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.

 

Designed Solar System

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 25 2004 @ 01:55 PM
link   
The Solar system is shown to be in accord with an artificial equation, demonstrating that it is not natural. This is well known to scientist from around the world, including NASA, and many government agencies. The math is too complex for most people to understand.
 



members.aol.com
The observed fact of order in the Solar system is not explained by the nebular Hypothesis or any other scioentific theory known to the writer.


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


The solar system is shown to be designed, in that it is full accord with an artificial equation. i.e. the system isn't completely natural. The positioning of the planets is shown to be neatly ordered.
The math is verified by an independent professional on site.
The site has been visited by all the usual suspects from the military and government, and a great many more from academic establishments.
It has not been published in the media, and never will be. It is kept secret by its complexity, but THAT DOESN'T MEAN IT ISN'T VALID.

[edit on 25-8-2004 by eunycycle]

[edit on 8-25-2004 by Valhall]

[edit on 8-26-2004 by Valhall]




posted on Aug, 25 2004 @ 09:26 PM
link   
sorry, already been debunked.


www.badastronomy.com...



posted on Aug, 26 2004 @ 06:32 AM
link   
How are the outdated, unscientific, religious, and thuroughly undemonstable ludicrous ideas of IDiocy (Intelligent Design) in anyway 'news'.

If anything this belongs under the 'Conspiracy in Religion' forum, or some other religious forum, not the SCI/TECH forum.

The idea of design in nature was strongly defended by Paley nearly two centuries ago, before there was most of the knowledge we have of the world today, and even in his day, Paley's ideas were bunked.



posted on Aug, 26 2004 @ 12:42 PM
link   
I fail to see how this qualifies as news. It isn't new. That site has been around for years and has been debunked already.

Can the admins please remove this news article?:



posted on Aug, 26 2004 @ 12:50 PM
link   
This has got to be the worst news post I've seen since I've been coming here.



posted on Aug, 26 2004 @ 10:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by TexasConspiracyNut
This has got to be the worst news post I've seen since I've been coming here.


No doubt. Complete lunacy if you ask me. I wish people would just use the Bible, Koran, or what have you as a general guide for their lives and quit trying to make it the authority on any other subject that science and investigative history can debunk with ease in the modern age.

I assume that since this member has deleted his or her membership they have no desire to enter into debate or admit their mistake. Some people will believe anything and thats fine as long as they have the cajones to defend themselves and their views. That I can at least respect to a certain degree.

[edit on 26-8-2004 by Weller]



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 11:45 PM
link   
Too Bad.

The Solar system is designed somewhat how I would have built it.

Although the original designer left out that "Planet of Women"
which appears on MY blueprints.

Is it too late to submit my plans? Maybe a retrofit?




posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 11:52 PM
link   
We ascribe to random chance that which we do not understand. It's a fallacy of our day to think that we know everything there is to know...especially in the realm of science.



posted on Aug, 29 2004 @ 09:54 PM
link   
So you are saying that we don't know that its designed, and can't show that its designed, and that there is no evidence to suggest its 'designed', but that its infact been designed?



posted on Aug, 29 2004 @ 10:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan
So you are saying that we don't know that its designed, and can't show that its designed, and that there is no evidence to suggest its 'designed', but that its infact been designed?


I'm not sure who you are responding too, but if these questions were addressed to me, I'd say....that it CAN be designed. I mean, honestly, we don't even have a unified field theory. And if science knew everything, then why do we still have researchers. That is my point...I think the debate on this is far from over.

[edit on 29-8-2004 by Jamuhn]



posted on Sep, 1 2004 @ 08:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jamuhn

Originally posted by Nygdan
So you are saying that we don't know that its designed, and can't show that its designed, and that there is no evidence to suggest its 'designed', but that its infact been designed?


I'm not sure who you are responding too,


I was informed that when responding to a person who's post is directly above your response that you aren't supposed to use quoting at all, and in other situations to use ti sparingly. I thought that this meant that people who had been in the forum for a while wouldn't have a problem knowing who is responding to who.


that it CAN be designed.


Of course, and I do't dispute that. However, I would dispute that there is anyway to scientifically determine if it was infact designed by an all powerful creator god.


science knew everything, then why do we still have researchers


I don't think anyone claimed that. What is claimed by the original poster is that the solar system is designed. There is no evidence to support that unfounded conclusion at all.


I think the debate on this is far from over

It hasn't even started. The design supporters have only barely formulated there position, and they certainly haven't presented any evidence.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join