Science & Religion

[StrawberryJam]

I agree that the universe appears to be expanding at very high speeds. My problem is that the Theory was devised strictly by scientists who were determined that the Big Bang had to be a materialistic theory. That there must not be any room for an intelligent being called God allowed in the Theory. My view of our universe and life on this planet requires an Intelligent Being in order to impose boundary conditions on the Laws of Physics and chance to bring about the universe as we know it.

The Big Bang Theory is a purely mathematical abstract construct with very little or no basis in reality, except that the universe is expanding and that the expansion appears to be accelerating. The math was invented by materialists in an effort to explain the observation of our expanding universe and the known helium and deuterium abundances found in the universe. The math is constantly being tweaked in an effort to explain the big bang as well as the formation of galaxies, stars, planets etc. As with biogeny, cosmogony has become permeated with evolutionary assumptions and conclusions, yet, despite this, the Big Bang points to an extremely fined tuned low entropic beginning of our universe that suggest an uncaused cause, that must exist, that caused the universe to come into existence, and many have concluded the uncaused cause to be an intelligent being, the I AM, God Himself.

Whenever problems arise, a big banger will just add some more mathematics to the equation, thus we have this mysterious mathematical ‘inflation’ to help bring the ‘materialistic’ Big Bang theory into agreement with observations. If there was ‘inflation’ at all, then we do not know what started the inflation and what caused the inflation to suddenly stop.

Mathematical changes also resulted from the “Big Bangers” failure to find the predicted gravitons, monopoles, etc. Using their preconceived materialistic worldview as a constraint, and their intelligence, big bangers simply devised more mathematics to explain away their failure to observe the predictions of their Big Bang Theory, and now the “Big Bangers” have new mathematical reasons why we do not observe the predicted gravitons, monopoles, etc. If they had found the predicted gravitons and monopoles in the first place, they would not have bothered to add the new math that makes them invisible.

I’ll leave it at this for now.

Telestia

Which Big Bang Theory are you discussing? The modern one or the one that came before it that was ground breaking at that time?

 

[StrawberryJam]

I’m willing to listen, Can you show me the evidence that proves evolution to be true?

You state that Evolution is not proven. Your burden is to prove that it is not fact.
I can not prove Evolution to be true on this website as it is a banned topic.
Wonder why?

 

[Telestia]

Which Big Bang Theory are you discussing? The modern one or the one that came before it that was ground breaking at that time?

The one that Cobe and WMAP wa suppose to validate, but ended up doing the opposite.

 

[StrawberryJam]

The one that Cobe and WMAP wa suppose to validate, but ended up doing the opposite.

Telestia,

The Big Bang Theory in either the old model or the more modern one is still very good science.

Evolution is true, and has not been debunked.

The topic is banned from discussion here.

ID is not science, it never will be.

 

[Telestia]

You state that Evolution is not proven. Your burden is to prove that it is not fact.
I can not prove Evolution to be true on this website as it is a banned topic.
Wonder why?

Then I must not do it either. It’s a shame, I am quite knowledgeable with the topic when my brain is actually functioning. I out-debated Professors of various sciences on their field of evolutionary expertise, and on the internet. I even had some top notch evolutionary scientists come to my aid when they saw I was being snowed by evolution mobs on the internet.

Evolution’s most serious flaw are that there exist no Scientific Law that is an organizing principle to overcome: THE 2ND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS: MOLECULES WILL ALWAYS FLOW FROM STATES OF LOW PROBABILITY TO STATES OF EVER HIGHER PROBABILITY.

AND THE MOST PROBABILITY STATES ARE CHAOS AND A HEAT DEATH WHERE NO WORK CAN BE DONE. IN THE END.

Sorry, I think I must drop this subject. as you say: 'It is a banned topic."

I probably will leave this forum. It appears to me that I can not express any controversial views that I hold based upon my understanding of the Bible, science, math, and history some of which do not fit with, important to Catholics, Catholic Teachings, which to me seem unsound. Plus my mind only functions only short periods of time. I ain’t the man I use to be.

However, I do have a nice post in the ‘Back Fence’ (?) under Protestant vs. Catholic Jokes, or something like that. I invite you all to read it.

May God’s grace, kindness, and mercy be upon you all.

Telestia.

We are such stuff as dreams are made of. W.S.

 

[StAnastasia]

I’m willing to listen, Can you show me the evidence that proves evolution to be true?

Telestia, the theory has been more and more strongly confirmed ever since it was first broached in 1859. Because 100,000 biologists assume the truth of evolution in their daily work, the burden is on you to disprove the theory. I can almost assure you that if you disprove it you will win a Nobel Prize!

 

[StAnastasia]

On the other hand, The Theory of Evolution has been utterly debunked on the Macro-evolution level,

Completely false.

and so has the secular humanistic Big Bang Theory.

Completely false.

On the micro level, Mendelian Genetics rules on the variation of the species.

What does this mean?

 

[Telestia]

Telestia, the theory has been more and more strongly confirmed ever since it was first broached in 1859. Because 100,000 biologists assume the truth of evolution in their daily work, the burden is on you to disprove the theory. I can almost assure you that if you disprove it you will win a Nobel Prize!

I have, and I will not get a Nobel Prize. You apparently have no idea the power of Secular Humanism and humanists control what scientists can see, and can not see, when it comes to Evolution. Disagree and you will not get published and most likely will lose your job, and be banned from being a teacher.

Science says NO! to evolution…

 

[StAnastasia]

Is electrical activity an adequate explanation of insight, intuition, induction, and inspiration? Is reasoning merely a process of mechanical computation?

I would not use “merely”: as I’m not a metaphysical reductionist. There have been some interesting studies in the cognition of crows in Japan, who have learned how to crack nuts by flying down to a crosswalk while a truck is at a stop light, placing the nut in front of the tire, and then retrieving the contents of the nut after the truck has gone by. This is a reasoning process, but I would not reduce it to “mechanical computation.” Reasoning is and emergent property.

Do you believe in a personal God?

Of course.

In what sense are we made in God’s image?

The entire universe reflects God’s image, in ways that reflect varying levels of consciousness, self-awareness, moral and spiritual awareness.

Does God know what He is doing?

Presumably. The universe continues to expand; stars and planets continue to be born from nebulae.

They are implied by your statement that truth, freedom, justice and love are simply concepts, values and ideals in the human mind - and correspond to nothing in reality.

I did not say this; you are making this up about me.

What is a fact?

A completed action (from Latin factus).

A figment of the imagination?

No.

Then what are the realities to which those symbols refer?

Systems and principles by which humans and human communities understand and organize their communities.

 

[StAnastasia]

I have,

False - you have proven no such thing.

and I will not get a Nobel Prize.

Probably true.

You apparently have no idea the power of Secular Humanism and humanists control what scientists can see, and can not see, when it comes to Evolution. Disagree and you will not get published and most likely will lose your job, and be banned from being a teacher.

False – that’s propaganda from Ben Stein!

Science says NO! to evolution.

Regrettably, you are reality-challenged.

 

[Telestia]

Completely false.

Completely false.

Thanks for sharing your rich knowledge of evolution theory. This is as good as it gets for proving evolution theory to be true. OK, you are not allowed to post it.

What does this mean?

It means that all known evolution is merely are small variation around a mean, based upon Mendelian Genetics. Darwin actually had no Theory for variation of the species. Darwin’s Theory for how evolution works is a theory that goes back to 400 BC, called pangenesis.

Mendel is the hero when it comes to the passing traits to offspring. And Mendel’s Theory removes the plasticity of the species that Darwin and Wallace based their Theory of Evolution on. Through Mendel’s laws, it became clear that all variation comes from existing genes, and the variation was enormous, so that to the untrained eye, it may look like evolution is occurring from generation to generation, but it was actually stasis with an enormous data base to allowing all species to adapt to a wide range of environmental niches. So what looked like evolution was merely expressions of an enormous pool of characteristics in the existing genes. God made it very probable that his creatures would survive in a wide range of environments.

Gregor Mendel found Darwins’ Theory to be unpersuasive. Mendel’s data on inheritance led Mendel to conclude that heretidy involves stable factors that determines an organisms traits. Thus under Mendelian Genetics, the species once again are static, (Unchanging, varying only within the genetic limits inherent in the existing genes of the genotype: The entire set of genes in an organism).

This fact caught Alfred Wallace’s atttention:

Alfred Wallace, the co-developer (with *Charles Darwin) of the evolutionary theory, survived Darwin by several decades and was alive when Mendelian genetics was rediscovered and began to be investigated. Wallace, clearly recognized that Mendelian principles were a total variance with evolutionary theory.

In the words of Alfred Russel Wallace, co-founder of the Theory of evolution with Darwin.

“But, on the general relation of Mendelism to Evolution, I have come to a very definite conclusion. This is, that it has no relation whatever to the evolution of species or higher groups, but is really antagonistic to such evolution! The essential basis of evolution involving as it does the most minute and all-pervading adaptation to the whole environment, as extreme and ever-present plasticity, as condition of survival and adaptation. But the essence of Mendelian characters is their rigidity. They are transmitted without variation, and therefore, except by the rarest of accidents, can never become adapted to every varying condition.” *Alfred Russel Wallace, Letters and Reminiscences by James Marchant (1916), p. 340.

 

[Telestia]

False - you have proven no such thing.

Probably true.

False – that’s propaganda from Ben Stein!

Regrettably, you are reality-challenged.

What is it with you and declarations, they carry no weight at all. Also, I wrote my response, of which my last post is only a small part thereof, years before Ben Stein made his movie. And his movie is a good expose of what is really going on, the suppressing of real science with evolutionary propaganda. And the people behind it were England’s secular humanists.

 

[StAnastasia]

It means that all known evolution is merely are small variation around a mean, based upon Mendelian Genetics. Darwin actually had no Theory for variation of the species. Darwin’s Theory for how evolution works is a theory that goes back to 400 BC, called pangenesis.

False, but you might as well propose a paper on this topic to one of the hundreds of professional biology and genetics societies. They might give your ideas a hearing. I assume you have the academic degrees and professional qualifications necessary to have a paper accepted. Check out some of the societies on this list:

netsci.org/Resources/Web/society_biology.html

 

[StAnastasia]

What is it with you and declarations, they carry no weight at all. Also, I wrote my response, of which my last post is only a small part thereof, years before Ben Stein made his movie. And his movie is a good expose of what is really going on, the suppressing of real science with evolutionary propaganda. And the people behind it were England’s secular humanists.

Ben Stein’s movie Expelled is a crock, filled with lies and distortions, which quickly moved to become a staple of church basements, where it is discussed by people who have no experience with science. There is no suppression of “real science”; I work with evolutionary biologists and geneticists on a regular basis, many of them Catholic, some of them even Catholic priests.

 

[StrawberryJam]

Back fence it is then.

 

[Charlemagne_II]

In a purely materialistic universe it should not be possible to imagine anything that is immaterial because all thought would be bound to our senses. But I can imagine the immaterial world, even though it is not evident to my senses. Mathematics, for example, is immaterial. The universe itself is controlled by mathematical (abstract) principles that are impervious to physical detection even though we can understand them. Therefore the immaterial world must exist; and the thing that imagines it, the mind, must also be immaterial.

 

[StrawberryJam]

In a purely materialistic universe it should not be possible to imagine anything that is immaterial because all thought would be bound to our senses. But I can imagine the immaterial world, even though it is not evident to my senses. Mathematics, for example, is immaterial. The universe itself is controlled by mathematical (abstract) principles that are impervious to physical detection even though we can understand them. Therefore the immaterial world must exist; and the thing that imagines it, the mind, must also be immaterial.

We need aids to our senses to see what we do.
Some use a book for it.
Others use tools. Tools that we can use to aid our senses.

Can you think of any examples of tools we rely on to know about things that are not evident to us through our senses?

 

[Telestia]

Okay, I just read the post that says posts on evolution are temporarily banned, and I will fully comply.

I’ve wrote too much here already, I just felt compelled to answer questions, but from reading that that warning post, I should not have,

If you wish to read my views on this subject:

I shared my views on Catholic Online in several different posts in their speculation forum.

Here is one of my first such posts. Others you would have to search for. Many Catholics were very pleased and appreciative of my responses there.

forum.catholic.org/viewtopic.php?f=84&t=41322&start=50

My name there is : Arturo my 1st post is about a third down that page.

I will not post anything more on this topic on this forum, at least until the ban is lifted.

 

[Telestia]

Ben Stein’s movie Expelled is a crock, filled with lies and distortions, which quickly moved to become a staple of church basements, where it is discussed by people who have no experience with science. There is no suppression of “real science”; I work with evolutionary biologists and geneticists on a regular basis, many of them Catholic, some of them even Catholic priests.

I earned College degrees in Physics, Math, Electrical Engineering, and History.

 

[StrawberryJam]

Okay, I just read the post that says posts on evolution are temporarily banned, and I will fully comply.

I’ve wrote too much here already, I just felt compelled to answer questions, but from reading that that warning post, I should not have,

If you wish to read my views on this subject:

I shared my views on Catholic Online in several different posts in their speculation forum.

Here is one of my first such posts. Others you would have to search for. Many Catholics were very pleased and appreciative of my responses there.

forum.catholic.org/viewtopic.php?f=84&t=41322&start=50

My name there is : Arturo my 1st post is about a third down that page.

I will not post anything more on this topic on this forum, at least until the ban is lifted.

Post in the back fence so I can discuss this with you. You have poisoned the well here long enough.