|
|
| |||||||||||
| From | Message | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
 HORROR BECOMES MORE HORRIBLE |
||||||||||
|
the-jim 05-Nov-17, 18:02 |
Some people don't believe in what they cannot see. I have been informed before that there is no God as we cannot see God or Angels etc. I say what about the air we breath? We may feel it when there is a breeze. We can tell that it fills our lungs even though we do not see it. Also we cannot see gravity, but when we drop something we can see evidence that gravity is at work. Furthermore, we cannot see odors, but our nose picks them up.... We cannot see sound waves, but our ears detect them. So we do believe in things we cannot see! |
||||||||||
|
Hebrews 11:1 King James Version (KJV) 11 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. King James Version (KJV) |
||||||||||
|
the-jim 05-Nov-17, 19:08 |
Shirl You can not see me, but I am here with my Teddy bear in bed Good Night My Friend! Jimmy |
||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
|
Seeing is Believing You can see millibars indicating changes in air pressure. We can measure the air. Similarly, we can translate sound waves into visual patterns, and measure decibels. While we cannot see gravity, we can see the effects of it. We have measured the force of gravity, and it is 6.754x10^-11 m^3/[kg(sec^2)] What is the value of bigger G? [G]od? What is the measure of God? I once saw a rabbi davening before the wailing wall in Jerusalem. [I was there about 5 years ago]. I asked him what he was doing. "I'm praying for peace between Muslims and Jews," he replied. "Does that work?" I asked. "It's like talking to a wall," he responded. |
||||||||||
|
Believing is seeing |
||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
|
Schrodinger's Cat I didn't mean to imply that God does not exist--though I understand my words could be taken that way. Rather, we lack any means (at present) for detecting God's presence. I believe there ARE sound philosophical reasons for postulating God exists. I don't, however, get from there to any specific dogma. That is a gap beyond bridging, at least for me. Can we accurately measure the totality of the universe? Probably not--though that which we CAN measure leads us to conclude it does exist. Because it is measurable. And because any two people making independent measurements ultimately arrive at very similar answers. Any two random people attuned to God yield widely varying answers. What gives? |
||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
|
LS |
||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
|
Gravity We know less about it than we do the weak nuclear force, or any of the other fundamental forces (strong nuclear force and the electromagnetic force). Far less. It wasn't until just within the last century that we developed a theory of gravity that properly accounts for the motion of Mercury. Newton's theory didn't do it. It wasn't until just within the past few years that we discovered gravity waves, and oh what waves did we discover! Three solar masses bleeding into the spacetime fabric! Almost inconceivable! I'm going to listen to another talk on the forefront of gravity wave research this coming Monday, by a professor of astronomy who took over my class this semester. And next year, for my 30th wedding anniversary, my wife and I intend to visit VIRGO, the Italian gravity wave observatory, near Piza, Italy. Are phenomenon fully explainable and knowable any less mysterious? We probably know more about electromagnetism, mediated by the gauge boson known as the photon, than any other force. Yet it remains both marvelous and mysterious, and we have barely begun to scratch the surface of our understanding of it. Surface mount microelectronics, switches that cycle in mere femptoseconds, quantum computing... |
||||||||||
|
Quantum Entanglement The photoelectric effect. Oh, my cousin (author of "Beyond Comprehension") brought up the relationship between the particle/wave duality of light and the triune aspect of deity. Things we sort of take for granted, but lack decent explanation. We currently lack the means of laboratory analysis of God. Will that always be the case? I was born in 1961. A few years back I took a tour of Cape Canaveral, where Alan Shepard was launched into space atop a big metal can. Just suborbital, it was still almost as awesome a feat as the earlier launch of Yuri Gagarin, who circumnavigated our world in a voyage of roughly 90 minute duration. The control rooms in the bunker adjacent to his rocket were full of computing equipment--multiple "room" sized computers, which today could all be replaced by a single device easily fitting in the palm of my hand, with processing power to spare. A single box sitting on my desk can compute numerical products faster than all the humans on our planet combined. Processing power nothing short of miraculous, from the perspective of people alive when my father was born--before the first electronic computer. So how does the manipulation of electromagnetic fields compare to God? By turning wire inside a magnet we produce a current flow, oscillating back and forth over a tungsten filament light (and even more heat) is produced inside an incandescent bulb. The night sky turned dayish, drowning out the nasty stars. Better still, this energy warms elements which, attached to a blower, warm one's house in winter. Cheery little dots of warmth and happiness littering the winter countryside. I could go on and on, but the question is, how does all this compare to God? |
||||||||||
|
With regard to the Shroud of Turin, I know a lot about it. It was damaged in a fire, as Robert stated, and was repaired by nuns, I think, so it has newer cloth attached. What is also fascinating is that the scientists found pollen in the Shroud, linked to the Middle East. The Shroud actually led me to Christ in 1978 when I formerly believed myself to be an atheist. I purchased the book, The Shroud of Turin, by Ian Wilson. Excerpts of it were published in my local newspaper, and they aroused my interest. I give a testimony about my conversion on the Bible Club, but I have now left the Club. I hope to join another in the near future. The image on the Shroud appears to be a negative, which was revealed when it was photographed. The story is fascinating. I still have that book in my bookcase, along with a lot of old newspaper articles that were written about it after the book was published. |
||||||||||
|
Scientists I read an article about it in Skeptical Inquirer, which pretty well settled all the claims. It very likely did originate in the middle east, due to the pollen grains noted by Shirley. But (as I recall) it wasn't older than about 14th century. Around 700 years old. I think the timeline fits very well with that of crusaders returning it from eastern conquests. The image is much more like that of a Teutonic knight than of a dark skinned, hook nosed Hebrew, more in fitting with the lineage of Jesus. But it is an authentic burial cloth--just not old enough to have been the one in which Christ was buried. I'm not sure we should be placing our faith and trust in artifacts anyway. These are not timeless. The cloth had been damaged in a fire at one point. Carbon from the fire would have contaminated the radioisotope content of the cloth, except researchers were well aware of this (and the handling problem--wax and oils from human fingers) and carefully cleaned the original sample before vaporizing it for the isotope ratio. While the first test was good, the second is considered definitive (and in good agreement with the first) and neither scientists nor church officials accept the cloth as a relic of the era of Jesus. |
||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
|
I Use Scientific Talk My science is in no way intended to relieve a person of any deeply held religious belief--except where that belief conflicts with reality, such as in the age of our world and the death of the dinosaurs. |
||||||||||
|
I'll say it again. the shroud of turin and the relation it has to The Sudarium of Oviedo: which has been dated to the first century. If it were a murder investigation the forensics are 100% that both the face covering and shroud were on the same body at the same time. |
||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
|
Also My goodness that was one talented forger! The best ever and they even predicted future technology and 500 ahead of time. Wow just wow |
||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
|
Forgery? Back around 1400, which is the date of the original fibers. This is pretty definitive. en.wikipedia.org |
||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
|
The best evidence that the shroud is from the first century is.... www.google.com |
||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
| |||||||||||
