Is the universe an intelligence creating machine?

[james bond]

I’m not taking anything out of context. I am asking you if you believe God created the universe. Do you?

Are you arguing that the Catholic Church does not accept evolution?

No. I told you why I’m not answering your questions. I’m not going to argue with you about it.

Back to the grindstone. Listen to zaangalewa as you made a Catholic faux pas in calling him a bro. Catholics are very much sticklers when it comes to their dogma. I'm going to assume you have not gone to church nor received any sacraments growing up or even as an adult. I don't think you know much about Pope Francis like you didn't know what happened in 70 AD. That was in your catechism! Most people are glad to express themselves about their religion. Not you. You only do it to pontificate against the atheists/evos. An intelligent Catholic will whip out their Catholicism and run rings around me as I've stated.

Instead of being a hypocrite, you should own what you say.

 

[james bond]

If ding isn't a hypocrite, then he probably is a pandeist. He sounds very sincere or faithful even though he's not really a Catholic.

"Pantheism is the belief that God is everything and everything is God.

Pantheism is the belief that God and the Universe are identical, and that there is no difference between God and the World. One rationale for pantheism, as opposed to monotheism, is that, for the human practical sense of the physical world, there seems no possibility of God's omnipresence in the Creation unless God is identical to the Creation. Pantheism therefore holds all things to be divine; but, this view was rejected by Saint Augustine because this view would mean that even sin was divine. Historically some philosophers, such as John Toland, have used pantheism to mean the equivalent of atheism, denying that the world is the product of divine creation, denying any guidance of God, and even denying the existence of sin. Or alternatively, by saying everything is divine, ultimately, nothing is. This can be demonstrated with the super heroes metaphor: If you assume a place where everyone has special powers, no one is special, hence, no superheroes.

Some pantheistic ideas were bandied about as early as the time of the ancient Greek philosophers, who felt that everything in the Universe was made from the same divine substance. Pantheism resurfaced in the 1700s from the writing of Benedict Spinoza, who laid out certain philosophical justifications for the idea. Two refinements of pantheism developed in the 1800s, panentheism and pandeism. Panentheism tried to bring pantheism back into monotheism by describing the Universe as one part of God existing at the same time as a transcendent part of God existed apart from it. Pandeism tried to combine pantheism with deism, which was then at the height of its popularity, by describing a process in which God became the Universe and in that process ceased to act as God.

Modernly, pantheism has declined from the level of popularity achieved in Spinoza's day."

This would explain why he doesn't have a SOURCE to back up the points he's trying to make.

Pantheism - Conservapedia

 

[ding]

Matthew 10:14

 

[james bond]

Matthew 10:14

You cannot even quote Scripture correctly such as a pandeist.

"And when Jesus was baptized, immediately he went up from the water, and behold, the heavens were opened to him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and coming to rest on him; and behold, a voice from heaven said, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.” Matthew 3:16-17

No baptism?

 

[ding]

The evolution of intelligence was preordained through the laws of nature before space and time existed.

 

[james bond]

The evolution of intelligence was preordained through the laws of nature before space and time existed.

Another assertion.

You do not answer my questions, so let's chalk it up to you have no source, I'll continue to think you aren't Catholic, you are wrong, will be misled (already off the track), and are just a nutgoober critic of atheists .

 

[ding]

SETI, the search for extraterrestrial intelligence is predicated on the belief that it is natural for intelligence to evolve. That it is expected.

 

[zaangalewa]

The evolution of intelligence was preordained through the laws of nature before space and time existed.

"Before" time existed? "Before" time existed existed no "before". This sentence is without logic. And what is "evolution of intelligence"? The result of the "evolution of wolves" are wolves. And wolves are as intelligent as wolves are - what's somehow a kind of perfect intelligence in their way to live like wolves. But what is the "evolution of intelligence" per se? An all knowing ET or a supercomputer? An absolute intelligence? How we are able to say what it will be, as long as we are not perfect intelligent on our own?

And makes it an hammer intelligent, when the hammer hits nails? Hammer and nails were made from human beings, when they had the idea to make hammers and nails. A hammer knows not it is hammer - a nail knows not it is a nail. They follow all natural laws - like everything else in this unverse - but they are not following the biological natural law "evolution". No machine follows this biological law. Machines are not a part of the biology of evolution - they are not biology at all. Biological organisms are not machines - also when the Nobel price winner Richard Dawkins says so: this is just simple nonsense.

In context "evolution of the universe" take the sun as an example. When you take out of the sun a mass in size of the earth and you throw it on the other side of the sun back to the sun - knows the sun anything about? It will for sure not cry "Ow!". So is the sun intelligent? When we compare the sun with a human beings in context "intelligence", then the intelligence of the sun is perhaps as little as a most little quant - and the intelligence of a human being is perhaps as big as a galaxy (although human beings are perhaps only idiots). Goethe for example said once "The eye is sun-like". But the sun is much more simple than an eye. They eye is an answer of the biological evolution to the light of the sun. But this makes the sun not to an intelligent object - not so a galaxy too ... so why the universe in total? Only living structures are intelligent. And we know only one planet in the whole universe with living structures = with a biosphere: our own planet.

 

[ding]

The laws of nature existed before space and time because the creation of space and time was according to the laws of nature.

There was no before for our existence but there was for the laws of nature.

 

[zaangalewa]

The laws of nature existed before space and time because the creation of space and time was according to the laws of nature.

There was no before for our existence but there was for the laws of nature.

No. "Before" suddenly in a first moment of time our universe appeared (space, time, energy, natural laws and ...) was nothing, what we are able to say - since about 1700 years. At this time of history Christians answered with a smile to the quesion "What did god do, before he had created the world?". It was a joke to say "He had created the hell to throw people in, who ask such stupid questions."

Augustinus of Hippo was the first, who said, that the word of god is a timeless word (what we often call eternal word too). We are on our own not able to hear this word - and we are not able to speak his "logos" on our own. Nevertheless everything all around us is the result of this word.

But we are within this created world not able to create energy or to destroy energy - we are only able to transform it. (What makes us by the way to the most mighty kings of our living world with the highest responsibility for all and every life here in the eyes of gods). We are able to modify - not to create. What's lost is sometimes irreversibel lost forever.

But let me say: An exception seems to be the world of spirit - but also this world is not arbitrary, what everyone learns, who learns something about mathematics for example - although we are able to see with the might of mathematics - but not with any other method of physics - that parallel universes could exist - with totally different natural laws. An interesting question could be, whether an universe within this hypothetic multiverse could exist without mathematics. Could we call this "the hell of physics"? And is this possible within a structured multiverse? And what is oustide of the nothing or nothings, which connect or disconnect all this universese with each other? Or are we only on our own the hell for mathematics and physics? Some teachers may not doubt about.

 

[james bond]

SETI, the search for extraterrestrial intelligence is predicated on the belief that it is natural for intelligence to evolve. That it is expected.

Where does SETIt say that?

You won't be able to answer my question, so you are even more of a nutgoober .

The laws of nature existed before space and time because the creation of space and time was according to the laws of nature.

There was no before for our existence but there was for the laws of nature.

Nature is not something of intelligence or of laws; it is a force. There is God behind it that causes the forces of nature. You're wrong again. Evos are usually wrong.

 

[ding]

It was perfectly natural and expected that the antimatter and matter annihilations would occur and release tremendous amounts of energy that would propel the expansion of the universe of the remaining matter remnants.

As this was preordained by the laws of nature that existed before space and time.

 

[zaangalewa]

SETI, the search for extraterrestrial intelligence is predicated on the belief that it is natural for intelligence to evolve. That it is expected.

Where does SETIt say that?

You won't be able to answer my question, so you are even more of a nutgoober .

The laws of nature existed before space and time because the creation of space and time was according to the laws of nature.

There was no before for our existence but there was for the laws of nature.

Nature is not something of intelligence or of laws; it is a force. There is God behind it that causes the forces of nature. You're wrong again. Evos are usually wrong.

And what is "force of nature"? And why do you think god forces anyone? When god used words (logos) to create what we know, then a word is in a most simple case "know how". He forced nothing to be - he made it to be. And for sure exist natural laws - and for sure biological evolution is a natural law too. The problem of lots of people who argue in the name of evolution is just simple that they overestimate what evolution is and where evolution is. Not everything has do with evolution. Machines do not evolve for example. Machines are products of human beings. We learn and make products better.

 

[mikegriffith1]

Do you believe that given enough time and the right conditions that intelligence will eventually arise?

That's the utter nonsense one must believe to be an atheist. Evolutionists have strained badly to explain the massive amounts of information that we now know are involved with life at the biochemical level. They have no rational explanation for how that information could have originated by unguided processes.

 

[ding]

Do you believe that given enough time and the right conditions that intelligence will eventually arise?

That's the utter nonsense one must believe to be an atheist. Evolutionists have strained badly to explain the massive amounts of information that we now know are involved with life at the biochemical level. They have no rational explanation for how that information could have originated by unguided processes.

I’m not an atheist. I believe God created existence. I believe the incredible complexity is programmed into life and that life is programmed into existence.

 

[james bond]

The laws of nature existed before space and time because the creation of space and time was according to the laws of nature.

There was no before for our existence but there was for the laws of nature.

This is your religion? No, Jesus created the forces (vector force) of nature. He is the designer with intelligence. From nature, we see its complexity and beauty. We also see that life does not come from non-life. This is the supernatural part with God's breath. This is one of the evidence for God.

It is ALWAYS Jesus vs. Satan. Not Jesus and Satan. You are misled with your own human thinking and fallibility.

ETA: I say the above two sentences to zaangalewa, too, as it sounds he believes in the BioLogos theistic evolution. Probably more in line with Pope Francis' thinking. Satan = evolution.

 

[luchitociencia]

The evolution of intelligence was preordained through the laws of nature before space and time existed.

This topic is very interesting.

However, your point has a huge technical error: physically time doesn't exist.

Regardless of the claims made by a theory invented in 1905 saying that time not only exists but that also "dilates", the sure fact is that time is nothing but a measure, same as weight, volume, etc.

Even the god of the bible specified the meaning of time. This biblical god related time as a measure. Genesis 1:4

And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:

God taught Adam to use the regular (fixed) motion of the celestial bodies (including our planet's rotation) to be compared with the changes of weather and also compared against our actions.

And this is exactly what we continue doing today. With obtain time data by comparing the rotation of earth against our trip from New York to Florida. We concluded it took a day and a half driving, taking breaks, hotel, meals, etc. When you celebrated your 18th birthday, in reality you just have celebrated your 18th complete round trip around the Sun.

That's all, time never "moves or flows", never "passes thru", never "dilates".

Those theories of flowing time come from a conventional idea, nothing scientific but solely an illusion to which many people have felt without knowing it.

And don't trust the pieces of paper "proving" time dilates, because formulas and equations are very easy to manipulate in order to obtain the result they want to obtain.

Even when using the atomic clock, we are just comparing the vibration frequency of the atom of Cesium against the motion or decay of other bodies.

Then, the biblical god never invented a "physical time" but solely taught man how to obtain time data by comparing the motion of bodies.

It is a must for you to understand that in science the theories are just attempts to explain the process of a phenomenon as caused by a former phenomenon. This is what a theory is about, an "explanation".

Without a physical existing time, how it comes that it will dilate? That is the ten million dollars question.

On the other hand, laws appear continually accordingly to the status. This is to say, when the world had no motor vehicles, then the traffic laws were about horses, wagons, etc. When motor cars appeared, then new laws were made and many former laws became obsolete.

Having that in a very beginning it was no universe, then no laws of physics were in existence.

I know some orthodox religious authorities argue that the Torah -with its laws- was created before the universe, but one can easily reject such ideas because the Torah shows us examples of cases of trial and error made by the god of the bible.

In the book of Proverbs 8 "wisdom" is portrayed to exist before the universe, an idea which fits greatly with the insight giving by you in this topic.

Just notice that it says "wisdom" and not so "laws". Wisdom was first to create the universe, laws appeared later on when the universe started to work.

12 “I, wisdom, dwell with prudence,


and I find knowledge and discretion...

22 “The Lord possessed me at the beginning of his work,

the first of his acts of old.


23 Ages ago I was set up,


at the first, before the beginning of the earth.


24 When there were no depths I was brought forth,


when there were no springs abounding with water.


25 Before the mountains had been shaped,


before the hills, I was brought forth,


26 before he had made the earth with its fields,


or the first of the dust of the world.


27 When he established the heavens, I was there;


when he drew a circle on the face of the deep,


28 when he made firm the skies above,


when he established the fountains of the deep,


29 when he assigned to the sea its limit,


so that the waters might not transgress his command,


when he marked out the foundations of the earth,


30 then I was beside him, like a master workman,


and I was daily his delight,


rejoicing before him always,


31 rejoicing in his inhabited world


and delighting in the children of man.

 

[james bond]

However, your point has a huge technical error: physically time doesn't exist.

ding makes his own religion up. He has no source and a few people have tried to set him straight to no avail. I doubt he goes to church or has received any sacraments even though he claims to be Catholic.

I agree that time is still a theory and a unit of measurement, but LHC is trying to demonstrate the 4th dimension exists. If they are successful, the time would be physical as another dimension. We also have evidence of the 4th dimension as we can see how 3-D objects look as 4-D models using a computer.

Another example would be brain vs. mind. The AMA does not recognize the mind, but the brain. Thus, we leave the mind to social or soft science such as psychology. What's also true is Eastern medicine does not recognize the nervous system. I'm not sure why, but I think it has to do with it not being treatable. Instead, they treat it as chi or life flow throughout the body.

 

[luchitociencia]

However, your point has a huge technical error: physically time doesn't exist.

ding makes his own religion up. He has no source and a few people have tried to set him straight to no avail. I doubt he goes to church or has received any sacraments even though he claims to be Catholic.

I agree that time is still a theory and a unit of measurement, but LHC is trying to demonstrate the 4th dimension exists. If they are successful, the time would be physical as another dimension. We also have evidence of the 4th dimension as we can see how 3-D objects look as 4-D models using a computer.

Another example would be brain vs. mind. The AMA does not recognize the mind, but the brain. Thus, we leave the mind to social or soft science such as psychology. What's also true is Eastern medicine does not recognize the nervous system. I'm not sure why, but I think it has to do with it not being treatable. Instead, they treat it as chi or life flow throughout the body.

I doubt it.

In order to establish the presence of time as vulnerable and becoming flexible by causes like speed of objects and gravity of bodies, first, before any other further step, is to detect time "before" its dilatation, then, to proceed with the test with speed of an object, then to check what happen with time after the effects of the moving object are gone.

As you can see, without "detecting time" before the subsequent phenomenon of the assumed "dilatation, the whole theory of relativity is false, never proved as a scientific approach. I think the whole fuss about relativity is more a fraud than science at work.

Reviewing science for decades has made me very skeptical, and several scientists of renown have agreed with the same opinion, relativity is not science.

On the other hand, do not trust computer models that much, because those computer simulations only obey what the programmer wants them to do. And, there is not such evidence that you can observe the universe from a 4th dimension point of reference. Such is just void points.

 

[zaangalewa]

However, your point has a huge technical error: physically time doesn't exist.

ding makes his own religion up. He has no source and a few people have tried to set him straight to no avail. I doubt he goes to church or has received any sacraments even though he claims to be Catholic.

I agree that time is still a theory and a unit of measurement, but LHC is trying to demonstrate the 4th dimension exists. If they are successful, the time would be physical as another dimension. We also have evidence of the 4th dimension as we can see how 3-D objects look as 4-D models using a computer.

Another example would be brain vs. mind. The AMA does not recognize the mind, but the brain. Thus, we leave the mind to social or soft science such as psychology. What's also true is Eastern medicine does not recognize the nervous system. I'm not sure why, but I think it has to do with it not being treatable. Instead, they treat it as chi or life flow throughout the body.

I doubt it.

In order to establish the presence of time as vulnerable and becoming flexible by causes like speed of objects and gravity of bodies, first, before any other further step, is to detect time "before" its dilatation, then, to proceed with the test with speed of an object, then to check what happen with time after the effects of the moving object are gone.

As you can see, without "detecting time" before the subsequent phenomenon of the assumed "dilatation, the whole theory of relativity is false, never proved as a scientific approach. I think the whole fuss about relativity is more a fraud than science at work.

Reviewing science for decades has made me very skeptical, and several scientists of renown have agreed with the same opinion, relativity is not science.

Read this: Hafele–Keating experiment - Wikipedia

Excerpt:

A more complex and precise experiment of this kind was performed by a research group at the University of Maryland between September 1975 and January 1976. Three atomic clocks were brought to an altitude of 10 km above Chesapeake Bay in Maryland, and three other atomic clocks were at the ground. A turboprop plane was used, flying at only 500 km/h, in order to minimize the velocity effect. The plane was steadily observed using radar, and its position and velocity were measured every second. Five flights were carried out, each of 15 hours duration. Special containers protected the clocks from external influences such as vibrations, magnetic fields, or temperature variations. The time difference was measured by direct clock comparison at the ground before and after the flight, as well as during the flight by laser pulses of 0.1 ns duration. Those signals were sent to the plane, reflected, and again received at the ground station. The time difference was observable during the flight, before later analysis. An overall difference of 47.1 ns was measured, which consisted of the velocity effect of −5.7 ns and a gravitational effect of 52.8 ns. This agrees with the relativistic predictions to a precision of about 1.6%.

On the other hand, do not trust computer models that much, because those computer simulations only obey what the programmer wants them to do. And, there is not such evidence that you can observe the universe from a 4th dimension point of reference. Such is just void points.