Jacko;
Macgyver suggested all believers have doubt, you told him he “missed the whole point".
You told Lois there is a vast collection of archeological evidence. I pointed out very huge flaw in one from the list you linked, and you didn’t respond.
You said there “FACTS" that support the design argument, but several people told you they have considered those facts and found them wrong and gave explanations. You pretty much ignored those and shifted the conversation to “conscious engineering", getting us to where we are now.
I consider statements like “Tell that to the science of Quantum Mechanics" hostile. But when I respond to your obstinacy and demands with a demand to not be demanding, you cry foul. I don’t play those games. I like to help people, but you have shown a consistent pattern of not wanting to be helped. You have shown no humility or interest in learning. I might watch your youtube link later, or I might not. Given everything you have linked so far, the odds that this one is valuable are low.
Jacko; Macgyver suggested all believers have doubt, you told him he “missed the whole point". You told Lois there is a vast collection of archeological evidence. I pointed out very huge flaw in one from the list you linked, and you didn’t respond. You said there “FACTS" that support the design argument, but several people told you they have considered those facts and found them wrong and gave explanations. You pretty much ignored those and shifted the conversation to “conscious engineering", getting us to where we are now. I consider statements like “Tell that to the science of Quantum Mechanics" hostile. But when I respond to your obstinacy and demands with a demand to not be demanding, you cry foul. I don’t play those games. I like to help people, but you have shown a consistent pattern of not wanting to be helped. You have shown no humility or interest in learning. I might watch your youtube link later, or I might not. Given everything you have linked so far, the odds that this one is valuable are low.Your distraction technique is not working... I'm still waiting for an answer, which will probably never come. :(
Your distraction technique is not working... I'm still waiting for an answer, which will probably never come. :(I answered why you are "sensing hostility". I'm not going to attempt to say anything about quantum physics because I suspect it would be a waste of time. Wait all you want.
Jacko; Macgyver suggested all believers have doubt, you told him he “missed the whole point". You told Lois there is a vast collection of archeological evidence. I pointed out very huge flaw in one from the list you linked, and you didn’t respond. You said there “FACTS" that support the design argument, but several people told you they have considered those facts and found them wrong and gave explanations. You pretty much ignored those and shifted the conversation to “conscious engineering", getting us to where we are now. I consider statements like “Tell that to the science of Quantum Mechanics" hostile. But when I respond to your obstinacy and demands with a demand to not be demanding, you cry foul. I don’t play those games. I like to help people, but you have shown a consistent pattern of not wanting to be helped. You have shown no humility or interest in learning. I might watch your youtube link later, or I might not. Given everything you have linked so far, the odds that this one is valuable are low.Your distraction technique is not working... I'm still waiting for an answer, which will probably never come. :( "Friend believes in a higher power that created all this" Well your friend is wrong!! Ask your friend how this greater power works and what he uses as evidence for this assertion. And have him/her provide reliable links to support his proposition. You chide Lausten for using a PBS as (usually reliable) source, but then you post links to (notoriously unreliable) YouTube as your source to support an argument which has nothing to do with a higher power, but with "probability waves" and the "uncertainty effect", meaning that it is impossible to measure both speed and position of a particle at the same time. wiki,
Wave–particle duality postulates that all particles exhibit both wave and particle properties. A central concept of quantum mechanics, this duality addresses the inability of classical concepts like "particle" and "wave" to fully describe the behavior of quantum-scale objects. Standard interpretations of quantum mechanics explain this paradox as a fundamental property of the Universe, while alternative interpretations explain the duality as an emergent, second-order consequence of various limitations of the observer. This treatment focuses on explaining the behavior from the perspective of the widely used Copenhagen interpretation, in which wave–particle duality serves as one aspect of the concept of complementarity, that one can view phenomena in one way or in another, but not both simultaneously.[1]:242, 375–376and
A photon is an elementary particle, the quantum of light and all other forms of electromagnetic radiation, and the force carrier for the electromagnetic force, even when static via virtual photons. The effects of this force are easily observable at both the microscopic and macroscopic level, because the photon has zero rest mass; this allows long distance interactions. Like all elementary particles, photons are currently best explained by quantum mechanics and exhibit wave–particle duality, exhibiting properties of both waves and particles. For example, a single photon may be refracted by a lens or exhibit wave interference with itself, but also act as a particle giving a definite result when its position is measured.Quantum is a function of non-massive objects and propagates in a wavelike manner (a probability wave). When we observe (take a still picture) of a single instant in time, the probability wave function (of a particle in quantum transit) collapses and the particle materializes as a particle at a certain coordinate in space time. Does your friend claim that an outside observer is collapsing the entire wave function of all elementary particles in the universe and thereby is creating our reality or is this just an expression of spacetime potential?
Jacko; Macgyver suggested all believers have doubt, you told him he “missed the whole point". You told Lois there is a vast collection of archeological evidence. I pointed out very huge flaw in one from the list you linked, and you didn’t respond. You said there “FACTS" that support the design argument, but several people told you they have considered those facts and found them wrong and gave explanations. You pretty much ignored those and shifted the conversation to “conscious engineering", getting us to where we are now. I consider statements like “Tell that to the science of Quantum Mechanics" hostile. But when I respond to your obstinacy and demands with a demand to not be demanding, you cry foul. I don’t play those games. I like to help people, but you have shown a consistent pattern of not wanting to be helped. You have shown no humility or interest in learning. I might watch your youtube link later, or I might not. Given everything you have linked so far, the odds that this one is valuable are low.This is the only question that I could see that I did not answer. I must have missed it. But I will now answer it. So you think you've found a flaw in the Bible? You say that "the Bible says the languages were created at the Tower of Babel, after the flood, so how can we have historical records of Sumeria before the flood?" The answer is.............. Sumerian happened AFTER the flood because the Sumerian tablets in the Epic of Gilgamesh say that it is a story that is "retold". It is an oral retelling of the story of the flood. "I [Gilgamesh] began to fear death, and so roam the wilderness." (Tablet 10) "I [Gilgamesh] have come on account of my ancestor Ut-anapishtim [who was on Noah's ark], who joined the Assembly of the Gods, and was given eternal life. About Death and Life I must ask him." (Tablet 9) Unfortunately many people do not know what is written on the tablets and automatically assume that it is the original story of the flood. They rather believe these tablets before the Bible. But really it is just another “proof" (telling the same story) that an actual “flood" happened.
Jacko; Macgyver suggested all believers have doubt, you told him he “missed the whole point". You told Lois there is a vast collection of archeological evidence. I pointed out very huge flaw in one from the list you linked, and you didn’t respond. You said there “FACTS" that support the design argument, but several people told you they have considered those facts and found them wrong and gave explanations. You pretty much ignored those and shifted the conversation to “conscious engineering", getting us to where we are now. I consider statements like “Tell that to the science of Quantum Mechanics" hostile. But when I respond to your obstinacy and demands with a demand to not be demanding, you cry foul. I don’t play those games. I like to help people, but you have shown a consistent pattern of not wanting to be helped. You have shown no humility or interest in learning. I might watch your youtube link later, or I might not. Given everything you have linked so far, the odds that this one is valuable are low.Your distraction technique is not working... I'm still waiting for an answer, which will probably never come. :( "Friend believes in a higher power that created all this" Well your friend is wrong!! Ask your friend how this greater power works and what he uses as evidence for this assertion. And have him/her provide reliable links to support his proposition. You chide Lausten for using a PBS as (usually reliable) source, but then you post links to (notoriously unreliable) YouTube as your source to support an argument which has nothing to do with a higher power, but with "probability waves" and the "uncertainty effect", meaning that it is impossible to measure both speed and position of a particle at the same time. wiki,
Wave–particle duality postulates that all particles exhibit both wave and particle properties. A central concept of quantum mechanics, this duality addresses the inability of classical concepts like "particle" and "wave" to fully describe the behavior of quantum-scale objects. Standard interpretations of quantum mechanics explain this paradox as a fundamental property of the Universe, while alternative interpretations explain the duality as an emergent, second-order consequence of various limitations of the observer. This treatment focuses on explaining the behavior from the perspective of the widely used Copenhagen interpretation, in which wave–particle duality serves as one aspect of the concept of complementarity, that one can view phenomena in one way or in another, but not both simultaneously.[1]:242, 375–376and
A photon is an elementary particle, the quantum of light and all other forms of electromagnetic radiation, and the force carrier for the electromagnetic force, even when static via virtual photons. The effects of this force are easily observable at both the microscopic and macroscopic level, because the photon has zero rest mass; this allows long distance interactions. Like all elementary particles, photons are currently best explained by quantum mechanics and exhibit wave–particle duality, exhibiting properties of both waves and particles. For example, a single photon may be refracted by a lens or exhibit wave interference with itself, but also act as a particle giving a definite result when its position is measured.Quantum is a function of non-massive objects and propagates in a wavelike manner (a probability wave). When we observe (take a still picture) of a single instant in time, the probability wave function (of a particle in quantum transit) collapses and the particle materializes as a particle at a certain coordinate in space time. Does your friend claim that an outside observer is collapsing the entire wave function of all elementary particles in the universe and thereby is creating our reality or is this just an expression of spacetime potential? The “higher power" assessment is just a logical reflection. No there is no proof of this (because we have no way of testing it), but common sense (dependant on the double slit experiment) dictates that when an observer is watching, these particles are “consciously aware", and change their path. In this same sense, the micro in this case can also apply to the macro of the universe. As the saying goes, “as above, so below." Additionally if particles are conscious then we live in a conscious universe. What is consciousness and WHO created it?
...but common sense (dependant on the double slit experiment) dictates that when an observer is watching, these particles are “consciously aware", and change their path.Anyone who thinks common sense can explain quantum phenomena has no understanding whatsoever of quantum mechanics.
In this same sense, the micro in this case can also apply to the macro of the universe. As the saying goes, “as above, so below.QM does not apply to physics on the macro level. That is why theorectical physicists are having no luck developing a theory which comprises both QM and Relativity.
Additionally if particles are conscious then we live in a conscious universe.That is a mighty big if.
What is consciousness and WHO created it?We do not yet understand the nature of consciousness. Leaping to a "who" before we tech that understanding is just a god-of-the-gaps argument. Your argument is, at best, a non sequitur.
Jacko; Macgyver suggested all believers have doubt, you told him he “missed the whole point". You told Lois there is a vast collection of archeological evidence. I pointed out very huge flaw in one from the list you linked, and you didn’t respond. You said there “FACTS" that support the design argument, but several people told you they have considered those facts and found them wrong and gave explanations. You pretty much ignored those and shifted the conversation to “conscious engineering", getting us to where we are now. I consider statements like “Tell that to the science of Quantum Mechanics" hostile. But when I respond to your obstinacy and demands with a demand to not be demanding, you cry foul. I don’t play those games. I like to help people, but you have shown a consistent pattern of not wanting to be helped. You have shown no humility or interest in learning. I might watch your youtube link later, or I might not. Given everything you have linked so far, the odds that this one is valuable are low.This is the only question that I could see that I did not answer. I must have missed it. But I will now answer it. So you think you've found a flaw in the Bible? You say that "the Bible says the languages were created at the Tower of Babel, after the flood, so how can we have historical records of Sumeria before the flood?"
The answer is.............. Sumerian happened AFTER the flood because the Sumerian tablets in the Epic of Gilgamesh say that it is a story that is "retold". It is an oral retelling of the story of the flood. Which flood? How big was this flood and where did this happen? And who were the "survivors who were doing the "retelling" before someone wrote it down as a "retold" story? Obviously, if the flood was that long ago it would have been interpreted as an act of a god, just like thunder. Tales from mythology do not give a reliable account of how and why things happened. Do you really think that Noah was able to gather breeding pairs of every living animal on earth? Have you ever visited a zoo and the space it takes to house just a few hundred species of large animals. And how far did Noah travel to gather all the animals peculiar to far flung regions on earth? How did he get a hold of a pair of Platypuses or Kangaroos? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platypus My friend, it takes a planet to house and sustain all the animals in existence. A few hundred cubits just won't do it. A clear contradiction in the bible.Lausten, But, in the OT, everyone is wiped out, except Noah and his family. This evidence says kingdoms that existed before the flood were then repopulated. There is no mention of this in the Bible. In fact the lineages and histories of kingdoms is quite different. It is a rather abrupt transition from Gen 10 to Abraham and his travels to Egypt. The Bible says the languages were created at the Tower or Babel, after the flood, so how can we have historical records of Sumeria before the flood?
"I [Gilgamesh] began to fear death, and so roam the wilderness." (Tablet 10). "I [Gilgamesh] have come on account of my ancestor Ut-anapishtim [who was on Noah's ark], who joined the Assembly of the Gods, and was given eternal life. About Death and Life I must ask him." (Tablet 9)And what did Ut-anapishtim know about the world, except that ridiculous story of Noah's flood which wiped out all animal life on earth? And do you really believe that up until the Tower of Babel story people all spoke one language which then suddenly became confounded? No wonder, there must have been several people who already saw the inherent flaws of logic and protested against that interpretation, which did not confound the language but the logical conclusions. Then of course, at that time mankind had already spread all over the world and each settlement had already developed its own language, dialects and mythology. Just look at the existing gods of those times. The very same gods were called by a number of different names.
Thousands of NAMES OF GODS, GODDESSES, DEMIGODS, … http://www.lowchensaustralia.com/names/gods.htmand
Greek Gods vs Roman Gods Greek Mythology Although Greek Gods are arguably better known, Greek and Roman mythology often have the same Gods with different names because many Roman Gods are borrowed from Greek mythology, often with different traits. For example, Cupid is the Roman god of Love and Eros is the Greek god of Love. Ares is the unpopular and feared Greek god of war and his Roman counterpart is Mars who is the revered martial fertility god. http://www.diffen.com/difference/Greek_Gods_vs_Roman_GodsAnd you are now saying that Gilgamesh joined the "Assembly of the Gods" and was given eternal life? So the bible contradicts itself by claiming there are more than one God. And here we go with the myth of multiple gods again. Which then is it, One primal God, or an assembly of gods (mythology)? If the concept of a single primal God came later, then that would falsify the concept of an "Assembly of Gods", no? Either way, this is a clear contradiction contained in the OT. No wonder that the languages became confounded.
Unfortunately many people do not know what is written on the tablets and automatically assume that it is the original story of the flood. They rather believe these tablets before the Bible. But really it is just another “proof" (telling the same story) that an actual “flood" happened.This is a clear example of the bible being a confused compilation of mythological stories as told and retold. Ever heard of the word "rumor" and what happens to a rumor that is told and retold?
Do you really think that Noah was able to gather breeding pairs of every living animal on earth?I do! But sure, he had some logistic problems, as you see depicted here]. We know what the consequences were...
Jacko, hard as you may try to use the bible as an objective source of scientific knowledge, you will always fail in that respect.
As Carlin observed it was a tool to CONTROL society by sowing the “fear of god” into the minds of people, but has no basis in fact. It is a popular fable, much like all the other fables from which one may derive a moral message.
Do you really think that Noah was able to gather breeding pairs of every living animal on earth?I do! But sure, he had some logistic problems, as you see depicted here]. We know what the consequences were... First: :bug: , then: :roll: , and lastly :lol: :lol: :lol:
Jacko1, everything you have posted is so wrong, that it’s not even wrong. Are you aware of this? Not even wrong - Wikipedia
It seems that from reading your posts, you can’t discuss anything on the level this forum asks for; your links are completely biased, your arguments are so filled with fallacies, that it’s comical. Maybe you should give up.
There is another obvious reason for a Creator. It is a very simple one! For obvious reasons, people can learn from nature that everything comes from its like kind, just like the bible says about “seed in itself". Science can bicker all they want about there not being a Creator, but scripture blatantly and outright informs us otherwise, that there is only ONE Creator and that this Creator created everything in existence. So how can we counteract that? Simple, WE CAN’T!Of course we can. You have shown no evidence that scripture is anything more than the ravings, wishes and fantasies of primitive men who didn't know something as basic as that the sun didn't revolve around the earth. You have accepted myths about scripture as if they were true with nothing to support them and then you challenge us to counteract what they claim! Science and common sense itself counteracts everything scripture claims. Lois Lois, there is a vast collection of archeological evidence that is to date being verified and validated by the Bible equating to proof. http://www.equip.org/articles/biblical-archaeology-factual-evidence-to-support-the-historicity-of-the-bible/You consider the Christian Research Institute to be unbiased? Are there any scientifically reputable investigators studying these issues?
So you think you've found a flaw in the Bible? You say that "the Bible says the languages were created at the Tower of Babel, after the flood, so how can we have historical records of Sumeria before the flood?" .In this case, I’m not pointing out a flaw in the Bible, but a flaw in the archeology site you cited. It claims to have proof for the Bible, but uses a civilization that existed before and after the flood as that proof. It’s not my misunderstanding of Sumerian history that is the problem. The site said it, now you are saying no, Sumeria happened AFTER. So apparently you don’t agree with the link you linked. Can you see why I’m having trouble following what you’re saying?
“I’m not going to attempt to say anything about quantum physics because I suspect it would be a waste of time. “ From Lausten 10-23
Write4U then explains the Copenhagen interpretation. He explains that physicists are still working on this, that it is a matter of viewing phenomena from different perspectives. He never mentions consciousness affecting particles, because physicists who work on this never mention it.
“…but common sense (dependant on the double slit experiment) dictates that when an observer is watching, these particles are “consciously aware", and change their path." From Jacko1 10-23
“And there, even as I have said it would, it has come to pass." Lausten 10-24
I will leave you to talk amongst yourselves. Have fun! 
I will leave you to talk amongst yourselves. Have fun! :)You were never here for rational discussion anyway. Don't let the door hit you.
I will leave you to talk amongst yourselves. Have fun! :)You were never here for rational discussion anyway. Don't let the door hit you. You're right, he didn't want to discuss anything, he wanted to preach his brand of religion. His mind was closed. Lois
I will leave you to talk amongst yourselves. Have fun! :)You were never here for rational discussion anyway. Don't let the door hit you. You're right, he didn't want to discuss anything, he wanted to preach his brand of religion. His mind was closed. Lois The discussion is far from rational, more like one sided. I am open to many things, but feel I was blatantly attacked because my posts were over-involved in religion. :( I wonder if there is any “real" moderation around here. I would be obliged to stick around but not with this hostility. It’s very obvious! So yes good by! As I said, have fun talking amongst yourselves. :)
Do you really think that Noah was able to gather breeding pairs of every living animal on earth?I do! But sure, he had some logistic problems, as you see depicted here]. We know what the consequences were... What's that thing in the water behind the boat?