Different Opinions....Who is right?

[Dan From Smithville]

Dan, I thought it would be best to post my response to you, on this thread (my reply has nothing to do w/ abiogenesis, but it’s more about this thread on different opinions).......


There are all types of designs that one can see! And the interactions & fine-tuning between these tangible and intangible designs, cycles, processes, etc. reveal a Mind.
“Explanatory Deficits”? Yeah, big time....all across the board!

Regarding God’s absence from most human activities, requires a theological explanation: a deep analysis of Genesis 3 reveals a reason for it. God’s sovereignty was questioned....and the issue / accusation that man doesn’t need his Creator’s guidance, required settlement of the issue in the best and surest way possible... God mostly staying away from human affairs and allowing mankind to rule themselves,
The “results” are pretty much in....man can’t successfully rule himself without Jehovah, his Creator.

Understanding the Scriptures to be mostly allegorical, just makes them ambiguous and for the most part, meaningless.

I have thought about this a bit. Why is it best to post the answer to questions from one thread on another? I can certainly see how it would give you the advantage by leaving others out of important points on the other thread. The fact that you were claiming--but not supporting--that the product of human intelligence is evidence of an intelligent designer for life puts my responses in an awkward context and opens them to irrelevant responses from others. Was that your intention?

Unless there is some compelling, probative value that you can provide, I would appreciate that you respond to my posts in the thread in which they were made.

Since we were talking about the products of human intelligence and how that is recognizable, I will again point out that there is no evidence for something similar in the biological world. Beehives might be the product of non-human intelligence, but they are more likely the product of evolved instinctual behavior. Certainly, there is no evidence of the assertion and experimentation of intelligence that humans use in constructing our designs. In any case, the work of bees and beavers are in the physical realm and equivalent in that way to the product of human intelligence. They can be known from observation. A designer cannot. There is nothing that has been found in the biological world that indicates the presence or actions of a designer.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Nobody says that in the real world stuff happens in isolation.

But that doesn't stop us to isolate certain processes into controled conditions to study said specific process and by controlling the conditions, figuring out what happens under which circumstances, and then try to predict what will happen under certain circumstances.

Why would that be a problem?

Fires in the real world happen in a wide variety of conditions and not in controlled rooms. But by studying how fire behaves in those controlled rooms, we can better understand how the fire will behave in the wild - and use that knowledge to our advantage in all kinds of ways.



Just because you think that what one likes is a legitemate factor in trying to figure out what's most likely true, doesn't mean the rest of us do also.

I for one don't. And i'm pretty sure that @Dan From Smithville won't either - certainly not when it comes to scientific subjects.

There are no "favorites" in science. There is only the evidence.



Absurd nonsense.
Scientific models are testable.

I find it amusing that posters that claim science can only come from experiment turn around and decry experiments as some sort of half measure.

 

[cladking]

Your quote does not support your allegation. More likely the quote (if even verifiable) refers to a god making big mountains, not comparatively little pyramids.

Maybe you should become an Egyptologist. Not only do they consider not a word in the Pyramid Texts to apply to pyramids but they believe none of it was meant literally.

Maybe they are exactly and completely correct but then they need to answer the question of how they can come to understand a real people with real artefacts by a book of magic and gobbledty gook.

The PT says over and over that the pyramids were the dead king and NOT tombs and they were built by the Gods. This is the literal meaning of their words. Perhaps I'll search for all the times they said it was built by the gods and add it to the Ancient Reality thread.

So now you consider thread posts as evidence.

Evidence is evidence.

But when anyone presents evidence for things you don't believe in like that nothing about life happens gradually you can't see it and can't apply it to your model of evolution. You believe in "survival of the fittest" and nothing is going to affect it. You aren't even aware you've built models of experiment so you can't see that these experiments are based in definitions, axioms, and assumptions that have never undergone scrutiny. Your entire world is composed of models and you protect this house of cards just as diligently as anyone else. How ironic that religion is based in science and science in definitions and abstractions!!!

 

[cladking]

I find it amusing that posters that claim science can only come from experiment turn around and decry experiments as some sort of half measure.

Experiment is no "half measure", but without an understanding of the definitions, axioms, and assumptions experiment can be misinterpreted.

Even when experiment is interpreted correctly, models can be constructed that are in error.

 

[ecco]

they need to answer the question of how they can come to understand a real people with real artefacts by a book of magic and gobbledty gook.

People learned a lot about the ancient Hebrews by studying the OT. We can even learn some things about the world of 2000 years ago by studying the NT.

Those are both books of magic and gobbledty gook.

The PT says over and over that the pyramids were the dead king and NOT tombs and they were built by the Gods. This is the literal meaning of their words. Perhaps I'll search for all the times they said it was built by the gods and add it to the Ancient Reality thread.

More evasion. I've asked repeatedly for your evidence. You refer to posts in other threads. Now you want to post whatever in another thread. I'm right here. You are right here. If you have evidence, post it right here.

If you can't, well, I'll understand.

Evidence is evidence.

Thread posts are evidence only of the fact that someone posted an opinion.

Is it really necessary to post a definition?

ev·i·dence
/ˈevədəns/
noun
the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.​

A thread post is not an "available body of facts or information".

But when anyone presents evidence for things you don't believe in like that nothing about life happens gradually you can't see it and can't apply it to your model of evolution.

That may or may not be true. Let's test it. Post some evidence instead of talking about evidence.

You believe in "survival of the fittest" and nothing is going to affect it. You aren't even aware you've built models of experiment so you can't see that these experiments are based in definitions, axioms, and assumptions that have never undergone scrutiny. Your entire world is composed of models and you protect this house of cards just as diligently as anyone else. How ironic that religion is based in science and science in definitions and abstractions!!!

I'm willing to accept you were trying to say something in that long ramble.

 

[cladking]

People learned a lot about the ancient Hebrews by studying the OT. We can even learn some things about the world of 2000 years ago by studying the NT.

Those are both books of magic and gobbledty gook.

No! The Bible makes perfect sense. We might not understand and we might misinterpret but every sentence has an apparent meaning.

The Pyramid Texts is translated and interpreted differently by every single scholar and reader. Sentences have no apparent meaning.

More evasion. I've asked repeatedly for your evidence.

You can't see evidence. You asked for evidence that the gods built the pyramids and I cited something the builders themselves said, "Tefnut makes the earth high under the sky by means of her arms". I could have cited dozens of others like "Osiris tows the earth by means of balance" but you choose to dismiss the literal meaning of all these sentences and ascribe them to magic and superstition. No matter how many times the builders said one thing we interpret it as something different and we interpret it differently each time. I've cited the physical evidence numerous times but people choose to interpret even physical evidence in terms of their own beliefs rather than in terms of logic and consistently with all the physical evidence. Our reality is built of our beliefs.

You can't even see that ALL KNOWN CHANGE IN LIFE in all respects and parameters is sudden. Since you can't see it you can't accept it as evidence. You can't see facts and logic that don'rt agree with what YOU WANT TO BELIEVE and you want to believe the fit survive and others die. You can't even see all individuals are fit and there's no such thing as our neat little taxonomies because there are no two identical things in existence.

The mother and father of all evidence ias always right before our eyes but we see what we choose; what we believe.

That may or may not be true. Let's test it. Post some evidence instead of talking about evidence.

I've posted it dozens of times and it is all ignored.

Why don't you prove some gradual change in any life at all?

I'm willing to accept you were trying to say something in that long ramble.

To what "long ramble" are you referring?

My signature lines are hardly long. Please refer to them.

.

 

[ecco]

No! The Bible makes perfect sense. We might not understand and we might misinterpret but every sentence has an apparent meaning.

Do you really understand what you just wrote?

• The Bible makes perfect sense.
• every sentence has an apparent meaning.
• We might not understand
• we might misinterpret

How do you know it makes perfect sense if it is easy to misunderstand and to misinterpret?

What does apparent meaning mean? Are you sure? How can you be if it is easy to misunderstand and to misinterpret?

The Pyramid Texts is translated and interpreted differently by every single scholar and reader. Sentences have no apparent meaning.

Then you cannot cite them as evidence of anything. In other words, your evidence is, by your own reckoning, worthless.

 

[ecco]

You can't see evidence. You asked for evidence that the gods built the pyramids and I cited something the builders themselves said, "Tefnut makes the earth high under the sky by means of her arms". I could have cited dozens of others like "Osiris tows the earth by means of balance" but you choose to dismiss the literal meaning of all these sentences and ascribe them to magic and superstition.

Where are the builders quoted as saying these things? Are you referring to the Pyramid Texts that you yourself said are misinterpreted and misunderstood?

No matter how many times the builders said one thing we interpret it as something different and we interpret it differently each time.

Then none of it is reliable. If you admit it's unreliable why do you keep referring to it?

I've cited the physical evidence numerous times but people choose to interpret even physical evidence in terms of their own beliefs rather than in terms of logic and consistently with all the physical evidence. Our reality is built of our beliefs.

All you've posted in this thread is hearsay based on misunderstood and misinterpreted texts. If you've cited physical evidence I must have missed it. Please provide a link.

 

[ecco]

You can't see facts and logic that don'rt agree with what YOU WANT TO BELIEVE

I can't see your facts and logic if you haven't posted them. I keep asking - you keep evading.

you want to believe the fit survive and others die. You can't even see all individuals are fit and there's no such thing as our neat little taxonomies because there are no two identical things in existence.

Your post shows that you have a very deep misunderstanding of "survival of the fittest". That's not surprising.

 

[ecco]

I've posted it dozens of times and it is all ignored.

You've posted no evidence - none.

Why don't you prove some gradual change in any life at all?

I have no idea what you are talking about.

 

[gnostic]

No! The Bible makes perfect sense. We might not understand and we might misinterpret but every sentence has an apparent meaning.

The Pyramid Texts is translated and interpreted differently by every single scholar and reader. Sentences have no apparent meaning.



You can't see evidence. You asked for evidence that the gods built the pyramids and I cited something the builders themselves said, "Tefnut makes the earth high under the sky by means of her arms". I could have cited dozens of others like "Osiris tows the earth by means of balance" but you choose to dismiss the literal meaning of all these sentences and ascribe them to magic and superstition. No matter how many times the builders said one thing we interpret it as something different and we interpret it differently each time. I've cited the physical evidence numerous times but people choose to interpret even physical evidence in terms of their own beliefs rather than in terms of logic and consistently with all the physical evidence. Our reality is built of our beliefs.

You can't even see that ALL KNOWN CHANGE IN LIFE in all respects and parameters is sudden. Since you can't see it you can't accept it as evidence. You can't see facts and logic that don'rt agree with what YOU WANT TO BELIEVE and you want to believe the fit survive and others die. You can't even see all individuals are fit and there's no such thing as our neat little taxonomies because there are no two identical things in existence.

The mother and father of all evidence ias always right before our eyes but we see what we choose; what we believe.



I've posted it dozens of times and it is all ignored.

Why don't you prove some gradual change in any life at all?

Actually, no. You haven’t posted any evidence at all.

All you have done is posted your interpretations of what the Pyramid Texts.

Interpretations of ancient writings ARE ONLY CLAIMS AND PERSONAL VIEWS on what PT “MIGHT SAY”. And as such interpretations, they are merely opinions, they are certainly not evidence.

You keep brow-beating Egyptologists for their translations of the Pyramid Texts, for their interpretations of the translations, but you cannot read and translate PT yourself, so you are merely interpreting what others have translated, and think that you have the right interpretations.

But interpretations don’t equate as being “evidence”, they are merely your words and your views, and that is all they are - your personal interpretations.

Do every passages in the PT have meanings?

Sure, of course, they do. But to say the translators didn’t grasp the meanings, but you did...well, it is simply sheer arrogance and just conspiracy theory.

Each translators may interpret some passages differently because the Egyptian language and their hieroglyphs are dead language, therefore they are no longer easily understood, so of course there will be certain amounts of passages which they would disagree on. And that’s fine, because that is the case with all dead languages and ancient languages.

But to say, you have got the translation right, even though you have never translated hieroglyphs into English, is just sheer delusion.

In your thread - Ancient Reality - I have repeatedly told you, that the Pyramid Texts aren’t building manuals or building treatises. I have read 3 different translations already (Mercer, Allen and Faulkner), and nothing in them propose how to build the pyramids.

The passages you referred to, with Tefnut and Osiris, are merely your interpretations. The pyramids most certainly not by gods, and not Nephilim, but built by men - human builders.

The evidence to support this is the worker village at Giza, just west of Khafre’s pyramid, humble quarters for the builders and other helpers. The quarters are close enough to walk to a couple of quarries, just south of pyramid complex. They ate near their quarters and they slept in these quarters.

You can quote and interpret Pyramid Texts all you want, but they are not evidence to anything, other than your own inflated opinions.

 

[Deeje]

I've posted it dozens of times and it is all ignored.

Why don't you prove some gradual change in any life at all?

Funny, I have been asking for "evidence" of a slow and gradual change in lifeforms for years and never once have I seen anything that wasn't prefixed with a "might have" or "could have".....so how can something be true if it has to be preceded by a "maybe"?

Let's start with single celled organisms (ignoring abiogenesis because they can't talk about that) and lets see what evidence is produced to support any 'morphology' or gradual transformation into all the life forms that have ever existed on this earth......no diagrams or suggestions and assertions.....lets see what real substantiated evidence they have? And why they are so reluctant to produce it. Could it be that it doesn't exist except in vivid imaginations?....and computer generated imagery?

 

[cladking]

Funny, I have been asking for "evidence" of a slow and gradual change in lifeforms for years and never once have I seen anything that wasn't prefixed with a "might have" or "could have".....so how can something be true if it has to be preceded by a "maybe"?

Let's start with single celled organisms (ignoring abiogenesis because they can't talk about that) and lets see what evidence is produced to support any 'morphology' or gradual transformation into all the life forms that have ever existed on this earth......no diagrams or suggestions and assertions.....lets see what real substantiated evidence they have? And why they are so reluctant to produce it. Could it be that it doesn't exist except in vivid imaginations?....and computer generated imagery?

A "gradual change" would also suggest that something wasn't alive and then gradually became alive without "evolving" since only living things can evolve.

Believers can't see how unfounded their beliefs are because they are their beliefs.

 

[cladking]

But to say, you have got the translation right, even though you have never translated hieroglyphs into English, is just sheer delusion.

Nobody can translate Ancient Language because its formatting is different. It's impossible to translate and never will be translated.

Then you cannot cite them as evidence of anything. In other words, your evidence is, by your own reckoning, worthless.

Egyptologists say it is incomprehensible gobblety gook but I understand it and can say it is not nonsense. It is not incantation. It is the rituals read at the ascension ceremonies.

Egyptological beliefs are sheer nonsense and non sequiturs. If it is incantation and gobbledty gook then you can't say anything about the authors. As ritual I can legitimately describe the ceremonies and rituals and make deductions about the language. Egyptologists are NECESSARILY WRONG whereas I can be right. If I'm wrong then why can't Egyptologists see they are using illogical means to "understand" ancient beliefs and processes?

 

[gnostic]

Nobody can translate Ancient Language because its formatting is different. It's impossible to translate and never will be translated.

And yet, that's what you were using - some translations.

The translations aren't the real problems.

The real problems is you - you thinking that your personal view of the translations to be "fact" or "evidence"...which they are not.

Your hubris is showing.

 

[cladking]

That's funny!

Egyptologists dismiss the literal meaning of every sentence and ascribe the words to superstition but it's my hubris showing.

 

[The Anointed]

I was not familiar with Niayesh Afshordi or any theory he has postulated about cosmology either. I think @The Anointed is referring to actual science even though it appears from your review, he does not understand what he is referring to. It is not my area of expertise, but I found this and it may be the factual basis behind the attempt to falsely view science as a belief system. Did a hyper-black hole spawn the Universe?

It is clear that he believes that scientific theories are some sort of religious belief and not explanations based on evidence. Or at least it appears the attempt is to reduce them down to that level.

Thanks for your efforts to clarify the creationist straw.

In reference to your link, 'Did a hyper-black hole spawn the Universe,' and my changing the 'SINGULARUTY' to a White Hole at the end of the Einstein Rosen bridge that connects it to the hyper black hole into which the previous universe had fallen, what do you know of the 'Great Gatherer'..

The Great Attractor: what is this thing?

The smallest unit of galaxies out there is our local group, comprising the Milky Way, the Andromeda galaxy and about 50 others. The Local Group is in turn part of the Virgo Supercluster containing some 40,000 members. Beyond all this is an unseen object called the Great Attractor which is pulling the Milky Way and all else towards it at the terrific speed of 14 million mph. What is this thing, how far away is it, and what will happen when we reach it? No one knows.

Detailed observations of the galaxies around us indicate that there is superposed on the Hubble flow a large-scale streaming motion of about 600 km/s in the general direction of the constellation Centaurus.

This mass migration includes the Local Group, the Virgo Cluster, the Hydra--Centaurus Supercluster, and other groups and clusters for a distance of at least 60 Mpc up and downstream from us. It is as if a great river of galaxies (including our own) is flowing with a swift current of 600 km/s toward Centaurus.

Calculations indicate that ~1016 solar masses concentrated 65 Mpc away in the direction of Centaurus would account for this. This mass concentration has been dubbed the Great Attractor. Detailed investigation of that region of the galaxy cluster Abell 3627) finds 10 times too little visible matter to account for this flow, again implying a dominant gravitational role for unseen or dark matter. Thus, the Great Attractor is certainly there (because we see its gravitational influence), but the major portion of the mass that must be there cannot be seen in our telescopes.

Could we be heading toward the hyper black hole into which this universe will one day disappear as told by Peter, when the elements will become increasingly excited and burn up and this universe will disappear with a great hissing noise, who received his teaching from the book of Enoch, who was carried to the ends of time, where he witnessed the universe burn up and fall as massive columns of fire beyond all measure in height and depth into the Great Abyss, which he described as the prison of all the stars and the host of heaven.

But long before that happens, the conditions for the continued survival of physical life forms will be no more. Hopefully by then we will have evolved into the light beings that close the book of the evolution, of the 'MOST HIGH' to develop within the creation, when we shall be changed from bodies of corruptible matter, into glorious bodies of incorruptible light.

 

[gnostic]

That's funny!

Egyptologists dismiss the literal meaning of every sentence and ascribe the words to superstition but it's my hubris showing.

You quoted PT about Tefnut, who happened to be goddess of moisture in the air (humidity), water and rain, and you don’t think that what you are quoting isn’t superstition?

Tefnut who was born with her brother, brought into existence in Re’s semen when the sun god was masturbating.

In other version, like in the Coffin Texts, she came into existence through saliva of Re’s spit.

So her birth don’t require superstition?

You are cherrypicking what parts of Pyramid Texts are or aren’t superstitions just show that you don’t understand PT.

In some iconic imageries of her, she is portrayed as lioness (like Hathor and Sekhmet) with her brother Shu, and at other times she has body of woman, but a head of lioness (again like Hathor and Sekhmet). Those images aren’t superstitions.

The Pyramid texts aren’t the only Egyptian literature, because you are ignoring the consistencies of the myths that showed she is among goddesses they worshipped.

Seriously, cladking, you really need to go back to school, because you only want to see the picture that you want to see, but you see very little.

No Tefnut was responsible for building the pyramids, they were built by human workers. The evidence are the worker’s village near the quarries and Khafre’s pyramid in Giza. Your interpretations of Tefnut in PT , is merely just that words, your words, your words aren’t evidence of anything except your deluded fantasy.

 

[cladking]

Your interpretations of Tefnut in PT , is merely just that words, your words, your words aren’t evidence of anything except your deluded fantasy.

If the word "god" exists in the PT it would be the only abstraction. So why didn't Egyptologists ever notice this or that the language breaks Zipf's Law?

In context "tefnut" always means "downward" as the subject of the sentence and the perspective. Egyptologists didn't notice just as Darwin never noticed that all life is individual, change is sudden, and massive population swings account for change in species. We all see what we expect. You expect crackpots to be illogical, Darwin expected simple answers to explain fossils, and I expect people to always make perfect sense. Egyptologists expected to see stinky footed bumpkins laboriously building tombs. But in no case can we all be right.

What you see is irrelevant to understanding reality because you see what you expect. Egyptologists, biologists, et al have tried to turn looking and seeing into a science but it never will be. "Reality" is probably very similar to what ancient people glimpsed. They called it "amun" because it was always hidden and this word means "the hidden". They knew they couldn't see it by merely looking but we don't. Their understanding of change in species appears in the PT and is very similar to mine. I have the advantage of experimental results and they had the advantage of a great deal of experience. They'd have laughed at Darwin if they could recover from laughing at each and every Egyptologist.

The chief reason people can't accept that other true sciences can exist is they don't understand our science and why it works. So they look at ancient mathematics which we can't understand (yet) and fail to consider it applied to a different reality that arose from different language and different axioms.

 

[gnostic]

If the word "god" exists in the PT it would be the only abstraction. So why didn't Egyptologists ever notice this or that the language breaks Zipf's Law?

In context "tefnut" always means "downward" as the subject of the sentence and the perspective. Egyptologists didn't notice just as Darwin never noticed that all life is individual, change is sudden, and massive population swings account for change in species. We all see what we expect. You expect crackpots to be illogical, Darwin expected simple answers to explain fossils, and I expect people to always make perfect sense. Egyptologists expected to see stinky footed bumpkins laboriously building tombs. But in no case can we all be right.

What you see is irrelevant to understanding reality because you see what you expect. Egyptologists, biologists, et al have tried to turn looking and seeing into a science but it never will be. "Reality" is probably very similar to what ancient people glimpsed. They called it "amun" because it was always hidden and this word means "the hidden". They knew they couldn't see it by merely looking but we don't. Their understanding of change in species appears in the PT and is very similar to mine. I have the advantage of experimental results and they had the advantage of a great deal of experience. They'd have laughed at Darwin if they could recover from laughing at each and every Egyptologist.

The chief reason people can't accept that other true sciences can exist is they don't understand our science and why it works. So they look at ancient mathematics which we can't understand (yet) and fail to consider it applied to a different reality that arose from different language and different axioms.

What does the pyramids, gods or the Pyramid Texts have to do with Darwin or Natural Selection or fossils?

Absolutely nothing.

And the only person I have seen to use the “stinky footed bumpkin“, it is not from any Egyptologists, it only come from you. So this is nothing more than you beating the strawman with these empty accusations.

The Pyramid Texts are building or architectural treatises, cladking. That you would use or interpret as one, just show how little understand the texts.

Second, there are too much resemblance between the Pyramid Texts and the Middle Kingdom Coffin Texts in matters of ritual for the dead (eg preparation of the bodies, and rites for resurrection and ascension) and on similar mythological subjects (creation myths) - to see they are both funerary literature.

The main difference between PT & CT, is that the PT are for pharaohs and their families, while CT were use for the non-royal rich or middle class deceased or for the priests, based on the coffins found in tombs.

It is clear that the Pyramid Texts have some influences upon later dynasties of different periods (Middle Kingdom, New Kingdom, Late Period), because some of the same rites are repeated as well as the same myths.