Adam and Eve

[Valjean]

I learned quite a few things that even science rejects now . Ya gotta love those ' missing links ' that get debunked and relaced by a new ' link ' only for that to be debunked soon after . I learned a few of those .

What "missing links?" What debunking? I'm not clear what you're referring to, here. Clarify?

I learned about uniformtarinism , about how things are assumed to arrive at the conclusions . Made famous by Charles lyell ect .

Are you saying uniformitarianism isn't real? What about catastrophism? Both happen, don't they?
What's your objection to these?

I learned the fairy tale for grown ups that essentially says something came from nothing. life came from non life and many other classics.

Are you referring to the Big Bang, or to abiogenesis?

How familiar are you with theoretical physics and the evidence of expansion from a singularity? What alternative hypotheses are there?
Is theoretical physics a færie tale? Did physicists just make it all up?

How about the origin of life? It's Christians who say it came from nothing; it just magically poofed into being. Biologists outline mechanisms using known, observable chemistry. Which is more credible?

 

[John1.12]

What "missing links?" What debunking? I'm not clear what you're referring to, here. Clarify?
Are you saying uniformitarianism isn't real? What about catastrophism? Both happen, don't they?
What's your objection to these? Are you referring to the Big Bang, or to abiogenesis?

How familiar are you with theoretical physics and the evidence of expansion from a singularity? What alternative hypotheses are there?
Is theoretical physics a færie tale? Did physicists just make it all up?

How about the origin of life? It's Christians who say it came from nothing; it just magically poofed into being. Biologists outline mechanisms using known, observable chemistry. Which is more credible?

Why is there something rather than nothing? Where did everything come from? What caused the universe to come into existence?

 

[John1.12]

What "missing links?" What debunking? I'm not clear what you're referring to, here. Clarify?
Are you saying uniformitarianism isn't real? What about catastrophism? Both happen, don't they?
What's your objection to these? Are you referring to the Big Bang, or to abiogenesis?

How familiar are you with theoretical physics and the evidence of expansion from a singularity? What alternative hypotheses are there?
Is theoretical physics a færie tale? Did physicists just make it all up?

How about the origin of life? It's Christians who say it came from nothing; it just magically poofed into being. Biologists outline mechanisms using known, observable chemistry. Which is more credible?

_///It's Christians who say it came from nothing; it just magically poofed into being.///
The nothing-caused-the-universe option is worse than magic. In magic, a magician pulls a rabbit out of a hat. In this case, though, there’s no hat...and no magician. There’s just a rabbit (the universe, in our case) appearing out of nowhere.

You have a miracle with no miracle worker .

 

[Valjean]

Why is there something rather than nothing? Where did everything come from? What caused the universe to come into existence?

1 -- Question doesn't make sense.
2, 3 -- Active fields of study in physics. Google.

 

[Valjean]

_///It's Christians who say it came from nothing; it just magically poofed into being.///
The nothing-caused-the-universe option is worse than magic. In magic, a magician pulls a rabbit out of a hat. In this case, though, there’s no hat...and no magician. There’s just a rabbit (the universe, in our case) appearing out of nowhere.

Exactly! -- Magic.
Question: Who's asserting that 'nothing' caused the universe? Do you think this is the current view of science?

You have a miracle with no miracle worker .

Didn't they used to say the same thing about earthquakes, storms, seasons and caterpillars turning into butterflies?

I don't believe in miracles/magic. I believe there are not-yet-understood phenomena, as do all scientists.

 

[John1.12]

Exactly! -- Magic.
Question: Who's asserting that 'nothing' caused the universe? Do you think this is the current view of science?
Didn't they used to say the same thing about earthquakes, storms, seasons and caterpillars turning into butterflies?

I don't believe in miracles/magic. I believe there are not-yet-understood phenomena, as do all scientists.

Yes the current answer from the boffins is still " we don't know, but we will one day "

 

[Valjean]

Yes the current answer from the boffins is still " we don't know, but we will one day "

Yes, we want to understand. That's the whole point of science.

In the absence of any effective investigative modality, we satisfied ourselves with magic and folklore (religion), for thousands of years.
No consensus was ever reached, nor did human knowledge or understanding significantly increase. The main force driving technology was our constant squabbling.

Only when we abandoned supernatural "explanations" (attributions), did our understanding of the world really take off.
Blame the boffins.

 

[rational experiences]

Because 'microwaves are accurate', so Cosmic 'Microwave' Background Radiation (CMBR) is accurate.

Yet you are using earths cold fused radiating mass. You heat convert it to own a machine based on radiating gas atmospheric non physical as conscious awareness.

Machine transmits to machine inside an atmosphere.

A human bio consciousness data questions and data answers their own human theories inside the atmospheric condition.

The past science human thesis based on conscious human self comparisons proved how a human theories originally for science.

As an answer why you destroyed life on earth.

As none of the data is human owned as a self.

Instead the theorist always displaces self ownership human with multi other forms as non human spirit ideals.

The human teaching science versus conscious awareness.

 

[John1.12]

Yes, we want to understand. That's the whole point of science.

In the absence of any effective investigative modality, we satisfied ourselves with magic and folklore (religion), for thousands of years.
No consensus was ever reached, nor did human knowledge or understanding significantly increase. The main force driving technology was our constant squabbling.

Only when we abandoned supernatural "explanations" (attributions), did our understanding of the world really take off.
Blame the boffins.

Who believed in God in the first place. Atheisms popularity has grown since then.

 

[John1.12]

Exactly! -- Magic.
Question: Who's asserting that 'nothing' caused the universe? Do you think this is the current view of science?
Didn't they used to say the same thing about earthquakes, storms, seasons and caterpillars turning into butterflies?

I don't believe in miracles/magic. I believe there are not-yet-understood phenomena, as do all scientists.

// not-yet-understood phenomena// science fiction you mean ?

 

[Valjean]

Who believed in God in the first place. Atheisms popularity has grown since then.

Of course. As the old, "Goddidit" attributions were supplanted by an actual understanding of the processes involved, who needed a magician any more, to account for them?

// not-yet-understood phenomena// science fiction you mean ?

Huh? What are you talking about?
Not yet understood means just that. 99% of human knowledge was once not-yet-understood, was it not?
How did we come to understand most of it -- science, or religion?

 

[rational experiences]

What "missing links?" What debunking? I'm not clear what you're referring to, here. Clarify?
Are you saying uniformitarianism isn't real? What about catastrophism? Both happen, don't they?
What's your objection to these? Are you referring to the Big Bang, or to abiogenesis?

How familiar are you with theoretical physics and the evidence of expansion from a singularity? What alternative hypotheses are there?
Is theoretical physics a færie tale? Did physicists just make it all up?

How about the origin of life? It's Christians who say it came from nothing; it just magically poofed into being. Biologists outline mechanisms using known, observable chemistry. Which is more credible?

Neither actually.

The self human ignores self relevance as dominion over all things an ignored teaching.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

3/4 of a century.
Jewish circumcision goes back, Not hundreds, but thousands of years ago and did Not change things.

Sure. I am aware of that. It is evidence against acquired characters. I am not familiar with the experiments you are claiming about the flies, but in order to state conclusions, you do have to actually run experiments.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

The experiment the reseachers performed were on winged fruit flies.
That does Not mean other types didn't exist, or change. Look at the caterpillar to butterfly.
Jewish circumcision has been performed for 'thousands of years' and nothing has changed. It's still is the same.
So, what he was saying the reseachers were wasting their time because all they had to do is look at the very-long history of Jewish circumcision that has still resulted in No change.
Winged fruit flies are still winged fruit flies even if they try to perform the same experiment again it will have the same outcome that each generation will be born with wings.

Caterpillar to butterfly is not an evolutionary change. It is physiological.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

The experiment the reseachers performed were on winged fruit flies.
That does Not mean other types didn't exist, or change. Look at the caterpillar to butterfly.
Jewish circumcision has been performed for 'thousands of years' and nothing has changed. It's still is the same.
So, what he was saying the reseachers were wasting their time because all they had to do is look at the very-long history of Jewish circumcision that has still resulted in No change.
Winged fruit flies are still winged fruit flies even if they try to perform the same experiment again it will have the same outcome that each generation will be born with wings.

I am not sure that the Jewish foreskin is definitive for all evolutionary change, but circumcision is evidence against acquired characteristics in humans just as wing removal would be in flies.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

.......
No work for 6000 years. By now, he should be sort of useless, atrophied.

Please note that I said ' creative works , that is different than just Not working.
Even Jesus said at John 5:17 that his Father works and I (Jesus) work.
At John 6:28-29 is Not speaking of 'creative works', but that the ' work of God ' is to believe on the one God sent.
And to work, Not for perishable physical food, but 'spiritual food' because its the spiritual that leads to everlasting life.
So, both God and Jesus are now involved in doing 'spiritual works '.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Why is there something rather than nothing? Where did everything come from? What caused the universe to come into existence?

According to Psalms 104:30 God sent forth His spirit......
According to Isaiah 40:26 God supplied the needed 'Power and Strength' to create the visible realm.
In other words, God supplied the abundantly needed dynamic energy to create the material world.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Sure. I am aware of that. It is evidence against acquired characters. I am not familiar with the experiments you are claiming about the flies, but in order to state conclusions, you do have to actually run experiments.

I suppose then one could say the thousands of years of practiced Jewish circumcision is an 'actually run experiment' proving that circumcision is Not going to ever change.
Just like removing wings off fruit flies does Not bring about generational change.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I suppose then one could say the thousands of years of practiced Jewish circumcision is an 'actually run experiment' proving that circumcision is Not going to ever change.
Just like removing wings off fruit flies does Not bring about generational change.

It is evidence. There is no 'proof' in science.

It is, in a sense, a natural experiment.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Why is there something rather than nothing? Where did everything come from? What caused the universe to come into existence?

Sometimes the answer is "We don't know yet." That is never an excuse to say "God did it".