RunRyder RC
WATCH
 6 pages [ <<    <     2      3     ( 4 )     5      6     NEXT    >> ] 4843 views TOPIC CLOSED
HomeOff Topics News & Politics › Does Mass exist to create God
01-12-2010 10:26 PM  8 years agoPost 61
Dennis (RIP)

rrApprentice

Oregon

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

I don't know what God is suppose to be made of, it's all speculation. And all the things you have put forward is also speculation. Like speculating that God had to cause the Big Bang
It has nothing to do with "Speculation". Its just "Faith".

Its rather simple.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
01-13-2010 01:06 AM  8 years agoPost 62
synodontis

rrKey Veteran

United Kingdom

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

moreover . . .
Now I am being neutral here so I cannot take a side and I am only stating the facts in context to support logic for both sides by stating only known accepted facts both sides agree on.
No you're not neutral. You've put forward the concept of "God" into the discovery of the Higgs particle.

Why can't we treat it like any other scientific entity: lacking all consciousness, purpose or meaning. The only meaning it has is that we verified it's existence (which might happen), and therefore a new theory of physics and a new direction emerges.

But it doesn't stop us all thinking that it's still an impersonal process/concept. These particles don't have consciousness - or anything of the sort.

It might work out that the process of the big bang was also a impersonal process, without purpose or meaning, and everything else was a consequence of it. If this is true then the concept of a God would also be absurd. And if you were to call God (or entertain the notion of such an entity) an impersonal, meaningless process then I might agree with you.

But the vast majority of people don't want to believe in the latter concept for the reason that there will be nothing to gain from it. They want the "benefits": the afterlife (that there will be something better than their pathetic lives waiting for them after death), being told what's right and wrong etc. . . And this effects their behaviour, which in turn effects the ways our society operates and causes social ills because of they way people behave due to their silly faiths.

I leave the final words to the novelist Ian McEwan, because the major point he makes is all the really interests me as far as this silly notion of religion is concerned:

"What I believe but cannot prove is that no part of my consciousness will survive my death. I exclude the fact that I will linger, fadingly, in the thoughts of others, or that aspects of my consciousness will survive in writing, or in that positioning of a planted tree or a dent in my old car. I suspect that many contributors to Edge will take this premise as a given: true but not significant. However, it divides the world crucially, and much damage has been done to thought as well as to persons by those who are certain that there is a life - a better, more important life - elsewhere. That this span is brief, that consciousness is an accidental gift of blind processes, makes our existence all the more precious and our responsibilities for it all the more profound."

topic unsubscribed: I'm sick and tired of talking to delusional morons like EW Higgs.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
01-14-2010 03:45 AM  8 years agoPost 63
drdot

rrElite Veteran

So. California, Orange County.

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

fwiw..

...In the anti-universe...God must exist to create mass....

"So...Did you hear about the Agnostic Dyslexic Insomniac...? He stays awake all night wondering if there is a Dog..."

Thank you...I'll be here all week....Tell your friends....

BC

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
01-14-2010 04:13 AM  8 years agoPost 64
Dennis (RIP)

rrApprentice

Oregon

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

The worst moment for the atheist is when he is really thankful and has nobody to thank.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
01-14-2010 06:57 PM  8 years agoPost 65
EW Higgs

rrNovice

Hood River

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Real Gravity or Mass Potential Energy
Synodontis said:

Quote:

Now I am being neutral here so I cannot take a side and I am only stating the facts in context to support logic for both sides by stating only known accepted facts both sides agree on.

”No you're not neutral. You've put forward the concept of "God" into the discovery of the Higgs particle.”

Then I said:

No, I put forward the concept of "God" into the discovery of the Higgs Mass as Infinite Mass. It takes time/movement to create particle/wave points. Many people already refer to it as a particle including mainstream physics. That’s only one of two ways of looking at it after it moves. See, I’m being Neutral.

Just because I might not believe in Gravity that’s no way to talk to somebody…BTW

Synodontis said:

Why can't we treat it like any other scientific entity: lacking all consciousness, purpose or meaning. The only meaning it has is that we verified its existence (which might happen), and therefore a new theory of physics and a new direction emerges.

Then I said:

If you have Consciousness the “purpose” to avoid pain and deliberate attempts to have fun doing so (“meaning”) become obvious but you need Consciousness for that so lets keep this simple and stick to the subject, not peoples feelings about them/chemicals made later of Mass associated with feelings of awareness from an unknown source in Physics, and God’s Mass in Religion. So on to the question of the scientific entity of Mass and its relation to Consciousness and why can't we treat it like any other scientific entity:

Because Mass is an Entity separate from the other scientific entities with it’s own algebraic symbol called “g” for Gravity.

Because if we are to compare Physic’s Mass to Religions Mass it has to have Consciousness in the first half of our Models that use Religion’s Mass found at the beginning of Time, and also in the other half of our Models, the Templates of Quantum Physic’s where Consciousness is created some how at a later date out of matter that still needs Mass to create matter to create Consciousness.

Either way both sides say you need Mass to have Consciousness, and if you take Mass away you cannot have LIFE BASED ON BOTH MODELS. That’s huge. Mass and Consciousness go together like a shriveled glove on a cut hand in a failing Court system. If you try the glove on in the beginning you get a perfect fit. If you wait arguments come about if the glove fits or not. But you always need Mass in both camps to have Consciousness and the argument in Physics is merely the date the Glove fit. In both their opinions: no Mass = no Consciousness.

You are saying I’m wrong when I say Mass and God are the same thing in Religion and this is the same Mass Quantum Physics is searching for. I disagree. Real rest mass weight is real rest mast weight any way you look at it (very unusual in Physics) and something “Is” if it has it.

Everyone knows that in Religion there is Mass (God) and it has/is Consciousness, and adding Quantum Physics beliefe that there is Mass that made Consciousness “somehow” confirms the relationship. The only difference is the unknown time in Physics that Consciousness came about to give matter a sense of being. There is clearly a relationship between Consciousness and Mass shown by removing Mass which in turn removes Consciousness. The fact that I can say that about the well tested beliefe system of both groups shows the relationship. When you get down to absolutes on each side of a part of a picture you are getting next to the Truth of the part.

Synodontis said:
But it doesn't stop us all thinking that it's still an impersonal process/concept. These particles don't have consciousness - or anything of the sort.

And I said:

Particles came together to make you say that, and you had Consciousness to do so because of this process. Mass in both Models is responsible for giving the particles Consciousness and this is proven by removing the Mass from both Models. You are only correct in saying that as if saying a hammer is not part of the Man swinging it. But the Man’s house still gets built out of silent dead trees like the hammer’s wood handle and iron head and Time shows us no two Observers could hear the trees fall at the exact same frequency. Something that is “Single” is being shared by all Observers and it is called Mass, it’s not a particle in a still non-moving state, and it is as real as Gravity but only if Mass is real. Without a doubt Religion tells us Consciousness has Mass and Quamtom Physics states the need for the same Mass. According to both beliefe systems you need Mass to have matter. Common sense tells us that if there is no Mass there can be no Gravity and there must be another Constant in the Universe to replace the Mass and Gravity in both Models. Only Consciousness made of Energy, not a single Mass, can allow two Observers to be in the same place at the same time IF you eliminate the end of time Mass location which “Relative Time” does. Only Constant Time requires a beginning and an end and has a real arrow. Energy is found throughout Space Time and we need to ask why and how the Universe is expanding if Energy is a Constant like “g”. There is always a simple answer to explain things like this WHEN you look at it differently to see it.

If I am to accept your statement “These particles don't have consciousness” and agree with you, it is just like you telling me God’s Mass is real because A Particle is a Point of Past Observation and the Anti-particle has the Smart Part in it, the Mass of the particle that created the particle’s Space. Where in Physics did you EVER read that? And why would I want to talk to some expert that can’t even tell me in simple terms what the difference between a Particle and an Anti-particle is in reference to Mass Content, saying I even believe in Mass. When you add the Anti-particle to your statement about the particle you create a place to put God’s Mass which is the same Mass that removes Life from both Models if left out. How do you know it’s not mass potential energy? How do you know Gravity is real? Where is the Mass found? You would think if we could find Space on Mars we could find a gram of matter on Earth. Where’s the Graviton, the force carrier of Gravity? You can hear the Big Bang just by unplugging your cable TV and hooking it up to a real antenna so why can’t we detect a Gravity Wave? Or Dark Matter? The list goes on and on dealing with the problems of believing in Gravity. What is the relationship of Gravity to Electromagnetism? Is it THAT complicated that we can’t understand what it is at least? If you give up thinking for yourself you give up the chance to learn.

Synodontis said:
“It might work out that the process of the big bang was also a impersonal process, without purpose or meaning, and everything else was a consequence of it. If this is true then the concept of a God would also be absurd. And if you were to call God (or entertain the notion of such an entity) an impersonal, meaningless process then I might agree with you.”

I Said:

You are adding to the question by adding purpose and meaning. With Consciousness present and aware at the beginning of the Big Bang I would have to say birth hurts more than we want to remember and Life is a cycle of ups and downs we sense that is not the least bit impersonal giving Mass a quality to respect that most certainly would create consequences with meaning (pain) and a purpose (avoid pain, have fun). However in the simple beginning I don’t think Life had enough time/parts to think about it as you keep mentioning but certainly was aware of the unavoidable experience.

Synodontis said:

But the vast majority of people don't want to believe in the latter concept for the reason that there will be nothing to gain from it. They want the "benefits": the afterlife (that there will be something better than their pathetic lives waiting for them after death), being told what's right and wrong etc. . . And this effects their behaviour, which in turn effects the ways our society operates and causes social ills because of they way people behave due to their silly faiths.

I said:
This goes past the original thread’s question of “Does God Exist” and asks “What does God/Mass do and why does He do it.”

But I’ll say most if not all people are aware of future points of coming Observation and how their own actions affect them. Why would forward thoughts in time be limited when anticipation in Life is so important? I’d have to add some animals and plants to this as well if you believe in DNA and the Life it creates, and this supports the Bible as well as Physics if you start at the beginning. The real question is the “After Life” and it answers itself if you think about it in simple terms before adding more complex reasons that deal with the reality of Space being relative to Time and where you put it. If there is Mass, and that’s what Life/Consciousness is, how can it not be? It takes “something” to create “nothing” because nothing is only a conception of thought based on the opposite of something using a home made computer. It can only move and change like Energy, not go away. It cannot stop being real, and something real (weight) cannot come from nothing. We have noticed it stick around for Billions and Billions of Life cycles. And if it remains constant in so many Life cycles why/how would it stop being even if it needed time to start building advanced Life forms after a simple and perhaps horrific beginning.

Over 95% of our DNA says we don’t know what Life is past our current molecular template/form. That means we don’t know what Life’s by product is past our current molecular template either. Life’s by-product (to be polite) is created by time itself, what we call matter that both camps claim need Mass to subsist.

Synodontis said:
I leave the final words to the novelist Ian McEwan, because the major point he makes is all the really interests me as far as this silly notion of religion is concerned:

"What I believe but cannot prove is that no part of my consciousness will survive my death. (Edit by E.W. Higgs^^ Then he believes as Hawking once believed: information is lost.^^) I exclude the fact that I will linger, fadingly, in the thoughts of others, or that aspects of my consciousness will survive in writing, or in that positioning of a planted tree or a dent in my old car. (Edit by E.W. Higgs^^ Evidence that Life, like Energy, moves through change not loss, and a TV has more than one channel.^^) I suspect that many contributors to Edge will take this premise as a given: true but not significant. However, it divides the world crucially, and much damage has been done to thought as well as to persons by those who are certain that there is a life - a better, more important life - elsewhere. (Edit by E.W. Higgs^^I agree it divides people but the reality of figuring it out obviously requires it and it does not hurt thought if the correct answer is obtained no matter how long it takes especially if the Observer is a constant like Energy. Damage happens because someone listens to deception: false words and interpretations such as the Sun rotating around the Earth. More damage will occur if the correct answer is not uncovered so we should not give up after all the work and offer up a closed mind allowing it to remain.^^) That this span is brief, that consciousness is an accidental gift of blind processes, makes our existence all the more precious and our responsibilities for it all the more profound." (Edit by E.W. Higgs^^ At some point you need to look and let go of believing in luck or coincidence as the cause of Life and accept the fact that the complexity of organized Life could not survive so much information without Life to keep it organized. With what we have learned in the last decade to add to our past knowledge that mistaken beliefe is now just a resistor marked “very stupid” if not insane. The Strong Force holding our atom’s and molecules together is just what we see. Life is a self aware machine and we are small but important parts inside it just flipping the coin of symmetry again to realize that matter did not create Life, Life was there first and created all the matter we see out of itself. Here Religion is a huge step ahead of Physics, but that won’t last much longer as reality sets in and Physics humbles itself to accept the basic principles of Religion to take off as we discuss the first step of connecting Consciousness to matter, the makeup of Consciousness: an Initial Inertial Frame of reference believed to be real Mass but so far lacking any real evidence outside of Theory and Mass potential energy known to be real. This is an important argument in Physics setting the stage for the next show of Intelligence. The correction for Time in the Strong Force that opens the next door.

unsubscribed: I'm sick and tired of talking to delusional morons like EW Higgs.

And I’m used to it hearing it from people that always turn out to be wrong…But if you think I’m bad…listen to this fool. “The pilots commented that the aircraft was so smooth that there was no vibration or noise to indicate that they were in a rotary wing aircraft, let alone one flying at 170 mph with the rotor slowed to 107 rpm.” http://www.cartercopters.com/mu-1.html

Remember: “Rocks don’t throw people, people throw rocks.”

But don’t let your Ego get in the way of where Life is found or what it’s doing. Look what you’re sitting on….. I should have said “little rocks”.

E.W. Higgs

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR
01-18-2010 03:55 PM  8 years agoPost 66
str8den

rrVeteran

NE U.K

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

well said mr. higgins.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
01-19-2010 03:07 AM  8 years agoPost 67
synodontis

rrKey Veteran

United Kingdom

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

And I’m used to it hearing it from people that always turn out to be wrong…
no, you're just a "moron".

All because something has mass doesn't mean it has consciousness. I can't prove that a block of iron has no consciousness but I'm pretty sure of it.

Consciousness is not purely due to mass, it due to other factors too (most of which we will probably never understand and never will due to the nature of its philosophical construction), and so far as our scientific experience is concerned mass is a necessary but not a sufficient condition for consciousness. And as a classification exercise we have yet to find an entity that has consciousness but no mass. I suggest you waste your time doing the latter.

Consciousness has profoundly deep philosophical problems associated with it, which most of us cannot go into. Certain species of corals can subdivide as a form of reproduction, this now throws profound questions about whether it's immortal (given an abundant and stable environment for infinite time), or whether the offspring are "different" consciously (they only live for 30 - 60 years). Another problem I see with consciousness is what it means as regards atomic configuration and information: if it's possible to create an exact replica of myself down to individual atoms does it imply that it's "me"? And then what happens to the original "me"? If we manage to construct a teleportation device, when I get teleported to somewhere else, is that a "copy" of me being teleported and the original "me" destroyed? The latter point being totally unfalsifiable since it could be that the copy of me would behave like the original "me" exactly to all external observers, but in fact the original "me" has ceased to exist and a copy of "me" has taken my place, and thus teleportation would amount to murder (but it would be totally impossible to prove that the murder has taken place!)? There are more perplexing, nasty questions/thoughts that I don't have time here to go into.

And you totally missunderstood what Ian McEwan was getting at.

I probably would find it interesting to argue, discuss with you, further points/concepts, but neither have the time nor inclination for it: I'm going to be too busy with Galois theory. And besides, this is not the place for it. . .

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
01-19-2010 03:29 AM  8 years agoPost 68
Dennis (RIP)

rrApprentice

Oregon

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

synodontis
Consciousness has profoundly deep philosophical problems associated with it, which most of us cannot go into.
Yes, and you are not doing so well with it.

Here is an example:
no, you're just a "moron".

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
01-19-2010 12:05 PM  8 years agoPost 69
str8den

rrVeteran

NE U.K

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

nicely pointed out dennis.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
01-19-2010 02:41 PM  8 years agoPost 70
1stPlace

rrApprentice

Ohio USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

nicely pointed out dennis.
Except that Dennis is talking about "conscience" not "conscious".

Diejenigen, die nicht lernen aus den Fehlern der Vergangenheit bestimmt sind, zu wiederholen.

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  GALLERY  Attn:RR
01-19-2010 03:41 PM  8 years agoPost 71
str8den

rrVeteran

NE U.K

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

1stplace, i am very sure that you're right.

i was getting kinda scared what with the moon having a conscience!

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
01-19-2010 03:55 PM  8 years agoPost 72
Dennis (RIP)

rrApprentice

Oregon

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Well heck. I was conscious when I typed that. Does that help?

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
01-19-2010 09:59 PM  8 years agoPost 73
1stPlace

rrApprentice

Ohio USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Does that help?
No, but it's a start.

Diejenigen, die nicht lernen aus den Fehlern der Vergangenheit bestimmt sind, zu wiederholen.

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  GALLERY  Attn:RR
01-19-2010 11:38 PM  8 years agoPost 74
Dennis (RIP)

rrApprentice

Oregon

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
01-20-2010 06:26 AM  8 years agoPost 75
kevlar11

rrApprentice

Edmonton

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

EW Higgs sounds just like this guy

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  GALLERY  Attn:RR
01-20-2010 11:34 PM  8 years agoPost 76
eSmith

rrVeteran

Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

There was a woman once, who insisted she could talk to and understood her cats. She was a little off her rocker. But one guy, just kept arguing with her that she counld not talk to her cat. She disagreed and the argument was never ending.

He would say to us "She's Crazy" and we would reply, who is crazier, her for thinking she can talk to her cats or YOU for thinking you can change her mind???

Some people who just love being involved in these discussions have stated over and over again, they believe in an invisible man in the sky who doles out punishment and reward to them and they live life trying to avoid his wrath and garner his favor. They are well aware there is no proof for any of this and that fact doesn't even slow them down.

Who's crazier, them for thinking the absurd, or us for thinking we can get them to follow reason?

The problem here is they, and at times perhaps us, don't seem to realize that these inferrior minds were molded by there uneducated parents long ago and we are dealing with the end product of a brainwashing campaign devised to completely dominate every decision they will ever make. The die were cast long ago, it's too late to re-educate them now.

They are unable to think independantly. This is reinforced in their weekly cult meetings and manifests itself over and over as they in turn abuse there children with this controling behaviour.

I avoid these conversations now because it's the same old trolls who mindlessly reply over and over with little or no new information. Just the same tired arguments that have been shut down again and again. All they display is an inability to learn what others have long ago known as truth. They show a refusal to be enlightened.

Sorry, but they have nothing stimulating to offer. Try as you may, the lights might be on but there is nobody home.

Faith is for fools. If you can stand up and make claims without proof and think "Faith" is a resonable defence of your position, then your parents failed you, just as their parents failed them.

It's a mirror of the welfare state where poverty just creates generation after generation of poverty.

-eSmith.

http://www.edmheli.ca

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  GALLERY  Attn:RR
01-21-2010 12:26 AM  8 years agoPost 77
Dennis (RIP)

rrApprentice

Oregon

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

It's a mirror of the welfare state where poverty just creates generation after generation of poverty.
So, faith is the reason for poverty. No, poverty is people that simply can't do better and for the very lazy. There is some of one and a lot more of the latter.
Faith is for fools. If you can stand up and make claims without proof and think "Faith" is a resonable defence of your position, then your parents failed you, just as their parents failed them.
If you are of the mind that faith is for fools. Then 80% to 85% of ALL people out there are fools. Man, that is one thick minded, closed minded, and egotistical statement.

Up to you. You are what you are.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
01-21-2010 07:10 PM  8 years agoPost 78
synodontis

rrKey Veteran

United Kingdom

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

He would say to us "She's Crazy" and we would reply, who is crazier, her for thinking she can talk to her cats or YOU for thinking you can change her mind???

Some people who just love being involved in these discussions have stated over and over again, they believe in an invisible man in the sky who doles out punishment and reward to them and they live life trying to avoid his wrath and garner his favor. They are well aware there is no proof for any of this and that fact doesn't even slow them down.

Who's crazier, them for thinking the absurd, or us for thinking we can get them to follow reason?
My point is that E W Higgs is a sad, delusional individual. Physics cannot ever offer any explanation/proof of God. Something utterly fantastic has to happen.

If what he says has merit then the best physicists in the world (Witten, Green, Weinberg etc. . . ) would stand up to attention and listen, papers would be flying out of the window, left, right and center!!!!

It's NOT happening, because these distingished individuals don't want to involve themselves with morons and their "nonsenses".

Totally agree with what you said, eSmith, maybe taken up knitting might be a more profitable use of my time.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
01-21-2010 07:45 PM  8 years agoPost 79
1stPlace

rrApprentice

Ohio USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

There was a woman once, who insisted she could talk to and understood her cats. She was a little off her rocker. But one guy, just kept arguing with her that she counld not talk to her cat. She disagreed and the argument was never ending.

He would say to us "She's Crazy" and we would reply, who is crazier, her for thinking she can talk to her cats or YOU for thinking you can change her mind???
What's so crazy about that? Haven't you ever seen trained cats?

Watch at YouTube

Diejenigen, die nicht lernen aus den Fehlern der Vergangenheit bestimmt sind, zu wiederholen.

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  GALLERY  Attn:RR
01-25-2010 04:02 PM  8 years agoPost 80
eSmith

rrVeteran

Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

You know, when I see something so blatently misunderstood like this:
So, faith is the reason for poverty. No, poverty is people that simply can't do better and for the very lazy. There is some of one and a lot more of the latter.
I really wonder how small minded some people are. I guess it is a big leap to think the concept of an "analogy" wouldn't be too much for the readers here but then our poster boy comes in and proves he doesn't understand how launguage works and is used.

I think I was pretty clear that I was compairing faith breeding faith, as a concept, to the cycle of poverty. As in, just like poverty, once you are born into it, it is very hard to break out of...

Now come on, that's not that hard to understand is it?

BUT, then we get Dennis, so blind with obsessive hate he can't read for comprehension. And yet again, hard as he tries, the only thing he can comment on is the part he clearly misunderstood..... Try again Dennis, This time try thinking about the content before commenting.

And to be clear Dennis, 80% to 85% do appear to be fools. Don't blame me for pointing it out. Others have done so long before me.

Groups and mobs do not denote intelligence, the closer you get to "Convential Wisdom" the better chance there is you are wrong. Hide in the group if you like but it's a group of fools, like it or not.

Quantity never trumps quality, only the align crowd buys into that line of B$ (literally)

Synodontis, Not knitting just yet, but I've started learning Bass Guitar. I started about the same time we were in the "Does God Exist" Thread. It's been a far better use of my time. At least it's productive.

If it wasn't for the handfull of guys I PM with here, I'd stop browsing off topics altogether.

-eSmith.

http://www.edmheli.ca

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  GALLERY  Attn:RR
WATCH
 6 pages [ <<    <     2      3     ( 4 )     5      6     NEXT    >> ] 4843 views TOPIC CLOSED
HomeOff Topics News & Politics › Does Mass exist to create God
 Print TOPIC  Make Suggestion 

 11  Topic Subscribe

Monday, December 10 - 7:43 pm - Copyright © 2000-2018 RunRyder   EMAILEnable Cookies

The RC discussion world needs to consolidate. RR is now one choice for that. Its software is cutting edge. It hosts on-topic advertising. Help RR increase traffic buy making suggestions, posting in RR's new areas (sites) and by spreading the word.

The RunRyder Difference

• Category system to allow Rep/Vendor postings.
• Classifieds with sold (hidden) category.
• Classifieds with separate view new.
• Answer PMs offsite via email reply.
• Member gallery photos with advanced scripting.
• Gallery photo viewer integrated into postings.
• Highly refined search with advanced back end.
• Hosts its own high end fast response servers.
• Hosts thousands of HD event coverage videos.
• Rewrote entire code base with latest technology.
• No off-topic (annoying) click bait advertising.
Login Here
 New Subscriptions 
 Buddies Online