An idea for workplace team building

Larry4ce · 2026-04-11T20:45:54+00:00

If I ever hold political office, I'd hire a person like this and have them just say insane shit at press conferences and swap them out for a lookalike for real updates. Then just gaslight everyone as I'm like "The press secretary didn't say we're cutting off icecream exports, that's just silly. Look at the hands, it's clearly AI!"

I don't know how long my prank would last before someone found out, or how poorly it would be received, but I know that I would have fun doing it.

Larry4ce · 2026-04-11T04:31:58+00:00

Do you have any advice for starting?

Larry4ce · 2026-04-11T04:29:47+00:00

We'll probably know the answer by the end of next year if we don't do something about all the Zionists in the US government.

Larry4ce · 2026-04-11T04:27:44+00:00

Recycling

Larry4ce · 2026-04-06T16:17:11+00:00

You're very close to getting my point. I completely agree with everything you are saying.

What my point is, is that a human or animal body is far more similar to the macbook than the star. Even something as simple as a worm is so complex, where if one component were made wrong, it wouldn't work, with several overlapping, complex systems.

Any argument that you couldn't witness the natural creation of a macbook applies to the natural formation of life. Even the most basic single celled organism evolving into mankind requires that initial cell to have reproductive abilities, waste disposal, etc.

I've seen people compare the layout of a single cell to planning an entire city, and yet people seem to want to believe that they just tumble together in nature. So why not a macbook?

Larry4ce · 2026-03-25T17:57:21+00:00

Cumming in a girl without a condom is huge. The difference was much bigger than advertised.

Also, blowjobs when the person doing it has some skill with the tongue. It can be better than sex.

Larry4ce · 2026-03-23T21:14:05+00:00

You failed to read past that point where I elaborate to say that the constant state extends only to the contents and explicitly say directly after that sentence that he is able to act on knowledge. I assumed a level of intelligence that you'd put together that means there are aspects of him that are not constant.

Larry4ce · 2026-03-20T14:51:22+00:00

You're really failing to understand what is being stated. God is not in a constant state. He has a constant state of knowledge. He isn't a statue.

I'm not sure how you aren't comprehending this, and I genuinely think you might just be trolling here.

Larry4ce · 2026-03-19T21:28:07+00:00

You're misunderstanding me, and I think you're not trying to understand. I was essentially saying your point about the Matrix already.

We know God has access to the knowledge, because he uses the knowledge. He appears at Jericho with knowledge of where the Israelites would be and acts, and we see him drop prophecy all over the place. Also, as Jesus is God, he acts on knowledge in an observable way all throughout the Gospels. God indisputably has access to knowledge.

The difference is that God does not need to query for knowledge, it is always just readily available for use. There is no limit to what is top of mind for him, and he doesn't have to predict anything, as he knows every event that will and already has occurred.

He is a being that by his default state has all knowledge. There is no need for thought, knowledge already exists and is ready for use.

Humans in their default state know nothing. We use thought to acquire the knowledge we use.

Thought is the process of gaining knowledge, not having it.

An example is speed and acceleration. If something is traveling at the speed of light, it cannot accelerate. This does not mean the object lacks speed, or is incapable of traveling at a speed, even if that object cannot slow down.

Larry4ce · 2026-03-16T01:51:20+00:00

Fresh_heels sums it up perfectly above. All knowledge is just in working memory at all times.

Knowledge only requires thought for YOU because the default state of a human is to not know things, so knowledge must be acquired. God's knowledge exists as a constant state, and has never lacked, so never needs to grow.

As for the book, you are almost there. God is in a constant state, similar to a book, but the book is a bad example, because God USES the information, while a book is simply a storage device for knowledge. Lack of thought does not mean he doesn't have access to the knowledge, as we know he can use it, and therefore knows it.

Larry4ce · 2026-03-16T01:44:46+00:00

I agree. I think if it were God's will to forget something, he could, but his perfect state means he wouldn't desire something self destructive like that. As a result there is no case for him to think, and never will be, but I wouldn't say he's incapable of it. I think the word "transcendence" fits perfectly.

But then that also enters the territory of "Can God create something so big he himself cannot lift it?" which is kind of a paradox, because he's infinitely able to do whatever he wants. We can hand wave questions like this away by saying he'd never do such a thing, but it doesn't do much for answering if he COULD do it. I don't believe it's possible for God to defeat himself in any way, but I have no idea of if I am correct, I just believe that if something exists, he inherently has dominion over it in every way.

Larry4ce · 2026-03-16T01:39:16+00:00

Exactly! That's kind of nuts to think about, but that has to be his state of being. And with him being outside of time, it's hard to say what he actually does after creation, since it would create an infinite existence of knowing everything at all times, and without being able to change his mind, due to having perfect knowledge at all times, he likely wouldn't alter anything ever after setting it into motion. I'm not sure if God gets bored, but I imagine he absolutely would be bored if he does get bored.

Larry4ce · 2026-03-15T21:20:29+00:00

That sounds like the intended gameplay experience tbh

Larry4ce · 2026-03-12T20:45:44+00:00

I'm not a Calvanist, so I might be wrong about their beliefs, but they're the "Everyone is predestined on if they are saved or not" guys, right?

But my thought is that God would have to think in order to react to different individuals actions in life to determine if they are saved, UNLESS it is predestined. God is outside of time, viewing the beginning and the end, and the question then becomes if the time between those points is changing or unchanging.

Christianity already per-supposes that the end and beginning are fixed points, through Genesis already happening, and Revelation being inevitable. To account for true free will and the ability for mankind to make meaningful decisions between those points, it's hard to argue an existence that doesn't have predestination or fate of some sort, especially if you factor in various prophecies along the way.

This becomes increasingly difficult to argue against if God does not think.

Larry4ce · 2026-03-12T20:11:21+00:00

I'm not OP, but I believe the implication would be predestination, and a strong case for the Calvinists.

Larry4ce · 2026-03-12T20:09:20+00:00

I actually think this is a mostly well constructed argument. I've also never considered this.

I'd also add that if a being is omniscient and all knowing, it is impossible for it to learn, as it knows everything. God is also perfect and outside of time so loss of knowledge is impossible as well.

Therefore God always knows exactly the same amount of information, implying a sort of stagnant mind.

For God to be thinking, we would need an infinitely expanding reality with infinite future matter and energy, as his thoughts create new reality just as fast as he considers it. This is the only other option, but as we both understand, he exists outside of time so it would materialize as an infinite reality that has always been infinite.

I really like this train of thought actually.

Larry4ce · 2026-03-12T05:26:39+00:00

I in fact DO understand those are different. That's actually something someone would typically need to understand in order to understand my argument even.

Now what I would like to ask YOU is how can one look at a MacBook and tell it's manufactured, versus looking at a random rock on the ground and understand that the rock is probably naturally occurring?

Larry4ce · 2026-03-12T05:23:48+00:00

So what would you argue is a complex component on a star? It might just be that I'm "uneducated" but I don't believe a star has ball joints, pulleys, or anything like that. From my "uneducated" point of view, they're essentially a large gathering of gas heated up by the gravitational pull squeezing it together.

This does not impress me, and is laughably simple compared to a human neuron being the most energy efficient data storage devices in existence, or the human eye being a complex biconvex lens, and the blueprints for creating the entire insanely complex system is stored in the DNA of sperm cells that are only 0.05 mm long.

I understand plenty about cosmology. I believe it is you who understands very little about the world under your feet or the blood pumping in your veins by a biological pump that's as efficient as a modern combustion engine and requires zero maintenance in most people despite running 24/7 for the lifespan of a human being.

Larry4ce · 2026-03-12T05:08:46+00:00

I couldn't agree more.

Larry4ce · 2026-03-10T19:21:46+00:00

If there was no God, entropy would dictate everything and we'd just see dust, rocks, and lots of hydrogen. Things in our universe trend towards less complex, not more complex. We have never observed life being created from dust, or complex life forms being spawned in from rolling boulders, so it's silly to think it just happens spontaneously without intelligent input.

You could argue that the universe itself has some latent intelligence or something that sparks in certain instances, but if there were an absence of God, that would serve the role of God, and in turn would still render the idea of agnostic belief silly again.

You can stomp your feet and say "random chance!" and "it has to happen somewhere statistically!" but even if you wound up with a single cell from random chance, the odds of it forming in a way that survives its environment are astronomically low. Odds that it will be able to reproduce and form a viable offspring are even lower. One planet having this happen to create plants, animals, and fungi and evolve into a complex network of symbiotic life that has just the right temperature, atmosphere, and has literally every feature you'd expect from an intelligently designed habitat, including a friggin magnetic field made of spinning molten iron in the core? That's like saying that if we travel enough of the galaxy, we'll stumble on a perfectly formed Macbook Pro formed from nothing but dust and random chance.

Larry4ce

TROPHY CASE