Science moves closer to biblical creation.

[hjmick]

Science is not moving closer to biblical creation. And nothing in your link article indicates otherwise.

 

[Woodznutz]

Exactly wrong. If there were a creator God, he would be supernatural to have created the natural world, by definition. Science is restricted to the study of the natural world, NOT the supernatural one.

The natural is the visible evidence of the supernatural.

 

[Hollie]

The natural is the visible evidence of the supernatural.

Wha?

 

[Woodznutz]

Wha?

Science is stumped by this as well.

 

[Blues Man]

And that of course just "kicks the can down the road."
Who 'created' "a race with sufficient technology"? Or should I say how did IT come to be?
Transpermia solves nothing.
`

Who cares?

 

[Blues Man]

I'd say. Demonstrated for those who retain doubts (many) and for those who didn't already know that matter could be extracted from apparently "nothing" short of having a large bang! (most). Also, "a race with sufficient technology" goes nowhere as a logical substitute. Sure, with sufficient technology no doubt we could do mighty impressive things. But creating an entire universe where we became "a race" to begin with, no. Not without being anal retentive gods.

For all we know this universe is nothing but a computer program

 

[alang1216]

The natural is the visible evidence of the supernatural.

So what is the evidence of the supernatural?

 

[Leo123]

God created the material universe "out of thin air", that is, out of nothing (although there is more to the story than this). Science has moved closer to demonstrating this.

MSN

The article says they used electric fields and graphene. These are not nothing. Need more info.

 

[Grumblenuts]

For all we know this universe is nothing but a computer program

From all we know, that's highly unlikely. Just sounds defeatist.

 

[Grumblenuts]

MSN may say it is from 'nothing' but I'd guess the scientists would say it is from the fields that make up the universe.

I wish. I'd sure like to expound on that when I get a chance..

 

[Grumblenuts]

Okay, stealing some expound time..

MSN may say it is from 'nothing' but I'd guess the scientists would say it is from the fields that make up the universe.

Scientists? Physicists? Cosmologists? In any case, all have been talking about "fields" far more and "particles" slightly less lately, thankfully. Perhaps too little, too late, but hope springs eternal.

It sure would be refreshing if our kids or grandkids were being taught that fields "make up the universe" rather than all the crap we were fed. Basically, that everything's just matter with with lots of "nothing" in between, LOL. Gravity acting upon big masses with a bit of, sometimes dangerous, electromagnetic energy bouncing around from here to there. Pathetic.

We learned somewhere that "Nature abhors a vacuum" and then there was no real follow up. Truth is, "nothing" never occurs. Virtually "nothing" is what apparently caused our Big Bang, resulting in our local, visible universe. This thing that "scientists" vastly, arrogantly, and ignorantly presume to be our entire universe. Every black hole, which we now presume to reside at the center of every large galaxy, is a virtual "nothing" that somehow manages to possess tremendous mass simultaneously and at the same time too!

These are just a few among many things that should lead people to question "Just who the hell's been in charge here anyway and where'd they stuff all the smart people?!"

Atoms supposedly consist of "subatomic particles." Protons, neutrons, and a whole bunch of crap no one will ever actually "observe." So we have protons, neutrons, and a whole bunch of spark theory. The math definitely works out so it all simply must be real as first described by our geniuses at CERN.. all of this "duel wave/particle" stuff.. The "Standard Model".. Quantum Mechanics.. Well math sure comes in handy, but it can't explain everything. In fact, it has explained its own limitations. We learn about Heisenberg Uncertainty, nod, and conveniently forget about it, much preferring well-hardened, way overcomplicated, absolute, institutionally approved certainty.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Problem is you either have a particle or you don't. QM has been getting away with mushing "waves" (energy) together with "particles" (mass/matter) from day one even though Einstein correctly revealed that mass(matter) and energy are essentially equivalent. All is really just energy, much possessing "apparent mass." Once one can wrap their head around that they are freed to forget so-called "particles" and begin discussing fields (energy, reality) with gusto.

 

[Grumblenuts]

To really begin discussing fields with gusto one must also wrap their head around the Aether. The Aether is real, required, and not simply lumenifericent. It's the fundamental field, enabling and effecting all energy transfer, and it's clearly mathematically based. What they really explore at CERN is the Aether. They just don't know it yet. Einstein mistakenly deemed it "unnecessary" and electrical science has been largely knocked unconscious since.

I'll just discuss this perhaps most common and revealing example before I shut up and go to bed. Say we have light (energy) passing through air, then (a layer, lens, or prism of) glass, then air again. One easily observes how it abruptly changes direction at the interfaces and splits into a rainbow of colors in the case of the prism. We know that light (energy) travels more slowly through glass than air. So what makes it speed up again to nearly "the speed of light" once it exits the glass??? The only intelligent answer is: Must be the Aether!

The Aether itself effects the entire business. It remains nominally dense in air, but being attracted to matter, packs itself within the molecular lattice of all solid materials. So when it hits the glass.. Wait, what hits the glass? The light energy being transferred through the Aether, silly. Whatever! So, as I was saying, once it hits the glass it slows down due to the Aether being thicker (more dense) there. And naturally, it just speeds back up again once it escapes back into "thin air."

 

[Grumblenuts]

Okay, one last thing. A photon is then just a linear unit quantity of light energy. A little field in a sea of fields. All just Aether manifestations. A photon's length and speed depend upon the density of matter its attempting to pass through. Not a wave. Not a particle. It will travel at c wherever there's relatively little matter around to interfere. Again, due to the Aether's attraction to dense matter, light (energy) is bent around massive bodies in space such as black holes, planets, and so forth. All that four dimensional "spacetime" BS logically rendered "unnecessary"! Fugget about it! Space cannot "warp" by definition.

 

[Woodznutz]

So what is the evidence of the supernatural?

The natural.

 

[alang1216]

The natural.

Sounds like a contradiction to me but what do I know.

 

[Hollie]

Science is stumped by this as well.

Science tells us that such things as firmaments and a flat earth are not stumpers.

 

[Woodznutz]

Sounds like a contradiction to me but what do I know.

The earth is a very unnatural place in the universe (which is also pretty unnatural).

 

[Woodznutz]

Science tells us that such things as firmaments and a flat earth are not stumpers.

Scientists will also tell you there are things that just shouldn't be. I read that somewhere...no link.

 

[Woodznutz]

Science tells us that such things as firmaments and a flat earth are not stumpers.

Science makes good living trying to explain the unexplainable.