Industrial Deals Beauty Save up to 90% on textbooks STEM nav_sap_plcc_ascpsc PCB for Musical Instruments Starting at $39.99 Grocery Handmade Wedding Rustic Decor Home Gift Guide Off to College Home Gift Guide Book House Cleaning TheOnlyLivingBoy TheOnlyLivingBoy TheOnlyLivingBoy  Amazon Echo now $99.99 Limited-time offer: All-New Fire HD 8, starting at $59.99 Kindle Paperwhite uncharted Tailgating STEMClubToys17_gno

Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-14 of 14 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Apr 17, 2007, 6:04:45 AM PDT
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 23, 2007, 9:44:02 PM PDT
[Deleted by Amazon on May 6, 2011, 12:02:25 PM PDT]

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 27, 2007, 5:59:20 PM PDT
[Deleted by Amazon on Oct 13, 2008, 10:12:42 AM PDT]

In reply to an earlier post on May 11, 2007, 1:51:12 PM PDT
I checked out your site, George. It is disjointed, meandering, and replete with unsupported pronouncements of your beliefs presented as fact. Basically, you have proved nothing and read like a garden variety street corner religious nut

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 2, 2007, 1:15:15 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 2, 2007, 1:17:23 PM PDT
Have you ever submitted a peer-reviewed paper outlining all your findings? If so, could you post its results?

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 22, 2008, 7:21:31 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Jan 22, 2008, 7:26:19 PM PST
"the spiritual light of God" so you will use light of God to prove God exists? Saw no real science at your site, let us know if you get any real proof and not opinions.

Oh and I invented a teleporter, So maybe TD and I should form a startup and offer to teleport believers to heaven.

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 7, 2008, 7:49:42 AM PST
J. Wood says:
From George's Blog: "I expect these blogs and the related blogs of other people to be detected by Jesus Christ and those higher intelligent humans who already live on other planets."

William, perhaps you can assist George in making his way off of this hive of lower intelligence?

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 7, 2008, 9:24:23 AM PST
If only I could..........

In reply to an earlier post on May 29, 2009, 7:41:04 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 8, 2009, 3:40:44 PM PDT
Look, George... There is no such thing as a SCIENTIFIC PROOF of "God".

There can be faith propositions for the existence of God; but no scientific proof.

Your claim serves as evidence of a common assumptive error, which excludes your "proof" from the realm of Scientific Methodology.

Specifically, it is just this. All elements in Science which are expressed, must have specific definition in terms.

As God is ceded to be INFINITE, he is both beyond both MEASURE and a limiting definition.

For the same reason, philosphical writings by Atheists who are also scientists, and attempting to offer a proof that God does not exist, fail for the identical reason.

Notably, propositions such as yours always flourish in the absence of any meaningful definition as to what GOD is. In the absence of such a specific definition, there is no Science evident.

Because it is nieither Logical, nor evidence of Science, to set about to PROVE something which is only vaguely DEFINED, and thereafter go about vainly boasting that the conclusions and results consist of precise MEASUREMENTS and PROOFS for a specific IDENTITY.

Propositions such as this always disintegrate in either the PREMISE or the CONCLUSION. Another way of writing it would be to indicate that there are massive flaws in either the HYPOTHESIS or the RESULTS.

Either the HYPOTHESIS disregards the critical necessity of PRECISELY DEFINING what exactly IT is that is being proven; or alternatively, the CONCLUSION is vaguely worded, such that it is not actually rationally derived from the Hypothesis.


It is rather like coming up with a PROOF for "XYZ".
I may have a PROOF for something; but I cannot objectively indicate what exactly "XYZ" is. If I reverse the action, using XYZ as either CONSTANTS or VARIABLES in my experiment, there is no certitude, according to the 18 or so known natural laws, that I am going to arrive at the identitical PROOF.






The philosopher Goedel, who was a personal friend of Albert Eiinstein, has a rational proof that is valid; but again, a Proof by reason, and a Proof by Science, are not precisely the same. Besides, Goedel's proof is so abstract, that very few people can even begin to understand it, but it is a valid proof.

A proof by logic, though entirely rational, is NOT a proof by science. Proofs by REASON are PHILOSOPHICAL PROOFS, rather than SCIENTIFIC Proofs. There are distinctly different criteria evident in either system.

Generalized knowledge such as this seems to be the sort of thing that people are generally least familiar with.


Posted on Jun 7, 2009, 8:18:47 PM PDT
Okay, I gotta ask: Bruce, what is up with all the lines and slashes and unnecessary capitalization? Nobody can read your posts with all that extra crap in there.

Posted on Jun 8, 2009, 3:36:52 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 11, 2009, 6:01:18 AM PDT
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

Posted on Dec 4, 2010, 11:21:32 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 4, 2010, 11:40:01 PM PST
M. Secades says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 8, 2010, 1:40:16 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 21, 2010, 5:08:17 AM PST

M. Secades:

Your account is of great interest, and is anything but cliche'.

However, there are contradictions in your arguments, as indicated by the following, which account perhaps for your current dilemma.

You wrote:

"I wish God would show himself more. I wish he would just appear for all to see."-------------sentences 1 & 2 of paragraph 4, comment of M. Secades on Dec. 4, 2010 11:21 PM PST regarding the discussion topic, "Scientific Proofs of God" on

(1) I assure you my friend, there is absolutely no location in this Universe where "God" does not dwell.
If we are not "seeing" more of God, then something we do or think is blocking our vision.

In addition, you wrote the following, which is significant:

"Nobody should try to dictate another persons life."--------sentence 2 of paragraph 3, comment of M. Secades on Dec. 4, 2010 11:21 PM PST regarding the discussion topic, "Scientific Proofs of God" on

(1) This what is blocking your vision of "God". You have an errant ( illogical ) premise. Your premise is that nobody should ever TELL another person, anything. Your assumption, that a person in possession of knowledge or wisdom, should never impart knowledge or wisdom to another, is demonntrative of an irrational approach to life, which itself will lead to further difficulties for you, and in fact, may entirely block your vision of God.

For example, it is never supposed, I would argue, that it is logical to claim that Nobody should tell you, in regard to a medication, how many pills to take so as not to harm one's self.

Neither is it supposed that nobody ever TOLD an airline pilot how to fly an airplane.

It is never supposed that nobody can tell a Medical Surgeon how to operate.

It is never supposed that nobody told an Engineer how to build something.

But for confused reasons, obviously, you operate on a premise that if "God" or anyone else TELLS a person something, some vague ethic is violated.

That is why perhaps, you endorse common POLITICALLY CORRECT notions about being PRO-CHOICE, or other confused ideas about EQUALITY FOR GAYS.
The peculiar thing about these POLITICALLY CORRECT conceptions, is that:

(A) You are essentially TELLING people, that these are appropriate or ethical perspectives.


(B) These POLITICALLY CORRECT propositions are demonstrative of a kind of Self-Righteousness.

The problem is, that unless you are willing to gird your loins, and stand for something, you are at best, a sort of "Luke Warm" Deist, rather than a Theist.

Your blank dismissal of "religion" with the argument that IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH GOD is absurd, because in writing that, you are engaging in the very practice which you claim to object to; that is, you are TELLING PEOPLE how to live. You are TELLING them to dismiss "religion" and have nothing to do with it.

Your confused thinking, I would argue, is why you currently see less of "God".

The proposition that you can go through life, without HURTING---PEOPLE'S---FEELINGS is a formula for disaster.

The very idea in which you assume that your experience is a PERSONAL PROOF, is moreover, demonstrative of you telling people something specific. In and of itself, that can HURT---PEOPLE's----FEELINGS.

Your difficulties are demosntrative of several of the errant assumptions, confusing premises, and misconceptions that are prevalent in the American mentality. Until one is prepared to actually stand for something, and present a rational justification for that idea, some mediocre state of mind is about all that can be acquired.

. In conclusion, you write that God is true, and everything in the Bible is true, on the assumption that God is not TELLING people how to life, or in the errant assumption, that men and women have not died to bring you that Bible, or in the errant assumption that those who delivered the Bible to us accompanied by TELLING us that we should live by a "religious" standard.

No wonder your vision is so clouded. If the Bible is true, and God is true, then it follows that Jesus Christ is true. What hope for us is there, if we do not bear testimony to Jesus Christ as the truth?

You have a confused logic. What you are doing is ignoring the issues that mankind faces. If Hurting--Feelings were your actual operative premise, you would oppose Abortion; because it is not reasonable to assume that a Fetus has no FEELINGS. Your public PROOF is a testimony to a confused theology, at best.

What hope for us is there, if we claim to know a truth, but refuse to TELL people what the Truth is?

The entire point being, you cannot affirm something as TRUE, and then disassociate yourself from it, and postulate contrary conceptions to that truth, such as your confused thoughts as to POLITICALLY CORRECT concepts. In that context, you're just jumping on the popular bandwagon.

You claim that it is a demonstration of a WRONG, for people to dictate to another, how they should live. Unfortunately, in your bearing testimony to your PROOF, you demonstrate explicitly, that you have permitted others to dictate precisely how you should think and act.

And Why? Apparently because somebody told you that those POLITICALLY CORRECT concepts were also, "true" and you would rather following along with the ambiguous arguments, rather like a sheep being led by wolves.

. I know all about that kind of thinking my friend. That used to be my thinking, until I became a follower of Jesus Christ. I assure you, I struggle as much as anyone to live up to the ideas which a loving God, "dictates".
Were it not for the fact that my God were a loving God, whose Son assumes the burden of my sins, I would probably be unable to continue.

I would like to leave you with something. Martin Luther King spoke as follows in a speech.

"When I say to you; 'Don't even be afraid, you know what I really mean?'
For I submit to you tonight, that no man is free, if he fears death;
but the minute that you conquer the fear of death, at that moment, you're free.
You must say somehow;
'I don't have much money. I don't have much education.
I may not be able to read and write; but I have the capacity to die!'
And I say to all, ...the man that will not die for something, is not fit to live."
----from a sermon attributed to Pastor Martin Luther King, who succeeded Pastor Vernon Johns at the Dexter Avenue Baptist Church in Montgomery, Alabama, in the Televised movie,

Therefore, if Martin Luther King, like many martyrs for Jesus Christ, was willing to die to tell people of righteous living in accordance with the teachings of the Holy Bible, and if Jesus Christ was willing to endure death and pain for mankind, merely for telling people how they should live, are you going to continue thinking that nobody from heaven, is dictating how man should live?


That is why my friend, Western Civilization is esablished upon Logic, rather than Feelings.
The proposition that religious doctrine, is demonstrative of some sort of a dictatorship which restricts a person, is not to be rationally demonstrated.

What human history really shows, is that the price of telling people how they SHOULD LIVE, is death.
That is why blood is taught as a "mystery" in the Christian Religion. Blood is always the cost of speaking or writing the truth. Why? Because there is seldom such a thing as a "popular" Truth. If mankind wanted Truth, there is no possible way that men and women down through the centuries would be continually martyred.

The price of Truth, the price of telling mankind how they should live, is not written in ink my friend. Truth, has been written in Blood down through the centuries and the blood of Jesus Christ, and all the blood of the Christian martyrs is a sacred testimony to that fact.




I was reading a fascinating book of Golf Instruction last night, wherein PGA great, Jerry Heard was indicating, that if one wishes to improve at Golf, they should GET---ANOTHER----PAIR----OF---EYES, meaning that they should have someone else study how they swing a golf club.

The principle is the same with THINKING. If we wish to see more clearly, we can benefit from:

(A) Allowing others examine our THINKING


(B) Studying what others have written as to reasonable THOUGHT, based upon historical Facts and Certain Knowledge.


The neglect of this is as known, cared, or written.


In reply to an earlier post on Dec 8, 2010, 8:16:29 AM PST
J. Wood says:
"I wish he would just appear for all to see. The reason he doesnt is b/c he wants to rule by love not by fear." - M. Secades

Of course even the most cursory glance at any version of any bible (NT, OT, anything) would inform anyone with half a brain that exactly the opposite is true, but whatevs.
‹ Previous 1 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in


This discussion

Participants:  10
Total posts:  14
Initial post:  Apr 17, 2007
Latest post:  Dec 8, 2010

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 3 customers

This discussion is about