The only thing I hate about being an Atheist and knowing the truth is...
Offline Would you want to live forever or extend your life-span if you could?
The only thing I hate about being an atheist and knowing the truth is being aware to the fact that everything I see, feel, and think will all come to an end someday in the future. Sometimes I feel that the theist have it so good while living a delusion, and not being aware of the 'countdown' to death. I compare their mindset about death to those of all the other non-intelligent life on this planet who have no clue what death is, or that it even implies to them. Non-Intelligent life such as incects, and small mammals. Like the theist/christians, lower life-forms 'seem' to live the most happiest and care free lives.
When I was about 7 years old I was always confused by how people would say all this wonderful stuff about that place they call heaven, then cry & morn when someone finally got a chance to go there, lol. I use to think to myself: If they were really sure about what they believe and thought they were going to the same place when they die, Why be so sad as if they'll never see the person again. Growing up this helped me really see how unsure they were about their faith.
But if someone offered me a 'Matrix Pill' to forget about death, and never to be aware of it again in return for religious delusion; I still couldn't bring myself to do it.
I try not to think about death, but the thought aways seems to creep into my mind again and again. I always just tell myself that it's the little price we pay for knowing and tuning into the Truth, and in the end I would have it no other way.
Slimm,
"When one person suffers from a delusion, it is called Insanity. When many people suffer from a delusion, it is called Religion." - Robert M. Pirsig,
- Login to post comments
Offline "Pseudoscience of the gaps" fallacy.
"Science the unchecked glob of human frailties" fallacy.
"Anyone can repress a woman, but you need 'dictated' scriptures to feel you're really right in repressing her. In the same way, homophobes thrive everywhere. But you must feel you've got scripture on your side to come up with the tedious 'Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve' style arguments instead of just recognising that some people are different." - Douglas Murray
- Login to post comments
Offline Robotics transformed manufacturing, tossing people out of jobs that are now done entirely by machines. There was a lot of controversy, but still, it came to pass.
Medical procedures that seemed like science fiction 20 years ago are now routine, extending life beyond what many think is its natural limits.
The Hubble Telescope has overturned more cherished theories than just about any single object in human history. Lots of entrenched scientific dogma has fallen by the wayside because of it.
The point here is, that science at times balks at change, but change comes anyway. There is no vast conspiracy to keep new ideas out of the mix, they are evaluated and often grudgingly instituted if they prove their worth.
Luminon, I can't put this any more simply.
Your particular pet "pseudo-science" is just that... pseudo, false, untrue, not real, phoney et al.
Past Life regression does not work. It is nothing but imaginary scenarios, conjoured by susceptable, gullable minds guided by a fool. Nothing that you see, feel or sense while in a session is REAL, it is your imagination working to fill your expectations, nothing more.
It would be just amusing, were it not for the potential for real lasting harm to those who desperately need real theraputic help, but instead opt for the quick fix placebo effect you offer.
People still line up for the psychic surgeons, with their slieght of hand and bits of chicken guts. It is false, fraudulent and dangerous for the same reasons, but still they come and offer glowing testemonials.
People still flock to the faith healers side show tent, with his microphone in the ear, and his blatent use of shills in the audience. He's a fraud, a fake, but still they come, still they offer glowing testemonials.
Pseudoscience is not a term we attach to things we are afraid of because they are so revolutionary, its a term that means just what it says, psuedo...false, fraudulent, fake.
Please STOP, before someone gets hurt.
LC >:-}>
Christianity: A disgusting middle eastern blood cult, based in human sacrifice, with sacraments of cannibalism and vampirism, whose highest icon is of a near naked man hanging in torment from a device of torture.
- Login to post comments
It doesn't really bother me.I'm not gona know I'm dead when I am, so I won't be distraught about it. I wouldn't say christians live happy and care free lives. They deny themselves many simple pleasures, and have the constant fear of hell. I find the atheist life more care free in some regards, less in others. In almost every regard though, happier.
Ya, Harris discussed this in End of Faith. You never see them rejoicing when someone dies. They'll say, 'they're in a better place' or 'they've gone home' but it won't be partying. At the end of the day theists are human, and I think no matter how hard they try, there's a part that isn't sure about the whole afterlife thing.
I barely think about death. It happens..and like I said, you aren't going to know anyway.
Psalm 14:1 "the fool hath said in his heart there is a God"-From a 1763 misprinted edition of the bible
Argument from Sadism: Theist presents argument in a wall of text with no punctuation and wrong spelling. Atheist cannot read and is forced to concede.
"You were dead for millions of years before you were born, did it bother you then that you were dead?" I am not sure who said this but I love the comment.
My father was an Athiest and he passed away 1 day before his 92nd birthday last December. It did not bother him at all knowing that he was going to die in a week or 2 as the doctor informed us. He was tired of living with diminishing capabilities for the last year or so of his life and he openly talked about it.
I think it was much harder for the rest of us. I really miss him and I probably will for the rest of my life, but I am glad knowing that he is not enduring eternal torture for not believing in something that was told to him as a child and he could never accept as other than pure fantasy.
This is my consolation knowing that as an athiest like him, he is not suffering from such a horrific ordeal from a jealous entity who cannot see the good in people unless they accept him as their 'God'.
Jamie
Mark Twain if I'm not mistaken
Psalm 14:1 "the fool hath said in his heart there is a God"-From a 1763 misprinted edition of the bible
Argument from Sadism: Theist presents argument in a wall of text with no punctuation and wrong spelling. Atheist cannot read and is forced to concede.
Yes you are right. I remember now. I read it in the God Delusion by Dawkins. Wonderful book. While reading it, I spent half of the time shaking my head and the other half laughing out loud.
Jamie
You know, on occasion it bothers me, too, that there will come the time when I stop existing. In part I think it's because I was raised to expect to exist forever and discovering that was a lie was and is something of a huge let-down. It's also a certain frustration about not having the opportunity to know "what happens next".
In an act of self-consolation I sometimes tell myself that, from my point of view, the universe came into existence when my cognitive abilities developed and the universe will end when those cognitive abilities no longer have a functioning brain to emerge from. It's silly stuff.
The fact is, I won't be around to be worrying about not being around any more than I was around to worry about not being around before I existed. The final futility of filling my mind with information when it's going to evaporate ( "...like tears in the rain." ) doesn't outweigh the pleasure and fun I have doing it.
Hip hip! For having had the chance to do anything at all. And Hip hip! For having been born in a country and time where it wasn't all suffering and backbreaking work.
"Anyone can repress a woman, but you need 'dictated' scriptures to feel you're really right in repressing her. In the same way, homophobes thrive everywhere. But you must feel you've got scripture on your side to come up with the tedious 'Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve' style arguments instead of just recognising that some people are different." - Douglas Murray
I used to fear death and the place in which your soul goes if you are bad, but after shedding that delusion, I have no actual fear of leaving this existence.
I think if you live to an old age and your body starts shutting down, it would be a welcome respite. The one thing I wouldn't say I fear, but rather hope that it doesn't occur, would be a particularly gruesome death in agony. Not a ton of people know how they are going to die, so this is a fairly big unknown to ponder.
Before I was nothingness, and into nothingness I shall return.
“Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.” Yoda
You know, I tend to agree with those that say we will just stop existing, and we won't know we ever existed.
I don't know how many of you have had similar experiences, but I've lost consciousness on a couple of occasions. On one, I was unaware of about 8 hours of my life (accident in which I hit my head); the other was brief, only lasting a few seconds. But I equate death to what it was like - complete unawareness that I ever stopped being conscious... I was just... nothing. When I awoke, that time was lost. There were no dreams to remember to attribute that lost time to either. Just nothingness. It was quite amazing actually.
That does make you wonder though, if "you" will ever spawn into some other form of conscious life. I'm not talking about reincarnation, but just the idea that a life of some sort is bound to come into existence, and it will be self-aware... a new you - but you aren't "you", since "you" stopped existing. It could be an alien on another planet, wondering the same thing we wonder... "is there anyone else out there?". Or end up as a bird here on earth... Regardless, "you" will transist from one form into another, with no comprehension of what, when, or where "you" were before. You'll just be living a new life, with a completely fresh slate - just like what happened when we were born, and became conscious. If you happen to enjoy your life as it is now, I suppose that you'd worry that you'd start out again as something worse... But I guess that's the good thing about memory. You won't know any different if it does happen to suck. It will only "suck" based on the relative nature of other life around you. For all I know, "I" could have been living some fantastic life as a technologically advanced alien watching these humans
It's kind of a hard concept to write about. It makes more sense in my head. I suppose that this is a form of "eternal" life, except you don't take your life's experiences along to the next one... Since there is no evidence of a "soul", I think there can be no "connection".
Yeah the fact that we aren't conscious to even realize our death is a good thing too. But the thing is having a conscious mind right now and anticipating the whole out come that always gets me. But I guess what you all just showed me is that there's a (Good & Bad) inside this concept at the same time which cancel each other out into nothing.
The only thing that really pisses me off about death is, we won't be able to tell the theists 'I told you so..."
Seriously, I have no fear of being dead, that's simple non-existence, the same place I was before I was born. The act of dieing scares the bejeebers out of me, but then it SHOULD scare any rational person.
I'm an autopsy assistant (in fact, I'm sitting here wearing my 'I see dead people' t-shirt my wife had made for me). One thing I'm certain of, death is final and permanent.
LC >;-}>
Christianity: A disgusting middle eastern blood cult, based in human sacrifice, with sacraments of cannibalism and vampirism, whose highest icon is of a near naked man hanging in torment from a device of torture.
Reading everyones reply has really lessened the notion of death. This is almost like therapy, lol.
Knowing that there is no personal eternity to share with my loved ones makes me appreciate them more now. If you know you will be returning to somewhere you tend not to worry about seeing, doing or appreciating it to the fullest. I'm not gonna walk over to the rim of the Grand Canyon because I'll be back next year. There is always the next trip...
But if you truly realize there is no do over. No eternity in heaven to play checkers with the kids. So seeing your son, daughter, father, mother, wife, husband, friend tonight could be the last time ever, no really, ever. So it's important to live life to the best of your ability because there won't be a chance to make up for things missed later in eternity. Love the people you love so they really know they were loved by you.
How the hell did I get tripped up in all this syrup? Hopefully it makes a little sense despite all the saccharin
Respectfully,
Lenny
"The righteous rise, With burning eyes, Of hatred and ill-will
Madmen fed on fear and lies, To beat and burn and kill"
Witch Hunt from the album Moving Pictures. Neal Pert, Rush
I just wanted to discuss this point for a minute.
Dying of old age isn't as peaceful as it sounds. My grandfather just died a few months ago of old age (he was 92). It was sort of an epic battle til the finish, and he hated every minute of the process probably more than we hated watching it.
His kidneys were failing, so his urine was bright orange; he had to be turned over to get wiped off whenever he defecated, but moving hurt him, and he would be moaning in pain through the whole process. He often hallucinated or didn't remember family members because of the meds he was on. His teeth looked literally rotten, he had trouble breathing, he was in constant pain, his parkinson's was worse than ever, he could no longer walk, he refused to eat... it was just miserable. And yet, he had been a physician, and always took good care of himself - he ate healthily & did a lot of walking all his life. But despite keeping his body in good condition for so long, the failing process still was awful.
The church service on Good Friday (yes, my dad is a theist, and drags the rest of the fam along) reminded my mom of the death of her father. Here they were talking about how much Jesus suffered on the cross, but my papou's death was almost comparable. My mom started crying during the church service, and later explained that she realized that death in general is a painful process. You can die of an accident, of disease, and of many causes, all of which can be painful. But even if you die of old age, you will still die a "death in agony." After that experience, dying of old age isn't nearly the peaceful process people think it is. That's why I wish euthanasia would be legalized in the states already. But there would be some policy kinks to work out with that.
Anyways, the point I was trying to make was that I don't think death is a pretty process. I suppose our only consolation is that we won't remember it anyways.
Also wanted to add my two cents about the topic at hand, teehee.
Nah. Not really. I wouldn't want my lifespan extended unless "quality of life" could be extended as well. If you get "old" by the time you're 60 or 70, yet live til you're like 110... what good is it living through old-ness for 40 years?? I'd prefer to remain youthful at least a little longer. (Well, for me personally, that might happen anyways, since I have good genes and look younger than I really am.)
And as for eternal life... I would think that would get boring too. I mean what is there to DO up there in heaven? I once was required to read a book for a bible class in high school, in which the author described heaven (aka speculated wildly and made shit up). He went on about how we would leave our earthly bodies and receive "new spiritual bodies" that we couldn't comprehend, and some stuff about the angels... and it didn't really sound like a fun place to me. Plus I've always wondered what age you are in heaven. Like do you get to choose, or do you get to be the age at which you died forever? (I'm sure some apologist would say "you are all ages simultaneously!"
I don't think eternal life is all it's cracked up to be.
I'm totally fine with my mortality, and I just hope to get out of it what I can.
That really depends on the individual case, Greek Goddess. My grandfather died a few years ago. (Feb 2nd 2005) and he went through an "Indian Summer". His last night on this planet he was in a very good mood laughing and saying that he was ready to pass on. He had an enviable death and I hope that I am as fortunate as he was.
Some people die painfully, some die without even realizing it is happening, others die chuckling. It's different for everyone. Death does not require pain in order for it to happen.
"I am an atheist, thank God." -Oriana Fallaci
It does not bother me, that I won't go to heaven. I just really would like to stay alive to see all the future technological advances.
Death ? Done that , didn't bother me. Then I was born screaming. Now just getting back to dead ? Yeah don't want the suffering part. Stocking up on morphine and keeping a colt 45 on my side. Besides dead is an illusion. All that I AM as energy matter will exist forever as I always have. All is ONE.
_____________________________________________________________
Off Topic: GEEZZZ, beautiful sexy Greek Goddess
, your picture and words, and now all your wonderful sisters are all in my head too. Gets hard to think about other things when you brainy goddess's get to teasing ..... Just ain't fair, to just be a man ! No wonder men fear women and cover them up, but I ain't afraid. What is to fear ! Being slaves of women sounds good to me ! Whatever the girls want, I want. I AM sick of a mans world ..... get free girls of the ancient chains .....
Time to change this, It's a mans world - James Brown
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Fd8_gojNXc&feature=related
Girls can , a sister
Grammys: Christina Aguilera-"It's A Man's Man's Man's World"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PWGTOOiWSdU&feature=related
Thanks girl .....
Atheism Books.
The problem with extending life is this... humans tend to arrive at irrational or otherwise incorrect beliefs in their first 20-30 years of life and then, if they don't manage (for whatever reason) to see the problems with these beliefs before a certain point in life, they tend to become "set in their ways" and stubbornly stick with those beliefs, to the general detriment of society as a whole.... The easiest way to "wipe the slate clean" is to let them die of old age and be replaced by new humans. But if medical science were to allow them to live forever, as they continue to amass wealth and influence... that's a very scary thought.
Also, if medical science were allow people to live forever, wouldn't that exacerbate the growing population problem? Come to think of it, doesn't extending the length of human life already do that? And for what benefit? So people can live with failing health, pain, memory loss, loss of motor control.... But to help people in such circumstances end their lives peacefully and painlessly is considered criminal.... Why does society consider death to be such a bad thing that postponing it is worth all of that? I don't see any justification for it, regardless of what people think happens after death.
Just because you don't know of any evidence doesn't mean that no evidence exists... and to assume that it does would be irrational. Just think, 1000 years ago did people know of any evidence of quantum mechanics, relativity, or even electricity? If lack of knowledge of evidence demonstrated lack of evidence, then we would never have been able to have discovered any evidence of these more modern scientific concepts.
There is an Indian (native American) proverb:
"When you realize, that you ride on a dead horse, get down."
We do everything, but that. Everything, keeping on the dead horse by any means, by all miracles of science and medicine, by all our will, despite the agony, because we are afraid of that small piece of future, of our so-called death.
"A brave man dies only once, but a coward dies thousands of times before in his mind."
Death is always somewhere in future, we all wait for it to come. Future never comes. It doesn't exist and never will, nobody had ever seen anything else, than presence. Stay always conscious in presence, and you will never be afraid. In the moment you read this sentence, a thousands of presences already passed. One of them could be your death, and you didn't notice anything. Why should you be afraid of another tiny presence?
We are insane, we're worried of things, which doesn't exist. I don't mean ghosts and demons, it would be another story, I mean the past and future. They are not real, nobody ever saw them. Don't be foolish theists, don't believe in these non-existing dreams. It is much harder to get rid of this absurd faith, than of any religion, but it's well worth of it.
All right, my rationality quota for this post is done, now something from real life. I learn how to drive in these days, and I feel like a small dwarf in a big house. When I need to change my speed, I reach for a speed-lever and push the connector pedal, these things are both down there. I lose my sight, it is like my small consciousness would have to step away from a windows of eyes, and had to go somewhere down to cellar to push the pedal and operate the speed-lever, then it quickly must go upstairs, in front of the window and look through my eyes if I still ride on the road, and use the steering wheel if necessary. I know, it needs a practice, but this is a good example how my consciousness is not holding tight in my body and dwells around, like a bunch of flies around a running cow. If death is losing a body, then I'm practically half dead anyway, I have the house but most of the time I don't live there. You can see it on people's eyes, if someone's just staring dumbly somewhere, the consciousness is gone and the biological machine of body takes care of itself as best it can. (It can be cured by very intensive, regular and long-thermed GROUP BEER THERAPY in presence of females) The person you see, is always only a candle light in a big, empty house.
All crimes which ever been, happened, because people were not conscious. They were not conscious of suffering of the others, or they didn't see, that the diamonds and gems are just stones, cold, hard stones. They saw their dreams reflected in them, but these are just dreams, nothing real. All crimes are commited by sleepers. You can't blame them more than a guy, who killed his parents while being somnambulistic. Of course, there is always a reaction for any deed, a punishment, if you call it so, but it all has a cause in being unconscious.
Also, I have been several times through regression therapy, I saw some of my past lives, just like dozens of clients before me and after me, so I'm quite sure there is no thing like nothing after death.
Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.
How can I put this gently?
Regression Therapy is pure and refined bullshit.
It is the process of implanting false memories. The patient imagines scenarios which are reinforced by the 'therapist' (quack) to seem 'real'.
LC >;-}>
Christianity: A disgusting middle eastern blood cult, based in human sacrifice, with sacraments of cannibalism and vampirism, whose highest icon is of a near naked man hanging in torment from a device of torture.
Please, are you serious? Have you ever been through the therapy even just once? Have you been at least present to a therapy session? Or maybe, are you an educated regression therapist? (just asking, everything is possible) If may I ask, how is this opinion of yours backupped, on what basis did you acquire it, if it isn't too personal question?
My opinion is based on a personal experience (about 3 times) and seeing it work in practice for several last years.
Please note, that client during the therapy is ordered to make NO EFFORT to produce any imaginations, just has to stay in relaxed state, fully conscious, wait for what shows up.
Secondly, if a client still tries to think up any imaginations, to satisfy himself and a therapist, that he finally "sees something", the client is never able to fully describe a meaningful scenario and then repeat again and again it FOR HOURS without a failure. This is the same principle as in police interrogation. On the first opportunity a client will change the version into what he really sees AND BOTH PHYSICALLY AND EMOTIONALLY FEELS. Often the feelings are very strong and will cause the client to cry. A therapist has always a box of handkerchiefs next to the chair.
Thirdly, a therapist NEVER inspires or suggests to client what he should say and see, a therapist always precisely works with everything, what patient reports to see, nothing more, nothing less. There is no way how a therapist can transfer any memories to a client, it is not a purpose of a therapy, the client must work only with what he really observes. The purpose of therapy is not to describe a full image of circumstances (and a historical era, where's the observation taking place) but to focus on client's problem.
Fourthly, the client is ordered to report EVERYTHING. If he sees and feels himself or herself die by any, even extremely brutal death, or commit horrid atrocities, it doesn't matter, it everything must be worked with. This is supposed to be a version of the client from some previous life, thus the client is always afraid or embarrased, what the therapist will think about him, so clients are directly informed to say everything what they see there about themselves, even if it would put them into really 'bad light', because they're not an identic person with the one they observe.
Yes, there is a technique of "implanting memories", which is used at extreme cases, when a client can not endure and become emotionally neutral towards the same story he keeps reviewing for hours (up to 10), then by a therapist's guidance the story sequence is gradually changed, to end better, to be more acceptable for client. But this is not an usual part of therapy.
Also, there are more methods of regression therapy and a lot depends on therapist's skills. I can't guarantee, that all therapists and their methods are equally sophisticated. However, a reliable indicator of it is a reference of former clients. While a process of therapy session is a secret between a therapist and a client, former clients can still tell you if it was a helpful method and how much.
Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.
I think you totally misunderstood what I said. I was saying that as you get older, and life becomes excruciatingly painful in that breaking down process that human bodies undergo, death would be a WELCOME RESPITE(aka I would want death rather than be in a constant state of pain and agony knowing that the end was near and was only going to get worse). I had a severe staph infection from a back surgery and I have almost died and have felt excruciating pain for months at a time(even on earth shattering doses of morphine) where there is no respite from agony even in your sleep. If I had known that was all I had to look forward to I would have ended this life, because at that point the cons certainly outweighed the pros. Death is definitely not a pretty process for a lot of people suffering from old age, chronic disease etc. and I wholeheartedly concur with legalized euthanasia in warranted cases. Choosing the moment of one's death to escape chronic physical agony should be a choice made available to everyone, but for some that are not in agony, pain, or discomfort death can come swiftly at a moments notice to those in good spirits.
My friends Grandad(in his early 90s) started a family business of a fireworks company through which all of the sons and grandsons were employed. He had left the business to his son, and one fourth of July he ended up dying at the fireworks show, sitting in a chair and smiling as he watched the fireworks. My friend said he was fine, and happy and healthy that day, and said that he just stopped living, no convulsions or anything. Some people get lucky to have a swift, painless death I guess.
“Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.” Yoda
I was with both my parents when they passed on from cancer. My mom's last 6 months were like Greek goddess's grandfather, until her last few hours. All her pain vanished and her and I talked about love, laughed and played tic tac toe as she was sitting upright in her bed. Then she laid back and let out a long final breath. Her last hours were peaceful.
My dad never did seem to suffer much as he withered away his last month. Us 5 kids, me the oldest, were at his bed side just talking with him as he listened and smiled, when he pulled himself up and sat next to me on the edge of the bed and said "all is one". Then he laid down and let out a long breath. We were all amazed how easy and joyfully he passed. We sat there for 20 mins, until a nurse came in and kinda freaked out.
Neither of my parents were on morphine or pain killers their last day.
Yeah, dad, "All is ONE". Both of my loving parents were atheists.
Dying in our culture really is rather taboo and kept hidden .....
Atheism Books.
Unfortunately, even though Luminon is an atheist, he does seem to believe in a lot of "woo-woo" stuff - Homeopathy and now past life regression - and defends them the same way as most pseudoscientists and Theists defend their nonsense. I think we need a serious rational intervention here!
Debunking Homeopathy:
http://skepdic.com/homeo.html
http://www.randi.org/jr/02-02-2001.html
Debunking PLR
http://skepdic.com/pastlife.html
Matt Shizzle has been banned from the Rational Response Squad website. This event shall provide an atmosphere more conducive to social growth. - Majority of the mod team
Yes, I have witnessed so called regression.
No, I was not impressed. It was and is pure psuedo-scientific bullshit.
A quick search gave the following links, I strongly suggest the books listed.
http://www.stopbadtherapy.com/resource/books.shtml
I also recommend; "Crazy" Therapies What are they? Do They Work?
by Margaret Thaler Singer and Janja Lalich
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1996
The American Psychiatric Association stated in 1993 that it is impossible to distinguish accurately between true and false memories.
Mel Sabshin, MD, the Medical Director of the American Psychological Association condemned "past life therapy" as quackery: "The American Psychiatric Association believes that past life regression therapy is pure quackery. As in other areas of medicine, psychiatric diagnosis and treatment today is based on objective scientific evidence. There is no accepted scientific evidence to support the existence of past lives let alone the validity of past life regression therapy.", quoted in the Chicago Tribune 1995-JUN-21.
LC >;-}>
Christianity: A disgusting middle eastern blood cult, based in human sacrifice, with sacraments of cannibalism and vampirism, whose highest icon is of a near naked man hanging in torment from a device of torture.
ahem...ditto.
"I am an atheist, thank God." -Oriana Fallaci
All right, Mr. Thought police. I also have long hair.
I don't believe, I am convinced by what I see. You would be convinced too, if your house would be for years used as a "woo-woo" workplace and research facility, with progressively succesful activity. Seeing "woo-woo" stuff empirically work, people pay for it happily and recommend others, is my daily routine, it's statistically significant. If no science can prove "woo-woo" stuff, the statistics can. If it's unbiased, of course. Unbiased statistics are usually performed by undecided individuals for personal purposes, not by interested sides.
Hundreds of people came through here, and they succesfully participated on a kind of "woo-woo" they wished for, there wasn't ever any protest against it. Whoever asked about what's going on here, was informed, also practically and could make own opinion.
Just as atheists can't stay silent, when theists indoctrinates people's minds, I must tell others, what is my daily experience, when compared to what "credible" sources shows as their truth.
http://skepdic.com/pastlife.html
I am very worried about a credibility of this article. In fact, not much there matches with a hundreds of regression therapy sessions, which takes place for years in a room downstairs of where I'm just writing this.
"Past life regression (PLR) is the alleged journeying into one's past lives while hypnotized."
This article is all about a therapy under hypnosis. I can't say anything about that, I have never seen a regression therapist, who would use a hypnosis. All regression I ever knew about was performed in fully conscious state (just relaxed), which can never be mistaken with hypnosis.
"Psychologist Robert Baker demonstrated that belief in reincarnation is the greatest predictor of whether a subject would have a past-life memory while under past life regression hypnotherapy. "
Another lie. If a client doesn't believe in reincarnation, he's encouraged to consider his mental and physical observations as a product of brain, projecting a base of the problem in a form of imaginary visual sequences and synthetized emotions.
This means, that a client is able to experience the same phenomenon, independently on a kind of his belief. It is just necessary to prevent him from sabotaging the process by an active disbelief. Baker's "experiment" is clearly an example of affection of people's stance towards the method. When the stance is negative, they don't let it work.
Also, if a client recently uses any kind of psychopharmacy, he's unable to work succesfully by this method, the reliable psychological mechanism, on which it is based, is temporarily shut down. This explains a part of regressionally unsuccesful people.
"Since therapists charge by the hour, the need to explore centuries instead of years will greatly extend the length of time a patient will need to be "treated," thereby increasing the cost of therapy."
I have emphasized several times, that exploring wider circumstances of client's "past life" or more past lives, is beyond the purpose of therapy, which is solving a client's problem. (like phobia, alergia, chronical illness, and so on) Usually it takes 3-5 hours and the client doesn't need to come on another session, only in hard or extensively problemous cases. Average price, paid for all the session in one day was usually 50 to 60 dollars here, in currency conversion. Prolonging the regression and exploring the memories is, what some therapists do, so then they have some interesting and colourful stories for their books, but this is beyond a purpose of helping the client and it is done for money and popularity, for a detriment of therapist's reliability and discreetness .
Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.
.... the only thing I hate about knowing the truth IS ...... LIFE ! .....
I would point out that when clients DON'T come back (presumably because they get no value from the 'therapy', they are not considered as part of the statistical data base. This tends to skew the data a bit.
How does the above statement gel with this one?
It would seem that you are involved deeply as an 'interested side'.
And how is this different from, or any more credible than theistic 'witnessing'???
Odd, most hypnosis sessions I've been involved with had the patient in a relaxed and fully conscious state. M'thinks you don't understand the nature of REAL hypnosis as opposed to stage performances.
Ah, the excuses start flowing... skepticism blocks the vibes. Although your second statement hits closer to the truth...it's ALL "a product of brain, projecting a base of the problem in a form of imaginary visual sequences and synthetized emotions."
It's only when you believe the woo-woo does it become 'past life'...
It's the drugs man, the drugs...
So how is being a cut rate quack better ????
LC >;-}>
Christianity: A disgusting middle eastern blood cult, based in human sacrifice, with sacraments of cannibalism and vampirism, whose highest icon is of a near naked man hanging in torment from a device of torture.
Theists 'withesses', what did they read in Bible and never saw, I witness what I really perceive. Usually it means, that the same thing is already experienced by several other people and commonly worked with, in the citizen association.
Probably I don't. I always thought, that hypnosis means an increased suggestibility, but everything I ever heard, were therapist's very abstract directions ("go through that sequence again, perceive, describe what you see" and so on), which I had to try by my will. All the work was done by me, nothing was done without my participation or permission. I have also read, that hypnosis may involve the relaxed state, but it isn't necessary nor significant for it. (Wikipedia)
These are reasons, why I think, that relaxed state isn't identic with hypnosis.
It says a lot about therapists. Who does it just for money and rakes the money off clients, doesn't heal them quickly (as they could), but very slowly, in multiple sessions and who kows if at all. It is just like in that joke:
A father lawyer, when he sees his son graduate at a law faculty too, he comes to him and says:
"Now, my son, when you're a real lawyer, I'd like to pass to you a very special court case. Please do well with it."
After a month the young lawyer comes to the father and says, that he won the case.
The father is not very pleased. "You idiot, that case financed our family for 15 years!"
Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.
I wish some of the actual scientists - like Deludedgod - would come here to rip apart this pseudoscientific garbage, but here are a few syptoms of Pseudoscience - look familiar?
Cuntpasted. I'm actually surprised claims that it doesn't work if you don't believe aren't mentioned. By the way, reliance on testimonials is another - testimonials are scientifcally worthless.
Matt Shizzle has been banned from the Rational Response Squad website. This event shall provide an atmosphere more conducive to social growth. - Majority of the mod team
MattShizzle: I'm afraid, that ripping this garbage apart would require someone, who experienced on own skin this all, and more than once. I did, and I'm for it. I know the science rips apart the "pseudoscience", but what can I do, when some cases of it actually works. I would have to be nutty, if I wouldn't follow the evidence I regularly saw at home for years. You saw nothing outside of the microscope, all right, not all people are the same. If all scientists would have different microscopes, they would also see different things, and a tool of pseudoscience is mainly a human itself, the most diverse tool ever, practically unstandardized. And yet, there are some brave men and women, who measures, what is officially unmeasurable.
This will probably earn me a trollship soon, but I can't erase a memory of more than half of my life and put there an officially accepted science. It would actually be an indoctrination, a thing you surely want to avoid. I can just hope, that science will advance so quickly, that it will discover a sense in "pseudoscience" soon.
Until then, you can consider me as a court joker. It would be awfully boring, if here would be a community of identic people.
Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.
Only if you can come up with data that supports a near 100% satisfaction rate. I'm sorry partner, but I simply don't believe it.
I've heard this before, from any number of christians who swear they weren't 'indoctrinated' just raised in a christian home with christian parents, but they made up their OWN minds...
Witnessing from theists usually comes in the form of telling us how god makes them feel, how he changed their lives, how they observed how he changed other people's lives. That's different from 'preaching' which is telling us what they read in the bible. What you are doing here, is 'witnessing'. You are passing along subjective feelings and interpretations, liberally tossing in words like 'statistics' and hopeing that we won't notice the utter lack of evidence other than your own biased opinion.
I've seen the product of some of these past life regressions, and from what i have seen, there is little complexity, detail or reality in any of the tales told. No one becomes a genius, or can speak a language they have never known, or has experiences or recallections that can be historically traced or verified.
REAL psychological therapy isn't quick easy and painless. Only psycho-babbling quacks claim they can fix your problems in one session.
LC >;-}>
Christianity: A disgusting middle eastern blood cult, based in human sacrifice, with sacraments of cannibalism and vampirism, whose highest icon is of a near naked man hanging in torment from a device of torture.
Well, I can pretty much shrug my shoulders on what you say, that's a dead point... I hope someone gets curious and will try it for him/herself. I recommend trying to review own birth, my father did it (he had some chronical headache problems, caused originally by his very diffcult birth), and he was absolutely amazed by this experience, it was extremely intensive. He enthusiastically described, how a child just after birth has perfectly clear consciousness, though it can't control body much, it perceives all around in 360 degrees and even with closed eyes. (that is literally what he reported to experience in regression) Later, when a baby learns to use the body, these memories fades and disappears. All right, so reviewing one's birth is a must for every brave scepticist, wanting to try the regression for any reason. By the way, dad's lifetime occasional migraine disappeared and never returned.
I suppose you haven't been on enough sessions to find out some average circumstances.
Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.
Luminon, I do think this may be eligible for James "Amaz!ng" Randi's million dollar prize. If you're getting results at near 100% rates then it's testable. Go for it before the deadline comes up!
"Anyone can repress a woman, but you need 'dictated' scriptures to feel you're really right in repressing her. In the same way, homophobes thrive everywhere. But you must feel you've got scripture on your side to come up with the tedious 'Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve' style arguments instead of just recognising that some people are different." - Douglas Murray
I would maybe go, but we have bad experiences with such a contest. There was one man from Slovakia, a really enlightened person, who had a strong influence on my parents at their beginnings, and the name of the citizen association originates from one his dream (in proverbial sense). He was a very clear spiritual medium. We're used to understand "medium" as an intermediary between ghosts, demons, and such a vermin hardly worth of believing in, but this is just the worse case. We have collective subconsciousness (proven by founders of modern psychology) and collective superconsciousness (proven by some eastern mystics). What I mean, is being capable of contacting a part of collective superconsciousness, directly responsible for a single person. When anyone achieves such a contact, it's a great help, it can be compared to when a finger finally receives some nerve signals from brain, because the brain can actually see and control the finger to avoid harm and perform useful work. The finger's sense of touch is also useful for the brain, it's a symbiosis, and a very general description of a sense of life, of many lives.
The man, K. K., isn't alive anymore, but when he was, he once had a dream, in which he saw the principle, of how the Hanging gardens of Babylon, of queen Semiramis, actually worked, and transported water for plants into such a heights. (their existence is still quite unclear, though very possible) It was something about a capillary rise of water, very well scientifically explainable. In these times (maybe more than 15 years ago), there also was the 1 million of dollars prize, dunno if announced by Randi (he looks quite old, so it's possible) but it was the same thing, prove the pseudoscientific theory, and you'll get the million. K.K. attempted to get it, to prove the gardens of Babylon, and he really could and expected the million by every day, but nobody ever called him back. They just stayed silent, and kept the million. By time, K. K. died (apoplexy) and this is one of reasons, why the million dollar prize is still there.
This is why we don't have much trust in these contests, there is no guarantee it ever will be a fair process, in fact, the K. K's experience shows, that it probably won't be. Regression therapy is very easy to sabotage, it requires just a single packet of pills or drops for calming down, some of them even may be in every pharmacy store for a free sale, it doesn't have to be anything strong.
There's a saying about these things, like regression, astrology, and so on. Who is able, does the work, who isn't, goes to TV
Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.
Modern Psychology doesn't believe "Collective Unconscious" to be valid. It was an irrational idea put forth by Carl Jung - who did have some very good ideas, this wasn't one. And Mystics haven't proven anything.
BS in Psychology.
Matt Shizzle has been banned from the Rational Response Squad website. This event shall provide an atmosphere more conducive to social growth. - Majority of the mod team
I was just going to give you a "Bah!" but I think you deserve a "Bah! Humbug!"
"Anyone can repress a woman, but you need 'dictated' scriptures to feel you're really right in repressing her. In the same way, homophobes thrive everywhere. But you must feel you've got scripture on your side to come up with the tedious 'Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve' style arguments instead of just recognising that some people are different." - Douglas Murray
Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.
And I sincerly hope no one does, it's a waste of time and money. And for those with genuine psychological problems, getting involved in fake crap like this can actually be harmful.
You can not 'review' your own birth. Physiologically, memories from such an early phase of human developement are lost forever. The neural pathways simply do not form that early. If your father had a 'migraine' problem, it was most certainly NOT caused by a 'difficult birth'. Unless you are saying he was brain damaged at birth, and that would still not produce migraines, there are no pain receptors in the brain.
Headaches are caused by the constriction of blood vessels surrounding the brain in the sub-aracnoid area mostly. If his problem was psychosomatic, then yes, a placebo that promised relief might indeed make it go away. However, there is NO FREEKING WAY a quack is going to 'cure' a real, physical malady with woo-woo relaxation crap.
Wow, a whole DAY to cure a lifetime of neurosis??? I think they got screwed, heck, you should be able to cure that in 15 minutes, hell, why not just open up a drive-through window... all your problems cured while you wait, and a free car wash on tuesday.
You don't seem to get it. What you are going on about is a DANGEROUS and FRAUDULENT type of pseudo-scientific quackery.
Neither you, your father or any other quack can FIX anything in the human mind in a few hours.
Please stop, before someone gets hurt.
LC >;-}>
Christianity: A disgusting middle eastern blood cult, based in human sacrifice, with sacraments of cannibalism and vampirism, whose highest icon is of a near naked man hanging in torment from a device of torture.
Suddenly, my bull-shit-o-meter pegged out.
I know someone already pointed this out, but it bears repeating. Jung proposed the idea of the 'collective consciousness'. Jung was wrong.
Oh yeah, and we all know how reliable those eastern mystics are, they're so mystical and stuff...
Serious question, are you on medication?
Although there is some skepticism about the hanging gardens as to their existence, their true location etc., the watering system was pretty well and thoroughly described by a couple of greek historians as simple irrigation by means of the 'archemedian screw', a well known bit of engineering for the time.
If some bozo had a dream about it, so what? How does this in ANY way prove the 'paranormal' to be true.
Case in point, the construction of the egyptian pyramids. People have been theorizing for centuries on how it was accomplished. Everything from the woo-woo (it was the ALIENS man!!!!) to some very good engineering ideas. Recently, it was discovered that the majority of the structure was simply made of cement. Mundane, unsexy as hell, but true. But I digress...
Amazing how easy to 'sabotage' most woo-woo stuff is... Bad 'vibes', moon in a bad sign, presence of skeptics, or even as Luminon suggest, cold medicine....
LC >;-}>
"Newage, rhymes with 'Sewage'...."
Christianity: A disgusting middle eastern blood cult, based in human sacrifice, with sacraments of cannibalism and vampirism, whose highest icon is of a near naked man hanging in torment from a device of torture.
I wish you'd really take the time to bring any skills of skepticism you have to bear on these ideas of yours, hon. Pseudoscience and woo hurts people.
"Anyone can repress a woman, but you need 'dictated' scriptures to feel you're really right in repressing her. In the same way, homophobes thrive everywhere. But you must feel you've got scripture on your side to come up with the tedious 'Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve' style arguments instead of just recognising that some people are different." - Douglas Murray
I'm aware of an extremely wide range, which a "pseudoscience" is. As everywhere, there can be found deceivers, fools, fanatics, cultists, and simply misguided people. At one semminary of "Science philosophy" on university I attended (a longer story), I heard a case of an adopted girl from Nigeria, who had problems with re-estabilishing feelings to her new, American mother, so she had to undergo such a "process of rebirth". Among other things, it involved her new mother lying with her and licking her (like animal mothers does), and the final stage was burying the poor girl under a heap of pillows (from which she was supposed to "reborn" and the mother and therapist sitting and jumping on the heap. The pressure was about 300 kg (if I remember) and about after a hour the girl was dead. The therapist and american mother went to the court, I hope they're locked up till they rot.
Maybe you remember the case more precisely, from news. So yes, I know what it is like when pseudoscience hurts people. The worst case of everything is always harmful. Everything can be misused, both knowledge and ignorance. These cases are the most known, extensively propagated in our negativistically oriented media. Wars, crimes, financial frauds, fatal pseudoscience. This is the look from the worst side, a half of truth.
But no movement can be entirely based on lie and fraud, not for long, there's a saying, that even a devil must sometimes tell a truth, otherwise nobody would ever believe him. In "pseudoscience" believes a lot of people, so I guess the devil nowadays tells a lot of truth.
Now I will a bit paraphrase Fire's interesting topic... I think, it is also very well comparable with an original purpose and name of this topic. After all, this is the second thing some people hates about being an atheist.
The only true opinion a scepticist is allowed to have:
-When this, what we today call "pseudoscience" can't work according to our current knowledge level, it doesn't really work and never worked for these thousands of years the people practices it.
-All sympathizants of "pseudoscience" lacks logical thinking, ability to observe, gather data, compare, analyze and work with them. "Pseudoscience" is a faith, everyone who ever thinks of it, shuts down their rationality, even though they can be considered as a genius of science in different domains. For example, Sir Isaac Newton.
-While there are really many kinds of "pseudoscience" in all times and cultures, they are all the same in their complete wrongness and distance to a real world. No culture ever had a rational reason to practice, what we today consider as a "pseudoscience".
-All catalogized and described philosophical genres are wrong, because philosophy is non-scientific, thus impossible to use in scientific society. Identifying someone's philosophical orientation in a discussion automatically puts that person's opposing claims out of the game.
-Analogically, defining, catalogizing or giving a name to new kind of "pseudoscience" means identifying it as a wrong thing and gaining a moral superiority over it.
-A in any sense is not B and B in any sense is not A, for any relevant usage, and for any and all A and B.
-All people are the same and equally capable of observing all currently accepted scientific facts. If only a minority of people is able to observe a phenomenon, the phenomenon doesn't exist.
-The rule above has an exception for a certain minority of people, who has available devices like a microscope or a particle accelerator. In this specific case, this minority's own observations are extended on literate majority of society, by reading of scientific magazines and watching popular science TV and radio shows. These media are thus considered as a proof.
-There is no difference between organized and non-organized religion.
-A desire for a better state of world is a sign of dangerous idealism. Defining an acceptable state of world society and ecology is ignoring the reality and living in imaginary utopia. (utopia is a greek word, meaning something impossible)
Aspiring for, what is considered impossible, brings no improvement during the process, at least nothing worth of starting the process. This aspiring threatens to destroy a benefits we have already achieved, bringing nothing better.
-Pesimism is an advantage, because it helps us to be prepared for coming problems.
-Though is God considered by all believers as a creator of the universe, it is absurd to define it in harmony with the universe as we today know it. Any form of God is not present in our current knowledge and placing it beyond it, is absurd. Either God is at least a bit present in our current scientifically relevant knowledge, or it is nowhere at all. Defining an idea of God not mythologically-personal, but compatible with the mentioned knowledge, is a practice of apologetics, cherry-picking and speculating, in attempt to preserve the faith.
-Concepts, which can be defined mainly by being not defined in current scientific knowledge, are not defined enough, to be usable by a human mind. Concepts, which can't be processed by a rational, logically-analytical mind process, are irrelevant.
They can be accepted only, when there is a scientific excuse for their existence, until then, they can be misused by "pseudoscientific" sympathizants. For example, a love or a human dignity.
-Getting an academic degree and usage of scientific principles means to acquire a privilege of telling the masses how and what to think, thus leading them away from a dangerous swampy deeps of what we today consider as "pseudoscience".
-Science always thinks "in the box" and in the same time "out of the box". "Pseudoscience" is can't be defined as "thinking outside of the box", because "pseudoscience" means no thinking at all.
-A scepticism has a high probability of being correct, because it prepares us for a case, that all beliefs and "pseudosciences" are false. One irrational belief contradicts a lot of others plus scepticism, but scepticism itself contradicts all irrational beliefs as such, so it's at least a probability of 1:1, even if anyone mentions Pascal's wager, scepticism is still the best choice.
-Personal experience of a "pseudoscience" sympathizant is always incoherent with reality or wrongly interpreted. On the other side, an experience, coherent with our current scientific knowledge level, is always correct.
-There is only one correct way of thinking, which all intelligent people have in common. There is no qualitatively different thinking, or thinking on a different level, these are only attempts of irrational people to hide, that they're thinking less.
Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.
Pseudoscience doesn't always hurt directly, it's when folks who need real help are caught up in some sort of woo, draining their resources, and preventing them from getting that real help.
And last but not at all the least: If the technique/method/treatment being used can provide measurable, predictable results repeatable by many independent researchers using the scientific method then it is no longer pseudoscience.
In your case, you should be answering the question: How can there be past lives when we know that the human mind is an emergent quality of the human brain? Where expecting the mind to survive the wreck of the brain is like expecting 75mph to survive the wreck of the car. We have solid evidence to the effect that there is only one shot at life. This is contradictory to "past life regressions".
"Anyone can repress a woman, but you need 'dictated' scriptures to feel you're really right in repressing her. In the same way, homophobes thrive everywhere. But you must feel you've got scripture on your side to come up with the tedious 'Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve' style arguments instead of just recognising that some people are different." - Douglas Murray
Unfortuanately it seems Luminon is just as irrational as a fundie when it comes to believing this nonsense. Seriously, if someone had valid scientific evidence that could prove Past Life Regression, Homeopathy or any of this nonsense it wouldn't be suppressed - it would be accepted and more than likely they would win a Nobel prize. See science vs Religion - you can pretty much put all that pseudoscience in the same place as religion. We really aren't trying to put you down - we just wish you'd apply the sme skepticism to that crap as you do to religion.
Matt Shizzle has been banned from the Rational Response Squad website. This event shall provide an atmosphere more conducive to social growth. - Majority of the mod team
(I hope the 'scepticist's only true opinion' entertained you at least for a bit)
Well, that's a reasonable talk. I wish it would be always so simple. We measure everything by technics, by identic, non-living tools, and here are their limits. The predictable and technically measurable science is taken care of, that's good, now some people have nothing better to do, than explore something, which can't be practically measured by machines, as we today know them. The most important tool here is a living consciousness, a thing which can't be standardized in sufficient numbers. Observed phenomenons are just as fragile and unstable, as observer's consciousness. People actively improves their consciousness, but there's too few of them. Among such people, the phenomenon is observable just as a science requires, but hardly anywhere else. It needs standardized tools, and these tools are really scarce. But anyone can develop the consciousness, there's no limit, or there is, but you will never know if you match it, until you try it by all your will.
Why do you expect a mind to survive? The mind is only a sequence of thoughts and brain operations. It's deterministic and algorithmic. Memory is only a data. Both never lived. If you try to stay calm for a few minutes, you'll see, that mind is a parasite, clouding yur consciousness by a constant stream of insane fragments of thoughts. This is a bad habit, not a consciousness. Memory is not living too. We don't realize, what all we know at the moment. If I want to check something, I must reach into my memory and search it in there. (like my name, age, or a sentence from a book I had read 10 years ago, all are the same data) We can't identify ourselves with our mind or memory. People seeks for extreme sports and dangerous activities, because in the greatest danger, they don't think. They just act, and feel finally alive again, for a while. The purpose of many eastern meditations is to reach this state permanently, not forced by dangerous circumstances and to use mind and memory only when they're needed. Being an extreme sportsman is, in some sense, expressing a desire for spirituality, no society can permanently suppress this need.
The question is then, who we really are, who's the observer. What's the source of all human activity, which can't be algorithmically defined and pre-destined, but which is also a source of human development and can't be ignored. Where's the leaking hole in a closed system, called an officer, a forklift operator, an artist. This can be answered only by improving our consciousness, so it can demonstrate more of this quality to wider society, than only to self. When you identify yourself with your mortal tools and subsystems, like a body, you can hardly expect a demonstration of your immortal parts. Descartes held, that non-human animals could be reductively explained as automata. But in fact, humans as well, unless they start to reflect their higher qualities. Only a small fraction of population does so, but this number is hopefully increasing. Yes, I could extensively describe a mechanism of reincarnation, but it wouldn't be an explanation for you, because you don't identify yourself with majority of therms I would use. First, you should explain to yourself, why do you think you're more than a computer, on which you read this.
Yes, as we live now, we live only once. Next time we will live, the circumstances will be unique too. There's no depreciation of a human life in the reincarnation theory, just less of hystery with it's end.
I think the scheme on the image isn't complete. Yes, it's nice, just as it should be, but we don't live in a tale. In the 'science' part there are lacking components like 'is it lucrative?', 'what interests will this disrupt?', 'bureaucracy', 'opinion of current scientific authorities', 'cost of rewritting all the textbooks', 'is it possible to admit an error in front of the world?', 'isn't it a waste of people, who learned the old theories for all their lives?', 'is there any excuse for not knowing this before, when we should?', 'does my sponsor expect that kind of discovery?', 'who will lose a job, when this comes out?', 'will it destabilize a current global economic or politic state of things?', 'is this state convenient for us?', 'will my chief, company or government probably steal this discovery?', 'will it make my life or well-being in threat?', and so on...
You see, adding a components of real life into the science graph would make it very complicated and it wouldn't look so well, compared to the simplified 'faith' part. With such a mechanism of science, no wonder that a lot of things won't pass lower into the graph.
Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.