Isn’t the noosphere just the region on the surface of the Earth where we find consciousness? If you could tac pins onto a globe where you think consciousness exists (which would include the oceans if you want to include all animals), you’d probably get a 2 dimensional blob/mass of pins. ← That’s the noosphere–the “mainframe”.
Right? 
Phyllo … the post was simply “thinking out loud” 
I just read Gib’s last post … he has obviously had time to process all that he so eloquently expresses … for me …my ‘small town’ self … this OP is moving so fast I can’t keep up. 
Though it’s thoroughly entertaining and interesting.
What’d I miss? 
Gib … for me … you are a Master Craftsman of the highest order … you possess that very rare gift of being able to bring the abstract d0wn to earth
… and with such charisma! … you remind me of an expression I just learned the other day … “A Reluctant Saint”
back to Noosphere … I only have a very rudimentary understanding of the theory … too lazy to study it in any depth.
I would say the exquisite image you painted with words represents the “conduit”
As far as I understand Teillard proposed 3 spheres … bio(sphere) … atmos(sphere) and beyond the atmosphere … where ever that boundary is … the Noosphere.
Jump in WD … we’re only at the Noosphere at the moment … you can bring us from there to Heaven. 
Please tell that to iambiguous.
Now, now, Pilgrim, I surely don’t deserve that much praise. 
According to google, it is a…
So according to this, it might be a stage.
And according to the wikipedia article, it is the sphere of “thought”.
WENDY!!!
I was wondering when you’d jump in!
So… it turns out God isn’t inherently wrong after all… He’s inherently right! Ravi Zacharias told us so!
Tell me, what do you think he means by this:
Gibbinger,
Has anyone elsewhere read you yet?
What’s interesting is that Pierre Teilhard de Chardin was shunned by the Catholic church by introducing ideas such as the noosphere and the Omega Point. I think if Chardin was alive today he’d be a transhumanist, no doubt. But since he passed away, the Catholic church has put him up on a pedestal, for fusing the concepts of futurism, science, and religion (more specifically, Catholicism) into one cohesive thought.
It was Baha’u’llah that said, “religion without science is superstition, science without religion is materialism.” To Baha’is they work together. In fact, according to current Baha’i doctrine, if science proves something wrong with the Baha’i Faith, it is the Baha’i Faith that changes in lue for science. So, for Baha’is, science is always right - not God.
Edit: Hey, this is my 100th post. Huzzah!
I don’t think that God wants blind faith.
faith
noun
1.
confidence or trust in a person or thing:
faith in another’s ability.
2.
belief that is not based on proof:
He had faith that the hypothesis would be substantiated by fact.
3.
belief in God or in the doctrines or teachings of religion:
the firm faith of the Pilgrims.
4.
belief in anything, as a code of ethics, standards of merit, etc.:
to be of the same faith with someone concerning honesty.
5.
a system of religious belief:
the Christian faith; the Jewish faith.
6.
the obligation of loyalty or fidelity to a person, promise, engagement, etc.:
Failure to appear would be breaking faith.
7.
the observance of this obligation; fidelity to one’s promise, oath, allegiance, etc.:
He was the only one who proved his faith during our recent troubles.
8.
Christian Theology. the trust in God and in His promises as made through Christ and the Scriptures by which humans are justified or saved.
Faith is blind.
Yes …
… and no.
Human knowledge is rarely based on proof. It is mostly “reasonable belief” resulting from an examination of presented evidence.
Isn’t sitting on the fence uncomfortable?
Being “blind” to the fence is dangerous to sensitive concerns. 
Sometimes discomfort is required to avoid injury.
No.
What can you tell us about God’s love, Wendy girl?
Did you get your ILP bonus gift card?
I like iambiguous … for me … he is a Master Craftsman … of the highest order … of the art of perseverance.
OTH … perseverence … like all characteristics … is a double edge sword. Sometimes it is only through perseverence that one reaches one’s goal. Sometimes perseverence leads to perpetual discomfort.
Iambiguous is right! … everything about God stems from our mind(brain) … there is absolutely no objective proof … and there is a shitload of contradiction.
OTH … I have so much empathy and compassion for Iambiguous … he is a victim of what I’ve referred to in other OPs as “leaning against” … which inevitably becomes an obstacle to individuation. As yet he can’t “let go”…
This morning an image popped into my consciousness for iambiguous … let me try to paint the image with words …
Remember the old 45s and the record players that played them?
Remember that these 45’s would get stuck in the middle of a song and play the same few words over and over again?
Remember how we would stomp the floor … tap the record player … or something to get the 45 moving forward again?
Here’s the image …
Iambigous is sitting comfortably … alone … in some room listening to his favorite song … which is playing on a 45. The record gets stuck … the same few words start playing over and over again. Iambiguous does nothing to get the 45 moving forward again. He has the ‘perseverence’ to simply sit still and enjoy whatever few words of his favorite song are playing over and over and over and over …
I’m plagerizing again
Just read these few words … changed one word … and thought what these few words try to convey is worth sharing.
Didn’t you say that you are still RC?
Why?
That describes him exactly! Wow! You’re the wordsmith, not I. Yet I wonder if he’s really that comfortable. If he was truly comfortable, would he really be going around asking others if they know a way out of his dilemma? There’s almost a desperation about the way he does this. But then again, it might all just be a game. ← He might derive comfort from that.
Phyllo … you are a ‘saintly’ person. You somehow seem to know the appropriate question at the appropriate time. I’m sure others who are reading my ‘babble’ are asking themselves the same question and have difficulty reconciling the contradiction(s).
Peter K. said it best in the OP “Who are you?”
Let me share my feelings on your question:
I am still a man … substantially different from the man I was when I first entered manhood … nonetheless still only a man.
I take inspiration … at least in part … from individuals (RCs) who staunchly held to their RC faith until death … despite being ostracized by senior authorities in the church. Individuals like Teilhard and Matteo Ricci.
As I mentioned before in some OP … about 400 years ago Matteo Ricci attempted to convince some RCs … the intellectual/scholarly individuals of his day … that the Chinese people already know the Christian God. His first application for sainthood was likely blocked because of this. Since 2010 his application for sainthood has been back on the table … Pope Francis has even publicly applauded his intuition. Go figure!