By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
DélioPT on 21 December 2012
Edit Thread
happydolphin said:
DélioPT said:

I was going to quote another user on this, but if you don`t mind i`ll do it with you. Sorry if it`s a big post. If you want go to the last paraghraph.

It`s not that hard to put scientific knowledge into question.
People see or observ something and what is the conclusion? It`s a mix of what they see with what they don`t see. Where, through our imperfect and incomplete knowledge, do we see that what happens can only happen that specific way? Where in what we aprehend is "written" that it isn`t possible to be in a different way? Isn`t that a leap of faith? Wouldn`t it be fair to just say that what i see is what i see and at the same time i can`t tell if it`s the only way or not as my ability to know isn`t perfect or absolute.

People question the flood, people question Mary`s conception, for example, but is it based on the absolute certainty that it can`t be? You can answer that question yourself.

The thing is people don`t make real conclusions from what they aprehend, they make assumptions and sometimes not even that.
For example, people believe that nothing can`t create something. But somehow in the beggining of the universe and it`s continuation they stop taking that into consideration.
Imagine that the so called singularity was constituted by letters A and B. They were there from the start and then the world evolved and AB and BA were created. What is the explanation you will hear? A and B got together and AB and BA were formed.
But the truth is only A and B existed so how something new like AB and BA got to be? That isn`t explained. And to me (my vision of ID) is that AB and BA were already there in each one of A and B. They didn`t exist as AB and BA because you can only be one at once but the potential was there. Just like a videogame that allows you to do a certain amount of actions yet you don`t get to do all of them at once. It takes time!

This is an extract from an apparition in Portugal in 1917. If you want and i invite you, read about it and you`ll understand why scientific knowledge or any kind of knowledge is the end all be all:

"The people had gathered because three young shepherd children had predicted that at high noon the Blessed Virgin Mary would appear in a field in an area of Fatima called Cova da Iria. According to many witnesses, after a period of rain, the dark clouds broke and the sun appeared as an opaque, spinning disc in the sky.[4] It was said to be significantly duller than normal, and to cast multicolored lights across the landscape, the shadows on the landscape, the people, and the surrounding clouds.[4] The sun was then reported to have careened towards the earth in a zigzag pattern,[4] frightening those who thought it a sign of the end of the world.[5] Witnesses reported that their previously wet clothes became "suddenly and completely dry, as well as the wet and muddy ground that had been previously soaked because of the rain that had been falling".[6]

Estimates of number present range from 30,000 to 40,000 by Avelino de Almeida, writing for the Portuguese newspaper O Século,[7] to 100,000, estimated by Dr. Joseph Garrett, professor of natural sciences at the University of Coimbra,[8] both of whom were present that day.[9]

The event was attributed by believers to Our Lady of Fátima, a reported apparition of the Blessed Virgin Mary to the children who had made predictions of the event on 13 July 1917,[10] 19 August,[11] and 13 September.[12] The children stated that the Lady had promised them that she would on 13 October reveal her identity to them[13] and provide a miracle "so that all may believe."[14]"

@Story of fatima. So, in accordance with my commitment to truth, I cannot possibly say that this is false, because I was not there to witness it. It could be true, though I presonally do not believe it is. The important thing is to take the correct stace, which is the true one, which says "I am not 100% certain that this is false, but I (mildly/strongly)doubt/believe it and here's why...".

@A, B, AB & BA. The thing that would help you understand how AB & BA could arise from A and B is that, in our universe, given enough time, it is possible for elements to come together and form AB & BA.

My personal question would be, how did we get the primordial soup, how did we get the original environment for life. But once you have that, it could be possible given the pressures and energies that abide in the cradle of life to create the building blocks for life.

I personally don't believe it, but given the scientific processes we know, at least the creation of amino acids from basic inorganic compounds was simulated.  I'm not saying that it happened, I'm just saying that it could be possible. The most important thing is to look at all the possibilities, and at least get to the point where we say "It's possible and likely", "It's possible and unlikely", "It's possible in this context, but given the laws of the universe it's not possible in this context", and go to the bottom of the scientific reasoning without being affected by our pre-disposition to believe on thing over another.

That's what I mean by a commitment to the truth. I know it's difficult, but it is the dirty work that must be done. I call it dirty work because though it may be the right way to go, it may lead the thinker into paths that shake one's worldview and as such can feel like shacky or slippery ground. But for the sake of our friends, for the sake of the people we talk to and for our own sake, it's something that needs to be done.


Do you know how many things in your life you haven´t seem, yet still believe? Know why you believe them?
About the apparition itself, i only gave you a glimpse. If you read it you`ll see how it`s more than just a miracle.

"A, B, AB & BA. The thing that would help you understand how AB & BA could arise from A and B is that, in our universe, given enough time, it is possible for elements to come together and form AB & BA."

As i said, it`s not about the process. It`s about understanding how something created what it`s not. That`s why i used the videogame example. The whole game is already there from the start and with time (playing) you`ll discover said game.

If all A and B know/have is to be A and B, how can AB and BA exist? My view is that they exist because A and B already had AB and BA within them and given the encounter AB and BA became real.
So, if you believe that something creates something, from that singularity everything was already in it although all of that may or not come into realization.