Posts Tagged ‘Diálogos Publicos da Matrix/DNA’

Redes Sociais na Internet – Para Divulgacao da Matrix/DNA

segunda-feira, janeiro 13th, 2014

Dicas:

1) Reddit

1a) A Data Scientist Explains What Makes A Viral Reddit Post

Read more:  http://www.randalolson.com/2013/03/15/a-data-driven-guide-to-creating-successful-reddit-posts/#ixzz2qHLRv2cq

http://www.businessinsider.com/a-data-scientist-explains-what-makes-a-viral-reddit-post-2014-1

 

O DNA de Deus: Como ocorreu nos USA, Agora Tambem no Brasil Religiosos Tropeçam na Teoria da Matrix/DNA

quinta-feira, maio 9th, 2013

Alexander Cornwalled ev uma pastor americano ativo militante pelo partido republicano e sua igreja crista. Tem sido alvo de muitos debates devido suas posicoes extremadas em relacao a assuntos como aborto, casamento gay, etc. Dias atras fui alertado por um grupo de ateus reunidos num website denominado “The Skepitics Guide to the Universe” que minha teoria estava sendo usada por Cornwalled por interesses religiosos e me exigindo atuar desde que escrevi na primeira pagina de meu website que tenho os direitos autorais e desautorizo quem venha a usar algo com fins politicos, financeiros ou doutrinarios.  Surpreendido fui verificar o endereco que me deram “The Divine Matrix” e grande parte de meus textos e imagens estavam la. Os ateus alegaram que tambem tenho culpa porque escrevi na Home que “desde que dentro deste universo esta ocorrendo um processo de reproducao genetica do sistema desconhecido que gerou este Universo tunelado para nos produzir, e desde que aqui emergiu a Vida e a Auto-Consciencia”, sera racional supor que o sistema criador é tambem vivo e auto-consciente.” Os ateus me acusam de que assim fiz apologia religiosa e estou pregando a existencia de Deus, nao lhes sendo valida a minha insistencia em que a formula da Matrix/DNA esta sugerindo que esse sistema ex-machine tem que ser algo natural. Antes que eu pudesse tomar alguma providencia contra Cornwalled alguem entrou em seu website usando meu nome e dizendo que eu o demandaria na justica se ele nao o retirasse do ar. Cornwalled fez um estardalhaco com a Matrix/DNA dizendo que “foi descoberta uma formula que prova como foi o metodo de criacao por Deus, mas que os religiosos da America deviam imediatamente assumir e divulgar a formula antes que os ateus o façam como fizeram com a Teoria da Evolucao do Darwin usando-a para doutrinar os estudantes e afasta-los da igreja”. Mas como na America a justiçca realmente funciona e defende direitos autorais, ele retirou o website do ar, do qual mantenho uma copia. Eu jamais imaginei que meu humilde trabalho na selva amazonica pudesse um dia provocar tal celeuma na America, porem, estava acontecendo.

Agora atraves de uma pesquisa no Google descubro tambem que no Brasil um grupo religioso anima um movimento com pagina no Facebook denominado “O DNA de Deus”. Nao sei quem so e obviamente nao acredito que conheçam a Teoria da Matrix/DNA, mas ev um alento descobrir que em toda parte do mundo pessoas vindas das mais diferentes crencas estao se alertando para a existencia desse incrivel segredo oculto na Natureza. A titulo de curiosidade deixei a seguinte mensagem na pagina

(   https://www.facebook.com/DnaDeDeus   )

 

Louis Charles Morelli partilhou uma ligação.

Desculpe-me invadir sua pagina mas gostaria de sua opinião sobre isto. O nome ” DNA de Deus” me chamou atenção porque sou autor de uma teoria que pode ser denominada de “Matrix/DNA de Deus”. Resumindo, meu método estudando sistemas naturais na selva amazônica e aplicando anatomia comparada entre sistemas vivos e  inanimados resultou na teoria de que existe uma formula universal (Matrix), que a Natureza tem usado para organizar a matéria em todos os sistemas conhecidos, de átomos a galaxias a células. Acontece que  a formula tambem é a exata representação de um par de nucleotídeos, a unidade fundamental de informação do DNA. Isto significa que dentro deste Universo esta ocorrendo um processo de reprodução genética do sistema (do ser, ou seja la o que for que gerou este Universo.Pode-se dar o nome de Deus) Aqui nos USA tem havido reação a teoria e uma grande igreja daqui fez um website proclamando que foi descoberto o método da Criação e que isto prova a frase “o homem a imagem e semelhança de Deus” Enquanto isso ateus tem protestado em vários websites dizendo que estou usando a Ciência para publicidade religiosa porque digo que a emergência da vida e da Auto-Consciência aqui indica que o sistema alem do Universo sendo reproduzido aqui tem que ser vivo e consciente. Aqui nos USA esta havendo uma guerra acirrada entre Teoria da Evolução x Intelligent Designer. Uma breve ideia pode ser obtida no meu website onde esta a formula: http://theuniversalmatrix.com . Gostaria de saber a opinião de religiosos brasileiros a respeito. Grato, Louis Charles Morelli.

Evolucao: “Quebrando os Mitos do Darwinismo” – Novo Livro de Richard Milton

terça-feira, abril 9th, 2013

Shattering the Myths of Darwinism

http://www.amazon.com/Shattering-Myths-Darwinism-Richard-Milton/dp/0892818840

Este livro esta completo e livre para ler sem download no site SCRIBD.COM:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/124816244/Shattering-the-Myths-of-Dawinism

XXXXX

Por Amazon.com: Book Description

Release date: March 1, 2000

Compelling evidence that the most important assumptions on which Darwinism rests are wrong.The controversial best-seller that sent Oxford University and Nature magazine into a frenzy has at last come to the United States. Shattering the Myths of Darwinism exposes the gaping holes in an ideology that has reigned unchallenged over the scientific world for a century. Darwinism is considered to be hard fact, the only acceptable explanation for the formation of life on Earth, but with keen insight and objectivity Richard Milton reveals that the theory totters atop a shambles of outdated and circumstantial evidence which in any less controversial field would have been questioned long ago. Sticking to the facts at hand and tackling a vast array of topics, Shattering the Myths of Darwinism offers compelling evidence that the theory of evolution has become an act of faith rather than a functioning science, and that not until the scientific method is applied to it and the right questions are asked will we ever get the true answers to the mystery of life on Earth.

Richard Milton (not a creationist) is a writer, journalist and broadcaster on a wide range of subjects. He currently freelances for The Daily Telegraph and other papers. He is the author of six books including “Bad Company”, which The Sunday Times made its Business Book of the Week, and which sets out to explain why large corporations sometimes behave in self-defeating and even insane ways.  His controversial “Alternative Science” examines how and why good science is sometimes thrown out with the bad.

His novel “Dead Secret” is a mind-blowing paranormal thriller.  His latest non-fiction title “Best of Enemies” looks at Anglo-German relations through two world wars and charts the origins of modern propaganda.

His controversial “Shattering the myths of Darwinism” has caused some members of the scientific establishment to start chewing the carpet and foaming at the mouth, by daring to demand real empirical evidence in support of their Darwinian beliefs, in place of conjecture and pseudoscience.

Editorial Reviews

From Library Journal

With selective evidence and twisted logic, Milton (Alternative Science, Inner Traditions, 1996) attempts to discredit the concept of organic evolution. Although raising important questions about interpretation and methodology, he fails to overturn the neo-Darwinian framework as he attacks as “myths” the claims of modern science concerning the age of this planet, the geological column with its fossil record, and even the biological relationship between the great apes and our own species. He ignores most of the recent evolutionary literature (especially in paleoanthropology and primatology), and his chapters are full of dated illustrations, misleading generalizations, and glaring errors, e.g., “the evidence for humankind’s own evolution is actually nonexistent” and “Today, ‘Java man’ is thought to be an extinct, giant gibbonlike creature and not connected to humans.” His own interpretation of earth history remains ambiguous, leaving the reader to wonder about what hidden motive underscores this morass of falsehoods. Not recommended.?H. James Birx, Canisius Coll., Buffalo, N.Y. Copyright 1997 Reed Business Information, Inc. –This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

Review

“The world of science faces the biggest challenge yet to one of its most basic beliefs.” (London Times )
“The world of science faces the biggest challenge yet to one of its most basic beliefs.” (Neville Hodgkinson, Sunday Times )
“On subject after subject–methods of dating, the fossil record, microbiology, geology, etc.–Milton shows the inadequacy of the evidence for Darwinian evolution.” (Alpha Magazine )
“When a reputable science correspondent of more than twenty years’ experience raises serious doubts, then it is time to sit up and listen.” (Challenge )
“Bang goes the empirical basis on which neo-Darwinism rests.” (Bishop Hugh Montefiore, The Church Times  )
“. . . Significant and fascinating.” (Donald A. Yerxa, Journal of the American Scientific Affiliation, June 2001 )
XXXXX

Abaixo o post da TheMatrixDNA no Forum:

TPUC.ORG
by TNK » Sun Apr 07, 2013 1:31 pm
(Post nao publicado aguardando moderadores)
TheMatrixDNA:

It is not good for Humanity if it is a product of chance, alone. And since that the Darwin’s mechanism begins with transcription error or mutation by chance, the whole mechanism should be by chance, it does not matter natural selection: if there were no chance in mutations, selection shouldn’t have them for selecting. The problem is with those gene mutations. I think we have no enough knowledge for scientific conclusion about them. An experiment that could prove it should be showing a mutation of DNA surrounded totally by empty space. Then we could deny the possibility of hidden forces or variables, and the non-existence of unknown dimensions acting over the event. But even this experience would be not enough: maybe the hidden force is already encrypted into primordial DNA.

If it is not good for Humanity (if we appeared by chance, probable we will disappear by chance also, so, why we are building something for future…) and there are no scientific proof, why we should stopping the search for alternatives to Darwin’s theory… For instance, The Matrix/DNA new method of research and the surprising theoretical results suggesting that forces coming from this galaxy are acting over those mutations should be considered and tested. At least, it is a new source of superior meanings for Humanity existence.

Explicando um dos maiores segrêdos do mundo… pela Matrix/DNA

sábado, fevereiro 2nd, 2013

Uma explicação bem suscinta de uma imagem e em protuguês. A imagem é esta:

Human and Earth Life Cycle by MatrixDNA

Human and Earth Life Cycle by MatrixDNA

Tudo começa quando uma estrêla morre. Sua massa degradada fica como uma nuvem no espaço. Girando sôbre si mesma devido à rotação da galaxia, surge um rodamoinho no centro. O rodamoinho absorve parte da massa, ao mesmo tempo que cometas nergizados expelidos por gigantes vulcões dos pulsares penetram o rodamoinho. Misturando massa e energia o vortex emite esferas energéticas chamejantes que caem no espaço sideral. São as sementes astronomicas. Avançando no espaço em meio à poeira que vai se agregando e cobrindo a esfera chamejante vão se criando diferentes camadas de densidade pois cada vez mais distante o espaço se esfria. Nêste ponto a semente se tornou um planeta que cai na órbita de alguma estr6ela. A energia da estrela derrete as camadas de gelo criando os oceanos e continua a se infiltrar no planeta até alcançar seu nucleo onde desperta a semente e começam as reações nucleares. Como valvula de escape da pressão surgem vulcões em toda a superficie cada vez maiores, mais potentes.

Emitem magma na forma de esferas chamejantes que ultrapassam o campo gravitacional e caem no espaço na forma de cometas. O planeta nesta fase é um pulsar. Na continuação a ultima camada de rocha do pulsar colapsa e a luminosidade do nucleo se revela no espaço, criando uma estrela supernova, que se distancia da estrela-mãe e vai criar seu próprio sistema, sua familia. Tudo igual ao ciclo de vida humano. Inclusive o processo da reprodução sexual na sua versão mecanica/astronomica de nossos ancestrais. Mas lembre-se que as células tem dois tipos de formação: as primeiras células se formaram por simbiose, depois apenas se replicam. Para galaxias é a mesma coisa, hoje elas se replicam, mas as originais foram formadas por esse processo descoberto pela Matrix/DNA Theory. Moral: a matéria burra da terra não poderia ter inventado sózinha esta extraordinaria engenharia. Ela já estava escrita, desenhada, nas estrêlas.

Blogs de Ciências no Brasil

sexta-feira, janeiro 4th, 2013

1 – Vídeo de Palestra sôbre blogs de ciencias no Brasil… e os links sugeridos

CPBR3 – Blogs de ciência (

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0_1ZaOT_7SE&list=FLCPp07tsWrxoMUPoJDiCf4w

VER : Papo de Homem – Blog masculino que inclue artigos de ciência

VER: Meio-bit … blog que fala de ciencias

Debate no Youtube: How the Universe came from “Nothing”, Richard Dawkins and Lawrence Krauss discuss

domingo, dezembro 30th, 2012

How the Universe came from “Nothing”, Richard Dawkins and Lawrence Krauss discuss

https://www.youtube.com/all_comments?v=CXGyesfHzew

XXXXXXXXXXX

TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNADec – 30 – r:03 AM

Dawkins, like Darwin, had reduced the Universe into terrestrial events for analyzing biological history. They conclude by evolution and tried to identify its mechanisms. But… a microbe living inside a womb watching the embryogenese of a human fetus should conclude by evolution. We, outside the womb knows that evolution is not the ultimate event, it is “reproduction”. Amplifying our vision to the time/space of universal history leads us to see reproduction of Universes with another mechanisms.

XXX

TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Universe is not magic,he can’t create new information from nothing. So, he only can make a new thing, system, by the same process he was made. He can’t invent from nothing new information for other kind of process. We are a new system, so, if we want to know how the Universe was made, we have the process by which we were made. Our body started with a Big Bang, explosion of spermatozoon from initial singularity. What’s was before our fecundation? Another thing like us, conscious, natural. So?

Ninguem me “Cutuca” No Maior Debate da História que Está Acontecendo Agora No Youtube? Brasileiros! Tucuta-me…please! (10)

quarta-feira, dezembro 26th, 2012

POSTS DA MATRIX/DNA PARA ABERTURA DE DISCUSSÕES

XXX

Living in the jungle I woke up for the salvage chaotic state of this biosphere. All creatures, from any plant to any animal are tortured in this existence. But, then, suddenly we see a beautiful small flower. It seems not belonging to that world. We see a bird nurturing its offspring. We see the tall tree offering flavor fruits. And we see the salvage natives. A mother holding her baby and a male bringing on food to them. This is order lifting up from chaos. This is divine evolution.

XXX

Creation plus Evolution is a process much more complex than all guys are thinking here. The deeper template where natural history is established is the history of light light and dark light, ( vibrations popping out of a membrane of nothing that separates different worlds). Matter only is adjusted over this template. Driven by this universal force, biological systems (aka life) evolves in relation to Earth and degenerates in relation to this galactic system. The source of light is creation.

XXX

God said to humans: “Grow and multiplicate!”

But…he forgot to say the same thing to this planet. Now that human had grow, we have super-population, but the planet stands the same size…

What fuck…bad designer retard god!

XXX

Thanks America! This debate is signal that a collective mind of a whole Nation has the courage to face its inner conflicts, thinking about then, suffering the pain of self-correction,but just it keeps the strong creative power of this great nation. What’s about the European and the Asian religious countries, South America, etc., which already discovered the ultimate “Truth” and has no capacity for fix what is sure wrong? There is no such debate. Yours voluntary suffering here is an heroic act!

XXX

What’s beyond the Membrane of Nothing?! The astonished idea coming from Theoretical Science, is Lawrence’s “something from nothing”. Since that Matrix/DNA calculations arrived to the astonishing idea that the seven frequencies of electric-magnetic spectrum of lightwaves are the source that imprints the vital cycle, life, into matter, we are searching the source of this natural light. The unique situation where things emerges is through membranes, then, I think there is a Membrane of Nothing.

XXX

TheMatrixDNA

NoGoodScienceForYou is here suggesting a video ( /watch?v=HRyXauc0h04) which uses real scientific reality as propaganda for his theory. I think the best education for children is showing the images of reality but, being careful self-watching for not using any kind of concepts related to adult’s interpretations, no imposition of theories. I could make a video with same images having in parallel images of spermatozoons as comets, oocyte as nuclear black holes, etc. This is for philosophy class.

XXX

TheMatrixDNA – Dec – 26 – 7:35 PM

Creationists frequently are using the probability calculus for refuting the odds of evolution and evolutionists are using the same calculus for reinforce the odds produced by chance. Both are wrong. The “individual” evolution of a new being inside a womb is driven by the external environment (human species as the non-intelligent designer) which acts internally (through DNA) and externally. Biological evolution is being driven by an yet unknown external environment, probabilities does not applies.

XXX

TheMatrixDNA 10:11 AM – DEC – 29 –

Atheists: “How man was made?”

Creationist: “By magics of God”.

Atheist: ” Hummm… how the planet was made?”

Creationist: ” By magics of God!”

Atheist: ” Hummm… how was made…

Creationist: “Stop with these stupid questions… it is magics always down!”

Really, really that’s the Science they want for kids?

· 

XXX

TheMatrixDNADec – 27 – 2:28 AM

Creationist woman – “My grandfather was not a monkey!”

Lawrence Krauss – ” Well… yours case is not so clear… ” (maybe a pork?)

Evolutionists could be more intelligent if they explain the real state of Science today. All known facts suggests strongly the physical body of human beings came from primates. But Neurology – the field really expert in this matter – says that it still does not found how neurons produces thoughts and how they are related to human mind. This is hope for dignity

XXX

TheMatrixDNA – Dec – 30 – 4:23 AM

Edmond Goo: “Evolution was spoken into existence”
No. Biological Evolution is a point of time/space located at the long chain of causes and effects started with the Big Bang beginning with particles evolution, atomic and Cosmological Evolution. All forces of Biology were there at the last non-biological ancestor, the top pf cosmological evolution and I can show you where. But… we don’t know if the very seen steps of evolution is universal evolution or merely reproduction of universes.
XXX
TheMatrixDNA – Dec – 30 – 4:23 AM

GoodScienceForYou: “Mitochondria in most species has lost over 1200 complete genes”

And you says it is due degeneration from Adam’s DNA. You have a point, you are right. Adam was a closed selfish astronomical system, also called LUCA, his DNA was the formula of Universal Matrix. The decay or Fall of Adam into the microscope shape of biological system due entropy was a change from closed to opened system. Mitochondria tried to close it doing photosynthesis, and got it as cell plants.

XXX

TheMatrixDNA

The mistakes of “degeneration theory”:

About the graphic made at “evolution-is-degeneration dot ComSindex dot asp?PaginaID =1102”

Matrix/DNA:The graphic doesn”t shows a complete period of micro-evolution, nothing about universal evolution. Biological systems are result of the decay of astronomicals systems described by Newtonian mechanics plus Relativity plus Quantum Mechanics theories composing a quasi-perfect closed system, half-alive. This “evolution” has been reproduction of that ancestor

XXX

The mistakes of “degeneration theory”:

As introduction, they says: evolution theory says all life has started as single cell organisms”

TheMatrixDNA: It is wrong. There is no separation of life and no-life when talking about natural systems. Then, “life” has not started as single cell organisms. Biological systems (aka, “life”) had all principles of its forces, elements and properties inside atomic, astronomical systems, expressed or not. See them at Matrix/DNA models.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

INICIO DOS DEBATES

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Peer reviewed scientific paper shows there hasn’t been enough time in the history of the universe for evolution to take place.

Journal BIO-Complexity, “Time and Information in Evolution,” Winston Ewert, Ann Gauger, William Dembski, and Robert J. Marks, II once again show that a mathematical simulation of evolution doesn’t model biologically realistic processes of Darwinian evolution at all.

bio-complexity(dot)org/ojs/ind­ex(dot)php/main/article/view/B­IO-C.2012.4

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

This debate between Dembski team and Ewens team will not be solved while Humanity doesn’t know the entire context that affects our biosphere and living things. The existence of biological systems is not due a simultaneous act of magical creation neither a long process obeying natural selection as agent of immediate environmental changes. For instance, the process of Earth nuclear reactions and Sun’s reactions are stronger forces composing NS, any change there means changes here. See Matrix/DNA

XXX

Evolution has been destroyed and is now in the level of archaic mythological science. These priests of the past faith based pseudo science will be known for how they retarded biology and any progress towards cures for diseases. They’ll be mocked as they should be.

NOT ONE cure has ever come from the medical industry! We have rampant NEW genetic diseases eating away at us and killing our babies.

The rise in genetic diseases under their watch is horrendous. thanks to this Evodelusionism. LOOK!

The souls of the creators of the Selfish Paradise, Adam and Eve, that remains at Earth in shape of humans, are joined around the creationist world view, has been corrected. These people wants to reproduce at Earth the falling paradise, but they reserves to them the residence at the palace, while all other humans beings should be the slaves. You can see the design of that Paradise at Matrix/DNA Theory: You see Adam and Eve, the serpent, the tree, the apple, the Fall, and you will know the truth

XXX

I’m very glad to hear that you got saved. I certainly agree that the effects of Evolutionist propaganda are tragic. We need to fight for what’s true, but I don’t think comments on a YouTube video are exactly the frontlines I’m looking for. 😛

(For Evolutionists reading this comment: yes, spreading Evolutionism is only tragic from my Creationist viewpoint.)

· in reply to ncwdane (Show the comment)

The effects of Judaism and its Bible and its production as Christianism approving human slavery, sharing Humanity into predators and preys, and as Islam, the violence that never ends, are most tragic. You are a bad human when propagating that anti-Humanity book. It is rational to suppose that there is some thing as God, but one needs never forgetting the size of this Universe, then, giving to a “possible God” his real dimensions above the Universe. The bible stupidly reduces Reason and God

· in reply to Peter Markley (Show the comment)

XXX

The earliest writings on that subject come from the satanist Helena Blavatsky. She was busted several times scamming people and making up history. I take it you believe in her channeled demonic writings or one of the copycat offshoots like Zeitgeist the movie. The history lesion in Zeitgeist comes from Blavatsky’s imagination.

· in reply to geezusispan (Show the comment)

Yeahh… Blavatsky, a woman that challenged the Russian status quo established by imperators supported by arm and religion, a woman that abandoned a powerful Russian military husband, for travelling alone to Tibet searching other kind of knowledge. Was she a satanist? You, as supporter of an established power ruling at Vatican, unable to challenge the status quo, that had enslaved populations inside industries, is a saint? I prefer Blavatsky.

· in reply to Edmond Goo (Show the comment)

XXX

I have thought that the Earth is an amusement park. Where beings come, inhabit us and share our life experiences, feelings, etc. I’m not sure if the science fiction story has been written or not..

Your thought maybe is right, but, it includes the supposition that should have a parallel spiritual Universe, is it right? If so, I remember that there is no evidence/comparative parameters here for parallels universes and spiritual existences. Why not thinking that those beings that come, inhabit us, are really bubbles of consciousnesses that pops out of this planetary matter? Think about computers: software (as bubbles of intelligence) and hardware (material living bodies) in feed-back.

· in reply to geezusispan (Show the comment)

XXX

Have you ever written down your complete philosophy? It would make a great book… I would couch it in science fiction, personally.

· in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

I think it is not “my philosophy” because it is a normal natural effect given some circumstances. Any one, included you, should get the same world vision if – known the modern scientific data and with single scientific tools – go to live in some virgin jungle by 4 or 7 years. It is the jungle that produces this philosophy over modern hard-wired brain by scholar education. But Darwin took 30 years for written a book, the jungle is big, there are lots of data, I need doing lots of work yet.

· in reply to geezusispan (Show the comment)

XXX

GoodScienceForYou 1 hour ago

There is no evolution. There is no evidence for it. Not one species had evolved more complexity. You are a liar and are part of the denial of humans and their compulsions that destroy not only human lives but all life on earth. Putting your faith in humans has never worked. Why are you so stupid you want to thing now is different. They have killed so many people in the name of some idea.

· in reply to RipleySawzen (Show the comment)

Maybe you are right. Maybe there is no evolution inside this Universe. Millions of generations of hypothetical intelligent particles living 17 seconds each one and inside a fecundated ovum should watch the steps of evolution from single zygote to a human embryo believing that was watching evolution. We, outside their “universe” knows that it is “reproduction”. Maybe we are watching and working the reproduction of the son of some god. But… for while, we are watching evolution, that’s reality.

Changing the faith in humans for faith in supernatural ghosts produces the preys (95% of world population?) and hating humans by loving the salvage past animalism inheritance produces predators (the 1%?). Why human beings has followed these stupid millennial social models, shared into salvage capitalism, salvage communism, etc? It is the work of the “serpent” that convinced “Eve” in the “Paradise”. It is the stupid universal material tendency to be extreme selfish closed system. Not humanism…

XXX

“There are millions of single celled species that never evolved into multicellular organisms.” Exactly and that means there is no evidence of any form of advancement from a single cell to 2 cells with the new cells performing new functions. Thanks.

· in reply to RipleySawzen (Show the comment)

Don’t you know embryogenesis?! Fecundation, zygote, meiosis, morula…etc? You need learn something new, but for doing it, you need change your magic supernatural ghost creator in the sky by the real, natural, creator in the sky. Functions comes in two types: the systemic function (which is the effect over the external world from the projection of the shape of the whole system) and internal systemic function, which is related to each part of a system. There are different expressions of (cont.)

of internal functions and each system has its tendency expressed by the most strong expressed part. Any bit of external change makes changes at internal expressions. The interactions between internal parts creates infinite numbers of internal functions, called “fuzzy logic”. The initial process of eukaryotes merely replicating its cells is the first phase of biological evolution mimicking the process by which stars, galaxies are replicated, by self-recycling (see Matrix/DNA models)

· in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)
XXX

I want you to name one disease that “modern” medical science has cured.

I want you to find one positive mutation ever found in the human genome.

Where is your absolutely irrefutable physical evidence of simple life evolving into complex? NO opinions allows and no religious books.

· in reply to TheArgonianbeast (Show the comment)

“I want you to find one positive mutation ever found in the human genome.”

The Matrix/DNA models explains how and why the genome is continually mutated. The fundamental unit of information which is the building block of RNA/DNA is a bi-lateral pair of nucleotides, which is the biological microscopic counterpart of the building block that came evolving from quantum vortexes after Big Bang, to atoms to galaxies. This universal “matrix” diversifies into infinite different kinds of nucleotides

Medical science is going away off the beam due Biology being seen as separated from Physics. It’s the same that one try to understand the existence of human body composed by flesh organs and substance without the skeleton and nervous systems which are related to the entity of natural systems. They had separated Universal Evolution into two blocks, with no evolutionary links between them. The abysmal hole created between two blocks are being fulfilled with the myth of absolute randomness.

· in reply to GoodScienceForYou (Show the comment)

XXX

I use evidence and the DNA is fantastic evidence for only DE-EVOLUTION.. All creatures are losing gene functions and we can easily see this in the DNA. Fossilization is not rare. We have samples of over 200 million fossils from most creatures that have ever lived. WE have 88% of the non bird, NOW LIVING, vertebrates as fossils and the original looks FAR more fit than what we see now. Go look! You cannot use faith and belief!!

You are watching the reduction of ENIAC into a laptop and saying it is degradation?!

But… the difference between things produced by ENIAC/apes and laptops/humans are not de-evolution.

· in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

XXX

“suboptimal function”

This has to be the dumbest argument for evolution of all of them.

The famous laryngeal nerve “evidence”. If the path of this nerve is not optimal then God is a screw up.

The fact that “evolution” only leads to screw ups from the original far more fit condition means that the laryngeal nerve is evidence for genetic dysfunctions of original “engineering” when the nerve was in a much shorter path at one time and “Evotards” still don’t fully know the purpose of this nerve.

·

We know. The purpose of this nerve is transforming chemical operations for connections between organism’s organs into sounds waves (voice) for connecting separated brains into a whole Humanist system. When you need transformations of signal waves you need apply quantum superposition and following separation. Then, the left and right nerves superposed makes the complete circuit of an established system, and when are separated they can be turned into a new different system. But…this is complex

XXX

In the first paragraph they clearly define “anti-evolution” or loss of good genetic engineering as the creatures “degrade” from the more “optimal” to the “suboptimal”.

This is the MOST compelling evidence for anti-evolution or gradual degrading of the best genetic engineering to the more defective genetic engineering we see today that I have ever seen and that we can see today.

·

The problem is that yours “more optimal” is good for stupid monkeys, but unsupportable for who has some intelligence. Yours optimal is called “Adam’s DNA”, a creature that was living like a stupid monkey eternally at a garden full of animals and plants. Any intelligent being would prefer the suicide, if they think that would be condemned to that life by all eternity. Thankfully had the Fall, the “Adam” genetic degradation, even that we were condemned to beginning as microscope cell here

XXX

The famous The Left Recurrent Laryngeal Nerve is totally evidence for genetic degradation. These people are “nuts” by the way in not being able to see the obvious, because they are brainwashed into seeing things BACKWARDS.

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

You are still blind to the deeper secrets of Nature Why the left RLN os different from the right RLN? This question makes no sense, there is no right and left nerves, there is a complete circuit of a system, separated into two slices. Make the superposition of those two nerves… you gets a complete circle. Why they makes a circle and why the left has several branches? Well… see the Matrix/DNA formula for natural systems, you will understand everything. No degradation


XXX

“protein functional redundancy”

There are only a very few amino acids available to make living tissue from, so OF COURSE it will be used in different creatures to make similar body parts.

Look at the amino acids chart and tell me how many do you see? (20)

We live on a tiny finite little planet with fixed resources.

We do not have infinite resources to build body tissue from.

Drive your eyes down to look to those 20 aminoacids and now drive yours eyes up to see the galaxy, the Universe, that produced them. Ask “why”, “how”, “for what”? Do you see the evolution of aminoacids? First step: Carbon is called by Nature to be the central atom. Why? Because Nature has several different faces, states, and our astronomical system was standing at the specific state as closed perfect natural system. Which is composed by six universal functions. Just carbon atomic number. So on..

“protein functional redundancy… our tiny finite little planet with fixed resources.”

This doesn’t means that life was tunelled due intelligent design. Proteins are slices of a kind of complete systemic circuit – the system around us – so the slices are limited in number. Planets has limited variations, resources, because limited is the specific state of Nature that produced them. But biological systems (aka, “life”) are just a rebellion against the creator system, so, open for mutations

· in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

XXX

“anatomical and molecular parahomology”

It is ridiculous crap “pseudo science” and a stretch of the imagination.

It goes along with the idea that fools think that any similarity of use, appearance can only mean a direct genetic linage link.

This is utterly ridiculous and in fact all that we have seen of this idea in fossils of the “ancient version” of the creature are shown to have far more usable features and the “homology” becomes more complex as you go back in time.

“De-evolution”

XXX

I was “informed ” yesterday that Darwin was wrong in places and so they changed it to whatever the heck they wanted.Even when I said Thats what I was taught in school they said I was wrong…and that was only 35 years ago.So arguing “evolution ” is pointless, as they now believe SOMETHING else.Bit sad really.They dispute their own “simple to complex” .. if youcan believe that…apparently it goes BOTH ways now….very sad.

· in reply to jhawkinsjs1

While Naturalists are struggling trying to understand this world, trying to discover mechanisms and processes that can be transformed into technology for increasing Humanity power, spiritualists are criticizing them, being obstacles to their job?! No spirits and supernatural beings has made anything good for human kind till now and still 95% of our brothers in species are being tortured in this stupid conditions of life. Evolution is the idea that arose from a man that sacrificed his life for us

· in reply to TheOneTheOwnLak (Show the comment)

XXX

I was “informed ” yesterday that Darwin was wrong in places and so they changed it to whatever the heck they wanted.Even when I said Thats what I was taught in school they said I was wrong…and that was only 35 years ago.So arguing “evolution ” is pointless, as they now believe SOMETHING else.Bit sad really.They dispute their own “simple to complex” .. if youcan believe that…apparently it goes BOTH ways now….very sad.

· in reply to jhawkinsjs1

That’s the cause we agnostics prefers the naturalist/rationalist community than the religious community. Our life experience as humans at Earth have been too much bad, our dream is to change everything. The naturalists woks in rhythm of changes, while creationists are conservationist of this stupid “status quo”, so, they are obstacles and unuseful.

· in reply to TheOneTheOwnLak (Show the comment)

XXX

Even the “father” of evolution mentioned sripulations under which evolution could not be true. Those stipulations were met. Darwin discredited evolution in his own words. But you all havent actually taken any time to study it, you just assume blindly.

Why aren’t you honesty and respectful enough? If you want to destroy the worldvision of a man due you think it has bad effects, what you should do? Repeat his experiments, contest his evidences. Take a ship and go by 4 years facing the hell in a salvage world, do observations by yourself, applying the modern knowledge, show what was wrong with Darwin idea. Or do you want to refute such sacrificial heroic job standing under air conditioned? Taking Reason off Nature by magical thinking is easier

· in reply to jhawkinsjs1 (Show the comment)

XXX

@”Christianity is a theory”

No it isn’t. It’s an assertion.

· in reply to SheepTheAsian

Christianity is a theory by the real definition of “theory” by the Greeks that coined the word. It is not a theory by scientific definition, but here is not a scientific community congress, it is a public debate. Theory is “a contemplative and rational type of abstract or generalizing thinking, or the results of such thinking”- Wikipedia. Christianism is product of earlier human consciousnesses recently formed as any modern baby impregnates its surroundings with magics and ghosts friends.

· in reply to emfederin (Show the comment)

@”Christianity is a theory by the real definition of “theory”

The guy was equating christianity as a “theory” to evolution as a “theory” and was attempting to put them on the same plane.

They are not.

· in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

Both can not equating at the same plane as the operations of a baby brain (Bible authors) is not the operations of a teenager brain (Darwin). All big religious theories were built from an unique source: the real little world seen by an infant intelligence plus flashes of memories popping up in the baby brain about a not seen but lived womb’s world. Ancient founders of all religions were visionaries (embryos) that had real visions about the womb were our ancestors shapes lived: the Cosmos.

· in reply to emfederin (Show the comment)

You will not believe in my narrative as I don’t believe in it, I am still searching a better explanation as skeptical that I am. The narrative is: a native xaman living in Amazon jungle 30 years ago, with altered state of mind due their beverages, described visions of black holes and cosmogony identical to descriptions of black holes and cosmogony seen at Blavatsky books about “The Secret Doctrine”, or “theosophy” made by ancient eastern 5.000 years ago. I have a theory about: same baby brains

· in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

Rational – based on or in accordance with reason or logic, able to think clearly, sensibly, and logically, endowed with the capacity to reason.

Christianity hardly fits the criteria for “rational”.

· in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

Yes, Christianity is not rational in the sense that Reason must be a natural product of nature. But… the non-rational productions of Bible’s authors can be rationally understood, using an analogy: the excessive installations of an industry is used to produce different sub-products. My theory is that the fusion of Chrom-2 suddenly produced an abrupt augment of cerebral mass beyond the normal installation that should be produced by the normal evolutionary chain. Earlier hominids had imaginations

· in reply to davermiava (Show the comment)

I an sorry that I am not finding now a recently published paper showing that human fetus suddenly produces neurons twice more fast than apes/monkeys fetus. I think it is a good evidence for this theory about the development of consciousness at the level of the human species, when I separated the stages of its evolution between babies/teenagers/adults shapes. But… why still there are people that believes in the Bible, which was a baby’s minded production? Missing education, denial to be adult?

· in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

XXX


I honestly don’t know what to think. The idea that there’s a guy upstairs pulling all the strings sounds silly, and completely illogical, yet for macro-evolution contradicts itself in more ways than one.

While it makes absolutely no sense how or why we’d choose to go back to primal technology after conquering the galaxy, the only thing I’m truly comfortable with is that we developed on another distant planet and migrated to earth.

Yes, makes no sense the idea of some intelligent powerful being responsible by this chaotic biosphere and the struggle for species to become powerful. And makes no sense that an intelligence in shape of quasi-apes after conquering galaxies with high technology arrived here forgetting all that technology. The unique explanation that makes sense to me is Matrix/DNA Theory. Intelligence was merely potential at ancestors that were, themselves, the building block of any shape of natural systems.

· in reply to SoulofaDeity

XXX

Macro evolution sounds silly because there is no such thing. Its just evolution. There is no reason to split it into micro and macro.

· in reply to tsub0dai (Show the comment)

Biological evolution is merely a micro-evolutionary cycle which must be added to lots of others micro-cycles and finally composing the Universal Evolution, from the extreme singularity resumed to a central point towards complexity expanded to astronomical size. How should you call the period of evolution that goes from yours body shape as teenager until the final shape of adult? As biological systems we are one transitional shape of a universal system that evolves by vital cycle process.

· in reply to NegridoPie

XXX

from simple to complicated

· in reply to NuggetKazooie (Show the comment)

Things does not change by themselves from simple to complicated, this should be creating new information from nothing, by magics. But there are things like atomic, astronomic, biological systems that changes from simple to complex, at individual and populations levels. Individual occurs at embryogenesis, a body transforming from extreme singularity to complex. The mystery is that this world has a hierarchy of systems and you are not seeing the system the informations are coming from.

· in reply to TheOneTheOwnLak

XXX

Panspermia, there is no real evidence, but it seems logical…

· in reply to SoulofaDeity (Show the comment)

Panspermia only transfers the question how biological systems arose, from Earth to other astronomical body. The natural elements and informations for transforming non-organic into organic and electric-magnetic-mechanical systems into biological systems does not arises by magics or absolutely randomness. Those necessary and enough for building biologicals must come from a stellar system described by Newtonian mechanics turned into half-biological galaxy, as described by Matrix/DNA Theory.

· in reply to geezusispan

@”Panspermia only transfers the question how biological systems arose, from Earth to other astronomical body”

And there you have it, folks.

You see this, soullessdeity?

Even matrixdna, world-class expert at butchering logic, reason and lucidity, not only completely understands the inherent conflict contained in your ridiculous statement, but can even state it on a level that approaches eloquence.

That alone should have you burying your head in utter shame.

· in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

I don’t understand why posts like yours are being flagged as spam. You, as everybody, has the right to express opinions, we are debating theories, one can read or ignore what he/she doesn’t like. This is not honesty. About logic I do my best advocating the logics that I learned from nude. virgin, salvage Nature living 7 years at Amazon jungle were was elaborated Matrix/DNA worldvision. Conflicts with modern scholar logic is an issue to be solved by time, not by us. Who is away off the beam?

· in reply to emfederin (Show the comment)

XXX

Look! There are trees. Someone must have designed them. See? Tree elves are real and great designers engineering trees for everyone. How else did trees get here, if not by the mysterious powers of the chief tree elf?

· 

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Yes, trees were designed. Genetically, by transmission of “Matrix/DNA” from their creators…living in the sky. Trees are the same image of galaxies.The trunk represents the central nuclear axis. The branches are the galaxy’s arms. The leaves are the planets. The yellow fruits pending on the arms are the stars. The plant cell is the biological tendency to reproduce the closed astronomical system with chloroplasts making photosynthesis linking the cell to the star, which is an evolution-stopper.

·  in reply to PinkUnicornIsLord (Show the comment)

XXX

Mikezzz749 25 minutes ago

Question: why can’t humans create a self replicating machine? We can’t even create a machine that can eat breakfast. Intelligent designing humans can’t come close to the technology, complexity, efficiency, eloquence, etc of any type of life. Why would random chance processes be better able to produce life (even when the laws of physics, entropy, are against their natural creation?). I’m interested in an intelligent response! Do you have one?

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

“Machine” and “life” are cultural symbols used for describing real states and details of Nature. We learn mechanisms, processes existing at Nature and we see matter organized as working systems. Our technology is mimicking natural phenomena, sometimes applying fuzzy logics, mixing mechanisms and materials from different phenomena and producing new arrangements. We produces “machines” because our limited sensors and brain capability see only mechanical and biological aspects of natural systems.

·  in reply to Mikezzz749 (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

If you want to debate your theory about this yet unknown world first of all you need be honest and a method. You post this exactly post here yesterday, got several answers, now answers that answers.

·  in reply to Mikezzz749 (Show the comment)

Martin Koch 46 minutes ago

Man has created self replicating machines.

·  in reply to Mikezzz749 (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Could you elaborate this information? Are you referring to synthetic molecules, like those from Craig Venter? Matrix/DNA is researching the extensive already published papers related to NASA research of self-replicating robots, but any additional information about other sectors will be welcome.

·  in reply to Martin Koch (Show the comment)

Mikezzz749 42 minutes ago

@Martin Koch really? That’s all you got? Just flat out denial? Oh brother.

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

NASA has a sector dedicated to study self-replicating machines. The goal is sending robots like Curiosity to other astronomical bodies, self-replicating robots that could use the matter of those bodies for populating the astro, maybe extracting some valorous mineral, etc. I am preparing a descriptive suggestion because the Matrix/DNA models arrive to a theoretical formula, a software’s diagram about a natural self-replicating machine. It is about the Newtonian mechanics aspect of systems

·  in reply to Mikezzz749 (Show the comment)

JoshuaWaller 41 minutes ago

The same question would have been asked as to why humans can’t get to the moon a hundred years ago. Not only have we done that, but we’re getting closer to building a self replicating machine.

Also, technically, we absolutely can create a self replicating creature that eats. We can create some that are even capable of learning on a fundamental level. Programmers have done that for quite some time. It’s limited to another, simulated universe. Technically, those programmers could be gods.

·  in reply to Mikezzz749 (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

This issue is good food for thought. Nature makes self-replicating machines: a stellar system (working with the principles of Newtonian mechanics) degenerates, decomposes, its dust composes again as a new stellar system. But this process is self-recycling, when the original machine needs “dying” and its matter be used for a new one. Suppose that we could insert a software inside each atom of Curiosity and when the robot become oldest, we keep it at same place, the atoms would joining again…

·  in reply to JoshuaWaller (Show the comment)

XXX

Joe Shmoe 31 minutes ago

Then why doesn’t 1 human have at least 1 wing growing out of their back. The fly did it, w/ less of a need to fly, than we have. They can walk around all day and find poop. That is their life “poop”, poop is on the ground, they do not need wings.

·  in reply to g24417 (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Joe, the causes are deeper than we think. Wings can be a result of personal effort (anfibians jumps) or can be imposed into a specie by informations flowing in this environment. Wings are specific shapes of accessories developed from cellular cilia which was produced by a universal systemic function number 5. This same function produced the tails of comets for realizing an operation. Here, the system that built biosphere was in need of something being the transporter of pollen. It was imposed

·  in reply to Joe Shmoe (Show the comment)

XXX

Alan Clarke 18 minutes ago

@tsub0dai “humans are far more diverse as a species than any individual person”

The population of human species is comprised of individuals. Theoretically, one individual from today’s human population could be compared to one individual, Adam, in the creation model for genetic diversity. The quagga is an example of selective breeding (artificial selection) used to restore lost genetic information to a few individuals. Natural selection works oppositely toward genetic entropy, i.e. loss.

·  in reply to tsub0dai (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Yes, Adam/Eve were/is the most perfect genome possible to be made by Nature. Their genome was the formula for building their bodies, which was a closed non-minded system, merely extension of their genome. You can see their “photo” published by Matrix/DNA theory. Natural Selection worked oppositely to their tendencies, entropy causing the big Fall. As microscopic biological systems, the offspring of Adam/Eve lifted up at planets, as opened systems. The sinner father in the sky is driven NS now.

·  in reply to Alan Clarke (Show the comment)

XXX

GoodScienceForYou 53 minutes ago

The land of militant Evotards who constantly give me death threats:

Austrailia: “The incidence rate for all cancers combined increased by 27% from 383 cases per 100,000 people in 1982 to 485 cases per 100,000 people in 2007.”

This is the highest rise in cancer of all the social liberal states I have found 127% rise in cancer in 25 years.

Cancer is only caused by genetic defects according to 449087 peer medical papers on PubMed, the international library of genetic diseases.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Yes, cancer is an issue that needs urgent attentions. If you see the picture at my website tipping “The Cycle Of Cholesterol And The Matrix” you will know a new approach for understanding diseases. We have the formula for perfect systems, any disease is dysfunction of that formula. My problem is that I am alone doing this, have no time and resources. I did only fast research about bad cholesterol, Alzheimer. For analyzing cancer under Matrix models is necessary reading lots of informations.

·  in reply to GoodScienceForYou (Show the comment)

XXX

GoodScienceForYou 20 seconds ago

Germany, with militant socialists liberalism has 7.5 million functionally illiterate adults out of a population of 81.7 million.

That is a great sign of how well that works. Germany used to be the country where science and engineering prevailed and German engineering was well known. Now 9% of the population can’t read or write. They are setting up programs to educate people who have already been through the school system

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

I think this is normal result from WW2: generations of people went to hard work instead schools. But this is also a suggestion that Matrix/DNA models are right. They are suggesting a different kind of targets for the Science enterprise, producing a different kind of technology, medicine, human habitat, different design for urban life. Different from that produced by Germany, whose unconscious target was driven to be a kind of Brave New World ruled by the Big Brother, mimicking insects societies

·  in reply to GoodScienceForYou (Show the comment)

XXX

GoodScienceForYou 1 minute ago

OUR DNA closely maps out our history of self destruction. Its clear that we have been destroying our genome for a long time and it shows in the huge numbers of deaths directly due to genetic diseases, 30.4 million is less than half of the real number each year. Considering that we created all the viral fungal and bacterial infections by our stupid actions that kill us from infections.

We seem to have become animals with sexual compulsions owning us completely, never aware of what that is doing

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

The building blocks of DNA, bi-lateral pair of nucleotides, are diversified copies of a unique system. each copy expresses a particular particle, a specific function, different of all others. These copies self-assembly themselves, free in biosphere and cell environment. Some kind of biological behavior selects among these copies which will be increased in their genomes. But the constructors of these copies does not want us as biological minded creatures, they want pieces for a natural machine.

·  in reply to GoodScienceForYou (Show the comment)

XXX

GoodScienceForYou 2 minutes ago

We now have the all time record of childhood congenital disease rates and at astonishing accelleration. 120% rise in Autism in 2 years! 1 in 88 diagnosed by 8 year old. 1 in 125 babies born with congenital heart disease. A rise of 135% in childhood invasive cancer in 34 years. 200% rise in 10 years of STD’s affecting 1 in 4 and young fertile girls have the highest rates. Evolution is a denial mechanism that supports this genetic suicide. “evolutionforum.info”

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

I should leave these statistics for atheists answering them. But, my personal technique is searching causes based on Matrix/DNA models. They suggests that degradation of humans genetics and bodies is the predicted results from this biosphere evolution. This biosphere was produced by chaos through fragments coming from the decay of a ordered half-mechanical/half-biologica­l system. The action of these fragments is to reproduce the machine, humans must be pieces, so, it is fixing our genome.

·  in reply to GoodScienceForYou (Show the comment)
XXX

GoodScienceForYou 3 minutes ago

History’s shown from the dark ages; the advent of many diseases that nearly wiped out humans, like the plague , wiping out 1/2 the population of Europe; resulted in extreme political measures, using the state religion, Gods authority, to stop diseases. Prison time public whipping, death to homos & anyone who had sex outside of a virgin marriage was a criminal period. It took a lot of suffering to learn to stop killing families children mothers fathers. Used to use a sharp pole for punishment.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

I had no time yet for analyzing those plagues based upon Matrix models, but these models suggestions about the origins of viruses also suggests that diseases caused by them are produced by specific psychological states – individual or collective. Viruses are organic constructs from Matrix/DNA genetic code – which exists inside living beings and flowing in the environment – produced by universal function number 5. So, those plagues were produced by specific state of mind, which were religious.

·  in reply to GoodScienceForYou (Show the comment)
XXX

GoodScienceForYou 1 hour ago

33% of people ages 15 to 64 will die from cancer in the USA. Source CDC. Childhood invasive cancer in the US has risen by 135%;34 years. STD’s in the US up 200% in 10 years with the highest rates: young women ages 14 to 24.

It seems that also the fastest growing religion is atheism.

It turns out that Evodelusionism is the religion of atheists, homos, sex addicts, socialist liberals, communists, politicians, prostitutes (no kidding) and scientists. What a group of people to model after. Eh?

· 

TheMatrixDNA 44 minutes ago

It is just the opposite. This degradation of human bodies is the corolary of millenniums of religious thought ruling societies with wrong social systems, wrong technology and wrong science. Religion is a minded-stopper, it separates men from its Nature for alliance with supernatural. Then, the whole body is driven not by the intellect, but by the laws of atoms composing the body. These atoms are matter which supreme tendency is closed inertial equilibrium. We got it, but Nature is responding.

·  in reply to GoodScienceForYou

TheMatrixDNA 35 minutes ago

A good sample is the biggest religions of the planet, the Asian religions, which supreme goal is the search for personal equilibrium and nirvana. We have a model of a natural system just in this exactly state: the building block of astronomical systems, our ancestor since 10 billion years ago. It is a closed system into itself, cutting relations with the whole natural world, a self-constructed paradise, where the two aspects of matter, mass and energy got its targets. Extreme selfishness.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

These building blocks grew and built galaxies. Its shape is like a perfect machine, a perpetuum motor, self-recycling. The Universe was populated by them. But, above galaxies are forces like the Clausius Law, which produces degradation, measured by entropy and the pretense eternity falls down. Today the Universe is composed by their fossils, ours ancestors. Meanwhile, consciousness was sleeping at galaxies, woke up in shape of animals and lifted up as humans. Religious aret repeating the sin

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

emfederin 1 minute ago

@”But, above galaxies are forces like the Clausius Law, which produces degradation…”

First off, it doesn’t produce degradation. It simply states that isolated systems will always achieve maximum entropy, manifested as thermal equilibrium. This is the ultimate destiny of our universe.

Secondly, galaxies aren’t isolated systems within the context of “the universe”.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Are you based on Thermodynamic Theory for systems? First of all, those theorists never knew how and what is a perfect closed system. It is built by any lightwaves invading inertial mass and modeling matter accordingly to its seven different frequencies of vibrations, from gamma-ray to radio. Entropy is the name of unit of measurement, not the sate itself. Degradation is not loosing quantities of energy/mass, is fragments escaping from the circuit flow and diminishing the quality of closed system

·  in reply to emfederin (Show the comment)

XXX

ozredneck22 3 hours ago

EVOLUTION is a fairytale for grown-ups, complete with its abiogenetic virgin birth, apes that talk and tell lies, “survival of the fittest “moral code, The prophet called Charlie, a magical process that’s never been observed while its happening, cows that tried to walk on water but became whales, a story about how a primordial soup made a chef.

· 

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Almost equal to the collection of fairytale in the Bible, eh? The big difference is that Charlie really sacrificed his best years abandoning a good life in London for facing the hell of the salvage world, observing facts for building conclusions, while the prophets of Bible forgot the real facts of nature and jumped to imaginary conclusions. Any other man that go back to the salvage world with the modern scientific knowledge will find models that solves all problems pointed by you, rationally

·  in reply to ozredneck22 (Show the comment)

XXX

odinata 10 seconds ago

DNA proves evolution.

shut your retarded hole.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

No, DNA proves that he has all informations for doing all species at Earth. DNA proves to aliens that there are diversification of species at Earth. It does not prove Evolution, it merely suggests that evolution is possible.

·  in reply to odinata (Show the comment)

XXX

Nathan Londrie 1 hour ago

I’m sorry, but last time I checked, not matter what you believe, there’s only so much evidence, and at some point you have to go on faith. Tell me again how evolution is a fact?

·  in reply to PinkUnicornIsLord (Show the comment)

odinata 16 minutes ago

DNA proves it.

FACT.

·  in reply to Nathan Londrie

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

DNA proves for a microbe as observer located inside the womb and watching the progress of a fetus that he is seeing evolution. As observers outside the womb, we know that it is reproduction. This Universe is a cosmic egg – or is an agglomerated of bodies still alive or of died fossils (galaxies) – where is occurring a normal natural process of reproduction. And we – like all conscious living beings at millions of other planets – are the minded “genes” making the embryo for the final Big Birth

·  in reply to odinata (Show the comment)

XXX

Alan Clarke 2 minutes ago

@van der Meer “[Creationists] provide an answer, just not the correct one”

Considering that scientific theories are only temporal and never absolute (e.g. Newton’s gravitation theory was replaced by Einstein’s general theory of relativity), how do you know what the “correct” answer is concerning man’s origin? Modern-day scientists admit that they don’t know how life began nor has anyone ever created an artificial environment that facilitates the spontaneous generation of life from non-life.

·  in reply to Peter van der Meer (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Newton’s theory was not replaced by Einstein’s theory because they were dealing with different dimensions of time/space. Newton’s theory is for Einstein’s the same that atoms are for cells, it means, the new arrangement of atoms inside a cell changes their behaviors and functions. Newton was dealing with mechanics at stellar system level which is an mechanic arrangement like a watch – but Einstein was dealing with galaxies which is half-mechanical/half-biologica­l acting over stellar systems

·  in reply to Alan Clarke (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

We don’t know man’s origins in relation to human mind/brain, which could have aggregated new informations coming from a superior natural system located at a superior level of complexity in relation to the total systemic environment (Milk Way) that supplied informations for man’s body, about which we have the most strong evidences that came from primates. For creating biological systems from the evolutionary top of non-biological systems we need more knowledge about natural light, it is the code

·  in reply to Alan Clarke (Show the comment)

XXX

kamphwagon1 2 hours ago

I would hardly think the lack of 100% confirmed theory in the branches of science would drive children into the wrong path, most depending on age wouldn’t grasp the Matrix /DNA theory anyway ,and most likely be taught at the college level.. Where as religion prefers to brainwash children at a young age before their logical abilities are fully developed and are still easy prey to mythical fairy tale stories and fear of invisible boogie men and good fairies … 😉

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

You are right, religion has not worked for improving human existence, so, they are not the solution, our futures generations needs search other alternatives, while the empirical scientifically proved facts must be known. The observation of fossil record and another known facts strongly suggests that there is a natural process from simplest to complexity, which is called “evolution” But this process happens at universal macro scale, unknown, so biological evolution is a non-complete theory.

·  in reply to kamphwagon1 (Show the comment)

XXX

RogerS4JC 1 week ago

@NuggetKazooie “negative factors you described wouldn’t apply to the other populations”

Then you get a net positive. Even very small positives soon leads to huge numbers & small negatives quickly lead to extinction.

“Human evolution thus appears like an hourglass, with a narrowing population of Homo erectus leading to possibly one single mutant, whose improved genes emerged into a new era of unprecedented progress. The transformation from failure to success is startling.” Alan F. Alford

·  in reply to NuggetKazooie (Show the comment)

Martin Koch 1 week ago

Not true. Alan F. Alford is not an reliable witness–His first book Gods of the New Millennium (1996) drew on the ancient astronaut theory of Zecharia Sitchin

·  in reply to RogerS4JC

RogerS4JC 12 hours ago

@Martin Koch “Alan F Alford is not an reliable witness”

“however, he admitted to serious faults in his use of Sitchin’s theory and proposed an alternative, cataclysm theory of ancient myth: “I am now firmly of the opinion… the descent of the gods was a poetic rendition of the cataclysm myth…” wiki

Alan Alford is thus a “hostile witness” for creationism. Too bad he was forced to consider what he thought was a better mechanism than TOE.

Do “reliable witnesses” only have your same viewpoint?

·  in reply to Martin Koch

Martin Koch 5 minutes ago

Again, the crackpot claiming “ancient aliens” is not a valid source.

·  in reply to RogerS4JC

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

“Human evolution thus appears like an hourglass,…”

But his observation above is known, being the human genes emerged by evolution or by other unknown source. Alford almost touched the deeper secret of Nature and the deeper source for religious myths. In fact happened a cataclysmic event and the descent of gods as source for human genes. But this cataclysm was not the Noah’s flood neither the explosion of Nibiru, Matrix/DNA suggests other kind of “cataclysm” and descent “gods”

·  in reply to Martin Koch (Show the comment)

odinata 1 minute ago

No, there is no known observations of any aliens, ancient or otherwise.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Yes, that is what Matrix models are suggesting: no aliens, ancient or otherwise. We need to remember the initial state of this biosphere and the jungle is the best witness still existing about the life’s origins. It indicates that this biosphere is product of chaos. Chaos is product of cataclysm that happens on ordered environments. The environment existing before biosphere’s origins was made of atomic and astronomical systems. So, there was the Newtonian machine and ours ancestors, the “gods”

·  in reply to odinata (Show the comment)

odinata 31 minutes ago

There is no “Matrix Model”

There is only “Matrix Gibberish”

You’re an idiot.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

The Matrix model still is a theory explaining this worlds’ existence, under tests facing real proved facts. It is a natural formula used by Nature for assembling matter into systems, like atoms, galaxies, trees, humans, cells, etc. This formula is under evolution since the Big Bang ( initially the Matrix was shared by billions of vortexes as bits-information or ex-machine quantum genes) and here the formula is resumed into a base-pair of nucleotides, the building blocks of DNA. Theories…

·  in reply to odinata (Show the comment)

XXX

khoraski 1 hour ago

How is Science inappropriate for children?

TheMatrixDNA 55 minutes ago

Only when Science as real knowledge of real facts is used by someone that did the mental exercise for connecting the facts, got a big picture, and teach to children that his picture is Science. Since we for sure don’t have all facts ( maybe neither 30% of all facts of this Universe) any big picture will be product of imagination, then, should be taught as theory. Any big picture (as Matrix/DNA Theory) now will be a driven into wrong pathway for children or a closer mind

·  in reply to khoraski (Show the comment)

khoraski 38 minutes ago

Well, yeah. That’s true for both Evolution and Creationism.

My point is, Creationism, by definition, is Science.

Throwing away an entire branch of science simply because you don’t believe in it, and disallowing any studies in that field is extremely unscientific.

Personally, I think we should teach all science behind all theories of our existence, or we should teach none.

And besides. Natural Selection is not the theory of Evolution, like a lot of Atheists try to combine as one single idea.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

I agree and I will talk to kids about ToE, ID, panspermia, Matrix/DNA, etc., mentioning that I don’t know which theory is more appropriated and my personal thought has indicated that there is a natural process of transformation that have increased complexity. But, all these theories must be taught in a Philosophy class, not Science class. Science only inform about real known facts, has no conclusions. The most important thing is to be certified that kids will be opened minds, free for choices

·  in reply to khoraski (Show the comment)

odinata 48 minutes ago

Shut your gibbering hole, fuckwit.

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

That’s funny. You make me remembering when Morelli was in Amazon jungle and elaborated the Matrix/DNA Theory. He saw lots of snakes in his pathway, they were static waiting any attack for expelling their venom. Louis usually touched them with a long piece of wood, and the snake bites the wood, before going away. Here in Internet, we find snakes in needs of expelling poison of their souls and any comments contrary to their beliefs works as the wood branch. Funny is that Interned is enough long

·  in reply to odinata (Show the comment)

mrtalos 51 minutes ago

@khoraski ok fine, give me a proven testable hypothesis, just like every single real scientific thory must do, and we will start calling creationism scientific.

·

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

You have a testable hypothesis. The Last Universal Common Ancestor – LUCA – of all living systems, is pictured in a intelligible astronomical model that’s testable. Taking out LUCA from Earth and out of abiogenesis, putting LUCA in the sky, all tools of a cells system can be reduced to the astonishing singularity of LUCA. Broken LUCA into small pieces, you have as result all living species seen at earth. But, LUCA was found coming from before the Big Bang, its origins is unknown.

·  in reply to mrtalos (Show the comment)

odinata 6 minutes ago

A theory is well established set of facts.

Your gibberish is not weel established.

Its not “factual”

It doesn’t qualify as a “theory” it is a madman’s rant.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Ok, they you think you have the right for taking the word “theory” from the ancient Greeks that coined the word and give a new definition. No, my friend, the modern schools are not the owner of this world, they applied the wrong word to jobs resulting from a specific method of connecting real data, which method can be wrong. The Matrix?DNA Theory is a theory in the strictly sense obeying the right of its creators.

·  in reply to odinata (Show the comment)
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Good Ideas/Informations

The constant assertion of belief is an indication of fear.

All anyone has to do is see an animal react to noise or movement in the woods and watch it assume something is there, something invisible to be wary of. Some unusual invisible force that must be respected and scared of, and how easily this assumption can be extrapolated into an all mighty invisible being at the cause of all things unknown by sentient beings. Belief in god is more proof of evolution.

· in reply to TheOneTheOwnLak (Show the comment)

Sentient animals put a face to phenomena – the evolution of the ‘god’ concept. All anyone has to do is see an animal react to noise or movement in the woods and watch it Assume something is there, something invisible to be wary of. Some unusual invisible force that must be respected and scared of, and how easily this Assumption, this Instinct can be extrapolated into an all mighty invisible being at the cause of all things unknown by sentient beings. Belief in god is more proof of evolution.

· in reply to TheOneTheOwnLak (Show the comment)

Mas então tem o contra-argumento dos criacionistas, o qual precisa ser notado, considerado, pensado, para procurar a explicação:

TheOneTheOwnLak 1 minute ago

Yes we all see monkeys with Gods ….talking of evolution when primates dont worship anything kinda contradicts your words…Primates with Gods?…oh dear.

· in reply to mechanicmike69 (Show the comment)

E esta analize me fêz produzir a seguinte resposta:

That’s your big mistake! yes, primates and all animals worships real things which symbolizes divinity. Primates, dogs, worship caves. black caves, they do holes in the soil, because in their brains are flashing images of black holes, which is encrypted into DNA. Flies worship any lighting lamp, because their atoms is a scene of electrons worshiping the luminous proton. Bees and ants worships the model of astronomical closed system and indeed, they built social system as the real copy.

· in reply to TheOneTheOwnLak (Show the comment)

Vídeo Muito Interessante Viaja USA Revelando a Mente dos Religiosos

segunda-feira, outubro 15th, 2012

Conspiracy Road Trip: Creationism – YouTube

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oju_lpqa6Ug

E nós estamos participando dos comentários no debate do vídeo:

XXX

Posts de Entrada para Debates:

I think that among all species there is a big gap in relation to the idea of transformations from one into other. Seeing that chimpanzee and humans side by side, and although making the mental calculations of an evolution in million years, I ask: “Why this happy monkey should made the sacrifice of his freedom on the jungle for to be the slaved human urban zombie working 50 hours a week today?” Why a free reptile that throws eggs out should making the sacrifice of supporting pregnancy? Answers?

Louis Charles Morelli8:50 PM – Mon – 15

1) We, human beings, arise inside this galaxy. There are virus that arises inside our body. Why not the same process? 2)Billions of galaxies are merely diversification of an initial galaxy, like billions of different cells of a blastula are diversification of an initial zygote cell. There are thousands of different biological species: why not as merely diversification of an unique initial ancestor? Why not the same process? 3)Our bodies were produced by designs in parents; why not universes?

Louis Charles Morelli –  9:43 PM – Mon – 15

XXX

Although I watched this as an atheist/anti-theist and enjoyed it… I think there were many missed opportunities during the trip to better explain how science works.

Also I think that regardless of what the host said… it WAS a very biased “trip”. Attempting to move someone from their position to yours is an agenda in and of itself.

I like this idea but in my mind it could’ve been better implemented and more carefully thought through.

Jay Jay Abels 44 minutes ago

The best video should be monitored by an agnostic and the participants should be atheists, creationists, occultists, natives American and agnostics. Facing the skulls over the table, each one explains his/her theory about its origins, and after that, over the table are trowed the real evidences everybody knows about natural processes: nature transforms things from one into another, never nobody watched miracles, etc. The goal is: are there some invisible forces producing these transformations?

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to Jay Jay Abels – 8:34 PM – MOn – 15

Nope. I think ( my humble opinion that arose from my private experiences with natives Americans) that the modern scientific reductionist method is driven by unconscious bias. This method is selecting only those data that this limited human senses and its technological extensions can see and discriminating those data that it can’t grasp. It is product of “biocentrism” – projecting the biological over the whole, it is product of chaos not order and ignores the effects of natural systems.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to narco73 (Show the comment) 1 second ago

XXX

“What do you think came first, male or female?”

Male/female is the biological counterpart evolved from the universal dichotomy that came before life’s origins, even before matter’s origins, in shape of quantum vortexes spin right/left. If you want to see were female/male come from see first the hermaphroditic micro-organisms. Then go to see this picture ( Google – Images – and paste ” origem-astronomica-dos-cromoss­omas-sexuais-289×300.jpg) .It is the first image.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to JesuitBakery (Show the comment) 12 minutes ago

XXX

I agree, not all scientists are in this conspiracy. Right now there are students who have degrees in science looking for work in their fields but can’t find it. I believe some are honest in their pursuit of doing science. Not all. Some are taught evolutionary science and are told it’s true, whatever is presented before them is accurate and correct and they just accept it without questioning. With this in mind they look for more information to support it. It becomes their bread and butter. more

MosheMYY in reply to JohnnyRelentless (Show the comment) 3 minutes ago

You are right, there are bias driven the scientific method. When observing any object, this method selects some data it can see and discriminates data it can’t see. If there are forces from invisible systems acting over the object, they are ignored. But is is not conscious, it is due the limited human senses and the tools are extension off these senses. We can’t know the Truth of any real object, that’s why we elaborate theories. Bring on facts over the table, let’s go debate our theories?

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to MosheMYY (Show the comment) 1 second ago

XXX

Ninguem me “Cutuca” No Maior Debate da História que Está Acontecendo Agora No Youtube? Brasileiros! Tucuta-me…please! (5)

segunda-feira, outubro 8th, 2012

(Vai lá e clique no botão com o polegar prá cima – claro, se você concordar com meu comentário)  Esta é a quarta parte dêste artigo, vide as três anteriores, numeros 3, 2 e 1) . Foram perdidos muitos posts da Matrix devido uma revisão que desapareceu do blog ( principalmente posts do dia 08). Neus posts estão em dois nomes: TheMatrixDNA e Austriak1)

( Deletar PC Cleaner Urgente! Perdí Todos os posts entre 11 e 13)

Ultimos posts da Matrix/DNA: (perdidos posts de 04, thuesday, devido PC cleaner)

XXX

Posts modêlos para entrada todos os dias:

My question:

Saying that God creates Universes and man that seems like him inside it is not problem because humans also creates eggs and men inside it. Saying that Universes becomes a hot and concentrated small dot and explodes becoming again Universe is not problem because a big adult human becomes small egg and after the sperm “explosion” becomes adult again. But saying God lives inside Universes and Universes evolves without purpose are problems because I can’t see these things in Nature. What’s up?

Louis Charles Morelli 1 second ago

As an agnostic and defending a new and unknown evolutionary theory different than ToE, I want for my kids ToE in science classrooms and ID obligatory in social/philosophical class. Evolution is not understood if only based on biological history, so, ToE is non complete “theory” and is necessary that it be criticized and checked by ID. ToE has no intellectual support for a meaning of our existence as religions does for avoiding kids falling on drugs, and ToE alone will not keep free thought.

Louis Charles Morelli 1 second ago – 8:56 PM – Tue – 09 – Oct.

I think Bill Nye is the expression of a second wave of Enlightenment, as happened at 18th century, due human Reason reaching a new shape in its vital cycle. Philosophers joining to scientists and atheists against those fantasies of Reason’s baby times, promoting science and intellectual interchange and opposed superstition, intolerance and some abuses by church and state. If the first wave was based in Newton ( after Copernicus and Galileo), now it is largely based in Darwin and Astronomy.

Louis Charles Morelli 1 second ago – 7:14 PM – Oct – 12

Creationist “faith” can not be explained rationally based on current scientific view of the world. But, at same time this faith is an aberration produced by Nature, this aberration can not be explained because the scientific current world view does not translate the real world. This faith is product of expression of data storaged in the wrong called junk/DNA, real data about real world of times beyond 4 billion years. People with this faith has hard-wired brain confused by these memories.

XXX – PERDÍ OS POSTS ENTRE 11 E 13.  RECOPIA-LOS.

TrueVerdicts: You haven’t criticized my post: “Science does not explain what does not exists. Time-Space are not entities “per se”, they are human imaginary creations. Think the Universe as a ball. Beyond the ball is nothing, infinite. There is no space in nothing. Now, take any object from the ball and put it outside. Now you have a distance for measurement. You created space. Something for time. Imagine everything stopping moving and coming back moving again. How much time in between? Zero…

Louis Charles Morelli 1 hour ago – 7:00 PM – Oct – 13

XXX

Here are creationists and immediate naturalists debating. They want to model the formation of children’s minds of the world. But, there are a minority – the cosmic naturalists agnostics – that also has its own model. We want our voice be heard here also. As said “illegalconspiracy”, a child with mind structured upon lots of evidences of a natural process of biological evolution interpreted by modern Darwinism will be a believer in an almost magical blind God acting without any guidance (cont.).

For us, biological evolution, the change into news species over long time, is obvious. In another hand, although we consider the indoctrination of children by a doctrine expressed in Bible is a prejudices to their healthy, we try to see the world from a cosmological point of view, and our suspection is that this process is not blind, what leaves opened to possibilities, included a non-biblical kind of “god”. So, although evolution must be a fact, the Darwinian interpretation must be a theory.

XXX

OT, huh? Well…

“Slaves, obey your earthly masters with fear and trembling, with a sincere heart, as you would Christ” Ephesians 6:5

“Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything; and do it, not only when their eye is on you and to win their favor, but with sincerity of heart and reverence for the Lord.” Colossians 3:22

“Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed.” 1 Timothy 6:1

So much for that.

That’s why earthly masters are the fundies of Christianism and appreciate that book – the Bible. And why you see the high authorities of the church always hand by hand with earthly masters. The very group of predators, mimicking the rules of the salvage system of the jungle for building social systems for humans. That’s why I hate that book since everybody treats me all my life as slave because I was born without family and homeless. I don’t understand why the preys are so indoctrinated.

XXX

since many times creationists are accused of inhibiting science because of their presuppositions (the God-did-it-so-there’s-nothing-­more-to-study idea; but in reality, it’s just the opposite—“God did it” so we have every reason to study it!). Creationists for many years have argued that non-coding DNA is not junk (see “Junk” DNA Is Not Junk)

And now the scientific thought is acting as a science-stopper again. Due some success explaining evolution by Darwinian mechanisms and due our Astronomy still beginning and doing wrong cosmological models (as the wrong model of spontaneous generation of astronomic bodies), modern scientists don’t are stimulated to search the links between cosmological and biological evolution. The result is that changing in species are not understood because there are mechanisms coming from cosmology.

XXX

Ohno stated, “The earth is strewn with fossil remains of extinct species; is it a wonder that our genome too is filled with the remains of extinct genes?”1 Due to his evolutionary presupposition, he assumed that non-coding DNA was merely a “genetic fossil” that may have been useful somewhere in our evolutionary past but had been discarded as we evolved into more complex, higher organisms. Since this “junk” DNA was no longer needed,

Ohno had great intuition, he is in the right track. But he is touching something deeper, he can’t imagine that. Since we discovered that the fundamental unit of information of DNA – a horizontal base-pair of nucleotides – is just a copy of the fundamental building block of old galaxies, we have everything for supposing that DNA is merely the biological shape of a universal Matrix evolving since the Big Bang. If so, junk-DNA is memory of 13,7 billions years of evolution!

XXX

Mutation and natural selection, thought to be the driving forces of evolution, only lead to a loss of functional systems. Therefore, antibiotic resistance of bacteria is not an example of evolution in action but rather variation within a bacterial kind. It is also a testimony to the wonderful design God gave bacteria, master adapters and survivors in a sin-cursed world.

Not in relation to a closed system. Entropy attacks these systems beginning at periphery and advancing internally towards the center. There are no loss of energy/mass but degradation. From periphery goes the bits-information of that system, but if these bits reaches a platform, like a planet surface, a neuron in the brain, they have two alternatives: mixing with locals elements, reorganizing themselves as mutants end lift up as a new system. Or, as in Alzheimer’s, they does not re-organizes.

XXX

I’m pretty sure you know the Bible isn’t written in English, close enough is what we get, as long as the meaning is exactly what it is supposed to be expressed as, the Bible is surely more perfect than any other book available today. You should tell a judge that eye witness is INCREDIBLY FLAWED and there are no truthful people in the world, not even if God’s inspiration is flowing, OH WELL you wouldn’t ever get that. Besides they have no gain in writing a biased testimony, doing it to die.

I have my own theory about the Bible. Some events and places described in Genesis ( the Garden Paradise, Adam/Even, the selfish serpent, the fall to Earth) are real metaphorical but exactly descriptions of the state of the world and the event occurred before abiogenesis. They describes the body and process of LUCA – the Last Universal Non-Biological Ancestor. But I Ching, The Secret Doctrine, also describes the same LUCA. Explanation? Memory of past times registered into junk/DNA.

XXX

1GODISNOWHERE1: “Nothing in the periodic table of elements needs Darwin’s theories”

They need. The elements are different, diversified, because their origins was under the laws of evolution. Mendeleev discovered that each element of positions derived from 7 have the same properties. And Matrix/DNA discovered that different shapes of those elements corresponds to the different shapes of living beings under vital cycle. So, lithium and neon are babies, beryllium and magnesium are kids, etc. Louis Charles Morelli 1:56 PM – Wed -17

XXX

I wonder what the more believable theory is: that everything was created from nothing during the big bang or that matter was already here and was just re-organized by a higher intelligence into what we now call the universe. Higher intelligence or nothing that is our choices.

BigWater59 1 hour ago

I think there is a problem about the scientific community interpretation of Big Bang and this problem is that the Universe is being studied by Physics and its theories are elaborated with mathematical intellectual exercises. One sample? Physics arrived to “maximal amount of entropy” causing the Big Bang. But, a biocentric view see universes produced by Big Bangs as spermatozoon explosions and zygotes being formed due entropy attacking a human body system. Which method is the best? I don’t know.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to BigWater59 (Show the comment) 1 second ago

XXX

This has been flagged as spam hide • 

1) Creationism is the beleif that a diety created everythign out of nothing…it is the ONLY concept put forth that says From Nothing

2) Big Bang says from a singularity..an expansion from condensed matter.NOT from nothing

This will natural lead to “Well then where did the singularity come from?” which is an argument from ignorance.

Personally, I tend towards the veiw that the universe is eternal and cyclic and that eventually it will colapse back into a singularity and repeat

whiteowl1415 in reply to BigWater59 (Show the comment) 33 minutes ago

All things that are cyclic replicates the last shape automatically, does not need repeats internal evolution again and again. Sample: the first cell system was organized by symbioses, but after that it does not do it anymore, it merely replicates. There is other argument for a theory of recycling universes?

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to whiteowl1415 21 minutes ago

This has been flagged as spam hide • 

Things that are cyclic repeat stages, they need not do so the same way.

Seaons are cyclic, this does not mean it is going to rain on the exact same days every spring or that the snow will fall in the exact same amount.

The cycles can contain internal variation.

Note I said I beleive, not proven, but…

Stars convert lighter elements to heavier ones, logicaly we will eventually end up with only the heaviest which through gravity of thier mass should recolapse

whiteowl1415 in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 16 minutes ago

Ok… I think we are based in two different things: I am based in systems and you in processes. That’s why I appeal to a system (a cell) and you to a process ( seasons). The weird question is: the universe is a system or a process? If it is a process, you earned, the universe is self-recycling. But, I am not sure. Stars makes heavier elements. But I always search parameter in Nature here. Womb’s cells makes dense placenta for discarding it in name of embryonic evolution, not re-cycles.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to whiteowl1415 (Show the comment) 1 second ago

This has been flagged as spam hide • 

Nothing in nature isn’t recycled.

Amoung other animals, the placental is often reconsumed by the parents.

When it isn’t it nourishes the soil for plants.

People waste, nature never does.

whiteowl1415 in reply to Louis Charles Morelli 8 minutes ago

Again, our problem is “process or system?” You said that your preferred theory is a self-recycling universe. I prefer an universe under evolution reproducing an old universe but increasing a little bit of complexity. Reconsumed placenta is a process among a lots of them that composes a whole system. In relation to embryonic evolution and its womb, placenta is discarded forever. In relation to Universes, matter will be discarded in name of an embryo of counciousness. You are part of that embryo.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to whiteowl1415 (Show the comment) 1 second ago

XXX

We have no acceptable theory of evolution at the present time. There is none; and I cannot accept the theory that I teach to my students each year. Let me explain. I teach the synthetic theory known as the neoDarwinian one, for one reason only; not because it’s good, we know it is bad, but because there isn’t any other. Whilst waiting to find something better you are taught something which is known to be inexact, which is a first approximation

–Professor Jerome Lejeune, Lecture in Paris

JoelMckay69 2 minutes ago

There are other theories than neoDarwinian theory that has found as existent the natural process of evolution, working with different mechanisms and suggesting new worldviews. Then, why you don’t know them? Because they can’t be published, the established mindset does not permit it. For instance, I will talk about Matrix/DNA Theory, which arose applying the method of comparative anatomy between living and non-living systems – trying to find a link. But, the found link is not ideologic accepted

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to JoelMckay69 – 12:38 AM – Tue – 16

That is not an argument against evolution it is an argument against abiogenesis. I take it you’re a Matrix student?

BigWater59 in reply to Louis Charles Morelli 3 minutes ago

Yes, the theory is not argument against evolution, as I said: “it found as existent, the natural process of evolution”. The problem is about the differences between the final results between the two theories. 1) The link of Matrix/DNA is the same LUCA – the last common ancestor of all biological systems – hypothesized by Darwin, but Matrix/DNA found LUCA to be an astronomical system and not a microscope organism; 2) Matrix/DNA suggests 7 variables instead 3 of ToE. This changes the whole view.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to BigWater59 (Show the comment) 1 second ago

I am sorry Louis but that is still a biogenesis argument not genesis argument. I understand the basics of matrix but it still doesn’t fit into this debate.

BigWater59 in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 1 minute ago

Yes it is a genesis argument also. What is the first moment of your body? The “”big bang”of a spermatozoon inside an egg. Now, try to project this real event here over the Big Bang theory and see the Universe as an cosmic egg. But then, the event here suggests that was there, before the Big Bang, a previous design for evolution here, inside the parents (system) that produced the Big Bang. It is genesis by a natural being without using intelligence and magics, but with consciousness. Makes sense.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to BigWater59 (Show the comment) 1 second ago

Actually you have a good point and that is what really exist without consciousness to understand it. Is there an universe without conscience life. Good question which I would say no. Nice point.

BigWater59 in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 26 minutes ago

The problem arises when we try to develop this theory, trying to go deeper into the final mystery..The models suggests that any wave of natural light is the code for imprinting life into inertial mass. You can see why in the theory website. So, it suggests that the ex-machine system that triggered the Big Bang made it using only light. But the source of this light seems to be a kind of vortex (based in QM). Is it “the natural god” a kind of vortex? A vortex with consciousness?! I am lost now

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to BigWater59 (Show the comment) 1 second ago

You’re a little over the top now and I am not a matrix student so bring it down a little so we can understand your point.

BigWater59 in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 6 minutes ago

The theory is based in a formula made like a computer’s software diagram but at same time is a unit of genetic information. The surprisingly thing is that all known natural systems fits exactly when superposed upon the formula, suggesting that the formula is the way nature organizes matter into systems, from atoms to galaxies to human bodies. Later, we noticed that the functions of that formula can be expressed as the seven different frequencies of light waves and it explains the vital cycles.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to BigWater59 (Show the comment) 1 second ago

XXX

To say that Humans evolved is to say that intelligence/science saw birth with Humans — that science was at stage zero prior to Humans — as humans are the most intelligent entities — this is conflicting, because there existed things beyond human understanding prior to humans. <= Do grasp your mind very well around this. This only concludes that there was intelligence prior to humans which engineered them.

TrueVerdicts 3 days ago

I don’t understand. It is not what Nature is showing here and now. The nowadays bodies of human beings are made by parents through natural genetic process without parents applying intelligence and although it happens, these bodies evolves and reveals intelligence. That is the real way nature works facing our eyes. So, a rational mind must apply the same process when inquiring the origins of first human beings. The non-living matter must have the forces for intelligence, but doesn’t applied it.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to TrueVerdicts (Show the comment) 1 second ago

XXX

Only one problem(if Bill is honest) with his narrow-minded assertions. The fossil record. As every paleontologist knows, the fossil record displays a consistent pattern of sudden appearance followed by stasis, that life’s history reflects variation around a set of basic models rather than one of accumulating improvement and finally that mass extinction has been predominantly by catastrophe rather than gradual obsolescence.

Jonathan Michaels 3 hours ago

These three questions are solved by Matrix/DNA Theory, unifying cosmological and biological evolution. The most complex non living system must be direct ancestor of the less complex biological system – of course. Since this ancestor is astronomical – it is the building block of galaxies, a system that works as perfect natural machine and shows all life’s properties – and the first living is microscope, Nature used the same process we see here when miniaturizes a human body inside chromosomes.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to Jonathan Michaels – 7:47 ÃM – Mon – 15

XXX

First there was simple single celled life. Then suddenly, about 530 million years ago, most major animal phyla were here. The fossil evidence is missing showing how life went from the single cells to the major complex divisions of animal life we have today. After the early Cambria era explosion of life there is fossil evidence that that life was now here. But no fossil evidence beforehand showing how simple single celled organisms suddenly became very, very, very complex.

EphraimManasseh in reply to narco73 (Show the comment) 35 minutes ago

No. The Big Bang of “your life” can be watched here and now, every time is exploded the envelope of a spermatozoon inside an ovule. The Universe only can create things like itself was created. Abiogenese is not going from single soup to single cell, it is about the almost perfect closed system that works like a machine called “galaxy” and nanotechnologically going to a single biological cell. Mother Nature does not play dice with us. She is showing here how she works. Why are you cheating her?!

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to EphraimManasseh (Show the comment) 16 minutes ago

XXX

(Fill in the blank, whatever your blank is) bless Bill Nye. My childhood, for what little of it you were a part of, was that much more awesome while you were in it. Let’s hope you’re right. Let’s hope in the future, the outdated ways of thinking which rule today are gone. Replaced by education and knowledge rather than fear and overreaction. The only saving We All Need is from ignorance.

homewherehorrorlives 18 minutes ago

“The only saving We All Need is from ignorance.” That’s the most beautiful phrase I like and I would ad my bit: “and saved from our selfish gene”. This selfishness expresses in everybody. The result is forgetting that our little brain facing this immense mystery can not grasp the final Truth. So, we watch evolution here, but is it blind without purpose? I watch evolution inside a womb, a shape of blastula becoming unrecognizable in the next shape as fetus. But, then…there is purpose. So?!

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to homewherehorrorlives (Show the comment) 1 second ago

XXX

These debates are mostly useless. I never try and “win”, I just interject verses from the Bible and let God work on your hearts when you read them.

1 Thessalonians 2:13 For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe.

The1Indignitary 10 minutes ago

It does not works with me. The History of America, my ancestors, its fairy tiles, folklore and traditions in first place, that’s what I want for my kids, not those of foreign origins. And there are no mentions of interventions of God in our History. So, if the god of foreign people is real, he has not talking with us, then, he is not real for us and not our friend. You are practicing mental terrorism on my kids. Let’s the people of America alone for discovering the meaning of our existence.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to The1Indignitary7:43 – PM – Oct – 13

XXX

Why do so many Christians pretend that science and/or evolution are religions? This is a difficult question to answer because there are so many possibilities. Perhaps religion so controls their lives that they can’t think outside of religious categories. Perhaps they can’t imagine that anything which makes strong claims isn’t religious.

IDisnotscience 42 minutes ago

They have something (a fault on modern scientific thought) for hold on: 1) Darwin should never talk this: the diversification of life shows that species were not created one by one ( by God). Because Darwin was not prepared for explaining the origins of species; 2) Scientific worldview resists to link cosmological evolution with biological evolution and had inserted, in this big abism, the magical thinking of randomness. Scientists need avoiding to extrapolate to worldviews for avoiding enemies

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to IDisnotscience 7:24 PM – OCt – 13

XXX

1) Your science is simply an extremely negligible STUDY of an existing, indescribably sophisticated science/intelligence. Nothing simply ‘be’ be it not Time-Space. The engineering of the tree is the utmost science; the making of the star is the utmost science, the systematic, purposeful, flawlessly timed, synchronizing of cosmological entities is the utmost science; the engineering of the brain is the utmost science…

TrueVerdicts 48 minutes ago

Search the natural matrix formula that organizes matter into systems and discover from where is coming all this “engineering”. If after that you will say loud that this is the formula created by God for creating things in these Universe without magics, I will show for you that this formula is coming from something natural, extra-universe. But you still will say that the extra-universal was created by God… and here I will stop. I don’t know.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to TrueVerdicts (Show the comment) 1 second ago

XXX

1)Do you realize that your science, as a subject of Time-Space, is lesser than Time-Space, making Time-Space greater (than all) — as such, your science CANNOT explain Time-Space. And, it certainly not with physical approach. Your science is very negligible. It’s no hot stuff! It’s sad that you believe that Time-Space can explain by physics alone. You ought to be begin to understand that Time-Space simply ‘be’; that, in itself is illogical, metaphysical, it cannot be explained with physics.

TrueVerdicts 38 minutes ago

Science does not explain what does not exists. Time-Space are not entities the per se, they are human imaginary creations. Think the Universal as a ball. Beyond the ball is nothing, infinite. There is no space in nothing. Now, take any object from the ball and put it outside. Now you have a distance for measurement. You created the space. Something for time. Imagine everything stopping moving and coming back moving again. How much time was there? Zero.There is measurement of a chain of events.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to TrueVerdicts (Show the comment) 1 second ago

XXX

Your science will erroneously claim that intelligence dwells within biology, as it seeks to deny all possibilities of anything outside of physics. Intelligence does not reside in the body. “Thoughts” may, allegedly, be influenced in the manner you mentioned as a result of the mechanism/the biology being affected by the drug; i.e, when you alter/impact a vehicle’s part, the vehicle may perform differently; this does not mean the operator/driver/intelligence of the vehicle is ONE with it!

TrueVerdicts 32 minutes ago

Alzheimer’s is proof that intelligence/consciousness resides in our bodies. As the brain decays so does the intelligence and personality. Your ‘soul’ assertion dissolved with a single physical decay.

mechanicmike69 in reply to TrueVerdicts (Show the comment) 25 minutes ago

I will suggest an argument for your theory. Think about a computer decay like Alzheimer, but, die fire. The hardware goes destroyed, but what happens with the software? As said mechanicmike69, the scientific theory uses Alzheimer as evidence that consciousness reside in our body. I think that computers are evidence that consciousness is separated. The software resident in computer is destroyed but the same software is in other places, like the mind of his creator, other computers. Do you agree?

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to TrueVerdicts (Show the comment) 1 second ago

The “software” in humans is the interconnection of billions of nerve cells, that die when you die and have no duplicate copies. Your argument is rediculous.

HodadWah in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 32 minutes ago

Hold on. Bits in a computer does not organizes themselves for running a software and does not creates their own software. And for clues that my argument is ridiculous you need bring on the paper peer-reviewed that reveals the mechanisms by which neurons are related to thought. There is no one. My theoretical models suggests that a natural software composed by photons is transmitted by galaxies over primordial soups driven abiogenesis. This software, later, becomes human consciousness. Weird,but

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to HodadWah (Show the comment) 1 second ago

xxx

EVOLUTION DOESN’T MAKE FOSSILS; FOSSILS ARE NOT EVIDENCE OF EVOLUTION. STOP HIJACKING THE EVIDENCE OF THE GLOBAL FLOOD OF NOAH FOR YOUR EVIL ATHEISTIC PSEUDOSCIENCE OF EVIL EVOLUTIONISM.

HISTRUTHBEKNOWN in reply to ExtantFrodo2 (Show the comment) 1 hour ago

That’s funny! You say that one real natural phenomena – the amount of collected fossils – are being used by evil evolutionism as evidence for evolution, and at the same time, you point out one real natural evidence that sometimes in that place in the past had some flood and uses it by yours evil religionism as evidence for your imaginary fairy tales. If you think this behavior is a sin, why you do it?!!

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to HISTRUTHBEKNOWN 1 hour ago

Because he is mentally ill.

HodadWah in reply to Louis Charles Morelli 4 minutes ago

What should mean that his brain is hard-wired in a non natural way? And maybe due indoctrination? I think that my brain is not hard-wired correctly also and I explain it by the fact that I am product of a chaotical biosphere that has tortured me mentally. But, if he have problems we need try to help him going back to the right track. My theory suggests that the supreme goal of evolution here and now is evolution of human brains and that we need all human brains evolving for our collective future

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to HodadWah (Show the comment) 1 second ago

I have waisted enough of my time trying to explain things to religious people. They do not get it and I think never will. I now try to humiliate them with their beliefs. But you go for it. I enjoy reading your post.

HodadWah in reply to Louis Charles Morelli 1 minute ago

I understand that you are upset due religious prejudicing yours goals. I was just reading Cosmic Log where comments criticizing NASA for spending money with Curiosity for finding pieces of metals. I will give my last dollar for NASA doing it because I need cosmic expansion, and religious does not help. But I don’t agree with humiliation, I think it does not work either. They are our brothers, we need find a kind of method for bringing them to our team, but, it needs be good for them also.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to HodadWah (Show the comment) 2 seconds ago

XXX

EVOLUTION DOESN’T MAKE FOSSILS; FOSSILS ARE NOT EVIDENCE OF EVOLUTION. STOP HIJACKING THE EVIDENCE OF THE GLOBAL FLOOD OF NOAH FOR YOUR EVIL ATHEISTIC PSEUDOSCIENCE OF EVIL EVOLUTIONISM.

HISTRUTHBEKNOWN in reply to ExtantFrodo2 (Show the comment) 4 minutes ago

That’s funny! You say that one real natural phenomena – the amount of collected fossils – are being used by evil evolutionism as evidence for evolution, and at the same time, you point out one real natural evidence that sometimes in that place in the past had some flood and uses it by yours evil religionism as evidence for your imaginary fairy tales. If you think this behavior is a sin, why you do it?!!

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to HISTRUTHBEKNOWN (Show the comment) 2 seconds ago

XXX

This argument looks like it’s gonna go on forever….

VitalSubtlety 15 minutes ago

Not forever. The reliance on evidence for making decisions, for understanding what is true, for establishing one’s position with regard to everything else – is growing. Religions rely on non-evidence , are based on faith, and fail as means to find truth. With the internet, more people see this and abandon the old ways.

ExtantFrodo2 in reply to VitalSubtlety (Show the comment) 10 minutes ago

Congratulations! You wrote what is happening with the right words. I think that religion has been propagating inside churches/schools by that authoritarian strategy of one-direction-dialogue. Nobody in a mass can stop the priest for asking questions when don’t understand/don’t accept something. Now, with Internet, everybody can see  doctrine questions enunciated and has the courage for doing what has been afraid to do. God Bless the Internet…oh…I mean… PinkUnicorn bless the Internet…

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to ExtantFrodo2 (Show the comment) 1 second ago

XXX

Part 1 of 2

You can’t deny God from ignorance as you aren’t all knowing. What you don’t know is infinitely more than what you believe you know but is mostly wrong. Only a superior intelligence could and did create all that exists that humans didn’t and can’t reproduce in the world nor could or does mindless & lifeless chemical elements by chance. This leaves only God, a superior intelligence/being, as a reasonable and intellectually honest option.

HISTRUTHBEKNOWN in reply to TheRainmaker2001 (Show the comment) 18 minutes

Please, tell me how and which method have you used when connecting the real and natural amount of proved data we have today and show me the final picture did you got? I did my own search for knowledge of those data, I choose a method (comparative anatomy between all known natural systems) for connecting all that data, I got a final picture, which is not suggesting any magic intervention of gods, from since before the origins of this Universe to nowadays. I am very curious to know your picture.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to HISTRUTHBEKNOWN (Show the comment) 1 second ago

One cannot have knowledge/science of things presumed/imagined, which do not happen, and have hot happened and which cannot be reproduced. Pond scum to you evolution never happened or happens.

EVOLUTIONISM IS A LIE AND PSEUDOSCIENCE AND SCIENCE FICTION ATHEISTIC STYLE. IT HAS BECOME THE RELIGION OF THE ATHEISTIC SORT.

COMPARATIVE ANATOMY DOESN’T SUBSTANTIATE YOUR IMAGINED NOTIONS THAT A BEAR BECAME A WHALE; A MONKEY BECAME A HUMAN, THAT BIRDS CAME FROM DINOSAURS. THIS IS INSANE & UNSCIENTIFIC.

HISTRUTHBEKNOWN in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 3 minutes

You are right…lol! One cannot get the final Truth (if have one) based solely in all data we know today. Any methodical exercise of connecting the known data shows blank spaces where is missing data. But we need some guide, meanings that makes sense, then we do the connection and hypothesizes how should be that missing data and get a final picture. This is called “theory”. Sample? The Higgs bosom. It is a guide for next search, experiments. Still waiting your picture.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to HISTRUTHBEKNOWN (Show the comment) 1 second ago

Comparative anatomy is the most ancient and authentic method for rational theories about the unknown. Opening the bodies of animals instead the body of humans was the method for inferring what was inside the human body, which substantiates ancient medicine. We don’t know the natural forces that drove abiogenesis, then, take the state of the world of that time, put the existent systems, atoms and galaxies, over the table, and do comparisons with the first cells systems. Get theories of forces.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to HISTRUTHBEKNOWN (Show the comment) 2 seconds

YOU’RE SO STUPID AND CAN’T THINK FOR YOURSELF.

WHO SAW A BEAR BECOME A WHALE, OR DINOSAUR BECOME A BIRD, OR AN APELIKE CREATURE BECOME A HUMAN, OR CHEMICAL ELEMENTS IN WARM POOLS OR WATER SPONTANEOUSLY GENERATE THE ALLEGED COMMON ANCESTOR OF ALL AND THEN ITS TRANSMUTATION INTO ALL THE LIFE FORMS THAT EVER LIVED? EVOLUTION FROM POND SCUM TO ALL THAT EVER LIVED WAS AND IS NEVER SEEN FOR REPEATED TESTING AS THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD REQUIRES. THEREFORE, EVOLUTIONISM IS ATHEISTIC PSEUDOSCIENCE/SCIENCE

HISTRUTHBEKNOWN in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 3 minutes ago

You are right. The great transformations of, to say, reptiles into mammals, are not well explained solely by the three mechanisms of ToE: Variation, Selection, Inheritance. Then, what a rational mind should do? Go back re-observing everything. Put the galaxy over the table, put the reptile inside the galaxy, stands above the galaxy and think. One day, one year, or 30 years like I did, no matter, think. I got an answer: there are more four mechanisms added to those three. I got my mammal. Theory

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to HISTRUTHBEKNOWN (Show the comment) 1 second ago

Are you saying that I can’t think by myself and you can, then, I should accept like a ewe your conclusions? You are insulting my intelligence. Ne pas jamais. But I like to learn and changing real information. If you go straight to the data…

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to HISTRUTHBEKNOWN (Show the comment) 1 second

COMPARING ALL CARS AND THEIR ENGINES DOESN’T MEAN THAT THIS COMPARATIVE EXAMINATION CONFIRMS THAT CARS EVOLVED BY ACCIDENTAL COLLABORATION OF MINDLESS AND LIFELESS CHEMICAL ELEMENTS. DID YOU WAIT FOR YOUR CAR AND HOME TO MAKE ITSELF?

WHY ARE YOU INCAPABLE OF RATIONAL CRITICAL THINKING? WHY DO YOU LOVE THE LIE OF EVIL EVOLUTIONISM? WHAT SIN DO YOU LOVE OVER THE TRUTH OF GOD?

YOUR IDEA OF THEORIES IS ACTUALLY VILE FOOLISH HUMAN IMAGINATION.

HISTRUTHBEKNOWN in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 3 minutes ago

Comparative anatomy does not work in this way, it works only applied over real natural wholes systems. But the comparison of cars, since the carriage pulled by horses to a BMW suggests evidences for a process of evolution and suggests the existence of an external agent driven this evolution. Since it is not a living thing, the evolution happens in the agent, not in the cars. If a future car gets artificial intelligence, it should evolve by itself. That’s what happens since origins of life.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to HISTRUTHBEKNOWN (Show the comment) 2 seconds ago

GOD DOESN’T LIE. MAN DOES. WHY ARE YOU LYING FOR EVIL EVOLUTIONISM?

THE CAMBRIAN EXPLOSION OF LIFE FALSIFIES EVOLUTIONISM, AS DOES THE FOSSILIFEROUS SEDIMENTARY WITH BILLIONS OF DEAD FLORA & FAUNA AS GOD PLANNED TO DESTROY, AS DOES INFORMATION IN THE GENOME OF ALL BIOLOGICAL LIFE AND THE DNA CODE THAT CAN ONLY COME FROM AN INTELLIGENT MIND, AS DOES ALL THE KNOWN SCIENTIFIC LAWS THAT EVOLUTIONISM DEFIES.

HISTRUTHBEKNOWN in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 3 minutes

You are right, accordingly with my theory, which does not agree with the idea of a meteorite causing it. Dinosaurs disappeared due same cause disappears all species that super-specializes as closed systems and closes the door to its own evolution. But is not falsifies evolutionism. Nature applied the old astronomical mechanism of entropy producing chaos for dinosaurs and went backwards, finding the small cyanodont for continuing evolution and getting a mammal. And then, new order arose.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to HISTRUTHBEKNOWN (Show the comment) 1 second ago

There’re many idiotic stories for the extinction of dinosaurs. Dinosaurs are found in graveyards with many different animals together. This information is kept from the public because it falsifies the alleged order of evolution which the fossil record doesn’t help as with the Cambrian Explosion of life containing more than 100 phyla that suddenly appear without links to the bacteria, spores, algae in the adjacent layer, the Precambrian, just below the Cambrian. Evolutionism is a cosmic lie.

HISTRUTHBEKNOWN in reply to Louis Charles Morelli 1 minute ago

Sorry, I have not studied completely the Cambrian explosion as you seems to be well informed. But I said that I am waiting your information about the method you been using and the final picture you got. You have found intervention of a God producing a flood at that time? Is it 60 millions years ago? My method has suggested that – if had no evolutionary links between pre-Cambrian and after-Cambrian, there was intervention of solar flares due atomic reactions reaching internal new layers.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to HISTRUTHBEKNOWN (Show the comment) 1 second ago

YOUR COMPARATIVE ANATOMY IS EXACTLY THE SAME AS MY CAR/ENGINE ANALOGY. STOP LYING. DID YOU READ ROMANS 1:18-32?

ALL THE CHEMICAL ELEMENTS IN YOUR BODY AS IN THE CAR ARE NOT ALIVE I.E. HYDROGEN, OXYGEN, CALCIUM, NITROGEN, CARBON ETC. ARE NOT ALIVE AND CAN’T CONTRIVE ENGINES, CARS OR BIOLOGICAL LIFE.

THE “EVOLUTION OF THE CAR” IS YOUR DECEPTIVE USE OF THE WORD. IN THIS CASE IT’S THE PROGRESS IMPROVEMENT OF THE AUTOMOBILE AND TECHNOLOGY BY HUMAN INTELLIGENCE, NOT WITHOUT INTELLIGENCE.

HISTRUTHBEKNOWN in reply to Louis Charles Morelli 4 minutes ago

You are right, is the same analogy, and that’s why we arrived to same conclusion: there is an external agent doing it. The difference between us is about who is the external agent acting over biological evolution. You have seen a magical god I have seen a new cosmological model. The elements in our bodies are not alive, but they were connected by photons coming from sun light and cosmic radiation bringing on informations about a system that is half-mechanical/half-biologica­l. That’s a theory.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to HISTRUTHBEKNOWN (Show the comment) 1 second ago

XXX

ANYONE THAT ACCEPTS EVOLUTIONISM IS A MORON.

NOBODY SAW MINDLESS AND LIFELESS CHEMICAL ELEMENTS POPPING INTO EXISTENCE FROM THE ALLEGED BIG BANG OF NOTHING AT ALL, THAT THEN COLLABORATED TO CONTRIVE THE ALLEGED COMMON ANCESTOR OF ALL WHICH THEN TRANSMUTED INTO EVERYTHING THAT EVER LIVED?

BILLY NYE THE PSEUDOSCIENTIFIC GUY IS SUGGESTING THE OPPOSITE WHICH IS A PUT-DOWN AND AN INSULT TO BELIEVERS OF GOD.

HISTRUTHBEKNOWN in reply to HodadWah (Show the comment) 1 hour ago

Who are you in Internet calling me a “moron”? What evidence/proof have you found for bringing on the table and proving that?

Natural evolution was the rational conclusion of any healthy mind in my teenager times. There was no enough data about abiogenesis and Big Bang, so, any affirmative conclusion would be not rational, it were opened questions. About History, myths, the one of my nation has the first place, and there is no mention of interventions of supernatural beings. What do you want?!!

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to HISTRUTHBEKNOWN (Show the comment) 1 second

XXX

I did not say DNA cannot “divide or reproduce”. It cannot change into another (entity’s) DNA.

TrueVerdicts in reply to TheHigherVoltage (Show the comment) 7 minutes ago

I think you are based on the information that scientists have trying to ad information into DNA and never got an improvement – an information that fits your world view. I read it 20 years ago, and I don’t know if still is valid. But, since you are advocating the idea that humans are special because you believe they have “soul”, I ask you: “why not a soul under evolution that can change DNA when the body is a hardware that does not works?” Have you thought in this possibility?

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to TrueVerdicts (Show the comment) 1 second ago

XXX

I agree. Though, dolphins are not intelligent, as they CANNOT engineer and innovate. I submit to all following this debate that only Humans are intelligent.

TrueVerdicts in reply to ExtantFrodo2 31 minutes ago

I think you need change the word “intelligent” in this debate and not using the words “engineer, innovation” for advocating an idea of human “soul”. Intelligence has been defined in many different ways including, abstract thought, understanding, self-awareness, communication, reasoning, learning, retaining, planning, and problem solving. People here understand it as it derives from the Latin verb intelligere which derives from inter-legere meaning to “pick out” or discern.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to TrueVerdicts 2:21 AM – Thu – 11

XXX

Thankyou but there is a God and he is the the one and only holy GOD and that is the only one you should believe in!

Chloe Woodward 14 minutes ago

If you feel happy with your belief, good for you. But, please, don’t tell it to my kids neither through their school because I want the mind of my kids free of private fantasies for better learning so many things about the nature of this world and be prepared for survival facing the ferocious competition. Fantasies are defined as private world views without public evidences.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to Chloe Woodward 9:36 – PM – Wed – 10

XXX

One does not convert to atheism because atheism is nothing. It is a neutral stance on the claims about god. One just wakes up one day and says ” shit I’ve wasted my life on bullshit!!!”

allanhill1 1 minute ago

But…attacking the name “god” is wrong, I think. My life’s experience and little knowledge are suggesting that this mind inside each human head and probable in many other lifeforms are like bubbles of dense substance called “consciousness” floating in an infinite ocean of slight consciousness, like a photon floating in light waves. Particles of photons with high quantum of light can be wave, also. Each one can call this “ocean” by the name he/she wants. If “god”, no problem.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to allanhill1 (Show the comment) 1 second ago

XXX

Life is so complex, that just a few proteins coming about by chance …even if the whole universe was an organic soup, is 10 with 40,000 zero’s after it to 1. Note that 10 with 50 zero’s after it, is a number greater than the atoms in the universe. So the chance is 0

iaml3642494 2 hours ago

An ovum is so simple and an embryo is so complex! Any hypothetical microscope being located inside an ovum, seeing only yolk, should say that the chance of something like genes coming about… even if that little universe was an organic soup, is 10 with 40.000 zero’s after it to 1. he should concludes the chance is 0.

But.. it happens. Nature has some forces in it that makes it happens. This microscope being that can’t see those forces would believe in magical gods or magical randomness. You?

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to iaml3642494 – 8:47 PM – Wed – 10

Yes for a few proteins to randomly pop up in thin air is damn near impossible. That’s not what scientists think happened btw. please do some research on abiogenesis. and it’s not evolution anyway.

tsub0dai in reply to iaml3642494 (Show the comment) 2 hours ago

Yes, iaml3642494 appealing to magical gods for explaining what happened in that primordial soup is not rational. But, scientists appealing to chemical reactions for explaining it is not rational too. My post above to iaml3642494 appealing to observed process happening in Nature is more rational, but… then, the same observation reveals that the events in that soup are driven by instructions coming from external source. Those scientists are suffering from myopia.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to tsub0dai (Show the comment) 1 second ago

XXX

XXX

Oh, friend, I thank FATHER for you this day! I, too, come from hard knocks, I can thus praise HIM for it’s not of me that you are seeing such a “good life” & “living a rich life” but of HIM & HIS love by HIS grace & mercies that I can share my testimony today with you & others. There’s nothing too impossible for FATHER to correct, nothing too bad/monstrous HE can not heal with in your hurting heart, friend, I assure you. Place your trust in HIM & HE’ll make a way for you. Feel free to PM me, OK?

netta2158 in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 3 minutes ago

“Feel free to PM me, OK?”

No it should not be good for you. If you are happy with your faith and respect the space of my kids, good for you. I am not the kind that go to church because when the priest says the first phrase and I think it is wrong, I stop him or I go out. No talks one direction alone. Debates only are useful if starts with real facts on the table. For instance: why your God permitted that me and other 1 million Americans that worked hard all life loose our homes?

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to netta2158 (Show the comment) 1 second ago

XXX

We have been seeking beings like us through the cosmos for decades with no success, that’s because our kind is unique. It’s not just biological. And we are mistakenly looking for intelligence of a difference creed than us. We are likely to encounter our same creed first in the cosmos, and they won’t necessarily  be more intelligent than us, but they could be more or less ‘advanced’ than us. And when/if we do find our kind, rest assured, that they will resemble us from top to bottom.

TrueVerdicts 2 minutes ago

Again you are only half-right. Seeds of “life” are produced and spreaded by galaxies in different time/space and they can germinate and grow if a convergence point is appropriate. That’s due the building blocks of galactic systems are half-alive and has the same configuration of nucleotides, the building blocks of DNA. Entropy attacking galaxies produces the transmission as in genetics and nanotechnology do the rest. But then is possible that we find a lifeform made-up of iron or plastic

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to TrueVerdicts (Show the comment) 1 second ago

XXX

There are diverse, transferable degrees of intelligence. Humans’ degree of intelligence was transferred, not evolved. In fact, biology CANNOT evolve; it is universally decreed impossible. Because all bodies within Time-Space, whether (inert or alive, including Humans) have a constant, identifiable structure, pre-determined mechanism, and purpose.

TrueVerdicts 1 hour ago

We don’t know yet. There is the new theory of Universe, called biocentrism. It makes sense also. Opposing Physics-centrism, if this Universe is the place where is occurring a process of genetic or computational reproduction of what was before the Big Bang, from Biology will come the Theory of Everything. All you said fits with evolution of a universal embryo: intelligence is transferred and evolves, all bodies has a Matrix/DNA structure, purpose, pre-determined mechanism, etc.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to TrueVerdicts (Show the comment) 1 second ago

XXX

Science’s narrowed biology-alone approach to intelligence simply diminishes the magnitude of what we’re part of; thus, has conducted studies on the wrong platform. Which is why we remain largely incapable of conquering the cosmos. The degree of intelligence needed to be fully fluid within Time-Space is metaphysical, not just biological or physical. It MUST be metaphysical as the state of being of Time-Space, itself, is metaphysical; i.e.Time-Space simply be; this fact is biologically unexplained

TrueVerdicts 1 hour ago

You are only half right, but if your goal is conquering the cosmos, we are together. Mathematical theorems has indicated that matter alone could not jump to self-consciousness and neurology has not found how neurons are related to mind. It means that biology producing consciousness is largely theoretical. I said before how “metaphysical intelligence” seems merely natural ex-machine software. Time is measure of chains of events and space arises only if have two objects. They aren’t entities.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to TrueVerdicts (Show the comment) 1 second ago

XXX

Another reason why intelligence does not reside in biology/genes is.. take robots/computers for example.. they can only showcase a mechanism. This is the plague that has stopped Artificial Intelligence dead on its track. AI will NEVER be self-innovative no matter the amount of physical intelligence inserted in a robotic entity; it can only showcase a limited, programed mechanism — even when it records new things on its own by means of repeated patterns, it cannot engineer and make things better

TrueVerdicts 1 hour ago

You don’t know the work of those two Physicists that earned the Nobel-2012. They got the isolation and observation of photons waves which is one step before quantum computation, which will be one step before artificial intelligence. If you add this discovery with what we had get in Matrix/DNA models, you will see the relation biology+intelligence+light. See our model: any wave of natural light seems the arm and hand of “the father’s source” that brings the code for imprinting life on matter.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to TrueVerdicts (Show the comment) 1 second ago

XXX

INNOVATION is UNIQUELY what intelligence is! The reason that, thus far, only Humans, as a subject of Time-Space, can innovate (not the stars, nor gravity, nor dolphins, nor monkeys, etc), is because only Humans are direct progenies of gods. Only gods can innovate. Therefore you are a god, not just biological matter, not EVOLVED. Because biology CANNOT evolve. You were engineered/created with the same properties/intelligence of “that” which engineered you (As it says: “In his image”)! Read below.

TrueVerdicts 1 hour ago

Human intelligence produces real innovation only when observing Nature, discovering its mechanisms/process and mimicking them. But you are right: only who has consciousness which are direct progenies of that “generator of universes” ( some fish, apes, already has flashes of it) can do it. But since you are mirroring in humans for inferring what is our “father” why you forget that we are not magicians, only natural? For avoiding rational evidence that the ex-machine “father” is too natural?

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to TrueVerdicts (Show the comment) 1 second ago

XXX

Biology can exist without intelligence (as all physical entities, including matter, are biological); and intelligence can exist without biology in a metaphysical form. However, biology cannot exist in a metaphysical form – which is where science remains stuck until it changes course.

Humans have inherited and can tap into the metaphysical source: innovation, dreaming, imagining, weeping, meditation, etc. Other forms of biologies, that we know of, cannot. [some say ‘spiritual’ for “metaphysical”]

TrueVerdicts 54 minutes ago

What you call “metaphysical intelligence” we call “universal software”, and biology is the hardware. We get the software when extracting out the energetic circuit of any natural system, included human brain and DNA. We have tracked backwards the evolution of this software and seen its origins at the Big Bang (quantum vortex and fluctuations of light waves). Only humans have dreams, consciousnesses, etc, because this software was sleeping in atoms, dreaming in galaxies and is waking up in humans

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to TrueVerdicts (Show the comment) 1 second ago

1) You are wrong, and you know it. Because you would have to explain the origin of the Big Bang. Secondly, if you’ve “extracted” it, you ought to be able to integrate it into other physical/biological entities. You folks should start with AI for instance, why not? Not gonna happen!

TrueVerdicts in reply to Louis Charles Morelli 2 minutes ago

Nope. And I can explain the origin of the Big Bang. Reason suggests that when you feels that there is a natural phenomena but you can not see it, collect its effects and search in nature the same manifestations. The phenomena producing these manifestations that you can see is the best source for a theory about what you can’t see. There is another “Big Bang” initializing a natural system and producing expansion, etc: the fecundation starting your own body. Nature does not play dice with us.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to TrueVerdicts (Show the comment) 1 second ago

2) Had Humans been solely biological, we would’ve digressed to the level of intelligence of the other biological species; or, it would be natural that other biological species progress/evolve to the level of intelligence of Humans. Biology, being found throughout Earth, could not have singled out just Humans be to intelligent, leaving behind all other species.

TrueVerdicts in reply to Louis Charles Morelli 3 minutes ago

My post agree with you that humans are not solely material biology, as only hardware, I told about the software. The cause that among all primates and other biological species only ancestors of humans got a brain that could wake up this universal living software was that only they went to leave in a cave, feeding the younger and older, which was the root of the human family, where arose feelings and emotions, the impulse for this awakening. If any ape give food to his father, he can get it too.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to TrueVerdicts (Show the comment) 1 second ago

XXX

if your god is the father then who was the mother? You should have symmetry in your anthropomorphism in order for your mythology to make some sense..

Mike Johns in reply to netta2158 (Show the comment) 2 hours ago

Well…glup…in certain meaning, the last universal common ancestor was the father of all living beings, and he was hermaphrodite… Oh…no…is God gay?

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to Mike Johns 2 hours ago

Noah is our common ancestor, and having 3 sons doesn’t make him a hermaphrodite. As for FATHER being gay, I do think HE is a very happy and joyful CREATOR after all look at all HE’s created … such beauty through all that our senses marvel in! What an awesome CREATOR we serve! Hallelujah, FATHER! Amen! Won’t you please learn of HIM & that of HIS love? HE truly is wonderful. HE loves you & us all so very much. Peace & HIS abundantly blessings to you, friend. <(^8

netta2158 in reply to Louis Charles Morelli 2 minutes ago

Este post abaixo devia ir para TrueVerdicts e errei:

Sorry, it is not possible an intelligent conversation between us. It seems that you had a good life with lots of money and living in a rich place for explaining why you have seen only the half part of this world, the beautiful one, which could explain the way your brain was hard-wired and your faith in a intelligent designer. Unfortunately I have seen the other half, the bad and monstrous design, which had effects in my hard-wiring and explains why I can’t believe in gods watching this here.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to netta2158 1 second ago

Every living thing through out the universe exists to evolve on some level, however, with out GOD, creationism & evolution would cease to exist. Therefore the human race who the FATHER of the Universe created, along with all seen & unseen things, need to teach our offspring about HIM & all that HE’s created especially of HIS mercy, forgiveness, grace, & unconditional love. I can only hope HE draws you, & us all, closer to HIM. May YESHUA/JESUS bless & fortify you, & us all, everyone. Peace. <(^8

netta2158 25 minutes ago

You are right, accordingly to last results of Matrix/DNA evolutionary cosmology, “theory”. Human race have as father who created the Universe. The problem is who created the Universe. Physics suggests it was a small atom. This theory suggests that this Universe is a kind of cosmic egg where is occurring a process of genetic or computational reproduction of who was existing before the Big Bang. But, parents outside the womb/egg does not go there creating shapes of fetus, embryos, etc. All Nature.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to netta2158 (Show the comment) 1 second ago

Yes, of course it’s nature … GOD, our FATHER in Heaven, created the very essence of nature and that of its’ components and cosmos. With out HIM there would be nothing, and nothing from nothing equals nothing … no womb, no egg, nor creation, no “big bang theory” and no “us” to debate HIS existence. I thank GOD the FATHER for HIS mercy, patience, forgiveness, grace, and love for we are a stubborn and rebellious creation. JESUS bless you, friend. Peace. <(^8

netta2158 in reply to Louis Charles Morelli 2 minutes ago

XXX

1) Ask yourself, if the essence of Earth was to harbor Humans, as we so arrogantly think, then why is it that Earth must have been in existence some 4 billion years prior to Humans insignificant few thousand lousy years on it. We can all agree that humans is the best thing to happen to Earth; then why must Earth have existed such length prior to the main Event?? That’s because, the Earth is, assuredly, NOT billions of years old; and science as a whole is in error.

TrueVerdicts 3 minutes ago

Nope. The shape of humans are result from evolution coming since abiogenesis, and abiogenesis took some billion years which is natural when a shape is coming from systems belonging to cosmological evolution. Think abiogenesis as process of macro-universal embryogenesis which takes billions years. Why should humans to be the best thing to happen to Earth?

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to TrueVerdicts4:36 AM – Wed – 10

Your science has gotten you so lost. Nothing, absolutely nothing, lasts such length within Time-Space. You cannot even truly begin to wrap your mind around ONE million years of past events, much less billions of years. Your science is tedious, very suppository and speculative. Yes, Humans, are the best thing to happen to Earth.

TrueVerdicts in reply to Louis Charles Morelli 22 minutes ago

Nature is tedious for a microscopic observer but it runs fast for an universal observer. Look to Solar System just now, it seems eternal, never changing, the moon always around Earth, the Sun always there… What then if observing the galaxy, 10 billion years, same shape? This vision impregnates us with tedious… but only those that think microscopically. Stars dies, becomes dust and resuscitates from its own gray, everything is moving. Abiogenesis is for universal observers understanding.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to TrueVerdicts (Show the comment) 1 second ago

XXX

Não Publicado

There is a method for training a person to evolves from a microscopic observer to an universal observer and you can learn it. But then, you need understanding universal macro evolution (13,7 billions years) and not only biological evolution (3,5 billion). And you need learn that DNA is merely the biological shape of a universal Matrix that began as simplest quantum vortexes emitting light at the Big Bang, has organized matter into atoms, galaxies and now is living inside cells systems.

XXX


louie says – ToE alone will not keep free thought.

Religious brainwashing is the antithesis of free thought…

geezusispan in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 2 minutes ago

You should say “creationism brainwashing is the antithesis of free thought”. Because there are religions more like philosophies different than creationism, which believes in ex-machine consciousness not interfering with human existence. But, the surprising and aggressive reaction of atheists (denialism of some form of superior consciousness) against a religion suggests that atheism is the other side of a coin, and if so, it seems also the antithesis of free thought. Why not ID also?

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to geezusispan (Show the comment) 1 second ago

So let’s hear your argument for ID

tsub0dai in reply to Louis Charles Morelli 3 minutes ago

I think nobody will accept my deep reasons for ID not in science classroom but in philosophical studies. Because for understanding my arguments, one needs leave out this planet, going above the galaxy, and from there, observe biological evolution here. I don’t know nobody did it besides myself. Doing it, ToE is revealed as a very poor theory that needs be improved. Then forget this argument and keep only the following: ID has been a tool for evolutionists rethinking evolution, improving it.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to tsub0dai (Show the comment) 1 second ago

Why not admit that God is the slow force behind evolutionary processes and cut out the middle man?

unclethermo in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 20 minutes ago

Why not admit that God is the slow force behind evolutionary processes and cut out the middle man?

unclethermo in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 20 minutes ago

I think that if one accepts evolutionary process by evidences seen in biological evolution, can not relates it with the idea of magic and omnipresent gods. Rationally, the two ideas are self-exclusive. But, universal evolution leaves an open door to the possibility that this evolution we are observing could be merely steps of an ex-machine process of reproduction (till of consciousness) like a virus inside an egg see evolution of an embryo. We are microscope beings in relation to the universe.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to unclethermo (Show the comment) 1 second ago

XXX

single cell organism’s from chemical reactions, research the theories instead of asking people on youtube…

kegstar4mma in reply to DarkHoundNero (Show the comment) 9 minutes ago

Certainly he knows the theory about “single cell organism’s from chemical reactions”from high school. If he is asking how life began is because he does not accept this theory. Why hydrogen cyanide separated from the Prussian blue and linked to ammonia for resulting in adenine if it never happens and any other situation? The theory suggests it was due pure chance, which is a hypothesis not falsiable. He is in his right.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to kegstar4mma (Show the comment) 1 second ago

XXX

Alma 14:124 “Yea, and my joy is carried away, even unto boasting in my God; for he has all power, all wisdom, and all understanding; he comprehendeth all things, and he is a merciful Being even unto salvation, to those who will repent and believe on his name.”

One of my favorites. Makes me feel happy. :)

bigjoegamer09 10 minutes ago

So you will educate your kids saying to them they are sinner and needs repent? Ok, we must respect the way you want to educate yours children, but, please, never tell this thing to my kids and does not force it into schools, because I am sure this is very prejudicial to the self-esteem of my kids.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to bigjoegamer09 (Show the comment) 1 second ago

XXX

ok, well, answer this qustion, if we came from life, and they say we came after the big bang theory, how did life start?

from whatever beginning of time they claim the big bang happened

how does life come from nothing?

if the first organism was brouht into existence and started repopulating

how could it be alive?

life just doesnt start from nothing, it had to be given it

DarkHoundNero in reply to parsivalshorse 2 minutes ago

When we have no enough data for provide an answer about any natural phenomena the logic is searching in Nature parameters, patterns. Because nature has its laws for doing natural things, and maybe there are patterns from where we can learn those laws. So, a good parameter for yours questions: Nature did your own body starting by an “explosion” ( abrupt opening of spermatozoon membrane), your life came from yours parents existing before that explosion. And they are “natural”. Any question?

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to DarkHoundNero1:55 AM – Wed – 10

XXX

And today we have separated the two fields of study into clearly defined “abiogenesis” and “evolution.” There is even an informal and outdated “law” in the study of evolution called “biogenesis” in which it is given that life is only formed from other life.

As you have been informed twice now that abiogenesis and evolution are two separate fields of study, you will begin to be a liar yourself should you choose to repeat the claim that abiogenesis and evolution are the same field of study.

arthurjeremypearson in reply to HISTRUTHBEKNOWN (Show the comment) 1 hour ago

Lol… thanks! That’s why I am following this debate: every minute you learn something new. The difference between abiogenesis, biogenesis and evolution, very well explained.

There is a tentative for searching how those ancestors non-living systems could produce – directly and evolutionary – the first living cell system. The Matrix/DNA Theory found a theoretical solution: a model of the building block of ancient galaxies that’s half-mechanical/half-biologica­l. Maybe ToE will be cosmological.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to arthurjeremypearson (Show the comment) –  1:36 AM – Wed- 10

XXX

indicating outward velocity as if, say, from an explosion.

we beleive that god is eternal and there for exists outside of time

its an explanation and realy better than nothing

why answers are better than nothing

boldburrito, you believe in the Bible’s god,  and I must respect the freedom of beliefs.  But why are  you here? I have collected your writtens: “every scientist now agrees that time started at somewhere”, “what made the big bang how did something come from nothing?”, “we believe that god is eternal and there for exists outside of time”, ” its an explanation and really better than nothing”, “why answers are better than nothing”.  All of this is debatable. Are you trying to extrapolate it to public education?

XXX

YOUR COMMENT IS THE NON SEQUITUR FALLACY. ATHEISTS DID NOT INVENT GRAVITY, GEOMETRY, OR ANY OTHER FIELD OF STUDY. ANYONE CAN STUDY GOD’S CREATION TO REALIZE GOD USED SYMMETRY, PROPORTION, PURPOSEFUL DESIGN ETC. WHEN HUMANS DISCOVER THE THINGS GOD MADE AND GET SOME SUPERFICIAL UNDERSTANDING IT NO MORE SUPPORTS THE RIDICULOUS NOTION OF EVIL EVOLUTIONISM THAN ONE STUDYING THE INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE WOULD. MINDLESS AND LIFELESS CHEMICAL ELEMENTS DON’T AND CAN’T CONTRIVE LIFE OR ENGINES.

HISTRUTHBEKNOWN in reply to parsivalshorse (Show the comment) 2 minutes ago

“ANYONE CAN STUDY GOD’S CREATION TO REALIZE GOD USED SYMMETRY”

So, symmetry is used by creationists as argument for magical creation? Sorry, it is not. Symmetry is result of a natural force that had been always present when Nature developed a new specie of systems. So, this force has been a systemic function and its mathematical number is phi, considered the golden ratio. Go to see the Matrix/DNA formula for systems, you will see there is no magical action for producing symmetry.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to HISTRUTHBEKNOWN (Show the comment) 1 second ago

YOU’RE A ROYAL BUFFOON. YOU JUST TOLD A FANCIFUL STORY. HAVE YOU SEEN NATURAL FORCES I.E. WIND, RAIN, THUNDER & LIGHTENING MAKE LIFE? MINDLESS AND LIFELESS CHEMICAL ELEMENTS CAN’T AND DON’T CONTRIVE LIFE OR CARS, BOATS, HOMES ETC.

DID YOU WAIT FOR NATURAL FORCES TO MAKE YOU A COMPUTER?

WHY DO YOU TALK ABOUT AND SAY THINGS THAT ARE IDIOTIC WITHOUT CRITICAL THINKING?

HISTRUTHBEKNOWN in reply to Louis Charles Morelli 1 hour ago

But you have not search the Matrix/DNA formula as I suggested for you learn how I based my arguments about where bi-lateral symmetry seen here is coming from. You have jumped to the conclusion that mine is “a fanciful history”, without knowing the foundations of that argument. This is the way you are dealing with origins of life, universe. etc.? Jumping to conclusions without searching the data collected by Science and/or empiricism? Sorry, in this way is not possible an educated debate.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to HISTRUTHBEKNOWN (Show the comment) 1 second ago

A computer is not a living creature…Completely wrong comparison..

TheRainmaker2001 in reply to HISTRUTHBEKNOWN (Show the comment) 59 minutes ago

By the way, computer are made by humans, and if humans are not a natural force, I don’t know what else they are…

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to TheRainmaker2001 (Show the comment) 1 second ago

And he says: “ALL THE ELEMENTS OF YOUR BODY AREN’T ALIVE LIKE THOSE IN A COMPUTER” . Is he suggesting something like the vital force as suggested by Pasteur – but is he suggesting this vital force coming from a magical god? If so, he does not know the strong evidence that the “vital force” was existing before life’s origins, animating the ancestors systems and there are strong evidences that it is encoded in a single wave of natural light. Ah..ah…now you are saying: this guy is also crazy!

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 1 second ago

XXX

what makes you atheist so sure that there is no God. science says nothing on the subject.

itsoriginalme 3 days ago

That’s right. Science doesn’t prove a thing. It only disproves.

Disproves stuff like talking snakes and “stopping the sun in the sky” and a worldwide flood.

Science is a knife that cuts away falsehoods, leaving something that’s the closest we can get to the truth.

God, spirits, and the supernatural might exist, but science says nothing about them. It all comes down to if you accept unfounded claims of magic, or not.

And if you do accept magic, I got a bridge I want to sell you.

arthurjeremypearson in reply to itsoriginalme 48 minutes ago

They are not unfounded claims most are founded on personal evidence granted that it is not testable but, it does not mean the claims are not valid. It just seems unlikely. The story of Adam and Eve is an allegory even though there are some who believe in it literal interpretation. Mass Christianity however recognizes that the story is an allegory

itsoriginalme in reply to arthurjeremypearson 1 minute ago

If it is allegory, must have a real event/fact that support the message in that allegory. What’s the real event/fact related to the narrative about Adam and Eve?

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to itsoriginalme 9:39 PM – MOn – OCT – 08

It is a story of how original sin came in to play and mankind gain free will independently of God. There also moral to the story that making something forbidden only makes people want all the more.

itsoriginalme in reply to Louis Charles Morelli 46 seconds ago

No, it is not “a story of how original sin came in to play”. The discipline of History in school there is anything related with this story. If you have discovered some real event/fact that in the past there was a ordered/perfect world, there was human beings or other lifeforms, these beings did something wrong and had a fall …. you need send it for peer-review. I elaborated a testable theory of a real event/fact for that allegory, it seems related to real event, do you want know it?

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to itsoriginalme (Show the comment) 1 second ago

i’m listening

itsoriginalme in reply to Louis Charles Morelli 2 minutes ago

Ok. There was a real world as described allegorically. In this world were living our ancestors, they did a “sin”, and they felt towards planets and they drove abiogenesis, still driving our evolution. This world is rational, scientifically testable, and I have its pictured model. It is the result of a method: comparative anatomy between living and non-living systems. Since Science has not got all data about that space/time, still is a naturalistic philosophical theory. Do want know more?

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to itsoriginalme (Show the comment) 1 second ago

XXXX

You see I’m going to have to disagree with Bill’s biased opinions, I think that all children should know things so that they can make there own informed decisions about life rather than being forced into one thing or another. They choose religion one must accept that, if one follows science then so be it.

MrDevin712

You are right accordingly with my personal viewpoint, which must be no totally right accordingly to the final Truth. This debate is between two extreme opposite world views – theists and atheists – and your suggestion means you are in the middle, like me. The question of this video is too much important, it is about the chose of the destiny of human kind. We in the middle need our voice be heard also, but all that came here suddenly disappears. We need here a list for subscribers. Or not?

Austriak1 in reply to MrDevin712 9:39 PM – MOn – OCT – 08

XXX

@DarwinsFriend Yes, let’s everyone rebel and become kings. There would be no inhabitants in our own personal kingdoms though since everyone one is king of their own inhabitantless kingdom as well. We will turn the universe into a hell. Or did you think you would deny one single individual the rebellion you enjoy? Party on, alone.

John Brown 21 minutes ago

Wrong. We, evolutionists don’t want to be kings. We want to rebel against any gods as described on the Bible, against humans’ gangs that gets money and power based on the rules of predators/prey observed in this chaotic and salvage biosphere, we want the universal human family as dreamed by a man, Jesus Christ. Everybody is our brooder with equal rights and obligations, every mother is our mother, every child is our child… This is the great cause of Humanity, going to its own transcendence.

Austriak1 in reply to John Brown (Show the comment) 1 second ago – 9:39 PM – MOn – OCT – 08

All this without authority right?

John Brown in reply to Austriak1 51 minutes ago

I don’t want be authority, I don’t want followers, employees, nobody below me, I want partners. If someone or a group want different, think different, no problem, keep their space and respect our space. Any social system that needs nucleus and periphery, predator and prey, any kind of authority, is based in the formula of closed systems, or dispersion opened system, which is a non-complete and related to past times of evolution shape of the ideal natural universal formula. Yes, no authority.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to John Brown (Show the comment) 19 minutes ago

@Louis Charles Morelli Sounds ideal but what do we do with those who refuse to play along? They say they don’t want partnership but war. What do we do and by who’s authority?

John Brown 3 minutes ago

Of course, first of all we need a cohesive group. Second we need to choose: let’s stay here among them or chose a separated place for living? Third: we need work hard for to be prepared for our self-defense. Fourth: while developing ourselves – materially and intellectually – we begins to ignore them – no business with them. And so on… While we don’t do nothing about this “dream” we need participate in this kinds of debate for not permitting any group getting the power. Snakes swelling snakes.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to John Brown (Show the comment) 1 second ago

@Louis Charles Morelli So unresolved disagreement means separation, like in a marriage. How long, unless disagreements cease, before we’re all separated? And, a military without a chain of command? Also, it’s death for those who don’t want partnership? Guess they weren’t free to rebel.

John Brown 4 minutes ago

Needs separation because the two groups, certainly, if one gets power, will make life here insupportable and self-destroyed. Atheism would leads to a kind of “Brave new World”ruled by a Big Brother, cutting our dreams about “to be something else more than apes” which is a mind-stopper. Theism would permit that the normal evolution of Nature with its normal changes caught us non prepared by Science, because they lives based in the “supernatural”. We need evolving but keeping our mind free.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to John Brown (Show the comment) 1 second ago

We will be separated – living at the same or different places – only temporary. We will joining together because we will develop the right Science and the right technology, we will have better society while they will be in trouble.Today technology is not for humans welfare because technology arises every time we discover new natural process/mechanism and Science is selecting some data and discriminating others due be driven by profit. They are our brothers in species, we will save them.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to John Brown (Show the comment) 1 second ago

@Louis Charles Morelli I’m having a hard time understanding you, are you translating from another language? Anyway, I don’t completely disagree with your utopian idea but you haven’t given me any realistic method to accomplish it. How will men ‘get along’?

John Brown 4 minutes ago

Sorry, English is not my native language, I am still learning. I think you have not read my two last posts to you. I think there is a possibility for human kind solving these actual problems that are leading us to out of control. A new big discovery about real Nature, about the meaning of our existence. This discovery would be the right drive towards a new worldview with new moral, where each human being will be part of solution. There is a scientific method that can leads us to this discovery:

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to John Brown (Show the comment) 1 second ago

@Louis Charles Morelli Oashpe? Scientology? Too naive and vague for today’s problems. So enlightening it’s blind.

John Brown 17 seconds ago

Nope, I don’t approve Oashpe and scientology. The worldview that I think is more rational and explains better our existence is TheMatrix/DNA Theory, but I don’t believe in it also. I need a world view now for driven my behavior but I cant believe in anything created by this little human brain when I remember the size and age of this Universe. I am still searching…

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to John Brown (Show the comment) 1 second ago

@Louis Charles Morelli I take that to mean that humankind doesn’t have the answer right now and I agree. Salvation won’t come from the mind of men and science. It came from above this world and Christians like me are saying “comprehend the light in the darkness (Christ) and take hold while you have the chance to choose life”.

John Brown 1 minute ago

Sorry, I can’t agree with this organized religion called “Christianism” because the real world I have seen in my life’s experience is suggesting to me that this religion is wrong. Christians are not real Christians I think and Jesus Christ said lots of wrong things and I don’t believe he was a son of God’s Bible.But Jesus said the most beautiful and lovely phrase: The universal sacred family is not this nuclear family but one where all brothers are my brothers, etc. Science is the unique hope.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to John Brown (Show the comment) 1 second ago

@Louis Charles Morelli I take that to mean that humankind doesn’t have the answer right now and I agree. Salvation won’t come from the mind of men and science. It came from above this world and Christians like me are saying “comprehend the light in the darkness (Christ) and take hold while you have the chance to choose life”.

John Brown 1 minute ago

I have post a comment answering this one. But let’s take this good example you said:”comprehend the light in the darkness (Christ)”. Yes, since light seems to be a universal constant, it should be the treasure keeping the secrets of universe and human existence. Comprehend what is light and finding all existent sources of light is the supreme goal. But you stop doing it when you think you know the mystery: you said “Christ”. Meanwhile my research of light is suggesting it has the code for life.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to John Brown (Show the comment) 1 second ago

Mark 3:35 “For whoever does the will of God is My brother and My sister and mother .” We don’t get to decide which parts of God’s word works us while we reject the rest. It’s either all valid and important or none of it is . You wouldn’t have it any other way would you ?

John Brown in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 3 minutes ago

God never said direct to me or to my parents or to my grandparents, to nobody that I know, what is his will. Why not? I am not a son of God equal others human beings? Why he talks with one son and not with other? My understanding about good fathers is that they does not discriminates their sons. So, it is most probable that my brother who said that god talked to him is lying. What will work for us, for our next generations? I have my opinion based in my life’s experience, anything else.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to John Brown (Show the comment) 1 second ago

@Louis Charles Morelli Searching? There is nothing else but Jesus.

John Brown 3 minutes ago

So Jesus is a searching-stopper. Who accepted Jesus and follow Jesus has arrived to the ultimate Truth. Does not need searching anymore. It means this being arrives to the ultimate shape and from now it will be eternal. I would not support eternity in this weak and stupid shape of human species. I know, you will say that the eternal is not human shape, but, the soul(spirit) shape. It is not rational to believe that we have soul and humans can ending the evolution of souls. No evidences.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to John Brown (Show the comment) 1 second ago

So you don’t believe because you don’t understand or accept His actions in a matter? Are you your father’s judge or authority?

John Brown in reply to Louis Charles Morelli 4 minutes ago

I never will accept that a father talks to one son and not with other. If my father do that, I go out of that house and never will see him again. It means he does not love me. That’s was my position when I began concluding that the Bible (the book of the Christian community where I grew up) is merely fiction. Then, I did my own search about the meaning of universe’s and human existence. Today I keep the possibility of having a superior kind of consciousness and why it does not talks to humans.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to John Brown (Show the comment) 1 second ago

The bible indicates that people will reject the truth in favor of appealing doctrines of malevolent beings. I can’t stress how important it is to be careful and pray for guidance. Your eternal destiny depends on it. Please.

John Brown in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 1 minute ago

A book does not indicates anything, the author does. The intention of this author is clear: he was advocating a doctrine, he want more people following the doctrine and is trying to keep the people that is already indoctrinated. He believes in that doctrine? Maybe yes but certainly nod guided by Reason. He is guided by natural instinct of survival and selfishness which approves privileged status for him, approves authority of ones over others, and avoids his obligation for doing the hard work..

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to John Brown (Show the comment) 1 second ago

My will ?! First of all, since I was born I never had an opportunity to apply my will. I was born in the wrong place, in the wrong time, and earned a body that seems merely an ape, less able to survive. The most bad design. And a human civilization that mimics the rules of the jungle, shared into predators and preys.That is why I choose early not reproduce me, I made myself the job of evolution, discarding what must be discarded.

Course I will select what I think operates better as you does.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to John Brown (Show the comment) 1 second ago

I lean completely on the bible . You rely on your own wisdom which is limited by it’s comparative lack of knowledge.

John Brown in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 3 minutes ago

No, you not lean in the Bible, you lean on what the authors of a book wrote. Who were those authors? 3.000 years ago? Yes, of course, I prefer lean on my poor and faulting knowledge than on the thousands minor knowledge of that authors. That’s why I am still searching knowledge, but the unique source for knowledge I believe is Mother Nature. I don’t approve the fact that Jesus worked as a searching-stopper for you, because you will not helping me to fix what I think is wrong.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to John Brown (Show the comment) 1 second ago

Adendos Começam Aqui:

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Excelente Esclarecimento da Diferença Entre Abiogenesis, Biogenesis, e Evolução:

And today we have separated the two fields of study into clearly defined “abiogenesis” and “evolution.” There is even an informal and outdated “law” in the study of evolution called “biogenesis” in which it is given that life is only formed from other life.

As you have been informed twice now that abiogenesis and evolution are two separate fields of study, you will begin to be a liar yourself should you choose to repeat the claim that abiogenesis and evolution are the same field of study.

arthurjeremypearson in reply to HISTRUTHBEKNOWN (Show the comment) 1 hour ago

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Against Creationism/ID

What’s malevolent, evil, & vile about the biblical god? Where shall I start? Maybe drowning a planet, sending fire bombs on a couple of cities, murdering the firstborn of Egypt for his own glorification, considering burning his chosen people & needing a mere man (Moses) to set him straight, sending his son down to be murdered so that he could forgive people their transgressions instead of just forgiving them. God is a total douche bag who despite his omniscience couldn’t teach a dog to bark.

ExtantFrodo2 14 seconds ago

“Slaves, obey your earthly masters with fear and trembling, with a sincere heart, as you would Christ” Ephesians 6:5

“Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything; and do it, not only when their eye is on you and to win their favor, but with sincerity of heart and reverence for the Lord.” Colossians 3:22

“Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed.” 1 Timothy 6:1

So much for that.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

SÔBRE EDUCAÇÃO DAS CRIANÇAS, NAS ESCOLA E FAMILIAS

Public school teachers and administrators shouldn’t allow creationism, which is a religious ideology, to be presented in classes or other officially sponsored school activities (assemblies, field trips, etc.). Unfortunately, we can’t always trust school administrators to do the right thing. Whether through ignorance or malice, creationism slips in and complaints from parents come too late.

IDisnotscience 21 minutes ago

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Informações Valiosas

Ohno stated, “The earth is strewn with fossil remains of extinct species; is it a wonder that our genome too is filled with the remains of extinct genes?”1 Due to his evolutionary presupposition, he assumed that non-coding DNA was merely a “genetic fossil” that may have been useful somewhere in our evolutionary past but had been discarded as we evolved into more complex, higher organisms. Since this “junk” DNA was no longer needed,

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Contra Evolução/Ciência

Hmmmm, science is the gathering of evidence and basing conclusions on that evidence. So technically evolution can’t be at the core of science because it would bend the scientists thoughts on a subject towards it. And that’s bad science. Just a thought.

Origem da Vida: Questão Atualizada Debatida em Congresso Cientifico

terça-feira, junho 26th, 2012

Origin of Life Probed in Scientific Contest

http://www.space.com/16311-origins-of-life-challenge-winners.html

SPACE.COM

xxx

Análise do artigo pela Matrix/DNA:

1) In 2011, retired chemist and entrepreneur Harry Lonsdale announced his plans to fund research on how life originally formed.

Matrix/DNA: Harry Lonsdale! Listado pela Matrix/DNA como um dos heróis da Humanidade. Investir dinheiro seu nêste tema e no trabalho de outros é realmente uma raridade e uma iniciativa de utilidade publica. Enquanto não entender-mos mais sôbre nossas origens, menos seremos donos dos nossos próprios narizes e pior será nossas condições de existência.

2) How life first developed is a poorly-understood process.

Matrix/DNA: Sim e será um processo muito mais dificil de enetender quando se entender que não existiu origens da Vida, não ao menos na Terra, nesta galáxia, e quiçá no Universo. Não tem como, racionalmente, definir como vivo um sistema biológico e não-vivo um sistema atômico ou astronômico. Cientificamente a palavra “Vida”, ao menos nesta questão de origens, deve ser trocada por “sistema biológico”, senão o conhecimento humano nunca conseguirá saber como foram conectados os fatos e eventos naturais ocorridos no passado.

3)  … the submitted proposals spanned a wide variety of potential research.

Matrix/DNA: Aqui está um dos principais benefícios da iniciativa filantrópica do Sr. Harry Lonsdale. existem teorias que podem serem testadas cientificamente e que estão sugerindo novos tipos de experimentos laboratoriais. Mesmo que a teoria esteja errada, ela contribue devido ao processo de “trial and error”.

4) “That’s kind of exciting, but also kind of intimidating, because we don’t know what’s going to be the right answer.” [7 Theories on the Origin of Life]

Matrix/DNA: tem o link para uma bem ilustrada lista das sete teorias existentes sôbre origens da vida, lista que já havia visto e sôbre a qual acrescentei um comentário na Space.Com e registrei aqui um artigo mencionando que existem 8 teorias, incluindo a própria da Matrix/DNA.

( tenho que interromper isso agora, mas voltarei com a análise)

xxx

Comentário postado pela Matrix/DNA na Space.com

I am very grateful to Mr. Lonsdale, I think this is an heroic act in benefits of human kind. U think that rationally there is 8 theories ( and not 7 as said here) about how biological systems arose at earth. Nobody has considered the hypothesis that biological systems were mere evolutionary development of prior natural systems, no biological. The Matrix/DNA theory is suggesting a model of original galaxies systems which could fit well as the prior system. In this model, the first galaxies were half-mechanical/half-biological and attacked by entropy the galaxies are irradiating its fragments that works as bit-information from itself,  and those bits, in shape of photons, when converged to a point that has good conditions, works like ancestral genes trying to reproduce the whole system. The final results is a base-pair of nucleotides, which is a system, and the next development is the biological cell system. Then, there should have no origins of life inside a galaxy, because makes no sense saying which is non-living. I defy any proposal of real natural fact or event that could destroy this theory and for your knowledge, the models are scientific falsiables. Of course, we don’t believe in theoretical models, they exists for to be tested.