| Subject: No Problem with Intelligent Design |
Author:
Tony
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 03/ 8/05 3:52am
Assumptions....
"In the beginning." There was a Big Bang to ignite Creation.
"In the beginning." The heaven and the earth. Were not, the
Heaven and the Earth.
Black holes regulate Creation, keeping it
perpetual.
Circular time exists in all solar systems.
Linear time exists beyond all solar systems.
Intelligence doesn't evolve.
Extraterrestrials exist, The evidence is
overwhelming.
The primitive homo sapien met up in Northern
Israel.
People and events in the Scriptures are in
our historical timeline. So they cannot be
deemed assumptions.
>Ever noticed that you never hear an affirmative
>definition of Intelligent Design Theory (ID)?
We call it Intelligent design by a "Living
Intelligent Designer" theory (LID)
The LID had a reason and a motive for making
the natural.
>
>I think this is the reason why. For any positive
>statement of a theory, you first state the assumptions
>required for that theory. For much of mainstream
>science, these assumptions are often taken for
>granted, such as:
>
>1) We can perceive the universe through our limited
>senses, using direct and indirect methods of
>measurement and observation.
And from where did the intelligence come, to do such
things? Only from people who were born with the intelligence to learn.
>
>2) These observations and measurements are things that
>are reproducible, or repeatably observable.
>
>3) Things that we cannot observe or measure, we cannot
>know about.
We can observe and measure crop markings. But the
assumption of a global 'hoax' keeps the LID away.
>
>4) We MAY make assumptions about these unknowable
>things, which allows us to continue our exploration of
>our universe, even if we cannot know certain things.
Like evolution. It's an assertion, of an assumption.
The only way to explore the universe is to bend space
time. Point to point ><....very fast......in half the distance. One could do that by amplifying the gravity
'A' wave in linear time.
>
>4a) BUT, since we're trying to truly understand the
>universe around us, we must require that these
>assumptions be minimial, and the assumptions we make
>MUST be "reasonable".
To assume we will traverse the universe and conquer
it by farting our way around within it, using our
'rocket science' and telescopes, is deluding
ourselves.
>
>(4a is just an alternate statement of the well-known
>philisophical saw, "Occam's Razor")
Occam's Razor is mediaeval think. It's old and rusty.
It negates any new thought against mainstream accepted
assumptions, being wrong.
Einstein's theory is still a theory. And it is assumed
it can never be proven wrong.
(No red shift need apply for the following.)
<><><><><><>
A SHIFTING THEORY OF GRAVITY
By Daniel G. Emilio, © Copyright 1998, 1999, 2000,
2001
"In an even more recent experiment, particle
physicists have shown that light pulses can be
accelerated up to 300 times their normal velocity
of 186,000 miles per second. The experiment involved sending a pulse of light toward a chamber filled
with Cesium gas. But before the light pulse had
fully entered the chamber it had actually gone right through it and traveled a further 60 feet across the laboratory. That is, it exited the chamber before it
fully entered it. It appears to have jumped forward
in time."
"The research is already causing controversy among physicists. What bothers them is that if light could
travel forward in time it could carry information. It
would shatter Einstein's theory of relativity since relativity depends on the speed of light as being unbreachable."
<><><><><><><>
Computers with faster than light data transfer?
The Government(s) have a crystalline chip that
uses 3D holographic technology. No hard drive.
Invented inGermany. A re-do of the "American
Computer Company's, transcapacitor."
A solid state chip the was demonstrated at a
computer show and was supposed to replace hard
drives, subsequently disappeared. And reappeared
in Germany a few years later. As the chip that
works with light (holograms) for data transfer.
But....NOT FOR YOU....!
>
>---
>
>The power of assumption is used in mathematics and
>science to great effect. We "assume" certain things
>that we cannot prove or disprove, and then build a
>scaffolding around these assumptions of verifiable
>observations and measurements. Some day, these
>assumptions may be falsifiable, which would allow us
>to set in concrete the foundations of some of our
>scientific advances. We must, with our logical minds,
>somehow come to a consensus of what assumptions are
>reasonable, and what assumptions are not. The general
>rule we, as humans use, is "the simpler the better."
That's a problem. If not 'the' problem. Simpletons
that can't see the simplicity of a Living Intelligent Designer (LID)
>
>The problem with ID is that we, as curious humans, are
>prone to asking questions about our assumptions. In
>fact, this questioning of assumptions is a neccesary
>part of "sanity checking" the assumptions we've made
>about any given theory.
Most of the theories we are to assume are true.
Are assertive and leave no room for any reason.
Even if the reasoning is more logical and rational
than the assertive assumption.
>
>If a scientific theory cannot allow a rigorous
>discussion of its assumptions, and why they are
>reasonable and valid, then it is not a scienfitic
>theory.
It can be if the LID is Omnipotent in all of the
known and unknown sciences. And not just omniscient
as we assume mankind to be.
>
>And this leads us to the crux of the problem with ID.
>What, exactly, are the assumptions of ID? I challenge
>(dare) anyone to unambiguously state the assumptions
>required for ID theory, and then to allow open
>discussion of those assumptions.
>
>You cannot, as the proponent of a theory, state the
>theory, state it's assumptions, and then forbid
>discussion of those assumptions.
BINGO. As in assertive theories and illusion to
keep the status quo. Intelligent Design. But no
Living Intelligent Designer of it?
Sounds akin to Deism.
>
>Here's a hint to anyone that might attempt to respond
>to this:
>
>Intelligent Design Theory assumes the existence of a
>sentient being or beings who may or may not exist
>presently, that, through unknown means, created
>specific biological systems in either exactly, or
>close approximation to, the forms in which they exist
>today.
Extraterrestrials are real. They exist in linear
time. And interact in our circular time.
>
>Yep. ID assumes that. I've heard (read) ID
>proponents hedging and dodging discussion of this
>assumption, with statements like, "Woah, now... I
>never said ANYthing about the designer itself! Did
>you hear me say 'GOD?' I didn't think so! ID says
>nothing about the designer, so we can't talk about
>that."
>
>Only we can, and must, if ID hopes to become a
>competing theory, instead of being regarded as a
>half-baked psuedo-intellectual knee-jerk reaction to
>the fact that current science has killed the very
>imaginary super-friend that so many people seem to
>depend upon for happiness.
>
>So, ID proponents, my direct challenge is this:
>
>State, unambiguously the assumption(s) of ID theory,
>and allow us to discuss the reasonableness of them in
>open forum. Allow us to compare them in complexity
>and ennumeration to the assumptions required by
>current evolutionary theory.
>
>Let us really see the foundation of ID. I, and many,
>many others believe it's a deceptive religio-political
>agenda. Here's your chance to show us all otherwise.
It's a philosophy of melding the Scriptures
and science.
Evolution ignores one thing. Intelligence. It
doesn't evolve. And certainly not to the state
of arguing an ID of an LID. Intelligence is there
at birth, or it's not. It's genetic and comes
from the parents.
The Neandertal and Cro-Magnon met up in Northern
Israel. That's fact. Nobody knows exactly what
happened when they did meet up. It's all assumption
and supposition.
People and events in the Scriptures are in our
historical timeline. So they cannot be deemed
assumptions.
Those people and events, to present day, had too
have a starting point. (A reasonable assumption.)
Scientists, today, know about human cloning. If intelligence doesn't evolve. Where did we get that
kind of knowledge?
At about the time of the primitive homo sapien,
Neandertal & Cro-Magnon, meeting up in Northern
Isreal. Assume there were two genetically perfect
beings on the earth. Perfect in all respects. Non umbilicus. And they knew and had personal commune
with the LID who put them where they were.
The genetically perfect male and female bore twins.
Males. Who were umbilicus. One died, and the other interbred with the primitive homo sapien.
The offspring being 'intelligent.' Building and
living in tents. Making the harp and the flute.
And playing them. Tending the fields and the herds.
Working in brass and iron. And nobody knows how
long they lived.
Assume their was a third male born, to the male
and female parents, of the first two twin males.
On completion of the first males interbreeding.
The third of the female's offspring interbred
with, essentially, modern humans. And their life
span is known. And the first born, of the third
male, called on the Living Intelligent Designer.
And the Designer chose that seed.
And more genes from the first parents being mixed
into the interbred species. From the many sons and daughters they bore. The origin of our species.
Who or what could possibly do, or know, 'our'
science of genetics, but us?
The same one who could pull off the above
hybridization of an entire species. A Living
Intelligent Designer. He has a name, HaShem.....!
>Duane
Put a LID on it. :)
~>
Twonky....
Aquarius.....the dawning of the age of enlightenment...
kiddush Ha-Shem........YAHU.....the New Jerusalem....
You get a lot more than what you bargained for
"I will eXalt my throne above the throne of God.
I will be like the Most High."
(Lucifer. Isaias 12:14)
The elohyim....
A reality and hierarchy beyond the understanding
of those who deny and doubt HaShem. Almighty God
(LID). And 'those,' are the deluded who live in a
reality of assertive theories, illusions and
assumptions.
Armageddon.....baby........
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
| |
Feedback: 