Skip to comments.More Fluctuations Found in Isotopic Clocks
Posted on 08/17/2012 11:21:22 AM PDT by fishtank
click here to read article
I had a similar answer to prayer, i.e. where words fail.
It was years ago and I had prayed asking God about the crucifixion. He gave me a mental image of a great Light coming from the Cross, extending over all of space and time - and innumerable tiny bubbles (us) rising up from the darkness and disappearing into the Light.
His answer wasn't in words and I could never paint it (wish I could) - but I am certain now that Christ's blood is timeless, it reaches to those in the past, present and future.
“According to his theory of a 6,000 year old universe due to there only being a few observable supernova, we should still be able to see the Hiroshima explosion.”
Simply put, no.
You’re confusing the local time versus the time acceleration at a different locality.
“Star5light and Time” explains all of that.
By the way, I am curious about your technical background. Do you have any formal training or experience in science or engineering?
[ I so enjoy hearing your testimony about your vision, dear hosepipe! I had a similar answer to prayer, i.e. where words fail. ]
During my “vision” it was like being wide-awake in a dreamy state with images but no words spoken.. I could write on my word processing software.. which I did.. The images were poignant and obvious and ideas about them appeared in my “mind” (no words)... I knew those ideas were not “mine”... Not scary at all.. but ebullient..
This happened in the morning after my prayer time.. for about an hour maybe 30 minutes then it went away and I performed my daily functions as usual.. With many of the images to think about.. This happened for about 10 days in a row maybe 12... can’t remember.. hasn’t happened since..
Its taken me several to process this data somewhat... Two of the “ideas” being 1)designated and 2)UN-Designated energy/matter.. there were and are many more... I had and still have no idea what those two can be.. actually.. but they are interesting concepts.. The “merging of spirits” or “spirit creatures/beings/us/whatever” was displayed in images.. Of course; I cannot fully explain it/them/the experience.. a very personal “image” of it happening..
I wonder if your experience was in kind... It’s hard to explain in words things that there is/are no words(I know of) to explain it/them.. Just the concept of language becoming obsolete floored me, just blew me away.. What is to replace language is the stuff dreams are made of.. i.e. merging..
The hard sciences will readily admit they can not re-create history nor come up with any one irrefutable natural clock to ‘estimate’ the age of rocks, fossils, stars, galaxies, etc.
What you also need to know is how many natural clocks the main streamers are not willing to display and discuss in order for folks to make an informed decision on these weighty matters.
101 Evidences for a Young Age of the Earth...And the Universe
Even though with the age that the evos are giving, what we observe today cannot have happened in that time,
a 4-5 figure old earth would completely refute the possibility of evolution.
That is why the AoTE is one of their hot button issues.
Well, it seems to me that a "Heavenly reference frame" must refer to the Word of God Logos Alpha to Omega.
But such would not be an "attribute" of God, as are some other items on your list (e.g., that He is omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent, unconstrained, eternal, designer, etc.).
The common thread underlying all these "attributes" of God is that all are conceived from the reference point of human experience, attempting to find a suitable language by which insights of the Infinite can be conveyed, communicated, to finite minds.
Yet those who have had epiphanies of God, visions, become aware that no language exists that can fully convey such experiences. A common report is that such experiences of the Presence of the Lord are not even given in human language, but only through images, "graphical" representations. (This squares with my own experiences of this type.)
And there is simply no way to "reduce" such experiences to ordinary human language. If one tries, one only "reduces" God to human categories of understanding; and if that happens, one is no longer even speaking of God as He IS in Himself absolute eternal Being. There is NO human analogue of this to speak from.
We try to understand the "nature" of God; but God is not "natural." HE is supernatural, "Beyond" what the human mind can conceive.
Oh Lord, you are not only that than which a greater cannot be conceived, you are also greater than what can be conceived. Anselm of Cantebury, Saint and Doctor of the ChurchBut as Anselm knew, the felt "pull" of the Divine is a human existential fact for those who have the "ears to hear" and thus are open to such experiences.
And so, Anselm begs God:
Speak to my desirous soul what you are, other than what it has seen, that it may clearly see what it desires.Question: How does one convey such experiences in terms of the language of "instrumental reason" so celebrated today?
Answer: One can't, without deforming God and the human experience of God as directly felt Presence....
It seems to me the Eternal Now is a Name, not an attribute, of God. Pure BEING is not an attribute.... It "pre-exists" attributes.
But the Eternal Now is something that human beings can "sense" if only fleetingly....
Well, words really can't convey what I'm trying to speak to. Obviously.
Man has LIMITS which God does not have.
A: Because what they really want to talk about is oranges, and comparing apples to oranges is a way to turn a conversation about apples into a conversation about oranges?
Beats me, dear tacticalogic. Anyhoot, I wasn't the one who invited Newton to this party....
I wasn't either. I just noticed him being on the guest list and thought it very odd.
Here’s my train of thought on this...
Well when you think of oranges that reminds you of apples
and then apples reminds you of Newton and
I believe the Newton inference has to do with his literal ‘yec’ worldview
which has been the source of so much consternation to those who deny that was Newton’s viewpoint
[even thou Newton also did add up all the begets and begots
like Ussher did when he calculated about 4,000 years age for all of creation from the old testament that Jesus also studied and affirmed completely in his heyday]
so these neo-Newton folks if you will
along with other folks who simply reject the Bible without ever reading it much
will then rather mindlessly usually switch the debate back to apples and oranges
to keep trying to impress the faithful that one’s worldview
only matters as much as the difference between apples and oranges
But then again maybe not...
[ Yet those who have had epiphanies of God, visions, become aware that no language exists that can fully convey such experiences. ]
I got you a big old amen waiting for here...
Thank God salvation is not just for the “smart”....
Even dumb folks qualify..
Some catholics think protestants are sometimes dumb...
And some protestants think the same of some catholics...
And they both think Mormans are (shall we say) challenged..
Not to speak of the Buddists, Hindus, and the poor Muslims.. and Animists...
people seek God with whatever they have to seek him/it with..
Sure God knows this... heck even I KNOW IT...
That kid was wonderous.. thanks...
If you have not heard or researched Emily Bear or Anna Graceman you’d be amazed as well..
Anna writes lyrics and music as good as Paul Simon or Carole King or the Bergman’s and she’s only 12 been writing music since 4 or 5...
Emily Bear just may be the next Mozart.. really not kidding.. amazing thing just to view YT’s of her..
Her composition “Northern Lights” is brilliant.. and so many others.. and shes what 12 or younger..
Jackie (the brat) stole my heart though..
I don’t want it back she can keep it..
In her second PBS Special she did
“The Summer Knows” from movie Summer of 42..
Blew me away.. amazing she could do such a
bluesy jazzy torch song like(better than) an adult torch singer..
and the trumpet player (Jamaane Smith) was brilliant..
She pretty OWNS this song from now on..
and then apples reminds you of Newton and
I believe the Newton inference has to do with his literal yec worldview
Somehow the entire concept of "analogy" got lost there. Or was intentionally discarded. I can't tell.
Mine have indeed been similar in that there are no words (music sometimes, no words) - but mine are not often repetitious.
For example, we mere mortals struggle with the concept of the Trinity, because it goes against what we creatures understand. But autonomy is not a restriction to God.
But where autonomy is, then of necessity there will be senders and receivers in communication and a need to encode/decode messages, i.e. language (semiosis.)
Interestingly, qualia are among the reasons artificial intelligence cannot be called "living." Qualia are those things we experience but are unable to convey to anyone else, e.g. love, pain, regret.
However, where there is no autonomy, the merged vision you had, there is no conveyance and the whole is the part and the part is the whole, the sense or experience such as qualia is felt by all, all at once.
Concerning the autonomy issue, I have recently been drawn to meditating on the geometry of space/time - more specifically that, if we were able to sense and act in more than 4 expanded spatial/temporal dimensions then we would be able to reach inside and remove the contents of a closed box, examine a planet in another galaxy without leaving our lab, etc. In effect, we would be able to transport things "faster than the speed of light" simply by changing perspective (like rotating a plane in a tesseract) - or to put it another way, as if bending space/time itself. Even so, whereas geometric forms would be visually though not actually disintegrated depending on perspective, the forms would remain autonomous because of the geometry.
Then again, geometry is part of the creation and not a property of the Creator of it.
God's Name is I AM.
“... if we were able to sense and act in more than 4 expanded spatial/temporal dimensions then we would be able to reach inside and remove the contents of a closed box ...” Or reach into Belshazzar’s palace party central and write on his chamber wall, or stand on a mountain top and cover the eyes of a passing Moses, bring three Hebrew boys into your presence inside a ‘furnace’, to ptotect them from harm, or enter a closed and shuttered room without using a door or window, or appear beside a couple of disciples walking a dusty road, then sit down to dine with them, give a blessing, then exit the scene instantly, or ... well, you get the gist no doubt.
All I can add is that the Jewish mystics use the term Ayn Sof when speaking of God the Creator. The term literally means "no thing" and the point is that any word man would use to describe Creator-God would limit his concept by the word he used.
That insight has stayed with me for years perhaps to warn me away from superimposing my mental limitations onto God's revelations of Who He IS.
Truly, God the Father has revealed Himself in four ways: through the Person of His only begotten Son, Jesus Christ, through the indwelling Holy Spirit, through His words in Scripture and through His Creation both physical and spiritual.
And so we can gather up testimonies, make observations about Him from His creation, compile His own words revealing Himself to us - whether Name or attribute - and yet we should stop short of presuming that we fully know or could ever fully know "Who God IS" - i.e. Ayn Sof.
Man is not the measure of God.
Man is not the measure of God.
Indeed, dearest sister in Christ. That's exactly the meaning I was trying to convey in Post #156. That's not to say that we should not "gather up testimonies, make observations about Him," etc. We want to understand Him. But it seems we need to be aware that He is not reducible to human categories of understanding.
This is an epistemological point. It's of concern to me, for man has the propensity to forget that his theories about anything are not the same thing as that to which they refer in Reality. No dogma can possibly encompass God as He IS in His fullness....
Instrumental reason cannot disclose who God IS. Only His self-revelation to us can do that, and that must necessarily be partial. For our minds are finite, quite puny, compared to the infinite Mind of God.
In short I completely agree with you, dear sister in Christ: We ought not to superimpose our mental limitations onto God's revelations of Who He Is.
I'm truly sorry if I've offended anyone by making such "philosophical" remarks. [My bad.]
Actually that was one of the most wonderful things in the "vision"(mine).. was that shape/form was not needed(geometry).. Still possible but not really needed.. I got the "feeling" it was "juvenile" or sometimes needed to relate to others(whatever they are/will be)... but the "normal" state was of no real shape.. I "saw" plasmoid entities/beings(kinda)..
Language and even Shape not really needed... was a lot for me to process.. I have had trouble trying to express this in words.. maybe still cannot(well)... Considering a "life" where shape is not really needed(by me) is hard to imagine.. let alone the language thing... In the "vision" the Universe exists mostly as is but there is a "plane/place" super universal.. that operates on different "laws".. existing simultaneously..
Thats where I will be (according to the vision)... But by the way earth will be HELL.. a good place for humans which those there will be relegated to.. i.e. being humans.. like; forever.. The Punishment being remaining a human.. instead of "something else"...
Some think I was (trippin)... but I wasn't.. it was as real as a heart attack... What to do with this data?.. Makes no difference really...
Whatever is.. "IS"/will be... What ever ain't ..."AIN'T"/won't be..
You know "dreams" might be to prepare us(our minds) for this.. So that it will not seem strange to us from the git go... Heck my "vision" itself was "dream-like"...
For The Son is in The Father and The Father is in The Son.
In another place in the Bible is the hint that refers to Jesus could not sin because His seed remained within Him, His Godness remained within Him thus He could not sin because that would be contrary to Whom God IS.
Jesus let us know that The Seed left Him at the end on the cross, so that He could die in our stead. I happen to believe that The Seed came back into the body in the tomb, and He left the wrappings and the rock enclosure by just stepping out of our spacetime limits.
BTW, we are told that the earnest of our inheritence of That Seed is what comes into our human spirit when saved, so that we have 'God with Us' for the remiander of our earthly life. But the degree of expression of His 'within us' is related to how much we allow Him to 'do it' ... Faithful is He that calleth you, for He will also do it.
Truly, when people try to superimpose their own mental limitations on God's revelations of Himself we end up with things like Michaelangelo's "Creation of Adam" in the Sistine Chapel - beautiful but misleading.
Conversely, we all benefit when we disclose everything - what we know, what we suspect, what we cannot know.
God's Name is I AM.
Indeed, perhaps it was to comfort you and prepare you for the next life.
Thank you so much for all your insights, dear MHGinTN!
FReepMail for you...
He's married to evolution because it allows his mind to go on permanent vacation, an autopilot rationalizing of his rebellion against his creator.
When it's broken down to it's very most basic buidling block, liberalism amounts to a rejection of God.
A mindreader troll with a vacuous personal attack. Yawn.
Truth hurts, eh?
You miss the point completely then.
And evolutionists oppose not just the written, revealed word of God but also the Creator who gave it to us.
You cannot possibly claim God to be God and call Him a liar.
It boggles the mind that any evolutionist who claims to be a rational and objective human being would be willing to worship a God who lies to them. How rational is THAT?
Adam was created as a full grown man.
On the next day, a creationist would correctly state that Adam was one day old.
The evolutionist would mock the creationist and appeal to the evidence of Adam’s age,.... and be quite wrong. The creationist would be the one who is correct.
What we observe is what we observe but unless we know ALL the facts, there’s simply no way of making accurate determinations about what we are analyzing.
That means instead of a rock formation being a billion years old, its 995 million years old.
What it means is that science is not reliable. Either it cannot be trusted because it is not accurate, it is being constantly *revised* as new data comes in.
Or the decay rates actually are changing thus the premise on which science is built cannot be trusted and all the conclusions built on that are wrong.
Evolutionists who live in glass houses should not throw stones.
Someone’s credibility just took a hit.
Surely the statement:
“Creationists oppose not just evolution, but also geology, physics, paleontology, astronomy and any other branch of science that refuses to stick with their useless precepts.”
is right up there with, ‘If you’re so smart how come you aren’t rich’ but without the humor or irony.
So the Pope and every other Christian who accepts evolution geology and astronomy rejects the word of God and calls him a liar?
What a myopic insular and hateful view. It must make you feel so smugly good about yourself to condemn all thinking people to hell with your ignorant zeal.
What's evolution geology? A new branch of science?
Or did the great intellectual forget his commas?
It's also disingenuous to suddenly drag other sciences into it. The discussion is about evolution. Being a geologist or astronomer does not by default demand acceptance of evolution.
Anyone's choice is to either believe God and what He put in the Bible, or not, no matter what their title or position. Either the Bible is true or not. If you choose to sit in judgement on it and determine with your limited human understanding, that it is wrong, you are stating that what is in there is not true. You are in effect, calling God a liar. Doesn't matter who it is and what their title is.
As far as the pope's position on evolution, I do believe that that has been addressed to you enough in the past and you have chosen to reject it. It any case, it is irrelevant to me what he chooses to believe on the subject so there's no need to bring it up to me again.
It must make you feel so smugly good about yourself to condemn all thinking people to hell with your ignorant zeal.
Where did I do that? Please post the links to the appropriate comments.
Check the title of the thread. It is about physics not evolution. How disingenuous of you to pretend that the only science under discussion is evolution.
Amusing that you are so bereft of intelligence that you cannot make an argument against science without making it about atheism or trying to make it about me. I feel sorry for you. I will pray for you.
Liberalism is the political expression of the religion of humanism, which indeed is the opposing “truth claim” to God’s truth.
Yes, with enough evolution, people will just become their own Gods. And sometimes they don’t even need a few billion years! ;)
You didn’t need to project and be sleepy about it. Pretty much everyone on FR knows you’re a sleepy liberal dreamer. ;)
Precisely. And notice the endless projections. Liberals pretend to know everything there is to know about geology through circular reasoning like “fossils are this old because of the old rocks they were found in, rocks are that old because of the old fossils found in them”.
YOU were the one who dragged the other sciences into it with your appeal to authority.
Just a degree with a few letters after their name.
I hope you’re feeling better.
WRT to circular dating methods, I always think of the movie “Finding Nemo” where the stingray teacher is singing a song to the “kids”...
the words for the “daters” would go something like this:
“oooooooh, the rocks date the fossils
and the fossils date the rocks,
and we don’t really know if they’re
older than your socks!”
It’s that fossilized uranium.
Or, just an Evo's fossilized CRANIUM
Paradoxically, if you could find that there wouldn't be any.
[[Creationists oppose not just evolution, but also geology, physics, paleontology]]
Actually Creationists and ID’ists Don’t ‘oppose’ any of these fields as these fields have yielded more than enough evidence to show that evolution is a lie! All the evidences that show evolution a lie is simply waved away by evolutionists as though it weren’t important or didn’t refute their claims- We also support mathematics whichg also show beyond a reasonable doubt that evolution is scientifically impossible and we also support biology and microbiology which show how intricately and intelligently designed everythign really is. And we also support scientific laws such as the second law of thermodynamics which show that it is impossible for evolution to have occured, and we also support thje study of chemicals andm inerals and genetics etc which show that in the beginning man had biologically pure elements- somethign which nature is incapable of producing with nothign but dirty elements to work with- No- Contrary to the assinine claims of evolutionsits, Creationists do not infact reject science- We embrace it because it shows the NEED for an Intelligent Designer- and when Evolutionsits put forth their assinine arguments abotu how Irreducible Complexity ‘could have evolved’ thewy apparently are too dimwhitted to recognize that their explanatiosn invovle the ‘evolution’ of IC via Intelligently designed circumstances, and biologically impossible scenarios! Miller faield miserably in his attempts to discredit Behe- and apaprently wasn’t sensible enoguh to recognize how silly his arguements sounded, and didn’t recognize the fact that he ended up supporting IC and ID- not refuting it!
And remeenber, anyoen can claim to be Christian, but hteir vehemence agaisnt God and God’s children show that they are anythign but Christian! They apparently think that attaching the title ‘Christian’ to their claims wikll give their silly aergtuments credence with the Real Christian Community
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.