Undeniable Proof of Intelligent Design.

page: 5
23
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 30 2013 @ 08:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by NewAgeMan
reply to post by Phage
 

Non-local, holographic universe, are you not familiar with the idea and the science? If the universe is made up of information within a non-local, holographic framework, then evolution isn't purely an isolated phenomenon, and so the last or more recent would conceivably be the most evolved ie: the last shall be fist and the first, last. Ah never mind, it's out there and not really on topic. It's just an idea I've had and "grokked", that evolutionary development might involve information sharing within the context and framework of an interpenetrating, organic, cosmological unity.


Just to show that I'm not totally bonkers with this idea which might be thought of in terms of a cosmological evolutionary framework arising both as a top down, downward causation, and, from the bottom up as an evolutionary phenomenon in eternity, I would like to defer to these two impeccably credentialed scientists of reknown.


Originally posted by NewAgeMan

The God Theory

"The God Theory" by Bernard Haisch
www.amazon.com...=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1249274834&sr=8-1

Haisch is an astrophysicist whose professional positions include Staff Scientist at the Lockheed Martin Solar and Astrophysics Laboratory, Deputy Director for the Center for Extreme Ultraviolet Astrophysics at the University of California, Berkeley, and Visiting Fellow at the Max-Planck Institute for Extraterrestrial Physics in Garching, Germany. His work has led to close involvement with NASA; he is the author of over 130 scientific papers; and was the Scientific Editor of the Astrophysical Journal for nine years, as well as the editor in chief of the Journal of Scientific Exploration.

an excerpt


If you think of white light as a metaphor of infinite, formless potential, the colors on a slide or frame of film become a structured reality grounded in the polarity that comes about through intelligent subtraction from that absolute formless potential. It results from the limitation of the unlimited. I contend that this metaphor provides a comprehensible theory for the creation of a manifest reality (our universe) from the selective limitation of infinite potential (God)...

If there exists an absolute realm that consists of infinite potential out of which a created realm of polarity emerges, is there any sensible reason not to call this "God"? Or to put it frankly, if the absolute is not God, what is it? For our purposes here, I will identify the Absolute with God. More precisely I will call the Absolute the Godhead. Applying this new terminology to the optics analogy, we can conclude that our physical universe comes about when the Godhead selectively limits itself, taking on the role of Creator and manifesting a realm of space and time and, within that realm, filtering out some of its own infinite potential...

Viewed this way, the process of creation is the exact opposite of making something out of nothing. It is, on the contrary, a filtering process that makes something out of everything. Creation is not capricious or random addition; it is intelligent and selective subtraction. The implications of this are profound.

If the Absolute is the Godhead, and if creation is the process by which the Godhead filters out parts of its own infinite potential to manifest a physical reality that supports experience, then the stuff that is left over, the residue of this process, is our physical universe, and ourselves included. We are nothing less than a part of that Godhead - quite literally.


More @ Brilliant Disguise: Light, Matter and the Zero-Point Field.(MUST READ!)


Next, by Ervin Laszlo

Science and the Akashic Field, an Integral Theory of Everything, 2004
www.amazon.com...=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1249275852&sr=8-1

And, his other seminal work
Science and the Reenchantment of the Cosmos: The Rise of the Integral Vision of Reality
www.amazon.com...=sr_1_6?ie=UTF8&qid=1249275852&sr=8-6

Ervin Laszlo is considered one of the foremost thinkers and scientists of our age, perhaps the greatest mind since Einstein. His principal focus of research involves the Zero Point Field. He is the author of around seventy five books (his works having been translated into at least seventeen languages), and he has contributed to over 400 papers. Widely considered the father of systems philosophy and general evolution theory, he has worked as an advisor to the Director-General of the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization. He was also nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize in both 2004 and 2005. A multidisciplinarian, Laszlo has straddled numerous fields, having worked at universities as a professor of philosophy, music, futures studies, systems science, peace studies, and evolutionary studies. He was a sucessful concert pianist until he was thirty eight.

In his view, the zero-point field (or the Akashic Field, as he calls it) is quite literally the "mind of God".

Naming Hal Puthoff, Roger Penrose, Fritz-Albert Popp, and a handful of others as "front line investigators", Laszlo quotes Puthoff who says of the new scientific paradigm:


[What] would emerge would be an increased understanding that all of us are immersed, both as living and physical beings, in an overall interpenetrating and interdependant field in ecological balance with the cosmos as a whole, and that even the boundary lines between the physical and "metaphysical" would dissolve into a unitary viewpoint of the universe as a fluid, changing, energetic/informational cosmological unity."

an excert from "Science and the Akashic Field, an Integral Theory of Everything"


Akasha (a . ka . sha) is a Sanskrit word meaning "ether": all-pervasive space. Originally signifying "radiation" or "brilliance", in Indian philosophy akasha was considered the first and most fundamental of the five elements - the others being vata (air), agni (fire), ap (water), and prithivi (earth). Akasha embraces the properties of all five elements: it is the womb from which everything we percieve with our senses has emerged and into which everything will ultimately re-descend. The Akashic Record (also called The Akashic Chronicle) is the enduring record of all that happens, and has ever happened, in space and time."
Laszlo's view of the history of the universe is of a series of universes that rise and fall, but are each "in-formed" by the existence of the previous one. In Laszlo's mind, the universe is becoming more and more in-formed, and within the physical universe, matter (which is the crystallization of intersecting pressure waves or an interference pattern moving through the zero-point field) is becoming increasing in-formed and evolving toward ever higher forms of consciousness and impressioned experience.

edit on 30-5-2013 by NewAgeMan because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 30 2013 @ 08:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by NewAgeMan
 

There are many coincidences which are interesting.

That doesn't mean they are significant or indicate any relationship. Nor does a single example in a very small sample (the Solar System) indicate that there is anything unique about it. That's the point about "Crown of Creation". You are taking a point of view which is based on the idea that there is something special, something unique about the Earth and its Moon. You are taking a very provincial viewpoint when there is a whole galaxy out there, about which we know few details.


Phage, I was going to reply further man, but you seem to being doing all the heavy lifting on your own, very good points, and all of them factually based, and full of logical thought.

This pleases me greatly to watch, no need to interact on my part, I just get to sit back and enjoy the show.

Please sir, continue.



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 08:54 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 08:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by NewAgeMan
reply to post by Phage
 

Fair enough, and it's an unknown yes. However, let's look at the corollary to that idea and put it forth as an open ended question and just consider how potentially unique it may very well be.

On how many worlds might it be possible for a self aware, sentient observer to witness (with a filter so they don't hurt their "eyes") their single, GIANT moon, perfectlyeclipse their sun?

Do you think it's probable that such a configuration happens more than once in a galaxy, do you?

There's another factor too regarding the evolution of life on Earth including our own and that's the cosmic rays directed our way periodically from Cygnus X3 which is one of THE most luminous objects in the entire galaxy or one of the top two or three anyway.

edit on 30-5-2013 by NewAgeMan because: typo
edit on 30-5-2013 by NewAgeMan because: (no reason given)


Givn the amount of stars planets and moons, in even a small galaxy, I would say it is a certainty that there is more than just one.



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 09:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by NewAgeMan
 


something that could only be significant or meaningful from the perspective of a self aware observer.


Perhaps instead of "self aware" you should use the term "theologically biased". Not that there is anything particularly wrong but that is a bit more honest nomenclature. I'm self aware. The only significance or meaning I see is that the Sun gets covered by the Moon sometimes.


So, in considering the dynamic and interplay of the relationship between the moon the sun and the earth, including the geometrial coincidence of the all but identicle visible circumfrence of the moon to the sun as seen from earth, with the moon as the "lessor light" rising at night, the full moon as the "mightnight sun" a perfect mirror-image reflection of the sun - I take it then that you do not, or do not wish to or choose not to, see it or recognize it as an allegory intended for mankind by the Creative Agency as an infinitely intelligent and fully informed first/last cause?



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 09:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by NewAgeMan
reply to post by inverslyproportional
 

Did you just kiss Phage's ass and if so at some point, if it's warranted might I get at the very least some sort of acknowledgement for my part in putting this info forward and carrying on with the debate?


I will acknowledge your commitment to your beliefs, and even admit I find your persistence quite inspirational, though I find to be misplaced in irrational beliefs, based, it seems, solely on the fundamental assumption, we are somehow special, and all this was done for our benefit, long ago, so we could look up and see a perfect eclipse occasionally.

So yes, your accomplishments in this thread are great, and many, just not the type I would emulate, and your contributions and assertions were well thought out and put together, from a mindset I cant fathom or share.

In short, this thread is why I don't visit the metaphysics forums often, it seems entirely irrational at all points, and no amount of logical thought seems to stick, on the surface of your religiously oiled mind.

In short, a lot of hard work, and a lot of thought, and I am positive some would find your words to be as true as you believe them to be, I am just not capable of being one of these types, it escapes me how anyone could possibly buy into any of this, and see the delusional nature of it all.

From what I see, you believe oil was made the way it is, and placed in the ground, because one day we would develop an internal combustion engine that could burn it, then you would use this to claim you have found proof of ID because it is so.

Cause and effect.

The conditions are the cause that effected our evolution.

Not the evolution we would take one day, caused the conditions to be created in the first place, billions of years in the past.

I will give you a star for your unshakeable resolve, but I will not ever, unless this creator himself makes his presence known in a real and actual way, be able to even approach contemplating believing what your claiming.



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 09:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by inverslyproportional
Givn the amount of stars planets and moons, in even a small galaxy, I would say it is a certainty that there is more than just one.

Well at the very least, because what we have here is so utterly workable, it's a perfect model of what's possible somewhere else, and if those scientists I quoted are right, then once it's been done once, that information isn't lost but informs an ongoing creative process that is obviously, for some strange reason, weighted in favor of life, so in theory the universe is in the process of becoming increasingly informed BY life itself, and again, where can we point but at what's apparent here on earth, this isn't about being "extra special" it's just deductive reasoning and logic, and a little awe and wonder thrown in because it's only appropriate.



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 09:19 PM
link   
reply to post by inverslyproportional
 


Fair enough, and while I don't ask anyone to accept what I "believe" all I'm hoping for is an open mind willing to consider things from a new perspective, you don't have to share it with me, although I do hope you might be willing to, for a moment at least, try it on for size and see what it looks like, and is it rational.

In many ways all I'm doing is holding this stuff out for careful evaluation and discernment, because as far as I can tell it's not the kind of thing you run across every day, and hey isn't that what we're here for?

So dear reader, don't pay attention only to the number of stars someone gets pay attention to what's being said, and the information presented and then make up your own mind and draw your own conclusions, you don't have to take my side or anyone's side because you can decide for yourself what to believe or accept and what not to. That said I don't think it's entirely fair for what I'm suggesting here to be disdainfully discounted as "delusional" that's not fair I don't think, given my presentation and contribution here, which as far as I can tell isn't the least bit delusional at all, however apparently unreasonable or contrary to common sense it might appear at first glance. It's a real paradigm shifter that's for sure, but the only assumption it begins with is the fact of this life and what we can observe about the phenomenal world and the framework and the means by which "all this" has come about.

Heck of a "coincidence" if you ask me, but what do I know I'm delusional.


edit on 30-5-2013 by NewAgeMan because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 09:32 PM
link   
reply to post by NewAgeMan
 


Phage tore your carefully compiled research apart within a few posts. I don't see why I should take your theories seriously.



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 09:36 PM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 


No problem. Have a nice day.



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 09:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 

Originally posted by Phage
Perhaps instead of "self aware" you should use the term "theologically biased". Not that there is anything particularly wrong but that is a bit more honest nomenclature. I'm self aware. The only significance or meaning I see is that the Sun gets covered by the Moon sometimes.

Ironically, "theologically biased" actually describes your OWN posts perfectly...

Scientific fundamentalism has no more credibility than any other mind control cult.


With respect to its great contributions to society, I think it is important to make a case that science is really affecting society more like a religion now than a field of study or a resource base of useful information. Many everyday people do not understand it at all and accept ALL its teachings on faith.

Unfortunately some scientists and academic professionals are not so noble and have perpetrated deliberate frauds and cover-ups of important discoveries.

Modern Scientific beliefs are based upon a leap of faith in the big bang theory. It has become a belief system based on faith and therefore another form of religion. Scientists, like priests can explain their beliefs but the everyday people accept it all on faith. Scientists and doctors are the priests of this new religion, getting angry and crying "heresy" when anyone respectfully disagrees with them.

Has Science become a Religion

Science - The Illuminati Religion and Mind Control Tool for the Masses



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 09:48 PM
link   
Just a little something to add to the discussion. The moon is apparently moving away from the earth at 1.5 inches a year. So even if there was a moment in time where everything lined up perfectly, that moment would pass and everything would be out of whack again, forever.

Physics can explain the position of the moon, earth, and everything else in our solar system.

Yes, there is a lot of really cool relationships between objects, and some really cool math behind it. This does not make it intelligent though, just cool.

DC



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 09:49 PM
link   
While I am all for intelligent design, the OP video is far off in the facts. For example, the Sun is as big as 395 Moons? Are you serious? It's a lot bigger than 395 Earths.

Tidal forces lock the Moon's surface Earth-ward.

An eclipse can be seen on other planets. Of course. How can you say these are unique in the Universe?

etc.



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 09:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Murgatroid
 


I don't see the problem. Science has proven itself a far more reliable system of investigation than religion - which is based on faith. I will take science over faith any day, especially when NAM has already demonstrated his awareness that science is an essential component of any acceptable theory.



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 09:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Jim Scott
 

You didn't seem to read through the rest of the OP, which is a two part series.

So it's not just this


Originally posted by NewAgeMan

But also the geometrical relationship between the diameter and circumference of the moon to the earth (as outlined in the OP) along with it's behavior or orbital characteristics in fertilizing life and maintaining a harmonic equilibrium balancing in favor of life, that, when both are taken together, along with the facts of life here on earth, that it becomes more than a little intriguing as a "coincidence".

Do you see it now?

Regards,

NAM

edit on 30-5-2013 by NewAgeMan because: edit



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 09:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Murgatroid
 


Hogwash complete hogwash....Science follows rules to prove something you have to use scientific method and they have to have that work verified by others around the world.
It is not a Religion and no leap of faith is required because it can be proven.
Next you will be saying the theory of evolution is only a theory because it has "theory" in it...



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 09:59 PM
link   
I don't really see any evidence of intelligent design necessarily.

That whole squaring the circle thing seems very contrived to me, and takes advantage that people don't know math well. Shapes have certain intrinsic properties.

Yes, the fact eclipses occur, practically perfectly, is pretty awesome. But I can imagine many planets where it does not happen. so yes, our planet is undoubtedly special in that aspect, but undeniable proof of intelligent design? Sorry, no.

and I do believe in intelligent design.
edit on 30-5-2013 by Ghost375 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 10:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Ghost375
 

I don't think that intelligent design is something that someone can "believe in". It is either proven or provable, or it isn't, but the counter argument of it being a "coincidence" in a purposeless "random" universe surely must be called out as absurd and ridiculous in the face of the data.



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 10:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jim Scott
While I am all for intelligent design, the OP video is far off in the facts. For example, the Sun is as big as 395 Moons? Are you serious? It's a lot bigger than 395 Earths.

Tidal forces lock the Moon's surface Earth-ward.

An eclipse can be seen on other planets. Of course. How can you say these are unique in the Universe?

etc.

The Sun is about 416 times (as a multiplier) larger than the Moon.

wiki.answers.com...

As to the early earth moon, see this post from earlier in the thread.

From the POV of the host planet, from no other planet in our solar system is such a thing as a total eclipse visble, it's not a common phenomenon like tidal locking for example whereby the rotation of the moon is such that only one face of the moon is always visible.

Edit: Ours is also a GIANT moon relative to the host planet, and, it's also somewhat unusual for there to be only one sole solitary moon. How many planets in our solar system have just one moon? One. Earth.

Best regards,

NAM

P.S. As per my avatar, yes there is evidence and historical data proving that Jesus used a scheduled lunar eclipse on Passover to perform his Great Work, but I don't want to overly prejudice or bias anyone too badly because contending with what's being presented here ought to be entirely sufficient to ..discombobulate or gobsmack, the truly inquisitive and the open-minded, that we don't have to go bringing any "religious" connotation into it. So I'll leave that for another thread unless someone asks about it here.

edit on 30-5-2013 by NewAgeMan because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 11:04 PM
link   
amazing stuff





new topics
top topics
 
23
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join