Science Proves Nature Was Created

[leibowde84]

I got his book.....
and I got it.....

time is a measurement...nothing more.
what it measures are the effects of motion to gravity.

Then, how do you reconcile time moving differently for different objects moving at different speeds?

 

[psychoslice]

What you are describing is God -but it is understandable to not see the forest for the trees.

Yes could call it God, but I don't really like that label, its been too over abused and has lost all its true meaning. I certainly don't believe in a man in the sky. or any kind of being, we are all connected and we are all collectively pure Source, or Consciousness............or, that word God.

 

[psychoslice]

so there is no Spirit greater than this creation?
and creation is then 'self' starting?

and therefore science is wrong.....substance can move of it's own volition.
all that is above your head had no Hand in its' formation.

but....I think Someone did it.

No spirit at all, as for starting the universe no one can ever know that, and I don't think science say they do know, they may have theories but that's about it, and I have to say that their theories make a whole lot more sense that any religion could. All that is above my head is all part of one, you are separating it and trying to explain it, but you cannot separate it, and we cannot truly argue about it, because we can never know, we only know what we know through our senses, and that's about it.

 

[Bunyip]

Oh. My understanding of evolution is that all the life forms that mutate randomly with some advantage will reproduce more effectively than the prior.

Is this an older form of evolution?

No, it is not evolution at all. The whole concept of evolution is that it is not random. It is driven by feedback.

 

[Guy Threepwood]

My own mathematical skills don't go too far. I am not talking as a math expert.

I should clarify what i am thinking. Everything on Earth seems to break down. I am a carpenter and we try our best to build houses to last. The average house lifespan isn't more than 100 years. There are so many things that break the house down. Animals and plants don't last either. Reproduction saves life forms.

All life we know of is built of structures such as protein, amino acids, dna, etc... if the only way earth got to this level of complexity was from random assimilation of structures that tend to break down, then the probability of such an incredible series of events must be enormous.

I think that pretty much nails it. In a word: Entropy, random mutations could never create man from a molecule, they would do the exact opposite.

Life, like the house, requires a blueprint to build from. Neither accidentally assemble themselves for no particular reason

 

[Bunyip]

I think that pretty much nails it. In a word: Entropy, random mutations could never create man from a molecule, they would do the exact opposite.

Life, like the house, requires a blueprint to build from. Neither accidentally assemble themselves.

Well sure, which is why evolution is not just entropy. It is not random, not sure how missing the most fundamental understanding of evolution (that it is driven by feedback, and is not random) is 'nailing it'.

If that its nailing it - it is nailing it to the wrong tree. Were you to study evolution in elementary school - that it is not random would be about the first thing you learn.

 

[Thief]

No spirit at all, as for starting the universe no one can ever know that, and I don't think science say they do know, they may have theories but that's about it, and I have to say that their theories make a whole lot more sense that any religion could. All that is above my head is all part of one, you are separating it and trying to explain it, but you cannot separate it, and we cannot truly argue about it, because we can never know, we only know what we know through our senses, and that's about it.

The act of separation was not mine.....it was God's.
He caused the light.
He caused the firmament.

The beginning had a Cause.
the universe is the effect.

Substance does not beget itself and the dead do not beget the living

Spirit is in action.

 

[Thief]

No, it is not evolution at all. The whole concept of evolution is that it is not random. It is driven by feedback.

and is Someone reading that feedback and acting upon it?

 

[Thief]

Then, how do you reconcile time moving differently for different objects moving at different speeds?

The speed.
Velocity has an effect on the substance.
You are not the same at light speed as you are at rest.

The quotient on the chalkboard helps you to understand the difference.

 

[psychoslice]

The act of separation was not mine.....it was God's.
He caused the light.
He caused the firmament.

The beginning had a Cause.
the universe is the effect.

Substance does not beget itself and the dead do not beget the living

Spirit is in action.

Yes I can sort of agree with that, but God wasn't some separate being, God is the cosmos, he isn't separate from it, as we ourselves are not separate. I don't know what you mean by God, do you see him as a man, surely not ?.

 

[Thief]

Yes I can sort of agree with that, but God wasn't some separate being, God is the cosmos, he isn't separate from it, as we ourselves are not separate. I don't know what you mean by God, do you see him as a man, surely not ?.

I see him as Spirit waking up.
and the first of His speech.....I AM!

then ....Let there be light!

God is the Spirit and the separation....Spirit into substance.
with intent

 

[psychoslice]

I see him as Spirit waking up.
and the first of His speech.....I AM!

then ....Let there be light!

God is the Spirit and the separation....Spirit into substance.
with intent

Yes I can believe that as a metaphor which I do, but the concept of a God, just seems to ruin it, and I cannot imagine him speaking those world literally.

 

[Thief]

Yes I can believe that as a metaphor which I do, but the concept of a God, just seems to ruin it, and I cannot imagine him speaking those world literally.

Someone had to be First.
first in mind, first in emotion and first in Spirit.

that He is also the Creator seems to fit well......for me anyway

 

[psychoslice]

Someone had to be First.
first in mind, first in emotion and first in Spirit.

that He is also the Creator seems to fit well......for me anyway

But why call it someone , and why the mind, emotions and spirit had to be first, these concepts never existed back then, they are only our concepts, we apply them to that which we are ignorant of but through science we gradually become more enlightened about our world, religion only put us back into the dark age thinking, I believe we need to drop all this old way of thinking, and as Jesus supposedly said, "you will do better things than I", or something like that, and that is what we have been doing, better things.

 

[Thief]

But why call it someone , and why the mind, emotions and spirit had to be first, these concepts never existed back then, they are only our concepts, we apply them to that which we are ignorant of but through science we gradually become more enlightened about our world, religion only put us back into the dark age thinking, I believe we need to drop all this old way of thinking, and as Jesus supposedly said, "you will do better things than I", or something like that, and that is what we have been doing, better things.

yeah....greater things come from those with greater resources.
nowadays we have access to sooooo much!

Science will uncover how things work.
we then set about doing so.

Careful meditation will uncover what we know of God.
I suspect a Greater Person, than I.

 

[psychoslice]

yeah....greater things come from those with greater resources.
nowadays we have access to sooooo much!

Science will uncover how things work.
we then set about doing so.

Careful meditation will uncover what we know of God.
I suspect a Greater Person, than I.

Not a great person, but a great Consciousness, which you can enter any time you like, that's my experience.

 

[Thief]

Not a great person, but a great Consciousness, which you can enter any time you like, that's my experience.

mind-meld?(as in Star Trek)

 

[Etritonakin]

Yes could call it God, but I don't really like that label, its been too over abused and has lost all its true meaning. I certainly don't believe in a man in the sky. or any kind of being, we are all connected and we are all collectively pure Source, or Consciousness............or, that word God.

Yet we are also separate in our consciousness. We are all not aware of the same things at the same time.
Do you not believe it possible for any being to exist with greater ability than man -perhaps even one who willed to cause man to exist?

I don't believe in a man in the sky, as such -but rather that man is in the image and likeness of God. That is not to say he must look like us, but that we are similar in ability, but on a lesser scale.
For example... we have hands -but they are means of manipulating things and creating, whereas God could do so without hands, as such. The same with senses, etc.

Christ had a similar body to man while man -and a "glorious" body which was similar, but greater -as seen by Moses, but he was not limited to any form or representation.

 

[psychoslice]

Yet we are also separate in our consciousness. We are all not aware of the same things at the same time.
Do you not believe it possible for any being to exist with greater ability than man -perhaps even one who willed to cause man to exist?

I don't believe in a man in the sky, as such -but rather that man is in the image and likeness of God. That is not to say he must look like us, but that we are similar in ability, but on a lesser scale.
For example... we have hands -but they are means of manipulating things and creating, whereas God could do so without hands, as such. The same with senses, etc.

Christ had a similar body to man while man -and a "glorious" body which was similar, but greater -as seen by Moses, but he was not limited to any form or representation.

That is all the same rehash as we were just discussing, your just trying to make your personified God less personified to make him seem more probable, but no there is no personal God, and in truth we are not separate, its just our mind that makes it so. To reduce the cosmos to a mere god is blaspheming the cosmos, and yourself as well, why call it anything, whatever we call it isn't that which is.

 

[Etritonakin]

That is all the same rehash as we were just discussing, your just trying to make your personified God less personified to make him seem more probable, but no there is no personal God, and in truth we are not separate, its just our mind that makes it so. To reduce the cosmos to a mere god is blaspheming the cosmos, and yourself as well, why call it anything, whatever we call it isn't that which is.

Nope. Not what I'm doing at all.