Reconciling Creationism with Evolution: both are correct...

Hi all!
I'm sharing an article here which tries to explain how seemingly contradictory theories can be correct.
You will have to start with the premise that time does not exist. Only our shared subjective perception determines how we experience time locally, on Earth. (This is basic Einstein and the theory of relativity). However, you could still wonder how does "time" expand to form a seemingly coherent story?
The idea is that time expands in all directions at the same time. It is as if a movie would start coming into "focus" with the first and last "frame", in this case, the first "frame" being the void or nothing, and the last frame being "God", and then started to add "frames" in a geometrically symmetrical way (first a middle, frame, then new frames at an equal distance from that middle and the first and last)... You get the picture. The more "frames" you add, the more coherent the "story" becomes.

So when that process starts, it's the creationism theory that prevails: God created the stars, planets, the Earth, humans... instantly out of nowhere. But as "time" expands, you have more frames to play with, and so you can explain this story from other points of view, like evolution.
I'll let you read the article as it goes much more in depth.

**SNIP** Mod Edit

It should be noted that the theory of evolution addresses neither the origin of the Universe or the origin of life.

In other words, red herring argument. A logical fallacy. What a surprise.

a reply to: Marma

I see you have meet Phage already

a reply to: Phage

I don't understand your point.

Yea kinda like how they make those movies that are set in different time periods and they flash between events of a persons life from different time points.

To me it raises the idea of compression like how bytes of info are stored in a zip file and transmitted in a compact fashion.

a reply to: Marma

The theory of evolution has nothing to do with the creation of the Universe or the origin of life.

There is nothing to "reconcile." It is only when certain factions claim that life is as it always has been that ridiculousness enters the picture.

a reply to: Phage

This is precisely the point. I'm trying to say that everything is true, and nothing is ridiculous. But you would have to take an interest in the article to understand that. Careful though, it might change the way you think about the Universe..

a reply to: Marma

Everything is not true.

For example. The Earth is not flat, yet there are those who believe so.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Marma

Everything is not true.

For example. The Earth is not flat, yet there are those who believe so.

That is a matter of dimensional perspective.

I agree with op that everything is true but often clouded by perception and understanding.

The thing with evolution is there really is no way to do anything but make educated guesses. Until someone sees the big picture they really do not know for sure but are just applying known pieces of a puzzle. Often when entering into a mission to prove something speculated the person will find what they are looking for by way of forcing an outcome as they ignore pieces that do not fit.

a reply to: Marma

I’m guessing by your OP that you have no education other than watching youtube videos from creationist channels.

a reply to: UncleTomahawk

The thing with evolution is there really is no way to do anything but make educated guesses.

As opposed to the alternative type of guess?

There is very much evidence that latter species have evolved from previous species. No evidence to the contrary.

There is very much evidence that the Earth is round. No evidence to the contrary.

a reply to: UncleTomahawk

Except that evolution clearly describes exactly what it sets out to describe. With lots of evidence to support it.

Whereas creationism relies solely on large assumptions based on beliefs with no evidence to support it.

originally posted by: Phage
Everything is not true.

WTH phage!

How is it actually possible that we actually AGREE?

Have we just entered into 'The Twilight Zone'

a reply to: Woodcarver

Nope. I have studied mainstream science, and I believe that all of it is true. I simply have taken a broader perspective on how the Universe works.
A general rule is that a theory which allows to explain more while excluding less is more valid.

Evidence is like trouble..It is easy to find if that is your goal. The trick to not believing is to look for the opposite of what inflates your ego and head.

As i stated the earth being flat is a matter of dimensional perspective.

If your goal is too prove that evolution is real then you will seek out that which helps prove your point and if your goal is the opposite then you will seek out things that disprove. After finding any amount of either a person becomes more adamant in their beliefs.

Keep in mind i have not givin an opinion either way but through simple statements i have triggered a protection response that guard your beliefs. To many people if they realize such they may begin to question their selves and goals.

originally posted by: Marma
I'm trying to say that everything is true...

Without giving any source, good luck with that...

Here is where I stand BTW:

In the Illuminati propaganda arsenal, the greatest tool for destroying faith in God has been Darwin's theory of evolution. I know some say "I believe in evolution and God." Nonetheless, countless people have become atheists from being taught the theory as "fact" - I was once one of them.

Darwinism is an Illuminati Scam

a reply to: Marma

From your article you linked to in your OP (opening post):

you will understand that the future exerts a force of attraction on the past. We are being drawn towards a timeline in which Source can be all that it is, and that includes a future or a timeline in which humanity thrives, not one where we all perish under some form of natural disaster or global nuclear winter.

So, in simple terms: I am immortal, because I am aware of my self right now, therefore I must exist in the future, to theorize back to my present, thus creating my present self awareness.

Taken as a whole, your article reminds me of a theory that I came up with then discarded a few years ago. I called it Plenary Metaphysical Solipsism.

because we are like 7.5 billion movie directors inside their own movie, which, right now, are steering our collective story directly towards an iceberg.

I rejected it because sayings like, "Truth is what you make it and what I make it at the same time without possibility of contradiction or error." would make any kind of sense. In other words, facts don't matter.

a reply to: pthena

From your article you linked to in your OP (opening post):

That "article" seems to be the OP's own blog.

a reply to: pthena

I understand your point of view, however, facts do matter. Very much so!
But facts serve a purpose: that of surviving.
This is actually what triggered my spiritual awakening. It was listening to a debate between Jordan Peterson and Sam Harris on what was the "truth". And Jordan argued that the "truth" and "facts" depend on whether they kill us or not. In other words, if we invent a deadly weapon thanks to a totally new scientific theory on physics and end up killing all of humanity, we would have been "wrong" (even if "scientifically" right). Facts are useless without meaning. And coincidentally, humans never collect useless facts. I don't see people counting the number of individual pieces of gravel in their driveway, or comparing sizes and shapes of clouds all day... The facts we focus on are the ones that directly serve our interest. And our biggest interest is survival. Not only as an individual, but as a collective as well. That is the premise of my article. So yes, your theory was correct.

Your trouble accepting it is probably the deterministic nature of your theory. In this case, it's not deterministic at all. It is free will within a certain boundary. It works just like your physical body: if you cut yourself, white blood cells rush to disinfect the wound. It's not like the body produces 100% the exact number of required white blood cells and each one has a predetermined role to play out. Nope. Rather, it's as if your body had a "higher intelligence" where it knew exactly how many white blood cells to produce in excess, in order to make sure, with 95% certainty, that it would be disinfected, should some white blood cells decide not to do anything. And then, it case it fails, it applies the same kind of "wisdom" (95% antibodies) and so forth, in order for the probability of you healing is 99;999999999%. The Universe works the same way. We have 100% free will. But if you don't "play your part", the Universe has a near infinite series of backup plans to "steer" this story in the right direction. It's the same reason why a random bum on the street will collect a certain amount of money depending on how many people walk by. Your individual action counts, but if you don't do it, someone else will.

originally posted by: Woodcarver
a reply to: Marma

I’m guessing by your OP that you have no education other than watching youtube videos from creationist channels.

I am guessing that if you had your way then youtube would ban such like they did much other alternative stuff.