Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,426 Year: 3,683/9,624 Month: 554/974 Week: 167/276 Day: 7/34 Hour: 1/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Movie - "The Principle"
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 306 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 4 of 120 (760131)
06-18-2015 12:27 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Suzanne Romano
06-17-2015 11:09 PM


Are you going to argue in favor of geocentrism or whatever it is, or is this just an advertisement?
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Suzanne Romano, posted 06-17-2015 11:09 PM Suzanne Romano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by Suzanne Romano, posted 06-18-2015 10:42 AM Dr Adequate has not replied
 Message 16 by Suzanne Romano, posted 06-18-2015 12:03 PM Dr Adequate has replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 306 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(2)
Message 20 of 120 (760207)
06-18-2015 2:25 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by Suzanne Romano
06-18-2015 1:19 PM


Interestingly, in all of human history, we observe only one thing: That animal and plant species are fixed and immutable
No we don't.
Indeed the Linnaen and other systems of taxonomy work perfectly well in practice because there have been no recorded observations of transpeciation or transmutation within a kind from the beginning of human history.
This claim is so flagrantly false that most creationists have given up on it. For example:
Answers In Genesis says "Species do change. Since Darwin’s day, many observations have confirmed this. In fact, new species have even been shown to arise within a single human lifetime. "
Creation Ministries International says "New species have been observed to form."
The CreationWiki says: "Species have been observed to form".
The Institute for Creation Research says "New species do arise, a process called "speciation.""
Absurd consequences follow: True taxonomic measurement ceases to be possible because there are no immutable biological forms (no beings at rest, we might say) upon which to base a true branch of science. No category of living being can be anything other than a transitional, relative existence (relative to what, they never say); and this unmoors the entire science of taxonomy.
That may be unwelcome to you and to the ghost of Carl Linnaeus, but that doesn't make it "absurd". You might as well complain that the discovery that water isn't an element is "absurd" because it "unmoors the entire science of alchemy". Well, that's just something we had to learn to deal with.
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Suzanne Romano, posted 06-18-2015 1:19 PM Suzanne Romano has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 306 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 21 of 120 (760208)
06-18-2015 2:32 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by Suzanne Romano
06-18-2015 10:05 AM


The Copernican Principle, especially as it has been applied by modern speculative physics, is evolutionist in its essence. The evolutionary worldview posits several paradigmatic foundational principles, all of which have their nascence and inception in the assumptions and theories of the heliocentrists/copernicans.
The first principle of evolutionism is that of material origin or first cause. Whereas both Natural Theology and Divine Revelation recognize One, Omnipotent, Uncreated, Eternal, Intelligent, Simple, and Good First Cause (Creator), In Whom there is no matter, no composition, no material extension, and no potency, Who is pure Act and Pure Spirit, and from Whom came forth the material, finite, created Universe; the evolutionary worldview posits a material first cause. Matter was, matter is, and matter will be. All things that exist are products of cosmological and biological material causes. Whatever form their existence might take at any moment of measurement, observation, or apprehension, owes all of its attributes to random physical causes, and not to the intelligently determined design of an omnipotent Creator.
The Copernican Principle (CP) underpins the Big Bang Theory (BBT) of the origin of the Universe. This theory posits a material first cause. Something - in some versions so small that it amounts to virtually nothing - exploded, cooled, and gelled. And then there was the Universe. And this took billions, and billions of years.
The next principle is perpetual change. In the evolutionary/copernican/relativist paradigm, there is no stable, immovable, absolutely at rest body. If absolutely nothing in the material Universe is at rest, then no motion whatsoever is capable of measurement; for all measurement requires a standard for comparison. Furthermore, if absolutely nothing in the material Universe is at rest, then there can be no objective direction. There is no up, no down, and no center. All motion is relative, i.e. subjective, i.e. based on perception and vantage point and nothing more. Indeed Big Bang Cosmology posits just this: an acentric universe with no objective direction and no objectively measurable motion.
According to Natural Philosophy and Divine Revelation, the Earth is a fixed, stable body at rest in the center of the spherical, finite Universe. A fixed Earth conforms to common sense, and, being fixed, provides the basis and foundation for all measurement of all motion. Copernicus, Galileo, Kepler, Einstein and the modern scientist establishment posited that the Earth is not fixed, but rather revolves around the sun and rotates on its own axis, in addition to hurtling through outer space with its sun, moon, planets, and galaxy. This destroys the objective existence of a body at rest in the created cosmos, destroys all true measurement of motion, and - not incidentally - destroys belief in the literal sense and inerrancy of Sacred Scripture.
Likewise biological evolutionism posits perpetual change in the matter-form composition of generic biological forms. Sacred Writ reveals that the Eternal Word created all things according to their kinds (genera). Sacred Theology and Scholastic Philosophy teach that the kinds of plants and animals made by God during the Six Days of Creation are immutable substances, which, though subject to the changes of growth and corruption, are not subject to transubstantiation or transmutation. Evolution holds for the absurd idea that a lower being has the power, through material causality, to transmute itself into a higher being, so that it gives what it never had. Amoeba has no lungs and no legs, but by some magic (called billions and billions of years), its offspring has lungs and legs. Ape has no rationality, but, by the power inherent in matter cum quasi-infinite magnitudes of time, can transmute itself into man.
Evolutionism gives to matter creative power OVER TIME. Matter creates OVER TIME. Because time is the essential requisite for the evolutionary system to have any possibility at all, the entire construct is qualified by the attribute of perpetual change, a function of time. In the case of man, matter is alleged to have created both a body and an immaterial soul. But this is absurd because there is no intellectual or spiritual power or capacity in matter. For this cause the evolutionary paradigm is constrained to categorize man, not as rational animal, but as just plain animal, and to deny the existence of his immaterial, rational, immortal soul. But this flies in the face of observable reality.
Evolution posits that the observable and measurable created kinds are not immutable forms, but rather transitional forms, always in the process of becoming, and therefore never actually participating in true existence according to a true essence or nature. Absurd consequences follow: True taxonomic measurement ceases to be possible because there are no immutable biological forms (no beings at rest, we might say) upon which to base a true branch of science. No category of living being can be anything other than a transitional, relative existence (relative to what, they never say); and this unmoors the entire science of taxonomy.
I don't want this reply to go on forever, wherefore I hope I have sufficiently addressed your question.
And yet for all this blather, if the Copernican Principle was disproved tomorrow, all the evidence for evolution would still be there; and if evolution was disproved tomorrow, then we'd still have no reason to assign our planet a special place in the universe. The two questions are completely independent. The one thing that links them together is that some religious people deny both of them. But they really have nothing to do with one another. It's like when Bush invented the "axis of evil" --- remember that? Consisting of three countries with no common factor except that he didn't like any of them.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Suzanne Romano, posted 06-18-2015 10:05 AM Suzanne Romano has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 306 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 22 of 120 (760210)
06-18-2015 2:34 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by Suzanne Romano
06-18-2015 12:03 PM


DR ADEQUATE: Are you going to argue in favor of geocentrism or whatever it is, or is this just an advertisement?
SUZANNE: Of course; and it is also an advertisement or promotion.
OK then. Go for it. Geocentrism. Give it your best shot.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Suzanne Romano, posted 06-18-2015 12:03 PM Suzanne Romano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by Suzanne Romano, posted 06-18-2015 2:41 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 306 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(1)
Message 38 of 120 (760304)
06-19-2015 8:59 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by Suzanne Romano
06-18-2015 12:03 PM


DR ADEQUATE: Are you going to argue in favor of geocentrism or whatever it is, or is this just an advertisement?
SUZANNE: Of course; and it is also an advertisement or promotion.
You have the floor. Go for it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Suzanne Romano, posted 06-18-2015 12:03 PM Suzanne Romano has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 306 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 40 of 120 (760361)
06-20-2015 7:03 PM
Reply to: Message 39 by RAZD
06-20-2015 6:35 PM


Re: wrong in wrong out
The Copernican Principle is not the same as Copernicism, although it may well be that the makers of the movie are conflating them.
The Copernican Principle is the idea that our planet doesn't particularly have a special place in the universe. In terms of its location (if not its population) it's just one more planet in the solar system; the solar system is a perfectly ordinary solar system of a sun which is unremarkable in our galaxy; our galaxy is a normal member of the Local Group, which is just one more bunch of galaxies in the Laniakea Supercluster ... and so on.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by RAZD, posted 06-20-2015 6:35 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by RAZD, posted 06-20-2015 7:53 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 306 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 114 of 120 (761592)
07-02-2015 9:11 PM
Reply to: Message 105 by Suzanne Romano
07-02-2015 6:03 PM


Re: VERBAL SPAM - WROTE IT MESELF
Now there is no movement in God. His Being (Pure Act), and therefore His Truth, are immutable. Man, by virtue of his place in the hierarchy of being - made "a little less than the Angels" - is intended by God to be the most fixed and stable creature in the changeable material universe ...
And yet people do in fact move about. I've moved several miles today. Over the course of my lifetime, tens of thousands of miles. Hence "we must presuppose an inherent instability" in humanity, "and hence a privated or divided cause". This is why gay people can marry, y'know. It's 'cos they keep moving around. Presumably in all the countries where they still can't marry, this is a result of all the inhabitants of those countries staying perfectly still.
Clearly our moral salvation must depend on asserting the doctrine that no-one ever moves, and clinging to this doctrine in the face of the overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 105 by Suzanne Romano, posted 07-02-2015 6:03 PM Suzanne Romano has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 306 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(2)
Message 116 of 120 (761602)
07-03-2015 12:23 AM
Reply to: Message 105 by Suzanne Romano
07-02-2015 6:03 PM


"Truly Obscene Speeds"
The first wave of invasion begins with copernicanism, which violently dislodges the Earth from its place in the cosmos. The intellectual effect on mankind is that Earth, in reality stable, immovable, unshakable, at rest, and centrally located, is now erroneously believed to hurtle through random space at truly obscene speeds.
Why are speeds obscene? In what way are speeds obscene? Are all speeds obscene, or how fast do they have to be to get saucy? Am I OK driving in a car? How about traveling in a plane? Is it kinkier if I break the sound barrier?
And why out of all the planets do you only worry about the obscene speed of the Earth? Using geocentric principles, we can establish that the speed of Neptune is even dirtier and that the motion of the stars can only be compared to an all-out orgy. And, of course, a geocentrist must think that the velocity of the Sun is exactly as depraved as a Copernican would claim that the velocity of the Earth is. Is the Sun a flaming pervert? All geocentrism achieves is to suppress the fast filth of one part of the cosmic picture by transferring it to another part. Indeed, you require the stars to move faster than what physicists say is the fastest speed possible, and which is therefore the most obscene any speed can be --- and your picture of the universe is obscener than that. Geocentrism turns the entire night sky into one great kaleidoscope of velocitudinous pornography. Shame on you, lewd hussy!
No wonder SCOTUS went gay. The stars are moving too quickly and depleting our moral fiber.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 105 by Suzanne Romano, posted 07-02-2015 6:03 PM Suzanne Romano has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 120 by NoNukes, posted 07-03-2015 11:57 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 306 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 118 of 120 (761607)
07-03-2015 2:56 AM


Interim Summary
Under correction from anyone who knows more physics than I, it seems to me that we have two options:
(1) We can adopt Newtonian dynamics, in which case according to experiment and observation it is false to say that the Earth is stationary.
(2) We can adopt a more sophisticated Einsteinian view in which it is meaningless to say that the Earth is stationary.
When they find themselves otherwise unable to defend against (1), the geocentrists take refuge in (2), since this affords them the doubtful pleasure of denying that the fixed stars are stationary either.
But whichever way you slice it, there's no warrant for saying that the Earth is stationary.

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024