Prescient comment. For indeed, the appearance of the "universe" is a form of vengeance. The "design" is for axe grinding, grudge holding, and gyrating grievances. It is literally unforgivingness that makes time, shapes and forms. So it is forgiveness that collapses space and time. The "design" is that of a jailhouse. It is filled with those unwilling to release the minds of others to the truth. Those willing to release themselves and others do not appear here very long. As they release, they are released. It is an extremely cruel "design" in which everything is attacking everything. Merely observe a "nature" filmography like "Planet Earth" to verify the many forms of attack. The acceptance of a "design" will indeed advance you farther and faster than the denial of a maker. But an awareness of the intention will take you out of this world at warp speed. For this reason, those unwilling to release the minds of others are simply continuing the legacy that makes this realm seem real. This realm is upheld by belief...and only belief. It is the "stuff" of faith...every last mountain. "Science" upholding it's reality will be faith-based. Religion upholding it's reality will be faith-based. There is a false dialectic between such religion and science because their goals are the same: axe grinding. For them, the world serves as a convenient chopping block upon which to behead their brethren. If the truth were known, there would be no place to use axes...no more killing fields. So it is not in the interest of axe grinders to question the veracity of this universe. All science can do is observe what seem to be "laws" in order to build technology that makes jailhouse conditions more tolerable...until the time of full release. Science that enables peace of mind promotes forgiveness and release from the world. All of the "laws" upholding this universe can be broken by those who understand that they are under no laws but God's. There will never be a unified theory of this universe because it is based on the ideology of separation...which is an attack on Oneness. Since Oneness is the norm for creation, this universe is an attack on God's creation. In such a universe, eyeballs are designed by insanity, for they are designed to see nothing but illusion so as to make it seem real. In such a "universe" eyeballs are literally designed for deception. It is only when you realize that you are the designer of the universe that your sight can be healed. Only then can you wake up to the self-deception, and make a choice to undeceive yourself. As extensions of the human eye, scientific instruments will tend to verify the "reality" of this "universe". Thus, they may be used by those with "an axe to grind" to perpetuate the ignorance that makes the world spin. But any tool that has been made to deceive can be harnessed by a Son of God and turned against it's original purpose. Faith and denial are two tools used to make this insane universe which I used to release it. Peace Jesus
Nice to see this thread finally dying. The believers were unable to provide any evidence to support their assertions. They were reduced to claiming that they had the evidence but were going to keep it secret. ID is now shown unequivocally to be Creation rebranded. In rare cases ID/Scientologists believe that the earth was seeded with life by extraterrestrials from Planet 9. The aim of ID/C proponents is to remake Western society in a manner 'more consistent with theistic ideals'. This transformation is unwanted by the majority. The practice of religion belongs in the privacy of one's home and within the walls of the place of worship.
Now this is funny. The Uber-Troll, the man who defines internet trolling, speaks. Profile For ZZZzzzzzzz Date Registered: 06-14-04 Total Posts: 15888 (15.16 posts per day) By the way, Z... you still haven't told us why you were banned from ET under so many other user names. Was it for abusive behaviour? Can you comment on your charges of ad hominem in light of your own continual use of that technique? Or is it like when you call other people 'fags' but then upbraid Ann Coulter for doing the same thing? Are there two standards for behaviour? How does that square with your religious beliefs? Don't you believe that all beings are CREATED equal?
If you choose you can depart this world entirely. It is not death that makes this possible. But it is change of mind about the purpose of the world. If you believe that it has a value as you see it now, so will it remain for you. But if you see no value as you behold it, it will depart from you. If you see nothing that you want to keep as yours, it will depart from you. If you see nothing you would search for as a goal, it will depart from you. It will "die" like a thread upheld by beliefs and unfounded assertions. Then, you will say to yourself, Jesus
What is the world? It is a place to think you have private thoughts within the walls of flesh you call "bodies". It is a place to worship privacy, and believe that it is possible. It is apartheid incarnate. The world is a false perception. Its born of error and remains in the mind that thought of it. It will remain no longer than the thought that gave it birth is cherished. When the thought of separation has been changed to one of true forgiveness, the world will be seen in quite another light. This light leads to truth where all the world must disappear and all its errors vanish. Now its source has gone, and its effects are gone as well. The world was made as an attack on God, and symbolizes fear. Fear is loves absence, so the world was made as a place where God could not enter, and where his Son could be apart from Him. Here, perception is born to replace knowledge. Knowledge could not cause such insane thoughts. But, eyes deceive and ears hear falsely. Now, mistakes become quite possible, for certainty has gone. The mechanisms of illusion have been born instead. These mechanisms go to find what has been given them to seek. Their aim is to fulfill the purpose which the world was made to witness and make real. They see in its illusions a solid base where truth exists upheld apart form lies. Yet everything that they report is but illusion which is kept apart from truth. As sight was made to lead away from truth, it can be redirected. All perception can be given a new purpose. We must save the world. This is our function here. For we who made it must behold it through the eyes of Christ. Let us not rest content until the world has joined our changed perception. Let us not be satisfied until forgiveness has been made complete. And let us not attempt to change our function. For what was made to die, can be restored to everlasting life. Jesus
Tradernik - whether it is creationism or not. why claim victory when you have lost on the more important point. That point being that some very respected scientists say there is the appearance of design. I will give you a quote from Susskind again. --------------------- Is it any wonder that the Anthropic Principle makes many physicists very uncomfortable? Davies and Greenstein are serious scholars, and Hoyle was one of the great scientists of the twentieth century. As they point out, the appearance of intelligent design is undeniable.? Extraordinary coincidences are required for life to be possible. It will take us a few chapters to fully understand this "elephant in the room," but let's begin with a sneak preview. The world as we know it is very precarious, in a sense that is of special interest to physicists. There are many ways it could go bad-so bad that life as we know it would be totally impossible. ... Nik when Davies Greenstein and Hoyle say there is the appearance of intelligent design - how do you claim victory. do you think you know more about physics then they do? Why don't you address their work and explain why they are wrong.
A point that is of course lost on the atheistic ET evolution defenders, is the very nature of intelligence. If we were to take them seriously, then what is considered intelligence from their perspective (mankind's intelligence of course, human intelligence) then this so called intelligence would be nothing other than the accidental unplanned byproduct of billions of random ignorant chance evolutions, so intelligence itself would be nothing beyond some accidental condition. It is only a condition of pure ignorant luck that the human mind can grasp the developments of the hard sciences, the immutable laws of nature, mathematics, essentially it is a complete fluke that the human being "evolved" to the point of grasping the mechanics of the universe to the degree that we have understood these mechanics. Now, I would really like to see intelligence spring from accidental random happening...not not the way so many of the ET crowd were likely procreated out of some drunken night with a bimbo...but intelligence coming from non intelligence at in a series of unplanned unintelligent ignorant moves. I dare say it would be easy to prove that intelligence could come from ignorance... Simply program one computer to win at chess, knowing all the possible moves, the AI computers that can challenge (an example being Big Blue computer) and often win against the greatest chess (human) players in the world. Then pit this intelligently programmed computer to play another computer that makes all moves entirely at a random, from a level of ignorant unplanned programming. Let's see how long, if ever, the computer that is programmed for pure ignorant chance moves will take to beat the intelligent computer. The hubris of course is that the ET atheists think that their intelligence is the superior intelligence, but of course this conclusion is ultimately derived from a condition they think is the product of random ignorant chance. The absurdity of their position is extremely obvious, but it takes deprogramming of the atheistic ego to be able to see it...
TraderNik wrote: Hardly. There have been 3,000 views of this thread in the last couple of days, leaving all the rest in the dust. TraderNik wrote: Here is an article by an ID theorist. I challenge the ID critics to find any reference to the supernatural, any reference to religious doctrine, any quotes from the Bible, any hint of creationism or anything that is remotely anti-evolution or anti-science. Life exhibits features specific to design We begin by asking whether or not life itself owes its origin to design through intelligent intervention. To help us answer the question, we can look to examples other than life: things that are designed through intelligent intervention and things that are not designed through intelligent intervention. More specifically, we can look to engineering on one hand, and physics, chemistry, geology, meteorology, and astronomy on the other hand. Then, we simply ask into which of these hands is life a better fit. It is my position that life better fits in the class of things known to be designed through intelligent intervention. (1) The study of life is much more like the study of engineering than any other field of science. This is clearly seen from the fact that teleological language and concepts are very important in biology and engineering, but essentially missing from the other fields of science. If life is designed, this makes much sense. (2) Over the last few decades, the more we have learned about cell biology and molecular biology, the greater has grown the distance between chemistry and biology. Biological states are high information states and biological processes depend crucially on these high information states. Thus, in order for life to exist, we find such things as codes, sophisticated molecular machines, proof-reading of information, and quality control mechanisms. In the entire known non-living universe, such things are found only in artifacts and given that these things are at the very heart of life, the significance of the similarity is profound. In fact, note carefully the conclusions of physicist Paul Davies: Where in chemistry, astronomy, or geology do we find essential information-processing systems employing software control?? I maintain that (1) and (2) constitute a positive case for the design of life through intelligent intervention. While these reasons may be insufficient to prove design, or even generate a widespread consensus, they are sufficient for employing ID as a working hypothesis. (3) Concerning abiogenesis, Paul Davies also writes: "Many investigators feel uneasy about stating in public that the origin of life is a mystery, even though behind closed doors they admit that they are baffled." At this point, we need to ask a question: Why are origin of life researchers baffled? During the many decades since abiogenesis was proposed, scientific advance has progressed at an incredible rate. Yet research into abiogenesis stagnates. Why? Non-teleologists have faith that this is simply another gap to be filled with the same scientific cement used to uncover the genetic code and clone Dolly. But is it? The problem is that the very advances in science we have seen are not working to make abiogenesis more tractable, but instead, are highlighting (1) and (2) above. Thus I have an explanation for this bafflement - (1) and (2). That is, the same level of bafflement would exist if scientists insisted on explaining the origin of human artifacts without reference to intelligent intervention. In contrast, non-teleologists have no specific explanation for this atypical level of scientific bafflement. Therefore, I maintain the failure of origin-of-life research not only supports (1) and (2), but is explained by (1) and (2). Consider the following scenario. In the future, imagine space travelers landing on a sterile planet to colonize it. Upon mapping the planet, they find a strange object which is quite different from the natural surroundings. Upon analysis, it is determined that this object is actually a machine. From here, most colonists infer the machine is a product of an unknown alien intelligence. But some colonists have a non-teleological perspective. They pooh-pooh this claim and insist they need determine how the planet's geology spawned this machine-like thing. So two camps emerge. The non-teleological camp sets out to figure out how geology spawned the machine. They are baffled, and the more they learn about the machine and the planet, the more baffled they become. The other camp decides to reverse engineer the machine. They try to figure out what makes it tick so they can copy basic design principles and employ the technology in other areas. This camp makes tremendous progress as it builds on the design inference. After all, if the machine represents superior design, the colonists have much the learn from it. As we turn from scenarios to reality, biology does indeed work by reverse engineering things to determine the internal logic of any system. Such insights are then used to develop biotechnology and eventually nanotechnology. Biology, with its reliance on teleological concepts and language pays tribute to ID each and every day. But it is not tribute paid with words, it is tribute paid with deeds. It is not a question of merely marveling at the design of life, it is about wanting to better understand why such designs are so much superior to ours.