Proof we were Created - Yes, I said Proof!

reply to post by boncho

So if one person gives me and orange, and another person gives me an orange, me holding two oranges in my hand is not proof that I hold two oranges in my hand?

The question is not oranges in your hand. The question if proof those oranges came from a seed of information. Inside the orange seed, there is encoded information that contains the entire orange tree. For there to be an instruction, the must be an instructor. Information arising to form and function does not arise on its own. Chaos arises on its own. Even if you want to argue that evolution was somehow a cause, which nobody so far has even suggested, you still need to figure out how chemiosmosis was first engaged as a mechanical process with a stator and motor.

Evolution ends at the Electron Transport Chain in the cell. It's a fuel cell of nearly 100% efficiency. It is designed with parts. This is proof at a different level that the orange, the tree, the DNA in the cell and the engineered environment that supports it is designed. It's really not hard to see.

Given the FACT that nobody besides me has been presenting any evidence seals the deal. It would be fruitless since I have been presenting the fruit. Where is the argument for evolution as a cause? As long as you guys keep aiming this argument toward me, I will keep aiming it back to the proof. PROOF! Right here in this video. Talk about the video. Can you try that pathway?

reply to post by EnochWasRight


I'm enjoying your thread. Haven't quite caught up. Just wanted to say: Have you seen this?

Anybody ever notice the Shemhamphorasch is constructed entirely from the reduced Fibonacci series ?
www.abovetopsecret.com...
by Soupornuts
started on 8/26/2013 @ 06:26 AM

Star and flag by the way.
:up

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by EnochWasRight

 

How is that? How do I operate? Talk about ad hominem.

Where does Paul call them bondservants? My lexicon shows the word used in Ephesians 6:5 as "douloi" which means slave, NOT bondservant. The word used in Galatians 3:28 is "doulos" which is the singular form of "doulois", so it seems he was contradicting himself after all.

I asked where Paul calls them bondservants and you come back with Paul calling himself a bondservant? That wasn't the question I was asking and you know it. No wonder you had to resort to an ad hominem.

ETA: Apparently a bond-servant IS a slave. Talk about ironic. What was your argument again? Because you basically just proved my point for me.

edit on 26-8-2013 by 3NL1GHT3N3D1 because: (no reason given)

This is an interesting topic, but how do you describe Chemiosmosis as arising from evolution? Let's return to the topic of the OP first, then you can start a new topic on your thread idea above. Reference my last post on this topic and give me a reasoning behind how the electron transport chain arises by chance. Electrons are a slave to this process, as all things are a slave to the Strong Nuclear Force. This is the TOPIC of the thread. Make a thread on the other topic and we'll discuss it. For now, we know the strong force (Strong House / Aleph Bet) is information controlling the process. How is it that the Father is so closely related to invariable symmetry?

Speaking of slaves, in the cell, we have a good description of what the Bible calls a walled city. It is my contention that the entire Bible is showing us the basics of physics with stories from our own history. As you argue the word meanings of slave and bond servant, all your cells are doing the process in the video below to keep you alive. If not for the slave nature of the cells, how would you be alive? Is there a benefit to you?

reply to post by EnochWasRight

reply to post by EnochWasRight


Your argument now has veered off into a new direction. You are saying any type of uniform principal within basic components of matter are proof of god because there is instruction. You might be trying to say DNA is the code that proves god, but the same fundamental rules govern the interaction of elements and molecules.

So essentially, you are saying proof of god is because if metal gets wet it rusts. Rust is proof of god.

Congratulations, you have overturned centuries of thinking with rust. You sir, have a vision. I urge you to preach it to the masses.

Originally posted by this_is_who_we_are
reply to post by EnochWasRight

 

I'm enjoying your thread. Haven't quite caught up. Just wanted to say: Have you seen this?

Anybody ever notice the Shemhamphorasch is constructed entirely from the reduced Fibonacci series ?
www.abovetopsecret.com...
by Soupornuts
started on 8/26/2013 @ 06:26 AM

Star and flag by the way.
:up

edit on 8/26/2013 by this_is_who_we_are because: typos

It doesn't often happen, but you are showing me something I have never heard of. This name derivation of Shem HaMephorash is an artifact I have never seen. I'll put some time into this later today and see if there is merit in it. Thank you for the tip.

The Bible is filled with these enigmas for sure. Each points to another level of meaning in a broad territory. I can't say for sure on this since it is new to me, but I will look at it.

reply to post by boncho

Or wait, you are speaking about proof of creation? So you cannot find proof that we were created in tangible objects/items/relics.

If I say the word EMET, you need to know what it represents before you know the meaning. If I show you the Electron Transport Chain, you need to know how it works before you can see the design of its creator. As you investigate the meaning of things written with Aleph Bet forming Words, you then see the origin of the universe as a design of meaning. When you look at things and actions, you see no meaning. When I show you they have meaning, you can decide for yourself it this is proof of design. I have already made my decision about EMET. AMEN (AMN). Check the OP if you need to know what Truth is.

How does your own evidence of origins explain this:

Originally posted by boncho
reply to post by EnochWasRight

 

Your argument now has veered off into a new direction. You are saying any type of uniform principal within basic components of matter are proof of god because there is instruction. You might be trying to say DNA is the code that proves god, but the same fundamental rules govern the interaction of elements and molecules.

So essentially, you are saying proof of god is because if metal gets wet it rusts. Rust is proof of god.

Congratulations, you have overturned centuries of thinking with rust. You sir, have a vision. I urge you to preach it to the masses.

You say things are governed? You speak well. Aleph Bet is the Authority of the House. Aleph is strength / authority and Bet is House. Alphabet represents the instructions of Word. It is the Strong House, or strong nuclear force. For anything to be combined (coalesce), there must be a chiral nature between two dissimilar units of design. Just as the Bible says, "Two become one." Chirality states that two things, although mirrored to each other, cannot be superimposed one to the other. Individuation is the point. You have two of everything on your body in a mirror of chirality. Your hands each have a purpose. Two chambers of your heart derive energy for the body. Apart from the motor and stator in the electron transport chain of your cells, the strong house of the cell (Walled City) could not produce energy for the heart. It's a system of complexity and function from the stars above to the cells below. Even the cells have components in the form of smaller chains called quarks. Protons and Neutrons each have an invariable symmetry called the strong nuclear force. Protons have two up quarks and one down. Neutrons have a mirror (Chiral) to this with two down and one up. They form the Strong House (Aleph Bet).

This is proof God got it right at every level we can find. He even gives you the best way to see this as an image (Hologram) of particles and light from information. The four Nobel Physicists agree with me.

John 1

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4 In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind. 5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome[a] it.

Give me a better understanding of this video if you can. Your evidence can deny my proof if it has merit.

Electron Transport Chain

When you get this finished. Speak to the topic of this video as well.

VIDEO OF THE HOLOGRAM DISCUSSION

Originally posted by EnochWasRight
reply to post by boncho

 

Or wait, you are speaking about proof of creation? So you cannot find proof that we were created in tangible objects/items/relics.

If I say the word EMET, you need to know what it represents before you know the meaning. If I show you the Electron Transport Chain, you need to know how it works before you can see the design of its creator. As you investigate the meaning of things written with Aleph Bet forming Words, you then see the origin of the universe as a design of meaning. When you look at things and actions, you see no meaning. When I show you they have meaning, you can decide for yourself it this is proof of design. I have already made my decision about EMET. AMEN (AMN). Check the OP if you need to know what Truth is.

How does your own evidence of origins explain this:

In far more depth and understanding than any biblical text, that's for sure.

www.eurekalert.org...

Originally posted by the sloth
reply to post by EnochWasRight

 

Are you #ing joking? You honestly came to ATS with ... with THAT? Incredible. I never thought I'd say this to a wimpy theist, but I think It actually takes more balls to believe that load of cow dung than reality. I mean, really did I miss the joke? Was this supposed to be like satire or something?

I take it you didn't bother with the links or podcasts at all. I take it you have not bothered to read the rest of the thread. Ad Hominem is not a reply.

Originally posted by Pardon?

Originally posted by EnochWasRight
reply to post by boncho

 

Or wait, you are speaking about proof of creation? So you cannot find proof that we were created in tangible objects/items/relics.

If I say the word EMET, you need to know what it represents before you know the meaning. If I show you the Electron Transport Chain, you need to know how it works before you can see the design of its creator. As you investigate the meaning of things written with Aleph Bet forming Words, you then see the origin of the universe as a design of meaning. When you look at things and actions, you see no meaning. When I show you they have meaning, you can decide for yourself it this is proof of design. I have already made my decision about EMET. AMEN (AMN). Check the OP if you need to know what Truth is.

How does your own evidence of origins explain this:

In far more depth and understanding than any biblical text, that's for sure.

www.eurekalert.org...

Yet you have no words or links or descriptions to back this up. I have given more than enough information. The OP is the root of this truth. Behind it, the rest flows as evidence from the root. Aleph Bet and Word. Pi and e. No mistakes in this. It's there for us to see as enigmas we cannot discount as true.

reply to post by EnochWasRight


Thanks for the quasi science lesson. This is really rich. For centuries, religious zealots persecuted anyone who put anything about god into question. Namely, sciences. The bible, whether or not you want to believe accounts were written right at the time of occurrence, briefly afterward, or long afterward, no matter would be penned with bias. Either you believe it is a metaphorical fairy tail or literal interpretation of the once in a eon supernatural events. Which leads us to so many colourful, various interpretations.

Same for the koran, another verbal book of so called god's words, not written by the purported listening to the voice, but by hand of others, of course, with bias, and again why there are variations of interpretation.

And no matter what, human bias creeps its way into each one.

And when the literal traditions fail, new, gobbledygook variations arise again, hoping to unite the lost, naive and gullible. And what would the backbench be this time? Oh, the perceived enemy by all who tried to claim know-it-all status (the religious) of everything on and off the world, (their perceived enemy) science. The so called enemy of religion is now the weapon to beat down those stupid mislead scientists.


So... Since youve lost all your arguments in the past you will claim scientific discoveries as biblical fact.





If that's not ironic, I don't know what is. So save us your lectures on things you have a weak understanding of, and things you are trying to twist and manipulate to fit into your preconceived conclusions.

Everything you are spouting was not discovered with preconceived conclusions, the exact opposite actually. And if you wish to suddenly throw it into a box you will spit on the good work of everyone you are trying rip off right now.

Yes, fire puts out water. Hydrogen fusion produces helium and heats planets in the nearby vicinity. Cells behave a certain way on Earth... and, supremely shocking, life tends to be carbon based on Earth. Does that make evolution impossible too, because all life is some form of carbon based life?

Evolution ends at the Electron Transport Chain in the cell. It's a fuel cell of nearly 100% efficiency. It is designed with parts. This is proof at a different level that the orange, the tree, the DNA in the cell and the engineered environment that supports it is designed. It's really not hard to see.

Your argument is stupid. Nonsense. And it rapes the good nature of everyone who worked on bringing this knowledge to the human race. What you spout isn't knowledge, its the anathema to it. As someone mentioned, the bible has been written in other languages, was written by man, has been attributed X,Y,Z to it, by man, not god.

And your relentless push on chemiosmosis is annoying, especially because you are most likely arguing (in ignorance) that we were created by aliens throwing meteors:

This new study shows how a chemical, similar to one now found in all living cells and vital for generating the energy that makes something alive, could have been created when meteorites containing phosphorus minerals landed in hot, acidic pools of liquids around volcanoes, which were likely to have been common across the early Earth.

"The mystery of how living organisms sprung out of lifeless rock has long puzzled scientists, but we think that the unusual phosphorus chemicals we found could be a precursor to the batteries that now power all life on Earth. But the fact that it developed simply, in conditions similar to the early Earth, suggests this could be the missing link between geology and biology," said Dr Terry Kee, from the University's School of Chemistry, who led the research.

All life on Earth is powered by a process called chemiosmosis, where the chemical adenosine triphosphate (ATP), the rechargeable chemical 'battery' for life, is both broken down and re-formed during respiration to release energy used to drive the reactions of life, or metabolism. The complex enzymes required for both the creation and break down of ATP are unlikely to have existed on Earth during the period when life first developed. This led scientists to look for a more basic chemical with similar properties to ATP, but that does not require enzymes to transfer energy.

www.sciencedaily.com...





Furthermore, for the last time in a "Creation wins, evolutions loses!" Thread, which has to brought up every bloody time, because bible thumpers can not get this through their head... Evolution is not the opposite of creation.

It would be fruitless since I have been presenting the fruit. Where is the argument for evolution as a cause?

It isn't. No one said it is. You are probably thinking about abiogenesis.

I've just realized, this thread is just a rehash of another creationist argument done with a little more tact, and a little more research (I admit),

of course,

I'm referring to the Atheist's Nightmare...

The Heavenly Banana

(or the pleasures of a poor woman, [or closet preacher])



rationalwiki.org...

The argument for the banana being designed (and as the next section will attest to, this is a surprisingly fair conclusion) is based on the following characteristics:
The banana is shaped to fit into the human hand.
It comes with a protective, non-slip surface to hold.
It is curved towards the face for ease of consumption and does not squirt in one's face during the act.
There is a "pull tab" at the top for easy access, but is easier accessed by pinching the bottom and opening from that end.
It has a simple color code to show ripeness: Green; too early. Yellow; just right. Black; too late.

reply to post by EnochWasRight

The argument for the banana being designed (and as the next section will attest to, this is a surprisingly fair conclusion) is based on the following characteristics:
The banana is shaped to fit into the human hand.
It comes with a protective, non-slip surface to hold.
It is curved towards the face for ease of consumption and does not squirt in one's face during the act.
There is a "pull tab" at the top for easy access, but is easier accessed by pinching the bottom and opening from that end.
It has a simple color code to show ripeness: Green; too early. Yellow; just right. Black; too late.

One last thing I am curious about, why is it that no biblical scholars discovered nuclear force? Since it was there the whole time, just lingering about...

The discovery of the neutron in 1932 launched the modern era of nuclear physics.

www.physics.ucla.edu...

there must be a chiral nature between two dissimilar units of design. Just as the Bible says, "Two become one." Chirality states that two things, although mirrored to each other, cannot be superimposed one to the other. Individuation is the point. You have two of everything on your body in a mirror of chirality. Your hands each have a purpose. Two chambers of your heart derive energy for the body.

And yet, only 1 liver, but two kidneys.

Protons and Neutrons each have an invariable symmetry called the strong nuclear force. Protons have two up quarks and one down. Neutrons have a mirror (Chiral) to this with two down and one up. They form the Strong House (Aleph Bet).

And Jesus holds it all together:



"Current physics model being discussed at MIT Nuclear Sciences Division"

I found a question posed in another forum, I'm hoping you can answer since you seem the authority on biblical physics:

For instance, it seems that Jesus is powerless to directly affect the electromagnetic force itself. He can only exert his own force to oppose it. This suggests that the EMF was not actually created by God, which leaves open the question of its origin. Was it created by Satan? Or is it perhaps part of the "nothing" from which God created the universe?

Also, does the bible tell us if quark stars are indeed real? Or were they just a math error? Maybe we should just divide by π

Tell us, because anyone well versed in the science you mutilate, would have at least a general understanding of the questions I'm asking.

reply to post by boncho


Bronco.
As a man who seems to know a little about science, could you be so kind as to answer a question for me?
Some might say it deveates from this discussion, but I think the two are related.

Was it not a Catholic prist who first proposed the "big bang theory"?

I had read something to this effect many years ago and would like to know if it were true.

It does seem kind of odd how many "religious" people totally reject the idea of such an event if it was started by a priest.

Originally posted by teamcommander
reply to post by boncho

 

Bronco.
As a man who seems to know a little about science, could you be so kind as to answer a question for me?
Some might say it deveates from this discussion, but I think the two are related.

Was it not a Catholic prist who first proposed the "big bang theory"?

I had read something to this effect many years ago and would like to know if it were true.

It does seem kind of odd how many "religious" people totally reject the idea of such an event if it was started by a priest.

Monseigneur Georges Henri Joseph Édouard Lemaître

Thank you for arguing semantics, as if the religious debate had not enough to begin with. As long as he was not preaching proof of god by his scientific wit, and calling all who don't believe him fools, he is far from relevant on this subject.

reply to post by boncho


Thank you.

I hope my connecting this to the current discussion is noted by all.

reply to post by EnochWasRight


I get the feeling you're trying out a random word generator.
You have to be.

reply to post by EnochWasRight


This proves absolutely nothing except that someone has too much time on their hands and an obsession with their religion being "right".

reply to post by EnochWasRight


I like Chuck Missler, he really got me into the Bible more than I was before.

There are a lot of good people out there showing the stupidity of atheism, it is so absurd to think all life came from nothing by nothing. I actually breaks a lot of mathematical, scientific, and common sense laws to think everything came into existence from nothing and by nothing, and organized itself for life by random chance. The entire idea is actually what I would define as madness.

The problem is Darwins Evolution has big money and big power behind it, the driving force behind socialist government is an atheistic belief system. Making the government god who grants you rights, instead of the one true God. This is what we have in power today controlling our government, education, and media. Brainwashing kids at a young age all their life. Creating good little secular brain washed government drones who worship government, or themselves, or entertainment stars, etc.. you name it.

I believe this creation we have today (possible 2nd creation if you accept the Gap theory) is only around 6000 years old. Comets themselves attest to young a universe. Comets can't last longer than 15,000 years max, yet we have them today. What does the secular community come up with in response to this fact? "Uh there is this Oort cloud that has comets bouncing around in it." Another completely made up idea, based on zero evidence, in fact, it isn't even theoretically possible if one looks at the idea of an "Oor cloud of comets". There are other facts like size of the sun in the past based on its current loss of mass etc... Without billions of years, Evolution has no chance, even with billions of years life creating itself it is still impossible actually, but the atheist either don't get it, or want to deny the obvious problems with the lack of a creator.


Anyways, just wanted to throw in my two cents on this topic,
Good day to all