The Genesis Code

reply to post by Miccey


Read the theory from the scientists before you reply....

and this has nothing to do with Jesus....it was billions of years before his supposed life.

reply to post by Astyanax

For the first 380,000 years or so, the universe was essentially too hot for light to shine. The heat of creation smashed atoms together with enough force to break them up into a dense plasma, an opaque soup of protons, neutrons and electrons that scattered light like fog.

www.space.com...


I'll be back with more facts to prove you wrong when my daughter finishes her economics homework.

Originally posted by timetothink
Has anyone started a thread on this movie and its theory yet? I have been searching the site to no avail, but find it hard to believe no one else saw this amazing movie.

The theory in the movie lines up the book of Genesis with Stephen Hawking's theory of time travel and Einstien's theory of relativity...it is really mind blowing......has anyone watched it yet?

No. Someone has started a thread about a movie. The theory part hasn't really been put forward. It is left to those willing to watch the movie. Does Hawking have a theory on time travel? I thought he had ideas on time travel, based on the theories of relativity.

...I don't even go to church or believe in GOD......

Yet, are you not promoting a movie that has as its main point, the idea that God created the universe (with the normal drippy subplot, of course)?

you wont even read the scientists theory and face the fact that the bible might have nothing to do with religion.

What scientific theory are you referring to? Please don't cite the biased religious nonsense you referenced earlier as being a theory. In which scientific publication has it been published, peer reviewed or accepted that the bible gives the correct scientific view of the creation of the universe? I don't seem to be able to find that.

I can think of many people who would argue your point that the bible has nothing to do with religion. Due to it basically being proclaimed as god's written word and something that many millions base their religion on. So it's not just a highly accurate historical text now as the "Biblical Scholars"(oxymoron) would like to believe, now it is also a secular document/science manual?

I can tell the people replying to my thread are not even reading my posts...what a bunch of ignorant closed minded fools.... I am talking the opposite of religion and you keep bringing it back to religion....

So you promote a movie that has as it's point some Christian propaganda... that genesis apparently has (pseudo) scientific merit... due to being able to interpret a mythical story whatever we like and assign any values that might fit ...then extrapolate and meld it to other real scientific theories... therefore god created the universe! You add absolutely nothing to your op other than "I like this movie, what do you think", yet you don't like religion being mentioned in the debate. Once again...

You seem to be asking for a movie review. Fair enough, some will be happy to sit through it.

You realise anyone could write a book about a race of magical pink unicorns, claim it was divine inspired, give a rough chronological order of the way they created the universe, then meld it to fit real scientific theories and nothing would be lost. It would carry every bit as much weight scientifically (none).

As an advice, though you are obviously under no obligation here. It might have been better to cite the reasons why you believe science supports genesis in the op, referencing the movie as a source or inspiration. Or at least outline the apparent 'science" the movie puts forward. Then people will be able to respond to the ideas you seem to be taken with and debate them. Without having to waste hours on some (according to reviews) b grade flick that doesn't quite reach the level required of reasonable science fiction, or feel like they are acceding to some form of advertising.

If this movie proves the obvious reality of genesis to you, not much to say. Go for it.

Originally posted by timetothink
You are the idiot because you are denying the science and physics.

There's no need to be rude. I am very far from denying physics; I am simply denying that the statements in this movie are scientifically accurate. They are not. I know a bit of physics, you see, and the origins of the universe have fascinated me for years – no, make that decades.

You also think I am a religious crackpot...you know nothing about me.

I do not think you are a religious crackpot. I said the people who make films like this are religious crackpots. You didn't make the film, did you?

What I did say is that you are ill-informed. That is because you don't seem very clued-up on the scientific picture of the origins and early evolution of the universe. If you were, you wouldn't be falling for this silly film.

Here are two accounts of the Big Bang. The first is from the University of Michigan. It's short and easy to read, and it sums things up very well. The second is from NASA and includes recent information from COBE and other space missions. When you've finished looking at them, you will have better information with which to judge the movie.

I don't even go to church or believe in GOD...you closed mind shows how ignorant you are....you wont even read the scientists theory and face the fact that the bible might have nothing to do with religion.

I know you're an ancient-aliens believer. The people who made the film are Christian apologists, though.

What a bunch of ignorant closed minded fools.... I am talking the opposite of religion and you keep bringing it back to religion...

That's all right. I won't trouble you and your thread any more. But please take a look at the links I posted. Deny ignorance, as we say around here.

Originally posted by timetothink
reply to post by Miccey

 

Read the theory from the scientists before you reply....

and this has nothing to do with Jesus....it was billions of years before his supposed life.

I have. And the texts are still what i said
"A story taken to serious... "

If they "The writers of the texts" had knowlage about
events that took place "billions" of years ago...I have
only one theory, aliens did it....
And as allways when when somone comes with a
counterpost its gets attacked. The Jesus part in my
post was merly an explanation to my standpoint.

reply to post by Cogito, Ergo Sum


The movie was about the theory of the universe being created in 6 days.....if you had read my posts you would see the theory and the scientist who wrote the book about it...not going to keep reposting it...if you are not interested in watching the movie then DONT READ THE THREAD!

Why would people waste their time on a thread just to insult the the op on a subjuct they dont care about and dont want to explore?

reply to post by Miccey


I have no idea if you are trying to converse or are insulting me like the others.

Your reply is not clear.

Originally posted by timetothink
reply to post by Cogito, Ergo Sum

 

The movie was about the theory of the universe being created in 6 days.....if you had read my posts you would see the theory and the scientist who wrote the book about it...not going to keep reposting it..

I read the link you posted. It is not a theory in any scientific sense. It is a religious belief that he tries to pin to the coat tails of science and was very unimpressive.

if you are not interested in watching the movie then DONT READ THE THREAD!

Ok. No problems, no hard feelings.

Why would people waste their time on a thread just to insult the the op on a subjuct they dont care about and dont want to explore?

I doubt I have insulted you. It's an interesting topic, how our universe came into being. Generally threads about it are more interesting when they at least start out containing some information on the subject, or at least some sort of explanation/personal understanding of the beliefs put forward.

reply to post by Cogito, Ergo Sum


It is, in fact, a theory. The implications of possibility render the development of a plausible hypothesis allowing the literal existence of that history stated within Genesis...since it cannot be PROVEN to have happened, but can be definitively argued to be possible (and yes, the case given is quite persuasive) then it is a theory.

Just because YOU don't like the idea, or YOU don't want to give it credence, does not give YOU the right to tell the rest of us it isn't a theory. Or more precisely, you can...but be sure to clarify that it is your opinion, and not fact.

Because it is a theory. A very well-researched theory, at that.

reply to post by Starchild23


thank you star....

like I said, the hatred and prejudice for religion is so pervasive it blinds people to seeing anything else.

it's really sad people are so closed minded.

reply to post by timetothink


I actually enjoyed the abbreviated presentation.

My only concern is that if the Earth could be formed by "God", why the hell weren't other planets and other species in other galaxies also formed?

And if there were, why haven't we discovered them yet? Either there's more to this than the Bible let's on, or there is a massive conspiracy hiding the truth of extraterrestrial life from us...

I swear if all the answers to all the questions in the universe were wrapped in a package with paper that said "bible" with pretty little crosses on it....people would burn it before even opening it. Guilt by association...even if that association proves one or the other or both are right.

That is the exact opposite of being scientific.....being scientific is looking at all possibilities even if you don't like the outcomes.

Remember all those silly scientists who thought the Earth was round fighting all those silly scientists who thought the Earth was flat?

All those silly scientists that thought the sun revolved around the Earth fighting all the silly scientists that thought Earth revolved around the sun?

Most of the things you are 100% sure of today will be wrong in 100 or so years....that I am 100% sure of.

reply to post by Starchild23


What I got from the movie was they did mean the whole universe in Genesis...but I think tptb that authored the books centered everything on Earth.

That's why I said in my previous posts, I think the information was given to the ancients who could not understand it or chose to hide for their own reasons......I think the whole bible needs to be looked at in this context....not as religion but us hidden scientific knowledge.

This is what the religi-phobes posting are not understanding....so thick headed.

I believe religion has been used not only for the purposes of war etc, but for hiding scientific answers to questions about the universe...the same way they controlled science in the past.

I think the Pope has begun disclosure about this recently when he alluded to alien life.

In my opinion, the case for the bible falls with one simple argument:

If you believe in the bible, you have to believe something along these lines:
for around 96,000 years humans are born, usually dieing at child birth, the mothers often dieing as well. Disease and natural disasters killing off many more of the people. Wars break out between small people groups over land, tribalism, women, food, etc.. life expectancy around 25. people who make it that far usually dieing from their teeth. So, for 96,000 years the heavens watch this with indifference, with folded arms. and then, around 4,000 years ago, but only in really barbaric middle east, they decide it's time to intervene. Not in China where people can already read and write, and know science to some extent, but in barbaric illiterate middle east. And what better way of intervening than by promoting human sacrifice, genocide, plagues, and all the other horrific stories in the bible. Also, people living to be 900 years old and people giving birth at 100 years old is quite an improvement over death at childbirth and life expectancy of 25. It is not impossible that this is what happened, however, i think we can agree that it is highly improbable that something like this happened. You have to believe something similar to this happened to believe in the bible. And with that, the case for the bible, and divine intervention falls, and we should be glad that it has fallen.

reply to post by TheCelestialHuman


From your response I can see you didnt read the thread....

Thanks anyway.

Originally posted by Starchild23
reply to post by Cogito, Ergo Sum

 

It is, in fact, a theory. The implications of possibility render the development of a plausible hypothesis allowing the literal existence of that history stated within Genesis...since it cannot be PROVEN to have happened, but can be definitively argued to be possible (and yes, the case given is quite persuasive) then it is a theory.

Just because YOU don't like the idea, or YOU don't want to give it credence, does not give YOU the right to tell the rest of us it isn't a theory. Or more precisely, you can...but be sure to clarify that it is your opinion, and not fact.

Because it is a theory. A very well-researched theory, at that.

The religious nonsense about genesis is not a scientific theory, as I have stated. Whether you understand this, or whether you accept it as a theory, or the way in which you accept it, or what our opinions may be, makes no difference. That is a fact. No matter how well researched, it is a "laymans theory" (which can contain any vaporous idea you like) put forward by a "religious" scientist (the dissonance must be tough), in an effort to fit god into genuine scientific theories. God is not falsifiable. Creation could be divided into any other number you like and you could correlate to any amount of events, then assign any number of gods you like the same way. Similar "theories" happen all the time with aliens, bigfoot, nessie, giants...

Starchild, this notion that someone must hate religion because they disagree with you, is a complete assumption. The same as claiming to know why someone holds a certain view without having discussed said view. It is easier to like religion when it doesn't falsely claim to be scientific though. It appears you are only interested in personal arguments unless the information is accepted from your viewpoint.

It does make a pleasant change to see religion acknowledge science though, rather than reject. Not so much when it turns genuine science into a pseudo science of belief though.

reply to post by Cogito, Ergo Sum


I see where you are coming from....

2 respected scientists (Schroeder and Aviezer) have theories about the creation of the universe/big bang and the book of genesis...they use the theory of relativity, theories of Hawking,Weinburg, Guth, Cameron, Press, and Crick to name a few to explain how they came to their theories, they have written books and papers...teach at colleges...but to you it's all garbage?

Why...because they are Jewish...it has to do with the Book of Genesis? You know more than them...I'm confused?

It's a theory...no one has disproven it...move on...

reply to post by Cogito, Ergo Sum


I see where you are coming from....

2 respected scientists (Schroeder and Aviezer) have theories about the creation of the universe/big bang and the book of genesis...they use the theory of relativity, theories of Hawking,Weinburg, Guth, Cameron, Press, and Crick to name a few to explain how they came to their theories, they have written books and papers...teach at colleges...but to you it's all garbage?

Why...because they are Jewish...it has to do with the Book of Genesis? You know more than them...I'm confused?

It's a theory...no one has disproven it...move on...

Originally posted by Cogito, Ergo Sum
Starchild, this notion that someone must hate religion because they disagree with you, is a complete assumption. The same as claiming to know why someone holds a certain view without having discussed said view. It is easier to like religion when it doesn't falsely claim to be scientific though. It appears you are only interested in personal arguments unless the information is accepted from your viewpoint.

Forgive me Starchild. This paragraph should have been adressed to the op, not yourself. Too late to edit.

Adieu.