It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


The Science of God

page: 1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

+36 more 
posted on May, 21 2009 @ 03:56 PM
Hello everyone. I've been meaning to post this for a long time. I am going to go into known physics to implications in quantum physics and so on and so forth. This is going to be a very long thread, so please make sure to read the whole thing before you reply.

Before I begin, I would like to set some boundaries so that we can get some real debate going on in this thread. I ask the following:

1. Forget that that any religion here on earth ever existed (including your own), and remember they do not apply to this conversation (other than for implications in science as it applies to this thread)

2. Make sure that your replies are related to science, and therefore do not use words like "sky fairy" or any other name currently used in any religion except "god" (which is a general label) so that we do not go into any current religion or belief / disbelief.

3. This is not a conversation about belief or disbelief in god, it is merely talking about god as a scientific concept. This way we do not get into theological or political debate over that concept. Again remember this is a scientific debate.

4. I have put a ton of work into this. Please be mindful and respectful of that fact.

Lets Begin!

A big ball of matter!

Without a god there could not have been a beginning of time. Think about it! What would have been before that? More time right? If nothing created the universe then it had no beginning and therefore has always been there.

The best theory still is a modification of the big bang theory. We have already noticed that the universe is expanding via red / blue shift observations. We know that galaxies are moving relative to each other, and that they are getting further apart every single day. Not only that, but the universe’s expansion is accelerating. (we don’t know much but some things we can observe). We can already see that the universe is accelerating away from a point in space, and therefore at one point all matter was contained in a massive ball. This is the only real way to account for the relative expansion of the universe. Now let make time run backwards! If we are located at a certain distance today, then yesterday we were closer together. The day before that, we were still closer. Ultimately, where must all the galaxies have been? At a point! At the beginning! A big ball of matter…

Some say the universe expands and then contracts back into a singularity, which is the only way really the universe could exist without time having a beginning. If all matter was contained within a single ball forever then how long could it last? If there was no beginning of time (which is the only way it could be without god creating it) then how did that singularity last so long without going sooner? There are some pretty unstable elements that we know of. I’m sure there are many elements that we have not seen that can exist in certain environments. How could all these elements exist together without violent chemical reactions occurring all the time? It was bound to blow as soon as it came into existence (which it would have never came into existence because it would have always had to exist)… Why would it have lasted so long?
We know by the first law of conservation of matter that matter cannot be created nor destroyed. That matter would have always existed in form. So in order for this to be able to work then the universe would have to expand then contract over and over again.

We know that the expansion of the universe is speeding up. If the expansion is speeding up then how could there have not been a beginning since the unstable ball of matter would not have lasted very long and there was no beginning of time? And furthermore if it is expanding and accelerating then how did that big ball come to be in the first place?

In 1999, it was discovered that the galaxies are accelerating in their expansion. Any notion that we live in an oscillating or pulsating universe has been dispelled by this discovery. The universe is not slowing down, but speeding up in its motion. In other words, it is not contracting.

Lets talk about Hydrogen!!

This is the important part…

Hydrogen is the most abundant resource in the cosmos. Anyone who knows anything about spectrographs knows that certain elements only show light in a certain frequency in the spectrum.

When light passes through a prism, it separates into the colors that make it up. White light changes to a swath of colors. This rainbow is called a spectrum. You can make spectra (the plural of spectrum) in many ways: with a prism, with drops of water (as in a real rainbow), or with gratings (like in the glasses you can get). Scientists build special instruments to separate light, usually with gratings. These instruments are called spectrographs.

It turns out that each element absorbs light of a particular frequency—a particular color. If that element is in the cool atmosphere of the star, those atoms will absorb the light at that color and produce the line. Each element has a specific "signature"—a specific set of line.

Every star is a massive nuclear furnace constantly converting hydrogen (its fuel) into helium (its exhaust). The sun in fact has only used up about 2% of it’s hydrogen since it came into existence (neat little factoid there). When a star runs out of hydrogen It eventual dies. The star’s death might be violent and might be subtle but the fact remains when the hydrogen is gone the star is doomed. During a nuclear fusion reaction, two hydrogen atoms fuze together and form one helium atom. That helium atom is eventually released into the vastness of space.

If there was no beginning of time, and matter cannot be created nor destroyed then there should be the same matter today as there ever was. Right?

Ponder this…

What would eventually happen if you where to try to drive your car forever? Wouldn’t you eventually run out of gas?

If stars have been running on hydrogen forever, and thermonuclear fusion has been going on forever (since there is no beginning of time) then why hasn’t the universe run out of gas?

In fact it’s not even close! Hydrogen is by far still the most abundant resource in the universe! Helium (the exaust) is very scarce. So in order for this to actually work…… there would have had to be a beginning of time, but how could all of this exist and how could there be a beginning of time if there wasn’t something there to put the ball into play? How could the universe exist without being created? It would have ran out of gas long ago…


[edit on 21-5-2009 by DaMod]

posted on May, 21 2009 @ 03:57 PM
Something from Nothing?

If matter had a beginning and yet was uncaused, one must logically maintain that something would have had to come into existence out of nothing. From empty space with no force, no matter, no energy, and no intelligence, matter would have to become existent. Even if this could happen by some strange new process unknown to science today, there is a logical problem.

In order for matter to come out of nothing, all of our scientific laws dealing with the conservation of matter/energy would have to be wrong, invalidating all of chemistry. All of our laws of conservation of angular momentum would have to be wrong, invalidating all of physics. All of our laws of conservation of electric charge would have to be wrong, invalidating all of electronics and demanding that your TV set and Computer not work! Your television set and computer may not work, but that is not the reason! In order to believe matter is uncaused, one has to discard known laws and principles of science.

What is God then?

I’m sure everyone here is familiar with the idea of flatland.

If not then watch this video.

We really have a very backwater view of god.

How can we really know what or who god would be? God by definition would be far beyond our abilities of comprehension. He would be known as an inter-dimensional being by our standards. If he is a 11th dimensional being that means he could see every possible universe and every possible possibility all at once. To this one, time would not exist. We all should know how powerful thought really is. A being of this dimensional set up might be able to just think something into existence. (this is not beyond scientific possibility)

How could we possibly understand something like that? How could we possibly know what something like that would want from us? How could we possibly know anything of god? This makes (at least scientifically) every religion ever thought of completely wrong. It doesn’t mean there isn’t a god, it just means we don’t know what or who god really is because god is far beyond our little brains.

One possible explanation to what god could be would be M theory.

Part 1.

Part 2.

A being that could view all dimensions at once, would be beyond our understanding. And actually the membranes of all these places could be the embodiment of our God mind.

Another way of looking at it could be how the universe is set up like a neural network. Quantum entanglement is the process of two atoms that are interconnected. If you where to do something to one atom then the exact thing would happen to the other atom at the exact moment you made the change. Therefore distance really doesn’t matter at this level of thinking. Perhaps the entangled universe is our God Mind. Which means every atom in every molecule is a part of this mind.

I will continue this thread later on. I have to get back to work

[edit on 21-5-2009 by DaMod]

posted on May, 21 2009 @ 04:08 PM
Thanks for the info. Star and flag for you. It wll take me sometime to digest all of this info so I will hold off on commenting further until then.

posted on May, 21 2009 @ 04:20 PM
Excellent thread.

It's always good to think about god with an open mind, forgetting about what we are taught from religions just for a moment, and instead try looking at it from another direction, in a free minded way.

Athiests can deny the christian god for example, but that does not mean they should deny the possibility of some sort of god, or not even attempt to "define" god.

How can you deny something you cannot define or understand.

[edit on 21-5-2009 by _Phoenix_]

posted on May, 21 2009 @ 04:24 PM
Great thread! Am I wrong in assuming tahat you are asking what I consider to be the basic question? What happened one second BEFORE the big bang?

posted on May, 21 2009 @ 04:28 PM
Wow nicely written! I could never write something like this. It was a nice read for me, made me think I was in science class again! I dont have sound so I couldnt watch the video's but the rest was very interesting and informative for me. Thanks! S&F!

posted on May, 21 2009 @ 04:35 PM
I am sorry for the useless post, but a co worker and I were talking about the scientific realities of religion. I used to be religious, but I have a scientists mind, I question everything. Now I would call myself an agnostic. I want to believe in God but I thought that either you believe in science or God, not both. This thread is Exactly the type of food for thought that I was looking for. I am at work and can't watch the videos yet, but I am very interested. Thanks for the legwork and the incredibly interresting thread. Subscribed.

posted on May, 21 2009 @ 04:45 PM
Another thing we should think about is, if god created the universe, then god must have created the "laws" of the universe, the science, right?

What if trying to understand god with our science is impossible? Because god does not follow our physics, god "created" these physics/laws.

e.g Imagine a computer game called "the universe" The creators of the game create all the laws and in game physics they desire. But does that mean the same laws apply to the game creators too? No.

Anyway there are so many possibilities about this universe, it's the biggest mystery mankind has always tried to understand.

Can we ever understand it? can our brains figure it out?

If we have not explored 000000.1% of the universe, if we do not understand the most complex maths, how are we supposed to understand somthing so complex and powerful such as God?

Is it beyond imagination?

Just posting random thoughts haha.


[edit on 21-5-2009 by _Phoenix_]

posted on May, 21 2009 @ 05:00 PM
reply to post by DaMod

Please continue with your spectacular thread. I recall recently posting a comment in a typical "atheist vs believer" thread about the fact that the disagreement between the two is only one side of the coin. I stated that we should try to focus on the ways "science and religion" agree.

You have taken my statement farther than I could imagine. My lame attempt at a progression of knowledge instead of a stalemate between science and religion has been justified by your thread.

I feel I would be classified as a scientist with the belief that anything is possible, including the existence of God, if I was educated enough to be classified. I may not be able to post often in this thread, but I WILL read it with great intrest.

posted on May, 21 2009 @ 05:33 PM
reply to post by Tyler 720

I'm glad you liked it! I will be posting more, but I have had the same problem in other debates but figured it would be a waste for this information not to have a thread of it's own. I think I will cover creationism and evolution next and how they really compliment each other. (after I get off work that is) That seems like a logical next step.

I'm sure everyone will find it interesting.

posted on May, 21 2009 @ 06:48 PM
Before I go into the next topic I wanted to expand on that last idea on what god is. More in the lines of what thoughts are made of.

Here is a link to work done by Mr. Emoto. He is the words and water guy. It's worth checking out.


Alright on to the next part!

Evolution and Creationism

There has been a long standing battle between creationists and evolutionists. They have fought and given eachother countless examples as to why either side is right.

Now I say unto you dudes, try mixing the two together.

Evolutionists primary source of evidence is fossil records and the like. This is good evidence but not proof of evolution, and certainly not enough to keep the creationists at bay. There is something closer to proof in the world of evolution. The ERV (Endogenous retrovirus)

An ERV is a viral sequence that has become part of the infected animal's genome. Upon entering a cell, a retrovirus copies its RNA genome into DNA, and inserts the DNA copy into one of the host cell's chromosomes. Different retroviruses target different species and types of host cells; the retrovirus only becomes endogenous if it inserts into a cell whose chromosomes will be inherited by the next generation, i.e. an ovum or sperm cell. The offspring of the infected individual will have a copy of the ERV in the same place in the same chromosome in every single one of their cells.

This happens more often than you might think; 8% of the modern human genome is derived from ERVs. Repeated sequences of this kind were formerly considered to be non-functional, or "junk" DNA. However, we're gradually finding more and more examples of viral sequences that appear to have some kind of function in human cells. For example, many ERV sequences play a role in human gene regulation. ERVs contain viral genes, and also sequences - known as promoters - that dictate when those genes should be switched on. When an ERV inserts into the host's chromosome, its promoter can start to interfere with the regulation of any nearby human genes. In the example that I researched, the ERV promoter has become responsible for most of the expression of a particular human gene in the large intestine.

Creationists and intelligent design advocates like to think that because some ERVs have useful functions in the human genome, they must have been deliberately put there by a creator / designer with that particular purpose in mind. Of course, no-one can explicitly prove that that is incorrect - it's not a falsifiable hypothesis, and therefore it's not science. What we can show is that ERVs provide evidence in support of the theory of evolution.

Let's imagine how ERVs would behave within a model of evolution by common descent. An ancient creature, let's call it the common ancestor of all modern mammals, is infected by a retrovirus that becomes endogenous. All of the animal's descendants (i.e. all mammals) would be expected to carry the same ERV insertion (ERV1) in the same chromosomal location.

Fast forward in evolutionary time. Different lineages have evolved and diverged from the original common ancestor and there are now many different types of mammal in existence, all carrying ERV1. A small rodent, let's call it the common ancestor of mice and rats, is again infected by a species-specific retrovirus that becomes endogenous. This is ERV2. In a parallel event in a different lineage, the common ancestor of all great apes acquires a third insertion, ERV3.

Moving forward again, a fourth ERV appears in some of these new-fangled human thingies that are running around in Africa, but not in their hairier relatives who will eventually evolve into modern chimpanzees. The early humans spread out, and a fifth and (don't worry) final ERV arises in a population that is isolated in a discrete geographical location. The infection does not spread to other human populations.

So what would we expect? Humans, chimps, mice and rats should all possess ERV1. The mouse and rat genomes will also contain ERV2, the virus that infected their common ancestor, but not the primate-specific ERV3, 4 or 5 insertions. All great apes will share an identical ERV3 insertion; all humans will also possess an ERV4 insertion that is not found in chimps or other apes. In addition, some, but not all, humans will carry an insertion of ERV5. The rodent-specific ERV2 insertion will not be found in any primate species.

In a nutshell a virus infects a human cell. What if this cell where say an egg or a sperm cell that happened to join with it's counterpart and form a full grown human?

Lets go back a few million years. Lets say this "lemur" common ancestor we just found (no proof that it is. Just using it as a general example.) produced offspring with ERV1 that infected the egg cell. All ancestors of this lemur would contain that same ERV in the same part of thier genome. That is how we can say that apes and us came from a common ancestor. We have several ERVs in common with eachother in the same parts of our genome.

Woa creationists don't jump the gun, you're right too! We talked about how the universe came to be earlier. Well imagine if this god decided to create life to come from a soup of organic molecules that eventually formed replicable RNA molecules. The birthplace of DNA as we know it.

All god had to do was light the fuse on the big bang and BOOM here we are. To a being to which time does not exist what is a few billion years?

As everyone who has ever read any of my other posts already knows, I am a huge fan of Carl Sagan and I am going to post a couple vids now that I have deemed relevant in this discussion.


Want to know how god created man? Watch!

In order to have been created we wouldn't have to have been directly planted into existence. What is 4 billion years to one to whom time does not exist? We all know that nature is the most powerful creator, created by the most intelligent creator. So when you put the two together it really makes sense of what we have seen in science and creationism.

I'll write some more later! This one has stuff to do..

[edit on 21-5-2009 by DaMod]

posted on May, 21 2009 @ 06:52 PM
reply to post by DaMod

I'm glad you liked it! I will be posting more, but I have had the same problem in other debates but figured it would be a waste for this information not to have a thread of it's own. I think I will cover creationism and evolution next and how they really compliment each other. (after I get off work that is) That seems like a logical next step.

It is a wonderful thread. A friend U2U'D me about this thread because you and I are like two sides of a coin! You explain the scientific side, and I attempt to explain the spiritual/consciousness side.

Yes, a few of us have attempted to explain that creationism and evolution work together. It doesn't have to be one or the other.

You have the knowledge to connect one side to the other. Thank you!

posted on May, 21 2009 @ 06:55 PM
reply to post by MatrixProphet

Agreed, great thread.

For anyone who hasnt yet, click on matrixprophets profile and check out those threads.... all of them combined seem to explain alot.

posted on May, 21 2009 @ 07:20 PM
Dear DaMod

I am attempting to actually answer some of these questions you have as there are cosmologies which do undertake to provide the basis of the generation of reality. But which reality?

Before I begin, my interest in these fields of inquiry did not begin through a science but rather through an inquiry to the center of all things that made science and religion possible. I am unusual only in one way, and that is I have a conveyance of information based on the actual reasons for being and how that reason caused the genesis of what we call reality today.

I learned after quite a few false starts that to approach a true cosmology is to have to abandon the bias of ideas which limit perception. The mind is quite capable of understanding new ideas and concepts once we unleash it to pursue the logic of observations down to the level of their origins.

Einstein was bothered by his own conclusions sometimes. His bias was to remove unseen causes as superfluous in any explanation of universe being. However, in spite of his real dislike of mystery, he actually made room in his calculations in relativity for something he called “spooky action at a distance”. That is the quantum weirdness your refer to as one particle affecting the other far away. What is at work and what underlies the material energy to cause the body of the universe, even in its infinitesimal parts, to synchronize effects on itself to unseen causes even a physicist can observe?

Einstein knew there was a God, but he also saw God as abandoning direct interest in the creation while being completely satisfied with the job he had done. Einstein said that God created only with elegant simplicity and that theories that were very complicated usually undid themselves before they were conclusively proven to be false.

However the scientist approaches the cosmology of the universe, in most of them is the awe of the Creator however that may be personally defined. I include myself as a believer that the Creator promulgated reality in such a way that all things and beings are inter-related if one could only follow the discourse back far enough to peer into the cradle of infinity from which it all springs.

It is to this conjectured cradle I now turn to discuss the concepts which made the universe and are at the root of what we call real.


Some time ago I provided the ATS board with something I called the Origins of Matter. It was politely received but clouded over by individuals who could not conceive that matter, new matter, is produced in prodigious amounts in the furbishing of the universe to new levels of existence. This time, however, I will not provide the detail as I did in the past, but to rehearse for you now the basics of material universe generation.

Matter in time is ripe. It has reached the furthest point of development it may undergo. Such statements imply that matter also exists in an undeveloped phase which we are unable to measure in the sciences. That is also true.

If one genuinely understood the genesis of matter, half the battle of universe understanding would be complete. The genesis of matter does not take place in time but is a force-energy injected into time by transcendental absolutes, the ones Einstein said do not exist in time but may exist as forces contrary to our understanding of the universe. He attempted to follow this trail but he seems to have gotten side tracked on other issues of import and left the concept alone.

From these force fields which have no substance and are without polarities reside the existing conditions from which are teased into motion and the eventual rotation of their energies by the transcendental organizers. The force fields are already subject to the absolute gravity of origin and then eventually to linear gravity which is the materializing phase brought on by rotation. You and readers are quite familiar with the nebula and galaxies that result when the force fields begin to clump and clot to the visible eye as rotation becomes faster and faster.

Permit me now to spend a little time with what is not part of these observations, but really are the resources at hand that makes the appearance of new matter possible.

Infinity once existed as the all of the undefined unconditional . By its nature wherever it was expressed it was its own center. No God head functioned, however. No universe blazed away in some night sky. This infinity was the homogeneous infinitude and was dominated by an infinite will that had not yet diversified the infinitude into experiential reality.

Such a domination of the pre-substance of reality was self-caused and even in infinite stasis “it” could think and make choices. For no other reason than to say it was so willed, the generation of reality was undertaken from the infinitude. The initial results were to observe the appearance of the infinite expression of God; then followed by the diversification of infinity into seven sub-sections. Once these transactions were complete, the first universe of living beings was brought into existence by fiat. This is the pattern material universe in the center of all things around which rotate the galactic wheels of creation in time. It does not experience time.

End Part 1
Next: The Big Bang

[edit on 21-5-2009 by Aronolac]

posted on May, 21 2009 @ 07:23 PM
Part 2

God does not require creation to come forth with an explosion. The big bang is a hopelessly naive creation of time-bound minds, and the better one thinks the more one may see there is no reason to expect man to use outdated concepts any longer than absolutely necessary. Someday this popular theory will be relegated to the dust heap of old scaffolding we used to understand our place.

I have alluded to a pattern or model universe above. It was produced by fiat. It does not and did not experience evolution. It contains the patterns for all future universes and acts as a gravity balancing wheel for the entire outer space regions. At the center of the model universe is the largest construction of matter in the universe. It is the source of the seventh sub-section of infinity that functions to provide the new energies for the expansion of space. Because the seventh sub-section of infinity is a material absolute (it could not exist in time) it can not be exhausted. It is subject to the demands of the universes that rotate around the pattern universe and through a set of complex mechanisms, provides the material energy for universes in time and in the outer space regions.

The wall of galaxies rotate around the edge of the time-space sectors we are part of. When we look at them we are seeing the consequence of the introduction of new space materials. In the outer space regions there are trillions of new galaxies forming in what is yet uninhabited space. They are not part of time as we are. Science has mistakenly used red shifts and blue shifts as measuring devices to ascertain distances and speed. However, they have not taken into account that the wall of galaxies is rotating away from us as we are rotating in the opposite direction around the central universe. We are viewing them as from our back window as we too move away in the opposite direction. The result is sometimes nearly a doubling of the error of true speed and distance in both directions.

Nor is the apparent expansion of the universe the result of a big bang. There is a control mechanism in space itself which permits the recycling of old space into new space. The consequence of this arrangement is what would appear to our senses to be space respiration. According to the universe archives, the universe is in mid cycle of a 2 billion year outward expansion. This is to be followed by a 2 billion year cycle of inward motions of space toward the central creation.

Space is a thing. It was endowed by Deity. It flows. It moves. It can be manipulated by the transcendental forces that dominate the central universe. Space is not absolute, but it comes as close as time origin beings will know of a transcendental substance.

Space can be compressed and thinned. It exerts pressure in the outward directions more than in its inward directions. Therefore instruments can measure the pressure differences and such measurements make it possible to know true direction in the universe. Greater pressures flow north and the inward pressures are taken in through a southerly path. A path to what? - You may ask.

I have spoken of a huge materialization at the center of the model universe, the one created by fiat. This structure is so large that it exerts a dominating gravity that over rides local gravity in all universes. It gives a trend motion to all space objects. Science speculates about this - or something - that is behind the universe’s existence. They are seeing (or measuring) the cause of some of Einstein’s “spooky action at a distance” when they learn to recognize this great mass at the center of all things. Space itself is affected by this mass presence which is also the origin of space and its final repository.

Space does not require the association of time with it. Space transmits all energies instantly without regard to gravity except those material energies subject to linear gravity. The speed of light is constant to material objects. That is not true for spiritual transmissions and travel as light speeds can be vastly exceeded by all types of spiritual locomotion.

I have spoken as though these concepts originated in the first person of myself. They are my words and my explanations of the source material provided to me through out the thirty years I have worked with the cosmologies of universe existence. The concepts reside here and there in places around the world, but they are collected in one super-place of residement, and that place is in the central abode to which I have spoken. I have made use of these concepts as they have been told to me over a period of time of revealment. I am grateful for their cooperation even though I am unable to name names or assign places to those who have made the information available. I have consistently denied having access to the records is in any way special. The Deities invented science as a way to explain the physical environment and to discover the laws of nature as it was placed before us to observe. These records are available to all; I just happened to have minded the lessons and made them available as they may, per chance, be useful to inquiring minds.

I have also made use of a popular best seller on Einstein for this narrative which was able to make sense to me of the relativity mystery - at least in part. That book is highly readable and recommend to anyone who is interested in the life and times and theories of Albert Einstein.

Einstein: His Life and Universe, by Walter Isaacson, Simon and Schuster, PB 2007.

Thank you.
Ron (Aronolac)

posted on May, 21 2009 @ 07:25 PM
Ah what the heck I'll expand on that idea a little bit more. Nature is a very powerful thing. Since life came about that way, it set the world up to be very well adapted to it's environment before mankind even came along.

Creationists have to stop thinking along a single tract. If you look at how massive the universe is then you will begin to think that we are not alone. If there is other life out there then it would have been created by god also and it's world would be far different from ours. I guarantee however, that the life on those worlds would have to be as well adapted to their environment after billions of years of evolution. They would have a world that is set in harmony (even though nature can be brutal it works in perfect harmony). Until we introduce alien (not from there) animals into another ecosystem that is.... anyway!

Perhaps being created in god's image does not necessarily mean to look like god. Perhaps it is our minds, and the ability to think and dream and have ideas or create things ourselves. Sometimes, especially something like this, you have look at it from outside the box.

posted on May, 21 2009 @ 07:33 PM
Great post.

"Without a god there could not have been a beginning of time. Think about it! What would have been before that? More time right? If nothing created the universe then it had no beginning and therefore has always been there."

That is the ultimate statement to wrap your mind around. That is to reach into the hardest part of understanding.

To say the Universe could not have come from nothing because EVERYTHING needs a beginning.

BUT a God or attempt at describing the First Domino does NOT need a start seems like "two sides of the same coin".

I CAN state that it is possible for a god to exist I just do not see the NEED for a god to exist. People cannot describe things without the NEED to insert a first domino into the picture.

I can see everything as happening forever for no purpose other than it just IS. It just DOES. No intelligence behind it.

I guess I give a god or First Domino a 50/50 chance.

Mayhpas it is an' mayhaps it ain't.

posted on May, 21 2009 @ 07:35 PM
reply to post by DaMod

Way too much info for me to get into right now. Read a few paragraphs and I am hooked enough to read the rest later on tonight.

Thanks for taking the time and putting the effort into making your argument ( if thats what you want to call it ) as thorough as possible.

I love posts like this because it allows for more discussion about actually facts and less about the what ifs.

posted on May, 21 2009 @ 07:50 PM
reply to post by Aronolac

The Deities invented science as a way to explain the physical environment and to discover the laws of nature as it was placed before us to observe. These records are available to all; I just happened to have minded the lessons and made them available as they may, per chance, be useful to inquiring minds.

I have also made use of a popular best seller on Einstein for this narrative which was able to make sense to me of the relativity mystery - at least in part. That book is highly readable and recommend to anyone who is interested in the life and times and theories of Albert Einstein.

Einstein: His Life and Universe, by Walter Isaacson, Simon and Schuster, PB 2007.

I read his book and I thank you for explaining it well. I need to go back and read your post again to digest it.

It is amazing to me that The Gods - deities, created all of this and it is there for people to learn from, and yet, so many deny the very Gods who knew that; we would want to know. They gave us a gift. Our egos, conditioning, and prejudices incline many to take credit for what isn't our knowledge to begin with, and distort it to fit our own beliefs.

reply to post by DaMod

Perhaps being created in god's image does not necessarily mean to look like god. Perhaps it is our minds, and the ability to think and dream and have ideas or create things ourselves. Sometimes, especially something like this, you have look at it from outside the box.

I don't follow the trend or fad of today where individuals believe that WE are God. I see too much evidence, otherwise, but, that is not to say that we are not part of a divine consciousness with individuation also. It doesn't always have to be; either...or!

I see the wonder of the cosmos and man, as together, and separate. Separate personalities, yet, all of one energy. God can be in me, yes, yet, apart. I think of it more as an energy or essence that flows between us and everything.

posted on May, 21 2009 @ 07:58 PM
reply to post by DaMod


OT, too, has been thinking, as you have...for a

maybe this thread will help you in your (discovery) journey...

OT prayin for insight for ya...

Good night...


new topics

top topics

<<   2  3  4 >>

log in