Spiritual Forums

Home


Donate!


Articles


CHAT!


Shop


 
Welcome to Spiritual Forums!.

We created this community for people from all backgrounds to discuss Spiritual, Paranormal, Metaphysical, Philosophical, Supernatural, and Esoteric subjects. From Astral Projection to Zen, all topics are welcome. We hope you enjoy your visits.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest, which gives you limited access to most discussions and articles. By joining our free community you will be able to post messages, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload your own photos, and gain access to our Chat Rooms, Registration is fast, simple, and free, so please, join our community today! !

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, check our FAQs before contacting support. Please read our forum rules, since they are enforced by our volunteer staff. This will help you avoid any infractions and issues.

Go Back   Spiritual Forums > Spirituality & Beliefs > Science & Spirituality

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 13-06-2019, 10:47 AM
Serenity69 Serenity69 is offline
Master
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Xanadu
Posts: 1,315
  Serenity69's Avatar
Color Science Has Found Proof of the Existence of God!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Er9D00DXQQs
__________________
Bliss Hope Peace Serenity



https://www.facebook.com/serenity.xanadu
https://twitter.com/Serenity_Xanadu

Email:serenity.xanadu.2020@gmail.com
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 14-06-2019, 05:07 AM
wstein wstein is offline
Master
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Austin TX USA
Posts: 2,279
  wstein's Avatar
So much over reaching.

1. It has a beginning: That doesn't mean it was created by a god. Update, there are other theories the suggest 'bangs' happen repeatedly when (mem)branes collide [which removes anything special about this particular beginning].
2. Fine tuned for life: Not really that fine tuned, most of the universe does not support life, its empty and cold. True that some constants are close to preventing life but only as we know it. Other sets of constants produce other stable universes with potentials for other kinds of life.
3. DNA complexity: Its only mindbogglingly complex as compared to man's limited progress. Update, recent experiments show that basic materials in DNA are fairly common near stars/planets. Recent ideas/experiemnts are starting to show how the basic material could combine into crude cells and longer molecule chains.

Before you get the idea, I don't' believe the universe is created, think again. I know it was created.

It's just that none of the above proves anything other than man's very limited understanding of the universe.
__________________
no sugar coating here, I tell it straight as I see it
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 30-06-2019, 11:08 AM
ketzer ketzer is offline
Guide
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 728
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by wstein
So much over reaching.

1. It has a beginning: That doesn't mean it was created by a god. Update, there are other theories the suggest 'bangs' happen repeatedly when (mem)branes collide [which removes anything special about this particular beginning].
2. Fine tuned for life: Not really that fine tuned, most of the universe does not support life, its empty and cold. True that some constants are close to preventing life but only as we know it. Other sets of constants produce other stable universes with potentials for other kinds of life.
3. DNA complexity: Its only mindbogglingly complex as compared to man's limited progress. Update, recent experiments show that basic materials in DNA are fairly common near stars/planets. Recent ideas/experiemnts are starting to show how the basic material could combine into crude cells and longer molecule chains.

Before you get the idea, I don't' believe the universe is created, think again. I know it was created.

It's just that none of the above proves anything other than man's very limited understanding of the universe.

Not to mention that with a multidimensional many worlds multiverse, there are are perhaps infinitely many rolls of the "constants dice". Given that any probability, no matter how small, times infinity, equals infinity, not only is it a certainty that a universe with fine tuned constants such as ours will exist, but that there are infinitely many of them.

However, given the impacts on time coming out of relativity, perhaps one cannot say the universe was created, only that the multiverse is.

Of course, both of these concepts are abstractions that are beyond the human mind to hold in their entirety, so who knows what lies beyond them. There is always room for God, but the more dependent we try to make proof of God on the truth of our own human mythologies and pseudoscientific misinterpretations of facts, the more inaccessible and unlikely God becomes. The more someone tries to prove "God" to me by trying to convince me of the truth of the Bible, the more discredited the idea of "God" becomes. While I find wisdom and value in parts and pieces of that book, it is not by a long shot the first place I go to find God.
__________________
“It is dangerous to be right in matters on which the established authorities are wrong.”
― Voltaire, The Age of Louis XIV
"Yeah right, tell me about it." Jesus
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 02-07-2019, 12:20 AM
Morpheus Morpheus is offline
Master
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: The Matrix
Posts: 5,898
  Morpheus's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by wstein
So much over reaching.

1. It has a beginning: That doesn't mean it was created by a god. Update, there are other theories the suggest 'bangs' happen repeatedly when (mem)branes collide [which removes anything special about this particular beginning].
2. Fine tuned for life: Not really that fine tuned, most of the universe does not support life, its empty and cold. True that some constants are close to preventing life but only as we know it. Other sets of constants produce other stable universes with potentials for other kinds of life.
3. DNA complexity: Its only mindbogglingly complex as compared to man's limited progress. Update, recent experiments show that basic materials in DNA are fairly common near stars/planets. Recent ideas/experiemnts are starting to show how the basic material could combine into crude cells and longer molecule chains.

Before you get the idea, I don't' believe the universe is created, think again. I know it was created.

It's just that none of the above proves anything other than man's very limited understanding of the universe.

This present, "evolved", situation in which we find ourselves is the result of a "fall".
As Einstein stated, "modes in which we think, not conditions in which we live."

Question is? A fall from what?
See what and who "stars" represent throughout the Biblical scriptures.
__________________
"I believe there are two sides to the phenomena known as death. This side where we live, and the other side, where we shall continue to live.
Eternity does not start with death.
We are in eternity now." - Norman Vincent Peale

"There is no place in this new kind of physics for both the field and matter, for the field is the only reality." - A. Einstein
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 14-07-2019, 03:07 PM
Legrand Legrand is offline
Knower
Join Date: May 2019
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 228
  Legrand's Avatar
Hello,

I took the time to read each post on this thread, and I really enjoyed them. Please do not take this post personally. It is simply an opinion about the scientific approach in its attempt to find Universal and Immutable laws.

I find the scientific approach pretentious in its way to change what are only hypothesis about this world into Theories just after a few observations that concord with the initial hypothesis, thus creating archetypes as lens to see this world. This scientific approach only as been existing for a few hundred years and ever since it existed it wants to be the only flagship of the truth. It has at least the merit to have been a counterweight to institutionalize religious belief in history of mankind.

Lets just take the scientific approach conclusion in the time of Newton. For science in those time, time and space where the same no matter where you are in the Universe. The universe was made of matter moving like pool balls and if one could know the exact position and speed of each peaces of matter, one would be able to predict the position of each peace of matter at anytime in the Universe. It was a theory, that could not be changed. The laws of movement where set for eternity in the human mind of scientific of those times. The universe was infinite and always existed and will always exist according to those laws. Which contradicted the belief of spontaneous creation of some institutionalized religions.

Then came the discovery of atoms and even smaller parts constituting matter, the relative theory of Einstein, the uncertainty principle of Heisenberg that limits our ability to know the state of matter at a very small scale, etc. Time and space became relative according to our speed relatively to other systems. The speed of light became limited and constant, it was not infinite anymore. The archetypes changed again, thus changing completely the way of Scientifics to look at the world. New theories where born, new laws where made to explain this world, always in the limited perspective of the scientific approach.

On a cosmological point of view, came with this new thread the Big Bang theory, only based on three types of observation. The Universe then came from a singularity and we where even able to say with great conviction how many millions of years ago.

Again, all this is changing, scientific don’t agree anymore that the universe was created from a singularity with the observation of matter being created all the time in the center of galaxies, with this new concept of dark matter, etc. Some even say today that the void of space is denser in energy that matter itself. Matter pops up from the “void” all the time from the microscopic level and returns to it. This would mean, to take an image, that matter is like bubbles of air in the dense ocean instead of being solid rocks in the empty space. So, no ones agree today in the scientific community if the Universe is born or unborn, infinite in time and space or not.

So, in the brief history of those few hundred years of scientific approach, we passed from a world created from god, to an infinite world in time and space, to back to a singularity creating the world to back again to a world that is always auto creating itself.

Time and space where immutable at one point of this history, now they are relative. The speed of light is now considered immutable. But what says that the speed of light may not change at anytime? The same with all those basic constants that definite the laws the scientific community as found?

With so many changes in trying to define the origin of matter, if matter has an origin in Time in this Universe, how would this approach would be able to define the origin of God. And then which God? Would it be the conscious God tied to matter in this universe. The Creator God that as the power to project a void of Itself to see himself and thus creating matter? Would it be the unborn God that has no Name? Who knows?...

Do not take me wrong, the scientific approach did procure many nice things, and not so nice ones also, for the human population. But those are only recipes and techniques of manipulating the matter. They are not Universal laws. Like one preparing food from a recipe for a meal. The recipe those do not give any real insight on the food itself only ways to bring it to taste like we want it to for dinner.

Of course, research is still being done with a scientific approach, but those researches are mostly biased now by the institution it has became, like religions did.

To take a small example of how this research is biased, lest just take for example the research done by the pharmacology industry. To test a medication effect of a new medication, they will always test its effect against a group that is given only a pill or an injection of a sugar-based solution. This because they are aware of the placebo effect, meaning that if someone believes enough that he or she is given a real medication to cure the illness, there is an ability of the body/consciousness relation to heal the body by itself without the use of medication. The pharmacology industry does not understand this placebo effect, and does not want to understand it, all they want is to substitute it by their medication they can sell. Yet they recognise that this effect really exists. No real money and time are really spent in understanding this placebo effect and how we could find new ways to help people to heal themselves by amplifying the power of this effect.

The same goes for research done on consciousness using a scientific approach.

So, this was just an opinion of mine.

Regards
__________________
*********
The One Existent, the illuminated seers speak of variously - Rig Veda

Last edited by Legrand : 14-07-2019 at 06:50 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 20-07-2019, 01:57 AM
Morpheus Morpheus is offline
Master
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: The Matrix
Posts: 5,898
  Morpheus's Avatar
The tripod of mutual agteement and support is this...

One, the Holy Scriptures.

Two, the very many anecdotal NDE, and OBE accounts.

Three, what science has been revealing to us since Einstein.
__________________
"I believe there are two sides to the phenomena known as death. This side where we live, and the other side, where we shall continue to live.
Eternity does not start with death.
We are in eternity now." - Norman Vincent Peale

"There is no place in this new kind of physics for both the field and matter, for the field is the only reality." - A. Einstein
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 22-07-2019, 04:51 PM
Shivani Devi Shivani Devi is offline
Master
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 9,983
  Shivani Devi's Avatar
Science may only just be scratching the surface in giving explanations as to how certain things come into being, but it is still a long way off in explaining why.

I watched only half of the video in the opening post, but it was just too broad, general and over-simplistic for my personal tastes, even though I believe in Intelligent Design and therefore, "God" as a self-aware form of conscious energy.

The whole multidisciplinary approach needs to be drawn from different areas of science (other than those aforementioned)...including quantum field mechanics (waveform fluctuations in quantum foam) to bio technology (biological nano machines based upon irreducible complexity like flagellum tails) to fractal mathematics and sacred geometry (Nassim Haramein and squaring the circle in crop circle tetrahedrons) to Neurotheology and the role of entheogen receptors in neuroplastic brain wiring to structured light sensing and depth of field radiation and detection within electromagnetic casimir gradients.

To put it simply...why IS it that no two snowflakes or grains of sand are exactly the same out of the trillion, trillion, trillion of them?

The more I look, the more I come to understand that all of this...whatever we can perceive is not just a random thing, so there must be something behind/beyond what we can perceive through our limited cognition and while science may have found many of the answers to questions never asked, they are still a long way off the GUT (Grand Unified Theory) or TOE (Theory of Everything) or maybe they have found it, but will need to drop the whole "scientific method" and associated experimentation to find it...which won't make it "science" any longer...it will then be either pseudoscience or metascience/metaphysics which does not sit well with the mainstream scientific ideology...but what if science needs to drop science to find the truth? Do you think it ever could?

My whole idea of "God" is based upon a Divine Intelligence...a cosmic architect and artist if you will, who uses the canvas of Spacetime and the brushes of energy, vibration and frequency...ala Tesla-esque to create multilayered holographic fractals, reflected in the mirror of its own awareness of Self....like the operator of a giant 3D printing machine with inbuilt randomization codes.

Like I said, the video was way too simplistic....for God exists as that which we will never understand and not for the want of trying.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 22-07-2019, 06:06 PM
Shivani Devi Shivani Devi is offline
Master
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 9,983
  Shivani Devi's Avatar
While I am on the subject of structured light sensing, depth of field and electromagnetic casimir gradients revealing multidimensional realities...

There are certain things that I would LOVE to receive a scientific explanation for...other than scientists refusing to acknowledge any scientific evidence for it.

This thread may just morph into "Shivani's weird thread of unexplained stuff". LOL

1. Microsoft X-Box Kinect Cam mapping wireframe figures in perceptual uninhabited space which respond intelligently to given commands

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=M5bzLxkVWrI
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Ga4uKRHqGoM

The device was modified by electrical engineer Bill Chapel from Digital Dowsing.

This is only two examples out of hundreds of them.

Could we fine tune this technology to let us see other dimensions between the varying gradations of light and shadow? I would love to use one of these in a mirror tunnel...

What the hell?

So, if anybody can explain this scientifically, I am all eyes...if not, it will be "God did it". LOL
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 23-07-2019, 09:08 PM
peteyzen peteyzen is offline
Master
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: leicester
Posts: 1,459
  peteyzen's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Legrand
Hello,

I took the time to read each post on this thread, and I really enjoyed them. Please do not take this post personally. It is simply an opinion about the scientific approach in its attempt to find Universal and Immutable laws.

I find the scientific approach pretentious in its way to change what are only hypothesis about this world into Theories just after a few observations that concord with the initial hypothesis, thus creating archetypes as lens to see this world. This scientific approach only as been existing for a few hundred years and ever since it existed it wants to be the only flagship of the truth. It has at least the merit to have been a counterweight to institutionalize religious belief in history of mankind.

Lets just take the scientific approach conclusion in the time of Newton. For science in those time, time and space where the same no matter where you are in the Universe. The universe was made of matter moving like pool balls and if one could know the exact position and speed of each peaces of matter, one would be able to predict the position of each peace of matter at anytime in the Universe. It was a theory, that could not be changed. The laws of movement where set for eternity in the human mind of scientific of those times. The universe was infinite and always existed and will always exist according to those laws. Which contradicted the belief of spontaneous creation of some institutionalized religions.

Then came the discovery of atoms and even smaller parts constituting matter, the relative theory of Einstein, the uncertainty principle of Heisenberg that limits our ability to know the state of matter at a very small scale, etc. Time and space became relative according to our speed relatively to other systems. The speed of light became limited and constant, it was not infinite anymore. The archetypes changed again, thus changing completely the way of Scientifics to look at the world. New theories where born, new laws where made to explain this world, always in the limited perspective of the scientific approach.

On a cosmological point of view, came with this new thread the Big Bang theory, only based on three types of observation. The Universe then came from a singularity and we where even able to say with great conviction how many millions of years ago.

Again, all this is changing, scientific don’t agree anymore that the universe was created from a singularity with the observation of matter being created all the time in the center of galaxies, with this new concept of dark matter, etc. Some even say today that the void of space is denser in energy that matter itself. Matter pops up from the “void” all the time from the microscopic level and returns to it. This would mean, to take an image, that matter is like bubbles of air in the dense ocean instead of being solid rocks in the empty space. So, no ones agree today in the scientific community if the Universe is born or unborn, infinite in time and space or not.

So, in the brief history of those few hundred years of scientific approach, we passed from a world created from god, to an infinite world in time and space, to back to a singularity creating the world to back again to a world that is always auto creating itself.

Time and space where immutable at one point of this history, now they are relative. The speed of light is now considered immutable. But what says that the speed of light may not change at anytime? The same with all those basic constants that definite the laws the scientific community as found?

With so many changes in trying to define the origin of matter, if matter has an origin in Time in this Universe, how would this approach would be able to define the origin of God. And then which God? Would it be the conscious God tied to matter in this universe. The Creator God that as the power to project a void of Itself to see himself and thus creating matter? Would it be the unborn God that has no Name? Who knows?...

Do not take me wrong, the scientific approach did procure many nice things, and not so nice ones also, for the human population. But those are only recipes and techniques of manipulating the matter. They are not Universal laws. Like one preparing food from a recipe for a meal. The recipe those do not give any real insight on the food itself only ways to bring it to taste like we want it to for dinner.

Of course, research is still being done with a scientific approach, but those researches are mostly biased now by the institution it has became, like religions did.

To take a small example of how this research is biased, lest just take for example the research done by the pharmacology industry. To test a medication effect of a new medication, they will always test its effect against a group that is given only a pill or an injection of a sugar-based solution. This because they are aware of the placebo effect, meaning that if someone believes enough that he or she is given a real medication to cure the illness, there is an ability of the body/consciousness relation to heal the body by itself without the use of medication. The pharmacology industry does not understand this placebo effect, and does not want to understand it, all they want is to substitute it by their medication they can sell. Yet they recognise that this effect really exists. No real money and time are really spent in understanding this placebo effect and how we could find new ways to help people to heal themselves by amplifying the power of this effect.

The same goes for research done on consciousness using a scientific approach.

So, this was just an opinion of mine.

Regards

Great post !
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 03-08-2019, 08:37 AM
AppleCore AppleCore is offline
Seeker
Join Date: Aug 2019
Posts: 41
  AppleCore's Avatar
Shivani - enjoyed your post (although I didn't understand some of the science-speak!). But got the gist of what you are saying.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shivani Devi
To put it simply...why IS it that no two snowflakes or grains of sand are exactly the same out of the trillion, trillion, trillion of them?

I've always wondered about this. Do they (i.e. the 'experts') absolutely know that this is true? And how do they know? They obviously haven't examined every single snowflake that ever was, ever is and ever will be so I'm guessing there must be a scientific equation to prove it. Which is probably way too advanced for me to understand, so either I believe the equation without question, or wonder about it. I'm a wonderer.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shivani Devi
...but what if science needs to drop science to find the truth? Do you think it ever could?

Nice thought. I think it could...but perhaps not in our lifetime.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:02 PM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
(c) Spiritual Forums