You just mount your soapbox of "There is no God and you can"t prove there is one"!
Ive never said this to you.
This is a summation of your premise.
You are still delusional. Why are you avoiding anything substantive?
Why are you? As I said,"In the full length of this thread, you have yet to talk on any of my talking points at the beginning of this thread."
My opening statement was...
Imagine, if you will, an infinite moment of creation. The entire infinite universe begins; the illusion of space-time is created. A neutral force of the mind of creation
begins to separate two forms of light, negative and positive.
This entire debate has been centered around my statement, "the mind of creation." There is abundant evidence within the observation of the creation, to demonstrate that there is an intelligent mind behind the creation of reality.
The domain of science includes only that which is capable of observation and verification.
You have yet to point out what portion of my theory, starting with the entire universe being very hot, and you can read the rest, hopefully with a little open minded visualization, does not co inside with the observations of science.
You have exerpted NO evidence. Youve only stated that you can use the same evidence as anyone else.
What else is there? We are looking at the same thing, from two different perspectives. The Big Bang beginning with a concentrated singularity of all of the energy in the universe, released into nothing, and expanding/evolving into the universe as we now see it, and what I said in my opening post.
We both observe the presence of gravity, and clouds of negative energy surrounding nucleus's of positive and neutral energy, separated by a whole lot of nothing.
We also observe light appearing as both wave and particle. And what of the so called "fabric of the universe", and dark energy?
With all of the information and observations available, I have attempted to present an explanation for these things. It takes some visualization on your part to make an attempt to see what I am saying. If you refuse to even look at it, how can we have a conversation?
Is visualizing a theory, not scientific? What about the trampoline and the bowling ball used to explain the bending of space and the presence of gravity?
How stupid is that? If this were true, the earth would spin around the sun in a circle, gradually getting closer, until it eventually falls into it. How would it do otherwise?
Other than gravity, the remainder of the a fore mentioned observations, science doesn't even have an explanation for.
This is hardly a scholarly discussion. Its consistant with your brand of idiocy.
That,s your opinion.
You stated the "scientific validity" of ID. I dismantled that so you just skipped over the entire issue like some defense attorney whose premise has been shoved up his ass. Familiar position for you?
I believe we are talking about two different things. I'm talking about an intelligence behind the creation of the universe. You are talking about an intelligence within the creation actively involved in the creation process. God spoke, and it became, creating itself, from the first appearance of energy, (positive, negative, and neutral), to the formation of the galaxies.
God spoke to his creation at certain stages of it coming into being to fine tune the location of our sun and moon and the creation of earth. He was involved in the placement of the sun and the moon, which science has proven, is precise and crucial to our existence. He said, let the dry land appear, and let the earth bring forth, He did not have to be actively involved in it, the dry land appeared, and the earth brought forth. God is a spirit, speaking to the energies of creation, to formulate the creation that he is mindful of. Not the vibrations of the air as we understand speaking, in our communication with one another, but the coming together and the vibrations of the energies already present to form the creation that he is mindful of.
You brought up the subject, I only provided real evidence where you are wrong. George ob just stumbled in like some drunk to help you out by claiming my post was rehashed discussion. It may be true from his point but as for you, youve only come aboard and are claiming some "scientific credibility" based on your silly hypotheses.
Again, how is my "hypotheses" any sillier than the trampoline and the bowling ball?
Evidence is all you have to present. I know you wont cause you cant.
Again, the evidence is already here, I'm only presenting a different perspective.
All the rest of your posts are bullshit and fluffy Biblical passages.
Again, your opinion, without much consideration.
Genesis 1:8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day. (is this where
Are you claiming that this is valid science??. How bout some evidence.
Try Googling Global Consciousness Project. I'm just saying, is it possible that the seat of consciousness lies in a global consciousness within the energy makeup of our atmosphere?
Revelation Chapter 4
1 After this I looked, and, behold, a door was opened in heaven: and the first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me; which said, Come up hither, and I will show thee things which must be hereafter.
2 And immediately I was in the spirit; and, behold, a throne was set in heaven, and one sat on the throne.
Notice the voice said,"come up hither", and it doesn't say John went anywhere. It says,"and immediately I was in the spirit", a transformation into a reality not of the physical. Just something to consider.
PS, if your gonna quote people, try to learn how to properly use the quote feature. Its really easy.