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.
Originally posted by tkwasny
I can only accept self-evident Truth. For me all things infinite never began, cannot change, cannot end. All things finite can only begin, exist a period of time, then terminate. Infinite cannot generate from finite, but it is clear finite has generated because of infinite. The contents of what is the known Universe is all composed of finite, thus is not the origination or originator. The key for us finites is why would infinite generate finite anything. I'm on board with it has absolutely nothing to do with us, for us. Yet we are all used where it has everything to do with us, for the purposes of the infinite. Our obtaining evermore newness is a side light (but not to us).
Originally posted by Titen-Sxull
reply to post by NorEaster
It'd be very hard for such a theory to exist, since most versions of creation must invoke the supernatural and the supernatural is difficult to prove/disprove using science (some would argue its ultimately outside the purview of science altogether).
But if there was sound logic and evidence involved I'd be interested.
Originally posted by tkwasny
I can only accept self-evident Truth. For me all things infinite never began, cannot change, cannot end. All things finite can only begin, exist a period of time, then terminate. Infinite cannot generate from finite, but it is clear finite has generated because of infinite. The contents of what is the known Universe is all composed of finite, thus is not the origination or originator. The key for us finites is why would infinite generate finite anything. I'm on board with it has absolutely nothing to do with us, for us. Yet we are all used where it has everything to do with us, for the purposes of the infinite. Our obtaining evermore newness is a side light (but not to us).
Each side is rigidly dogmatic in its refusal to even entertain any grays that might exist between its own version of black and white,
And now technology is outing both of them
Originally posted by Barcs
. There's no way to verify any of it.
Originally posted by Titen-Sxull
reply to post by NorEaster
Each side is rigidly dogmatic in its refusal to even entertain any grays that might exist between its own version of black and white,
Except that science doesn't have dogma, science has to remain open to new information so that it update constantly. The history of science has been the replacement of outdated or unproved ideas with those that garner new and better evidence. Even within the scientific community there are debates or what you might call "gray" areas. For instance there is even an ongoing debate on just where birds fit in the evolutionary lineage of theropod dinosaurs.
And now technology is outing both of them
New technology is developed with the help of science, not in spite of it.
Certainly modern mainstream science doesn't know everything and it's constantly discovering new information and thus updating it's hypotheses and theories and while it isn't perfect I don't think it's anything like you describe.
Originally posted by spy66
reply to post by NorEaster
I have written a school paper on dimensions and energy. The first thing my professor asked me was: Are you religious?
I compared my paper with the three first verses of genesis and the Big Bang theory. Because they were all very similar in theory. But it all depends on how you are instructed by others to read/interpret genesis to see the similarities between my theory and the Big Bang theory.
edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Wertdagf
The concern has never been how hard it is to gain faith.... Its always been about how hard it is to live without it....
O NO!!!! What if tomorrow all the athiests wake up christians!!!!!! We have to prepare!!!!!
Originally posted by NorEaster
Each side is rigidly dogmatic in its refusal to even entertain any grays that might exist between its own version of black and white, and will even go to ridiculous extremes to dismiss what clearly challenges its very strict paradigm in ways that should be compelling enough to initiate investigation, if nothing else. And now technology is outing both of them, and what's making a run for the helm is a bizarre blend of mysticism and nonsense, that hasn't got any restraint at all on its capacity for dismissal of literally everything including reality itself. It's like the French Revolution, where everyone's head gets chopped off eventually, since it's not about revolution at all, but about watching heads roll (metaphorically speaking, of course).
Originally posted by NorEaster
There are definitely reality possibilities that are dismissed by science without any effort to allow for the need to adjust the verification process to properly apply to the requirements presented by the physical specifics of these reality possibilities. Science still tries to impose its own examination criteria on what it chooses to examine, which is akin to looking for intelligence within a dead brain by splitting it with a cleaver and declaring intelligence to be nonexistent because no intelligence spilled out onto the table when the brain was opened.
Please list the experiments that prove what you are talking about. I just don't get why so many people talk about quantum mechanics as if it's proven. One of the first people to speak out against Quantum mechanics was Albert Einstein. Regardless I don't like to deal with small talk, I'm about experiments.
And yet Quantum Mechanics continues to baffle scientists, and give ammunition to crazies who deny the existence of reality itself. Let's face it, technology is on the verge of debunking the basic concepts of material existence, and forcing a complete reevaluation of what constitutes matter. I'd call that outing hard science.
Except that if a physicist suggests a direction of inquiry that clashes with the standard industry line, he/she faces loss of tenure and career collapse.
Originally posted by prevenge
Originally posted by Barcs
. There's no way to verify any of it.
what if somewhere in our "junk DNA" some binary pattern says in ancientSumerian "copyright 6000 BC, Annunakki Genebanks Inc"