Where did Intelligence begin, in matter or fundamental energy?

DennisTate · Nov 13, 2017

FrumiousBandersnatch said:
It would be nice if hot fusion finally came good, but it doesn't look particularly close yet (always 20-50 years away). Renewables are improving fast, and new battery technology can help them; and there are several very promising scalable fission designs in the pipeline.

A certain possible problem that is confronting us
puts us into a situation where we have to come up with a response.

An astonishingly well informed online friend of mine sent me a personal message
several months ago and mentioned that there is really about 4.3 TRILLION USA Petro-dollars out there floating around.....
and I think he implied that if all that money hit the markets too fast.....
in a disorganized manner..... .a devaluation of the dollar could happen.....
that could produce quite a crisis.......
but... .what if seventy percent or so of that money were redirected into win - win - win - win
projects... such as finding truly good sources of green energy?

Theoretically...... this could positively transform the world economy.

I am thinking that I may send you a copy of the link to the original message as a personal message......
I am pretty sure you will find it interesting.....
and I think you will see why that message ate and ate at my thinking.... until I had to at least try to do something with it.............

Pope Francis, President Trump, 4.3 Trillion Petro-Dollars and JUBILEE!

"The very IDEA of associating HARD WORK, DEDICATION TO ONE'S PEOPLE AND WORKING A DEAL WITH FELLOW HUMAN BEINGS WHO GIVEN THE RIGHT DEAL AND RIGHT DIRECTIONAL FLOW OF HARD COLD AMERICAN CASH after all there the U.S. Treasury Satellite Currency location Detection Systems show about $4.3 TRILLION U.S. DOLLARS out there in the world floating around as FREE FLOATING CURRENCY when the U.S. Treasury ITSELF is LYING saying that there is only a bit over $2 Trillion out there free floating but NO!!! Those of us in the LOOP are well aware the exact total is closer to $4.3 Trillion." .......(AboveAlpha)

FrumiousBandersnatch · Nov 13, 2017

DennisTate said:
An astonishingly well informed online friend of mine sent me a personal message
several months ago and mentioned that there is really about 4.3 TRILLION USA Petro-dollars out there floating around.....
and I think he implied that if all that money hit the markets too fast.....
in a disorganized manner..... .a devaluation of the dollar could happen.....
that could produce quite a crisis.......
but... .what if seventy percent or so of that money were redirected into win - win - win - win
projects... such as finding truly good sources of green energy?

Theoretically...... this could positively transform the world economy.

I am thinking that I may send you a copy of the link to the original message as a personal message......
I am pretty sure you will find it interesting.....
and I think you will see why that message ate and ate at my thinking.... until I had to at least try to do something with it.............

Pope Francis, President Trump, 4.3 Trillion Petro-Dollars and JUBILEE!

Good grief, where do you get this stuff?

Thanks, but no thanks.

DennisTate · Nov 13, 2017

FrumiousBandersnatch said:
Good grief, where do you get this stuff?

Thanks, but no thanks.

In this particular case in a non-Christian political forum frequented by lots of writers with an IQ that I suspect could be nearly double what I am working with?!

FrumiousBandersnatch · Nov 13, 2017

DennisTate said:
In this particular case in a non-Christian political forum frequented by lots of writers with an IQ that I suspect could be nearly double what I am working with?!

IQ isn't that important, it's what you do with it that counts. I tend to be skeptical of people who flaunt their high IQ - it's an easy claim to make, and suggests a lack of confidence (or an excess of [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]ry).

DennisTate · Apr 4, 2018

FrumiousBandersnatch said:
IQ isn't that important, it's what you do with it that counts. I tend to be skeptical of people who flaunt their high IQ - it's an easy claim to make, and suggests a lack of confidence (or an excess of [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]ry).

Yes...... that often does seem to be the case.....
but there seems to be exceptions to virtually every rule.... and I have ran into a few regarding this as well....

DennisTate · May 7, 2018

FrumiousBandersnatch said:
IQ isn't that important, it's what you do with it that counts. I tend to be skeptical of people who flaunt their high IQ - it's an easy claim to make, and suggests a lack of confidence (or an excess of [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]ry).

I got back a fascinating reply on another discussion that I feel fits perfectly over here in this topic.

He was commenting on a video...... but I haven't had a chance to listen to it yet so I am not sure if it fits here or not.... .but the quotation sure s
Handbook for the New Paradigm - George Green - Part 1 of 6

Although I will have to get back to that long media version repeatedly when I have the opportunities, in between times I grabbed this other source that tackles such matters in a somewhat deep, mind-blowing analytical manner. I am still reeling from the blows. Here is my synopsis that begins at part II.

Belief in God can be supported persuasively using quantum mechanics and mind-based theory. Disbelief based on lack of physical evidence is invalid because ordinary physical science can’t produce an analysis of the basis of physical reality that is comprehensive and accurate.

Part I

Ordinary science that is applicable to objective physical reality is thwarted in its efforts to assess the true nature of the constituents of matter. It can determine either the mass or the momentum (location, etc.) of a particle but not both. Ordinary science is also unable to account for the behavior of atomic components and subcomponents that is contrary to the natural laws of physics.

Quantum mechanics has demonstrated a subjective process by which physical reality is shaped beforehand with an involvement of consciousness as a pivotal factor. Anyone who has not yet accepted the revelations of QM and said limitations of ordinary science should research these matters until they do and get used to it.

The double slit experiment featured in QM investigations done way back in the 1930s generated far-reaching implications, but until recent times most of humanity has been inattentive and has had little suspicion of the many floodgates of new knowledge that can be opened in support of the struggle against exploitation and destabilization.

We have been spoon-fed a preference for pushing ahead indifferently, remaining ignorantly preoccupied with materiality, caught up in the momentum of repeatedly ratcheting-up conflict-producing practices based on self-serving motives.

Elements in the establishment have fought long and hard to steer popular thinking away from clues on broad insight and more towards letting us stymie ourselves as if corralled by circular reasoning (example of the former: covered up discoveries of giant human skeletons).

We are on a collision course with the consequences of the mental blindness of ourselves and the insatiable bullies who insist on risking all in a skirmish with black-hole effects rather than weaken the profit pattern of the status quo via timely upgrades that are long overdue.

Mounting insecurity and territorial disputes may well lead to a rerun of the kind of destructive violence that appears to have spread beyond the boundaries of a single planet in the distant past.

Part II

Strange as it may sound, there are compelling reasons for believing in God without believing in the existence of God. The believable God is a Spiritual Ideal aka “The Mind of God,” aka “The Holy Spirit,” a universal mind that tends to have influence below the level of our conscious awareness. It is representative of the full potential harmonious state of the entire human race. When it develops in an individual, it is based in the unconscious mind and is known as the “The Holy Ghost.”

Reality-altering effects of its influence can be brought about by one or more individuals possessing a favorable integration of the conscious and unconscious parts of the mind. Also, about 5% of the population has intuitive capabilities (“the second mind”) of doing the same, but some perceive this manifestation as an agent in a separate part of themselves.

The production of our physical reality is guided from one microsecond to another by an unconscious consensus of all human minds in a collective known as the Universal Belief. A disparity tends to develop between the Ideal Mind and the UB. Any motive that is contrary to the logic and standards of the Ideal Mind is an unrealistic motive that can increase the level of conflict in the UB.

When a mounting level of conflict in the UB cannot be reduced (say due to the stubbornness of the conscious deviators), a subconscious consensus may agree on a necessary mass sacrifice that can include innocent collateral parties and/or happen only as a miracle. The corrective action affects the ongoing formation of reality and may take the form of a natural disaster. It is implemented unconsciously by one or more persons who have the special capabilities previously described.

That is how some civilizations have been decimated or destroyed. Sometimes it can occur without explainable cause during the blink of an eye. Do not underestimate the power of the qualified mind!

Few people will want to accept any explanation that seems unlikely and shocking, particularly if it is only a concise sampling of a more extensive work. However, my assessment of it is “If the shoe fits, wear it.” Unfortunately, the shoe fits all too well across a vast span of human existence.

Dark Energy (Dark Matter and Dark Flow) by Alex J. Morrey, 2010 issue, 127 pages.

FredVB · May 17, 2018

There is indeed conscientiousness involved with the fundamental levels of the physical universe. There are some, or maybe many, here who speak of requirement of physical proof of God being needed to be sufficient basis for belief in God. But God is not physical and is sovereign over everything and does not become subject to physical tests. There are bases God has showing for bases anyway with miraculous events, such as Jesus Christ who spoke about God and of the resurrection rising from his tomb after he had been killed. I believe though that there is basis from mathematical logic that God certainly exists.

We have conscientiousness that we trust that we can come to know the truth of things, including of what there is about the universe, how do we explain that from the physical processes? Does complexity from natural processes produce such? That there is already the conscientiousness that would explain it. But energy itself is not that, and any material of the physical universe has some energy to do anything at all. The conscientiousness is something else, and the physical is subject to conscientiousness.

FrumiousBandersnatch · May 18, 2018

DennisTate said:
I got back a fascinating reply on another discussion that I feel fits perfectly over here in this topic.

He was commenting on a video...... but I haven't had a chance to listen to it yet so I am not sure if it fits here or not.... .but the quotation sure s
Handbook for the New Paradigm - George Green - Part 1 of 6

I didn't find it particularly interesting; Part I was a ramble based on a popular misunderstanding of quantum physics (strongly promoted by woo-merchants). Part II was a ramble based on vague mysticism. Meh.

FrumiousBandersnatch · May 18, 2018

FredVB said:
... God is not physical and is sovereign over everything and does not become subject to physical tests. There are bases God has showing for bases anyway with miraculous events, such as Jesus Christ who spoke about God and of the resurrection rising from his tomb after he had been killed.

If God is not physical and not subject to physical tests, then physical events cannot be evidence for God.

I believe though that there is basis from mathematical logic that God certainly exists.

Excellent, let's hear it! Just a reference or link will do.

We have conscientiousness that we trust that we can come to know the truth of things, including of what there is about the universe, how do we explain that from the physical processes? Does complexity from natural processes produce such? That there is already the conscientiousness that would explain it. But energy itself is not that, and any material of the physical universe has some energy to do anything at all. The conscientiousness is something else, and the physical is subject to conscientiousness.

Do you really mean 'conscientiousness'?

FredVB · May 20, 2018

I mean consciousness, of course. Word suggestion on my phone doesn't show the whole word, I might trust it and sometimes I don't look back adequately to edit though I should as such a case shows me.

FrumiousBandersnatch said:
If God is not physical and not subject to physical tests, then physical events cannot be evidence for God.

I believe though that there is basis from mathematical logic that God certainly exists.

Click to expand...

Excellent, let's hear it! Just a reference or link will do.

It is unnecessarily limiting to say that God cannot have effect on physical things because God with being sovereign won't be subject to physical testing. It is too bad if that logic can't be grasped by some, but there can be more than what is physical affecting the physical, that is what the seeming effect of consciousness suggests. The presence of God is still shown without God submitting to being tested with physical tests yet. There are things revealed in history that are explained well with seeing God's actions, especially when there are many predictions of what happens before such.

I have heard from an accomplished mathematician that there is mathematically effective proof of God. He had the name Robert A. Herrmann.

For one thing there is still this for a site I can link to for a reference.
Scientists use mathematical calculations to PROVE the existence of God

FrumiousBandersnatch · May 20, 2018

FredVB said:
I mean consciousness, of course.

I thought so; just a heads-up.

It is unnecessarily limiting to say that God cannot have effect on physical things because God with being sovereign won't be subject to physical testing. It is too bad if that logic can't be grasped by some, but there can be more than what is physical affecting the physical, that is what the seeming effect of consciousness suggests.

OK, so how does the 'non-physical' affect the physical? What forces or particles interact with the protons, neutrons, and electrons we're made of to cause this?

What 'seeming effect of consciousness' suggests more than 'what is physical affecting the physical' ?

The presence of God is still shown without God submitting to being tested with physical tests yet.

If God detectably influences the physical world, detecting that influence is an empirical test for God. If God doesn't detectably influence the physical world, it's just another untestable hypothesis. You can't have it both ways.

I have heard from an accomplished mathematician that there is mathematically effective proof of God. He had the name Robert A. Herrmann.

For one thing there is still this for a site I can link to for a reference.
Scientists use mathematical calculations to PROVE the existence of God

Ah, no. Beware of tabloid headlines - they're designed to get your attention and draw you in. What happened is that some scientists proved Kurt Gödel's theorem (in the mathematical sense) regarding the existence of God. That doesn't prove that God exists.

Gödel's theorem was a logical representation of Anslem's 'Ontological Argument', and consequently suffers the same logical flaw, the equivocation of God-that-exists and God-that-can-be-conceived.

The theorem is proved, but it's assumptions are flawed - Here's a summary.

yeshuaslavejeff · May 20, 2018

DennisTate said:
I am an Evolutionary Theist........

I am of the belief that a being with "Godlike" technological capability

began, far far far far far more than 13.72 billion years ago, in
fundamental or nearly fundamental energy that to at least some
degree corresponds with "Energy from Quantum Vacuum."

This Intelligence learned and learned, and experimented..... .and
designed Big Bang type events, nearly an infinite number of them,
and eventually, around 13.72 billion year or so ago began our.......
Big Bang event that led to the evolution plus creation of
all the life forms that we see here on earth.

Since none of that happened,
what's next then ?

dmmesdale · May 20, 2018

DennisTate said:
I am an Evolutionary Theist........

Jesus wasn't.

FredVB · May 24, 2018

We have consciousness that we trust that we can come to know the truth of things, including of what there is about the universe, how do we explain that from the physical processes? Does complexity from natural processes produce such? That there is already the consciousness that would explain it. But energy itself is not that, and any material of the physical universe has some energy to do anything at all. The consciousness is something else, and the physical is subject to consciousness.

FrumiousBandersnatch said:
OK, so how does the 'non-physical' affect the physical? What forces or particles interact with the protons, neutrons, and electrons we're made of to cause this?

This is standard typical response by those who would suggest there is no way for what is nonphysical to act on anything physical. That would be the case if what is nonphysical is in fact nothing, which is all that can be imagined if all that there is would only be what is physical. But there is the Creator, with power that is outside of anything that is defined as physical, that explains how all things physical came into being. So it is that there is creative power with this case. That power is not limited from action on physical bodies. There can be action on all particles within bodies like there would be from gravitation for example. It would be contrary to physical rules but creation of the physical was outside of physical rules, which rules also came from such creation. I would not imagine limits to the unlimited that necessary being is.

What 'seeming effect of consciousness' suggests more than 'what is physical affecting the physical'?

I was thinking of the suggestion of that where there is communication of the observer and occurrences at the quantum level that have been studied, but I see miraculous events in testimonials can be such.

If God detectably influences the physical world, detecting that influence is an empirical test for God. If God doesn't detectably influence the physical world, it's just another untestable hypothesis. You can't have it both ways.

What happened is that some scientists proved Kurt Gödel's theorem (in the mathematical sense) regarding the existence of God. That doesn't prove that God exists. Gödel's theorem was a logical representation of Anslem's 'Ontological Argument', and consequently suffers the same logical flaw, the equivocation of God-that-exists and God-that-can-be-conceived.

I would say that if God was observed where God chooses to act, which is the only way the nonphysical Creator is going to be observed, the unbelieving observers will note the occurrence but that such is God will never be truly considered.

With the logic I know of that there is the Creator, the mathematical demonstration that the God-that-can-be-conceived would be no greater than God-that-exists would apply. Should I even think your understanding of the mathematical logic of it is greater than that of the mathematicians who find these conclusions?

FrumiousBandersnatch · May 24, 2018

FredVB said:
We have consciousness that we trust that we can come to know the truth of things, including of what there is about the universe, how do we explain that from the physical processes? Does complexity from natural processes produce such? That there is already the consciousness that would explain it. But energy itself is not that, and any material of the physical universe has some energy to do anything at all. The consciousness is something else, and the physical is subject to consciousness.

Energy is an indirectly observed conserved quantity, a property that things have according to their physical context and make-up.

This is standard typical response by those who would suggest there is no way for what is nonphysical to act on anything physical.

That's because actions on the physical are physical interactions and physical interactions are interactions between physical things - and we know what physical interactions are significant at everyday human scales. You can't have it both ways - if it's physical, it can interact with the physical, if it isn't, it can't. That's what physical means.

That would be the case if what is nonphysical is in fact nothing, which is all that can be imagined if all that there is would only be what is physical. But there is the Creator, with power that is outside of anything that is defined as physical, that explains how all things physical came into being. So it is that there is creative power with this case. That power is not limited from action on physical bodies. There can be action on all particles within bodies like there would be from gravitation for example.

Gravitation is physical. The rest is word-salad.

I was thinking of the suggestion of that where there is communication of the observer and occurrences at the quantum level that have been studied...

If you mean the idea that consciousness influences quantum events, that's a (sadly common) misunderstanding of quantum theory.

I would say that if God was observed where God chooses to act, which is the only way the nonphysical Creator is going to be observed, the unbelieving observers will note the occurrence but that such is God will never be truly considered.

It would still be a test for God, whether the results were accepted or not. However, if there was a plausible natural explanation (as there usually is when such claims are investigated), it would clearly be sensible (by the abductive criteria) to accept the natural explanation.

With the logic I know of that there is the Creator, the mathematical demonstration that the God-that-can-be-conceived would be no greater than God-that-exists would apply. Should I even think your understanding of the mathematical logic of it is greater than that of the mathematicians who find these conclusions?

As I said, the ontological argument fails by equivocation.

FredVB · May 26, 2018

FrumiousBandersnatch said:

We have consciousness that we trust that we can come to know the truth of things, including of what there is about the universe, how do we explain that from the physical processes? Does complexity from natural processes produce such? That there is already the consciousness that would explain it. But energy itself is not that, and any material of the physical universe has some energy to do anything at all. The consciousness is something else, and the physical is subject to consciousness.

Click to expand...

Energy is an indirectly observed conserved quantity, a property that things have according to their physical context and make-up.

I wasn't saying anything that contradicted what energy is. Somebody thought consciousness could be the energy, which I was excluding in the response. But you don't explain such consciousness.

actions on the physical are physical interactions and physical interactions are interactions between physical things - and we know what physical interactions are significant at everyday human scales. You can't have it both ways - if it's physical, it can interact with the physical, if it isn't, it can't. That's what physical means.

That is just not true at all, if all that is physical came from the Creator which is what I see as the necessary existence, which isn't physical, this means the energy for anything among all that is physical is created too. The Creator is not limited from such creation.

That would be the case if what is nonphysical is in fact nothing, which is all that can be imagined if all that there is would only be what is physical. But there is the Creator, with power that is outside of anything that is defined as physical, that explains how all things physical came into being. So it is that there is creative power with this case. That power is not limited from action on physical bodies. There can be action on all particles within bodies like there would be from gravitation for example.

Click to expand...

Gravitation is physical. The rest is word-salad.

No, it's not. It is what you dismiss, to not deal with. This explains all that is physical. I have been in communication previously where you had also posted where I was speaking about the basis with there being necessary existence, which is not considered by any of those responding from their atheist position.

I would say that if God was observed where God chooses to act, which is the only way the nonphysical Creator is going to be observed, the unbelieving observers will note the occurrence but that such is God will never be truly considered.

Click to expand...

It would still be a test for God, whether the results were accepted or not. However, if there was a plausible natural explanation (as there usually is when such claims are investigated), it would clearly be sensible (by the abductive criteria) to accept the natural explanation.

Then it could have been going on already, if there was study where the miraculous (which what such occurrence from God choosing to act is) happens, and God is not considered in what is involved. And God can act in the miraculous with ability as Creator, with energy or matter created, or with any of it transformed, or, which may be more often, with using what may only be seen with natural processes involved, but far too unlikely for such occasion when it happens, especially for those occasions when it was prophesied enough for far ahead of it happening.

With the logic I know of that there is the Creator, the mathematical demonstration that the God-that-can-be-conceived would be no greater than God-that-exists would apply. Should I even think your understanding of the mathematical logic of it is greater than that of the mathematicians who find these conclusions?

Click to expand...

As I said, the ontological argument fails by equivocation.

No it doesn't, because necessary existence, which I have already been bringing up, is never being dealt with when we consider these things.

DennisTate · Dec 13, 2018

miamited said:
Hi dennis,

Intelligence, that is the ability for a being to think and reason, has existed for all eternity with God. Just as with God Himself, there is no end or beginning to His existence. In this realm, intelligence began within six days of its beginning and the cause of its beginning is God.

God bless you,
In Christ, Ted

True.... and I would not attempt to rule out the idea of G-d organizing an essentially infinite number of Big Bang type events as Atheist and near death experiencer Mellen Benedict was shown:

Mellen-Thomas Benedict's Near-Death Experience

At this point of my near-death experience, I found myself in a profound stillness, beyond all silence. I could see or perceive FOREVER, beyond Infinity. I was in the Void.

I was in pre creation, before the Big Bang. I had crossed over the beginning of time / the First Word/the First vibration. I was in the Eye of Creation. I felt as if I was touching the Face of God. It was not a religious feeling. Simply I was at one with Absolute Life and Consciousness. When I say that I could see or perceive forever, I mean that I could experience all of creation generating itself. It was without beginning and without end. That’s a mind-expanding thought, isn’t it? Scientists perceive the Big Bang as a single event that created the Universe. I saw during my life after death experience that the Big Bang is only one of an infinite number of Big Bangs creating Universes endlessly and simultaneously. The only images that even come close in human terms would be those created by super computers using fractal geometry equations.

FredVB · Dec 18, 2018

DennisTate said:
Intelligence, that is the ability for a being to think and reason, has existed for all eternity with God. Just as with God Himself, there is no end or beginning to His existence. In this realm, intelligence began within six days of its beginning and the cause of its beginning is God.

Click to expand...

True.... and I would not attempt to rule out the idea of G-d organizing an essentially infinite number of Big Bang type events as Atheist and near death experiencer Mellen Benedict was shown:
Mellen-Thomas Benedict's Near-Death Experience

I found myself in a profound stillness, beyond all silence. I could see or perceive FOREVER, beyond Infinity. I was in the Void.
I was in pre creation, before the Big Bang. I had crossed over the beginning of time / the First Word/the First vibration. I was in the Eye of Creation. I felt as if I was touching the Face of God. It was not a religious feeling. Simply I was at one with Absolute Life and Consciousness. When I say that I could see or perceive forever, I mean that I could experience all of creation generating itself. It was without beginning and without end. That’s a mind-expanding thought, isn’t it? Scientists perceive the Big Bang as a single event that created the Universe. I saw during my life after death experience that the Big Bang is only one of an infinite number of Big Bangs creating Universes endlessly and simultaneously. The only images that even come close in human terms would be those created by super computers using fractal geometry equations.

Click to expand...

This as testimony of personal experience isn't so reliable. The idea that there are many universes produced was not from real basis other than the physical constants that are parameters in this universe that are independent of each other are just right for this universe to function with stars, galaxies, and any kind of possible life at all in worlds among that, and the parameters wouldn't be right for it with any different value, and many other universes thought to explain one working in this way, that design would not be considered to explain it. There is avoidance with all this, even with thinking of alien intelligences that were with technology that was God-like, of the necessary existence, which would be eternal and unlimited, that without there being such that could create other existing things there would always be nothing at all.

DennisTate · Dec 20, 2018

FredVB said:
This as testimony of personal experience isn't so reliable. The idea that there are many universes produced was not from real basis other than the physical constants that are parameters in this universe that are independent of each other are just right for this universe to function with stars, galaxies, and any kind of possible life at all in worlds among that, and the parameters wouldn't be right for it with any different value, and many other universes thought to explain one working in this way, that design would not be considered to explain it. There is avoidance with all this, even with thinking of alien intelligences that were with technology that was God-like, of the necessary existence, which would be eternal and unlimited, that without there being such that could create other existing things there would always be nothing at all.

Would you be offended if G-d has recorded every tiny detail of every moment of your life including the number of hairs on your head in any given instant??

Reverend Howard Storm's Near-Death Experience

3. The Life Review of Howard Storm

yeshuaslavejeff · Dec 20, 2018

DennisTate said:
I am an Evolutionary Theist........

I am of the belief that a being with "Godlike" technological capability

began, far far far far far more than 13.72 billion years ago, in
fundamental or nearly fundamental energy that to at least some
degree corresponds with "Energy from Quantum Vacuum."

This Intelligence learned and learned, and experimented..... .and
designed Big Bang type events, nearly an infinite number of them,
and eventually, around 13.72 billion year or so ago began our.......
Big Bang event that led to the evolution plus creation of
all the life forms that we see here on earth.

Thanks for admitting this openly.
It explains a lot I didn't understand about your posts before.
Sometimes it takes 2 years to get to the source of someone's ideas,
and seemingly a lot of wasted time and questions before getting there.

Where did Intelligence begin, in matter or fundamental energy?

The first Intelligence began in.....

Carbon based life less than 5 billion years ago, on earth.

Carbon based life in outer space.

Fundamental or nearly fundamental energy.

This is a new question that I am only now facing.

This question is flawed.... God had no beginning.

Newbie

Well-Known Member

Newbie

Well-Known Member

Newbie

Newbie

Regular Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Regular Member

Well-Known Member

simple truth, martyr, disciple of Yahshua

Well-Known Member

Regular Member

Well-Known Member

Regular Member

Newbie

Regular Member

Newbie

simple truth, martyr, disciple of Yahshua

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency