“Bird Droppings on my Telescope”

The Big Bang theory was totally rejected at first. But those who supported it had predicted that the ignition of the Big Bang would have left behind a sort of ‘hot flash’ of radiation.

If a big black wood stove produces heat that you can feel, then in a similar manner, the Big Bang should produce its own kind of heat that would echo throughout the universe.

In 1965, without looking for it, two physicists at Bell Labs in New Jersey found it.  At first, Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson were bothered because, while trying to refine the world’s most sensitive radio antenna, they couldn’t eliminate a bothersome source of noise. They picked up this noise everywhere they pointed the antenna.

At first they thought it was bird droppings.  The antenna was so sensitive it could pick up the heat of bird droppings (which certainly are warm when they’re brand new) but even after cleaning it off, they still picked up this noise.

This noise had actually been predicted in detail by other astronomers, and after a year of checking and re-checking the data, they arrived at a conclusion: This crazy Big Bang theory really was correct.

In an interview, Penzias was asked why there was so much resistance to the Big Bang theory.

He said, “Most physicists would rather attempt to describe the universe in ways which require no explanation. And since science can’t *explain* anything – it can only *describe* things – that’s perfectly sensible.  If you have a universe which has always been there, you don’t explain it, right?

“Somebody asks you, ‘How come all the secretaries in your company are women?’ You can say, ‘Well, it’s always been that way.’  That’s a way of not having to explain it.  So in the same way, theories which don’t require explanation tend to be the ones accepted by science, which is perfectly acceptable and the best way to make science work.”

But on the older theory that the universe was eternal, he explains: “It turned out to be so ugly that people dismissed it.  What we find – the simplest theory – is a creation out of nothing, the appearance out of nothing of the universe.”

Penzias and his partner, Robert Wilson, won the Nobel Prize for their discovery of this radiation.  The Big Bang theory is now one of the most thoroughly validated theories in all of science.

Robert Wilson was asked by journalist Fred Heeren if the Big Bang indicated a creator.

Wilson said, “Certainly there was something that set it all off.  Certainly, if you are religious, I can’t think of a better theory of the origin of the universe to match with Genesis.”

Stay tuned for tomorrow’s installment: “Why the Big Bang was the most precisely planned event in all of history.”

Sincerely,

Perry Marshall

Frequently Asked Questions

For further reading:
“A Day Without Yesterday” – Albert Einstein, Georges Lemaitre and the Big Bang

Share and Enjoy:
  • email
  • PDF
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
 
 

247 Comments

Colin says:

We both believe in chance. What are the odds of a supreme being coming into existence and deciding to create us? You still have not dealt with that question. Thanks,

Colin

Colin,

Great question. Let’s explore this. There is a probability that God exists. And there is a probability that God does not exist. Right?

So:

The Probability that there is not a God + Probability that there is a God = 100%.

Or using simple algebra to re-arrange the equation:

Probability that there is a God = 100% minus the probability that there is not.

In this blog post I showed (citing a peer reviewed paper in a respected physics journal – Susskind, Kleban and Dyson:
“Disturbing Implications of a Cosmological Constant”
) – that the probability of the universe expanding at a rate that would produce stars is one part in 10^120, or
0.000……0001 with 120 zeros.

That is the probability that this happened by pure chance, i.e. without the influence of an intelligent agent.
So the probability that there is a God is:

100% minus 0.0000000000001% = 99.9999999999%.

99.9999999999% probability that the fine-tuning of the universe was NOT a complete accident.

You can bet on the 0.000000000001%, I’ll take the 99.999999999% bet. That’s pretty good odds – at least it is in Vegas.

Sincerely,

Perry Marshall

Justin Holloway says:

Hi Perry

At the end of the day it is theorised that ‘Big Bangs’ happen all the time in other dimensions. Sure enough if the equations steer towards being 1 part in 10 -120 out, that universe will either blow apart to nothing, or contract and never become something. If these happen all the time, then some like ours will be spot on (hence the membrane theory they’re all trying to prove).

Personally I am agnostic. I feel there is no way that I can have blind faith in a God. At the same time there is no way you can say there isn’t. In fact looking at Wiki, I fall under the Ignostic bracket where the form of the deity needs to be identified before I can say either way.

As far as the Bible is concerned, I feel there are some righteous stories in there, and generally speaking, are good guides on how one should/could lead their life. However, most are just stories. I believe there was this brave individual called Jesus, and that he gave his life for what he believed in and am genuinely humbled by that. But that doesn’t mean I should follow in the ways he taught.

This sounds like I’m on the fence, and I would love be proven that the big man in some form exists, but for now I’m going to have to remain perched on my fence.

Oldstyle says:

Sitting on a fence…

It could be said that I am sitting on a fence also because I do not believe that mankind will ever find a logical explanation or description for God. I don’t believe that anyone will find a logical description of how life emerged by accident.

The basis for my belief is that there is very little in life that can be proven. Perry has offered very convincing arguments for why there is an intelligent designer for our universe, and still there are those that would argue each and every logical point he has made. No, I do not believe logical proof is available.

Human perception is made up of 5 physical sense, logical reasoning, emotional perceptions. These are perceptions our BODY uses for information gathering and expression.

Spiritual awareness is a psychic awareness that adds another level of awareness based on psychological information.

If you asked yourself how many methods of human perception require proof before they would accept a thing as being real, what would you find? Well, I can’t speak for you, but I see that it is only our logical perceptions that require proof. This is one out of four, and even then I read so many responses to postings that are so emotional that it strongly suggests that people do not even need logical proof to believe in their preferred choice.

But never mind proof. For a moment, as an exercise, postulate that proof is not needed. Instead ask yourself another question… “Would life, and choices in life, expand for me if I included emotional intelligence as an equal source of trustworthy information?”

One of my spiritual teachers put it this way. She said that “The more aware I am of a greater number of choices, the fewer choices I have for staying on my path.” It is a paradox, like so many things in life, but it can be explained.

Within a small window of awareness there are few choices, and they are not so clear. The more tools for awareness that are used the more choices there are opening up. Soon you have a whole horizon of choices, but you see that your chosen path for the greatest awareness is a narrow path indeed. But without shining a bigger light of awareness this narrow path would not be visible.

None of this has to do with logical proof, and that’s my point. That to open up to more information and take what you like and leave the rest is a wiser choice than hanging on the gate waiting for that letter of proof to arrive. And you already know that no one is going to provide you with any proof that you can accept until you decide to accept it.

We are all like that.

Jeremiah says:

if you want “proof’ that God exist, its simple, you first put all your faith in him and he will most defnitly prove himself to you. I’ve seen God in my life many times. I’ve seen God in other peoples lives many times. I’ve seen cancer get cured with just prayer, i’ve seen the cripple walk with just prayer, the deaf hear ,blind see and much more. How do you think these things happen? no man could possibly do that, its only God. Just think of wind. can you see it? No, but you do see the effects of it? do you feel it? Yes, and you know without a doupt in you mind that its there. same with God. eccept God deals with the individual. If you want to experience him, tell him, put all your faith in him and be earnest, and you will surelly have proof of who he is.

FellowTraveller says:

Justin, other than your “say-so” please supply a citation as the proof, (equations VERY welcome) as to the existence of “other dimensions. Thanks ahead of time for the scientific citation. Oh, unproven theories” (a nice way to state “speculation”) really shouldn’t be acceptable, now. Should they? thanks for your prompt reply. FT

Prince Lenu says:

perry,
There is no doubt d existence of God, big bang or no big bang. the evidence of intelligent designs is sure a proof that there must have being an author of everything we see, especially on earth- plants, animal, matter, etc.
The crucial question that is to be answered is where/who is the source of this author (energy) or intelligence. Considering the vast inexplicable size of the universe and the insignificant size of earth, if the big bang theory must be believed then God may have limited his art of intelligent designs to earth.
I also believe in the theory of the universe expanding as posible. Everything is in motion. the Earth, sun, moon , Mars and others are all on a journey to a destination unknown.
He is an awsome God.

Prince Lenu

md nazrul islam says:

sir i am waiting in your reply now i submit this tool: i am Bangladeshi if the word is not OK please fix t it . thank you sir,
Topic one: DNA/RNA/GOD

Dear Sir
I am just sending may be you are reading my topic .I found some important facet of god
And facet of code DNA/RNA.
Dioxins:

Human code error: knowing the god.

I am chatting some important yahoo room christen and Muslim .they are all believe god.
But what is the mother nature of god .they don’t know. now sir what is new I tell you.

This is new:-
1) One child is born in this planet they don’t know 1st time .what is his religion
Then that’s call DNA unknown signal system .but when the time is coming preens divert
His relation that’s a custom of nature .But the child asking her “Mother where is the god.”
Mother say stop don’t ask me. (Because unknown code) the part of the sound not helping
Mother. Not Olney mother so many person don’t know what is the code error .if any person known
This planet ether time sound and fell god that’s trough because some holly man is coming
This ether system .and they say who is the god for example Jesus.
Dear sir knowing pension found information and carrying her self that is the DNA work able

2) CODE error

Some times human DNA detect the brain wrong thing for example .we are see the moon small ball but, what is it
We are saying eye error but what is it.
I think I give you sound of god Harry .I am looking 3 times this topic stop thank you sending me .

Thanking
boysylhet@yahoo.com

T. Azimuth Schwitters says:

Mr. Marshall,

You propose a false dichotomy. There are infinitely more than two competing options. The seeming improbability of any event occurring does not itself imply the presence of a creator. It’s very unlikely that this one specific snowflake resting landed, of all the places in the world, on my windowsill. Did I create it?

Furthermore, declaring our current state to be immensely improbable is akin to throwing a handful of sand to the ground and assessing the probability of each grain landing exactly where it did. This is, in other words, “The mud puddle calling the pothole it inhabits perfect.” The odds don’t look so impressively long when you consider that the universe has theoretically had an undefinably long time to come into existence. Still another analogy is this: You personally will probably never win the lottery, but it is inevitable that someone will.

This is all a moot point when you simply consider this: Whether our existence is likely or unlikely, it’s too late to consider. We’re here.

You said: declaring our current state to be immensely improbable is akin to throwing a handful of sand to the ground and assessing the probability of each grain landing exactly where it did. This is, in other words, “The mud puddle calling the pothole it inhabits perfect.”

This is an inaccurate characterization of my argument. The big had to be fine tuned to 120 decimal places of precision. This isn’t like seeing scattered rocks and saying their pattern is improbable. It’s actually like seeing pebbles delicately stacked on top of each other in a narrow column 10 miles high and saying THAT is so improbable that only an intentional agent could have logically caused it.

frantony says:

Perry,
You have still not answered Colin’s question in two respects.

1) Your argument clearly shows that the probability of the creation of the Universe to have happened as an accident is very very small. The odds you have mentioned roughly equals the odds for about 150 six sided dices to all show “6es ” in one throw. If a gambler (with a life span of about 100 years ) rolled 150 dices throughout his life time, he may be dead before he gets 150 6es in a throw.
But if he had 10 x 10^120 years to throw, it is possible that, at one throw, he gets 150 6es, ie., the Universe could start as an accident if given sufficient time. (as per the statistics you have quoted).

2) Even if we agree that it is impossible for such a complicated, and purposefully structured Universe to happen as an accident, how much more remote must be the probability for a designer of the Universe to start existing without a maker? Is it not more logical to assume that the Universe existed from the beginning, than to assume that its maker existed from the beginning?
I think that this was what Colin was asking in his question.
In other words, is it easier to believe that a car assembled itself, or a car factory assembled itself?

In regards to #2, it is logically inevitable that there was a first cause because an infinite regress of causes is not logical.

The question is, do things automatically evolve from simple to complex?

Is an all intelligent God complex? (Christian theology says no, God is simple. Augustine wrote extensively on this as did Aquinas.)

If you look under the hood you find that biological evolution is extremely purposeful and ordered, and that randomness and chance only cause sickness, cancer, aging and death, not new organs and new species.

Everything that we know scientifically indicates that the universe is highly fine tuned and that evolution is engineered.

The existence of a prime mover isn’t a matter of probability, it’s a matter of necessity. You can’t compute the odds of whether such a being exists. Rather it is a necessary axiom in the only model of the cosmos that matches what we know about science.

does GOD hasn’t done a mistake by breaking symmetricity during big bang?

As per the big bang theory universe may be created from a atom or a point then how it hold’s ‘ law of conservation of mass & energy ‘ ?

ALL the mass of the universe was compressed into a very tiny particle. Not just one ataom.

SPHIWE says:

Perry that’s good stuff & theory from all the scientists; but nothing can just exist from nowhere. It has to start somewhere!!!.

Alyssa says:

what is nowhere? how can we even conceptualize a ‘nowhere’ if the moment we do think of it, that nowhere now exists. so when things come from other things, the new products cant conceptualize where they are from.
a baby has no concept of what its mother is until many years have passed and the baby is a parent of its own. or at least until they have separated in some way in order for the baby to see the mother in a different, new perspective.

are we anywhere near separating from our universe in order to see it better? maybe people who have experienced astro-projections and such other experiences, mystical encounters, who knows, – but the nothing and the nowhere you speak of are nonsensical to me.
think Outside the box ~~~

Mary says:

I am a born again Christian and have never doubted the discoveries of science. In fact, astronomy is a subject that has always fascinated me. We sing about the wonder and vastness of God’s great creation in the great hymn, “How Great Thou Art.”

I have often wondered why Christians do not like the fact that God is a lot bigger and a lot greater than our little minds can conceive. False religion has always stood in the way of new discoveries, but I have never had a problem with science and admire the great men who have opened up such wonders to us.

I always say this: “If tomorrow they would prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that evolution is true, I would just say ‘That is the way God did it..’ It would not shake my belief in Him one iota. Nothing ever will. By the way, I believe the Bible. I just believe some of it, like the Adam and Eve story and creation in seven days, is metaphorical.

The New Testament reveals Christ and His Sacrifice for mankind, and is my road map. Understand it, especially spiritually, and the Old Testament will open up in meaning. Thank you for your insight.

Kurt says:

So glad to see someone else realizing God is much more capable than our small minds can imagine. To limit your God into what “you” can conceive should have been considered heresy [not really serious] a long time ago.

pankaj says:

Dear kurt’
So glad to see someone else realizing God is much more capable than our small minds can imagine. To limit your God into what “you” can conceive should have been considered heresy [not really serious] a long time ago.

This statement is true even if you replace the word god by matter.
So glad to see someone else realizing Matter is much more capable than our small minds can imagine. To limit your Matter into what “you” can conceive should have been considered heresy [not really serious] a long time ago.

Chad Brewer says:

Be careful with this. This leads to having an agnostic view of God. At this present time, God cannot be greater than we can conceive (from our viewpoint, not his). To say that God is bigger than we can conceive is to say that we can conceive one thing about this inconceivable God, namely, that we can conceive something about Him. So, the fact that God made it so, that we can REALLY see and conceive who He is, is such an act of love, grace, and mercy. Let us rejoice in that. Anybody have thoughts?

Kristi King says:

The finite cannot conceive of the infinite. However, God has displayed his power and genius in the universe and the more we know of it, the more we should appreciate what he has done. However, we have to be careful to worship the Creator, not the creation.

Strangely enough, this immensely powerful God has chosen to reveal himself personally to us – he has talked to us through the Jewish prophets, spoken through the writers of the Scriptures and finally he came in person. He has said he will be found by those who seek him.

It is his choice to make himself known to us and it is the greatest joy to know him. Of course, he had to go one step further and solve the sin problem so that we could approach him. But now we are into the truly incredible – the God who would come and die for his creation in order to open the way for relationship.

So, yes, rejoice in our great Creator, the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, because he first loved us. That is mind-boggling!

Sahabsa says:

The statements seem rather incomplete and well…the content seems a little blasphemous-
A god that came down to earth and died??
Pardon me if it sounds rude and hope you are not taken aback by my reaction but it is my perspective..It does not make any sense that God needs to come down from this mighty throne, live like a human being to teach his own creation how things should be done and die in the eyes of human beings.

Sahabsa says:

Rather isn’t it more appropriate to say that Jesus (peace be upon him) is a human being himself and that there is a higher power than him?
Jesus the creation, created by a creator, one who is higher in authority.The same creator who sent prophets who are regarded as elevated humans to correct the wrongdoings that humans have tendencies towards
e.g. ‘sins’ committed by communities that ‘shake the world’

Kristi says:

It makes no sense that God would choose to leave his throne, be born as a helpless human baby and grow up to die a horrible death on the cross. To me, that is one of the proofs that Christianity is not a human invention – why would someone invent a religion that makes no sense. The things of God are foolishness to us mortals when we view them without the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

The other concept that is difficult to perceive is that God is one, yet the Father never leaves his throne vacant, while the Son laid his position down to live on Earth and the Holy Spirit was with him the whole time. The Trinity is another concept that we cannot understand.

Jesus’ life and death was God’s entrance into creation to overcome the devil on his own terms and open a way back for us to return to the relationship with God that Adam and Eve had before they sinned. Jesus had to be God or his death on the cross would have been a horrible abuse, child abuse. Jesus took responsibility for his own creation and came to save us.

It may seem blasphemous until you know this God – until you know Jesus. The Holy Spirit will reveal him through the Scriptures. Jesus will make himself known to you if you will ask him. He is a very personal God.

Jeremiah says:

Why? Why would you replace God with matter? Does matter have thoughts? Does matter have a plan? Who created matter?

Forrest Charnock says:

Dear Mary:

If “science” is your authority , which it must be if you decide that Genesis is allegory despite the fact it is written in the historical narrative form of Hebrew and all the prophets, all the apostles and Jesus Christ Himself saw it as literal history you have placed interpretations of the past which are not testable as superior to God word. You have elevated your personal opinion above Gods word.
Maybe if the flood was just a story to scare little children so is hell. Maybe Jesus coming back is a myth?

Mat 24:37 But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

If what you are saying is true then Jesus is not the last Adam, death is a very good thing to God and Jesus died for nothing, unless that is a myth to. After all no scientist , even a creationists would argue that virgin births, walking on water and feeding 5 thousand with one box lunch are scientifically possible either.

The song how great Thou art is poor evidence for picking and choosing what to believe. The gentlemen who wrote it believed in a 6 day creation. Perhaps you should learn the Bible before you take a pair of scissors to it. God rested the 7th day. As far as the New Testament it confirms a literal Genesis and it it the Holy Spirit that gives us wisdom to understand the Bible .The Bible claims t be true from the beginning but if you are correct the very first verse is a lie from hell and Ex 20 8-11 confirms God is a mental case.
Lord my God, When I in awesome wonder,
Consider all the worlds Thy Hands have made;

The BB teaches something altogether different than a supernatural creation. It allows for a vague deistic start perhaps but in essence it is an atheistic story about the past. It is also garbage science in light of new data from the Hubble telescope. haltonarp.com
I cringe when I hear the atheistic idea that believing God did exactly what He said He did is putting Him in a box. If there was no literal fall of man death is very good and you forget a new heaven and a new earth, at least for another 15 ba or so. . If you worship an inept god who cannot do what he says then there is no reason to believe he will suddenly be able to speak the new heaven and earth into existence.
We don’t worship the same God , my God cannot lie.

mielzedek says:

i think u dont understand what is a christian or a born again..
listen..
in able to be a christian u have to be born again (baptized with the water ; when baptized you decide therefore baptizing is a decision made that’s why Jesus was baptized when He was at the age of 30, a baby cant be baptized..)

born again is a process,,,
when you say born again Christian it’s redundancy..

its same thing saying “a cold ice cream” where we all know that an ice cream is cold.. and when you say ice cream its cold..

so you dont have to say you’re a born again if your a christian.

Forrest Charnock says:

The belief that one has to be Baptized to go to heaven includes calling Jesus Christ a liar for many reasons and is based on an assumption the mean Catholics stole the Gospel. The belief came out of the Campbell-Stone Restoration Movement that spawned the Brethren of Christ , was a huge influence on the Adventists and sent over 20 thousand of its members to the Mormons when Sydney Rigdon defected. And of course its most famous descendants are the Church of Christ and the Disciples of Christ who although they repeat the anti-Biblical,anti-God and anti-historical nonsense that the Bible needed to be restored and that they are the true church [some have backed down in recent years} when asked for evidence claim all they need is their private reinterpretation of scripture and historical facts are irrelevant.
Let the Bible speak is perverted to only we know what God really meant to convey.

Jesus Christ said you must be born again , He did not say you had to be baptized to go to heaven only that you need to. One could be baptized and still be unsaved so you are saying Jesus lied.
That is lie #1

Joh 3:5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
Joh 3:6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
Joh 3:7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.

You are not born in a river or a tank of water but your mothers water does break therefore born again is a spiritual condition , not a bath.

The Bible plainly teaches God is not a respecter of persons so that is a lie if the thief on the cross got to bypass all the things the pagan belief in works salvation entails. The thief never led a good life or got baptized yet Jesus Christ said He would go to heaven. That is lie number 2.

Either God is a respecter of persons or Jesus was jerking the thief’s chain or baptism is not a work needed for salvation. The only “work” is to accept the gift of salvation.
What puzzles me is the C of C agrees with the Catholics where they are wrong, works salvation , yet claims their practice of sprinkling is a mortal sin.
It is wrong, it is un-biblical , but the only mortal [unforgivable} sin is to reject the Holy Ghost. To make i worse the Catholics were still practicing baptism by immersion in the 4th century. The idea of sprinkling was slowly added in because so many children and so many people period died without a chance to be immersed they decided God would be pleased they did the best they could to obey and it became the norm.
Where the Catholics are correct, it is never to late to be saved as long as you are alive , the C of C is dead wrong. If you don’t happen to be near a tank of water with a C of C minister nearby when death comes your done.

Lie number 3 is works salvation itself.

Rom 6:23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

A gift has no strings , it only has to be accepted. To say otherwise is saying Christ’s sacrifice was not sufficient and needs us to contribute to the cause.

Eph 2:7 That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus.
Eph 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
Eph 2:9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.
Eph 2:10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.

We do good works because we are saved, we are not saved because we do good works. Again that says God becoming a man to die for us is not enough and can be compared to us behaving, that is wrong as wrong can be.

When John tried to get out of baptizing Jesus Christ he was not told to do so because salvation demands it.

Rom 8:24 For we are saved by hope: but hope that is seen is not hope: for what a man seeth, why doth he yet hope for?

Eph 2:4 But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us,
Eph 2:5 Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;)
Eph 2:6 And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:

Unni Raman Tharakkal says:

Is it not possible that the universe always existed as a very, very, very small concentration of matter and energy, very highly densed, which were being converted from one to another and in the process the whole system under very high pressure gave a big bang which started expanding to the present state. In this model there is no requirement of an intelligent creator. only a much more intelligent creator can create this intelligent creator and hence we reach nowhere.

Unni,

If we say that the universe always existed then there could not have been any entropy. Otherwise the universe would have degraded to a zero usable energy state after a finite period of time. In order for entropy to not come into play, the universe has to be completely motionless for an infinite past period of time, and then suddenly expand.

That requires a cause.

Which is, as described so far, an uncaused cause.

Which still requires an external agent.

So no matter what gymnastics we go through, we have the inevitable necessity of an external agent which is an uncaused cause. And we are still confronted with the question of why the universe is so orderly – and where did these laws come from?

I submit to you that the only sensible answer is an uncaused superintelligence.

Perry

Bertram says:

Hi guys, the big bang never happened and there is no such thing as time. You are being brainwashed into believing that the physical world exists. Why do you think they are spending billions on this and do not want to feed the world. It is to keep you in this state of ignorance and false believe of some control. It cannot be explained as it does not exist. We will always see and experience exactly what we want to and so we will be told how it is so that we can believe the illusion.

What really happened was the creation of the conscious mind, the Soul/Self. We were created in God’s image. God created us(sons and daughters) and we created our world and our physical appearance(because we listened to a liar…typical of us). There is however a home that our Father created for us. Remember the prodigal son.

Currently we are in a state of limbo, as we have forgotten who we are because we are not allowed to discover the truth. We are the Sons and Daughters of God. We opted to believe the powerful and corrupt Satan who wanted to be better than our Father. Why do you think we currently have the governments that we do(since the beginning of human history there were always tyrants and corrupt governments)? And do not forget about the lifestyles of the human race(remember when Noah begged the people to change). It is no coincidence, governments and the rich are working for the Devil.

I think Einstein discovered this truth late in his life that is why he stopped delving into this world’s mysteries. He found out late that it is a useless exercise. He probably tried to find out, who he, really was in his later life. This is the only thing you need to know and it is a lifelong quest. Regrettably, as I said we are not allowed to do this, as we are being brought up with false believes that is being forced on us through false education and an economic system which forces you to fight for material survival(they say you are a loser if you are poor). This you will do for your whole life and when you die, you will die in fear and no amount of material possession will save or help you. But still the world believes that this is the right way because the celebrities and politicians are doing it, so it must be right. They portray a false emotion of love and concern that is really just a mask of deceit to make you believe them. They also have armies and police to protect them. If you are honest with yourself, you will know the real reason for armies and police. They are protecting the interests of the corrupt and not to provide a social service. To top it off they let you pay for it.

Also, be very careful of religion, as it was instituted to deceive and not to be truthful. Yes, these people know but they will not tell you and they will deny because they know that their days are numbered and they want the world to perish with them. They have thwarted our Father’s work since the beginning and more so when we were created. They have spread their lies, deceit, suffering and death will let you believe that it is normal. It is the way of life. It is the lot of the unfaithful, wicked and poor. Yes and you will believe them because they are the masters of deceit.

So in the end, science, politics and religion are all tools used to mislead you closer to darkness. The light is the other way and it will mean that you must discard all the false believes and material obsessions that you have acquired and collected. Remember the words of Jesus when he said that his yoke is light. The wickedness of this world hates you and will come to you in sheep’s clothing. It hates you so much because it knows who you are even if you don’t. It never stops working to plan your destruction and demise. I don’t know how to explain to you how truly evil these beings are…all I can say is that the evil that the world is currently experiencing is childsplay to them. They have no remorse and no mercy and are relentless.

Make personal contact with our Father as soon as possible. If you feel stupid doing it, still do it and open you heart, spill out everything, your love your fears, your regrets. I guarantee you will be heard and it will all make sense to you once you have heard. You do not need a priest or pastor, as you have a direct link to our Father. Just discard the world and it’s works. I beg this of you my brothers and sisters and even though I said there is no such thing as time, we have but little time left. Do not wait for someone to predict a date as no one knows.

God bless you my brothers and sisters…

Sahabsa says:

A rather interesting read and i only have 3 questions based on it:

1. Who are ‘they’ and ‘them’ ,
2. Where do ‘they’ come from?(who created them?)
3. Who is the ‘father’ ?

As a bonus ;)
What do you mean when you say ‘They have thwarted our Father’s work since the beginning and more so when we were created’.

it almost seems as if ‘we were created’ is some kind of superior nation of some kind.

argadia saiya says:

god have never existed and if he is some where where is he?why he creadet humans for ?? why he need to create all this stars all this planets for what is there use for ??why god never show hemself to the people so people will meet there father creator ??why he hiding ???where god com from ???the egg makes chiken or chiken makse the egg?? why some storys from the bible its same storys with more ancient storys from all over the world do they make the bible from ancient storys before christ borne …?do you believe that adam and eve existed ?and if yes why there are so many colored people and different races black white yelow and red and some other ???
in what language the first borne adam and eve talk ?
with sand dust got makes them it is impossible to make some one like as only with that do you thing so?
if we are all brothers how dose this hapenet?adam and eve make 2 sons so how we becom milions after that they make love to there mother thats sin is it ?
or they make love to there sisters after to there doaters and god bless that what god is he then ???i can say to youso many storys about faith and gods mistakes there is no god there is nothing after deth people like to make storys becaus they are afraid of deth they believe in fantasys only that is god one big fantasy some they use this fantasy and make people to believe in fairytale storys of god and they brain wash them with lies about god creator of nothing .
thats god fantasy story that some people makes as to believe in it so they will have people under of there power so they can use them after for money and there lands that is the truth god dont need money but they do ….
find the reall truth aboiut the univers some where els not in god its so easy for people to thing that all this coms from god they dont search the truth about creation of all that planets dose god make something by mistake???you tell me so god needs help from our minds then ….

RedWolf says:

God doesn’t need to prove “his” existence to anyone. God gave us an immortal soul that cannot be destroyed. What we do with our human selves is up to us. We can do anything we want it all counts as learning. As we learn we grow as an older wiser soul. When we have learned all we can on Earth we can move on to the next phase of existence. It’s like school. You can’t call your parents from school and get the answers to test you are taking because then you aren’t learning for your self. Same with God.
The stars were created for all the other souls out there to have “schools” too. Why build just one school? Man is vain in thinking God cannot or would not make others like us. Man is also vain for thinking God is only as great as we can imagine.
Adam and Eve are a parable from the bible to explain mans desire for “forbidden fruit”. From stories comes a way of passing down wisdom. A kind of Aesops fables from a LONG time ago. It is there to teach us. A man wanting power declared the bible as Gods word and therefore “unquestionable”. Which gave THAT man (and many others) power over anyone who would question HIS interpretation of the bible.
The story of Adam and Eve doesn’t hold up because it was meant for children. It easily answered the question of where did we come from. Unfortunately those children grew up and never figured out it was like “Sant Claus” or the “Easter Bunny” kind of tale.
Heaven is a comforting story to ease the pain of lose. It is close to the truth but not quite right. Our souls leave our bodies behind and go to a higher “plane” of existence (for lack of better words). There, we reflect on our lives until we are ready to come back. Death is Natures way of saying “try again” : )
By your questions I see you are well on your way to learning more and thats what its all about. The answer to life the universe and everything is that ‘Earth is school’ (in my humble opinion).

Forrest Charnock says:

Dear Unni Raman Tharakkal :

I agree that the universe was not a very, very, very small concentration of matter and energy. However the argument “Who created God” is illogical.
God is the eternal one, He had no beginning , no cause.

You may chose to disbelieve but it has nothing to do wit logic, you just don’t want to.

Sandra says:

Well, I’ve been convinced about the fallacies of evolution long before, however (sorry 4 going 2 a completely different topic here), my friends have me stumped on one or 2 questions.

1) There are DNA present in our body that is also responsible for the formation of tails, and there have been several cases where babies have been born with ‘tails’…isn’t this a positive case for evolution?

2) Age of the earth..i really need help on this one, being a Christian we Know that it is no more than 4000 yrs old which means dinosaurs existed with man, though there is the flood to account for which wiped out the entire race except for Noah and his family and the animals along with him, but there hasn’t been convincing data to support this. What do you say??

Sandra,

I don’t necessarily think “evolution” is a fallacy. I think that evolution is an engineered process, not a random process.

1) Babies with tails: It certainly shows that our DNA has the information necessary to create a tail. It suggest to me that genes turn on and off and DNA is sort of like a “Swiss army knife” that can generate different features as necessary. This really is an amazing feat.

2) I do not believe that the Bible teaches that the earth is 4000 years old. This teaching barely existed before the 1800′s when Darwin was seen as a threat to Christianity. I think the universe and the earth are billions of years old and there are many scholars from 500-1000 years ago who read scripture the same way. I believe Noah’s flood was local to that area, not global. That’s why there is not much convincing evidence for a global flood. But it’s also why 270 ancient civilizations all have a flood story.

Perry

Stan Hodges says:

You said,”I believe Noah’s flood was local to that area, not global. That’s why there is not much convincing evidence for a global flood. But it’s also why 270 ancient civilizations all have a flood story.” I don’t understand how these two statements fit together, also I don’t understand how reasonable people can read the Flood story account in the Bible, and come to the conclusion the Flood was local.

Stan Hodges says:

Sir, that Flood theory doesn’t float Noahs’ Ark and you know it !!

Stan Hodges says:

I see you deleted my comment that your “localized flood” theory is not what the Bible says. I suppose if I point out that you are twisting Scripture for your own purpose, you will delete that too! The Bible was not written by the over-educated for the over-educated, it’s for all of us….ya’ll read it please !!!

Forrest Charnock says:

Dear Perry:

No human as ever been born with an animal like tail. There are cases where the spine is extended and sometimes a fatty tissue hanging down but you have bought a bill of goods on that one.

What you believe has no effect on objective reality and no offense but you are not even close to understanding what the Bible says. From the chronologies in the Bible the earth is approximately 6000 years old, not 4000 and anything other that a literal recent creation has always been heresy in the church. The atheists and liberal theologians are trying to rewrite history. Augustine made it crystal clear in the “City of God:” that the belief in the old earth was pagan idolatry. All of the church fathers before 1800 taught a literal recent 6 day creation.
http://creation.com/review-doctrines-of-genesis-1-11-warkulwiz
Not to mention Issac Newton who was a theologian who did science on the side. He sad it was actually younger than Bishop Usher did. Read the history of Josephus , most of the known world believed in a date close to that .
Please read these.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v20/i2/long_ages.asp
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v26/i2/tradition.asp

Jesus Christ said Adam and Eve were created from the beginning of creation and He taught that the flood was literal as well.
You can choose to disbelieve the Bible but it directly contradicts the BB. The earth was created first day and the universe was filled the fourth day.
It cannot be reconciled, on of the 2 is wrong.
I can give you quotes from Hebrew scholars, most of whom deny Genesis is true, who will tell you Moses meant to convey a literal 6 24 hour day creation around 600 years ago. It is very plain, you have been terribly misled. You should be furious.
Mar 10:6 But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.
Mar 10:7 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife;

Not only is Jesus affirming a recent creation but dispelling the two story myth of Genesis 1 and 2 .
Mat 24:37 But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

He confirmed the flood. It is philosophically necessary to believe in Long Ages to be an atheist. All atheists are long agers, all atheists are evolutionists .
Charles Lyell convinced the world the flood was a myth and for 40 years the best geologist in the world such as Gould and Agers have been saying the Lawyer Lyell brainwashed all secular geologist for 150 years.
Of course they just made a completely ad hoc explanation without a shred of proof to preserve the “dates” Lyell fabricated.
Lyell said he would separate geology from Moses, he was on a campaign to destroy Christianity and he was wildly successful .

Forrest,

You are misquoting Augustine. See http://geochristian.wordpress.com/2009/03/17/augustine-the-literal-meaning-of-genesis/

I strongly disagree that all theologians before 1800 taught young earth. Augustine being the first example. Origen being another. I asked friend of mine who is a Jewish rabbi what literature he had from Jewish sources and he referred me to a whole variety of opinions, including Namonides (sp?) who in ~1200AD estimated the earth was 13.6 billion years old.

An EXCELLENT book is “A Biblical Case for an Old Earth” by David Snoke.

I think the most compelling reason to believe in an old earth is that to believe in a young earth you have to believe that stars that are a million light years away were created with light already in-transit. This is no more defensible of an argument than saying we were all created 3 minutes ago with memories intact. It’s an unprovable assertion. It requires you to interpret real scientific evidence as an illusion. I think that’s non-biblical.

Then there are those who say the speed of light is changing. If that were true the Internet wouldn’t work. The speed of light is not changing. There is a book called “starlight and time” which espouses this theory and to be blunt it’s an absurd book. I’m embarrassed that an organization called Answers In Genesis espouses it. I am also embarrassed at the legalistic games that AIG plays, manipulating people into thinking that if you don’t embrace THEIR interpretation of Genesis then you’re some kind of heretic. I submit to you that it is AIG who is trying to write church history, not everybody else.

I don’t have time for that kind of legalistic nonsense. I grew up in it and I can smell it a mile away.

Read Snoke’s book.

The real theological reason for belief in an old earth is a particular interpretation of Romans 5 which assumes it’s talking about physical death – “In the day that you eat of the fruit you will surely die” and that the fall brought physical death into the world, that there was no physical death before that. Romans 5 is talking about spiritual death not spiritual death. Death existed on the earth before the fall. The fall was spiritual not physical. If you read Romans 5 very carefully you will see that.

Young earth is a forced belief if there is no death, because an earth existing for millions of years with no death makes no sense. How can a cow eat grass without killing the grass? Death had to exist for animals to eat.

I believe there was a flood, but I don’t believe it covered the entire planet and I don’t think the Genesis Hebrew language forces you to assume that it did. I think it was regional. Remember, Caesar Augustus issued a census for “all the world” and that was not the entire planet, that was the known political landscape for the writers at that time.

One can find many biologists and physicists and geologists who are Christians. In particular one will almost NEVER find a geologist who espouses the Young Earth perspective; the physical evidence is overwhelmingly against it.

I’m not young earth because I’m an electrical engineer and I understand the speed of light.

I encourage you to read Snoke’s book.

Perry

Forrest Charnock says:

Perry the quote I made from Augustine was word for word from the City of God which he wrote. Before you go questioning my integrity go check it out yourself.
Otherwise yours come into question.

“By Scripture’s authority creation was ‘as recently as within this six thousand years.’ He was also aware of long age ideas: ‘If the brevity of the time be offensive, and the years since man was made seem so few …’”

Those are his words and Ross denies it so you accept Ross, I have the book, it really says that!

Augustine and Origen had trouble believing it took God 6 days, they thought the creation was instantaneous, how does that help Ross’s case? It is a simple fact of history they both preached a young earth, the fact they were not literalist is beside the point.

Luther said, “We know from Moses that the world was not in existence before 6,000 years ago.”

I challenge to provide evidence of any church father not branded a heretic for believing differently . Ross is lying and you never bother to check it out, I don’t think the truth matters to you.

You are dead wrong that you have to believe what we see is an illusion to accept a young earth. There are some theories that make that absurd conclusion but you do not understand the Humphrey’s theory and it has made incredible true predictions. No one has a rock solid answer either way but you have allowed others to tell you what the creationist teach. There are stupid theories on both sides. I could say all secularists are idiots because some acept the multi-verse theory using your logic Perry. If you were honest with yourself you are allowing your emotions to cloud your thoughts.

Ross portrayed the brilliant theologian Ussher as an idiot in his childrens books because he believed the Bible . He forgot to mention Newton checked Usshers figures and came up with a figure four years older so he was calling Newton an idiot as well. When confronted he lied to their face. All you have to do is look at his cartoons and see for yourself, like I said I do not think the truth is any of your concern. Why does a non-Christian like yourself with obviously limited knowledge of the Bible and creationist theories defend Ross so vigorously, why do you care? It is plain your authority is human reasoning so what do you care about the Bible anyway?

I have reads the Bible cover to cover many times Perry and the reason Christ had to die was to atone for sin . Christ was the last Adam. There was no death before sin and that doctrine never reared its ugly head before 1800.
How absurd to claim Romans refuted the entire history of Hebrew schoolarshio up to that point? The Hebrews believed in a young earth long before Christ was born. Read Josephus.

Genesis clearly teaches man and animals were created vegetarian and it was not until after the flood we were allowed to eat meat. Ross’s ad hoc arguments would not fool a semi-intelligent 6th grader unless they wanted to believe the Bible is a lie.

Gen 3:17 And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life;
Gen 3:18 Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field;
Gen 3:19 In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.

The layers you Ross claims are millions of years old are full of thorns and if dust to dust is not physical death what is? Hebrew scholars translate the verse you will surely die as “dying you will die”.

There was no death before the fall,. There were no thorns and thistles, either the Bible is a pack of lies or “science” is wrong.

Explain away Ex 20 8-11.

What you “believe: about Hebrew and the flood is what Ross told you to believe. I spent 6 years in Synagogue and no Rabbi I ever met believed that the flood was told by Moses to be anything but global. I don’t think your stupid Perry although you think I am. I really don’t think you truly believe that the Bible does not teach creation by God is 6 days and a global flood.

Gen 7:19 And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered.

If you think it through Ross’s flood has only 3 sides as it ends on the beach of Saudi Arabia.

If every geologist on earth believed that it would not make it true, how many times has the majority been wrong before? The bandwagon theory is when you told your mom the other kids were doing it and she asked you if they were jumping off a bridge would you?

Again a literal earth covering flood was the ONLY belief of all of God’s people from creation to 1800 and still is for half of it . Your own words expose your argument from scripture as a farce. Ross decided the Bible and his interpretation of science disagreed and he immediately started changing the Bible to ‘fit” his view yet he claims the Bible is the word of God.
If you think about it he is saying his views are superior to God’s word.
Sitting in a chicken coup an hour every Sunday does not make you a chicken ..

Ross better pray the Bible is a pack of lies.

Rev 22:18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
Rev 22:19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
Rev 22:20 He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus.
Rev 22:21 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.

Perry I understand that science is your authority and not God and that is your right but why then do you support Ross who claims the Bible supports your interpretations of science. There are other explanations of how to solve the starlight and time problem that have been put together by award wining scientist, none of them are perfect but the Big Bang has its own starlight and time travel problem which you either ignore or acept a contrived ad hoc explanation for.

Forrest,

You are accusing me of being a non-Christian and that is an unreasonable and unwarranted statement. It’s also a judgment you are not qualified to make.

My primary aim is to address scientism, materialism and atheism. The primary purpose of this website is not to refute the Young Earth position. There are other websites that do a perfectly good job of that.

I have invested LOTS of time in this website – not only the time and money but considerable research, many books, etc. If you want to engage with me on this topic you will have to qualify for my time by investing in the prerequisite reading and research. Earlier I stipulated: Get yourself a copy of David Snoke’s book “A Biblical Case for an Old Earth” and read it. Then we will discuss this subject, and the discussion will begin with the speed of light.

I stand by that stipulation. You bring up many worthwhile points and I am glad to discuss them. But we’re going to need to start with some common ground and I have stated what that common ground is going to have to be. Read Snoke’s book and once you have done so, I will engage in this discussion.

Perry Marshall

Onder Y. says:

I read with patience until now. But I was expecting no matter who will mention about current distance and dimension of universe. Don’t you think about two different TIME? In dimension or time of God MUST be diverse.So 14 billion years maybe different time description in god’s level or in god’s location. Possible he mented in Bible and Qur’an by time of his own about Genesis.
Pardon me if I’m wrong but, what about some discoveries of mankind, relics, bones over 6000 or 4000 years?
And also all of you are speaking like no other religion or race then Christian!
Finally dear friends i tell you something.A Square will never have an idea about a Cube…have a nice day

Noah’s Ark might have landed in mount Ararat and it may well have been a local flood, taking into consideration of 6000 years ago’s technology, this makes sense… I do not know anything about the other 270 floods ending the civilisations, however I can believe this……. What I do not agree with is, the other floods cannot be shown as a sample to prove Noah’s flood could have been a local one……

I believe, Noah’s flood occurance is very important, because all three books refer to that FLOOD incident…. and it happens in a region where all the Prophets and God’s Son happen to be in that specific area. Since the Father started His education with His Prophets I think Noah’s flood has significant importance in reaching to God’s mind.

Dale Dalke says:

Forrest,

Perry’s comment back to you in his first paragraph sums up a primary issue. When you place yourself in God’s position by stating Perry is a “non-Christian”, this pushes you out of any type of meaningful and or constructive conversation.

Pronouncing judgment over a person’s faith in Christ, places you in the same position as the Pharisees of the New Testament. It also renders any comments you make highly suspect and thus they should be ignored.

I personally will skip over any of your comments and suggest others do so also.

Dale

Forrest Charnock says:

Dear Sandra:

Evolution is an ancient anti-God religion masquerading as science. No human has ever been born with a tail as in a monkey or whatever. What they fallaciously call a tail is a painful condition where the spine if elongated. No human has ever been born with anything remotely resembling a operational tail .

You would do well to trust the Bible and when you here this sort of “scientific” proof of evolution do some research and find out the other side of the argument.
Remember that for 42 years evolutionists preached Piltdown Man was the “Missing Link” and it was a cheap fraud just as the one in National Geographic where they presented a “fossil” of a “feathered dinosaur” that was actually 5 different animals glued together.

Sahabsa says:

Sandra,
With reference to your statement in question 2:
Consider the word ‘race’ in
“…wiped out the entire race except for Noah and his family and the animals along with him..”

Doesn’t that suggest reference to the population of a particular locality and not the population of the entire world?

RedWolf says:

The Church teaches that the Earth is 6000 years old because some Bishop added up all the years people in the bible lived for. By adding up all these lives you can come up with close to 6000 years. I think he figured it out the beginning to be on October 23rd at night 5974 years ago. Obviously ridiculous. “A” for effort though!
People just have to have an answer for questions. Even if it’s wrong it works until the real answer is discovered.
The Vikings use to think the moon was a giant fruit that a dragon ate from a little bit each night. Thereby making it smaller every night. Then it grew back somehow. Glad that one failed the test of time!
The great flood probably did happen. Many years before written word. The tale must of been handed down by word of mouth for many generations eventually evolving and changing to become the tale we know of today. Almost all ancient civilizations have some version of the story. It must of been a world wide event. The tale of Noah is just a way of answering childrens questions about how we survived.

Maulud says:

what Bible say about big bang, and what is the origin of the universe

Forrest Charnock says:

Dear Malmud:

The Bible is in direct conflict with the BB, one of them is false.

Hi Perry,

Very interesting I have found your site.

Ok just to let you know me, this may be off topic but I didnt find a better place to post it.

Well I am a spiritst, a follower of spiritsm, philosophical (not religious) stream born in the late 1800 in France.

I dont know if you know it. But we share some good points here.

One postulate of our philosophy is: “If in any way science prove this teachings wrong, we have to leave them and follow science”.

Peace
Rogers

pankaj says:

Only religions want followers,science not.Even if you are not believing in science you are using and following it.That is why all the religions have many propanganda agents and marketers where as science has nobody.

In Chicago we have an organization called “The Chicago Darwin Bulldogs.” I’ve always thought it interesting that Darwin is the only great scientist who “needs” bulldogs.

Actually I think EVERY discovery requires a marketer. Every scientist has had to ARGUE for his position. And persuade.

Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett and many others are propaganda agents and marketers. But they are not marketers of science; they are marketers of atheist philosophy under the guise of science.

Perry

David Legan says:

Why do you makethe statement that science cannot explain things, it can only describe things? This statement seems quite rediculous to me. Examples abound, but meteorology comes to mind. It does not simply describe weather. It explains how sunlight creates heat, which creates (along with the earth’s revolution) wind, and how wind carries moisture (also created through the scientifically expalined water cycle) within it. It explains how that wind, when rising over mountains cools and condenses the water, leaving the windward side of mountains fertile with rain and the leeward sides often as deserts. I could go on and on- but I don’t think I need to.

Bill Nilsen says:

Why does this poor fellow always seem to get overlooked? Georges-Henri Lemaitre, a Belgian Jesuit priest and astronomer-mathematician, was the man who first postulated the ‘Big Bang’ theory. He essentially reverse-engineered Einstein’s general theory of relativity and combined it with Hubble’s expanding universe; he initially called it ‘The Cosmic Egg’ theory. Einstein rejected it at first, but after attending a lecture by Lemaitre, called it ‘the most beautiful & satisfactory explanation for the creation of the universe he had ever heard’. In 1953, Pope Pius X 12th siezed upon this as the explanation for Creation, and thus a Creator; Lemaitre wisely counselled him not to declare it ‘Infallible’, because, as a scientist, he knew it was not a not a testable hypothesis. Lemaitre: give credit where it is due, please.

Mark says:

Okay, another religious look at things, rather than scientific.
I was drawn in, and feel mugged.

What part of what has been said is unscientific?

heidi says:

no questions, just a big thank you for all the info. i, too, look forward reading more and learning more. above all, i appreciate the manner in which this is presented, clear, easy to understand and without arrogance.

Sidenei Melo says:

Theories are very good to exercise and to develop our brains. Today there isn’t
another way except theories to explain beginning from nothingness. Imagine
decades further on, and a science expanding on a geometrical progress with
thousands of fantastics devices, and incredible telescopes, deep studies of
stars. Will we reach to a final conclusion ? Shall theories turned into proven conclusions ? And how about Super computers. How will be them on 2050 ?
And my final question : What will we do with our final and proved discovery about the beginning of the Universe ? And if the final conclusion will be this : There weren’t beginning. No starting and no ending point. Just eternity. The formation of life on Earth was due to a precise distance from our nearest star. This exact distance may be unique on all Universe, so we are all alone, trying to discover the essence of God.

pankaj says:

No body try to get an ultimate answer to anything.What I mean is there are possibilities of infinite questions to any logic.If one says Matter is the ultimate we can ask Who created matter. There are two answers 1. It is infinite. 2. God.
I can ask again who created god. Ans:1. It is infinite 2. Another god-His father god 3. Human beings.So if you give some other logical answers I can ask again who created that.So the question who created is meaningless. It is there No creation Only change of form of physical matters. There may be Bing Bang or some other Bangs. What is Banged. God himself or the existing matter?
In the universe we can not see thoughts or Ideas without matter.If it is brain or a computer.So if god is the creator he should have Ideas and that Idea should arise from his brain. Means matter is there before god.
Another sociological aspect: If god designed the human society he must be a stupid.Why this much enormous proverty, cruelty, criminalism,racism and all evils comparing to good things.Atleast he should be a sadist by creating the living organisms on earth preying ( compare prey and pray) one on another.

Panjay, I am sorry to hear that you are living in such an awful world. My God gave me love, happiness, hope, intelligence, compassion, health and a laptop to communicate with the rest of the world. I am ever so thankful to Jesus for giving me all these and on top of all these the education He is constantly giving to US.

We have a loving and living God. You must try to make the best of your life. Be good and happy and try to approach to Jesus. We are praying to Jesus, not to each other.

I love you! because you are part of my family, namely one of the residents of our planet Earth.

Love, take care

pankaj says:

This is called pure logic which absolutely wrong like the old cliche of doors.
Half closed doors = half opened doors
Therefore
Full closed doors = full opened doors.
Also
I/0 = infinite Another way 1x 0 = 0
2/0= infinite 2×0 = 0
that is 1=2. again 1=2.
these type of logic and algebra to prove existence of god itself disproves god,
like all religious philosophies.

Pankaj,

None of these statements are logical.

Perry

George says:

Dear friend,

I´m glad I’m receiving the series “Where Did The Universe Come From”
I just receive Part 2: “Bird Droppings on my Telescope”, but guess what, I didn’t get “Part 1″. Can you send it to me to the above email address please?

Thank you in advance
Sincerely yours

George

email: oasismc2@itelcel.com

Go to http://www.cosmicfingerprints.com/blog and you can read all 5 articles from the top.

Rob says:

What about string theory, which espouses that there are an infirnite number of universes and that these universes are not all stable. It also espouses that this instability, the crashing of one universe into another is what caused the big bang in the first place? This being the case, it would not take an intelligence to produce the universe, but merely the probability of it happening, somehow, somewhere.

I have no problem with string theory, it is a very interesting field. This is not the same as the “multiverse” theory. The theory of infinite universe suggests that the extraordinary fine-tuning of our universe was just an accident, so it was bound to have happened sooner or later because there was an infinite number of universes.

So this invokes an infinite number of universes, i.e. things that we have no ability to detect, examine, or even question.

This is not scientific nor is it even rational. It violates parsimony and ockham’s razor.

Monotheism posits that there is one simple, intelligent, uncaused cause; and that theology can investigate and debate the rationality of our conceptions of God. I maintain that this is the most rational available explanation for the origin of the universe.

Perry Marshall

Richard says:

Perry,

Interesting theories you have, but, respectfully, that is all that they are – theories. While I would love to have the time to go deeper into the source of the data for your equations that result in a 99.9999999999% chance of there being a creator, I don’t really need to. As any gambler knows, the ‘odds’ rarely play out – many a time has the river card defied all the odds.

I admire the way you are attempting to add credulity to creationist theory by pedalling it along side scientific fact – essentially trying to blur the vision of unchallenging minds. Add to that the few carefully chosen quotes, I’m sure many readers will be intrigued and ultimately duped by the attempt.

You are one of many creationists whom, over the course of the past couple of hundred years, continually back-pedal on religious stand-points and ‘re-imagine’ new stand-points in order to fit their ‘old’ religion into new immerging scientific world.

I orignally clicked your link because I was under the impression that your emails would be a serious and unbiased view on the subject of creation. I was disappointed to find it was more like an attempt at converting the non-believers – kind of like going to a shoe store only to find that they were really selling life insurance.

This is not an attack on you or your beliefs – good luck to you, I hope the random happenings of this universe land in your favor.

I’m happy to continue receiving and reading your mails, an open mind is the key to the truth, unfortunately for you, the evidence of the truth at present indicates that there will be a large ‘X’ placed at the end of your equation, at least from me.

Kind Regards,
Richard.

Richard,

Thank you for your opinion. You are welcome to challenge me on my specific facts.

Perry

Kristi King says:

The scientific argument is a powerful one – the odds in favor of design are enormous and design touches our lives in so many ways (what if the orbit of the earth were more elliptical and we all froze for a month per year? what if water sank when it freezes? how could evolution have gotten blood to coagulate when it takes 20 steps and animals would die with only the first 19?) – hopefully an open mind will begin to see that. Our culture has taught us to resist anything having to do with God, but the younger generation of physicists and even biologists recognize that this world was created.

God has made himself apparent in his creation and we are expected to see it. But God wants more than that – he wants a relationship, he wants us to know and trust him. In the end, we are saved by faith, and faith is even harder to conjure up than intellectual recognition. Faith is a gift of God.

Where does faith fit in to the energy, mass, information grouping? and isn’t mass really energy anyway? So we have energy on one side and the things of the mind on the other – information, faith, relationships, morality. The world is bigger than scientists have recognized and more heavily weighted on the side of mind.

I think the most technical and elegant answer to your faith question is Kurt Goedel’s incompleteness theorem, which is beautiful.

Kindergarten explanation: “Anything you can draw a circle around cannot explain itself, but requires something outside the circle that you must assume but cannot prove.”

For example a high school geometry book starts with four or five assumptions that we know are true but no one has ever been able to prove. Goedel proved that there are some things which can never be proven.

What this really means that reason cannot exist without faith, and faith cannot exist without reason. Anyone who says they operate according to reason and rationality and has no faith is contradicting themselves just by saying that. Faith and reason are in a dance together – each needs the other.

Perry

Forrest Charnock says:

Dear Richard:

Perhaps it is out of a misunderstanding on your part but Perry is anything but a creationists, he is an anti-creationist. Obviously you have never bothered to study the arguments of the creationists , like myself, or the ‘theistic evolutionists ” like Perry.

As far as your analogy about gambling the odds of the simplest living organism coming to be by random processes would be like drawing a royal flush every day day for a thousand years in seven card draw , all pat hands.

You are the one with the unchallenging mind, there is no methodology that can explain the creation of information from matter, transformism [what you wrongly call macro-evolution} is scientifically impossible. This is not to mention spontaneous generation was disproved long ago but yet you believe. Huxley changing the name to abiogenesis does not over rule the Scientific Law of Biogenesis but yet you believe.

Do you realize you are calling Newton, Maxwell, Werner Von Braun ,,Raymond Damadian [inventor of the M.R.I.}, the worlds greatest surgeon, the worlds foremost expert on computr modeling for plate tectonics, the worlds leading geophysicist period John Baumgardner unchallenging? I would call thet religios intolerance on your part as it has no basis in fact. Creationists are responsible for the rise of modern science. All the laws of nature, the major branches of science , and the vast, vast majority of mankind's greatest inventions were the work of these "unchallenging " minds you have such a low opinion of. Name one advancement in science that was the direct result of Darwinism, hint, there are none. Evolution is a worthless religion that can be traced all the way back to ancient Babylon.

Please do not tell us you are unbiased Richard. Of course if you were you would be insulting yourself because a person without a bias is a person with nothing to base their world view on. It is not a question of who is biased, all intelligent people are, the question is the person honest and which bias is best.
Pery has as much right to his opinion as you do and all you are doing is calling him names which does not speak well of you. I disagree with him but he is not "unchallenging" or ignorant as you suggest all who disagree with you are.
Once you resort to character assassination , questioning the intelligence and integrity of those you disagree with and mocking them you have shown your arguments are emotional, not from reason.

Why would anyone go to the trouble to send those e-mails etc. if not to promote their views? I am unaware of anything Perry is selling [not that that would be wrong} but to accuse him of the illegal and immoral practice of bait and switch is inexcusable, you owe him an apology.

And who are you trying to kid with the condescending statement that you were not attacking his beliefs? You never attacked his beliefs as unchallenging [stupid] and as dishonest.

From the position of a hostile witness [as I said I disagree with Perry} he is the one with an open mind, not you. You never attacked his beliefs , you made no attempt to refute anything he said, all you did was question his intelligence and integrity. My conclusion is that you were cheated in school. They taught you what to think and not how to. This is not personal but ad hominem attacks are the weapon of those who are poorly read and ill equipped to debate intelligently.

When you have no basis for an argument, abuse the plaintiff. ~ Cicero

Richard says:

Hi Perry,

Thanks for your brief response. I would gladly challenge ‘specific facts’ if I could find any. The only fact contained in your mail is that scientists proved the big bang theory – the rest is anecdotel.

Your closing argument was a quotation:
Wilson said, “Certainly there was something that set it all off. Certainly, if you are religious, I can’t think of a better theory of the origin of the universe to match with Genesis.”

Just because Wilson couldn’t think of a better theory doesn’t mean there isn’t one.

He also states ‘if you are religious’. What if you’re not religious? Could you think of a better theory if you weren’t religious, Mr Wilson?

Thanks
Richard.

Brian says:

I was a skeptic until I began looking into the predictions about what’s ahead. For many years the one concerning control of commerce (buy and sell) unless one had a “mark” intrigued me. Now with advancements in computing and electronics the secular community is proving the existance of a creator. and the humor is they have not a clue they are participants.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3vSOf8uqRJU

Enjoy. More to come.

More to come.

subas says:

Dear Sir
I would like to request you respectfully that existence of God can not be proved experimently. Please don’t mind human brain has not so much capacity who can prove existence of god by using worldly things. It is a supreme soul. God is embodiment of love, peace, religion, truth and non violence. God is within you, in you and around you. You can not experience god until you click the super concious mind. Another thing i would like to request you to go to Prshantinilayam just one time where god is walking on his two legs in the human form. Please, make this endeavor just for one time. I am very much obligued to you for getting chance to share my feelings with you.
May the god bless you.

Forrest Charnock says:

Dear subas:

I believe you can prove the existence of God , as Perry explained. If you disagree then you need to show how he was wrong, not just tell us you don’t believe.
And how do you know this god you speak of is non-violent etc.? For that matter what is” the god” to you? The God I worship created a perfect world and mans sin messed it up. But He loved us so much He sent His son to pay our debt with His life

How do you explain the existence of the universe and the life on earth?

I experience God every day without working myself into a trance .

Darryl says:

I’m sure our God knew Man was going to sin, and from most of the books I’ve read he wasn’t violent but told people to be. Children of Israel killing every man/woman/child on the way to the promised land as an example. It also doesn’t sound like a god who would send his son to his death to un-worthy people. God knew he created sinners, its part of being mortal. How bout this, god created everything starting with the big bang then moved to another project.

Forrest Charnock says:

Hi Darryl

I find your reasoning a bit odd. God created human beings in His own image that had a choice to love and obey Him or not. The fact He knew they would not is not evidence He caused that to happen. He could have created robots to walk around saying I love you daddy but He desired to be loved by choice just as we do.

If you understood who the people were that God ordered the Israelites to kill and why and who they have become you might think differently, God had His reason and the Israelites disobeyed and everyone is paying a price for that today.
Regardless of your opinion He did send His Son who did die on a cross for our sins, the tomb is still empty.

As far as the Bing Bang that is a secular theory full of assumptions and huge gaping holes and has nothing whatsoever to do with the God of creation, the God of the Bible, Jesus Christ. The Bible clearly teaches He created everything in 6 days about 6ka ago and the earth before the stars and out of water, not molten rock.

Who said the bible is right?
Did god told you? How many days a 4Kg Rock needs to turn into dust by erosion?
How many minutes the sun light takes to travel to earth?
I think if the bible is mathematically right, god has deviate from his own laws to fulfill his wishes as a dictator or like a corruptor would do.

You say “God created human beings in His own image that had a choice to love and obey Him or not”. Really? So we are great if we obey him? What orders? Give me the list of the orders from God, where it says what I have to do. Don’t give em the 10 commandments, because you cant prove that it came from god.

Can you prove that the god exists if the Jewish never would existed? I mean if the bible was never written?

What you believe in most in the Creator or in a Written, Ever changed, misinterpreted and misprinted book?

Or you just cant separate God from the book?

Forrest Charnock says:

Hello Rogers:

The Bible writes history in advance and not a word of it has ever been proven wrong, why do assume that it is?
What is your point about a 4 kg rock turning to dust?
If you are trying to argue that there has not been enough time for light to travel from the distant stars in the Biblical time frame you first need to realize what a light year is a measurement of, it is not time. Secondly the Bib Bang has a starlight and time problem of its own. It would behoove you to learn both sides of an argument instead of using emotion as an argument.

It is your choice what to believe or not to believe but I see no indication you are arguing from anything but anger. If we live without Gods law right and wrong cease to exist and personal opinion decides morality. Is that what you want, to live like animals, kill or be killed?

It is not necessary to prove a self evident truth, do we need a candle to see the sun? We live in a precisely tuned world bursting with complex coded information. That information is written in a complex code and the only source of languages , codes and information is intelligence. The intelligence that created the biotic code had to pre-exist all life and is by definition supernatural. .

And why do you say the Bible changed? We have a copy of the Septuagint printed 3 centuries before Christ that predicted a staggering amount of detail about His life , there are 9 letters different from the modern text in Isaiah and they make no difference in the meaning at all. We have incredible evidence the Bible is true. The odds of just 8 of the details of Christ’s life being purely chance is like burying the State of Texas 4 feet deep in silver coins and randomly picking a certain one. If you take half of the predictions and do the math you get a number that is greater than the number of atoms in the universe.

I assume that your comment about separating God from a book means you have a picture of God you created yourself.

You should read the Bible before you condemn it.

Hello Forrest,

I invite you to think with me, every transformation in nature takes time. Every chemical or physical reaction has its own time to happen, this fact is about that 4kg rock that is being eroded by nature.

Computers has a thing called clock, that is an electrical pulse that synchronizes processes, fast the pulse, fast the processing time.

Look to the sky in the night, what you see? The past, some stars that light shy in the night sky is a past image, they may not even exist anymore.

Ok, now the Bible.

Yes you may have that book, the hebrews may have that book, Jesus of Nazareth probably read that book, after all he was jewish. But that book is not the bible that we buy in the stores today. They are different, first of all, because that just represents the old testimony and second because there are books in there that was made Apocrypha. Why?

Man can choose what word of God is better then the other?

And the other cultures of the world, the Hindus has their own book, The Buddhist too, the muslims too (their are bonded with us christians and with the jewish because Abraham, and yes I am a christian). So what is the truth?

Look over, and you will find an incredible amount of changes made in the bible by the first popes. Try to read a orthodox bible and see how it is different from the protestants and catholics.

And I am not talking about the old testimony, but the in the new too.

Now I believe in god, I believe in the moral law, but I don’t need to believe 100% in the bible to say I know the law of god. I just need to hear the voice of jesus in the wind saying: “Love god above all, and love your neighbor as yourself” two commandments that echoes in all cultures and in time. From this two commandments I can take all moral guide for a life with respect and peace.

So I don’t need anything else to be happy, tho my curiosity and desire to better and comfortable life wont let me stop to do science. And science is what god gave to us, the tool to care of the universe.

Do you know what entropy is? In thermodynamics, entropy is how much a system or a reaction self de-organization will auto increase over time, like a ice melting in a glass of water. Everywhere in our life we have entropy increasing. In a abandoned house, the dust will fall on things, the weeds will grow outside and will start invading the house, things will get old, simplifying it: entropy will increase.

And here I post a quote from you: “If we live without Gods law right and wrong cease to exist and personal opinion decides morality. Is that what you want, to live like animals, kill or be killed?”

In this sentence I see a world where entropy is huge. But then God created us. And we are the ones responsible for that the balance of the universe so that the total entropy never increase in the point of the its auto dissolution, like an ice cube.

We know that the entropy tends to increase in any isolated system. But we are the means for that wont occur. Thats why he gave us free will, so we can learn and we can evolved continuously in our part, not like robots, programmed to do a determined function, but as mind, heart and hands of one great creation that is the universe.

I need to chime in here. Rogers, you said, “Look over, and you will find an incredible amount of changes made in the bible by the first popes. Try to read a orthodox bible and see how it is different from the protestants and catholics.”

I’ve got a whole stack of different Bibles here, I’ve got a book called “Faith of the Early Fathers” which has writings from the church fathers dating back to 80AD quoting all kinds of scripture. And aside from the inclusion or exclusion of the apocrypha, THEY’RE ALL THE SAME within +/-5%.

Rogers, I am guessing from what you just said that you have not put an Orthodox Bible next to a protestant or Catholic Bible and compared them for yourself. I am guessing that you just heard this somewhere.

The Bible we have today was NOT re-written by the popes, or Constantine, or anybody else. You can verify this for yourself from documents that are free on the Internet. Because we have OT manuscripts dating back to 200BC (Dead Sea Scrolls, I saw them myself in a museum) and NT manuscripts dating to ~150. You can assemble all but 11 verses of the NT just from first second and third century commentaries from the church fathers. There is abundant evidence for this and what you are saying here is an urban legend.

Perry

Hi Perry,

Not at all. Look at this:

New King James Version

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. 4 In Him was life, and the life was the light of men. 5 And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend[a] it.

New International Version
1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was with God in the beginning.
3Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4In him was life, and that life was the light of men. 5The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood[a] it.

The message bible
1-2 The Word was first,
the Word present to God,
God present to the Word.
The Word was God,
in readiness for God from day one.
3-5Everything was created through him;
nothing—not one thing!—
came into being without him.
What came into existence was Life,
and the Life was Light to live by.
The Life-Light blazed out of the darkness;
the darkness couldn’t put it out.

Darby Translation

1In [the] beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

2*He* was in the beginning with God.

3All things received being through him, and without him not one [thing] received being which has received being.

4In him was life, and the life was the light of men.

5And the light appears in darkness, and the darkness apprehended it not.

So as you can see in such small collection of verses we find some differences, and in this case for the mater of interpretation the most important for me is:

… the darkness couldn’t put it out
…but the darkness has not understood[a] it.
…and the darkness did not comprehend[a] it
…and the darkness apprehended it not

I am sure we all seeing different interpretations by the translators here, I am assuming I am not the only one.

I have myself read the bible lets look to the books of the laws leviticus 15:

The message
1-3 God spoke to Moses and Aaron: “Speak to the People of Israel. Tell them, When a man has a discharge from his genitals, the discharge is unclean. Whether it comes from a seepage or an obstruction he is unclean. He is unclean all the days his body has a seepage or an obstruction.

The New International version
1 The LORD said to Moses and Aaron, 2 “Speak to the Israelites and say to them: ‘When any man has a bodily discharge, the discharge is unclean. 3 Whether it continues flowing from his body or is blocked, it will make him unclean. This is how his discharge will bring about uncleanness:

So its different when I say: “I have a flow from my genitals” or when I say generically: “I have a discharge from my body”.

If we dig we go over the 5% for sure.

Abut the Nicea Concillium, you are probably right Perry, it could be a legend. But lets not be naive about a Roman Emperor who wants to retain power and the integrity of its empire when He is in a gathering deciding what will be the new guide for his Subjects.

The words are different. Sometimes entirely different. No argument there.

The meaning is the same though. Not more than 5% different. 10%, if you want to quibble.

If you’re unsure of any specific thing, put 2-3 translations side by side and compare one with the other and make a judgment call.

“I have a flow from my genitals” or “I have a discharge from my body” mean exactly the same thing if the context is understood by the listener.

Forrest Charnock says:

Dear Rogers:

I am curious why you use these modern translations to argue the Jehovah’s Witness, Brethren of Christ and other 19th century cults that came from the Stone-Campbell restoration movemen too numerous to mention here argumentst that Constantine and the mean old Catholics stole the gospel?

First of all these modern” translations” did not exist in Constantine’s lifetime ,second none of these modern “translations” existed when these cults started this urban myth so there must have been an agenda at work.

The Dead Sea Scrolls ended this nonsense once and for all and the modern “translations” came from the garbage in Alexandria and the “basement” of the Vatican and contradict each other and the Textus Receptus that both the Latin Vulgate which the Catholic Bible and the King James both came from.
So it makes absolutely no sense to use that argument , the Catholic Bible is based on the Textus Receptus and these modern “translations” were compiled from a tragedy in the late 19th century when 2 Satan worshipers compiled the basis for the modern “translations.

I am certainly not a fan of the Catholic Bible , I do not agree that the books the Jews rejected as cannon, Maccabees, the Dragon etc and the change in the Ten Commandments . It makes no sense to even try and compare the Catholic Bible and the modern ones, they have a different base. The difference between the Catholic Bible and the King James is pretty much limited to the above mentioned variance.

This is a complicated subject and cults know most people will not do the homework and prefer to believe outrageous claims instead, be careful.

the Dead Sea Scrolls have verified the

Forrest Charnock says:

true Perry:

There is no great difference in the Catholic Bible ans the King James, both tell you the only way to heaven is Jesus Christ..
I am still going to read that book.

Forrest Charnock says:

Hi Rogers:

You are assuming everything happens at the same rate, you know the beginning,and that nothing has contaminated the sample. Change any of these unknowable and unprovable assumptions and you can make up any “date ” you like. If you want to believe we are seeing an illusion when we study the night sky that is your choice.

I invite you to think. The Apocrypha was not considered scripture by the Jews and it was written before Christ so you can forget that argument. I don’t have time to go through all the New Age bibles but just because someone comes along in the age of critical Christianity and presents a new “version” is not evidence the previous one was wrong. The word of God is the word of God, you must study to learn which is which.

Your being happy is irrelevant, the Bible does not promise that, it promises you will be persecuted. You either believe the Bible or you don’t, if you pick and choose what is true based on outside information you have written your own Bible and created your own god.

The Buddhist do not have a god, the god of the Muslims hates the Jews and is capricious. The Hindus have 30 million gods. The God of the Jews and the Christians loves the Jews and delights in making and keeping His promises, He holds His word above His name. The God of the Muslims can do anything , they are not the same . Jesus Christ said He was The Way,The Truth,and The Life, and no one comes to the Father but by Him. You are not a Christian and your souls is damned according to scripture. I hope you reconsider before you die because I do believe the Bible .

You have a somewhat distorted view of entropy, you might want to study some more. Yes order leads to disorder but it is more complicated than that. Also I don’t see what your point was in mentioning it.

Love God and your neighbor does not “echo in all cultures” , for instance Islam teaches its followers to convert everyone, charge them a tax for a while if they refuse and if they continue to refuse to kill them in the most horrible manner you can imagine. It is obvious you have either let someone else do your thinking for you on the subjects of religion and science or you simply made it up.

I have no idea what your last paragraph meant,do you? We can try and forestall entropy in inanimate objects but when it comes to us and the natural world that is strictly up to God. I will assume your references to ice cubes is your attempt to say that entropy does not disprove evolution because energy applied to water can increase “order” . In other words the addition of energy to a closed system reverses entropy. This is a common and breathtakingly stupid argument of the evolutionists. It is simlpy not true for many reasons

. First of all the addition of energy ,sunlight , does not reverse entropy. Plants use that energy because they have an intelligently designed mechanism to utilize it. Sunlight by its self is destructive and causes great disorder. Lay out in the sun a few hours and see if you “improve’ ? It causes paint to oxidize , building materials to degrade, skin to wrinkle etc.

The refrigerator apology is even worse. First of all in order for evolution to occur you need an increase in specified complexity, not just order. Break an ice cube in half you get 2 smaller ice cubes, break a crystal and you get 2 , or more ,crystals, cut a baby in half you get a dead baby.

Hope this helps

adebojude says:

The formula for producing babies is far different from the formula that produce ICE BLOCKS! therefore, you cannot use the living things approach to nullify the entropy of animate objects. Meanwhile, you know magicians can cut a baby into two and still get the baby back and not a dead baby? How do magicians perform such feats anyway? Illusions? I beg to disagree, our level of knowledge is not yet adequate to produce such a feat and who do magicians invoke to perform such feats? Being from other dimensions who work faster than the speed of light such that our eyes cannot actually ‘see’ them substituting another baby for the baby that was being cut? Hey, I am not talking about street tricks magicians here, I am talking about real magis! In as much as my thought process has been tainted by the aggregate of what have been fed me and what I have fed myself from childhood, I know that the knowledge and the information I have accumulated so far points to the fact that we are all but puppets fulfilling other “beings’” agenda thinking that we are fulfilling our own and whilst there are myriads of unknown mysteries pervading the universe. Whatever your religion tells you to do, think twice if you are loving your religion, your God, yourself or your fellow human being.

Forrest Charnock says:

Dear adebojude :

Magicians cannot cut a baby in half , or any other living creature for that matter, and have it live. It is an illusion. I find it difficult to believe anyone could believe otherwise. That is why they call them magic tricks, they are done for entertainment .

Because you are not able to determine the trick has no bearing on whether it is. If a magician could kill a baby by cutting it in half and then reassemble it alive without a mark they could make the baby in the first place. At the very least they could make a lot more money reattaching limbs at the hospital.

No offense but you are either pulling my leg or you are in serious need of a psychiatric help.

There is no formula for producing babies they are an act of God, a miracle beyond human comprehension. Ice crystals are the result of the laws of physics, also a miracle of God. Why else do all other liquids save one shrink when they freeze? If water had the same properties ad 99.99% of all other liquids life would be impossible. Acceptance of blind chance as a reason here is a religious belief on an unwillingness to accept the obvious truth. An ad hoc explanation.

If you cannot comprehend the difference in specified complexity as in living creatures and the properties if ice cubes you may want leave the discussion of entropy to others.

Comment Page 1 of 512345»