Waton:-" Creating a self-designing, self-evolving universe is not easy,..... you try it."
And god saw that it was good... that good he designed it to self-destruct.
Tick tock tick tock...
Jupiter protects the earth... another example of intellectual dishonesty and an argument against design
by cognisonance 36 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
Giles Gray
-
Twitch
Lordy, not the Titus Bode thing again. Almost consistent to prediction does not a law make.
-
waton
Waton, I'm not sure why you think the controversial Titus-Bode rule somehow proves creation. Also, it also doesn't always hold true like you assert:
cognisonance: thank you for the graph. The rule holds true for Pluto, but not Neptune, (as i mentioned above) however, the outer, Uranus, Neptune, Pluto are equidistant at 9.6 AU spacings, as are the inner ones, Mercury, Venus, Earth at .3 AU showing a kind of a cognisonance, of 1 to 32 ( .3 to 9.6) wavelength, 5 Octaves of doubling, but equal spacings at both ends.
Keplers laws show, that if you have ratios like 1:2 in orbits you have relations in timing, velocities, all synchronized for many millennia.
Curious, that in this scheme of lowest common denominators Earth would show up at 10 (which wt adopted as the symbol of earthly perfection). Of course as you said, many variations in that, Venus retrograde rotation, Uranus's tilt. Pluto intersecting Neptune's orbit..... No planets in the bode-predicted halvings below venus.
Apart from this "10" coincidence, I consider all creation, or nature as proof of creation.
The solar system is stable because of the resonances in the orbits, possibly atuned even to the Eigenschwingungen of the Sun. latest enigma I am working on: 1/100000 herz of middle c in solar vibrations relating to "bode". possibly r of mercury orbit. if seen by "c" .382 AU.!
I do not believe , like Newton that the creator is a tinkerer, it all is made possible by the original setup, supply of Energy, matter, laws.
-
waton
Lordy, not the Titus Bode thing again.
Twitch here is a sequence that resembles a chromosome, with fixed ends at both ends, pronounced as useless by many astronomers, like a decoration superflouis but fitting, and compatible with what emerged out of the big beginning (ba..)
I tis really out there, , t()wich can not be said about wt way out doctrines)
-
cognisonance
Waton, I don't understand why Bode's predictions somehow matter, whether they constituted coincidence or law. And citing the Watchtower about 10 being a symbol of earthly perfection... are you still a JW or into numerology?
it all is made possible by the original setup, supply of Energy, matter, laws.
To that I'll defer to Carl Sagan: https://youtu.be/SYlIYnKmGV4
-
jookbeard
thanks for sharing this, brilliant article
-
stan livedeath
isnt jupiter another word for jehovah ?
-
waton
Waton, I don't understand why Bode's predictions somehow matter, whether they constituted coincidence or law. And citing the Watchtower about 10 being a symbol of earthly perfection... are you still a JW or into numerology?
c: no, I do not support wt dogma anyy more, but cited it as history. I am not into numerology per se, but numbers matter, if you can not put a number to a theory, you do not understand it.
The solar system has inherent cognisonances. The Sun rotates ~ 27 says, the moon roteates and revilves in ~ 27 days and human reproduction reaches its's peak every ~27 days. all timed events can also be expressed as wavelength when measured via C, the velocity of light. tThe solar system hums in harmonics.
Using Bode would have predicted the length of traces for Uranus, Pluto, and the odd ball neptune, the exception is the key to the underlying immediate cause, I blieve 8 planets in doubling spacings can not just be co-incidence.
It will be interesting if any of the exo planetary systems display bode=like patterns We are either common or unique) Trappist 10 has common spacings, but no geometric series.
isnt jupiter another word for jehovah ? stan live death:
in wt speak, Jehovah = GB, jw heavies, and Jupiter is 2.5 times bigger than all other planets combined. that is why it's orbit matters, dominating them all.
-
-
neverendingjourney
The problem with the "if you change this one little thing, life on Earth wouldn't be possible" line of reasoning is that life evolved specifically with the Earth's conditions in mind. Of course changing things around would be fatal for life on Earth. But life evolved to survive in these specific conditions, not any other.
There are likely trillions of worlds (including moons) in the universe, each with a unique blend of conditions specific to them. We know the vast majority of them don't have the conditions to host complex life as we know it, but eventually a world would have the specific mix of criteria just right for life as we know it to develop. The Earth is one such world.
More difficult questions arise with the "if you change this specific factor, the universe as we know it wouldn't exist" line of reasoning. Modern physics seeks to get around this conundrum with multiverse theories, but such theories are untested and perhaps untestable. That doesn't mean "God did it" is the correct answer, though.