100%, absolute, irrefutable proof of God's existence

johnnywong

Active Member
Sep 25, 2018
265
132
Auckland
✟32,912.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Hi all. This video is about the plank satellite and how it measured the CMB (cosmic microwave background). The data demonstrates that the universe rotates on an axis, with our solar system being the center of that axis. I'd like to hear what others think. Have you heard of this before? To me it is encouraging information because it's proof that the earth is not just some random, purposeless speck in the vastness of a bleak universe.


Yes. I heard that before . It confirmed that the earth was created by God at the center of his heart .You consider a small ant which is quite insignificant, but in the whole Mars you can't find something living like this . The whole wealth of Bill Gates can't create an ant that complex. With the new discovery of quantum mechanics, I guess, is that stars in the universe is providing energy to each living being on the earth , this is the reason there are so many stars .
 
Upvote 0

Qwertyui0p

Active Member
Dec 20, 2019
266
71
40
New South Wales
✟33,804.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Both the Big Bang Theory and the Theory of Evolution are very well established major theories, with enormous levels of verification and evidence. The ToE is stronger, probably, than the BBT, but it's sort of like saying 'steel is fairly strong but titanium alloy is stronger' - either one will serve for tableware with no danger of failure due to stress. At this point there are no known major issues with either theory. Details to be filled in? Yes. Serious difficulties? No.
'There is a debate tactic known as ‘elephant hurling’. This occurs when the critic throws summary arguments about complex issues to give the impression of weighty evidence, but with an unstated presumption that a large complex of underlying ideas is true, and failing to consider opposing data, usually because they have uncritically accepted the arguments from their own side. We should challenge elephant-hurlers to offer specifics and challenge the underlying assumptions.' (from a book written by Jonathon Sarfati and Michael Matthews)
Can you please provide some of the verification and evidence you allude to?
 
Upvote 0

childeye 2

Well-Known Member
Aug 18, 2018
4,924
2,884
66
Denver CO
✟200,758.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
It is not dishonest to have an opinion based on personal bias.
I didn't mean anything personal in my remark. By honest I meant ethical principle used in scientific method as opposed to bias. I took issue with the last statement since in my view it is contradictory to the first two under that definition of honest/ethical.

There is no theoretical reason to favour any of these over any other as far as I know. There is no reason to dismiss any of these as viable possibilities either. Thus there is nothing wrong with a willingness to favour one option due to personal bias or because it fits in with ones personal beliefs.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

timewerx

the village i--o--t--
Aug 31, 2012
15,205
5,877
✟296,878.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Single
Einstein once said "Not only is the universe difficult to understand, it may be more difficult than we can understand."

We have better understanding now but it won't be "enough" until you see what's outside the Universe.

What is outside however would only generate much more questions than answers. It doesn't answer anything at all our profound questions about the Universe and our role in it.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: childeye 2
Upvote 0

Josheb

Christian
Supporter
Jan 3, 2014
2,172
830
NoVa
✟160,065.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Hi all. This video is about the plank satellite and how it measured the CMB (cosmic microwave background). The data demonstrates that the universe rotates on an axis, with our solar system being the center of that axis. I'd like to hear what others think. Have you heard of this before? To me it is encouraging information because it's proof that the earth is not just some random, purposeless speck in the vastness of a bleak universe.
Do you understand the meaning of the words "proof" and "prove"? Do you understand the difference between evidence and proof?

If so, then please explain how the evidence cited above proves the existence of God. How does earth not being "just some random, purposeless speck in the vastness of a bleak universe" prove the existence of God. How does the absence of a specific spatio-temporal condition prove the existence of an extra-spatio-temporal Person?

Please be specific.
 
Upvote 0

YouAreAwesome

☝✌
Oct 17, 2016
2,181
968
Lismore, Australia
✟94,543.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Am I understanding correctly that the word "centre" is referring to halfway between the top and bottom of the universe? That is, the top half is slightly cooler and the plane separating temperatures goes through the same plane the earth makes with the sun?
 
Upvote 0

John Helpher

John 3:16
Supporter
Mar 25, 2020
1,345
479
45
Houston
✟85,316.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Celibate
please explain how the evidence cited above proves the existence of God.

Ordered complexity is a demonstration of applied intelligence. If you found the words "The wondrous light of the dawn brings a cascade of illumination upon the waves." scrawled into the sand on a beach, you would not suspect it was the result of a few seagulls walking around in a manner which coincidentally make marks in the sand which resulted in that sentence. You would see the intent and purpose in the sentence and understand it is the result of applied intelligence.

How does earth not being "just some random, purposeless speck in the vastness of a bleak universe" prove the existence of God.

In the same was you can see that the hour hand on a watch is not just some purposeless part among many other purposeless parts of metal and plastic heaped together.

How does the absence of a specific spatio-temporal condition prove the existence of an extra-spatio-temporal Person?

The data does not demonstrate the absence of anything. The opposite is true; it demonstrates that our solar system is the result of deliberate placement, in the same way you'd understand the deliberate placement of rhyming words in a poem or song.

The skeptical scientists themselves understand that if the data is accurate (according to wiki they're still hoping it will just go away some day) then it would demonstrate that the earth is special in the universe.
 
Upvote 0

lsume

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Mar 14, 2017
1,491
696
70
Florida
✟417,518.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Hi all. This video is about the plank satellite and how it measured the CMB (cosmic microwave background). The data demonstrates that the universe rotates on an axis, with our solar system being the center of that axis. I'd like to hear what others think. Have you heard of this before? To me it is encouraging information because it's proof that the earth is not just some random, purposeless speck in the vastness of a bleak universe.

Possible but unlikely is probably how I should see it. However if it’s true, that’s great!
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

John Helpher

John 3:16
Supporter
Mar 25, 2020
1,345
479
45
Houston
✟85,316.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Celibate
Possible but unlikely is probably how I should see it. However if it’s true, that’s great!

Hi Isume. Thanks for your willingness to consider what is a very different kind of thinking. We've been trained for so long to view the universe (and even life) as an accident by skeptical scientists that it's difficult to go against the flow. The skeptics do that on purpose; they use derision and conformity to coerce compliance to the "accepted model".

I think we need to break out of that kind of thinking. The data factually demonstrates that the universe rotates on an axis, and that our solar system is in line with that axis, i.e. we are the center of the universe. I realize that sounds egocentric, but not so if the data backs it up.

What the skeptics have done with the data is truly disingenuous. I'm not sure if you saw my earlier comments about the wiki page regarding this issue, but the skeptics do not deny the data demonstrates we are the center of the universe. Instead they call it an "anomaly" and refer to it as the axis of evil. One of them plainly "hoped it would go away". Others have suggested the data is a statistical accounting or collection error, though they showed no proof of that.

Imagine if the role was reversed and the data clearly showed that we were not the center of the universe, but the Christian scientists said they refused to believe it, called it evil, hoped it would just go away, and dismissed it as an anomaly; of course the skeptics would cry foul on all of those excuses, and they'd be right to.

We are the result of intelligence, deliberately and with intent shaped and placed; we should not feel embarrassed or ashamed of acknowledging the obviousness of that. It is those who want us to believe that we are the result of mere, dumb-luck random chance who should be ashamed of themselves. It is those scientists who hope the factual data will just go away who should be embarrassed.
 
Upvote 0

YouAreAwesome

☝✌
Oct 17, 2016
2,181
968
Lismore, Australia
✟94,543.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The data factually demonstrates that the universe rotates on an axis, and that our solar system is in line with that axis

I've been looking into this for the last day or so and can't find anything that supports the idea that the universe "rotates on an axis". Seems obvious that this is wrong though because there is no reference location outside the universe to support this idea of rotation so the universe will always appear to be stationary from within the universe.

From what I can gather the reason it is called "the axis of evil" is because Iran, Iraq and North Korea were called "the axis of evil" by George W Bush back in 2002. Then, because there are three things that seem to relate to each other in their data (the quadrupole, octupole and temperature of the CMB above and below our solar system) they proceeded with this logic: in both cases three things are similarly hard to understand, let's use the same title.

In saying all this, I'm glad you've pointed me to this finding. I did not know about it. It's quite amazing that when we use the plane that splits the higher temperature CMB from the lower temperature CMB it goes straight through our solar system! That is amazing! It is also amazing that when we use this plane to divide the universe into quadrupoles and octupoles that the data mirrors itself in each pole! Incredible really, if I've understood it all correctly.
 
Upvote 0

John Helpher

John 3:16
Supporter
Mar 25, 2020
1,345
479
45
Houston
✟85,316.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Celibate
I've been looking into this for the last day or so and can't find anything that supports the idea that the universe "rotates on an axis".

Hi YAA. In post #77 (on page 4 of this thread) I went through the wiki page on this topic (which is definitely not a christian resource) and demonstrated how the skeptics themselves do not disagree that the data shows a rotation around our solar system as the axis for that rotation. One of the problems Newton had with measuring space is that nothing is constant. Everything is in motion; planets, stars, galaxies, galaxy clusters and consequently the entire universe, (being made up of all those moving parts). With our solar system being at the center of the universe, the logical conclusion is that all this motion equates to rotating around the center.


From what I can gather the reason it is called "the axis of evil" is because Iran, Iraq and North Korea were called "the axis of evil" by George W Bush back in 2002.

Nah. In post #77 I comment on text from the wiki page which states that the axis was named because it threatens the currently accepted model. What really matters most, though, is that it doesn't matter where the moniker came from; the question is, why are they referring to the data as evil at all?

Then, because there are three things that seem to relate to each other in their data (the quadrupole, octupole and temperature of the CMB above and below our solar system) they proceeded with this logic: in both cases three things are similarly hard to understand, let's use the same title.

You actually make my point more solid; referring to 3 Islamic governments just after 9/11 as being evil is called "demonizing the enemy". If you can get people believing that the enemy is evil then it's easier to justify all manner of action against them, even to the point of collateral damage like the destruction of hospitals, schools, historical sites, and the death of women and children. I mean, those same people refer to the U.S. as evil, and if you wanted to compare death tallies, the people killed in the war against Afghanistan and Iraq, by the "allied" forces, led by the U.S., tallied in the hundreds of thousands.

Anyway, the point remains the same with the data from the planck satellite; referring to it as the axis of evil is meant to desensitize people to the facts, to the point that the supposed scientists can say, "we were just hoping it'd go away" (which is an actual quote from a scientist recorded on the wiki page) and no one will complain, least of all those skeptics who are famous for saying, "hey, we're willing to believe in God; just give us the evidence".

It is important that we, as Christians, do not join in with them in explaining away the data, no matter how unpopular or contrary to the "established, accepted model" it may be.
 
Upvote 0

YouAreAwesome

☝✌
Oct 17, 2016
2,181
968
Lismore, Australia
✟94,543.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I went through the wiki page on this topic... and demonstrated how the skeptics themselves do not disagree that the data shows a rotation around our solar system as the axis for that rotation.

The word "rotation" is not on the wiki page at all. And I think, perhaps, you misunderstand what the data actually shows. As far as I can tell, it says nothing about rotation at all, but I could be wrong. What I do know, is that you have not referred me to an article that explains how the axis of evil suggests that the universe rotates around our solar system. I have not read that anywhere yet. Can you point me in the right direction please? The Wikipedia page does not say anything about rotation.

why are they referring to the data as evil at all?

You answered this yourself here:

because it threatens the currently accepted model
 
Upvote 0

Josheb

Christian
Supporter
Jan 3, 2014
2,172
830
NoVa
✟160,065.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Ordered complexity is a demonstration of applied intelligence.
Fail. That sentence begs the question. Ordered complexity is an implication of intelligence, not a demonstration of that which is implied.
If you found the words "The wondrous light of the dawn brings a cascade of illumination upon the waves." scrawled into the sand on a beach, you would not suspect it was the result of a few seagulls walking around in a manner which coincidentally make marks in the sand which resulted in that sentence. You would see the intent and purpose in the sentence and understand it is the result of applied intelligence.
Fail again. The analogy stipulates inherent meaning. By using the word "words" the example is much different than the earth as the center of the universe. This means the analogy of centered-earth and words in the sand is a false equivalence. It is because the words having meaning and communicate that meaning we can infer prior intelligence as the source. That doesn't exist with a big ball spinning in space.
In the same was you can see that the hour hand on a watch is not just some purposeless part among many other purposeless parts of metal and plastic heaped together.
Another failed anology
The data does not demonstrate the absence of anything.
It does; you're just not informed enough to understand it.
The opposite is true; it demonstrates that our solar system is the result of deliberate placement, in the same way you'd understand the deliberate placement of rhyming words in a poem or song.
Data is raw. It has no meaning. Information is data with meaning. Sometimes that meaning is inherent; sometimes that meaning is attributed. Learn the difference between inherent and attributed meaning.

Furthermore, the earth isn't the center of the universe. I don't know where you got that idea but it is a falsehood. The fact is we have no way of determining what or where is the center of the universe. The reason this is the case is because we only know of the parts of the universe from whence we have observable light. Anything beyond that hasn't yet reached us. We don't truly know the shape or size of the universe; much less its center.


The reason I am so blunt with you is because I want you to be a better apologist for Christianity. You are mucking it up for the rest of us and I'd like you to stop it. Get better at understanding, get better and fact-testing, and get better at reason.
The skeptical scientists themselves understand that if the data is accurate (according to wiki they're still hoping it will just go away some day) then it would demonstrate that the earth is special in the universe.
So you're building your proof on skeptics? Please for the love of God and all of heaven and earth learn how to check your fact and form a logical argument for any case you present.




You are on to something with the existence of inherent information. It does, necessarily, imply prior intelligence. It does not prove prior intelligence. The best we can say is that given our current understanding of the physics, information, the universe, etc., the only source we know of for inherent information is prior intelligence, and that weights the debate in favor of some superior intelligence, one Christians believe to be God. Complexity in and of itself is not proof of anything. Attaching the word "ordered" doesn't change that fact. Go back and re-read Behe. You missed something.

You must understand the most of the atheists here are not atheists; they are anti-theists. They like it when you make a pinhead of yourself; foolish ops like this are used to mock you, ridicule Christians as a whole, and deny the existence of God.



John, if you are really interested in cosmological arguments then read these three books:

"Hyperspace," by Michio Kaku
"The Emperor's New Mind," by Roger Penrose
"The Dark Side of the Universe," by James Trefill

Penrose oversaw Stephen Hawking's doctoral dissertation. These are older books, and some of the content has changed with newer discoveries but these sources will help you be a better apologist. They'l make you a better critic of both Christian and secular sources. They'll also give you a much greater appreciation for God's creation and the complexity therein ;).
 
  • Informative
Reactions: YouAreAwesome
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

YouAreAwesome

☝✌
Oct 17, 2016
2,181
968
Lismore, Australia
✟94,543.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Nah. In post #77 I comment on text from the wiki page which states that the axis was named because it threatens the currently accepted model.

For the record North Korea, Iran and Iraq are mentioned here directly before the phrase "Axis of evil" which referenced them here. These three states threatened the accepted state of things just as the three findings (the temperature of the cmb above and below the solar system together with the quadrupole and octupole data) threaten the accepted state of cosmology.

And I want to clarify something from Wiki page, "There's no way there should be a correlation of structure with our motion of the earth around the sun – the plane of the earth around the sun – the ecliptic. That would say we are truly the center of the universe." From this quote it seems to me you believe the earth is the centre of the universe. If this is true, you must understand the meaning of centre in this context. Centre here does not mean the bullseye of a spherical dartboard. It means when we cut an orange in half with a knife, that the knife goes through the central plane of the sphere. There is a full circlur area of points this plane passes through. But this is not to say that this is not impressive. It is ridiculously impressive and astounding. Incredible really, if it is in fact the case. But calling it the "centre of the universe" is misleading. It is not the centre in the way we typically think of centres.
 
Upvote 0

Josheb

Christian
Supporter
Jan 3, 2014
2,172
830
NoVa
✟160,065.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Well, that's what the planck data demonstrates.
Given what is currently believed to be known and understood. That data also indicates this is all a hologram.

You do understand much of what we think we "know" scientifically changes every 100-150 years, yes? "Planck data" didn't exist 150 years ago. 150 years before Max Planck showed up we thought Newton explained everything.
 
Upvote 0

Guy Threepwood

Well-Known Member
Oct 16, 2019
1,117
73
51
Midwest
✟18,520.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Hi all. This video is about the plank satellite and how it measured the CMB (cosmic microwave background). The data demonstrates that the universe rotates on an axis, with our solar system being the center of that axis. I'd like to hear what others think. Have you heard of this before? To me it is encouraging information because it's proof that the earth is not just some random, purposeless speck in the vastness of a bleak universe.


It's interesting, because the academic consensus around the universe not having a center was always heavily based on the rationale: 'because if it does, we're apparently it, which would make us special, and we can't possibly be- that would be arrogant'- and worse: carry theistic implications, which was also the academic objection to the big bang for a long time

which is all an argument based more on psychology, ideology, the perception that self deprecation is more intellectually sophisticated than self appreciation , more than objective observation

We are the only species among millions that can ponder these questions, the only means we know of, by which the universe can literally ponder it's own existence- amongst the 'great silence' of the galaxy.. If recognizing that we are kinda 'special' is arrogant- what is insisting that we are not? an insecurity complex??

how about putting all psychiatry aside, and following the evidence where it leads- regardless of how 'special' or 'theistic' the implications of reality appear to be?
 
  • Like
Reactions: YouAreAwesome
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

John Helpher

John 3:16
Supporter
Mar 25, 2020
1,345
479
45
Houston
✟85,316.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Celibate
It's interesting, because the academic consensus around the universe not having a center was always heavily based on the rationale: 'because if it does, we're apparently it, which would make us special, and we can't possibly be- that would be arrogant'

Hi Guy. Thanks for sharing those thoughts. It can be a fine like between recognition of something special, and arrogance. I think the problem we humans have is that we tend to measure what is special in terms of how that specialness relates to us. It's easy to reason that, If the earth really is the center of the universe, then that must be because we are special, but not necessarily. God is a fantastic designer who wants us to recognize his greatness; perhaps the earth being at the center of the universe isn't meant to demonstrate that we humans are special, but rather that God is special; an amazing designer who, through the complexity of his creation, attempts to communicate to us just how amazing he really is.

It's like that with the watch argument; if you happen upon a watch lying on the ground and didn't see how it got there, it'd be foolish to think it was formed through the random-chance occurrence of wind, gravity, earthquake, and fire jostling the various parts together. The usual argument against that is that we humans have experience with watch-making so of course we'd not assume it was random chance. But then, with something much more complex, like a red blood cell (which we cannot make ), suddenly it's possible for such a thing to form by chance. The only difference between the two is the experience humans have with making watches. In other words, if a human can't do it, then it must be the result of random chance no matter how much more complex the thing is than what humans can make. That is the arrogance people should be taking note of and not that God put the earth at the center of his creation.
 
Upvote 0