God's Fingerprint On Creation Found!

page: 3
105
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 16 2010 @ 12:34 PM
link   
Wow, that was really cool. A nice change from the everyday doom and gloom on the news of wars and disasters. Thank you, as it has been a rather stressful week for me. Sometimes I have to stop and remind myself that God is in control. Blessings to you.




posted on May, 16 2010 @ 12:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by mapsurfer_

I have seen the Golden Square, Golden Angle, Golden Ratios, Fibonacci spirals occurring in nature which is indeed interesting and significant but how do you "connect the dots" between something that occurs in nature with Intelligent Design or God? I am not saying that it does or does not, but just asking how you derive that. I can definitely see the correlation between math and nature. Humans are the only species I am aware of, that use time and math to measure or attempt to "prove" anything at all... and we are only 1 species of millions on this planet. Where is the math that draws a correlation between God/creator and nature?




I just cited a few people including yours truly. Now take a crack at it yourself... It's not as difficult as you might think.



posted on May, 16 2010 @ 12:34 PM
link   
Isn't it 2010? Isn't it time we stop believing in superstitions?

2nd line.



posted on May, 16 2010 @ 12:41 PM
link   
I do not see how this interesting long-known fact points to a creator at all.

It can be easily explained as an efficient structure steming from some underlying mathematical and physical laws. You do not need creator to explain roundness of Earth, eliptical orbits, parabolic trajectories or crystal structures. Why should this structure be any different?



posted on May, 16 2010 @ 12:43 PM
link   
While the vide clearly hints at intelligent design and I am in no way refuting the idea, why do the weaker minds always say "SEE!!! I TOLD YOU SO! IT'S GOD!!!!
Why do you require a deific personification?



posted on May, 16 2010 @ 12:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Maslo
I do not see how this interesting long-known fact points to a creator at all.

It can be easily explained as an efficient structure steming from some underlying mathematical and physical laws. You do not need creator to explain roundness of Earth, eliptical orbits, parabolic trajectories or crystal structures. Why should this structure be any different?



A system of 'code' denotes higher intelligence. Much like we program machines using binary... Our Universe was programmed with 1,2,4,8,7,5.



posted on May, 16 2010 @ 12:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Blue_Jay33
 


Amazing thank you friend for posting this. I also think that together, we are god, and maybe at one point in our infinite history we were all apart of one giant consciousness that broke off into an infinite amount of smaller ones.



posted on May, 16 2010 @ 12:52 PM
link   
Stars and flags. It was just a couple of days ago I was pondering the incomprehensible vastness of the Universe and at the same time marvel at creation's wonders at the sub-atomic level.

The Fibonacci Sequence clearly explains the notion of uniformness throughout creation..that there is order in chaos. This order in creation shows that we are all bounded to the Universe although seemingly insignificant in grander scheme things.

Found the reply by fellow member gandhi cool and encapsulated the essence of creation and our oness with it.

"Ah, 1 1 3 5 8 13 21 35..... and so on. When i mountain bike, or snowboard in the mountains, i love to realize that I, the trees, the ground, and even the animals surrounding me, were derived from the same thing.
[edit on 16-5-2010 by gandhi].


Peace and Love



posted on May, 16 2010 @ 12:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Maslo
I do not see how this interesting long-known fact points to a creator at all.

It can be easily explained as an efficient structure steming from some underlying mathematical and physical laws. You do not need creator to explain roundness of Earth, eliptical orbits, parabolic trajectories or crystal structures. Why should this structure be any different?



With all respect, you don't need a religious "god" to explain any of those things. What you DO need is a prime mover. It's hilarious that someone can even mention eliptical orbits or parabolic trajectories in a context that suggests such things arose out of nothing/all on their own.

Most atheists are atheists because a religious "god" makes no sense. But that doesn't mean all this took shape and form all on it's own. I cannot understand how someone can be a skeptic in terms of a prime mover and then referr to science as evidence for their skepticism. As if all this is random...



posted on May, 16 2010 @ 12:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Blue_Jay33
 


No shet. Math is the universal language of the universe. Unfortunately, the vid was too short and didn't explain anything in detail. I thought the vid was going to go in the direction of the premise that we are all gods with the finger print introduction. Instead, it delves into math. Duh!



posted on May, 16 2010 @ 01:07 PM
link   
Ok, cool video in some respects, but it fails miserably in the end. It does what most videos or arguments that try to support a religious viewpoint, that is, look at something in nature and claim it "proof" of a matter of faith. If this video was presented in a court of law, as the video ended with "we see the fingerprint of God", the defense lawyer would yell, "OBJECT, CONJECTURE". I saw nothing that pointed to a "fingerprint" of God. All I saw was something interesting that we as humans happened to observe. And by no means am I an atheist. But this video screams of a Christian organization trying to present a case for the proof of god. And I love when they pointed to a galaxy and said that "even the galaxies above us are formed with the exact design that the tiny shell is formed". Really??? I haven't seen too many "irregular" shells that many of the galaxies are formed. There are MANY celestial objects that look nothing like a Fibonacci sequence. One of the biggest problems that "arguments" like the one presented in the video is that it takes very complex information and boils it down to a grossly over simplified conclusion, forcing one to take a "leap of faith" at the end of the video to come along side of its position.

By no means am I trying to discount the possibility of a creator or intelligent design; all I am saying is that this video does nothing to make a substantial argument in support of the claim.



posted on May, 16 2010 @ 01:08 PM
link   
To me it proved the limitations of the laws of physics.
Patterns != Creator



posted on May, 16 2010 @ 01:10 PM
link   
Nice video. I learned the Fibonacci sequence and all of its natural exhibitions when I was in 5th grade. I wouldn't say this is undeniable proof of a creator. Anyhow, I believe that there is/was a divine being who greatly influenced the universe.



posted on May, 16 2010 @ 01:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blue_Jay33
I would think that after watching this it's hard to be a pure atheist that denies a higher intelligence didn't have anything to do with the creation of both this planet and the universe itself.


After watching this video, it's hard to believe that someone of faith couldn't come up with a better argument for intelligent design. Yes, that's what you are propounding here - intelligent design. And we ALL know where that takes us...

As usual, you provide NO evidence for the God claim. You take a scientific phenomenon, and ascribe that its' very presence must mean that God made it. Yes, if that's true, god caused me to fart loudly in disgust 30 seconds into that video.

Come up with a better argument, and try again. FAIL.

Parallex.



posted on May, 16 2010 @ 01:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blue_Jay33


I would think that after watching this it's hard to be a pure atheist that denies a higher intelligence didn't have anything to do with the creation of both this planet and the universe itself.


Hmmm patterns in nature = evidence of a creator? If so that creator would be named "physics."



posted on May, 16 2010 @ 01:25 PM
link   
reply to post by dragonsmusic
 


I did not say anything about prime mover, in fact, I believe there was something like a prime mover, maybe intelligent, maybe nature itself.

My point was that ordered structures like this are not a proof of intelligent creator. Mathematics is an universal language of the universe, and ordered complex structures are common in math, with no outside intelligence needed to "create" them.

Appearance of complex ordered structures (such as life) could be considered a hint towards an intelligent prime mover setting physical laws in the beginning. On the other hand, this could be explained without an intelligent prime mover by anthropic principle.

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on May, 16 2010 @ 01:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Blue_Jay33
 


Beautiful thread, Blue_Jay33.
There is no doubt there is a Creator.

Ahh, the ultimate question...what is our purpose?

I certainly don't know, but here is another example of the Fibonacci Spiral:




posted on May, 16 2010 @ 01:27 PM
link   
There is no God, there is no creator. All life evolved.

When will people wake up from their stupid delusions. Go an read The Greatest Show on Earth by Richard Dawkins. Inspire your mind with something intelligent and worthwhile for once.

Religion is the cancer of mankind. Move along.



posted on May, 16 2010 @ 01:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by dragonsmusic
Mathematical formulas found in nature point to something which has been engineered.


I disagree wholeheartedly. The universe behaves in many ways which can be defined by strict, unwavering mathematical formulas. There is nothing particularly indicative of such behavior being "engineered".

Pulling the Fibonacci sequence out as an indicator of design is arbitrary and bizarre. Why not any other formula? E=mc2 seems more encompassing.

I find the whole notion that mathematical constants indicate presence of a god(s). It seems to indicate simply that the laws of physics are pretty solid.



posted on May, 16 2010 @ 01:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Blue_Jay33
 


well after reading this far i think its time for someone to say that at the end of the day NOBODY knows what created the universe. I would even go as far to say that none of the above are correct neither god, or maths or any type of idea we have ever had are even close. I think the true nature of reality and the dynamics involved are so far beyond our comprehension that it woulkd be like trying to teach an ant or similar einsteins theory of relativity. No matter how hard u try the ant will never comprehend a thing not even one word of what u say will compute even if it had ears. This is where i stand with the nature of realtiy and the small part within that realitythat created the universe. Its probably so far beyond our level of comprehension that we may never even scrape the surface.

Its a shame there are so many narrow minded people that think that they know what created the universe. This is our disabilty in progressing into a better understanding of reality. Be it god or whatever else chances are its ALL WRONG!!

[edit on 16-5-2010 by uk alienhunter]

[edit on 16-5-2010 by uk alienhunter]





new topics

top topics



 
105
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join