JFHermes

JFHermes t1_izwjp36 wrote

I certainly think running the houdini/C4D pipeline has given you some great flexibility for presentation aesthetics. As long as you don't exceed your hardware capabilities it makes sense to have the options available in these programs to make it look as excellent as it does.

Would be very cool to see you develop a game environment with intractability though. Having these kind of platforms for easy access on web 4.0 will be great for designers and visualisation experts.

Looks great really nice job.

1

JFHermes t1_izung0h wrote

They did the ML part in unity so I am assuming the renders are done using unity. Perhaps they bring the voxel model into something like blender to do the final renders but it seems like an unnecessary step as once you know how to use unreal/unity for rendering it becomes better than blender anyway.

1

JFHermes t1_ire29g9 wrote

If you are agnostic: you believe that there could or could not be a god. Basically it's unknowable if there is or there is not a god. That makes perfect sense to me, as religion is based on a system of faith and not logic (verifiable truth). Take that distinction as you may but that's not my point.

My point is that all atheists are agnostic - there isn't yet a way to disprove the 'existence' of god. There isn't a special class of atheist that has the ability to disprove god, therefore it's only reasonable to conclude that there only exists one type of atheist - the one that doesn't believe in god but also cannot prove/disprove it's existence.

What's more, gnosticism (is this what you mean by gnostic theism? - I looked it up but only found some dodgy quora answers using your terminology) is based on an inward looking acceptance that there is a divine force in the universe. It's not provable because the idea of god in this sense is purely spiritual and operates through the actions of people.

The interesting thing about Gnosticism is it's relation to greek/roman polytheism and their influences on early Judaism and Christianity. Much like one of the core components of the reformation - they believed that the channel between humans and god(s) were irrespective of organised religion and was a deeply personal projection of the forces of the universe (god).

I don't have to believe in god to be called a moron by an atheist because I feel a connection to a divine force that underpins the passage of time. I feel sorry for people who get organised religion tangled up with spirituality - I can feel there is something larger at play I just don't think it's personifications should be taken as gospel.

If an atheists prime example of disproving religion is taking a personification of god(usually intended for children because they don't have the mental capacities to understand more abstract concepts) as a way of invalidating everything ELSE that comes from texts/studies on religion then they are also like children.. unable to see the forests from the trees.

This is the whole point of the video - don't trip up on religion's gaps and throw the baby out with the bathwater. For a lot of people, they find a deep sense of contentedness when they believe in God, Religion, Unicorns... whatever. That is the point of Religion, not scientifically debugging texts from 2000 years ago.

0

JFHermes t1_irccpyp wrote

Reply to comment by BeaverFur in David Mitchell on Atheism by Huntstark

> You can be an agnostic atheist (in fact, most atheists are): someone who doesn't believe that there's a god, but doesn't claim that they know with certainty that god doesn't exist.

This is just atheism. What class of atheist can prove god doesn't exist? No one can know with certainty that god doesn't exist.

0