The Lie of Evolution from a Credible Scientist

Originally posted by Barcs

Originally posted by EnochWasRight
What does this have to do with what you are saying? Seeing the larger picture answers the questions without the need for answers. Perspective can negate then questions.

I'm glad you asked that question before I did. The bible is not the "larger" picture. That is your guess of what it may be. That doesn't answer my questions at all.

Fine tuning is precisely what is observed.

That video is a red herring in what we are discussing. I'm well aware of how the universal forces support our form of life as we know it and how adjustments would be catastrophic. The problem is you are confusing the cause and the effect. Life evolved from this universe and became finely tuned TO the universal forces. If it didn't it would have never evolved in the first place. No evidence suggests the universal forces were adjusted to support life. And again, we're talking our known form of life. There could be others, and its possible that if the forces were indeed a little different, life would have still evolved, it just would be very different. It also could most likely not survive in our universe. Our ability to measure forces does NOT mean they were designed, it's merely a measurement of the way things are. If we don't know the cause of the forces, we can't just take wild guess about them, well at least not in regards to science.

If the sole purpose of the universe was for life, designed by an all powerful creator, then why is life so rare in the universe? Why would supernovas be necessary for life to evolve? Why the constant extinction level events? If the universe was created, it was certainly not by an all powerful being. I'd expect to see a planet with life at every star in a designed universe, unless the designer(s) were indeed limited in their power, and used a very inefficient and time consuming process. This still has nothing at all to do with evolution. Believe me, I'm agnostic to the possibility of creation, but as far as science goes, there's nothing that suggests it. Only people's opinions.

Your premise is based on misplaced concreteness. The theory is needed to force the conclusion. With a Creator, the conclusion forces itself upon the implication of the observation. Not only this, but the latest theory revisions support the conclusion of design to such a degree that little doubt can be left. To assume that the universe is devoid of life is to assume we have direct observation. We don't have observation to determine the presence of life, but we do have one example that is a duplicate of what we see all around us in the universe. By the one observation, we then draw the simplest conclusions. Two become one for life on a planet. This is a process that is repeated like all unions in nature. The entire enterprise is designed for the support of consciousness in a bio-mechanical vehicle. The purpose is to discover and observe the hidden God.

reply to post by EnochWasRight


And what you just did here is called "preaching"

It isn't based on objective evidence...compared to the theory of evolution...

Originally posted by MrXYZ
reply to post by EnochWasRight

 

And what you just did here is called "preaching"

It isn't based on objective evidence...compared to the theory of evolution...

In a thread about Creationism, it's expected.

Originally posted by EnochWasRight

Originally posted by MrXYZ
reply to post by EnochWasRight

 

And what you just did here is called "preaching"

It isn't based on objective evidence...compared to the theory of evolution...

In a thread about Creationism, it's expected.

Just wanted to be clear that your post isn't based on facts or objective evidence

Originally posted by EnochWasRight
Your premise is based on misplaced concreteness.

Which part?

The theory is needed to force the conclusion. With a Creator, the conclusion forces itself upon the implication of the observation.

You don't force conclusions, you determine them based on evidence and experiments.

Not only this, but the latest theory revisions support the conclusion of design to such a degree that little doubt can be left.

Which scientific theory are you talking about?

To assume that the universe is devoid of life is to assume we have direct observation. We don't have observation to determine the presence of life, but we do have one example that is a duplicate of what we see all around us in the universe.By the one observation, we then draw the simplest conclusions. Two become one for life on a planet. This is a process that is repeated like all unions in nature. The entire enterprise is designed for the support of consciousness in a bio-mechanical vehicle. The purpose is to discover and observe the hidden God.

. Sun and moon are 2 becoming one??? I don't follow your conclusion in the least. How do you explain asexual reproduction?

In a thread about Creationism, it's expected.

Your thread title: "The Lie of evolution from a credible scientist". That title in itself is a lie.

reply to post by Barcs


You don't force conclusions, you determine them based on evidence and experiments.

Theory is stacked on theory to force the conclusion. This is the problem evolution has because the entire premise is built on the theory, not evidence. As I have stated before, entropy in information theory and collapsing wave function in quantum mechanics destroys the theory in place of the truth. Life is designed.

Which scientific theory are you talking about?

Evolution must agree with all scientific theory. The theory specific to evolution is based on the negation of design as a factor. The most obvious cause of life is design, yet the theory goes out of its way to avoid the possibility. This is not science. This is bais.

Sun and moon are 2 becoming one??? I don't follow your conclusion in the least. How do you explain asexual reproduction?

Apart from the sun and the moon being in the sky, there would be no life on the planet. Life starts by the union of the two as a primary mechanism for deriving energy in living systems. No sun and moon equals no life. Seasons, tides and migration all happen as a result of the moon cycles and our orbit around a magnetic center. Not only this, but all life derives its energy from the sun first. The entire focus of nature is two becoming one. It's a pattern that is centered around a design that all of nature obeys. Evolution has no answer to what governs the process. This is why evolution is an observed result of the rest and not the cause. A concept does not cause a universe. Law causes a universe and energy is the prima materia of the collapsing wave function as consciousness changes the states of matter through information. As I easily point out, entropy is caused by information in movement. It's the same reason your computer gets hot.

Your thread title: "The Lie of evolution from a credible scientist". That title in itself is a lie.

Leonard Susskind demonstrates that the universe is holographic in nature. A hologram of gemeotery, information and energy to form cannot be accidental. Entropy is caused by information transfer as the states of matter change. Consciousness is the only thing that can change the states of matter for a purpose. Did you watch the video below? The lie is to cling to the deception that creation and design cannot possibly be the simplest answer that fits all of the latest theory.

This thread has demonstrated the evidence with clarity.

reply to post by EnochWasRight


Intelligence based on theory... Gorilla's can suffer from human ailments and disease. I believe I just proved that gorillas are a common ancestor and evolution is probably the case. Also I'm not discussing a "creator" here the subject is laughable for the reason that if there was one we'll never know anyway, I thought this was a subject about evolution... not religion.

Originally posted by EnochWasRight
Nitrogen is 777 and Oxygen is 888. It just so happens that our Words in number for YHVH is 777 (Hebrew Gematria). Jesus in Greek is 888. Coincidence? I'll trust the information in nature over mankind's biased observation of it.

edit on 20-3-2012 by EnochWasRight because: (no reason given)

The gematria number value of YHVH is not 777 but 26:
Yod: Y = 10
Heh: H = 5
Vav: V = 6
Heh: H = 5
Total = 26

Before you can understand nature, you have to master gematria.

Originally posted by EnochWasRight
Theory is stacked on theory to force the conclusion. This is the problem evolution has because the entire premise is built on the theory, not evidence. As I have stated before, entropy in information theory and collapsing wave function in quantum mechanics destroys the theory in place of the truth. Life is designed.

1. Scientific theories are based on evidence.

2. Quantum mechanics and information theory are hypothetical and have nothing to do with evolution. There's no evidence of any of it. Prove that collapsing wave function exists. Prove that string theory is true. You can't because they lack objective evidence. They are mathematical theories, not scientific ones.

[Evolution must agree with all scientific theory. The theory specific to evolution is based on the negation of design as a factor. The most obvious cause of life is design, yet the theory goes out of its way to avoid the possibility. This is not science. This is bais.

Evolution is not about the origin of life, merely its diversity. It is not based on negation of design. This is only your lack of understanding about the theory. Science is based on tangible, objective, repeatable evidence, that is falsifiable. Design doesn't come close to that. If there is no evidence behind something (ie design), then yes it is ignored by science, since science is based completely on evidence. There are folks who have hypotheses about creation, but they aren't theories yet, because of the lack of evidence.

Apart from the sun and the moon being in the sky, there would be no life on the planet. Life starts by the union of the two as a primary mechanism for deriving energy in living systems. No sun and moon equals no life. Seasons, tides and migration all happen as a result of the moon cycles and our orbit around a magnetic center. Not only this, but all life derives its energy from the sun first. The entire focus of nature is two becoming one. It's a pattern that is centered around a design that all of nature obeys. Evolution has no answer to what governs the process. This is why evolution is an observed result of the rest and not the cause. A concept does not cause a universe. Law causes a universe and energy is the prima materia of the collapsing wave function as consciousness changes the states of matter through information. As I easily point out, entropy is caused by information in movement. It's the same reason your computer gets hot.

Law does not cause a universe. It is simply a rule that it has to apply to since we can measure it. I'm aware of how the sun and moon are necessary for life, but that doesn't mean anything like 2 become 1, and that theme hardly applies to the rest of life on the planet. There are much more than 2 things that drive the earth. There are multitudes of factors. Evolution has no answer to the sun and moon, because for the last time, it is a biological process, strictly about genetic mutations and natural selection. Reading the simple wikipedia on evolution will tell you this, but instead you feel the need to call evolution a lie without even reading the very basics about it. Do that, then come back and you'll realize that evolution is completely irrelevant in what you are talking about.

Leonard Susskind demonstrates that the universe is holographic in nature. A hologram of gemeotery, information and energy to form cannot be accidental. Entropy is caused by information transfer as the states of matter change. Consciousness is the only thing that can change the states of matter for a purpose. Did you watch the video below? The lie is to cling to the deception that creation and design cannot possibly be the simplest answer that fits all of the latest theory.

Please forward me to Susskind's peer reviewed scientific experiments that prove holographic universe. I'm not looking for the same youtube lecture that's already been posted. I want to see the hard evidence that his lecture is based on. Holographic universe is FAR from being proven, and if you've got something that shows otherwise, I'd love to see it.

If it is intelligent design, it is retarded. It makes a lot of mistakes.

Originally posted by micpsi

Originally posted by EnochWasRight
Nitrogen is 777 and Oxygen is 888. It just so happens that our Words in number for YHVH is 777 (Hebrew Gematria). Jesus in Greek is 888. Coincidence? I'll trust the information in nature over mankind's biased observation of it.

edit on 20-3-2012 by EnochWasRight because: (no reason given)

The gematria number value of YHVH is not 777 but 26:
Yod: Y = 10
Heh: H = 5
Vav: V = 6
Heh: H = 5
Total = 26

Before you can understand nature, you have to master gematria.

Do the research and you will find the answer. Here is the short list. There is much more.

Name something that is perffection 777: GOD Only! Three sevens is completion. It represents the Trinity.

Yehoshua = 391
Yeshua = 386
--------
777

When these names' alphabetic place values are included the sum becomes 888, which is the same as the numeric value of the greek for Jesus.

The difference between the names Yeshua and Yehoshua is the 5th Hebrew letter 'hey'. Hey was the letter added to Abram and Sarai. Of course, the Hey means behold a great work. YHVH means behold the hand, behold the nail. The great work was Jesus as the seed of Abraham.

777 - In the Firmament of Heaven

777 Wiki

Seven is the Seal of God and comprises the Heptadic structure of the Bible.

In Genesis 1:1, there are three nouns. God, Heaven and Earth. The Hebrew gematria for these are 86, 395 and 396. Add them together and you get 777. The verb Created is 203, or 29/7. This heptadic structure then repeats throughout the Bible.

7 Churches
7 Stars/Angels
7 Lampstands

7 Horns
7 Eyes and
7 Spirits of God

God rested on the 7th day.

The Seven Sealed Scroll (Rev 6, Rev 8:1-5)
The Seven Trumpets (Rev 8:6-13,Rev 9, Rev 11:15-19)
The Seven Thunders (unknown) (Rev 10:3,4)
The Seven Plagues/Bowls (Rev 16)

reply to post by Barcs

Please forward me to Susskind's peer reviewed scientific experiments that prove holographic universe. I'm not looking for the same youtube lecture that's already been posted. I want to see the hard evidence that his lecture is based on. Holographic universe is FAR from being proven, and if you've got something that shows otherwise, I'd love to see it.

Hard evidence is found in this video. Watch at 5:30. Matter is quantized into pixels. The experiment was done first in 1928. Take an electron beam and shoot it through graphite. The pattern of atoms is structured. .



There is more to this digital Creation we occupy:



And there there are these 100 reasons:



And this:

reply to post by EnochWasRight


I asked for the peer reviewed studies that confirm it. I can't watch youtube videos at work, so I'll be hoping that when I get home tonight the peer reviewed experiments will be posted as I requested. Youtube videos are NOT peer reviewed science experiments. Don't get me wrong, I'll still take a look at them when I get home, but I'm more about the hard science.

Originally posted by Barcs
reply to post by EnochWasRight

 

I asked for the peer reviewed studies that confirm it. I can't watch youtube videos at work, so I'll be hoping that when I get home tonight the peer reviewed experiments will be posted as I requested. Youtube videos are NOT peer reviewed science experiments. Don't get me wrong, I'll still take a look at them when I get home, but I'm more about the hard science.

edit on 3-4-2012 by Barcs because: (no reason given)

The experiment is over 100 years old. The video covers it as stated. You can then check the experiment with the journals. I can only encourage you to do the same research, but my job is not to do the work for you. The peer review is there for anyone to see. The implications we draw from the observation is a matter of seeing the data and drawing a conclusion. The conclusion is not the part that is peer reviewed. The research is. The research does not have one interpretation. Theory lends itself to many conclusions. The best conclusions are the ones we would defer to. Evolution is the least likely as a cause for all of the life we see in the world. Evolution is a result and not a cause. The cause is programming and engineering by a higher source. All things flow away from a source. All things experience entropy. Entropy is caused by the transfer of information as indicated in the Susskind video.

reply to post by EnochWasRight

I see. Twelve apostles. 12/7 = 1.7142857.. The seventh digit is seven. Yes, this proves everything. In all seriousness, what do you think gematria proves, I mean other than the writers and editors being familiar with it. Also, jews don't believe into a trinity, so your interpretation of 777 symbolizing it is almost certainly wrong.

If you are calling that hard evidence, then I guess that's where the problem is. I admit the math adds up and there is probably a lot more to quantum mechanics, but it's not proof of design. That could just be the way that it is. Using the metaphor of pixels for particles isn't the same as saying we are digital or programmed. Everything in the universe essentially is energy. What else would you expect when examining energy at its deepest level? If you interpret that as design, I got no problem with that, but it's certainly not hard evidence. It's definitely a cool theory to read about.

As for the evolution video, Kent Hovind is a proven fraud. Stephen Meyer essentially does the same thing you are doing now, by throwing random scientific facts around and then making assumptions about them. Not a single one of those guys has a peer reviewed science paper published, let alone "hard evidence" of anything. Hovind lies constantly and personal interpretations of scientific facts are opinions.

Originally posted by rhinoceros
reply to post by EnochWasRight

 

I see. Twelve apostles. 12/7 = 1.7142857.. The seventh digit is seven. Yes, this proves everything. In all seriousness, what do you think gematria proves, I mean other than the writers and editors being familiar with it. Also, jews don't believe into a trinity, so your interpretation of 777 symbolizing it is almost certainly wrong.

edit on 3-4-2012 by rhinoceros because: (no reason given)

The Kabbalah contains the Trinity. Putting this aside, we can look at what the Bible says of the subject. First, on science.

"O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called." (1 Tim 6:20)

Then, on worship of angles rather than God.

"Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ. Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind." (Col 2:16-18)

For whatever reason, what we experience as witnesses now will be taught to us correctly later. We are witnessing a shadow of what is to come by example. With this reasoning, the shadow of things to come is locked into the word in such a way that it defies our reasoning of it at this current stage. It is not unnoticed to us. The divine nature of the Word of God goes way beyond our ability to see clearly. I feel that this is why Jesus addressed the angles of the churches and not the churches themselves. There is a larger world beyond our view. There is an evil element and a divine element. We are caught in the middle, but protected by the divine. It's all for a purpose that is outlined from Genesis to revelation. The main secrets are outlined in Ephesians.

Originally posted by EnochWasRight
The Kabbalah contains the Trinity. Putting this aside, we can look at what the Bible says of the subject. First, on science.

But did the inventor of Kabbalah write Torah (e.g. old testament)? I don't think so, so again, your interpretation of 777 symbolizing trinity is almost certainly wrong. Also, I read that the Kabbalah containing the trinity is but one interpretation, e.g. there is another one that posits 10 gods (look e.g. here, no trinity, but 10). But I guess, we are allowed to interpret stuff as we like so it better fits our preconceived notions, right?

For whatever reason, what we experience as witnesses now will be taught to us correctly later. We are witnessing a shadow of what is to come by example. With this reasoning, the shadow of things to come is locked into the word in such a way that it defies our reasoning of it at this current stage. It is not unnoticed to us. The divine nature of the Word of God goes way beyond our ability to see clearly. I feel that this is why Jesus addressed the angles of the churches and not the churches themselves. There is a larger world beyond our view. There is an evil element and a divine element. We are caught in the middle, but protected by the divine. It's all for a purpose that is outlined from Genesis to revelation. The main secrets are outlined in Ephesians.

All this, proven to you by gematria? Care to explain, how exactly? Preferably in your own words instead of Bible quotes..

Originally posted by Barcs
If you are calling that hard evidence, then I guess that's where the problem is. I admit the math adds up and there is probably a lot more to quantum mechanics, but it's not proof of design. That could just be the way that it is. Using the metaphor of pixels for particles isn't the same as saying we are digital or programmed. Everything in the universe essentially is energy. What else would you expect when examining energy at its deepest level? If you interpret that as design, I got no problem with that, but it's certainly not hard evidence. It's definitely a cool theory to read about.

As for the evolution video, Kent Hovind is a proven fraud. Stephen Meyer essentially does the same thing you are doing now, by throwing random scientific facts around and then making assumptions about them. Not a single one of those guys has a peer reviewed science paper published, let alone "hard evidence" of anything. Hovind lies constantly and personal interpretations of scientific facts are opinions.

Your argument here would be better stated as against evolution, which is by far the weaker argument for a cause of life. I'm not sure how much more obvious design could be. If you are looking for clues, I suspect you would have a hard time arguing with Leonard Susskind on the issue of the universe being a woven fabric of information to purpose.

Originally posted by rhinoceros

Originally posted by EnochWasRight
The Kabbalah contains the Trinity. Putting this aside, we can look at what the Bible says of the subject. First, on science.

But did the inventor of Kabbalah write Torah (e.g. old testament)? I don't think so, so again, your interpretation of 777 symbolizing trinity is almost certainly wrong. Also, I read that the Kabbalah containing the trinity is but one interpretation, e.g. there is another one that posits 10 gods (look e.g. here, no trinity, but 10). But I guess, we are allowed to interpret stuff as we like so it better fits our preconceived notions, right?

For whatever reason, what we experience as witnesses now will be taught to us correctly later. We are witnessing a shadow of what is to come by example. With this reasoning, the shadow of things to come is locked into the word in such a way that it defies our reasoning of it at this current stage. It is not unnoticed to us. The divine nature of the Word of God goes way beyond our ability to see clearly. I feel that this is why Jesus addressed the angles of the churches and not the churches themselves. There is a larger world beyond our view. There is an evil element and a divine element. We are caught in the middle, but protected by the divine. It's all for a purpose that is outlined from Genesis to revelation. The main secrets are outlined in Ephesians.

All this, proven to you by gematria? Care to explain, how exactly? Preferably in your own words instead of Bible quotes..

edit on 3-4-2012 by rhinoceros because: (no reason given)

I rely on the Bible first. The verification of evidence comes from the world around us in parallel. Science points right back to the Bible. A comparative examination of religion points back to the symbolism in the Bible. History points us back and forward. Speaking of history, this is the primary reason to believe the Bible as accurate. History is what you see behind you as you walk away from the past. This is why the Hebrews call the past in front. The future is what is coming, yet we can also see it from the same past. God can draw the future into the past for us to see before it happens. I take one very clear example that can now be verified. 666 is Carbon. The fruit of knowledge was the primary theme of the Bible from the start and the main plot point to the end. Has history verified this? You see the fruit of knowledge (Technology) and the tree of life (DNA) mentioned in chapter 3. You then see the revelation of an out of place artifact in the last book. Could a man in a cave get it right 2000 years ago? Could he have tagged our day and age, a coming one world order and a coming economic system from an island prison?

You would say I am only seeing misplaced concreteness. I say, "Open your eyes." The Bible proves itself true. This is why the Bible doesn't say fact beyond faith leading to hope. The hope is all we can have at the present hour. Faith, Hope and then what remains at the end. LOVE. The greatest proof we have in the merits of the Bible is the fact that it rests on Love as the motivation for the struggle on our behalf.

By the way, the 777 thing is well known. You can argue it all you want, but it has been the number of completion attached to the Biblical God since antiquity.