"Is Genesis History?" creation vs evolution documentary on Netflix

Not mathematically impossible, just highly improbable.

However, just because an event is highly improbable doesn't by itself make it special, or in fact even rare, as odd as that sounds. Highly improbable, Virtually impossible events occur everyday.

I can even get you to do one right now. Take a deck of playing cards, and give it a real good and long shuffle. So it's as good and random as it can be.

There, you have just completed an act so improbable that it has never been repeated in human history. In fact that particular order of cards is so nearly impossible, that if there were a billion planets, each with a billion humans, and they shuffled cards non stop for a billion years, they will not recreate the order of cards you just created.

The chance of you landing on that card order are 52! to 1 (52 factoral)
52! is so big, it's 8 (followed by 68 zeros ) to 1. Way more unlikely then the chances of cellular formation on early Earth.

And the card order is not not even special or rare, go ahead, shuffle again for a minute. You just did it again, another order of cards that will never be recreated for the rest of human history.

The point is, that highly improbable events that led to intelligent life on Earth just were, but they weren't special or rare. If they didn't happen that day, they would have happened the next, or the next.

It seems counter intuitive but something's can be highly improbable but still be likely to eventually happen.

Gotta disagree, in cosmology light is used to measure distance, not rates of universal cooling.

I will give you that if you were trying to calculate the rate of cooling of say our Sun, then how fast light energy takes to escape from the fusion core would take C into account.

But for the big equation of how long it will take for all atoms to reach absolute zero, I don't believe C needs to be taken into account.

But it's really a small difference we're debating, even if C is needed, and even if C is eventually shown to vary under certain conditions, it won't throw of the results much Maybe we reach absolute zero in 9.8 trillion years instead of 10..

The speed of light is absolutely used to make measurements. And those measurements are used to create the foundation of cosmologies.

For the record, a cosmology is a belief system. It's a study of origin and has its own claims, rules, biases and findings. And when you look at it in those terms, it's a religion.

When you apply large numbers to a small constant, you will achieve approximately similar results.

Perhaps that's why the age of the universe keeps getting older and older......

The bigger the age of the universe the better the math works out for that agreed upon constant: the speed of light.

I agree, there are folks who have way too much "faith" in the standard model of cosmology. I believe we only know a fraction of what's going on out there, take dark matter or dark energy for example. I have my own theories on what they are, but basically they are huge void in our knowledge of the unviderse.

Talk about the age of the universe getting older and older, wait till the James Webb Infra Red telescope goes up next year, it will be orders of magitude more powerful then Hubble, and when it looks billions of light years further out then Hubbles deep field shots. The calculated age of the universe will take some big leaps for sure.

I'm a creationist who believes the earth is millions of years old.

In the beginning God create the heavens and the earth. PERIOD.

There is no specification of time between the first vs and the 2nd verse.

You have committed the fallacy of petitio principii. A cell needs both DNA and protein to function; getting them both and getting them integrated stretches the bounds of probability to the breaking point. If the odds are this bad - so bad that they amount to the closest thing next to impossible that's possible - what could account for atheists' incalculable faith in chance? To begin with, atheists think they got nothing to prove. Richard Dawkins summed up this sentiment when he wrote "however improbable the origin of life might be, we know it happened on Earth because we are here." But this is not an argument. It is, at best, an assumption dressed up as a demonstration. One could just as well demonstrate that fairies create life, for "we know it happened on Earth because we are here." This is the fallacy of a petitio principii: it proves nothing because it proves anything.

Although random processes can explain some interesting features of Life (adaptation, drug resistance, etc.) they cannot answer the most important questions of biology. The studies of HIV and Malaria conducted over the past fifty years and the more recent study of E.coli conducted by Richard Lenski provide scientists with the best data on what random processes can do in Nature where it counts. These studies demonstrate that Darwin's mechanism - natural selection acting on random mutations - doesn't "evolve" much of anything. In fact, there is a statistical limit to what random processes can achieve in Nature where it counts. Beyond that limit, non-random processes are required.

Dark Matter and Dark Energy are simply gaps in theoretical mathematical equations. Those gaps represent 94-96% of the known universe. Which means we know absolutely nothing about our universe using the mainstream cosmology.

The leading theoretical physicists who described both concepts quite literally throw random numbers at those equations with hopes [faith] that the end result makes sense.

There is no observation beyond math. There is no testing of the theories. And there is no confirmation that it is true beyond calculation.

It's Kabalistic.

It's fucking numerology.

Last Edited by BoatyMcBoatface on 06/08/2017 01:34 AM

I see no reason not to rely on the power of chance, but as I said just because the certain events required to form the first living cell are highly improbable doesn't mean they won't eventually happen, or even must eventually happen if the conditions are right.

I don't think the really improbable event is the spontaneous formation of life, as I think we will eventually find life forming spontaneously wherever the conditions favor it all across the galaxy. But what I think is the truly remarkable, and nearly impossible event is basic life, growing into an intelligent, sentient being that has the ability to ask these questions.

I personally buy into the Fermi Paradox, that if there is other intelligent life out there, where are their emissions and transmissions. I think that while basic life is everywhere, it's much more likely that we humans are the only intelligent self aware and technological life in our galaxy. We humans hold a special significance in our universe, you might call it a divine spark. I'm an atheist so I'll just say it's just something special about us.

Last Edited by mport81 on 06/08/2017 01:37 AM

I think dark matter and dark energy are the first real evidence that something outside our universe, in the "Metaverse" is effecting our universe. But because they are not in our universe, experiments to try and collect dark matter particle are going to fail.

Dark matter could be the left over matter from another universe that had wildly different physics then ours., where say the force of gravity was much stronger and the strong and weak forces were nearly non existent. That is why dark matter can effect our universe through gravity but it won't interact any other way.

And Dark energy, which is merely the unknown force that is fueling the accelerating expansion of our universe. Is just the effect caused by the energy that is driving the Metaverse, again, external of our universe, so it will most likely be a long time before we'll be able to measure it. If ever.

But it's all just ideas at this point, but just because science doesn't have all the answers and scientists are constantly striving for finer and finer observations in order to refining their calculations. Doesn't mean they aren't on the right track, or they don't have at least a basic grasp on what's going on out there. Some just have to be willing to let go of older, dogmatic theories and be willing to accept new ideas.

Last Edited by mport81 on 06/08/2017 01:41 AM

"Is Genesis history?"

Yeah, that band will never create interesting new work again.

The end.

Genesis: The ultimate fake news.

Calculus is the process of calculating n slices of quantities to get some answer about a question. Theoretical physics is based on calculus, and likes to invent its own math on top of that and assign new symbols to represent entire ideas and theories to represent it.

Science, if it chooses to prolong this approach, will never discover truth. And here's why:

You can't understand the whole of a thing by examining just slices of it, particularly (no pun intended) when you are comprised of it. This is why particle physics will ultimately fail to find truth.

You will, however, discover properties and methods of the whole of the thing, and that will lead to new technologies and ways to express such understanding.. But alone, it will never answer that fundamental question.

This is basic logic... And it's probably why people like Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk are suggesting that we live in a 'simulation'.

These 'new-agers' believe that because they possess similar capabilities to our creator, that they can overcome creation itself, and perhaps even the creator.

And that's why our leading scientists throw random numbers at their equations. They have no fucking clue how this came to be, or how it works.

In reference to the idea. It's repeated history based on what I'm in (if it's the spiritual). Ask the musicians they know what's up. Will they "talk" some of them might...

The evidence of intelligent design of the universe is quite simply everything in the observable universe. There is NOTHING in the observable universe that contradicts the theory of intelligent design. In fact, it is so intelligent in design that physicists are now coming to the conclusion that we are creating it by observing it.

In contrast, there is no actual empirical evidence that suggests the universe is a random happenstance. I could get into the intricate details of why the atheist religion of pseudoscience is hopelessly lost in a quagmire of impossibilities that will never actually answer any real questions about the universe, but I don't have the time or the inclination. I have went into many of these details in the past here an elsewhere and to my satisfaction proved my conclusions to the extent further debate on the subject is futile.
suffice it to say that the belief that the universe is the result of an infinity tiny focus of energy and matter that just decided to explode and arrange itself into an almost infinitely complex interaction of energy and matter is not just contrary to the basic laws of physics and the dictates of common sense and logic, it is an asinine and profoundly STUPID conclusion. It is almost as if there is an active attempt to oppose the truth with it's opposite.

We are constantly being brought back to one principal, probability. To put it into some kind of perspective, imagine if you can a tornado moving through a junkyard and in the process assembling a fully functional fleet of 1000 747 aircraft. Now divide that probability by ten trillion, and you're at about the right number for the probability that the universe is a random happenstance that occurred as the result of an explosion. It's not just the probability of one event you have to take into consideration, it is the interaction of millions of improbable events. The universe is an intelligent arrangement. What that means , I don't know as it relates to the existence of higher spiritual power, but what I do know and can say for sure is that there is not a single noteworthy scientist in hsitory that did not espouse a belief in intelligent design and a higher power in the universe that did the arranging. I personally believe in a three part divinity of sorts, the physical universe, the conscious mind, and the creator of the universe, which are all integral and have always existed. The need to create a beginning and an end of everything is a product of finite human thinking, and the universe and time are infinite. Another way to put it is time is not linear, but follows a curved path that eventually finds it's way back to the same place.

Here is the way I look at it, since I like archeology and history, some of the stories in the bible are widely total, years wise, but they also mention animal life, it not make believe that some animals thought to be extinct were alive even a few hundred years ago. That the problem with not looking at the historical parts to go with the spiritual part because man does have a spirit. Knowing what and now to put those strange statues in context of name or attributes of the leader or some other person they are talking about. Say a man had the courage of a lion, half lion half man, but then it past down to the family, not good because if they were not the man, they could not own it. A bull of a man, big stout and strong. This is part of it/

Say there is a lion, a bull, and a dragon on a wall, is the lion a fantasy, is the bull mythical? No, these were common animal that had mean back then, lions were fought and trained, the bull had other thing link to it, some about worship some about strong animal like and ox, now we come to the dragon, was it mythical just because you do not want it to be. Go read the histories of those ages, they did not believe in evolution. Dragons in dens during the those few hundred years ago in Europe and Russia, China and the Middle East, there is no telling how many people in their own languages talked about these animals.

The bible is full of history, I used it to see some of the things they found that fit the tells in the Bibles, Old Testament Genesis. They did not write on paper, and any of the newer thing, they carve it on stone or in stone, they made clay tablet, but their building told the stories also, they followed The Lords Command do not build with anything mixed of mud and other thing, cut stone, build it with stone hello, anybody checking histories not just the Bible but even old tale from history, I loves those because history is seen in them or heard in them.

That how I see it, I believe the Lord God above all others and his Son, Lord and King. He was in the book for all to see, both were.

No I don't and Genesis is the oldest with half lies.

You will discover the truth when Atlantis raise again.

if you have the time, this guy's different and so are his videos. really. unless you've been snowflaked, Trey Smith will be a shot in the brain.

[link to www.youtube.com (secure)]

Tried to watch it but it conveniently avoids the most important proof of our origins and that's the ancient writings of Sumeria and the Vedic scripts which tell us in detail where we come from and they were written over 10,000 years ago.

If they aren't starting with those writings first and foremost then they are stupid and missed the mark by a long shot.

Creationism VS Evolution, is just like flat earth VS Heliocentric Pear-Shaped Globe FALSE COSMOLOGY;

both models are promoted by the Illuminati, and both models are wrong. They just want YOU to emotionally align yourself and identify with either one, to seek to defend it :) time to snap out of the dichotomy folks

Evolution and the Spherical Earth are FALSE BY DEFAULT in this Manufactured Reality


Last Edited by LostReality33 on 06/08/2017 04:38 PM

zYeeeaaaaaa in case you aren't aware, Netflix is owned by the Illuminati .

Not much truth to be found on that platform except what they put into "fiction" format, movies like "They Live," ya know

Last Edited by LostReality33 on 06/08/2017 04:41 PM

Genesis is about the history of the intellectually advanced humans (modern humans) that originated in Turkey.

It is still misdirection, a method employed of dumbing down masses for easy enslavement and control

If you are not understanding Anu, Enki, Enlil then you will never learn real history.. And why..