Meu ultimo comentario postado:
“American television audiences seem more interested in competitive singing than real science.”
And the culprit are people like Tyson, who are the new sacerdotes of the dominant doctrine at schools. Like any other religion, the disciples that go to church and listen to the priest, are blind and inactive for inquiring and improving the old scripture, because who has the power of getting informations direct from the source (God) are not them. The modern student never mind that would be possible to be another Newton, Einstein, Halley – they were the apostles like Matheus, Paulus, etc, which were alive when informations were disponible and fresh, could be got by someone direct with the source. Today there are millions of scientists and discoveries happens with teams that have access to most powerful technology. The diminution of assistance from the Cosmos of Sagan and the Cosmos of Tyson is due the normal evolution of any doctrine. When faith is established, curiosity is dead.
But, Tyson and those communicating Science today are unconscious about the disservice they are doing to Science. “Today we know how a comet is born…”says Tyson. Who had watched the formation and birth of a comet?! “There was the Big Bang and before that a microscope atom…” My God, this is not the language of Science! Prove it, through lab experiments! “Today we know how a star is born…” But, such event must take millions or billions years, how could the human species culture that began 15.000 years ago watching such event? Computer simulations, mathematical calculus, theories about light waves, etc… is not scientific fact. It is theories.
Science-stoppers. If they have the final answers for everything, how the youngers will be stimulated for searching,… what?!
Applying the ancient method of comparative anatomy among natural systems, I got total different answers about the origins of the Universe, life, stars, comets, etc. There are lots of another methods and possible theories. A TV program wishing to stimulate kids for Science should give voice for all different theories, and the controversy would keep opened minds instead faithful minds. The modern academic world view elaborating the scholar curriculum today is not scientific anymore and the founder fathers of Illuminism failed in a trap: they criticized religions, but, their creation became same thing.
E o meu reply a mim mesmo, publicado:
Tyson began this episode holding a baby. Just what I should do in a TV show for communicating the opposite world view. Inserting a camera inside a fresh ovule, watching the spermatozoon coming as a comet, having its membrane-envelope exploded in a great ovular explosion like the Big Bang, the matter expanding like a blastulae where galaxies should be cells, than, the shapes of fish, reptile, mamifero, recapitulating biological evolution, and finally, showing a baby at my arms, asking to people which or what’s the baby that this Universe is generating? Creationists should be satisfied: “it is the son of God!” Them, showing that inside this Universe it seems that is occurring a normal process of genetic reproduction, I would talking by suspicion that it must be the son of a natural non-magical conscious ex-machine system. And we could do this show with the same real scientific facts, only changing theories. The communicators of Science today ( as Lawrence Krauss with his “Something from Nothing”, or Dawkins given personality and purposes to a bunch of atoms called genes, or Hawkings seeing ghost black holes where there is none) forgot that Cosmos is Nature like which we have here because they are listening to the world view narrated by simulations of the electro-mechanical brain which became the spy of non visible macro and micro-dimensions through its mechanical sensors… The real scientific facts we have today are pointing out that our Universe is more like a living thing than the machine aroused by chance they are believing… Creationists are wrong, but, sorry, the academic mindset is wrong also… Then, teach first only the real facts, no computer simulations. Them, teach all theoretical controversies, all interpretations of those facts, this will stimulate the mind of our kids…
Este novo show intitulado “Cosmos” ainda vai dar muito o que falar, principalmente porque mexe com a mais inquietante pergunta atormentando humanos – qual a verdade sobre a minha existencia e a existencia deste mundo? Vai dar muita discussão porque o programa pretende ser uma resposta a esta pergunta, mas não apresenta com lógica, racionalidade, sensatez, as provas para sua resposta, dando margem a quem não partilha da mesma ideologia revoltar-se e aclamar sua revolta. Por isso vou abrir este capitulo para ir acompanhando o desenrolar do evento.
E no artigo do Los Angeles Times, eu participo nos comentarios:
Oklahoma Fox station accidentally cuts evolution scene from ‘Cosmos’
- Meu comentario:
- Louis Morelli Guest – March, 13, 2014
Insisting with magical thinking that life and universe emerges from magical accidents is a science-stopper and plays the game of the other face of the same coin – the creationism magical thinking – then, we have this game-war going again and again.
This is a war between two different and poetic telling of the same event, both half/truth, half/wrong. Neil’s interpretation of universal history is external world based while ID is the same universal history internally DNA based. Expansion, contraction of human mind, both wrong because both are extremes, while the right one is a third interpretation, the product that arises from extremes conflicts and interactions.
Why Neil and his colleagues does not go to Oklahoma court claiming this “cut”? Because the advocates of creationism could ask scientific proofs for biological evolution and Neil can not show them, besides lots of evidences. And why Neil can not show a lab experiment where non-organic matter evolves into human beings and consciousness? Because the Darwinian mechanisms (VSI) are not enough for producing biological evolution, there are hidden variables still unknown that are missing for a successful lab historical reproduction of biological evolution. There are four hidden variables as suggested by Matrix/DNA Theory. These hidden variables connects biological evolution with cosmological evolution by a unique chain of causes and effects, but, then, the final interpretations seems to be metaphysics, which is not the wish of Neil’s materialistic view point.
março | 2 | 2014
“Our molecules are traceable to stars that exploded and spread these elements across the galaxy,” he explains.
Don’t say that, it is no good for kids and you could be teaching a wrong world view forming a wrong personality. There are no data that makes our molecules traceable to exploded stars, I challenge you bring them on the table. My mother did not explode for giving me birth. Reptiles did not exploded for giving birth to mammals, Earth did not exploded for giving birth to life. Every kind of birth that we know were ruled by genetic process. Why one should invent mechanisms that never was seen at any place, for explaining the unknown? What is the difference here with religion? Now, Matrix/DNA Theory is suggesting models about how life emerged here by astro-embryogenesis process, which is the prior non-biological mechanism of genetic transmissions. These models suggests that biological systems came from astronomical systems, not by explosions under chance that never could building something complex as organic molecules. There are models suggesting that building blocks ogf galaxies fits very well as ancestrals of the first cell system. No explosions, no magics, no origins, everything running inside an universal chain of causes and effects since the Big Bang. Kids knowing that we came from beyond the Big bang, beyond the Universe, will have a more heathier mind than those believing that we arose by chance from exploded stars, which is merely a theory.
He’s talking about the fact that when stars explode they create ( cook) the heavier elements such as carbon and iron. These elements are what we are made of. Hence why we come from exploding stars.
A theory, from a scientific perspective, is an explanation for an observation that has been confirmed by the evidence. By saying that it “is merely a theory” is a gross ignorance of science in general. Relativity, evolution, plate tectonics and germs being the causes of disease are all theories.
This is why we need Cosmos to air to the United States and the world.
You never will be able to show that “when stars explode they create ( cook) the heavier elements such as carbon and iron” and you know that. It is not logical that heavier atoms are produced throught explosions,instead, it is logical that they are produced by implosions, collapses. Like my theory is suggesting they are produced by galactic nuclear vortex mixing stars dust. And you really think that an infant mind of an American kid will be formed as a good citizen while believing that his/her origins remonted by explosions and events by chance?! By the way, it is not a scientific statement and can not tought as thru to our kids. Cosmos is necessary and good for our culture, but, it can not be used by any ideology.
Minha resposta a Vulpess55:
TheMatrixDNA – march, 04, 2014
You confirmed what I said. A theory, from a scientific perspective, is an explanation for an observation that has been confirmed by the evidence. When the explanation is confirmed by real facts, it is no longer a theory, it is a scientific statement. Now, please, show me the real fact ( a movie of the event) proving that heavier and more complex atoms are formed by cooking at explosions. I am not a physicist but everybody knows that high temperatures dissolves the most complexes elements and medium to low temperatures permits the organization and formation of them. Is it wrong? The theoretical astronomical model of Matrix/DNA suggests another mechanism for formation of those heavier elements and instead esxplosions they are based on implosions, collapses at lower temperatures. By the way, it is not a scientific fact, it is a theory, built by a private world view and the series Cosmos – a good and necessary initiative for leaving Science to people – could not be driving by any ideology.
Neil DeGrasse Tyson Takes on the Cosmos
Palavras de Tyson: “…. because the country needs an infusion of what it is to celebrate and embrace science literacy and what value that can have in your life…
Wired: The show isn’t only about space, it’s also about the scientific process and what science means. Was this focus on scientific evangelism a planned part of the series?
“… there’s an appetite out there that had previously been underserved….”
“…. There’s an inner geek in us all, an inner bit of curiosity that people are discovering, and they like it…This is another opportunity in the mainstreaming of science…”
“…. those who are studying how you go from organic molecules to self-replicating life. That transition remains a mystery and it’s got a lot of people scratching their heads, so I’m watching that space to see what comes out of it… “
” Tyson: It’s important because it’s humbling. And it’s always better to be humbled than to be bigheaded. You’re humbled because you learn how small you are in space, how small you are in time, and this benchmarks how you feel about yourself and about others. I think with the cosmic perspective it’s very hard to lead armies into war. I don’t think it’s ever been an astrophysicist who’s done that.”
‘ NASA says: “I want to find out scientifically how the universe works. I will send a space probe, I will use a telescope, I will do whatever I need to do to learn that.’
“… But here’s the test – if you go to a geologist and say, ‘We can send you to this one spot on Mars, or we could send 30 rovers to 30 different locations, for the same cost, and you get all the data back from those 30 rover, which do you choose?’ They choose the rovers, in a heartbeat.”
Meu comentario postado aqui:
Thanks Neil, our people need information about real Nature and stimulus for their evolution. But there are several dangerous prejudices caused to people due the scientific evangelism and ideology, you could fix it before going to public. Instead stimulus for curiosity this is a killer of curiosity like any other religion and instead bringing on the human bein for to be synchronized with natural evolution this ideology is driving them to go “more and more away off the bean”. I can’t explain it here. Let’s see what you said:
“… embrace science literacy and what value that can have in your life…”
Science is the new sacerdote interpreting the real world for kids. Better than those of “magical thinking” still it is a very limited and reduced thinking. Then we can not teach our theories as scientific statements, like you said “…how you go from organic molecules to self-replicating life”. This is not scientific fact, it is theory, there are lots of rational possibilities for emergence of primordial cells systems. I have found one: my theoretical models of building blocks of atomic and astronomical systems has the same configuration and functionality of a base-pair of nucleotides, of living cells systems and till the configuration of human brains. Since that those building blocks are systems and not organic molecules, life has no origins here, it is not different from our ancestrals till the Big Bang and beyond it, inserting a very different world view into the mind of human beings. What will be as adult a teenage believing that parents are merelly descendants of monkeys? But while neurology does not explain the interaction between synapses and thoughts nobody can say scientifically that humans are resumed to monkeys. This is theory. What will be a teenage believing that is merelly product of stars dust and big bangs? My models tells a different history keeping the mind opened for a more proudness ancestry and humans more concerned about the whole Humanity. I have merelly a theory, but, as I can’t do it with yours theory, you also can not destroy my theory because you have no scientific data for it. The series Cosmos could be beautiful and a great initiative, an heroic act, if it could drive the public to be open mind. Not only humble as you said, because humbly leads creatures to be like preys and unhappy. See my model of “The Human Cosmic Code” and unterstand what I am saying.
And yours suggestion to NASA is not all mentally healthier correct also. Physics and Maths has developed tools that are extensions of humans brain’s sensors for studying the invisible micro and macro dimensions, then, have connected these sensors to a electric-mechanical brain. The computers are furnishing the informations of these dimensions and by simulations, are building these theories and our world view. But as any different observer other than the biological brain with its own sensors, the mechanical brain will select data that fits its level of perception and descriminating all data outside it. So our scientists studying the Cosmos are like microbes living inside cells inside the skeleton of a human body grasping only the mechanical natural laws and projecting these mechanical laws towards the coverture of soft meat and mind. It does not works. The result is this mechanical world view where could be possible something coming from nothing! I applied a different method, the reverse one, starting from biological systems and projecting these laws over the skeleton, the structure of Cosmos, and the results are suggesting processes, mechanisms, out there, that scientists are not grasping. It is theory against theory, different investigative methods, but equally rationals. Ours goal must be teaching all controversies, all theorys, for not closing and killing our evolution.
Thanks Neil, our people need information about real Nature and stimulus for wish their evolution. But that are several dangerous prejudices caused to people due the scientific evangelism and ideology, you could fix it before going to public. Instead stimulus for curiosity this is a killer of curiosity like any other religion and instead bringing on the human bein for to br synchronized with natural evolution this ideology is driving them to “more and more away off the bean”. I can’t explain it here. Let’s see what you said:
“… embrace science literacy and what value that can have in your life…”
Science is the new sacerdote interpreting the real world for kids. Better than those of “magical thinking” still it is a very limited and reduced thinking then we can not teach our theories as scientific statements, like you said “…how you go from organic molecules to self-replicating life”. This is not scientific fact, it is theory, there are lots of rational possibilities for emergence of primordial cells systems, I have found one: my theoretical models of building blocks of atomic and astronomical systems has the same configuration and functionality of a base-pair of nucleotides, living cells systems and till the configuration of human brains. Since that those building blocks are systems and not organic molecules, life has no origins here, it is not different from our ancestrals till the Big Bang and beyond it, inserting a very different world view into the mind of human beings. What will be an adult a teenage believing that parents are merelly descendants of monkeys? But while neurology does not explain the interaction between synapses and thoughts nobody can say scientifically that humans are resumed to monkeys. This is theory. What will be a teenage believing that is merelly product of stars dust and big bangs? My models tells a different history keeping the mind opened for a more proudness ancestry and humans more concerned about the whole Humanity, I have merelly a theory, but, as I can’t do it with yours theory, you also can not destroy my theory because you have no scientific data for it. The series Cosmos could be beautiful and a great initiative, an heroic act, if it could drive the public to be open mind. Not only humble as you said, because humbly leads creatures to be like preys and unhappy. See my model of “The Human Cosmic Code” and unterstand what I am saying.
And yours suggestion to NASA is not all mentally healthier correct also. Physics and Maths has developed tools that are extensions of human’s brain sensors for studying the invisible micro and macro dimensions, then, have connected these sensors to a electric-mechanical brain. The computers are furnishing the informations of these dimensions and by simulations, are building our world view. But as any different observer other than the biological brain with its own sensors will select data that fits its level of perception and descrimating all data outide it. So our scientists are like microbes living inside cells inside the skeleton of a human body grasping only the mechanical natural laws and projecting these mechanical laws towards the coverture of soft meat and mind. The result is this mechanbical world view. I applied a different method, the reverse one, starting from biological systems and projecting these laws over the skeleton, the structure of Cosmos, and the results are suggesting processes, mechanisms, out there, that scientists are not grasping. Ot is thery against theory, different investigative methods, but equally rationals. Yours goal must be teaching all controversies, all theorys, for not closing and killing our evolution.
What do you propose? Anyone with a TV and antenna will be able to watch this show. What better way to get the word of science to the masses. Tyson, by his own admission, was as close-minded as you. For 3 Seconds!
Anyone that is an evangelist believing on humans theories about the Universe is not 3 seconds closed mind, but 1 second, in relation to cosmological time, even that he/she lives all life doing it. I hope that Neil be careful and makes the very distinction between theories and real scientific facts.
– See more at: http://theuniversalmatrix.com/pt-br/artigos/?paged=3#sthash.74vkrg8t.dpuf
Tyson is a magical thinker, sorry. Science to the public, yes, but, not associated with mysticism, graphic arts and computer simulations. There are two evidences for an initial big explosion and lots of evidences that the human body came from monkeys, but many more evidences for others non magical theories. See Matrix/DNA Theory, for instance: Nature applies nanotechnology for instance resuming an adult human into a microscopic genome and from it developing a baby. Then, before the origins of this Universe, there was a big natural and conscious systems, which was resumed into a microscopic genome. As a human body has its initial moment of origins by a big explosion of chromosoma envelope at the center of the egg liberating the genome, that’s the origins of this Universe. As any human body takes 7 or 8 months for getting conscious, the baby of that extra-system took 13,7 billion years for getting conscious.
Comparative anatomy between living and non-living systems discovered the link between Cosmological Evolution and Biological Evolution. It is the building block of atoms and galaxies and its configuration/functionality is the same of a base-pair of nucleotides, the building blocks of DNA. So, DNA is merely the biological shape of a universal genome called Matrix and this Universe is a kind of egg where is occurring a process of genetic reproduction. The first shape of this genome at the Big Bang was light waves, which shows a sequence of frequencies and vibrations that is the same sequence of any life’s cycles changing the shapes of biological creatures. Light has the code for life. Now, I challenge Tyson to debunk this theory with proved known scientific facts. If you tells the Universal History based upon a Cosmic Calendar and talks about 13, 699 billions years in 20 minutes and after that, you need years for talking about the last 10 minutes, it means that you does not know anything about those 13, 6 billions years. At that past time, all forces producing the complexity we see here and now were producing something in the Universe. Where are them? The models of Matrix/DNA Theory are suggesting what they did. Magical creative accidents is an absurd belief.
Postado e publicado em:
Toddman Jason – 1 day ago
Not half as absurd as this garbage you’re spouting.
Louis Morelli – Monday, march, 17
To Toddman: Why not mentioning real proved facts as fopundations for yours personal opinion? let’s begining with yours tiny microscopic atom or something else that exploded and created this Universe…!!! The 28 down rating for this posts, with no mention to real facts shows how is working this modern doctrine.
American Avenger1 day ago
I liked the original Cosmos series much better. The original Cosmos had much better music and Sagan’s voice is special. That said….Sagan was still a Godless biased Liberal who would not even admit that the existence of God was a possibility.
Yours comment was hidden due to low rating. See how works the modern academic doctrine. You are getting the right reaction to yoers says: “those who does not admit the existence of ( my kind of believed…) God is a Godless bisaed liberal” This is an affirmation coming from another doctrine. Why not forgetting ours doctrine and attaining to the facts brought by Tyson?
Joe17 hours ago
I thought the calendar/history of the universe thing was very good, put a lot into perspective. But most of the program wasn’t scientific enough, too simple….maybe they’re starting out slowly and waiting to gain an audience then will go deeper into the science, hope so.
Dead Orc Map17 hours ago
I agree Joe, but both my kids loved it and they want more, so it must have hit the mark!
Louis to Dead Orc –
Did yours kid accepting that a tiny microscopic atom full of energy was the first cause generator of this Universe? That the monkeys’ brain as known today was able to produce consciousness? There are no scientific proved facts for believing on that. You have the right to educate yours kids as you want, but, when you come to public saying what yoy are doing, I have the right to say what I am doing to my kids: “This is not proved, these are merelly hypothesis, this is a science-stopper,does not believe in it, keep yours mind opened for to be stimulated to continuing a non-biased search about these issues…”
Complex Being12 hours ago
Why do atheists claim to be logical when THEY not science, arrived at “The existence of God is unlikely”? Today’s atheists are like children. They want to pack a powerful punch and leave you angry, speechless, or they just want you to troll them back to feed their childish fantasy. They are becoming more aggressive as well.
Yes, you are right. Atheists and deists are the two sides of the same non rational coin. The whole thing in this Universe is pointing out a rational naturalistic theory that here is occurring a normal process of genetic reproduction, and this theory drives us to draw a model of what’s behind the Big Bang and beyond the Universe: a natural and conscious system. No magical gods and no magical randomness… welcome to the agnostic world.
Primewonk21 hours ago
Oh man, the creotards are not going to be happy with tonight’s episode.
I wonder if the Fox station in Oklahoma City will “accidentally” delete any reference to evolution from tonight’s episode of Cosmos like they did last week?
And those like you that loved the episode will not going to be happy when all kids will be indoctrinated by Tyson’s world view. There are hidden natural forces responsible by universal evolution, but the way that Tyson is interpreting evolution is a closer-mind and science-stopper, avoiding that we go on the right track. Why not be honest and advising when he is showing a real scientific fact and when is showing merelly a hypothesis or theory?
– See more at: http://theuniversalmatrix.com/pt-br/artigos/#sthash.2hUpHaZa.dpuf
Interessante artigo que copio para analizar aqui:
Will ‘Cosmos’ Miss the Big Bang in Science Communications?
March 12, 2014 | by: Bob Lalasz –
Meu comentario postado aqui ( não publicado ainda, aguardando moderação):
If you take LUCA (the last universal common ancestor of all living beings)out from Earth and put it in the sky, you can getting the whole diversity of lifeforms at Earth. And the most recent data are suggesting that the building blocks for life came from the external space. But, there is no scientific answer for the origins of LUCA in the sky. It is theory saying that life came from non-organic matter as it is theory saying that there is a God creator. Same thing for what’s caused the Big Bang. So,if Tyson explain this real problem instead talking theory as scientific statement, he would earn two points: 1)avoiding hurting the feelings of most populations that still believes in other theories, spreading the seed of doubt and slowing btinging these people for loving science; 2) avoiding that his show works as a cience-stopper, producing closed minds around a fake final answer, since that doubt is more stimulus for searching. See for instance what happens when we theoretically put LUCA in the sky, how the mechanisms and understanding of evolution is changed, as did Matrix/DNA Theory.
2 * Episodio:
Neil deGrasse Tyson Addresses Creationists’ Evolution Fears in ‘Cosmos’
By Danielle Wiener-Bronner and Abby Ohlheiser – Monday, March, 17
Meu comentario postado:
Tyson should not be affirmative about topics that Science has no proved facts and enough data for. The environment is the agent making natural selection? Prove that any reptile or sea creature developed by itself the apparatus for pregnancy and the environment selected it. It makes no sense. Prove that the first hominides have bodies more strong and healthier at the wild than monkeys for to being selected. Prove that a non-organic molecule was selected by the enviroment among all non-organic molecules… But, every problem for understanding evolution is solved when we know the universal formula for natural systems as suggested by Matrix/DNA Theory. It’s not the terrestrial environment alone, it is not the self wish of creatures alone, it’s not the 3 variables (VSI) suggested by Darwinian view of evolution alone. The causes are very pretty more and more complex than Tyson thinks as suggested by models of Matrix/DNA. Why are there such formidable diversification of life forms? If known data is suggesting that there was a unique common ancestor for all of them? The crude primordial environment had no such equal diversity were each new shape should be due to a specific kind of niche. But, when Matrix/DNA takes out the common ancestor from Earth’s surface and locates it in the whole galaxy, as a thermodynamic systems ruling under the thermodynamic forces of entropy causing fragmentation of that celestial closed system, into infinite diversified fragments, and shows how each fragment is restaured biologically at earth surface, the diversity of life is enough explained. The problem with matrix/DNA Theory that Tyson’s ideology does not appreciates is that this world view is pointing out to an external ex-machine conscious system as generator, and it lieaves an opened door to those educated by religious theories.
Publicação no facebook hoje: (17 março):
Inconformado! Ninguem é obrigado a gostar de um assunto que eu aprecio, mas não consigo entender como seres humanos conseguem viver ignorando este assunto! Todos os animais ignoram ele, mas humanos… já deviam estarem um pouco mais evoluidos! O assunto no meio intelectual-filosófico hoje na imprensa e Internet é a serie Cosmos, que qualquer um pode assistir no canal http://www.cosmosontv.com/
e a briga que isto levanta entre religiosos e não-religiosos. O efeito que o episodio de ontem, domingo a noite, provocou na mente de milhões de espectadores, principalmente crianças e jovens… a ira que provocou nos religiosos, principalmente pastores, sacerdotes, etc. A excelente fonte de informações sobre assuntos dos quais temos sido curiosos porem não tinhamos as informações certas, por exemplo, a origem e evolução do olho. A preocupante doutrina do apresentador falando de hipoteses e teorias como se já fossem fatos e comprovados cientificamente… E eu perdendo uma grande oportunidade para divulgar meu trabalho, pois poderia entrar nos milhares de debates que estão ocorrendo agora com uma teoria que ninguem conhece, enriquecendo os debates e portanto, as escolhas da Humanidade sobre qual caminho trilhar em seu futuro. Mas me falta um bom tradutor ao lado corrigindo meus textos, falta alguem levantando os sites onde a noticia foi divulgada e postando meus comentarios. isso aumentaria os já 300 mil hits por m6es que meu website está alcançando e daí, até pensar em aproveitar isso financeiramente para sustentar estes trabalhos. Mas não aparece uma unica alma disposta a investir o tempo que esta desperdiçando para me ajudar nesta causa. Até a Ucrania, a Turquia, etc., estão visitando mais meu website do que o Brazil, apesar da dificuldade de idoma que eles tem. Como disse de Gaulle: “brasileiros não são para serem levados a sério, ainda…” Triste, mas estes fatos comprovam a verdade.
‘Cosmos: A Spacetime Odyssey’ Episode 3 Synopsis: Newton, Halley, Gravity, and Comets
Ensaio para meu comentario:
Newton’s view of Solar System is the same situation if you try to understand a terrorist from Afganistan only in economicus bases, whithout knowing the influence of religion. Newton’s calculations are based upon the visible details of astronomical bodies ( mass, movements, position, etc) without knowing the invisible forces that connects those bodies and causes the movements (the religion of the sky). Then, his calculations got right some results, like you can get right some results from the terrorist, because his actions are related to economy also.
The reason that astronomical bodies are self-atracted and gets the composition of systems is that those bodies obeys the same force of life’s cycle that our bodies obeys. And the life’s cycle force comes from the division of primordial light waves into different frequencies, vibrations. The life’s cycle force transforms a unique biological body into several different shapes ( blastula, fetus, embryo, teenager, adult, etc.), and transforms an astronomical unique body into several different quantities ( mass, size, etc.).
Cosmos Wars, Episode III: Revenge of the Silliness
http://ncse.com/blog/2014/03/cosmos-wars-episode-iii-revenge-silliness-0015469 – ( veja meu comentario acima, no inicio, que foi publicado beste artigo da NSCE. )