How to come out of the Great Harlot?

> Shelby wrote:
>> Death is part of life, so it
>> should be something to dwell on. Einstein proved that we are always
>> dead
>> and always alive some where in the space-time continuum of the universe,
>> so it is all really meaningless any way.
>>
>> New friends and laughter sure seems like a positive drug to remove one
>> from the illusion that "past, present, and future" matter.

Anonymous wrote:
> Past, present and future DO matter, IME. I'm a human, living on Planet
> Earth, with a human brain that remembers past, breathes in present and
> anticipates future.
>
> (So do you, or you wouldn't try to put aside resources for the future.)

Shelby wrote:Guns are either useless or an inherently a socialistic (i.e. non-Libertarian) response to an oppressive govt or other social problem, because there is no way 1 lone gunman defends himself against a SWAT team. Instead gun owners will need to fight in social groups. I think this is why we will see social chaos eventually (gun groups versus...), because many of the masses support "peace & order" even at the cost of the personal liberty of others. They are easily convinced by false idols:

http://goldwetrust.up-with.com/economics-f4/who-really-controls-the-govt-conspiracy-theories-thread-t48.htm#1522

Gun owners for most part do not understand that the imminent financial collapse of the bankrupt dollar system can not be solved with guns:

http://silverstockreport.com/2009/gunshow.html

We are mostly sheep, and the concept of a "sheepdog" is socialistic and failure directed.

The only solution is an individual (Libetarian) one, where each individual saves himself by coming out of the Great Harlot system of false idols (monetary, cultural, etc). As Jesus said in Matthew 6:5, we are not to fear to be truely alone with God.

1 John 2:22

22Who is the liar? It is the man who denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a man is the antichrist—he denies the Father and the Son.

New International Version (NIV)


1 John 4:3

3but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you have heard is coming and even now is already in the world.

...Revelation 13

1And the dragon[a] stood on the shore of the sea.
The Beast out of the Sea
And I saw a beast coming out of the sea. He had ten horns and seven heads, with ten crowns on his horns, and on each head a blasphemous name. 2The beast I saw resembled a leopard, but had feet like those of a bear and a mouth like that of a lion...

...The dragon gave the beast his power and his throne and great authority. 3One of the heads of the beast seemed to have had a fatal wound, but the fatal wound had been healed. The whole world was astonished and followed the beast. 4Men worshiped the dragon because he had given authority to the beast, and they also worshiped the beast and asked, "Who is like the beast? Who can make war against him?"...

...5The beast was given a mouth to utter proud words and blasphemies and to exercise his authority for forty-two months. 6He opened his mouth to blaspheme God, and to slander his name and his dwelling place and those who live in heaven. 7He was given power to make war against the saints and to conquer them. And he was given authority over every tribe, people, language and nation. 8All inhabitants of the earth will worship the beast—all whose names have not been written in the book of life belonging to the Lamb that was slain from the creation of the world...

...The Beast out of the Earth
11Then I saw another beast, coming out of the earth. He had two horns like a lamb, but he spoke like a dragon. 12He exercised all the authority of the first beast on his behalf, and made the earth and its inhabitants worship the first beast, whose fatal wound had been healed. 13And he performed great and miraculous signs, even causing fire to come down from heaven to earth in full view of men. 14Because of the signs he was given power to do on behalf of the first beast, he deceived the inhabitants of the earth. He ordered them to set up an image in honor of the beast who was wounded by the sword and yet lived. 15He was given power to give breath to the image of the first beast, so that it could speak and cause all who refused to worship the image to be killed. 16He also forced everyone, small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on his right hand or on his forehead, 17so that no one could buy or sell unless he had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of his name.

18This calls for wisdom. If anyone has insight, let him calculate the number of the beast, for it is man's number. His number is 666...

Shelby wrote:There is only one sustaining law, and that is natural law. We reap what we sow. All the attempts of mice & men to create a greater organization than the natural one, e.g. the concept that punishing rape will incentivize a safer society, are futile and end with the opposite effect (a fascist society). This is really just the 1856 law of thermo that says disorder is trending to maximum on the whole of the universe (it must else the universe isn't the whole universe).

This is why the Bible speaks very clearly about coming out of the "Great Harlot" system. I think also I figured out what the "666" is in the Bible:

http://goldwetrust.up-with.com/biblical-f3/how-to-come-out-of-the-great-harlot-t97.htm#1984 (<-- "1984"...coincidence)

The color blue is special in Bible (see link above) and 666 is wavelength of red, and thus due to the logic above (see link also), the 666 is the religion of flesh (blood), i.e. the concept that mice & men can insure themselves anything but a random outcome on the long-term (and the opposite outcome often in medium-term). God (the universe trend) is in control. We are not. Any attempt to trust on the long-term (outside of infinite parallel closed system, i.e. realities or perception), is futile. Close all your senses, can you count time? So does time exist? Read my website link on my name above, for more on this.

esr, I am curious if you trust your extraordinary logic or are you resigned to random fate?

Shelby wrote:Jessica Boxer wrote:
> The wavelength of red is about 600nm-700nm, so lets take your 666.

My linked post states 666nm is roughly the weighted center frequency.

> That is 666 nanometers. Meters were invented in the 1700s

That is only a logical objection if the Bible is able to predict nothing.


Errata:
The color blue is the color of the church throughout the Bible (sapphire tablets of 10 Commandments, tassles to be worn, etc) and is missing from end times in Revelations.

The Bible explains in numerous scriptures and parables that we should not worship or put trust in things of this world, which we perceive to be ordered reality. Spacetime is just one model of the universe, even quantum models reveal that we own no exclusivity over the reality in our arbitrary copy of spacetime, analogously spacetime modeled that the non-exclusivity in our arbitrary copy of space or time orthogonally (depends on the arbitrary observer).

Even on the most fundamental level of our certainty that any thing we measure or perceive is not aliased error (which can be entirely opposite/random deviation from the actual signal), i.e. the Shannon-Nyquist theorem-- is only able to make that insurance for imaginary **INFINITE** time signals:

http://kwout.com/t/4qwqi9dm

My edit to Wikipedia for this stuck:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyquist%E2%80%93Shannon_sampling_theorem

"...The theorem assumes an idealization of any real-world situation, as it only applies to signals that are sampled for infinite time; any time-limited x(t) cannot be perfectly bandlimited..."

Science is a faith. The proof is above that science is a model that is never falsefiable because we have not perceived for infinite time!

Shelby wrote:Jake Fischer wrote:
> Shelby wrote
>> The proof is above that science is a model that is never falsefiable because we have not perceived for infinite time!
>
> in other words, “you can’t know, since you’ve not waited infinite time!”
>
> Doesn’t work that way, darling.

Wrong, that is TRUEly the way signal theory works. We will ***NEVER*** know if what we experience, measure, and perceive (whether it be with our own senses or devices) is an aliased artifact of the TRUE signal. And thus science is faith and not falsefiable.

I have debated the signal theory editors (experts) who maintain the Wikipedia entry, and they allowed my edit.

You need to understand that Shannon-Nyquist theorem shows that portions of the TRUE signal which lie outside your sampling interval can totally change the reconstruction if they are not sampled. And Wikipedia is wrong to emphasize that limited sampling intervals are a good approximation in most cases. In fact, mathematically the theorem tells us that we simply do not know how good our approximation is until we wait infinite time. Just because our observed reality matches our expectations for a while (seems ordered and seems to be a good approximation), says nothing about how we will view it in hindsight.

Study the math. Educate yourself about this. It is the most important thing you will ever learn. You can then stop the nonsense about science is falsefiable and religion is not.

Shelby wrote:John wrote:
> If we are to maintain a civil society, from a Libertarian perspective,
> we must have a means with which to effectively dissuade individuals
> from violating the Liberties of others in pursuit of their own

Each individual could protect his/her own liberties, i.e. anarchy. Once you abrogate this to the state, then you end up with no liberty at all at the end of the periodic exponential cycle between statism and anarchy.

noam wrote:
> ESR, I find your argument to be noble and ultimately untenable

Indeed for people to exist, they need society, and I explained this Bell Curve phenomenon:

http://www.coolpage.com/commentary/economic/shelby/Bell%20Curve%20Economics.html

Lock yourself in a 100% dark, soundproof, body temperature room where you can not use any of your physical senses. Come out after some days/weeks and tell me what the time and date are?

You can’t. You didn’t exist. Read my prior post. Start to think deeply about these matters. It affects your faith (what you believe in).

Shelby wrote:Shelby Moore wrote:
> Lock yourself in a 100% dark, soundproof, body temperature room…

98.6F wouldn’t be that comfortable. And I suppose one could train themselves to count seconds in their mind with an accurate rhythm, but hopefully you get my point, that each of us does not exist relative to some events occurring outside our perception (and of being perceived by others). There are near infinite realities occurring simultaneously all the time here on Earth even.

There is a verse in the Bible (Corinthians I think) where the people are advised not to have a king (a govt) because it will steal all your donkeys and everything in time, but the people demand it any way.

The Bible seems to be making one central point, and that is there is no salvation in our reality. I have developed scientifically that our reality is futile, because it is just a figment of our temporal perception. Resonance is the syncing of mutual perception (communication). These things (order) do occur in closed-systems, but they are always fleeting. And this is exactly the wisdom of the Bible, that everything of this earth is temporary.

So the debate over statism versus is anarchy is also a waste of time. When Jesus was asked about this, he said “render unto Caesar what is his and render unto God what is his” or something like that. Even the often quoted Romans 13 is misinterpreted by most. Reading it carefully, it says the evil power must obey the good power in time. In short, all the machinations of mice & men are luckly never sustainable.

Now on to more productive endeavors… (there is no such thing on the universe scale, but Bible tells us to be productive here on earth, be efficient, plant a whole acre, and generally help the trend towards the end times so we can break down this order called on earth towards the random nirvana). I simply came here to suggest not to waste your time on arguments about machinations of mice & men. Get busy being productive on helping those in need or who can’t yet see the light of the futility of the flesh.

Shelby wrote:Apologies for multiple posts, will try to make this last one.

I googled to see what others are writing about "Scientific Faith".

Follows an example of aliasing error due not sampling at a high enough frequency or long enough duration. I think this an interesting analog to simplicity of spacetime which didn't hold true for the more complex quantum level sampling granularity:

http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2000/0012fea1.asp

"But using this process of induction alone, the scientist can never assert truths with absolute certainty. No great number of white swans could rule out the possibility that the next swan could be black. Consequently, the scientist often constructs his hypothesis so that it can be verified and tested through experimentation. The experiment is then thought to confirm or dismiss the hypothesis.

But even this safeguard cannot guarantee the truth of scientific conclusions. This is illustrated by a simple example used by the philosopher Richard Swinburne (Simplicity as Evidence of Truth, . Marquette University Press [1997], 15–19). Let us say that a scientist is analyzing data composed of four pairs of numbers, the first number in each set being designated "x" and the second "y": (1,2), (2,4), (3,6), and (4,8). He wants to determine the relationship between the first and the second numbers in the series where x increases by 1 and y increases by 2.

Using induction, he compares the pairs of numbers and proposes that y = 2x. It is a reasonable hypothesis, but he resorts to more testing and comes up with two more pairs of numbers, (5,10) and (6,12). They seem to confirm his hypothesis, and he rejoices. What is not usually realized, however, is that this series of paired numbers can be adequately explained by an infinite number of alternate equations of the form y = 2x + x(x-1)(x-2)(x-3)(x-4)(x-5)(x6)z, where z can be a constant or another function of x. No further testing and collecting of data would be able to distinguish between these alternative equations and the basic equation y = 2x."


Another interesting point is how Christian faith is to reject (come out of Great Harlot) the commonly accepted "wisdom" and empirical evidence of the current epoch; whereas, scientific faith says to rely on the empirical evidence...well Shannon-Nyquist didn't say that, but scientists apparently ignored the implication of that theorem:

http://www.medsci.ox.ac.uk/gazette/previousissues/54vol2/Part3

" 1. Scientific faith — we believe a proposed hypothesis only because it is supported by the evidence and has survived attempts to disconfirm it, and we reject it if the evidence opposes it.
2. Theological faith — to survive a test of faith means to hold fast to one’s belief even when everything goes against it."

Shelby wrote:I will have to post one last time in this thread.

> Shelby Moore said:
>> Lock yourself in a 100% dark, soundproof, body temperature room where you can not use any of your
>> physical senses. Come out after some days/weeks and tell me what the time and date are?
>>
>> You can’t. You didn’t exist.

noam wrote:
> This is pure nonsense. Sense deprivation is a very far cry from cessation of existence.
> Existence is not an empty set; it is no set whatsoever.
> Sense deprivation does not cause time to “change modes”,
> it just blurs our perception of it. More, the body continues to sense
> but our brain is unable to distinguish changes in the surroundings.
>
> Even the most absurd solipsistic philosophers wouldn’t claim that
> if a tree fell in a forest and no one was there to hear it, that the tree did not exist.

The TRUE signal that exists orthogonal to any perception of it, can not be perceived according to the Shannon-Nyquist theorem, because unless we sample for infinite time, then we can never be sure of the degree of aliasing error in our reconstructed perception (aka measurement):

http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=1271&cpage=2#comment-240672
http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=1271&cpage=2#comment-240650

Thus Shannon-Nyquist is a model that nothing exists that isn't perceived (because we can not perceive the TRUE signals ever, because we can not sample for infinite time) and that everything that is perceived is an aliased error.

Sorry but the whole scientific method is an illusion (and as Einstein said about our empirical observation of death, "but a very convincing one"). I hope you realize that you are implicitly arguing that Shannon-Nyquist (the fundamental theorem of signaling theory) is an absurd model.

I hope you also realize from the complex plane of the Lorentz equations that Einstein used to derive spacetime theory, that time is not the absolute in our universe (it is not the independent variable). Spacetime is merely one model, that is broke and improved upon space orthogonal to time, which was then broken and improved upon by quantum theory.

The earth was flat, the earth was the center of the universe, space and time were orthogonal dimensions, time was an absolute, ... and it was absurd to disagree... Are you starting to see why Christian faith is about always disagreeing with the "theory of the epoch"?

Shelby wrote:> Shelby Moore wrote:
>> The TRUE signal that exists orthogonal to any perception of it, can not be perceived according to the
>> Shannon-Nyquist theorem, because unless we sample for infinite time, then we can never be sure of
>> the degree of aliasing error in our reconstructed perception (aka measurement)

noam replied:
>I barely understand the Shannon-Nyquist Theorem and
> I understand your pseudo-religious application of it even less.

The fact that nearly no one understands it, apparently not even the editors at Wikipedia (but they did yield to logic after several days of debate and hashing it out, so kudos to them), is why we have this nonsense about science being based on TRUTH (empirical evidence) and Christianity being based on fairy tales. Actually if you understand Shannon-Nyquist, you realize that science is a faith also, for the reasons I have previously stated. All science is inherently relying on Shannon-Nyquist, because evidence does not exist until it is sampled.

Understand that Shannon-Nyquist says we can model the TRUE signal with INFINITE duration sine waves, and thus it tells us mathematically the relationship between the samples number, spacing, and sampling interval, to the quality of our reconstruction (i.e. how sure we are that our reconstructed perception gives us any non-random information about the TRUE signal).

> But it doesn’t take a lot intelligence to realize that what you’re claiming
> is similar to an ostrich sticking his head in the sand.

Actually it does take some knowledge of Shannon-Nyquist (and I suggest you go learn it) to understand that the ostrich is the person who claims that empirical evidence is not faith.

> And this theorem does not represent the first claim that
> the “TRUE” object/signal/whatever cannot be perceived by the senses.

It most certainly does! The theorem explicitly states it applies only to INFINTE time signals, and thus implies mathematically that the quality of the reconstruction is random if the sampling interval is not INFINITE. You must understand that to switch off the sine waves of the model (at the bounds of our sampling interval) will create INFINITE frequency harmonics, thus the entire theorem falls apart.

> Pyrrho said as much over 2000 years ago, as did Kant a bit more recently.

Apparently they are also ignorant of the above.

>> The earth was flat, the earth was the center of the universe, space and time were orthogonal
>> dimensions, time was an absolute, … and it was absurd to disagree… Are you starting to see
>> why Christian faith is about always disagreeing with the “theory of the epoch”?
>
> You’re confusing scientific claims with the scientific method.

No I showed mathematically that scientific claims are faith.

> The method is a process and by definition unfalsifiable (this is a “category error”)
> just like statements of faith. And science makes falsifiable claims.

They are not falsefiable, because the evidence is random. See above for why.

For periods of time, the evidence may appear to be ordered, but we are deceived. This local order in closed systems is what gives rise to trust in things which are random on the larger scale outside. This trust is what makes people forget that the Shannon-Nyquist says all the efforts of mice & men are random. This randomness is outside the scale of the local order which just andomly happens to be not random for some random amount of time. Here is an example. The flea doesn't know he is living on the back of animal who is moving relative to the ground, so this deception can go on for a while, until the animal jumps into a pool of water due to a random cat fight.

> It produces theories, not truths.

Thanks for finally agreeing with me.

Ken Burnside wrote
> I have a pretty good idea of how fast my beard grows
> from having shaved it off for 27 years.

Not if I deprive your senses (ability to touch it and feel it's weight on your face).

Shelby wrote:Jeff Read wrote:
> No one here ever said that any discovery yielded by science was anything but tentative.

Cool. But that is not what I read and here out there in the world. Mostly Christians get attacked by atheists as "believing in fairy tales", and I am just retorting with "scientists do too".

> Matter of fact, science is the worst possible system for ascertaining truth — except for all the others.

"except for all the others"...perhaps you still do not get it:

Science is no less random, when you are speaking about universal TRUTH (TRUE non-random signals on the universal scale). If you are merely speaking about being able to cope in the current shared perception (the tentative local order), then yes science gives you one way to cope or perform. I certainly do, even I am not an atheist. However, it is not the best (it is still based on random result on some unknown apriori time scale), it is just one way. Another tool is Christianity, which also gives a very good set of concepts to deal with the random change that blind faith in science does not cope well with. In fact, Jesus said use both methods, "render unto Caesar what is his, and render unto God what is his" or something like that, I don't have time to go dig up the exactly scripture quote. The Bible is a philosophy, that explains how to cope with Shannon-Nyquist and Bell Curve Economics.

Actually it is important to participate and maximize that local order (as the Bible implores us to do, "plant a whole acre", "be efficient"), because exponential growth, peak, and decay on the local scale is the optimization of the 1856 law of thermo's trend to maximum disorder on the universal scale. Again review the Bell Curve Economics paper linked to my name on my prior comments in this thread. I writing about this today relative to Google here:

http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=658&cpage=2#comment-240732


> noam wrote:
> And this theorem does not represent the first claim that
> the “TRUE” object/signal/whatever cannot be perceived by the senses.

Shelby replied:
> It most certainly does! The theorem explicitly states it applies only to INFINTE time signals,
> and thus implies mathematically that the quality of the reconstruction is random if the
> sampling interval is not INFINITE. You must understand that to switch off the sine waves
> of the model (at the bounds of our sampling interval) will create INFINITE frequency
> harmonics, thus the entire theorem falls apart.

And for those who do not want to wade through the debate I had over there at Wikipedia, let me just pre-emptly squash the common retort about Shannon-Nyquist being orthogonal to the pre-filter (which may be an analog device). The bottom line is the pre-filter (even it is analog) has to sample for INFINITE time also. There is no way to escape the INFINITE time requirement.

Dan wrote:
> Nope. Not random. Only unknown. Please demonstrate it mathematically if you think it is.
> I would think that there is a computable margin of error during the observed period.

Aliasing is random noise that occurs from insufficient sampling. Most people don't realize that Shannon-Nyquist requires not only a minimum sampling frequency (2 x higher harmonic in TRUE signal), but also requires an infinite sampling interval. Without the infinite sampling interval, you get aliasing errors, which are random, and can yield a result (aka reconstruction/perception/measurement) which is nothing like the original TRUE signal. The errors get projected into the reconstruction as noise. You apparently do not understand well this math (maybe you do not understand fourier transform and concept of bandlimited infinite time signals, i.e. by definition no finite signal could be bandlimited), so I refer you to the 1952 Shannon-Nyquist paper which is linked at the Wikipedia page. I had already explained why in my previous post, where I explained that the model of sampling and reconstruction deals with infinite sine wave reconstruction...

> And note that having a infinite observed period is worthless, we need results only for a limited observed period.

That is why measurements are faith.

Shelby wrote:I hope I can humbly exit now for a while after this post. Apologies if my posts come across as anything non-friendly or cocky or any other negative (not sure if they do, but just in case), I am actually in a hurry (to go do some hopefully with fingers crossed exciting projects, hope to see some of you amicably in that realm) and really didn't allocate enough time for this as it requires, so in haste I can't exhaustively check my writings for "attitude" and "ad hominem attacks" etc. I am no where near as skilled a writer as some of you.

Dan:

1)

(a) Any signal that was truely time limited, would need an INFINITE sampling rate, because it would have an infinite frequency component in it, where the signal just stopped. The aliasing error (noise) that results does not only apply to the ends of the sampling interval, nor in any predictable spacing that could be substracted.

(b) Even if the TRUE signal had a relatively insignificant amplitude outside your sampling interval, that insignificant amplitude over INFINITE time can change (in random ways) the portion of the signal inside your sampling interval that you did not sample, which can randomly morph the reconstruction. This is very non-intuitive for most people. What I mean is that even if you think you are adequately point sampling at Nyquist rate over your finite interval, then the segments of the signal that you did not sample in this finite interval (you didn't take infinite samples), could have high frequencies spikes that are not modeled in the reconstruction due to the finite sampling interval and sampling rate. Even analog filters have limited resolution due to L-R-C reaction time.

2) Your point is that if you know a priori what to expect in terms of maximum frequency and maximum interval of significance, then you can reliably sample within known error rate of that. That may be true only to the extent that you already know the signal so well that you don't need to sample it in first place. My point is that when formulating theories of science about TRUTH, we do not know anything a priori, because our a priori foundation itself was based on finite sampling intervals and rates. There is a built in randomness, which does not necessarily manifest itself too soon, which gives rise to our confidence, but nevertheless the randomness is lurking. Some further examples and discussion below...

Thanks for the point about Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. Yes exactly we don't have to wait for eternity to see aliasing error, in fact that is Shannon-Nyquist says also. Don't think in terms of the aliasing error being only at the ends. It gets randomly into any point in the reconstruction. And agreed about randomness of even the next shared perception you have the next moment with a different set of people, circumstance, etc...more on that below including about engineering...

You will find that the 1856 law of thermo applies to everything, as energy and matter are just different perceptions. And then you backslide again into thinking aliasing only affects the ends of the interval. No you won't have to wait 5 billion years to see science fail you, it is failing you every day, and this is extremely applicable to social economics. Again click the link on my name above.

Ivaylo & Ken, assuming it is possible to deprive him of his senses entirely, even it it means cutting off the hair folicles on his face or giving him a drug that destroys all body hair, heck even if he does it to himself, then the point is that during the time he is sensory deprived, he himself does not know time, therefor he does not exist (in spacetime) to himself because he has no perception of himself in spacetime. To outsiders, he may still exist in spacetime if they are still observing him. (This is a thought experiment only, DO NOT TRY THIS AT HOME PLEASE) If he later reconnects with those who observed him and they restore his memory of what they perceived during that time, it still won't change that his memory of what he perceived is one of non-existence in spacetime during that period. He/She will have existed only in his thoughts during that time.

Shannon-Nyquist says you won't necessarily always get repeatable result (even from a so called repeatable experiment), because all scientific methods that do not sample for infinite time, thus obtain random results. The fact that we do get same result in our shared reality on some relatively ***EXTREMELY*** (see history of world below) small local scale, gives us a false sense of security. That shared reality is just one of infinite random realities that exist simultaneously in the universe, it appears non-random to "us", but it is just luck that if infinite actors exist in universe, then some quantity of them will share the same random reality (and others a different shared reality, in fact this is occuring right now on earth amongst billions if not trillions of diversity of different sharings mesh patterns among humans). We can't see it is false, because we can't perceive outside our limited dimensional view of ourselves. But this randomness does creep in. For example, no experiment is ever repeated exactly. There are always minute differences due to limitations of written language, limitations of precision of instruments, limitations of time to explain, etc..

Six sigma (ISO quality processes) tries to overcome that, yet still 3.6 in million fail due to this Shannon-Nyquist random fact of nature. Realize the shared reality has holes in it that are failing all the time, but you can't often see it because you don't share your reality at all times with all people on earth and all that ever existed (your sampling interval and/or sampling frequency is too small). I hope you remember my flea on cat that drowns in the pool example from prior post, now let me give you another example. The six sigma factory measures 3.6 failures per million, but this failure rate depends on what they measure as failure. Let's say they measure the turning a knob 10,000 times and extrapolate that out to MTBF rate. But the actual use of a product is not so ordered. When it gets out there in the field it might all change at some time in future. Case in point, all the military equipment failed in the desert due to sand when President tried to rescue the hostages from Iran some decades ago. So much for six sigma being repeatable.

Mainstream science may be more useful in the short-term of our spacetime, but it does nothing (or much less) to help you with time frames longer than about 120 years maximum. You are then dead in mainstream science, but not in other faiths.

Since mainstream science is saying we exist for only 120 years out of the billions or millions of years that (carbon dating) science claims our universe has existed, then statistically science is basically saying I do not exist much more than an individual quantum particle exists in our spacetime scale (which is just about non-existing from my perspective, quarks don't talk to me often). Science may eventually find a way to tap into longer perceptions of our existence. You will then might be surprised to see Christianity still applies when the old science has been replaced. That has been the historical pattern that I mentioned before, i.e. the earth was flat, space & time were orthogonal, spacetime was the absolute, whoops we have randomness in quantum granularity, etc...

Nah I don't overly trust science. I am aware that most of the world runs at about 1 or 2 sigma at best (again click the Bell Curve Economics on my name above). Humanity places an illogical trust in things which are growing exponentially more random on larger scales (people leave that 120 year reality and move on, only some are still in it and in fact even the people here on earth are not sharing one monolithic reality to the degree some might initially assume), and this explains the natural result of why statism ("Mr. Society") is now trending into a big exponential peak and decay-- IMHO the point of this thread and past few from ESR on many different levels (economic, ethical, etc).

Most apparently refuse to heed the wisdom of Christianity, which is to not place ultimate (absolute) faith in false Gods and things of this world (i.e. 2nd Commandment, except Catholics who omitted it), including spacetime, time, or any other manisfestation mice & men, i.e. science. The larger scale randomness is ultimately in control. Christianity does say to maximize the local order (don't put your head in sand like an Ostrich, in the story of talents God reprimanded the one who buried his talents), just don't get into trusting and needing it too much. Trusting too much in science is analogous to the Catholics discarding the 2nd Commandment and praying to statues of dead people (St. Nino). The King was probably happy with the removal of the 2nd Commandment, as it enabled the people to continue worship things here on earth. Come out of the Great Harlot. You can not take any of that science with you when you die in that science and move your consciousness into the greater scale of the universe. There is a reason Christianity has stood the test of time, and it is because (up to now at least) it is a truthful window into the greater scale of the "universe" (aka God, for non-atheists). Using the scientific method on Christianity itself, I can say it is trueful because it hasn't failed yet, as evident by the repeatable measurement of it's popularity. Applying Darwin's evolution and survival-of-the-fittest, it is less probable for some philosophy to remain so overwhelmingly popular for 2000 years if it was information that lead to failure of species? And I suspect the atheists are about to lose again in a big way in the coming periodic exponential peak of "Mr. Society" (probably not the final one mentioned in Revelations, as a large portion of the world does not yet have the "science is not a faith" western disease yet). Please do not associate Christianity with those false misrepresentations that died during evolution of humanity, i.e. the ones that persecuted others, as those were not Christianity and they had discarded some of the Commandments. Afaik, most (if not all) of the churches today (afaik all popular ones) are not Christianity, for afaik they all fail to teach Matthew 6:5, wherein Jesus said do not pray (i.e. to meditate on these matters we are discussing) in the "synagogues like a babbling pagan" for the pagans "already received their reward" here on earth, but "go in your room" and keep it a secret. Those who boast about prayers, reduced faith to needing this word and it's approval and reward. And that is why I must discipline myself to not post more here in this thread. I achieved my objective to share.


AXIOM: exponential models of life and business are most freedom directed. Warren Buffet invests for income in mature businesses, not for maximum growth, thus he ties himself to statism and the tail end of the move towards decay. His theory is he can always reinvest the income, but this theory fails on sufficient scale, because ultimately this will misallocate resources. The Bible is so wise about our needs and freedom and priorities of life, as Jesus said, "if God provides for the birds, certainly he will provide for humans". Seek out exponential growth opportunities, no matter how small relative to your accumulate worth, and then discard the baggage. You will be so free as a bird. And as a bonus you can have an everlasting existence on a different scale than spacetime.

...recently in a caldera in Idaho that was the location of the last eruption of the Yellowstone hot spot, before it blew the current Yellowstone caldera into existence. By way of comparison, Mt. St. Helens blew 0.7 cubic kilometers of rock into the air, covering half of Washington with four inches of ash. The eruption that created the caldera I was standing on blew about 1,000 cubic kilometers of rock into the air. Such an eruption, today, I was told, would kill everything as far away as Chicago...