The Briefing Room
General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: Quasar44 on May 24, 2020, 12:38:53 am
-
Not at all
The “ big brains “ of theoretical physics “ the best brains on earth “ all believe our universe is one out of infinite ones in a 11 dimensional hyper space -known as the multiverse!!!
It’s way beyond my puny brain power to even think about
Right now ..new big bangs and new universes are appearing As I type this
Sorry I cannot explain this lol
This is string theory
-
You do realize that the appeal to 11 dimensions is from string theory, which hasn't produced a single testable prediction in 50 years and pushes all the interesting questions in physics off onto happenstance of an (unobservable) "string vacuum state" in the early universe. And it's not where the supposed "multiverse" (a device as unobservable and unfalsifiable as Divine intervention at some point in the past) resides -- all the universes of supposed "multiverse" are supposedly 11 dimensional, just like ours. (Why 11? Because that seems to be the handiest way to get something almost like observed particle physics while not needing to learn any mathematics other than differential geometry, which is the only math most physicists learn.) They "other universes" are also unobservable, and thus unfalsifiable. String theory long ago ceased to be science and became an atheist creation myth whose high-priests decide who gets funding to do "theoretical physics".
At least the debate over angels dancing on the head of a pin, back in the day, was about a real question: whether physical space is infinitely divisible or not -- the interesting positions were "infinitely many" and "finitely many". (BTW, the answer, we now know, is finitely divisible, since energy is quantized and attempting to divide space too finely involves making the energy density for the smallest probe to make the measurement so great that the probe collapses in its own Schwartzschild radius, making a black hole -- the length at with this happens is called the Planck length, and its existence say that differential geometry, which uses calculus and thus depends on space being infinitely divisible, can't be a good model for physics at the fundamental scale string theory supposedly deals with.)
-
You do realize that the appeal to 11 dimensions is from string theory, which hasn't produced a single testable prediction in 50 years and pushes all the interesting questions in physics off onto happenstance of an (unobservable) "string vacuum state" in the early universe. And it's not where the supposed "multiverse" (a device as unobservable and unfalsifiable as Divine intervention at some point in the past) resides -- all the universes of supposed "multiverse" are supposedly 11 dimensional, just like ours. (Why 11? Because that seems to be the handiest way to get something almost like observed particle physics while not needing to learn any mathematics other than differential geometry, which is the only math most physicists learn.) They "other universes" are also unobservable, and thus unfalsifiable. String theory long ago ceased to be science and became an atheist creation myth whose high-priests decide who gets funding to do "theoretical physics".
At least the debate over angels dancing on the head of a pin, back in the day, was about a real question: whether physical space is infinitely divisible or not -- the interesting positions were "infinitely many" and "finitely many". (BTW, the answer, we now know, is finitely divisible, since energy is quantized and attempting to divide space too finely involves making the energy density for the smallest probe to make the measurement so great that the probe collapses in its own Schwartzschild radius, making a black hole -- the length at with this happens is called the Planck length, and its existence say that differential geometry, which uses calculus and thus depends on space being infinitely divisible, can't be a good model for physics at the fundamental scale string theory supposedly deals with.)
I not very knowledgeable in mathematics but apparently the calculus says 11 dim
Yes they are working on new tests such as more powerful atom smashers .
String did produce and calculate the HB particle !!
It does explain Dark matter and energy
It maybe true ,but still not any real concrete evidence, but with advances in engineering- it could be realty
-
I am not seeing “ any politics in this “
This theory is widely supported but ..the progress is slow
It is the unified theory of everything ..if true or it’s a
giant waste of billions and decades
There has to be a correlation from Newton and Einstein to QM
-
I am not seeing “ any politics in this “
This theory is widely supported but ..the progress is slow
It is the unified theory of everything ..if true or it’s a
giant waste of billions and decades
There has to be a correlation from Newton and Einstein to QM
Quantum physics, like Evolution, and like every other thing science is coming up with always seems to start with 'Once upon a time'. Fairy tales. No proofs. That is not science.
-
Quantum physics, like Evolution, and like every other thing science is coming up with always seems to start with 'Once upon a time'. Fairy tales. No proofs. That is not science.
Evolution is 100 percent fact !! Anyone who disagrees is “ Science illiterateâ€
String theory has the math but not the “ physical evidence “..yet
Evolution has the genetics/DNA, the fossil record and many other things .
For example , Your DNA and a fish DNA are very similar and suggest common origins . Your arm and a cats paw are Very similar in origins . Humans are littered with bad evolutionary designs and dead ends
The Bible is good for morals and teachings but it has zero science !!!
-
QM is 100 percent fact
They have many decades of experiments from the 1920s and the knowledge of the “ strangeness “ of how electrons behave . Without QM .you have no computer and many other things.
They know electrons can exist in both wave and particle forms and can exist in infinite states
-
Our universe may not be so special but our planet Earth is in the right place in the Goldilocks Zone for life. Life begat us and all the other wonderful creatures on it.
True, it will end when the sun dies, most likely engulfing Earth, but my hope is by then humans will become interplanetary people. Or go out by Darwin’s law. Who knows?
The more we are learning about other exoplanets we are finding out that gas giants, rocky planets, hot Jupiter’s, and the like are quite common. Some solar systems have their gas giants closer to the sun than we do and some have Earth like planets so much bigger than ours.
What makes our solar system unique to us is that it’s ours.
Welcome to TBR @Quasar44 0005a 0005a
-
I not very knowledgeable in mathematics but apparently the calculus says 11 dim
Yes they are working on new tests such as more powerful atom smashers .
String did produce and calculate the HB particle !!
It does explain Dark matter and energy
It maybe true ,but still not any real concrete evidence, but with advances in engineering- it could be realty
The Higgs is a prediction of the symmetry breakings in the Standard Model and the Goldstone mechanism, not of string theory -- stuffing the Standard Model (Higgs boson included) into string theory is why they need 11 dimensions (or maybe it's 10, they don't seem to have quite resolved that). As to "dark matter and dark energy", physicists only posit their existence to fit observations we don't understand into physics we think we do (some large scale gravitational anomalies for dark matter and inflation in the early universe for dark energy) -- they're called "dark" because we can't observe them. You may find the discussion of string theory here: https://golem.ph.utexas.edu/category/2007/02/this_weeks_finds_in_mathematic_7.html interesting. One of the posters uses my favorite analogy for "dark matter and dark energy" in it -- "gaseous Vulcan". (My close colleague who works on applications of category theory -- the sort of mathematics I do -- to fundamental physics also likes that analogy.)
-
Evolution is 100 percent fact !! Anyone who disagrees is “ Science illiterateâ€
String theory has the math but not the “ physical evidence “..yet
Evolution has the genetics/DNA, the fossil record and many other things .
For example , Your DNA and a fish DNA are very similar and suggest common origins . Your arm and a cats paw are Very similar in origins . Humans are littered with bad evolutionary designs and dead ends
The Bible is good for morals and teachings but it has zero science !!!
No, it's 100% bullshit. And I say that BECAUSE of the science, not because of the Word of YHWH, which I DO believe upon. Because the science fails its own prescription.
But then you seem content to live with contradiction, or you would know what I am saying already - What good is the Bible WITHOUT Torah? Without Genesis? If you write off Genesis you can write of ALL of it.
-
QM is 100 percent fact
PROVE IT.
You cannot. Literally, you cannot. IT HAS NO PROOFS.
Ergo. NOT SCIENCE.
-
This is the right thread for this, so I'll leave it right here:
Error 404 (Not Found)!!1 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OmfAyK6CeIg#)
-
PROVE IT.
You cannot. Literally, you cannot. IT HAS NO PROOFS.
Ergo. NOT SCIENCE.
It's hard to prove but it's more based on fact than the Bible is.
God may exist indeed but if He does He should be proven through Science, not through blindly believing a book.
-
It's hard to prove but it's more based on fact than the Bible is.
Not true.
God may exist indeed but if He does He should be proven through Science, not through blindly believing a book.
As long as science denies the supernatural, of its nature it cannot see any god of any kind.
As to the proofs that do exist, you and I would interpret the data entirely differently.
Who is 'blindly believing'? I would say the same of those who blindly follow the religion of science... Which really has not been science since Newton's day.
-
No, it's 100% bullshit. And I say that BECAUSE of the science, not because of the Word of YHWH, which I DO believe upon. Because the science fails its own prescription.
But then you seem content to live with contradiction, or you would know what I am saying already - What good is the Bible WITHOUT Torah? Without Genesis? If you write off Genesis you can write of ALL of it.
You are in the 19th Century with that kind of thinking .
-
You are in the 19th Century with that kind of thinking .
Thank God for that. The sophistry disguised in modernity is a lie.
-
Our universe may not be so special but our planet Earth is in the right place in the Goldilocks Zone for life. Life begat us and all the other wonderful creatures on it.
True, it will end when the sun dies, most likely engulfing Earth, but my hope is by then humans will become interplanetary people. Or go out by Darwin’s law. Who knows?
The more we are learning about other exoplanets we are finding out that gas giants, rocky planets, hot Jupiter’s, and the like are quite common. Some solar systems have their gas giants closer to the sun than we do and some have Earth like planets so much bigger than ours.
What makes our solar system unique to us is that it’s ours.
Welcome to TBR @Quasar44 0005a 0005a
Hello and thx.
We don’t have the technology yet to really detect smaller rocky planets . I assume there is billions of planets that have “ advanced life “
Oddly ..they would have found us by now ???
Maybe they have ...and don’t think we’re worth a visit !!
-
Humans will have colonies within 50 light years in the next few centuries
The sun dying in billions of years has no relevance
-
No, it's 100% bullshit. And I say that BECAUSE of the science, not because of the Word of YHWH, which I DO believe upon. Because the science fails its own prescription.
But then you seem content to live with contradiction, or you would know what I am saying already - What good is the Bible WITHOUT Torah? Without Genesis? If you write off Genesis you can write of ALL of it.
888high58888
www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-ewaCVARtM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-ewaCVARtM#)
-
THE BOOK OF GENESIS:
Chapter 1
[1:1] In the beginning when God created the heavens and the earth,
[1:2] the earth was a formless void and darkness covered the face of the deep, while a wind from God swept over the face of the waters...................
Chapter 50
........... And Joseph died, being one hundred ten years old; he was embalmed and placed in a coffin in Egypt.
http://www.vatican.va/archive/bible/genesis/documents/bible_genesis_en.html (http://www.vatican.va/archive/bible/genesis/documents/bible_genesis_en.html)
-
Humans will have colonies within 50 light years in the next few centuries
The sun dying in billions of years has no relevance
You've watched far too much Star Trek.
-
You've watched far too much Star Trek.
Anything's possible, once we get the Food Replicators up and running....
-
You've watched far too much Star Trek.
It’s only a question of engineering
They need AI first and the rest will be easy
Star Trek is vast glaxies
I am only taking about local regions in the Milky Way
Humans in 200 yrs will be living on dozens of nearby planets
-
THE BOOK OF GENESIS:
It means EXACTLY what it says, or the whole thing falls apart.
Without the direct lineage from Adam to Yeshua the death on the cross is no victory. In the very real and technical sense, he cannot, under the law, be the salvation of ALL mankind without that direct proof and descent. And Adam necessarily MUST be the first Man.
Likewise prophecy breaks - The Jubilees, an incredible prophetic clock becomes nothing. The prophetic calculation between Adam and Noah, Noah and Abraham, Abraham and Yeshuah, again becomes void. I could go on and on and on. Even the names of the Patriarchs, necessarily in their order, cry out the truth.
People who claim otherwise have a shallow anchor in the scripture... Ignorant of the delicate timepiece built within it, and all too ready to destroy what they know not.
-
PROVE IT.
You cannot. Literally, you cannot. IT HAS NO PROOFS.
Ergo. NOT SCIENCE.
You are confusing mathematics and science. Mathematics has proofs. Science has falsifications and truths which are always tentative because they fit all the observations thus far, but could be overthrown by a new one. (Consider Newtonian mechanics, overthrown by the precession of Mercury.) Quantum mechanics (QM) is as true as anything in science has ever been, as is general relativity. String theory not so much.
The two-slit experiment with both electrons and photons and its success in describing the hydrogen atom are enough to establish the truth of quantum mechanics. Other more subtle experiments have shown that unless you're willing to accept instantaneous cause at a distance (which runs into trouble with general relativity) there isn't a classical hidden variables theory that could do the job. (As a wag replying to Einstein's "God doesn't play dice" put it after the experiments that showed the violations of Bell's inequalities -- conditions that would have to hold if there were a local classical hidden variables theory that accounted for quantum mechanical phenomena -- in nature put it, "God not only plays dice, He rolls them where they can't be seen.")
The irritating thing about the current state of physics is we have two theories that explain different aspects of nature, each verified by experiments with accuracy of something like 10^(-14) in the relevant units, which cannot be reconciled -- one can only do quantum mechanics in a classical background, not a relativistic background. And no, string theory doesn't help.
-
Anything's possible, once we get the Food Replicators up and running....
All we need is AI that can build and mine the new settlements in real time
Robots that can work in the harshness of Space is the key
We will use Hydrogen fussiion and can travel to close star systems within 20 -50’light yrs
Could even just send human DNA by lasers that prelaunched robot factories can download to creates organic bodies of humans
-
It’s only a question of engineering
They need AI first and the rest will be easy
Star Trek is vast glaxies
I am only taking about local regions in the Milky Way
Humans in 200 yrs will be living on dozens of nearby planets
You are living in a fantasy.
-
Anything's possible, once we get the Food Replicators up and running....
I know, right.... And warp drive... and subspace communication (whatever that is)...
-
All we need is AI that can build and mine the new settlements in real time
Robots that can work in the harshness of Space is the key
We will use Hydrogen fussiion and can travel to close star systems within 20 -50’light yrs
Could even just send human DNA by lasers that prelaunched robot factories can download to creates organic bodies of humans
AI intelligence is here and it is getting more advanced each day....but that doesn't disprove the teachings of the Bible. Not even close.
GOD is our creator and the creator of the heavens and the earth period.
-
AI intelligence is here and it is getting more advanced each day....but that doesn't disprove the teachings of the Bible. Not even close.
In fact, quite the other way around...
And if that is true, there ain't another two hundred years left, and man will not get off this rock before it ends.
-
I know, right.... And warp drive... and subspace communication (whatever that is)...
"Subspace." A fictional device to explain how we can communicate at faster-then-light speeds. The faster-than-light space travel ("Warp Drive") was supposedly based on the Tesseract?
-
"Subspace." A fictional device to explain how we can communicate at faster-then-light speeds. The faster-than-light space travel ("Warp Drive") was supposedly based on the Tesseract?
Beats the hell outta me.. It's all the fevered dreams of Ray Bradbury... with the emphasis on FICTION.
-
Subspace is a state of transcendence that many subs go into during BDSM play. Through some combination of sensory deprivation (blindfolds, ball gags, restraints), and pain play (whipping, paddling etc.), the mind releases you into different mental plane. Many have described it as “floating on a cloud†or “a state of total peaceâ€â€”sort of like the peak of orgasm. For many people who enjoy the role of sub, it’s the primary reason they engage in the play.
-
Subspace is a state of transcendence that many subs go into during BDSM play. Through some combination of sensory deprivation (blindfolds, ball gags, restraints), and pain play (whipping, paddling etc.), the mind releases you into different mental plane. Many have described it as “floating on a cloud†or “a state of total peaceâ€â€”sort of like the peak of orgasm. For many people who enjoy the role of sub, it’s the primary reason they engage in the play.
:pondering: :pondering: :2popcorn:
-
Subspace is a state of transcendence that many subs go into during BDSM play. Through some combination of sensory deprivation (blindfolds, ball gags, restraints), and pain play (whipping, paddling etc.), the mind releases you into different mental plane. Many have described it as “floating on a cloud†or “a state of total peaceâ€â€”sort of like the peak of orgasm. For many people who enjoy the role of sub, it’s the primary reason they engage in the play.
*blink* *blink* *pause*
:silly: :silly: :silly: :rolling: :beer:
:yowsa:
-
Evolution is 100 percent fact !! Anyone who disagrees is “ Science illiterateâ€
String theory has the math but not the “ physical evidence “..yet
Evolution has the genetics/DNA, the fossil record and many other things .
For example , Your DNA and a fish DNA are very similar and suggest common origins . Your arm and a cats paw are Very similar in origins . Humans are littered with bad evolutionary designs and dead ends
The Bible is good for morals and teachings but it has zero science !!!
-----------------------------------
Suggest you stuff your pretentious malarkey and GET REAL!
Darwin wrote "The Origin of the Species", promoting his theory of
biological evolution and it remains a theory to this moment. GOT IT!!!
The worth of Physics is derived from its applicability and practicality,
which is why the Laws of Newton and others, are infinitely superior,
in worth, to the Theories of those such as Darwin and Einstein.
Mathematics, be it addition or calculus, is the structural support for these
Laws, rather than their proof, which is derived from their inherent insight!
-
Not true.
You really believe the earth is 4000 years old or whatever?
-
You really believe the earth is 4000 years old or whatever?
4000 would be the flood. 6000, or thereabouts, creation. yes. There is a wee bit of wiggle room thereafter - In the actual days of creation (1000 years is like a day, perhaps), but no where near what science has defined. It is ridiculous.
-
You really believe the earth is 4000 years old or whatever?
------------------------------
Date of the earliest fossils of anatomical humans found in Ethiopia was 135,000 BC.
Sourced from Cassell's Chronology / Cambridge.
-
------------------------------
Date of the earliest fossils of anatomical humans found in Ethiopia was 135,000 BC.
Sourced from Cassell's Chronology / Cambridge.
Actually, there are human remains dating back way further than that. 250000 in the yucatan if I recall correctly... Might have been central America.
But in order to believe that, you must discard history.
-
Actually, there are human remains dating back way further than that. 250000 in the yucatan if I recall correctly... Might have been central America.
But in order to believe that, you must discard history.
The whole Radio-Carbon Dating thing is passe.
-
The whole Radio-Carbon Dating thing is passe.
I don't care what you do for dating. Anything over 3000 years or so is extrapolating, and subject to be incorrect, wit no way of knowing.
-
I don't care what you do for dating. Anything over 3000 years or so is extrapolating, and subject to be incorrect, wit no way of knowing.
So you think it's about 50% as likely as your book?
-
So you think it's about 50% as likely as your book?
No. I reject dating altogether in favor of history.
-
You are in the 19th Century with that kind of thinking .
Evolutionary 'science' is still stuck on Darwin, a nearly 200 y/o theory.
As theories go, evolution sucks. It's wildly speculative, but very little proof.
-
No. I reject dating altogether in favor of history.
Ok.... so the Bible is history then?
Yeah... I guess I'd like to believe that, but I see no evidence of any of that stuff today really though. Burning bushes, whales, giants, etc. etc.. You really think that stuff exists today next to all the technology and advancement we have?
-
Ok.... so the Bible is history then?
Yeah... I guess I'd like to believe that, but I see no evidence of any of that stuff today really though. Burning bushes, whales, giants, etc. etc.. You really think that stuff exists today next to all the technology and advancement we have?
Giants? Giants are known the world over, in every history. Red haired, elongated skulls, double rows of teeth... many attributes the same, everywhere. Every culture has a world flood, again with much the same story. Nearly every culture remembers fighting dragons.
Burning bush - supernatural. Jonah - supernatural. As I said, science is incapable of measuring the supernatural by it's very definition. Do I believe there is that which is supernatural? Of course I do.
Technology and advancement of today? A rabbit warren excluding the natural more and more. The hubris of modern man playing at life like a video game... Believing whatever the creators thereof have designed.
As to the rest, as I said here lately, my reality has my own hand in a Sasquatch track. Twice. Now who do I believe, your science or my own lying eyes?
-
Now who do I believe, your science or my own lying eyes?
Your own lying eyes? You've seen all of this stuff, like giants, whales swallowing people, burning bushes etc.?
I've personally never seen anything close to that, nor have I seen any proof of it. I have seen proof of stuff in science, or at least I know that the methodology to arrive at some of the more abstract conclusions is sounder than believing some book.
-
Evolutionary 'science' is still stuck on Darwin, a nearly 200 y/o theory.
As theories go, evolution sucks. It's wildly speculative, but very little proof.
Beyond that, discredited. Debunked. DNA destroys evolution.
-
DNA destroys evolution.
Interesting, care to elaborate?
-
Your own lying eyes? You've seen all of this stuff, like giants, whales swallowing people, burning bushes etc.?
Like I said, I have personally had my hand in a Sasquatch track, twice in my life. Your science discounts Sasquatch (a giant btw). Who shall I believe? your science or my own lying eyes?
I've personally never seen anything close to that, nor have I seen any proof of it. I have seen proof of stuff in science, or at least I know that the methodology to arrive at some of the more abstract conclusions is sounder than believing some book.
Nor are you likely to see anything close to that.. firmly ensconced in the matrix as it were.
Tell me, what does your science do with megalithic cyclopean architecture, found the world over, that we can neither build, nor even begin to move some of the rocks, not to mention sculpt them with all of our vaunted technology applied?
Your science says they were built with stone and copper tools by near savages... Do you believe that?
-
Like I said, I have personally had my hand in a Sasquatch track, twice in my life. Your science discounts Sasquatch (a giant btw). Who shall I believe? your science or my own lying eyes?
Seeing a track is one thing, I need better proof of them.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
Tell me, what does your science do with megalithic cyclopean architecture, found the world over, that we can neither build, nor even begin to move some of the rocks, not to mention sculpt them with all of our vaunted technology applied?
Your science says they were built with stone and copper tools by near savages... Do you believe that?
Do you have a link for what you're talking about?
-
Seeing a track is one thing, I need better proof of them.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
LOL! of course you do. Lord knows you cannot believe a track on the ground. Not a single track, mind you... in both cases a track way. several prints. Enough to track a ways. One was female. I can tell by the way she pissed. The other a huge male with a stride I could barely leap across, and sunk deep despite its surface area, much deeper than my near 300lbs and 40 lb pack could even begin to do.
That IS extraordinary evidence. I know the sign of every single thing in these woods, and I have been tracking since I was a pup. The natives know he's there, and have stories going back centuries. The hillbillies know he's there. Thousands of prints. Thousands of fecal samples. Thousands of hair samples. Even DNA. But y'all need extraordinary evidence.
Can't see what's plain on the ground. Because science.
Do you have a link for what you're talking about?
No... Go look. search 'Megaliths' or 'Cyclopean Architecture' ... Ancient architecture... It's everywhere. Start with the three sisters of Baalbek. Tell me how they were moved. Look in Egypt, Japan, the Czech countries, Anglo Celtic countries...the Pre Aztec/Mayan... Megaliths are literally everywhere.
Pay attention to hardness too - granites and diorite... copper tools... riiight.
-
After the jury listened to the lawyer explain DNA, one OJ Simpson juror stated: "what about DNA? Eberybody gots DNA.
Dat don't prove nuthin.
OTOH they found the Arc, or made one in Kentucky, so that settles that.
-
LOL! of course you do. Lord knows you cannot believe a track on the ground. Not a single track, mind you... in both cases a track way. several prints. Enough to track a ways. One was female. I can tell by the way she pissed. The other a huge male with a stride I could barely leap across, and sunk deep despite its surface area, much deeper than my near 300lbs and 40 lb pack could even begin to do.
That IS extraordinary evidence. I know the sign of every single thing in these woods, and I have been tracking since I was a pup. The natives know he's there, and have stories going back centuries. The hillbillies know he's there. Thousands of prints. Thousands of fecal samples. Thousands of hair samples. Even DNA. But y'all need extraordinary evidence.
Not sure how this got turned into a thread on the veracity of bigfoot, but at least that's in the realm of science. i'm sure there's undiscovered creatures the world over. Of course, it's amusing that every few years the media gets fooled by some clowns with a gorilla suit in a freezer who claim to have "found bigfoot". :rolling:
I'd love for it to be real, but i need some concreate proof. With valid DNA evidence it could be shown to fit into our understanding of the great apes tree somehow. And 100 years of bigfoot "sightings" and nothing more than some tracks and some deer hair?
No... Go look. search 'Megaliths' or 'Cyclopean Architecture' ... Ancient architecture... It's everywhere. Start with the three sisters of Baalbek. Tell me how they were moved. Look in Egypt, Japan, the Czech countries, Anglo Celtic countries...the Pre Aztec/Mayan... Megaliths are literally everywhere.
Pay attention to hardness too - granites and diorite... copper tools... riiight.
So back to our original debate, is this supposed to prove that giants exist and the earth is 6000 years old?
-
(http://www.cryptozoonews.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/wwn-bigfoot.png)
-
The power of Physics derives from its Laws and Principles which advance Mankind:
* The Principle of Archimedes explains buoyancy, permitting ocean travel.
* The Laws of Motion of Newton permit travel by auto.
* The Principle of Bernoulli explains aerodynamic lift permitting travel by airplane.
There are dozens of these Laws and Principles which affect the daily life of Man.
In contrast, the Theories of Darwin and Einstein, among many, are just that, Theories,
which have virtually no impact on daily life. Rather they are a catalyst for speculation
by those who desire to remake this world, as well as Man, in their own image.
-
Evolutionary 'science' is still stuck on Darwin, a nearly 200 y/o theory.
As theories go, evolution sucks. It's wildly speculative, but very little proof.
-----------------------------
Indeed it's merely a Theory, yet the evolutionist fanatics insist it's a Law.
-
Not sure how this got turned into a thread on the veracity of bigfoot, but at least that's in the realm of science. i'm sure there's undiscovered creatures the world over. Of course, it's amusing that every few years the media gets fooled by some clowns with a gorilla suit in a freezer who claim to have "found bigfoot". :rolling:
I'd love for it to be real, but i need some concreate proof. With valid DNA evidence it could be shown to fit into our understanding of the great apes tree somehow. And 100 years of bigfoot "sightings" and nothing more than some tracks and some deer hair?
There IS valid DNA. Double blind, two labs. But unless you go looking, you'll never know.
But that is not the point. I don't care what you believe about it. I KNOW. I have had my hand in the bloody track. incontrovertible evidence. There could have been no other thing that laid those tracks.
Yet science convinces you, or at least most, that I am a quack, and that there is no proof, YET for fifty years and even now, absolute forgeries like the piltdown man are in the history books.
THAT is the point, and why should I believe it? That which I know to be real, pushed down. That which is false lifted up. And if I can point to it there, and in the timeline attributed to Egypt, and in the absurdity of human and societal development - HISTORY ACCORDING TO SCIENCE - Why should I believe any of it?
I know it to cower behind group think and politics... also in evolution. Also in the Flood. Why would I not assume the very same across the board? It all works the same way.
So back to our original debate, is this supposed to prove that giants exist and the earth is 6000 years old?
It is supposed to prove that a false narrative exists. Explain this world-wide society, built in stone, that we cannot do with all our might today. Yet the whole of it written off as being built by savages. Because science.
It is errata, and stands against the proofs. If they cannot tell me that, why the hell should I believe the fairy stories they are so positive of that assuredly happened millions and millions of years ago?
I think the story is entirely different.
Like I said, history attests that men were fighting dragons (read dinos)... Matter-of-factly, in military reports.
The same with giants. I mean to pit history - factual accounts in known time - Against what 'science' has to say. And when the two are opposed, which they very certainly are, which then will you believe?
-
When these thread pop up, I usually just remember Job 38 where God just mentions that we don't know, will never know, and probable are foolish thinking we can figure it out. String theory out your behinds, it is beyond our grasp.
4. Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.
5 Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it?
6 Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof;
7 When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?
-
When these thread pop up, I usually just remember Job 38 where God just mentions that we don't know, will never know, and probable are foolish thinking we can figure it out. String theory out your behinds, it is beyond our grasp.
4. Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.
5 Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it?
6 Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof;
7 When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?
3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,
4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.
5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:
6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:
7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.
-2 Peter 3 : 3-7
:beer:
-
:beer:
:beer:
-
Whazziss got to do wit' Bigfoot? :pondering:
-
Whazziss got to do wit' Bigfoot? :pondering:
Just a tool for demonstration purposes.
-
Just a tool for demonstration purposes.
Ah! An anology! :beer: :beer: :2popcorn:
-
Well, this thread has wandered off a long way from the original topic -- a gee-whiz post about the things string theorists claim in a desperate attempt to keep all of physics inside differential geometry, rather than needing to learn any other mathematics, thereby rendering their enterprise non-scientific (and disadvantaging it in terms of Occam's Razor, in comparison to a theory invoking Divine intervention, by needing not one not-directly observable entity, but a whole host of them, string vacuum states in the early universe, dark matter, dark energy, a whole host of "other universes",...).
I would observe about the rest of what has come up:
(1) Strictly speaking evolution means "change in allele frequency over time". That this happens is an indisputable fact. What is open to debate scientifically is whether the Darwinian mechanism of "random" mutation and natural selection provides a complete or even adequate explanation for the change in allele frequency. There are hints that there may be some subtle Lamarkian mechanisms involved as well, and epigenetics makes the whole project much more complicated.
Of course the "debate" about Darwinian evolution is not primarily scientific, but rather metaphysical, and is so heated because both sides seem to accept as true the notion that a mechanism that involves randomness is somehow or other contrary to the mechanism's operation being intentional. One side says "random variation was involved in the development of biological diversity, therefore there is no Creator"; the other says, "God made the world, humanity included, therefore a description of its making that involves random variation must be false." I say, remember that hardening metal and annealing metal involve sequences of thermal (that is random) effects, but an archeologist who finds a piece of well-hardened metal or a piece of annealed metal will assume they are a fragment of an artifact, something created intentionally. We Orthodox Christians say "I believe in One God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible..." Among the invisible things are the laws of physics, the laws of logic, the laws of probability, space, time, numerosity, extent .... The Sovereignty of God does not end at the door of a casino.
(2) Biblical literalism is the odd view that the books of Scripture were addressed principally to post-Rennaisance rationalists, and thus that their truths should be discovered by reading them with the same mind-set (we Orthodox prefer the word phronema) with which one reads post-Rennaisance scientific treatises. This was certainly not how Christians who lived in the same culture as the Holy Apostles read them. St. Basil the Great, whose commentary on Genesis, The Hexameron is often held up to claim the Fathers of the Church were literalists in their interpretation of Genesis, writes early in the book, "it matters not whether you say 'day' or 'aeon', the thought is the same". There is also an ancient Christian tradition of referring to the Age to Come as "the Eighth and Eternal Day", which refers to the related tradition that all of human history lies within the seventh day on which God rested from His works. The Psalmist's warning about God's time scales is a bit more flexible than equating a day and a millenium: "For a thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past, and as a watch in the night." (Note the deliberate lack of precision, a watch in the night is perhaps 3 hours, and it is not a day, but 'yesterday when it is past', the mere memory of a day gone by.) I commend to your attention the commentary on Genesis by probably the best Greek lay theologian of the last century, Alexander Kalamiros, here: https://www.scribd.com/document/75080212/The-Six-Dawns-by-Dr-Alexander-Kalomiros (https://www.scribd.com/document/75080212/The-Six-Dawns-by-Dr-Alexander-Kalomiros) . By reading Genesis in the partistic phronema, rather than a rationalist phronema, he quite masterfully shows that there is no conflict between the Truth of Scripture and the truths of modern science.
-
Well, this thread has wandered off a long way from the original topic -- a gee-whiz post about the things string theorists claim in a desperate attempt to keep all of physics inside differential geometry, rather than needing to learn any other mathematics, thereby rendering their enterprise non-scientific (and disadvantaging it in terms of Occam's Razor, in comparison to a theory invoking Divine intervention, by needing not one not-directly observable entity, but a whole host of them, string vacuum states in the early universe, dark matter, dark energy, a whole host of "other universes",...).
I would observe about the rest of what has come up:
(1) Strictly speaking evolution means "change in allele frequency over time". That this happens is an indisputable fact. What is open to debate scientifically is whether the Darwinian mechanism of "random" mutation and natural selection provides a complete or even adequate explanation for the change in allele frequency. There are hints that there may be some subtle Lamarkian mechanisms involved as well, and epigenetics makes the whole project much more complicated.
Of course the "debate" about Darwinian evolution is not primarily scientific, but rather metaphysical, and is so heated because both sides seem to accept as true the notion that a mechanism that involves randomness is somehow or other contrary to the mechanism's operation being intentional. One side says "random variation was involved in the development of biological diversity, therefore there is no Creator"; the other says, "God made the world, humanity included, therefore a description of its making that involves random variation must be false." I say, remember that hardening metal and annealing metal involve sequences of thermal (that is random) effects, but an archeologist who finds a piece of well-hardened metal or a piece of annealed metal will assume they are a fragment of an artifact, something created intentionally. We Orthodox Christians say "I believe in One God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible..." Among the invisible things are the laws of physics, the laws of logic, the laws of probability, space, time, numerosity, extent .... The Sovereignty of God does not end at the door of a casino.
(2) Biblical literalism is the odd view that the books of Scripture were addressed principally to post-Rennaisance rationalists, and thus that their truths should be discovered by reading them with the same mind-set (we Orthodox prefer the word phronema) with which one reads post-Rennaisance scientific treatises. This was certainly not how Christians who lived in the same culture as the Holy Apostles read them. St. Basil the Great, whose commentary on Genesis, The Hexameron is often held up to claim the Fathers of the Church were literalists in their interpretation of Genesis, writes early in the book, "it matters not whether you say 'day' or 'aeon', the thought is the same". There is also an ancient Christian tradition of referring to the Age to Come as "the Eighth and Eternal Day", which refers to the related tradition that all of human history lies within the seventh day on which God rested from His works. The Psalmist's warning about God's time scales is a bit more flexible than equating a day and a millenium: "For a thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past, and as a watch in the night." (Note the deliberate lack of precision, a watch in the night is perhaps 3 hours, and it is not a day, but 'yesterday when it is past', the mere memory of a day gone by.) I commend to your attention the commentary on Genesis by probably the best Greek lay theologian of the last century, Alexander Kalamiros, here: https://www.scribd.com/document/75080212/The-Six-Dawns-by-Dr-Alexander-Kalomiros (https://www.scribd.com/document/75080212/The-Six-Dawns-by-Dr-Alexander-Kalomiros) . By reading Genesis in the partistic phronema, rather than a rationalist phronema, he quite masterfully shows that there is no conflict between the Truth of Scripture and the truths of modern science.
Well, I cannot get to the recommended material, merely a preface.
If that preface us what you meant to point to, rather than the work, Then I can reject it on its face. The primary criteria being:
First, Yah did not create an ascending creation... something striving for the perfection of Man... No, the whole of it was perfect. In fact he draws that perfection in a beast as well - The Behemoth - which Yah also claims as perfect.
Secondly, asserting that Yah has given us 'science' so we must not seek against it omits that Yah also identifies a 'science so called', which leads one to ask which one we are seeking after. Because Yah proclaims he will make them laughingstocks in the end.
Thirdly, in a more practical sense, DNA flatly destroys evolutionary theory. The degradation thereof, and the basics of thermodynamics do too. Man is not ascendant, but rather descendant. Nothing gets better with time, but rather decays. The very same with genetic coding. Evolving does not make better, it makes worse.
In the post you opine that evolution is fact. Within a kind that is obvious, and no one has contended otherwise. But those changes are limited to kind and there is no evidence otherwise.
I would submit that DNA contains all that myriad variety from its start within a kind. And that DNA is degrading across the ages, not improving. Genesis describes 5 kinds of flesh I believe, and in fact describes as part of the fall a corruption of all flesh, the primary reason for the flood. the mixing of flesh is directly against Torah.
If that is the case (which it is) then the boundaries that set flesh as a 'kind' are set, and they do not mix naturally. lest there would be no adamant law against it. And it is adamant. With emphasis.
Thus the mixing above the 'kind' would require more than nature - a manipulation - one present twice on this earth... Once in Noah's day, And today. Because science.
-
Evolution is 100 percent fact !! Anyone who disagrees is “ Science illiterateâ€
String theory has the math but not the “ physical evidence “..yet
Evolution has the genetics/DNA, the fossil record and many other things .
For example , Your DNA and a fish DNA are very similar and suggest common origins . Your arm and a cats paw are Very similar in origins . Humans are littered with bad evolutionary designs and dead ends
The Bible is good for morals and teachings but it has zero science !!!
100% fact? seems I heard the same thing about Anthropogenic Global Warming, back before the world ended a few times. Oh wait. It didn't...Maybe in just 10 more years?
The fossil record has more holes than a collander.
There are a buttload of hypothetical ancestral stocks, transitional forms (missing links), and dotted lines just to get to amphioxus.
It stands to reason creatures in a similar environment would have to have similar body chemistries, otherwise, they'd be dead. Quicker and easier to create them than evolve them, and there is your common origin.
-
I don’t want to get into a Darwin debate on this thread.
All I know is the first time I ever looked into a telescope, and it was the one at Princeton University for a Girl Scout badge in 4th grade, I’ve been hooked as an amateur astronomer, ever since.
Now that more and more exoplanets are being discovered it may be our universe isn’t special. The Milky Way May be structured like millions of galaxies, and when it collides with Andromeda in several billion years, that too may be considered an “ordinary†or “common†thing.
All I know is when I look through a telescope, or I see pictures from Hubble, Cassini, Juno, Huygens (which landed on Titian) etc, I’m struck in awe and wonder. It may be ordinary in the grand scheme of things, or if I was a space traveler like say Captain Kirk, or Picard, but to me they are among the most beautiful sights I’ve ever seen. Extraordinary. They make me happy, and that is priceless.
I know I’ll never get to go to another planet or moon in my lifetime but I do in my dreams.
-
Darwinian Dumbasses (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwjNnJK09dPpAhVTHzQIHdukDcYQFjAQegQIChAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icr.org%2Farticle%2Fprobability-order-versus-evolution%2F&usg=AOvVaw2-tU7OLe73R66kZsKqNQQ0)
Astro-physicists estimate that there are no more than 1080 infinitesimal "particles" in the universe, and that the age of the universe in its present form is no greater than 1018 seconds (30 billion years). Assuming each particle can participate in a thousand billion (1012) different events every second (this is impossibly high, of course), then the greatest number of events that could ever happen (or trials that could ever be made) in all the universe throughout its entire history is only 1080 x 1018 x 1012, or 10110 (most authorities would make this figure much lower, about 1050). Any event with a probability of less than one chance in 10110, therefore, cannot occur. Its probability becomes zero, at least in our known universe.
Thus, the above-suggested ordered arrangement of 100 components has a zero probability. It could never happen by chance. Since every single living cell is infinitely more complex and ordered than this, it is impossible that even the simplest form of life could ever have originated by chance. Even the simplest replicating protein molecule that could be imagined has been shown by Golay1 to have a probability of one in 10450. Salisbury2 calculates the probability of a typical DNA chain to be one in 10600.