It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

How close are you in believing ?

page: 6
45
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 15 2016 @ 07:44 PM
link   
a reply to: uncommitted

I believe in God because I feel him /it like a jedi feels the force.

I am close to him /it, like I am to my hand, my feet, or my mind.

That is why.

Nothing and no one will do anything to change that. I have felt this since before priests and teachers showed me names and symbols.

I dont need religion, religion needs me.

I belong to nothing. I dont even belong to God. He /it, is everything, including me. He /it, is all things, and as such I am free to be born and disolve into oblivion, never changed from my primal state.

I only grow, even when I die. I only grow in this "force".

Science is a method, a way. A school of thought.

I see it as religion. I belong to nothing.

I am free, and because of this, all that must be seen is revealed. All I need be, I am.

All I am, I am.


edit on 8 15 2016 by tadaman because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 15 2016 @ 07:54 PM
link   
Tesla: "If you only knew the importance of the 3, 6 and 9."

This is a very interesting set of videos Slayer69, I've only watched the first one, now into the second.

S&F

I'll comment more when I've watched them all later. Fascinating so far.



posted on Aug, 15 2016 @ 08:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: peter vlar

Who are these REAL scientists and what makes every other scientist a fake scientist other than their ability to understand the evidence showing that evolution is a real biological process?


Real scientists follow the empirical evidence regardless of their old bias.


That doesn't really answer the question. What are the names of these "REAL" scientists? The entire premise is hoakum





Because mainstream science papers do not publish papers that disprove a large portion of their past content


This Is complete garbage. There is a constant stream of new information being published every month in journals across the world.



Every dinosaur fossil that has been carbon-dated thus far has had C-14, but this does not mean they all do (it's just very likely the case). If you can find an AMS test that found no C-14 in a dinosaur fossil I will retract such a statement.


So you can't actually provide proof of the claim and you want me to provide proof that it is false? pretty standard. I like how you ignored the claim of every fossilized remain having flesh on it. It's a bigger lie than the 14C in fossils claim.

Let's look at the testing that has led to the 14C found in fossilized remains claim. The integrity of Hugh Miller from the CRSEF, or Creation Research, Science Education Foundation is highly questionable. Hugh Miller is the man who has claimed to have dated dinosaur bones using radiocarbon methods, determining them to be no older than several tens of thousands of years old.

Miller's research group obtained their sample in a rather shady way. In fact, the creationist posed as chemists in order to secure fragments of fossilized dinosaur bone from a museum of natural history, misrepresenting both themselves and their own "research" in the process of doing so.

The museum that provided the bone fragments emphasized that they had been heavily contaminated with "shellac" and other chemical preservatives. Miller and his group accepted the samples and reassured the museum that such containments would not be problematic for the analysis at hand. They then sent it to a laboratory run by the University of Arizona, where radiocarbon dating could be carried out. To get the scientists to consider their sample, the researchers once again pretended to be interested in the dating for general chemical analysis purposes, misrepresenting their research.

So after misrepresenting who they were, what their scientific background was and obtaining materials they knew ahead of time were already chemically contaminated, I'm to be expected to believe that the results of the 14C testing gave legitimate results? Please, let me have some of what you guys are smoking because it's got to be PRIMO.

After the samples were submitted by the laboratory, Miller was informed by a professor from the University of Arizona that the samples were heavily contaminated, and that no collagen (where most of the carbon for 14 C
14C dating comes from) was present. Miller let assured the professor that the analysis was still of interest to the group.
The only things tested here were sample contamination and the integrity and trustworthiness of Miller and his "group".


Hugh Miller generously provided me with a copy of the elemental analysis of one of their dinosaur fossils. Daniel Fisher of the University of Michigan’s Museum of Paleontology examined these results and concludes that there is nothing whatsoever extraordinary about them. The predominant suite of elements present and their relative percentages (including the 3.4% carbon!) are about what one would expect to find in hydroxyapatite and calcite, two of the commonest minerals present in ordinary dinosaur fossils. There is absolutely nothing unusual about these fossils and no reason to think the carbon contained in them is organic carbon derived from the original dinosaur bone.

Robert Kalin senior research specialist at the University of Arizona’s radiocarbon dating laboratory, performed a standard independent analysis of the specimens submitted by Hugh Miller and concluded that the samples identified as “bones” did not contain any collagen. They were, in fact, not bone. These results corroborated established paleontological theories that assert that these fossiles presumably were 'washed away' over long periods of time by ground water, replacing the original bones with other substances such as the minerals naturally present in the water, implying that this sample could not tell you anything about when a dinosaur lived (or rather, died).



Miller and his "group" completely ignored the scientific method during every step of this "testing". In fact, he won't even give the names of some of the labs purported to have done the testing. Had I ever done work of that level, I would have been thrown out of school and would never have been allowed in a lab or at a dig site ever again. That's the quality of the work you're referring to when you talk about "REAL" scientists? You should be embarrassed for yourself if that's the case.

www.fleming-group.com...

www.scientificamerican.com...




There is plenty of evidence - You just ignore the evidence contrary to your beloved theories.



As demonstrated by your insistence that many tests have been undertaken(without actually providing anything resembling a citation to support the notion) while completely ignoring the highly unethical methods of the "team" who wasn't trying to get an honest, true result(their only goal was to cast doubt on the efficacy of 14C dating no matter how low they had to stoop to do so. No ethics and less integrity.) your ability to distinguish actual science from wishful thinking and confirmation bias is highly questionable at this point. The group who allegedly proved that 14C was present in dinosaur fossils doesn't actually fall under your own preferred definition of a "REAL" scientist. Ain't irony grand?

I've addressed every single one of the evidentiary claims you listed in the past and I'm not going to waste my time doing so again because you, like your idol Miller, appear to be more interested in promoting your agenda than discussing the truth and the actual science in play. And using AIG to support claims regarding science is a joke right? Seriously, they wouldn't know science if it gave them a lap dance. Your "evidence" is less scientific than the fraud perpetrated by Miller and that's saying a lot. Why don't you discuss the science yourself instead of hiding behind some links and parroting someone else's words?



posted on Aug, 15 2016 @ 08:27 PM
link   
I'm just going to add that never in my life have I heard a theory where a God or God's could not have been behind it. The thing that most people do seem to agree on is that we are surrounded by both good and evil forces. I bet if we are honest with ourselves, most will admit to having "felt" both. I've experienced enough and heard enough from all walks of life. I hope we all get to learn the truth somehow. It's my opinion that this soul farm weaved in the magic of the matters could use alot more truth.



posted on Aug, 15 2016 @ 08:27 PM
link   

edit on 15-8-2016 by Illumimasontruth because: Tech issues, slow load and repeated. Cough.



posted on Aug, 15 2016 @ 08:45 PM
link   
In my case, I just don't think I'm mentally equipped to be a full on atheist. I believe that most atheists fit a certain personality type. They tend to be very science, math, and logic oriented. I'm casually interested in science, but I don't really have the "scientist brain." I've read many arguments for the nonexistence of a god or an afterlife, but there is just some part of me that can't shake the feeling that there is something more out there. Things like the DNA argument and accounts of NDE's I usually take with a grain of salt. It's not really about evidence for me (although I would still love to find some). My spirituality hinges on some kind of basic, underlying inability to discount it. Whatever the reason for that might be, I really don't see myself ever being anything more than agnostic.



posted on Aug, 15 2016 @ 09:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: peter vlar


Let's look at the testing that has led to the 14C found in fossilized remains claim. The integrity of Hugh Miller from the CRSEF, or Creation Research, Science Education Foundation is highly questionable. Hugh Miller is the man who has claimed to have dated dinosaur bones using radiocarbon methods, determining them to be no older than several tens of thousands of years old.


How can anyone argue with you if everything that is presented contrary to your opinion is automatically fraudulent? I assume it's safe to say you agree that the University of Georgia's Accelerator Mass Spectrometry team is credible??? THEY were the ones who did the testing, not Hugh Miller. There is no point in arguing with you if every shred of evidence is dismissed because it does not adhere to your precious dogma.

Finding C-14 in dinosaur bones should excite you! NEW SCIENCE. but no, you stick to the old, afraid of any contradictory evidence. It would've blown my mind if you would've said something along the lines of "wow that's interesting, we should really look into that more", rather than "nope, they're frauds, it can't be true".

Get real. Or at least be objective.



posted on Aug, 15 2016 @ 09:56 PM
link   
a reply to: SLAYER69

I believe there may be something out there, maybe not. Out of all of the creationist theories, I find the computer simulation model to be the most reasonable. I am open minded.

I do not think that any of the religious works have any answers. I believe they were written by men, for men, without any type of divine intervention.

If god really did want us to know of him, and worship him, he would just let us know. He would not leave us multiple ancient books written by multiple prophets, with similar stories, where the consequence for picking the wrong book is eternal damnation. It makes 0 logical sense to me.

I think that organized religion is a scam. I think that it's creation was a tool for control, just like government. I do not dislike or bash people that do believe and I respect other people's opinions.

With that being said; I think that it is closed minded to believe in any religion or creation theory fully without exploring all options. Most people belong to a certain religion based on location and culture. Claiming that you have all of the answers and that your religion is right, and others is wrong, is extremely arrogant and self righteous.



posted on Aug, 15 2016 @ 11:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: peter vlar


Let's look at the testing that has led to the 14C found in fossilized remains claim. The integrity of Hugh Miller from the CRSEF, or Creation Research, Science Education Foundation is highly questionable. Hugh Miller is the man who has claimed to have dated dinosaur bones using radiocarbon methods, determining them to be no older than several tens of thousands of years old.


How can anyone argue with you if everything that is presented contrary to your opinion is automatically fraudulent?


Right... that's what it is, everything is an automatic fraud if it doesn't adhere to my preconceived notions. What a joke and not even close to the truth.


I assume it's safe to say you agree that the University of Georgia's Accelerator Mass Spectrometry team is credible??? THEY were the ones who did the testing, not Hugh Miller. There is no point in arguing with you if every shred of evidence is dismissed because it does not adhere to your precious dogma.


You've got it completely backwards. There's no point in having a discussion with YOU if you're unwilling to look at the fraudulent manner in which Miller perpetrated a scam so that people like you can say "look! There's REAL scientists out there willing to get their hands dirty and all of you dogmatic nutters refuse to look at it". Did you read ANYTHING in my post? Because if you had you would have seen where the testing lab told Miller that the results weren't valid because of contamination issues. That Miller lied to get samples and lied to the labs involved.


Finding C-14 in dinosaur bones should excite you! NEW SCIENCE. but no, you stick to the old, afraid of any contradictory evidence. It would've blown my mind if you would've said something along the lines of "wow that's interesting, we should really look into that more", rather than "nope, they're frauds, it can't be true".



If the tests were done in a proper fashion, if Miller weren't a lying sack of S#, if the 14C were actually from the fossils... then yes, I'd be very interested and if that were the actual evidence and it were true, I would, as I do anytime new information is brought forth, change how I look at things. But that's not what happened here. Miller lied every step of the way and for some reason you're OK with that and think it's actual science, let alone good science. I cited all the pertinent data but that means nothing to you because you want to accuse me of what you are actually guilty of. It's the most insane thing I've seen on ATS so far this week.


Get real. Or at least be objective.


You might want to follow your own advicxe because I can think of many adjectives to use for you here. Objective isn't one of them. Please explain to me how they tested the "bones" for 14C when there was ZERO collagen present? You know, collagen? what is actually going to be tested for 14C?

Please explain to me how its objective for Miller to obtain samples that he knows are contaminated because the museum told him before turning over the samples, and then pretend to test them? He knew exactly what was going to happen and he knows the results aren't valid. But the lack of ethics or integrity by Miller and his "team" is for some reason irrelevant to you. The fact that he purposely sent contaminated samples out for testing holds no water in your mind.

Either you're as much a liar as Miller or you didn't read anything beyond my first paragraph. Which was it?



posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 12:26 AM
link   
a reply to: SLAYER69

Hey slayer! I like your op. Um I'm just gonna go ahead and say this without any fear. I believe in God, Jesus and Holy Spirit. I laid my life down Tuesday August 9th. I feel a peace has washed over me. I've always been a child of God but I was spiritually awoken on last Tuesday.. I see the light, no joke and it's like I have a new sight. I may seem a bit bonkers but let me tell you a secret .. All the best people are a bit mad my dear !!


I believe God created everything. For the purpose is to love I suppose .. I do know that I am supposed to live my life to the fullest and love. Be kind to all. Help others in need. I feel the meaning to my life is to love and push out all the love I can and be a loving, selfless person.

Much peace and love to you xoxo
We all go through diff experiences in life.. I got a chance to go through an experience on Tuesday that was magical .. I wish I could share visually and emotionally and everything that I experienced but I can't so I just have to use my words and live by example

edit on 16-8-2016 by natalia because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 12:29 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

In one of saturn`s many dimensions, not in our plane.. yeah, he/it said the same thing..

Buddha was awesome too, totally had an obsession with sound, (funny because he does not like to speak, uses telepathy instead)
He is still meditating in there, and will do so for all of eternity.

The underworld is an interesting but dangerous place, because they are all dead, or dying, and will try their best to steal your life.

Anyone can make soma after a few years of research, but the most difficult part is to get an invitation from the other side.


Edit- About science, it is possible to reverse engineer stuff from there, like flying saucers and nuclear devices,
the reich was aware of this, and created many things, that originate from the other side. Great are the powers of Teonanacatl.
edit on 16-8-2016 by solve because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 02:24 AM
link   
Deciding on what is the truth is not the truth.



posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 05:16 AM
link   
a reply to: SLAYER69

Can you say NINE...

This reminds me a tad of The 36 story. Well is just happens that 3+6=9, the nine pillars ?
So what are the NINE ?

Also the way he shows the shapes all fitting into and apart from each other, this reminds me of everything being connected. Good Stuff ! What are the parts of the nine, they go on and on and on...like the mandelbrot set.

The whole video is explanatory... but pay special attention to the 2.34 mark of the video. As I think it relates...


leolady

edit on 16-8-2016 by leolady because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 05:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: logicsoda

originally posted by: BlackProject
a reply to: cooperton
There is no grand design. Period. This comes from a mind not dissolved or effected by shear belief in science or shear belief in religion but understanding of common sense with what we have in front of us.

But im sure your
about this even being true.

You don't know that there is no grand design. You keep touting that as an absolute fact, but the thing about it is that we really don't know if the universe was had some designer, particularly when you take into consideration the multiverse theory which implies the possibility of an infinite universe which subsequently implies infinite possibilities. There is no evidence to suggest a designer, but there is still that possibility, however small.


It seems you are adamant that there could be a designer, just because there is no proof otherwise.

Just because science is yet to prove that our existence is due to mass coincidence does not mean other fact proven by science do not already answer these questions. It can be seen in snowflakes, the ice patterns that are created and fall to the ground have been studied meticulously for there infinite design yet is only due to natural occurring heating up and cooling down processes as it falls. The breakthrough of understanding there infinite patterns of symmetry can be utilised to see that our universe although seemly perfectly made is only perfect to life that exists to flourish in it.

This goes back to the age old story told to children. The giraffe has a long neck so it can reach the tall tree's. Religious outlook. Things are made for purpose. The giraffe has a long neck, so chooses to eat the food of tall trees. Common sense, reason.



posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 05:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: amazing


Why can't we have both...a belief in a Creation by God and a belief in Science and natural processes?


I've snipped what was an extremely thoughtful post - mind you, I say that as it fairly much mirrored my own thoughts, but the question I left in above................... of course we can. I believe in some sort of divine architect theory that I cannot of course prove in any conventional sense, but I also know that evolution is a reality - actually, the very fact life evolves is part of that whole design - in an ironic way, perhaps the two are the constant truths that actually validate each other



posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 06:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: Logarock

originally posted by: uncommitted
a reply to: SLAYER69


whatever it is we were designed/created to finally accomplish.


Really? Why do you think we are anything other than another branch of life? Assuming homo sapien had never come into being, assuming none of the forebears to homo sapien had come into being, do you think every other species of life - plant or animal - would have missed us? I'm not so sure an arrogance that we are somehow the best of breed holds true personally, and without our footprint, maybe the world would be in a much better place.



Well first I have never understood calling humans "arrogant". Even if its true that the world would have been better off with out humans.....well oh well. Looks like we have had several extinction level events that had nothing to do with our foot print. So yea wow let the world go on with groundhogs digging holes, birds building nests year after year animal world round about. Big deal. Anyway you have these human animals that really are quite the spectacle in the animal world. Nothing even close to humans.....unless, as some will note that apes throw rocks at stuff but haven't been found building a convenience to mars or anything......deep in their jungle lab.


I'm sure you must have had a point when you started responding, give it a while, it may come back to you.



posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 06:16 AM
link   
a reply to: BlackProject


This goes back to the age old story told to children. The giraffe has a long neck so it can reach the tall tree's. Religious outlook. Things are made for purpose. The giraffe has a long neck, so chooses to eat the food of tall trees. Common sense, reason.


Thing is, the actual facts are nowhere near that straightforward - there is no definitive answer it appears as to why the giraffe developed a long neck. I give you the fascinating article below which I found after your comment sparked my interest.

www.wired.co.uk...



posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 06:29 AM
link   
a reply to: Illumimasontruth




The thing that most people do seem to agree on is that we are surrounded by both good and evil forces. I bet if we are honest with ourselves, most will admit to having "felt" both. I've experienced enough and heard enough from all walks of life. I hope we all get to learn the truth somehow. It's my opinion that this soul farm


Its quite obvious that this soul farm is harvested for loosh, I see the "good force" usually takes a back seat.



posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 07:06 AM
link   
a reply to: SLAYER69

Well i'm pretty much agnostic so I believe in a governing force, but I have no idea what it is.

For your amusement here is a rap battle of science vs. religion that is so bad it's funny.




posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 07:09 AM
link   
a reply to: TinfoilTP

Likewise if we take the Creationists perspective that this creation and planet is unique all hope is lost; it was pretty easy for man to fall with a bit of persuasion from the serpent. Where was gods omniscience then or now?

In one of your possible universes the serpent is in control, ponder that




top topics



 
45
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join