Nipples!

Some more videos on Fine Tuning.

The title of the series is Science of God and His Word.

He maintains that we have been studying the "supernatural" all along in the history of science. That's what he thinks anyway because the very existence of the universe is do to the supernatural - ie. something outside of the universe - mater, energy, space, time.

YouTube&NR=1

Originally posted by jaywill
[b]=================================
The vast majority of the universe is anything but finely tuned for life, don't you think?
=================================

From what I have heard this is not so. We are talking about constants set just right or else life could not exist anywhere. We are not talking only about local constants ...[text shortened]... r there, the more you really confirm that it is a science to detect ID.[/b]

quote:
So the more you say that you detect that the design is flawed here or there, the more you really confirm that it is a science to detect ID.

I didn't say I detect a flaw. I said I'm not so sure that we are in a position to decide how intelligent the design is. What I especially don't understand is why the ID movement rejects the notion of intelligently designed biological evolution with some direct intervention in the case of the human soul. What's your take on this?

Re: habitable planets, you might be interested in searching on 'habitable zone".

Originally posted by JS357
quote:
So the more you say that you detect that the design is flawed here or there, the more you really confirm that it is a science to detect ID.

I didn't say I detect a flaw. I said I'm not so sure that we are in a position to decide how intelligent the design is. What I especially don't understand is why the ID movement rejects the notion of intelligen this?

Re: habitable planets, you might be interested in searching on 'habitable zone".

================================
I didn't say I detect a flaw. I said I'm not so sure that we are in a position to decide how intelligent the design is. What I especially don't understand is why the ID movement rejects the notion of intelligently designed biological evolution with some direct intervention in the case of the human soul. What's your take on this?

Re: habitable planets, you might be interested in searching on 'habitable zone".
===================================

I know a little about a habitable zone for a planet. Happy to learn more on it.


====================================
I said I'm not so sure that we are in a position to decide how intelligent the design is.
===================================

I think we can gage some comparison to our own level of intelligence by seeing what this intelligence can do compared to what we yet can do. It seems that we are learning from it. It seems that we are the pupil and this intelligence would be the teacher.

Don't you think that the history of technology would suggest that kind of relationship ? We are discovering how to munipulate the laws of nature to work for us. Through time, and standing upon one another's shoulders, we are able to accumulate more information and encrease our technology.

I think that suggests that we are in some kind of pupil to teacher relationship. And that would not tell the degree of intelligence of a designer. But it might show a greater degree of capability frm which we can encrease our degree of capability (if not intelligence).

============================
What I especially don't understand is why the ID movement rejects the notion of intelligently designed biological evolution with some direct intervention in the case of the human soul. What's your take on this?
=====================================

I don't know much about the acceptance or the rejection of such an idea.

It sounds like you are saying humans directly, at some point/s, intervened in the design of the human soul.

I'll have to think about that. But please give me an example of what you mean.
Do you mean like the work of Behavioral Psychology of a B.F. Skinner ?

Originally posted by karoly aczel
Edit: "Habitable planets are so few and far between..."
Our habitable part of the universe is "off the beaten track" , so the E.T's tell me.

More intelligent life in other parts of the universe.

The Pelidean System, for example, has many inhabitable planets with intelligent life.

Which star is this? And I for one am very interested to hear how you came by this information, if you're willing to expand?

Originally posted by jaywill
[b]================================
I didn't say I detect a flaw. I said I'm not so sure that we are in a position to decide how intelligent the design is. What I especially don't understand is why the ID movement rejects the notion of intelligently designed biological evolution with some direct intervention in the case of the human soul. What's your ...[text shortened]... you mean.
Do you mean like the work of Behavioral Psychology of a B.F. Skinner ?

============================
You: I think we can gage some comparison to our own level of intelligence by seeing what this intelligence can do compared to what we yet can do. It seems that we are learning from it. It seems that we are the pupil and this intelligence would be the teacher.

Don't you think that the history of technology would suggest that kind of relationship?
============================

Me: As a metaphor, I would want to know how it is useful -- and it might be, for example, in fostering a respectful, ecologically responsible relationship to the world. If it were offered as a scientific explanation, the designer would have to be treated as part of (or all of) the natural world. That's how science works. In that case, there would be a question about how it came to design itself. But I might still like to refer to it as a metaphor, under certain circumstances.

=====================================
Me: What I especially don't understand is why the ID movement rejects the notion of intelligently designed biological evolution with some direct intervention in the case of the human soul. What's your take on this?
=====================================

You: "I don't know much about the acceptance or the rejection of such an idea.

"It sounds like you are saying humans directly, at some point/s, intervened in the design of the human soul."
=====================================

Me: Sorry, I was saying that under one theological explanation, the designer intervenes in the biological evolution of humans at the point where humans first appear, for example to invest them with a soul human reason, a moral sense, etc. This idea of biological evolution with divine intervention for human development, is accepted by the Catholic Church but is rejected by the ID movement. Are you sure you want to defend the ID movement?

Originally posted by avalanchethecat
Which star is this? And I for one am very interested to hear how you came by this information, if you're willing to expand?

Is there a Pelidean system? I'm not an astronomist. It could all be crap?

I've often wondered who names these systems. Us or them?

Anyway , I got no credit for checking it out on the net.
The other system that we have a genetic connection with is supposed to be called Arcturia. Again, I've no idea and could be peddling a bunch a crap.

Without having any of these hypothesies disproven, I remain open to the possibility that this channelled information could be true.

Also whats the go with Syrius, the Dog Star? Aren't there some aliens from there that visit the Earth?



edit: Throughout my studies into this stuff, the same messages begin to emerge.
A lot of people ask similar types of questions, like the one you asked, and then some follow up questions. But eventually it always come back to " this is restricted information FOR NOW. Your Earth needs to evolve. Individuals on Earth need to find out about the universe out there by going in here. The answer is us in some trancsendental way.
You know the eastern mystics and the aliens have an open dialouge. Its only natural that they would. They also crop up regularly in eastern literature.

Originally posted by JS357
============================
You: I think we can gage some comparison to our own level of intelligence by seeing what this intelligence can do compared to what we yet can do. It seems that we are learning from it. It seems that we are the pupil and this intelligence would be the teacher.

Don't you think that the history of technology would suggest that kin rch but is rejected by the ID movement. Are you sure you want to defend the ID movement?

=========================================
Me: Sorry, I was saying that under one theological explanation, the designer intervenes in the biological evolution of humans at the point where humans first appear, for example to invest them with a soul human reason, a moral sense, etc. This idea of biological evolution with divine intervention for human development, is accepted by the Catholic Church but is rejected by the ID movement. Are you sure you want to defend the ID movement?
========================================

This interventionist theology would not make me want to discard ID.

I am not qualified to say ID as a general movement would reject some forms of abrupt appearance, intervention, or Theistic Evolution.

I simply don't have the confidence to affirm that ID as a whole movement has no corners in it that would consider some kind of interventionist approach.

There should be wide enough lattitude to include something like abrupt appearance, intervention, or even some appearing like punctuated equalibrium yet intelligently punctuated.

Originally posted by karoly aczel
Is there a Pelidean system? I'm not an astronomist. It could all be crap?

I've often wondered who names these systems. Us or them?

Anyway , I got no credit for checking it out on the net.
The other system that we have a genetic connection with is supposed to be called Arcturia. Again, I've no idea and could be peddling a bunch a crap.

Witho louge. Its only natural that they would. They also crop up regularly in eastern literature.

This is the sort of level of data I've encountered previously from people who claimed to have channelling contact with ETs. As far as I can see they're not terrifically useful without something a bit more concrete - maybe you could get some astronomical reading under your belt and then perhaps you could tie that up with your channelled information?

The Sirius stuff is interesting - I take it you're referring to the supposedly advanced astronomical knowledge of the Dogon people in Mali? Some French anthropologist whose name escapes me for the minute came out with a bunch of interesting stuff not only about Sirius A and B (and possibly C as well I think) but also about Jupiter's moons and Saturn's rings and what have you. I think there were some questions thrown up about his methods and conclusions back in the 80s, but from what I remember he was never really discredited. Haven't encountered anything new about it in a while mind.