It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
conception of the universe is akin to looking through at an oscilloscope
The scientific explanation of our universe is no more concrete than any religious explanation, both are theoretical
Gibberish is not my first language
my hands are shaking after a nice wank, so
out of my arse cheeks
That's the inherent hypocrisy in all forms of modern rationalism, to act as if subjective, perceptual, abstract concepts are "real" simply because scientists (priests of relativism) have an official piece of paper that says so..... and then they ask a theist to prove the existence of God. Sheer hypocrisy, and an inherently flawed mode of thought.
The ‘Scientific Revolution’ describes the sixteenth- and seventeenth-century watershed in the basic attitude to the scientific method, laying the foundations for the modern technological age. Starting when Copernicus went public with his heliocentric theory in 1543, and ending when Isaac Newton published Principia Mathematica in 1687, textbooks say there was a window of just 150 years when European thinking was transformed from superstition to science.
But that’s not the way it was. In reality, science owes its origins to beliefs that the high priests of modern science such as Richard Dawkins would regard as even more irrational than Christianity. Far, far worse to them would be the fact that the particular ‘superstitions’ in question were unprecedentedly influential.
In fact, the Scientific Revolution was driven by a very specific magical philosophy and cosmology, set out in a set of texts that inspired all the pioneers of science, directly or indirectly.
The Books that Really Changed the World
Bluntly, these texts have had a greater influence on Western civilization than any other set of texts apart from the Bible – and the greatest effect on modern Western civilization than any texts including the Bible. The scandal is that so few people today have even heard of them.
They are a collection known as the Hermetica, setting out an uncompromisingly magical and mystical philosophy and cosmology. Their name comes from their attribution to the legendary Egyptian teacher, Hermes Trismegistus (‘Thrice-Great Hermes’). According to the Hermetica, he was a descendant of the god of that name – Hermes in Greek, identified with the Egyptian god of learning, Thoth, scribe to the gods.
In medieval Europe, with the exception of the one treatise Asclepius, they had been lost, thanks to the fourth-century crackdown on pagan learning by Christian zealots. However, the books survived in the Middle East, becoming the foundation for the famously advanced medieval Arab science. All knowledge-hungry Europeans could do was hope – and pray? – that they might be rediscovered.
Eventually they were. In 1463 an agent of the great patron of the early Renaissance, Cosimo de Medici, returned to Florence with a set of 14 Hermetic treatises, written in Greek, which he had acquired in Macedonia. Famously, Cosimo’s top scholar, Marsilio Ficino, was working on the first translation of the complete works of Plato into Latin – but Cosimo, beside himself with excitement at the new discovery, ordered him to drop it in favour of the Hermetic books.
Through his translation – the Corpus Hermeticum – and allied esoteric writings, Ficino is a major figure in the restoration of Hermeticism, setting it at the heart of the Italian Renaissance. And thanks to the sensational new technology of the printing press, the Hermetic books fomented the greatest furore among European intelligentsia. It is impossible to overstate their impact, both then and much, much later. Hermeticism influenced everyone from Leonardo da Vinci to Shakespeare, and can be said without exaggeration to have kick-started the Renaissance. But the Hermetic books’ significance has always been downplayed by academics, particularly historians of science and philosophy.
The Hermetic works were so enthralling largely because they were believed to preserve the wisdom of the most ancient period of the Egyptian civilisation, that of the pyramid builders, predating even the Old Testament. But the most important reason for their huge impact was the image of humankind they presented – diametrically opposite to Man-the-doomed-worm so beloved of the Vatican.
According to the Corpus Hermeticum human beings are brilliant, amazing creatures of unlimited potential. Treatise X even declares that “the human is a godlike living thing,”1 reinforced by the Hermetic adage ‘Magnum miraculum est homo’ (‘Man is a great miracle’). This also applies to women: the Hermetic tradition had great respect for the feminine – a reason by itself for the Catholic Church’s horrified reaction to this audacious philosophy.
Although to the Church it was bad enough to promote ideas of a divine-spirited Man, to include women as inherently god-like was considerably worse. Some clerics were still debating whether they had souls, and here come these vile pagans with outrageous beliefs that women were dazzling beings of ultimate light…
Many authors have written at length about the Hermetica’s influence in generating the surge of self-confidence that inspired the great flowering of art and literature that is the Renaissance. We, however, take it further and link this Hermetic epiphany with the history of science.
Righto, I'll get to making that thread.
Message to my opposition: Prepare to be mentally annihilated.
originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight
a reply to: Connell
I never knew an oscilloscope was used to look at the universe or even measure it.
Well there's a difference between a theory and a belief based on faith. Usually theories are testable.
originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight
a reply to: Connell
You speak the language of poetry perhaps or of a regressed kindegarden toddler? Such persuasiveness. I think the site you'll feel at home at is GLP.
originally posted by: Astyanax
a reply to: Connell
A little late, but welcome to ATS.
Your basic premise was exploded in the thirteenth century by the friar-philosopher Roger Bacon, who pointed out that the universe has a metrical frame.
Peeple explained it well. There's really nothing else to add, except that, when your point that our perceptions could be no more reflective of fundamental reality than an oscilloscope trace, you neglect to consider that an oscilloscope trace is a very accurate reflection of that aspect of fundamental reality it is designed to reflect — one may equally well say, 'to manifest'.
Rationality can be accurately summed up as dogmatic naturalism, something that attempts to apply human perceptual standards to the universe at large, and attempts to explain our existence through extrapolation of observable telluric phenomena.
Time is a system we've devised to measure material degradation and solar phases, but it has no absolute basis in the physical world. Can you show me proof that there are twenty-four hours in a day, can you prove that things come into being and then cease to exist in a linear fashion?
Neither is mathematics anything but a theoretical system of quantification and measurement, based on ascribed values and the arbitrary division and reunification of those values. There is no physical basis for mathematics, yet it is universally accepted.
Ricin /ˈraɪsɪn/ is a highly toxic, naturally occurring lectin (a carbohydrate-binding protein) produced in the seeds of the castor oil plant, Ricinus communis. A dose of purified ricin powder the size of a few grains of table salt can kill an adult human.
originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: LewsTherinThelamon
Dude, if i were a mod i'd delete that. You just gave someone a precise recipe to death and the advice to do it. He is 19 for gods sake.
originally posted by: LewsTherinThelamon
a reply to: rickymouse
I actually agree with what you say. Science's theories are just theories. Even the scientific laws have limitations as to their use and application.
You are confusing hypothesis with theory.
Nope. I have read a lot of the theories and laws and researched the limitations of what they apply to. Their application many times is not viable unless certain conditions are met. Many of the laws of physics may not apply outside of this galaxy and possibly even just outside of the solar system away from the influence of the sun. The only way to know is to go outside the heliosphere and test them.