Undeniable Proof of Intelligent Design.

OP: I too enjoy these coincidences between the sizes and orbits of the planets, so thanks for continuing to raise debate on that.

I think part of the problem here is that the 'intelligent design' debate only seems to between two camps. Those who say god flew down and made our solar system specifically to create life, and those who say 'no, it's all random, chaos, coincidence, there are no real rules to be learnt here'.

I think there is another point of view which could include both sides. I see no reason that a Supreme Creator has to be actively or consciously involved in the creation of our solar system. I think that is a heavily anthropomorphic view of creation. But that does not mean our solar system can not have, by random chance, have slotted itself into a particular configuration of rules which were divinely created at the beginning of the universe (possibly by intelligent entities).

The divinity is probably not in our special little solar system, the divinity is in the background field of numbers and intricate physical laws that universal reality fits into like a mould. It could just be that we got lucky and happened to fit one of the moulds that are useful for evolving our kind of life. No direct intervention is required.

So I say your amazement about the numerical and physical coincidences in our solar system are valid. Because I think those numerical coincidences are a true sign of the underlying configuration of physics. I think there is probably a great deal of connection between the fundamental structure of numbers and natural physical laws. Just because science happens to be going though a phase where it ignores those patterns, does not mean those patterns are not there. It does not mean those patterns are not latent in the universe.

reply to post by yampa

Good points, but you'll see as we progress that the whole round number integers and ratios apply strictly to the moon, earth and sun in such a way that, well the result is all around us.

In the presence of the data-set, the traditional explanation for lunar formation doesn't work.

So either this was originated by super-infinite-intelligent design from a first-cause (origin of the universe) and/or it's an emergent cosmic evolutionary process with an ultimate aim towards life as the outcome (fine tuned in favor of life, which denotes an anticipatory intelligent first cause) and/or there was divine intervention during the formation of our solar system in particular as it relates the formation of the moon which is comprised predominantly of earth mantle material.

There's an "X-factor" in the mix somewhere, such that about the only hypothesis, in the face of the data, that can be logically rejected, is the fluke coincidence, chance theory, for reasons we've already covered and for reasons we have yet to cover which show a very distinct design correlation of round whole number integers applying to the moon-earth-sun relationship which would be impossible in the context of "coincidence" or mere chance occurrence, particularly given the outcome of - LIFE on earth.

Thanks for a thoughtful contribution.

Atheists have a strong bias and an ax to grind I've discovered and there's nothing that can be done about it. I've tried to bridge that divide many many times and it never goes anywhere that's productive. Therefore the reader must sift through what's being presented and simply decide for themselves who's making sense and who's being unreasonable.

When you really examine the data closely and inspect it thoroughly only so many logical inferences can be made, all of which lead in the direction of intelligent design, and that's just the way it (the Razor of Occam) slices it can't be helped.

Regards,

NAM

1. And I saw in those days how long cords were given to those angels, and they took to themselves wings and flew, and they went towards the north.

2. And I asked the angel, saying unto him: 'Why have those (angels) taken these cords and gone off?' And he said unto me: 'They have gone to measure.'

3. And the angel who went with me said unto me:
'These shall bring the measures of the righteous,
And the ropes of the righteous to the righteous,
That they may stay themselves on the name of the Lord of Spirits for ever and ever.

4. The elect shall begin to dwell with the elect,
And those are the measures which shall be given to faith
And which shall strengthen righteousness.

5. And these measures shall reveal all the secrets of the depths of the earth, And those who have been destroyed by the desert.

Book of Enoch, Chapter LXI.

reply to post by NewAgeMan


Quoting scripture isn't going to help convince anyone of your claims...

reply to post by boymonkey74

We still need to look at all the measures. That piece of scripture (which isn't even considered "canonical") by itself doesn't validate anything. What's interesting is how it could involve a reference to the polar circumference of the earth, written about 2300 years ago if not earlier. The reference to what is obviously ancient Egypt is also interesting.

P.S. boymonkey is now on the moon.. that's interesting too.

Originally posted by NewAgeMan
reply to post by yampa

 

Good points, but you'll see as we progress that the whole round number integers and ratios apply strictly to the moon, earth and sun in such a way that, well the result is all around us.

In the presence of the data-set, the traditional explanation for lunar formation doesn't work.

Part of the reason why honest scientists will tell you that the moon breaks the rules of current theory, or 'should not be there' is because current theory is incomplete in its perception of celestial mechanics. This doesn't just affect the models of the genesis and orbit of the moon - it affects most our knowledge of the planets and the universe in general. Specifically, there is a missing, counterbalancing field missing from all orbital equations (or included only implicitly, without definition). The idea that orbits are solely based on gravity is false. A gravity-only theory cannot account for the motions we observe, and this has been long understood. This is why Einstein had to resort to relativity and tensor calculus to explain the perihelion of Mercury.

The easiest proof of this is the surface profile of the moon. The difference between the very mountainous back and very flat front side of the moon is only explained in conventional theory by tenuous collision hypothesis. But the difference between the two sides becomes much easier to explain once you accept that all planets, all massive bodies, are equatorially emitting charged particles. That is, the reason the front face of the moon is flat and the back is not, is because the earth is bombarding the surface of the moon with particles. It is this bombardment which provides the counterbalancing force to gravity. It is only this force that allows the complex motion of the planets to be explained without resorting to the highly abstract theories that were forced into the theory of relativity.

There are many other proofs of the idea that all planets (and indeed, all matter) are releasing physical charged particles at the equator, and sucking them in at the poles, but I suppose there is not much point labouring that here.

This is not to do with what I'm saying above, but perhaps the OP might like this:

The speed of light
Quran 32:5 He arranges matters from the heaven to the Earth, then it ascends to Him in a day which is equivalent to one thousand of the years which you count. / Implication: He commands through the angels all that exists, from the most celestial Height to Earth. And all things travel to the higher plane where a single Day before Him equals a thousand years according to our count. (22:47), (35:10). These stages span fifty thousand years each, of our count (70:4) Angels made of light travel at the speed of light.

Speed or velocity = Distance / Time
actual scientifically calculated speed or velocity of light = 299,792 km / s
Speed or velocity of light in Quran = 12,000 Lunar moon distance km / sec in a day [32:5 above]
Distance = Circumferential Travel of Moon around earth in 1000 years
Calculation: All based on lunar figures [10:5]
Distance = Moon orbits in one year = 12 [32:5]
in 1,000 years = 12,000 orbits
Time of one day = 23 hours 56 min 4.0906 sec = 86164.0906 sec
Time elapse in one Lunar month = 27.321661 days = 655.71986 hours
Velocity moon = distance travelled in one Lunar month/time same period
=2 x Pi x r = (2 x 3.14159 x 384264 km)/655.71986 hrs (27.321661 days)
= 3682.07 km/hr
Angle travelled relative to sun
= (27.321661 days / month) x (360 deg) / 365.25636 = 26.92848 deg
considering the lunar geocentric motion relative to sun velocity correction = cosine angle = cosine 26.92848 = 0.89157 (21:33)
Speed or velocity of light by data provided in the Quran is:
= (12,000 Lunar orbits x moon velocity x correction factor x time of travelled in month)/time of one day.
= = 12000 x 3682.07 x 0.89157 x 655.71986= 25831348035 / 86164.0906
Speed / velocity light calculated by Qur’anic data = 299,792 km/s

Now that's pretty interesting - but I think it's obvious that those figures are hacked. Some of those values deliberately have numbers added after the decimal place, without a proper match to agreed constants or observed data.

There is another way to derive an even better number for the speed of light using that equation, without using hacked decimal places, using only rational or recognised mathematical constants for the orbital motions.

These are some fill-ins for the figures given above:

(12000 * (45/44) * ((e^(1+pi)) (pi^(-1-e))) * ((2 * golden angle) - (100/41)) ) / 86164 = 0.299792457484~

Currently accepted speed of light is - 299 792 458 m /s

Notice, for instance, the way the 86164.0906 figure in the second equation, given for the number sidereal seconds a day, is given by a whole number - 86164. The mean velocity of the moon is given by the whole numbers 12000 x (45/44). The 'sun velocity correction' is given by an interesting form - (e^(1+pi)) * (pi^(-1-e)) - close to Euler's identity -'the most beautiful equation in mathematics'. The time elapse of one lunar month is replaced by (2 * golden angle) - (100/41) (note there are many other observations which match the motions and proportions of the moon to the golden ratio).

But maybe this is an example of how easy it is to hack equations, rather than anything meaningful.

reply to post by yampa


I'm part of the camp that says, "we barely have enough data to compile a list of possibilities, let alone narrow them down, let alone pick any out and definitively set it on the table as a solid theory."

It's fun to toy with it and all, but always keep in mind two things: 1) almost everything is speculation, and 2) collect all the facts before you try and distort them. That way, anyone trailing behind will be able to pick out the gold and leave the dirt.

reply to post by yampa

That was a "golden" post, and from what I've seen it's only the half of it believe it or not.

You say it's possibly the numbers in the equations getting "hacked", but to what degree is that or could that be, the case? You seem pretty good with numbers so you ought to be able to get to the root of that question. Edit: I see you already did that really, but why then do you presume that you "re-hacked the numbers" and that therefore it's not meaningful?

What I'm in the process of researching is another data-set on the EMS (Earth Moon Sun) produced from an entirely different perspective and methodology. So please stick around and keep checking in on this thread, because when those numbers come out, you ought to be able to do some very interesting things with them, both in kilometers and another very reliable and accurate form of measurement for this system. To give you a hint, it divides the earth into a 366 degree horizon with each degree divided by 366 - well why hint here's (below) the methodology, posted earlier. Play around with it and see what you can come up with..? When this measure is applied to the polar circumference of the earth and it's intimate relationship with the moon and sun - whole round number integers and ratios abound, which ultimately relate yes directly to the speed of light - and yet, here's the thing: It's a relationship that doesn't apply to any other celestial bodies in our solar system. It is exclusive to the earth-moon-sun and one in which many of the whole numbers and ratios (like total eclipse and lunar eclipse), only apply for the epoch of earth evolution during which time there are earth-based observers, to notice them (dun dun dun..).

This could get interesting if it hasn't already, which I do believe it has contrary to apparent popular opinion. (who needs stars anyway? lol)

www.grahamhancock.com...

A frame 1/366th of the horizon angled to time a star.

This proved to be spot on. A pendulum that beat 366 times during one 366th of the Earth's turn was, much to our joy and amazement, half a Megalithic Yard in length! A circle scribed by such a pendulum would have a diameter of one Megalithic Yard. Archie Roy, emeritus professor of astronomy at Glasgow University (and a friend of the late Alexander Thom) joined us to give a public demonstration of how the Megalithic Yard is a product of measured observational astronomy.

We later refined the timing method, having realised that the Megalithic astronomers had improved their own accuracy by using the movement of the planet Venus at certain times rather than a star. Gordon Freeman, a distinguished professor of chemical physics and a much-published amateur archaeologist specialising in the Megalithic structures, was impressed with this saying; "Tying the MY to Venus path arcsecond is a major discovery. I'm an admirer of Thom, but was neutral about the MY. Now I'm a convert".

Alexander Thom had been right all along because the chances of this technique producing a perfect fit for his unit could not be a coincidence. But there was more - much more to this system. Given that the builders of these Megalithic sites some 5,000 years ago used a 366-degree circle caused us to look at the Earth itself. Taking the polar circumference as the text book 40,000,000 metres we turned it into Megalithic units and found was this:

- Earth's polar circumference = 40,000,000 metres

- 1 Megalithic degree (1/366th) = 109290 metres

- 1 Megalithic minute of arc (1/60th) = 1822 metres

- 1 Megalithic second of arc (1/6th) = 303.6 metres

Now, 303.6 metres for a second of arc may look a little boring but it is 366 Megalithic Yards. The actual figure is 829.5 mm, which is nicely with Alexander Thom's definition of 829.7 +/- 0.5 mm.

We now call this beautifully geodetic unit from the 366 system a 'Thom' (Th) to differentiate it from the arguably very slightly less accurate Megalithic Yard.

The Megalithic second of arc appears to have been adopted by the Minoan culture of Create some 4,000 years ago. The palaces of Crete were carefully surveyed by Canadian archaeologist, J. W. Graham who identified a standard unit he called 'the Minoan foot', which was 30.36cm. It follows that 1,000 of these feet make precisely one Megalithic second of arc. A decimalised version of what was already an ancient measure.

Even earlier the Egyptian culture had adopted units driven by the same thinking. They took the Megalithic Yard and made it the circumference of a circle. The diameter of that circle was called a royal cubit and the hypotenuse of a square from that diameter was called a remen.

www.grahamhancock.com...

How to create your own Magalithic Yard
The Mystery of the Megalithic Yard Revealed.


Best regards, and thank you yampa for a thoughtful and interesting contribution to the thread and I look forward to seeing what you make of the MY (Megalithic Yard) data-set on the Earth-Moon-Sun system. That data can then be run against other planets and moons, like Mars, to see if this whole round number integer and ratio type of thing applies anywhere else in the solar system. Phage could even help out?! (not likely.. except to try to draw attention to any slight errors or discrepancies and then declare the whole thing debunked and with many supporting stars)!


NAM

Originally posted by daskakik
reply to post by NewAgeMan

 

My experience in your other thread was that you ask that everyone keep an open mind while yours is so tightly shut that any facts presented by other members are quickly dismissed. I think that that should be noted by the reader.

This seems to be the case in this thread as well.

You must be referring to the thread Jesus Christ's Superderterministic, Cosmological, Magnum Opus where I posit the idea that the historical person of Jesus, during "the lost years" between puberty and 30 or early 30's, must have gotten trained up as a Magus, almost assuredly at the "university" of Alexandria (even yes, after the main library had burned down), to then re-enter Jewish society (around the fringes, circling Jerusalem like the eye of an impending storm) and carry out a plan known fully only to himself and John the Baptist (his own initiator, even though the result blew John's mind with a vision), to fulfill the old scripture and prophecy, even one timed down to the very hour and by a schedule known well in advance whereby Jesus saw his life and Great Work encoded in and bracketed by, the celestial divine order.

One only hopes that where the first are the last and the last, first, that Jesus was able to hold in reserve, for us (including himself) the very best of the best for last, on the far side of all sorrow and suffering ie: consider that he wasn't "beamed straight up" and although obedient unto the point of death, survived the ordeal, even if only by a mere thread - and note that Joseph of Arimathaea (the rich owner of the new tomb and friend of Jesus), along with Nicodemus (a Pharisee and friend - imagine his sense of guilt and remorse?) after getting permission from Pontias Pilate (who at one point declared Jesus innocent, and later tried to literally "wash his hands" of it) to take down the body of Jesus, early, because of the Passover (and he's also reported to have "died" rather faster than expected, avoiding the usual practice of having one's legs broken) wrapped him in cloth only after first covering his body, in aloe.

"My hour is not yet come", he said on more than one occasion, deftly slipping through the gathered crowd who were preparing to sieze him and/or stone him to death. And in terms of the art of debate (a learned Greek skill) well there was none better able to stump and silence his critics.

The Burial of Jesus.

For more on this aspect, which is purely intended as an "aside" to the overall content of this thread, I invite the reader, who's curious or interested, to visit that thread (JCSCMO - no need to repeat the title) as well as this one.

The Day of the Cross.

Best regards, and if considering these matters please just think it all the way through.. because then when you have the facts there's no need to distort them, and then voila, the real thing, not a pale imitation but the thing itself.

NAM

P.S. It doesn't matter if Jesus was dead as a door-nail or survived, obedient to the point of death, if he completed the evolutionary ritual while at the same time hoodwinking and confounding his enemies, including the whole dynamic of human sin and evil itself (if only we'd come to really understand the work's true significance and nature), only to burst forth and into a new, liberated life, out of the "box" of fated destiny and beyond to those hills yonder (see my avatar), to celebrate many solstices (which the ritual is a reflection of symbolically in terms of the cycle of life) thereafter (see avatar for clues, note Santa hat), to a another date with destiny, from the abode of everlasting light about 35-40 years later (think 68-70 yrs after Jesus was born..) in the form of a very very angry and hatred and vengeance-filled horse-riding man called Saul, on the Road to Damascus! LOL

Rolling the tape back again, he, Jesus, probably even left town (post tomb) with a haul of temple gold paid out as both a reparation, and, to give him enough never to return, thus ensuring that the new life he was entering into was not that of a beggar or one who lacked in anything, since he'd already proven that he could do that 'til the cows come home. Now that's pure speculation, but it makes sense when the rest of the "case" is examined carefully, and oh what fun to imagine such a thing, with his wife (or bride to be to be more precise) at his side, a chest of gold in the back of a one horse carriage, maybe even with bells ringing out (the church still likes to do that), and most certainly laughing all the way (Ho Ho Ho) for everyone's sake and mutual best interest!

Oh to have the courage to life fully and happily, and to realize heaven on earth for all the right reasons, what a life, what a man!

Think of this as the whole Jesus story, where the Churchianity version leaves us weaping and in guilt and shame at the foot of his cross, the resurrection and new life (straight up) something inexplicable to us, as some place we can only get to in the "hereafter". It's both very sad and very funny, once re-cognized in recognizing the rising full moon (symbol of a life fully lived - not a half-life) through the window of the box/cross of a room in da Vinci's masterpiece.

Originally posted by NewAgeMan

Originally posted by NewAgeMan

Zoom+Scroll Leonardo da Vinci's Blasphemous Joke "The Last Supper" in High Res.

[OT material removed by staff]

reply to post by NewAgeMan


Yes, the thread where, in the end, you offered to accept that the information that the thread was based on was inaccurate, in exchange for my acknowledgement that a historical Jesus existed.

Now you are here acting as if the info in that thread was not shown to be wrong.

It reads like biblical fan-fiction....is this what people do when I.D. fails them?

I present the information for consideration and investigation by the readership, not merely attack and ridicule by staunch atheists which I supposed goes with the territory.

reply to post by daskakik

I was referring to the killing of the 300 children by Herod the Great being suspect based on the dating, not that the whole line of inquiry was "wrong". You're doing something similar to what Phage is with the annular eclipse in regards to the content of this thread.

Originally posted by NewAgeMan
reply to post by daskakik

 

I was referring to the killing of the 300 children by Herod the Great being suspect based on the dating, not that the whole line of inquiry was "wrong".

The thread was based on the Star of Bethlehem software showing how the heavens gave a sign of the birth of Jesus. Your words:

But as to the real Star of Bethlehem occuring in near simultaneity with Jesus biirth, that's definitely suspect, I'll admit to that, unless there's any sort of discrepancy or overlap between BC and AD.

Don't try to wiggle out of it now.

You're doing something similar to what Phage is with the annular eclipse in regards to the content of this thread.

Yes, pointing out the facts, which you automatically dismiss.

reply to post by daskakik

If you watch the videos, it (Magi star of Bethlehem as retrograde motion of Venus) wasn't for the birth of Jesus, but would have taken place when he was a toddler. I'm not entirely clear precisely when the Venus/Jupiter conjunction took place relative to the projected conception or birth of Jesus only to say that it appears to have occurred around that time. My own interpretation initially might have been off a bit re: the killing of the 300 by King Herod, and neither am I backing away from the dating of the crucifixion or the lunar eclipse on that Passover Preparation Day, as a schedule that Jesus appears to have been working by. Anyway, that's another thread. Back on topic. I won't be derailing this thread nor allowing you to do so.

The impression I have is that you and others are asking the reader to throw everything out, if one small part of the puzzle doesn't fit perfectly or can be questioned, but aside from you and your atheist friends, I don't think they (the general readership) buy it and appreciate having new data they might have not seen or considered before to look at and evaluate and make whatever connections and draw whatever logical inferences from that they so choose. In them and their open-minded evaluative skills I have great faith.

NAM

P.S. On the Jesus front, the idea I'm presenting, aside from gaining an appreciation for a stunning level of genius on Jesus and John the Baptist's part in recognizing a fated destiny and a way to fight a corrupt empire including the whole dynamic of human sin and evil, is that at the point of the cross, Jesus became a type of human theodolite (measuring lens), as the true measure of a man, and the love of God as the height of the law of life and love, which is mercy and forgiveness.

What are the axises of a theodolite?

Answer:
Vertical and Horizontal. These are absolutely vital. some have The Horizontal ( latitude or Azimuth) scale given priority - some the Vertical or Altitude scale, but both are essential to a true theodolite - unlike a transit or level instrument no matter how powerful the telescope.

Originally posted by NewAgeMan
reply to post by daskakik

 

If you watch the videos, it (Magi star of Bethlehem as retrograde motion of Venus) wasn't for the birth of Jesus, but would have taken place when he was a toddler.

No matter how you try to make it fit, you can't have Harod greeting wise men in 2 BC.

The impression I have is that you and others are asking the reader to throw everything out, if one small part of the puzzle doesn't fit perfectly or can be questioned,

So know you want to be allowed fudge factors to prove that the universe is an example of precision engineering?

You can stop hiding behind the "your an atheist" card. The problem is your theory.

reply to post by NewAgeMan


You say.." if one small part of the puzzle doesn't fit perfectly or can be questioned"

But hold on you made this thread Titled "Undeniable Proof of Intelligent Design."

Don't play the you don't believe because you are Atheist card because Iam not one and the evidence you have shown while entertaining has been flimsy at best.

reply to post by boymonkey74

Like I said before the title of the thread was ill conceived because people can deny anything and things are not always so clear cut and there are always questions. It's an investigative inquiry - title should have been something like "Evidence for Intelligent Design?" or something along those lines.

And there's still more data to come. Stay tuned..

Originally posted by Prezbo369
It reads like biblical fan-fiction...

Yes, I guess it does read that way doesn't it (referring to the Jesus Christ's Superdeterministic Magnum Opus post above), you're right but at the same time, as a historical textual criticism, it's not the least bit unreasonable no matter how um unreasonably reasonable, the implications and significance might be even for us as an integral part of the brotherhood of man and the family of God and even if only by virtue of our own inclusion! And who doesn't want for there to be a true pillar of Justice, unmatched only by the magnitude of it's tender Mercy, so that we too might have the opportunity to laugh again like children, and play and co-create under the dome of the starry skies.

And it's not solipsistic either, but relativistic, because a theodolite measures both verticle and horizontal, unlike a telescopic lens.

And I'm just looking at it all after years and years of deep study and contemplation, through a lens of reason and logic (being a scientifically, rationally minded person) and since "wisdom must be proven right by her application". So I dug beneath the mythical story in search of the truth and what I actually found and discovered, while eminantly more plausible, and reasonable, and practical, was, at the same time so extraordinary and joyful and triumphant (sounds Christmassy) that it's capable, upon recognition, of causing a person (like it did me) to burst out both in laughter and tears at the same time, to at last "grok" of it with comprehension and understanding by coming to grips with the truth at the very heart of things because it's the truth that sets us free.

Best regards,

NAM

applicable musical interlude (just to keep things light-hearted!)