for them to happen.
and this: There is no answer to the why question, we will never have one, end of. It's not important, we make our own meaning through family and friends and enjoying our life.
To me this sounds like the atheist version of dogma and frankly, this is what I am sick of. I am not a religious person at all and find blind faith in religion dangerous and damaging to our world. And organized religion is even worse. But I also find folks who herald the view that what you see is what you get, that all can be explained by the physiology of the brain, and the only reason we think the universe may harbor conscious forces that have created us and/or influenced is because that is the way the brain is built a bit loony and dangerous as well.
I am not saying they are wrong, by the way. I frankly don't know. But frankly, neither do they.
What I do think is that there's so much more to know before we start to make concrete statements about the universe and the how's and why's of the universe that to stake a claim on anything that we call the truth- this early on in our understanding of things- is foolish.
I understand the brain- most likely- creates what we call consciousness. I understand the brain looks for reasons and patterns in things in order to protect us and make us feel safe and thus, get us to procreate. I've read Dawkins (actually going to see him speak tomorrow nite). So I get it, ok? I get where you are coming from. But to that I say: I agree with much of it but with much of it I also say: meh.
And frankly, I'm sick of 'new atheists' acting as if only us heathens and fools understood these views then we would see what they see. The reality is, I SEE what you see. But again I go back to the fact that just because you can explain HOW something works doesn't mean there is not some force behind the creation of that how. And it doesn't mean there is. And just because you claim WHY is as man made a creation as God is in your minds, what proof do you have of this? What evidence do you have that proves- or comes close to proving- that there is not a REASON for things that happen in the universe?
David
Haha, awesome post title. I love the movie Contact. One of my faves...
... and that's one cool pic. No matter what it might look like.
now thats a mouthful dave :-D goin all philosophical and shit....like socrates xD im tellin u a vid would be awesome. u speak with such charisma that it really shows how u made it where u are in life and in the industry. u are one hell of a person and u have my full respect aswell as many others. u are like the tarantino of game designers ;-)
Nino Mojo said:
"It is a really hard and long mental fight to be able to imagine and finally accept the possibility of no "meaning" in the universe or in "things". One that many people aren't capable of."
No "meaning" in things? If there was no "meaning in things why do people show emotion to these "things". Things have meaning to us or we wouldn't laugh, smile, cry, get mad, etc.
Stop forcing your concept of life on everyone else! Actually, your concept of life is 100% human conception.
@Anonymous
"No "meaning" in things? If there was no "meaning in things why do people show emotion to these "things". Things have meaning to us or we wouldn't laugh, smile, cry, get mad, etc."
Well, the answer is in your question. You have to read again what I said to understand it (understand, not agree). I'm telling you that "meaning" is a human conception, and then you ask "then why do PEOPLE..." See where I'm going with this? The snake is biting its tail.
Nobody said I was an atheist, David.
As for you last paragraph, if you get a chance, ask that to Dawkins tomorrow, he'll give you a better answer than anyone here including myself.
Nino- but EVERYTHING we talk about is a human conception. Even looking at the brain and coming to the scientific conclusions we come to about why we think what we do and why we are prone to desire things like God and meaning is a human conception. There is no pure 'is'ness unless- perhaps- you are talking about folks who mediate on a very deep level or someone like Jill Bolte Taylor (sure you've seen this: http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/jill_bolte_taylor_s_powerful_stroke_of_insight.html)...and even then, who knows.
This is why I get so annoyed when folks try to take the agnostic label from me and use their scientific beliefs to do so. Ultimately they throw up their hands and go, "Well sure you can't know ANYTHING! But now you are just arguing philosophy!" and they say this like ,"Well that doesn't help the argument and move us forward!" and I'm like: my whole point is that we simply are not able to know ANYTHING in any real sense. And because of that we are ALL agnostic, even atheists. And by agnostic- before it gets into a shit storm of semantics- I go by Webster's definition:
a person who holds that the existence of the ultimate cause, as God, and the essential nature of things are unknown and unknowable
Sorry again for flooding but:
It's important to note that science doesn't say "there is no God". It demonstrates that there is no need for one to explain the world as we know it. That's a very powerful nuance.
Then I agree with you and I'm an agnostic too.
Nino- where does science say, " there is no need for one to explain the world as we know it." Where does science say ANYTHING? Science has no motive other than the motive put on it by the folks who practice and study it.
Science is- and should be- cold and rational. Great. No issues there.
But science is a tool to understanding our world. And so far- for all science has given us (and it is a hell of a lot, but in the grand scheme of things, not much) I've year to ready anything where science cares about God one way or the other.
Wow great post jaffe.That is a truly amazing picture.It really makes your imagination run wild.I just love the beauty of thinking what's out there.Creation is just amazing.I get upset with the atheist crowd too.I mean even if you don't beleive in traditional religion.How could you look at the universe and think that there is not something godlike in control.I mean space can't be explained by any type of thinking by man.I mean space can't go on forever it's imposible right.So what is at the end of space.I mean I just think the no god of anykind thinking,is just very closed minded.But that's just my opinion. Chad
Chad- my whole point is that BOTH sides of the argument is closed minded. We simply do not know. Does not mean we should stop searching (scientifically and perhaps spiritually if you are so inclined) but to claim ownership over the truth given how little we know about the reality of our lives is the height if arrogance and ignorance.
All one needs to do is shift/add/remove some chemicals in the brain via drug use to realize that just because we see the world in a certain way (be it a scientific view or a religious view) does not mean that that is the way our world actually is...let alone our universe.
David
religion says god did X. science says "no god didn't, it happened through chance, and circumstance. blah blah blah". thats where god and science co-exist.
in a rational argument, something cant exist until its proven. the onus is on you to prove god exists. science says that there is no evidence to prove God's existence, therefore in a rational argument, it doesn't exist.
i myself tend to view things through an existentialist filter. to me, nothing has meaning except the meaning we imbue it with. so that picture, and its existence means nothing. it has no innate meaning to it. people associate their own dieties with it as perhaps proof of gods existence. an astrophysist will see it as a the culmination of massive amounts of chance, energy, and huge bodies of mass to form these amazing bodies of matter. thats its meaning.
I think it's foolish to assume that just because we can not prove something, there is a high probability that it does not exist. In our short human history there have been many times where there were many things we could not prove until science and art and craftsmanship evolved to the point to allow us to build the tools that allowed us to 'prove' x,y, or z.
I do not know if God exits. And I do not know what God even means. But I do know that just because I can not prove it exists right now in no statistically significant way indicates the probability that I will not be able to provide proof of it's existence in the future.
I also do not even know which- if any- reality is true. There are so many ways to see this world and the older I get, the less and less sure I am that the filter thru which most of us stream our consciousness is the only valid filter thru which to see the world. And when you begin to see the world thru a variety of filters, so much of the stoic stances of what a rational argument is (or what God is, or what right/wrong is) simply goes out the window. At that point, to argue really ANYTHING with any sort of passion- beyond the day to day rules of the world of form that we need to understand in order to simply function- seems a joke at best and a tragic way to get your questions answered at worst.
Good point Jaffe.I don't agree with either side really.I don't think we are close to capable enough to know these answers yet.And about perception is a neat way to look at it.I have often wondered about stuff like that.Like what if everyone sees the world in a diffrent way.Like everyone has diffrent favorite colors.What if every color looks diffrent to every person.And people who truly beleive in magic and so on.I wonder if reality looks diffrent to them.I like the story of Jim Morrison.How from lcd use beleived he could see the other world.I don't agree with that.But it's a neat point of veiw to look at it from.Me I am happy with not knowing.But it's the biggest mystery know to man.And very very fun to think about.
It seems really really likely that this is just a chance formation that occurred, which of course isn't too unlikely would occur within the vastness of space (In fact it'd be unlikely that something like this wouldn't occur). I agree it's nice to have a open mind and speculate about the possibilities, but in some cases the truth can seem so evident it just borders too much on absurdity to ponder these fanciful notions, such as this formation being "gods hand"....I mean come on... Would any rational being speculate that when it rains, it's really god crying? I know thinking rain is the tears of god is even more absurd than saying this formation in space is gods hand, but it's really similar. We have good scientific explanations for both phenomenon that makes total sense, and its not like most humans have witnessed up close the rain actually leaving the clouds...
Whats a 'new atheist'?
Very pretty picture.
Nino Mojo said:
"Well, the answer is in your question. You have to read again what I said to understand it (understand, not agree). I'm telling you that "meaning" is a human conception, and then you ask "then why do PEOPLE..." See where I'm going with this? The snake is biting its tail."
You ask me to understand what you believe but understanding IS a human conception, do you get it?
I say everything is as Men in Black showed us at the end of the movie. Where our galaxy is just a marbel. there is no hope for an explanation. Searching will just end in dissapointment. We go on searching because of hope. Hope of one day understatanding, if that day comes. We haven't even made it anywhere signifigant in our own galaxy yet. We can't even begin to understand space. I try to wrap my head around space being endless, and i wanna cry,lol.
It's literally like going back in time 17,000 years when you see something like that. Too weird!
There is no such thing as a fact really. Everything is someones perception.
Plus facts that we previously thought were absolutely right were proven wrong. Who's to say that our modern ideas aren't like those previous ones?
The bottom line is that all you can have is faith.
ITS DR. MANHATTAN!!! 8)
@grindhouse,
LMAO. nice one.
Anyway, I wanted to share 2 things from Douglas Adam's book, Mostly Harmless; both about robotic inventions that satirize our way of life, in terms of figuring out meanings.
Conducted at MISPWOSO (the MaxiMegalon Institute of Slowly and Painfully Working out the Surprisingly Obvious) "A robot was programmed to believe that it liked herring sandwiches. This was actually the most difficult part of the whole experiment. Once the robot had been programmed to believe that it liked herring sandwiches, a herring sandwich was placed in front of it. Whereupon the robot thought to itself, "Ah! A herring sandwich! I like herring sandwiches." It would then bend over and scoop up the herring sandwich in its herring sandwich scoop, and then straighten up again. Unfortunately for the robot, it was fashioned in such a way that the action of straightening up caused the herring sandwich to slip straight back off its herring sandwich scoop and fall onto the floor in front of the robot. Whereupon the robot thought to itself, "Ah! A herring sandwich ... , etc.," and repeated the same action over and over and over again. The only thing that prevented the herring sandwich from getting bored with the whole damn business and crawling off in search of other ways of passing the time was that the herring sandwich, being just a bit of dead fish between a couple of slices of bread, was marginally less alert to what was going on than was the robot. The scientists at the Institute thus discovered the driving force behind all change development and innovation in life, which was this: herring sandwiches." It goes on, saying that these individuals publish a paper on the meaning of life, and as they're called out on being stupid, they recheck and republish and republish their work, claiming it as the "practical function of boredom," and soon stopped using herring sandwiches to find happier emotions from the robot. (61-62)
Here's another exerpt from the book, between Arthur's daughter, Random, and the new Guide. "'We'll come to that in a minute," said the bird. (Guide) 'Just how many, please?' 'Well, you're sort of...' Random gestured helplessly off into the distance. 'I see, still infinite in extent, but at least we're homing in on the right dimensional matrix. Good. No, the answer is an orange and two lemons.' 'Lemons?''If I have three lemons and three oranges and I lose two oranges and a lemon, what do I have left?' 'Huh?' 'Okay, so you think that time flows that way, do you? Interesting. Am I still infinite?' it asked, ballooning this way and that in space. 'Am I infinite now? How yellow am I?' Moment by moment the bird was going through mind-mangling transformations of shape and extent. 'I can't...' said Random, bewildered. 'You don't have to answer, I can tell from watching you now. So. Am I your mother? Am I a rock? So I seem huge, squishy and sinuously intertwined? No? How about now? Am I going backward?' For once the bird was perfectly still and steady. 'No,' said Random. 'Well, I was in fact, I was moving backward in time. Hmmm. Well, I think we've all sorted all that out now.'" (194-195)
All in all, my whole interpretation to these exerpts are such: in the first part, anyone can believe any conclusion until heavily criticised that perhaps there's more to the meaning of life from herring sandwiches, due to that other universes might hate them or not even have them; in fact, I'm not even sure that's the way I want to word my statement, but if I find a better wording, I'll post it later. My interpretation on the second part is that we humans have only a fraction of ability to observe nature; we can only hear from 16 to 20 hertz, we can only see red to violet on the wave spectrum, we can't view instances that have occurred before our time unless we hear someone else's perception of events, we only have our perception. We only have our opinions of what is occurring as of right now, and as the world continues to exist, perhaps it is okay to figure out what makes sense to your perspective, whether there is a God/spirit/etc. or not, because everything has worked out so far (hopefully.) Anyway, I think I'm done with my rant, and I just wanted to make sure to tell everyone I am not forcing any beliefs of mine onto you. :) Oh, and to make sure everything is legal for me to post those quotations, here's the citation:
Adams, D. (1992). Mostly Harmless. New York: Ballantine Books.
JAFFE! wtf! thats freakin Kratos with is chains lit up! stomping or standing or being grabbed by something. OMG...the universe is telling you something jaffe. i dont know what .LOL
"There is no such thing as a fact really. Everything is someones perception.
Plus facts that we previously thought were absolutely right were proven wrong. Who's to say that our modern ideas aren't like those previous ones?"
I can agree that we can never be 100% certain of whether something is a fact or not, but that's just really naive to then jump to the conclusion that there is actually no facts at all out in the universe, and that everything is dictated by our perception??? That's a really huge conclusion to jump to that is not supported at all and that you really don't know is true or not.. Nothing prevents the possibility that there are actually facts in the world, and that were observing them, and just not 100% certain that they exist or not..
Also, there are plenty of things that we can be fairly confident are the way we observe them to be, such as rain being caused by clouds overhead, or the composition of our sun. Obviously there's tons of stuff out there that have yet to be fully explained, but a lot of the theories we've developed for some things, make incredible sense, and in all likelihood are either right are really really close to being right.
Nice pick. The farther we gaze into the universe the more we realize that it's all a series of patterns on an unimaginable scale. Maybe we learn about how the universe may have began by studying such phenomenas more extensively.
Perception defines what the integrity of a "fact" to a certain degree. However, there are concepts that are simply immovable. Whether we are aware of them is another question.
Yo!!! What up Cliffy,
Sweet post. Check this video out, and post your thoughts. I'm very interested on what you think about this as I my self am a firm believer.
http://media.abovetopsecret.com/media/394/Creation_is_a_Scientific_Fact/
Take care
Hey dude, David...have you seen this? Because this...is truly fucking beautiful:
http://www.emathclass.com/pictures/gods-eye.jpg
But god.....you just have to be just so freaking mesmerized by nature at times. It really gives you the chills but you can only think about how cool life is.
I am also agnostic and this is very cool. The fact that it is 17,000 years old and we are just seeing it is blowing my mind.
Could it be the hand of God? Maybe, I don't know. All I know is it is cool looking.
Hi David how you doing man?
Hope you´re ok, about the picture i don´t know if you have seen a movie, well it´s actually a documentary called Religulous, i recomended 1000% it´s precisely about what you mean, it doesn´t try to change your mind it only marks the truth about it, that we don´t know. It explains how the man has corrupted something that was suposed to be honest, now it´s only a busisnes based on people´s hopes and dreams, with a touch of humor into the mix you should really check it out man.
See ya later David, keep posting that i really enjoy your blog!
Lies, God is a lefty.
It reminds me of that Firefox looking one they found a few years ago.
Mr Jaffe, i just wanted to say i Agree with you 100%. i have been saying almost the exact same thing for quite a while. so you can understand how happy i was to read you feel the same way. it just goes to show that there is no such thing as little ideas. just little minds that cant understand those ideas and thus shrug them off as (Stupid) when they themselves are really the Stupid ones. stupid for not understanding that there MIGHT be something different in this world or reality but since they refuse to take a moment to ponder the maybe's will never see it. if we didn't have a guy sail around the world we would STILL THINK IT WAS FUCKING FLAT! and when he said the world was round he was laughed at. you cant let any little person get you down thats for sure. if you think your on to something then be true to yourself. in the end thats all that really matters.
In closing, the popularity of the hermes handbag does not seem to fading anytime soon. As long as people continue to purchase these bags for thousands of dollars, there is no doubt that 35 birkin will continue to make them, one by fabulous one? Even if hermes replica aren’t in your budget anytime soon, they are certainly worth taking a peek at.
It is also possible to acquire a second-hand or used hermes handbags at couture-consignment shops. bag hermes sold, are hand-made by experienced craftsmen. This is one of the reasons why the bags hermes are sold at a high price.
The other main ingredients of lida are also natural – small amounts of caffeine and black pepper. Now imagine how the combination of lida daidaihua contents influences the metabolism levels – it increases them, and accelerates the process of burning fat. daidaihua has also undergone several clinical tests and studies, and no problems were reported. Results have proven that if taken before, during or after physical activity, lida slimming increases the calorie burning up to 278 more calories, then usual. Back to the question whether slimming capsule is safe to use as a weight loss supplement –slimming capsules preparation technique ensures full absorption by the organism.
This was not the initial logo that Chanel bag once conceptualized. It absolutely was provided to her through the organization Chateau de Cremate in Nice. Chanel handbags absolutely was no more than within the start up of the first Chanel Wallet retailers that the logo started to be a hallmark for that style house.
Any woman will admit that deep down, that little box bearing the name Tiffany , will conjure up a world of starlets and beauty, and is highly coveted. Since September, 18, 1837, Charles Lewis silver earrings and John B. Young established what was then considered a 'stationary and fancy goods store' situated at 259 Broadway in New York City and named Tiffany necklaces . As one of America's first jewelry stores, it is no wonder that Hollywood has used it's influence to draw viewers and shoot the sales of the jeweler through the roof. Since silver necklaces set the standards for United States silver.
off white nike
moncler jackets
jordan shoes
off white hoodie
yeezy supply
yeezy shoes
kd 13
supreme clothing
bape clothing
jordan retro
a fantastic read g5n09q3y84 replica louis vuitton handbags replica bags f0v98p5d35 site w0c54u9z92 best replica bags online replica chanel bags ebay j2w45n1y06 replica bags in dubai gucci replica handbags m5z78p1g26 7a replica bags
Post a Comment