Why no evidence FOR creation/ID?

[Divide]

Back on topic. I said earlier that Sid said, they found the Hebrew alphabet in our DNA. I was taken to task for this because I didn't double check his sources and research the matter for myself. A good point actually. Some lie, some are honestly wrong, and no one gets it all right. So I've promised to do some of this research and I have been doing so.

Someone made the point (Sarah, I think) that DNA is comprised of 4 elements, and not 22 as the Hebrew alphabet has. A good point. I have not been able to find this evidence or source of what Sid Roth said yet. At least as far as our DNA having the entire Hebrew alphabet in it. (But in fairness to Sid, maybe I took him wrong, or he spoke wrong, and what was really meant was that elements of the Hebrew alphabet have been found in our human DNA). I did find this, just not that they found the entire alphabet. So here is a portion of the article which I found about elements of the Hebrew alphabet being found in our DNA. Which is an indicator of the fact that there is evidence of our creation...which is what this thread is about:

The DNA is composed of 4 elements hydrogen, nitrogen, oxygen, carbon, when put together form Y-H-W-G. Carbon is what makes us physical and earthly beings. When carbon is replaced with nitrogen, we have all colorless, odorless, and invisible gases! They form the letters Y-H-W-H which is the name of God.

…………………………..

The YHWH Code

The mapping of the genetic code, known as DNA, is probably the most important scientific breakthrough of the new millennium. On June 26, 2000, President Clinton and a group of world renowned scientists presented the first genetic map of the human DNA molecule. Clinton called the discovery the “language in which God created life.”

“Mapping the chemical sequences for human DNA — the chemical “letters” that make up the recipe of human life — is a breakthrough that is expected to revolutionize the practice of medicine by paving the way for new drugs and medical therapies,” says one web site. This discovery has lasting physical and spiritual implications. A direct link can easily be found between the building blocks of life and the Creator of the universe. Mankind is fearfully and wonderfully made, with a hidden code within the cell of every life. This code is the alphabet of DNA that spells out the Creator’s name and man’s purpose.

Scientist discovered a “map” of four DNA bases that carry the ability to sustain life. These bases, known as chromosomes, are paired differently for each person. Human DNA contains 23 pairs of chromosomes, made up of hydrogen, nitrogen, oxygen, carbon, and their acidic counterparts. Encoded within these elements is an amazing blueprint of life that proves the Creator has put His own unique stamp upon every person. This stamp is actually His name as revealed to Moses thousands of years ago.

The secret in our DNA…

It was from the burning bush that the Almighty revealed his character as the great “I AM.” This name is the tetragrammaton of the Hebrew letters yod, hey, waw, hey. “I AM WHO I AM. This is what you are to say to the Israelites: `I AM has sent me to you. The Almighty said to Moses, “Say to the Israelites, `Y H W H , the mighty one of our fathers… This is my name forever, the name by which I am to be remembered from generation to generation,” Exodus 3:14,15. The Almighty has given us His name as a sign of His existence and an avenue of communication. However, translators have hidden this Hebrew name in English Bibles. In the Scriptures, the Sacred name of YHWH is used whenever the English words “LORD” or “GOD” appear in all capital letters. YHWH is used almost 7,000 times throughout the Bible as the only and unique name of the Mighty One of Israel. Isaiah corroborates this: “I am YHWH; that is my name; and my glory will I not give to another, ” Isaiah 42:7. Jeremiah adds his confirmation: “They shall know that my name is YHWH,” in chapter 16 verse 21. While Amos 5:8 says, “YHWH is his name.” The book of Zechariah declares: “In that day there shall be one YHWH, and his name one.” The Creator’s Name is YHWH.

Now, compare this four-lettered name to the four elements that make up human DNA and discover an ancient secret of creation. “The key to translating the code of DNA into a meaningful language is to apply the discovery that converts elements to letters. Based upon their matching values of atomic mass, hydrogen becomes the Hebrew letter Yod (Y), nitrogen becomes the letter Hey (H), oxygen becomes the letter Wav (V or W), and carbon becomes Gimel (G). These substitutions now reveal that the ancient form of YHWH’s name, YHWH, exists as the literal chemistry of our genetic code. Through this bridge between YHWH’s name and the elements of modern science, it now becomes possible to reveal the full mystery and find even greater meaning in the ancient code that lives as each cell of our bodies.

When we substitute modern elements for all four letters of YHWH’s ancient name, we see a result that, at first blush, may be unexpected. Replacing the final H in YHWH with its chemical equivalent of nitrogen, YHWH’s name becomes the elements hydrogen, nitrogen, oxygen, and nitrogen (HNON) — all colorless, odorless, and invisible gases! In other words, replacing 100 percent of YHWH’s personal name with the elements of this world creates a substance that is an intangible, yet very real form of creation! This is not to suggest that YHWH is simply a wispy gas made of invisible elements. Rather, it’s through the very name that YHWH divulged to Moses over three millennia ago that our world and the foundation of life itself became possible. YHWH tells us that in the form of hydrogen, the single most abundant element of the universe, He is a part of all that has ever been, is, and will be.

Indeed, in the earliest descriptions of YHWH, we are told that He is omnipresent and takes on a form in our world that cannot be seen with our eyes. Thus, He can be known only through His manifestations. The Sepher Yetzirah describes this nonphysical form of YHWH’s presence as the “Breath” of YHWH: “Ten Sefirot of Nothingness: One is the Breath of the Living YHWH, Life of worlds. This is the Holy Breath.”

Additionally, the first chapters of Genesis relate that it is in a nonphysical form that the Creator was present during the time of creation (Genesis 1:2). It was “the spirit of YHWH” that first moved over the face of the earth.

Substituting modern elements for the ancient letters, it is clear that although we share in the first three letters representing 75 percent of our Creator’s name. While the presence of YHWH is the invisible and intangible form of the three gases hydrogen, nitrogen, and oxygen, the last letter of our name is the “stuff” that gives us the color, taste, texture, and sounds of our body: carbon. The one letter that sets us apart from YHWH is also the element that makes us “real” in our world – carbon.

Through both the secret letter codes of antiquity, and the literal translation of DNA as an alphabet, we’re shown that something about our existence remains lasting and eternal. We share that never-ending quality with our Creator through a full seventy-five percent of the elements that define our genetic code,” wrote Gregg Braden in his book The God Code.../

Source: The Hidden Name of The Creator in Your DNA

 

[tas8831]

We have come full circle - the bible's scroll's authors were numerologists (look at their fascination with repetitive numbers, the number 7, etc.) and now modern day numerologists are claiming a 'code' in the bible.

Fascinating.

 

[Ophiolite]

SO when we butt heads about details, it's merely from our preconceived notions of our standards of truth regarding a subject matter.

I have few, if any preconceived notions. I removed those through hard work, exploring multiple viewpoints, subjecting them to objective and subjective analysis and always being ready to consider alternatives.

If you subject any argument to the question "Why?" only the more secure survive.

You are pretty much unwilling to accept that I recognize the spiritual influences that affect my life and that I take them seriously as regards establishing truth and the ramifications of other truths that are implied in what I recognize to be truths brought about to me from spiritual sources. The example being of course, that God spoke to me (among other things) thereby establishing the truth of His existence and consequently, the truth of the Bible and related.

I don't know how you got that idea. I fully accept, and have done almost from the outset, that you take very seriously the spiritual influences that affect your life. What I doubt is that you have the correct take on these, or that God actually spoke to you. To repeat, I do not doubt the reality and importance of these events and perceptions to you.

Maybe our respective educational backgrounds have given us different sets of standards in which to accept truth. The mainstream educational system did not largely educate me, so I suppose that I missed out on some of the indoctrination's which accompany such a background.

That would embarrass you if you actually knew what, on this issue, you were talking about. At any university of quality the only indoctrination one receives is to question everything. The facts one is taught are incidental, the means of acquiring facts and evaluating them is what that education is about.

If one is lucky one can receive a good grounding in this approach earlier, in secondary school. I was lucky.

From what I can tell, you seem to be somewhat narrow minded in your foundation of standards which you adhere to in your pursuit of knowledge and understanding. And this is good in a way and bad in a way. It's good to have strict standards and to stick to them, but to never consider other methods of establishing truth beyond establishment protocols is leaving you somewhat short sighted in your pursuit in my opinion.

It's rather patronising that you choose to assume I have not explored other approaches. I was raised as a Christian and was sufficiently active that family members suspected I might go into the ministry.
But the arguments weren't convincing. I rejected Christianity on spiritual grounds long before I found any material reason to do so. If I argue against any portion of Christian belief today I do so from an objective, scientific standpoint, not because I do not have deeply textured, subjective spiritual objections, but because to use them would be arrogant. Why should I expect my subjective spiritual views to be given the time of day by anyone else? I don't and so I use what you, inaccurately, call my restricted standards, to convey my objections.

Narrowminded? I was open minded enough to conduct (amateurish) experiments in clairvoyance, telekinesis, telepathy and the like. I investigated a medium, have seen ghosts on two occassions, entusiastically advocated belief in the Loch Ness monster, UFOs, the prophecies of Edgar Cayce. Relished conspiracy theory surrounding JFK. Made a disastrous personal relationship based on the foolish notion that any two people could be happy together if they worked at it. Rejected Big Bang theory because I didn't like it. The list goes on. It's not just a case of "I've done that, bought the T-shirt". I bought up the factory that makes them and the chain store that sells them.

The spiritual realm and spiritual influences are real upon this planet. We will probably not get to know the full reality of the influence that beseiges us until it is all over with. We may be shockingly surprised at the sheer amount of influence, both good and bad that we all experienced within our lifetimes.

However, what you mean by spiritual and what I mean by spiritual are not the same. Overlap, yes; identity, no. That's the trouble with the subjective. At the end of the day it is . . . . . . subjective.

You should be a little more open minded.

If I were any more open minded my brains would fall out.

I don't mean to abandon what you know and go full blown spiritual, I think that would be a mistake also.

And, as you hopefully now understand, there is a strong spiritual aspect in my approach to life. It just isn't relevant when discussing the truth with others.

But understand that you have been lied to for most of your entire life, about the truths and realities which are upon us here.

Then it's just as well I have a system of spiritual reflection and scientific critical thinking to alert me to the lies and point me to the truth.

 

[gaara4158]

The spiritual realm and spiritual influences are real upon this planet. We will probably not get to know the full reality of the influence that beseiges us until it is all over with. We may be shockingly surprised at the sheer amount of influence, both good and bad that we all experienced within our lifetimes.

You should be a little more open minded. I don't mean to abandon what you know and go full blown spiritual, I think that would be a mistake also. But understand that you have been lied to for most of your entire life, about the truths and realities which are upon us here.

It’s fine that you believe this, but so long as you decline to provide sufficient evidence to support it, you cannot expect to be taken seriously here. It’s clear you really, really believe some things that you can’t demonstrate, and I urge you to ask yourself why you can’t demonstrate them. You became frustrated when I challenged you to substantiate your spiritual claims the other day. You took it as a personal rejection, but it wasn’t personal. The problem with the alternative method of verification you’re offering is it isn’t reliable. First, you can’t summon this verification on demand and second, anyone can get a really, really strong feeling, attribute it to God, and declare it as truth. And it can be false. People give their own lives over such falsehoods every day. Why should we believe something on the basis of such a wildly unreliable method, especially when what you’re claiming goes against what’s already been demonstrated by more reliable methods?

 

[tas8831]

Who, Ron Wyatt or God?

Either.

 

[AV1611VET]

We have come full circle - the bible's scroll's authors were numerologists ...

Going after the amanuenses now, are we?

It's not good enough you educatees have to sterilize Its message? you have to ruin the writers now?

 

[tas8831]

Going after the amanuenses now, are we?

It's not good enough you educatees have to sterilize Its message? you have to ruin the writers now?

Well tell us, oh master of all things, why do we see so many repetitions of certain numbers and/or their factors/multiples?

7? 40?

22? 12? 3? 6?

Hmmm....

 

[tas8831]

It's not that I know more than anyone about genetics, and it's not a gut feeling.

So you've got nothing.

Understood.

But I happen to know that we were created and that evolution is false, a lie cooked up by man (led by evil spirits) to hide God.

And the requisite condescending, question begging baloney.

I may know more about God than some on this board...that, at least He is alive and it is the truth that He's there and He did create us.

If you "know" this, then surely you can provide evidence?

Therefore I don't really have to be an expert in genetics to be able to recognize that aspects of what they say about it are false.

THAT is some major special pleading.


Coupled with massive amounts of question begging.

It is a shame, really, that so many adult Americans are content to just "know" things that they cannot actually know in order to dismiss things they do not understand.

 

[AV1611VET]

Well tell us, oh master of all things, why do we see so many repetitions of certain numbers and/or their factors/multiples?

Certainly not because of numerology.

 

[Ophiolite]

Certainly not because of numerology.

And you can count on that!

 

[pitabread]

Fair enough. You sound like one sometimes though.

For the record, I don't explicitly rule of the existence of a powerful being we might consider a "god". But I don't believe that any such being is accurately represented in any human religions. I believe all human religions are man-made; especially when studying the history of religions, and their current geographic and cultural distributions.

What if D-O-G really spelled cat? Come on man. I may not know everything, but I'm not a total idiot. Besides, then God would be a liar. Because His word says He who seeks Him will find Him, and that His Holy Spirit will lead us into all truth.

It's just a completely unconvincing argument.

You believe Ron Wyatt is telling the truth because you 'feel' it. And you believe that those criticizing him are somehow controlled by Satan.

Surely you can appreciate that to a non-believer who doesn't believe any of this stuff, how utterly banal an argument it really is.

Well, in a manner of speaking it is. I've been trained in body language recognition and read a lot of body language books. So I do pretty good at watching people for signs of sincerity and signs of lying. (My ex-wife hated that! She called me human lie detector, Lol!)

Oh, so now it's body language? What happened to getting this 'feeling' from God?

I wouldn't even know which archaeological places to go to to ask them to verify his findings.

And shouldn't that tell you something right there? I mean, you're watching these YouTube videos and taking the claims with blind faith, but you're not even sure how to begin validating them.

There are loads of archaeological societies, archaeological journals (where real archaeologists publish their findings), museums, universities, where you can go for more about archaeology in general and specifically Biblical archaeology.

Furthermore, based on Ron's claims you could even reach out directly to those societies or universities in respect to the regions he's alleged to have made these discoveries.

I've seen videos of the Israel lab people who tested the blood that Ron Wyatt found on top of the ark of the Covenant and they say it is human and only has 23 chromosones instead of the 43 that it should have if it were a human mother/human father. So that is verified.

That's not verification. Not in the slightest. For all you know, the person in the video could be a hired actor.

Real verification would involve actual published lab results backed by the lab in question. And further verification would entailing independent sample gathering and analysis, preferably by other reputable labs.

Has Ron ever done any of that? Are there multiple independent examples of published laboratory results of this analysis of so-called Christ's blood?

As far as I know, the Ark is still in the cave where Ron found it. They sent 6 guys to retrieve it and they all died. It has been said that the ark will remain there until the Mark of the Beast law is enacted then it shall be revealed to the world as an evidence of God.

Boy, that is sure convenient huh? Ron fond the Ark, but other people mysteriously "died" and haven't been able to verify his claims.

Honestly, this reads like the bad plot to a low-budget, made-for-TV Bible drama.

 

[Divide]

It’s fine that you believe this, but so long as you decline to provide sufficient evidence to support it, you cannot expect to be taken seriously here. It’s clear you really, really believe some things that you can’t demonstrate, and I urge you to ask yourself why you can’t demonstrate them. You became frustrated when I challenged you to substantiate your spiritual claims the other day. You took it as a personal rejection, but it wasn’t personal. The problem with the alternative method of verification you’re offering is it isn’t reliable. First, you can’t summon this verification on demand and second, anyone can get a really, really strong feeling, attribute it to God, and declare it as truth. And it can be false. People give their own lives over such falsehoods every day. Why should we believe something on the basis of such a wildly unreliable method, especially when what you’re claiming goes against what’s already been demonstrated by more reliable methods?

Yeah I get it what you mean. (you're still wrong though! Lol). I probably could demonstrate it to some extent that would bring comprehension of truth and validity to it, if we were in person together, but that's an almost insurmountable task over the internet.

...as far as demonstrated by more reliable methods...that's laughable on a certain level because it is mans method and we all know that, anything can be questioned and made to look as if it is untrue, and that if you torture the text of a book enough, (or even mathematics) that you can make it say and confirm anything you want to. So it's only really more demonstrable if one is willing to accept the presumptions and rabbit trails that inevitably come with it.

There's a guy on another board who likes to attack what I write. I can post a single verse of scripture which reads very plainly and can't really be misunderstood, for it is succinct and clearly spoken...and then he will come back with a 12 paragraph essay on why it doesn't mean what it says. Lol! He is so funny.

SO I understand that you have your way of thinking and have strict standards of what you're willing to believe, but you're being a little short sighted inasmuch as you won't accept the reality of the spiritual influence upon our planet and lives. Things can be unseen an gleaned by unseen source and be reality and truth. Whether you are willing to believe it or not. This is the reality that I have discovered is true.

Is there anything unseen that you believe in? Ghosts? Para-normal? UFO's (they're seen more and more) But millions if not billions of people report things happening around them which have no explanation. OUr natural (realm) reality is...what has been pulled over our eyes to blind us to the truth.

The Matrix was right in that. They like to give us clues in a lot of movies and laugh in our face with it. Have you ever seen the movie "The 13th Floor"?

 

[Divide]

We have come full circle - the bible's scroll's authors were numerologists (look at their fascination with repetitive numbers, the number 7, etc.) and now modern day numerologists are claiming a 'code' in the bible.

Fascinating.

They sure are, and God sure is too. I do not know why there is such a thing with all of the numbers and stuff. God does it too throughout the Bible. And I can't really explain why yet. But they have assigned meanings to different numbers and stuff and the full ramifications of it escapes me at this time. God likes the number 7, Man's number is 6 (created on the 6th day?), and on and on and on...Math gives me a headache, lol. I can count money good, but Algebra Trig, exponents and all that...Wow, is there an accountant in the house? Lol.

Apparently, the original language on earth is Hebrew, and I know little about Hebrew, but I do know that each letter has a corresponding numerical value. There's even a name for that, gemmatricl a something or other. lol.

Cool or not, weird or not, hard to comprehend or not...it seems to be an ingredient of all this that cannot be escaped. From what I can tell, there is something to it. It is a truth no matter how much I would like for the headache to go away.

I think that God may have done it for His purpose of validating His word as truth? To demonstrate that, the books content is not, uh, written by man, but divinely inspired and even dictated to man to be written. Because much of the code found within falls apart and would not work if anything was changed. Even the spaces and number of words and everything. Man can't write that good to be able to construct a book in such a fashion that it is a cogent book in text content, but that it also...has all the code stuff within also. A demonstration of the fact that God Himself wrote the book. It is from outside our natural and time domains.

Different kinds of codes too, apparently. ELS codes are in there and even more and different kinds of codes. Now that we have computers it is a lot easier for us to dig this stuff out.
I've watched some vids on it, where some things are shown and demonstrated, and Actually went and did it for myself to confirm the validity of what was said to me there.

Chuck Missler demonstrate a couple of these codes. I'll see if I can find a short one which he talked about which demonstrates an ELS code in the Torah, so you can check it out if you want and see that it really is there. It's a pretty short vid. Gimme a few, I'll find it.

 

[Divide]

Ah, here it is:

 

[Divide]

For the record, I don't explicitly rule of the existence of a powerful being we might consider a "god". But I don't believe that any such being is accurately represented in any human religions. I believe all human religions are man-made; especially when studying the history of religions, and their current geographic and cultural distributions.

I actually agree with this statement. The corporate church is very misleading and twists everything to where they have control, and that we somehow need them. This is untrue! When Jesus was crucified, there was an earthquake and the veil to the temple Holy Of Holies was rent in two. Thereby demonstrating to us that no longer did we need a priest as a go between, between us and God. We can go to God personally now. We have a hotline to the throne room of God, in prayer.
One thing about prayer that most people misunderstand is that, prayer is not a monologue, it is a dialogue. He'll speak back to us (if we're lucky) if we take the time to wait and listen. But most (me too in the past!) would pray, da da da da da, in the name of Jesus, amen. Done. Get up and go on my way. This is wrong.

It's just a completely unconvincing argument.

You believe Ron Wyatt is telling the truth because you 'feel' it. And you believe that those criticizing him are somehow controlled by Satan.

Surely you can appreciate that to a non-believer who doesn't believe any of this stuff, how utterly banal an argument it really is.

It's more than a feeling, man. I've said that, and...it's very hard to describe. I can't really describe it effectively. It's not a feeling...it's...more.

Well why else would the truth be attacked? It has to be a nefarious attack. It just makes too much sense to me to why the truth would be attacked, unless it is simply to discredit him so that people wont start believing the truth.

Whoa, learned a new word this morning! I hadda look that one up. That's no typo. Banal.
Hey you take that back! Lol. No seriously, I understand the apparent absurdity of such an "argument" coming from a stranger with wild ideas to a fellow of your your thinking patterns. I don't mean that in a condescending way, I'm saying I understand why you feel like you do.

Oh, so now it's body language? What happened to getting this 'feeling' from God?

Well sure some of it is. I am a man too and have to operate on this plane of existence. I was going to be a cop. I went through all of the training and even a little specialized training in preperation for it...and then changed my mind. So even though God speaks to me through His word, and through His Spirit, and even audibly the one time...I can't help but use my mind and what I have been taught and trained in in my life and automatically assume and look for lies, because that's what cops do. It's what I do because it's what I know.

And shouldn't that tell you something right there? I mean, you're watching these YouTube videos and taking the claims with blind faith, but you're not even sure how to begin validating them.

There are loads of archaeological societies, archaeological journals (where real archaeologists publish their findings), museums, universities, where you can go for more about archaeology in general and specifically Biblical archaeology.

Furthermore, based on Ron's claims you could even reach out directly to those societies or universities in respect to the regions he's alleged to have made these discoveries.

It's not total blind faith to me, because I know a little. But yeah I guess it is in a way. God didn't physically manifest to me and say hey Ed this is true.
I know that there are 'loads of archaeological societies, journals, sites, museums...' and all that, but, there are only so many hours in a day, and I have this life on earth thing to contend with too. So I haven't done a lot of searching out archaeological proofs from them or anything like that. After all, God did let me know it is true, so in one sense, I don't need to spend time doing that. BUT! You're right. I should have something more than what I do if I am going to get on here and say hey, this is true. I normally do like doing my own homework and not taking people s words for stuff, even pastors can be wrong about some things here and there. So it does behoove us to do all of our own homework. I'll see what I can find.

That's not verification. Not in the slightest. For all you know, the person in the video could be a hired actor.

Real verification would involve actual published lab results backed by the lab in question. And further verification would entailing independent sample gathering and analysis, preferably by other reputable labs.

Has Ron ever done any of that? Are there multiple independent examples of published laboratory results of this analysis of so-called Christ's blood?

I doubt she was an actor, but, you never know so it would be cool to have some published written results. I'll check into that.

Ron did what he could I think, he took it to a lab in Israel and turned it over to them to test. They did and he reported their findings, but didn't actually give the name of the lab or anything. I'll see what I can find about that. That's a pretty big finding, Christs blood on the ark/mercy seat. So something is bound to be out there about it. I hope.

 

[gaara4158]

Yeah I get it what you mean. (you're still wrong though! Lol). I probably could demonstrate it to some extent that would bring comprehension of truth and validity to it, if we were in person together, but that's an almost insurmountable task over the internet.

Remember, you don't have to convince me you're sincere. You're tasked with convincing me your "sixth sense" for truth is genuine. I can't imagine what you'd do in person that you can't do on here to support your claim. Hypnotize me? Do a cold reading?

...as far as demonstrated by more reliable methods...that's laughable on a certain level because it is mans method and we all know that, anything can be questioned and made to look as if it is untrue, and that if you torture the text of a book enough, (or even mathematics) that you can make it say and confirm anything you want to. So it's only really more demonstrable if one is willing to accept the presumptions and rabbit trails that inevitably come with it.

So because facts and statistics can be presented in misleading ways, we should abandon all serious efforts to understand the world around us? Sorry, but that doesn't follow. If someone is being misleading, you can demonstrate it by researching the facts yourself and showing which ones they're twisting. If the facts don't lead to a specific conclusion, you can demonstrate that by offering alternate, equally logical conclusions. Science as a serious discipline has been around for centuries now and they have indeed managed to develop more reliable methods of verification than a subjective feeling.

Honestly, it's enough to say that a subjective feeling isn't a reliable method of verification, regardless of what other methods are available. If I accepted everyone's claims on the same standard you're offering I'd have spent all my money on snake oil, famous bridges, and real estate on the moon.

SO I understand that you have your way of thinking and have strict standards of what you're willing to believe, but you're being a little short sighted inasmuch as you won't accept the reality of the spiritual influence upon our planet and lives. Things can be unseen an gleaned by unseen source and be reality and truth. Whether you are willing to believe it or not. This is the reality that I have discovered is true.

There is no limit to what I will or won't believe, so long as there's sufficient evidence. If I fail to accept the reality of a spiritual dimension, it is due to a lack of evidence, not a principled opposition to spirituality. I think you're having trouble recognizing the difference, so I'll put it another way.

I don't believe in dragons (the flying, fire-breathing, gold-hoarding giant carnivorous reptilians). I've never seen one myself, never met anyone I trusted who claimed to have seen one, haven't come across any evidence of them ever existing, and according to my understanding of physics and biology, the complications associated with an animal that size flying and breathing fire would almost certainly prohibit such features.

Now, let's suppose a guy named Jerry believes in dragons, and he tells me I'm wrong not to believe in them. When I ask him for evidence, he presents an old video of a man talking about having seen dragons before. Jerry tells me he gets a sensation he says is beyond just a feeling that the man in the video tells the truth. I get no such feeling from the video, nor does the video provide any evidence beyond the man's empty claim. No dragon fossils, no pictures, no video, no live dragon, biological explanation of the logistics of giant reptile flight or fire-breath, nothing. Just the man's word and Jerry's feeling. Am I narrow-minded to doubt Jerry?

If you answered anything but "no," you need to explain why.

Is there anything unseen that you believe in? Ghosts? Para-normal? UFO's (they're seen more and more) But millions if not billions of people report things happening around them which have no explanation. OUr natural (realm) reality is...what has been pulled over our eyes to blind us to the truth.

Exactly... people report things and have no explanation. Not having an explanation does not give you license to plug in whatever fantasy explanation you like the most. It means something happened you can't explain. The wisest thing to do when these things happen is to record the incident and the circumstances surrounding it so if it happens again in the future, comparisons can be made between the two instances so an explanation can eventually be discovered.

And guess what? If you really like a certain explanation, there's nothing wrong with that. You can form a hypothesis from it and see how it holds up. But you can't just say you really really feel like it's true and other people should believe you based on that. That's crazy.

 

[HitchSlap]

Going after the amanuenses now, are we?

It's not good enough you educatees have to sterilize Its message? you have to ruin the writers now?

If only we knew who they actually were.

 

[Astrophile]

I'm making a claim that I know Ron Wyatt is credible.

This is really rather funny. Professional scientists said that Charles Dawson was credible when he claimed to have found the skull and jawbone of an ape-man at Piltdown, and creationists sneer at them for being credulous. Now you say that Ron Wyatt is credible when he claims to have made important discoveries in Biblical archaeology, and you expect everybody to believe you without question.

 

[pitabread]

Exactly... people report things and have no explanation. Not having an explanation does not give you license to plug in whatever fantasy explanation you like the most.

 

[Divide]

Remember, you don't have to convince me you're sincere. You're tasked with convincing me your "sixth sense" for truth is genuine. I can't imagine what you'd do in person that you can't do on here to support your claim. Hypnotize me? Do a cold reading?

Nah, you're reaching now man. I aint into any of that crap, never have been.

So because facts and statistics can be presented in misleading ways, we should abandon all serious efforts to understand the world around us? Sorry, but that doesn't follow. If someone is being misleading, you can demonstrate it by researching the facts yourself and showing which ones they're twisting. If the facts don't lead to a specific conclusion, you can demonstrate that by offering alternate, equally logical conclusions. Science as a serious discipline has been around for centuries now and they have indeed managed to develop more reliable methods of verification than a subjective feeling.

Honestly, it's enough to say that a subjective feeling isn't a reliable method of verification, regardless of what other methods are available. If I accepted everyone's claims on the same standard you're offering I'd have spent all my money on snake oil, famous bridges, and real estate on the moon.

It wasn't subjective. Maybe to you but not to me. Look at the definition of objective.

Besides, we're not really getting anywhere with this merry go round. We think differently, that's all. Ok so you don't think Ron Wyatt is credible, and I do. Let's just move on. I do have some alternate equally logical material which points towards abiogenesis and evolution is bunk and our earth has a creator and was created. Fair enough? I'll start..

Ok so basically, you have the position of we just sort of randomly evolved and came into being through a big bang or whatever, right? Ok so would this be a fair statement to attribute to your position?:

Matter + Energy + Entropy = Life...