Guys, just wait until EoM gets in another couple chapters and discovers dark matter and dark energy.
Apognophos
JoinedPosts by Apognophos
-
8
Scientific explanation of how spirit creatures could materialize
by EndofMysteries inin my science class book i was just reading about particles and antiparticles.. i'll just quote a few parts, "every type of particle in nature must also have an alter ego, an antiparticle........one fascinating property of particle-antiparticles pairs is that if you bring such a pair together, the two particles will annihilate each other......when the pair annihilates, the mass of the two particles is converted into energy which is carried away by a pair of photons.....the reverse is also possible, two photons may collide to produce a particle and it's antiparticle-by a process called pair production.. so assuming spirit creatures are made of energy, there is a scientific explanation of how energy can become physical mass, and physical mass to energy.
whether you believe they exist or not, i thought that was an interesting read and a way to explain how they could materialize and de-materialize.. .
-
-
-
-
-
Apognophos
I agree that it looks as if some posters are not even trying. As a language lover, it's too painful for me to read some people's posts here. Sometimes it's not spelling that's the issue, but a lack of paragraphs, or rampant Capitalization of random Words for No Reason. I just skate right on by those posts.
Lately I am also noticing people getting waylaid by their autocorrect feature, which is apparently making wrong guesses when fixing their typos. Please, just read your post over before hitting Submit?
lurkernomore: The problem pointed out earlier was writing "babtize" with two 'b's.
-
72
When Was Jerusalem Destroyed By The Babylonians?
by Smart incan someone explain in easy to understand language what this argument is all about.
i am not that clever.
i am hoping to talk to the elders about this as well as whoever is willing to talk about it on here.
-
-
Apognophos
Maybe I can get them to think for themselves at least
Now why would they want to do that? Do you really think you've just discovered something they couldn't learn for themselves at any time if they wanted to?
I believe that at one time (up to the early 20th century?), 607 was the date used by many historians.
Never for Jerusalem's destruction.
Oh, hmm, sorry. Not sure where I thought I read that.
-
4
shortsighted subjective thinking...
by purrpurr ini overheard a comment recently at the meeting.
it was said how beautiful jehovah had made the earth and how awfull would the earth be if we didn't have the green plants and vegetation?.
but surely as an indigenous species of this planet we would always find our home beautiful?
-
-
Apognophos
This is just my personal thoughts, but I imagine that our sophisticated minds probably require a fair amount of pleasure to enable us to offset the existential and emotional anxieties that we face, and stay sane. Recreation is just part of our need for pleasant experiences. The other part is the appreciation of beauty.
The pathways in the brain that release pleasure chemicals would have come about by chance, and the ones that were most useful stuck around in our gene pool. So as you mentioned, if the sky was only ever gray, then we would find some gray skies as beautiful as we currently find blue skies to be. Because it's the only way we can enjoy life enough to keep our morale up.
-
72
When Was Jerusalem Destroyed By The Babylonians?
by Smart incan someone explain in easy to understand language what this argument is all about.
i am not that clever.
i am hoping to talk to the elders about this as well as whoever is willing to talk about it on here.
-
-
Apognophos
I believe that at one time (up to the early 20th century?), 607 was the date used by many historians. So back in the 1800s when they first started counting from 607 BCE to 1914 CE, the Society was in a much better position than they are now. They've refused to recognize the current evidence pointing to 587/6 because of the importance of 1914. That being said, there are arguments that they advance for keeping the 607 date, and then there are counter-arguments to those arguments, etc.
Personally I never had the patience to spend hours learning the details of this subject. Just seeing the unloving nature of the org. and learning about the flip-flop on organ transplants made it clear to me that this could not be God's organization, even if they did coincidentally predict something would happen in 1914 (emphasis on the "something", since the wrong thing happened at the wrong time of year).
-
116
Creationist Should Dismiss Genesis Quickly
by Coded Logic inchris tann,.
in your earlier post you seemed to be under the impression that genesis and science were somehow compatible .
however, the truth is the two are not reconcilable at all.
-
-
Apognophos
My whole point is that, given the current amount of unknowns that we are all looking at, the relative likelihood of a creator vs. a self-making universe cannot be appraised. Also, lose the condescending attitude.
-
-
-
Apognophos
This "May vs. Will" subject has been discussed on here many times. The talk was advertised under both names by Rutherford.
-
26
Reject "worldly" fantasies, pursue Kingdom "realities"!!!
by DATA-DOG inhave you had the pleasure of hearing this doozy??
i believe it was presented at the circuit level first, it has filtered it's way down.. the poor eldub opens with this definition of the word fantasize:.
"to conceive fanciful or extravagant notions, ideas, suppositions, ect.
-
-
Apognophos
People actually do everything for babies. It's not a fantasy at all.
Yes, exactly. Babies aren't fantasizing about anything; they're living in a real world where people actually pamper babies. Though I'm not sure what point the brother was trying to make with this line of thought anyway. After all, the recent assembly had a part where the young brothers on stage all fantasized about what they wanted in the new system, like a nice house with a great view, or getting to roam the world exploring nature.
-
43
WT Study Article Nov. 23, 2014--Adam understood "day" to be 24 hours
by Cadellin ininteresting admission in today's wt: adam may have understood "day" (as in "in the day you eat from it, you will positively die") to be a literal 24-hour period.
i don't think the wt has ever said this before; the usual emphasis is that jah meant it as a figurative day, a day from his standpoint which is 1,000 years (and the article does state that, later).. however, if adam understood god's warning to be carried out in a 24 hour period, and god did nothing to alleviate that, then who did the lying?
actually, regardless of adam's understanding, the question still stands but moving toward an admission of the use of day in that context to be 24-hours only makes the question even more valid.
-
-
Apognophos
It seems that when someone had a beard at a time when it was the cultural norm, as with the patriarchs, then they get to keep their beards in the new system. Caucasian brothers who survive from this system into the next apparently have to stay beardless forever because beards were not okay in the Western world in 2014 when this system ended.
-
116
Creationist Should Dismiss Genesis Quickly
by Coded Logic inchris tann,.
in your earlier post you seemed to be under the impression that genesis and science were somehow compatible .
however, the truth is the two are not reconcilable at all.
-
-
Apognophos
A hard drive full of data is more complex than one without any data.
No it isn't. Data is alignment of magnetic particles. The particles are always there, representing some kind of information, regardless of how much of its space is occupied by coherent "data" stored there deliberately by humans. Likewise, the human brain has a set amount of storage and processing capacity. When it is occupied with thought, there is more activity through its pathways, but its physical complexity does not change (I think it should be obvious why changes to the brain over time are not relevant to this discussion).
P1: Our universe (x) is complex
P2: A creator (y) would have some kind of complexity
C: Our universe plus a creator would be more complex than our universe alone
I have been trying to imply for a while now that the creator could have the universe contained in his own mind, but I guess I should have been more explicit.
Ultimately, the only thing we know for sure is that we don't know how we can be here. "Something from nothing" is still totally absurd when one really contemplates it. That's not to say that we can't exist for an absurd reason, but it is simply impossible to understand, and it is disingenuous to point to something like a lecture by Krauss and act as if it explains anything at all. So we're here because of fluctuations caused by nothing in a field of nothing?
Believing that an intelligent being came into existence on its own, and then made us, is also absurd. But is it more absurd than the idea that a self-making universe produced intelligent beings who can in turn create things? Either way you are looking at intelligence forming from nothing.
We can't pretend that we have enough information to say which is more likely because we know too little about the fundamental cause of the self-ordering properties in the universe, how many universes there have been besides this one, and through what sort of process intelligence could develop besides the way it happened on Earth. Thus we cannot confidently apply Occam's Razor to this whole situation.