Home » Culture, Intelligent Design, News, Philosophy » Darwinists say “there is no point in studying designs and its designer once we decide something is designed”

Darwinists say “there is no point in studying designs and its designer once we decide something is designed”

When Darwinists say that ID hinders science because once we decide something is designed, we stop inquiry. That is like saying, “there is no point in studying designs and its designer once we decide something is designed.” This is like saying once something passes our own personal Explanatory Filter, and we recognize design in an artifact, we just give up trying to learn more? I don’t think so.

When I first heard this wonderful piece of music, I wanted to learn more about its architecture, I wanted to study the written notes that generated the music, I also wanted to learn more about the designer, Massenet himself.

embedded by Embedded Video

YouTube Direkt

As a child, when I first heard a piano rendition of Massenet’s Meditation I knew immediately no ordinary mind composed the music. Something in this sonic architecture told me the source of the design was not some careless mind just making noise. The sequence of notes in the melody seemed levels above the music I heard on the radio (many of tunes that were popular then are now mostly forgotten). I feared I’d never hear this piece of music again. I didn’t even know the name of the piece.

But eventually I did hear the music again, and then again (like the above youtube video). It was too beautiful for the world to forget. I found out its name (Meditation from Thais) and its designer (Massenet). I learned music theory to understand the architecture of music. I found the notes to the music and spent many hours practicing and playing the notes the designer left for posterity.

The problem with evolutionary materialism is that it looks for square-circles. It looks for random chaotic undirected processes to created coordinated information — that is a search for a square circle. They want to know the mechanism of the designer in terms of mechanical process when such a description may not be even possible in principle if indeed the description of real intelligence cannot be reduced to simple mechanics. Indeed, in some interpretations of quantum mechanics, conscious intelligence is an irreducible given that cannot be explained and decomposed in terms of more elementary concepts.

Perhaps the more compelling question is “what is the nature, the character, the abilities of the designer — who is the designer?” These questions are outside of ID proper, but nothing stops us from continuing to learn and investigate more once we conclude something is designed. On the contrary, knowing something is designed might motivate us to learn even more.

HT: Mapou in Comment, The Enigma of Consciousness

  • Delicious
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • RSS Feed

20 Responses to Darwinists say “there is no point in studying designs and its designer once we decide something is designed”

  1. This podcast is of related interest. It humorously reveals the lengths cosmologists will go to deny the design that is now evident in the universe:

    “New Philosophy of Cosmology Wrestles with Origins, Fine-Tuning” – podcast
    http://intelligentdesign.podom.....5_57-08_00

  2. That the universe and life were designed were given as science was started and continued unabated for centuries before Darwin.

  3. “given” Should have said “givens”. There is a lot to be said for discovering how something works, as opposed to where something came from. That is how science has delivered the most benefit. Where it came from is irrelevant to discovering, imitating and benefitting.

  4. Responding to the headline directly, when a human artifact is discovered, there’s a lot to be learned from it about the originator—technologies, techniques, application, and so on. There are also questions whether some stone tools were intelligently designed or natural.

    The accusation in the headline seems to be an attempt at exposing an imaginary disadvantage to ID thinking—while ignoring the the very real errors made by Darwinists that did indeed impede scientific advancement (junk DNA, vestigial organs, and uniformitarianism come to mind).

    -Q

  5. They want to know the mechanism of the designer in terms of mechanical process when such a description may not be even possible in principle if indeed the description of real intelligence cannot be reduced to simple mechanics. Indeed, in some interpretations of quantum mechanics, conscious intelligence is an irreducible given that cannot be explained and decomposed in terms of more elementary concepts

    If we believe quantum mechanics is because of a creator,the line of enquiry will be different.We will go down the wrong path. We will be looking for 4th dimension and how a creator in 4th dimension can manipulate fermions in 3rd dimension.
    We will not be concentrating on trying to figure out the Hamiltonian of the Quantum system, we will not be trying to work out the dot product of the ket and bra vectors, we will not be trying to calculate an experiment which will reveal properties of Quantum particles .We would not have wondered why fermions have mass, we would not have wondered about local symmetry and would not have figured out the scalar field – the Higgs field. We would not have the LHC – a testament to man’s ingenuity- and we would not have looked at the results of years of LHC experiments – the bump on the graph representing 125 GeV, and would not have discovered the God particle. We would have missed (base jumping)^infinity.

  6. If we believe quantum mechanics is because of a creator,the line of enquiry will be different.We will go down the wrong path. We will be looking for 4th dimension and how a creator in 4th dimension can manipulate fermions in 3rd dimension.
    We will not be concentrating on trying to figure out the Hamiltonian of the Quantum system, we will not be trying to work out the dot product of the ket and bra vectors, we will not be trying to calculate an experiment which will reveal properties of Quantum particles .We would not have wondered why fermions have mass, we would not have wondered about local symmetry and would not have figured out the scalar field – the Higgs field. We would not have the LHC – a testament to man’s ingenuity- and we would not have looked at the results of years of LHC experiments – the bump on the graph representing 125 GeV, and would not have discovered the God particle. We would have missed (base jumping)^infinity.

    False. Those questions would still be of interest even assuming there was a creator because Quantum Mechanics was not a theory of origins unlike evolutionism.

  7. selvaRajan,

    I find it strange that you assume that ‘We will go down the wrong path’ if we assume God as necessary for doing science properly. The reason I find your ‘We will go down the wrong path’ sentiment strange is that, for one thing, science was born out of the matrix of Christian Theism. Here are just a few, out of many, references that can be brought to bear on the matter:

    Science and Theism: Concord, not Conflict* – Robert C. Koons
    IV. The Dependency of Science Upon Theism (Page 21)
    Excerpt: Far from undermining the credibility of theism, the remarkable success of science in modern times is a remarkable confirmation of the truth of theism. It was from the perspective of Judeo-Christian theism—and from the perspective alone—that it was predictable that science would have succeeded as it has. Without the faith in the rational intelligibility of the world and the divine vocation of human beings to master it, modern science would never have been possible, and, even today, the continued rationality of the enterprise of science depends on convictions that can be reasonably grounded only in theistic metaphysics.
    http://www.robkoons.net/media/.....ffd524.pdf

    “Did Christianity (and Other Religions) Promote the Rise Of Science?” – Michael Egnor October 24, 2013
    Excerpt: Neither the Greeks nor Islam produced modern theoretical science. The Greeks produced sublime philosophy and mathematics, but no theoretical science. They excelled in mathematics but never applied mathematical models to the systematic study of nature.
    Islam produced no real theoretical science. It invaded the Christian Middle East, Christian North Africa and Christian Spain, and expropriated the culture and work of Christians and Jews and pagans in the conquered lands. Centralized government and fresh availability of booty fostered a modest bit of science produced by the conquered locals — the vast majority of whom were not Muslim for centuries.
    It took several centuries before most of the conquered peoples under the Islamic boot converted to Islam — Islamic rulers coveted the dhimmi taxes and were not quick to force conversion — and when Islamic lands became wholly Islamic, science became wholly dead.
    http://www.evolutionnews.org/2.....78281.html

    Kelvin’s conundrum: Is it possible to believe in God and science? – 20 October 2013
    Excerpt: Some years ago, the scientist Joseph Needham made an epic study of technological development in China. He wanted to find out why China, for all its early gifts of innovation, had fallen so far behind Europe in the advancement of science.
    He reluctantly came to the conclusion that European science had been spurred on by the widespread belief in a rational creative force, known as God, which made all scientific laws comprehensible,” Lennox said.
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/0/24535331

    I have a fundamental belief in the Bible as the Word of God, written by men who were inspired. I study the Bible daily…. All my discoveries have been made in an answer to prayer.
    Sir Isaac Newton (1642-1727), considered by many to be the greatest scientist of all time

    Another reason I find your ‘We will go down the wrong path’ sentiment strange is that assuming Naturalism, instead of Theism, as true in science leads to the epistemological failure of science:

    Alvin Plantinga – Evolutionary Argument against Naturalism – video
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r34AIo-xBh8

    Content and Natural Selection – Alvin Plantinga – 2011
    http://www.andrewmbailey.com/a.....ection.pdf

    Why No One (Can) Believe Atheism/Naturalism to be True – video
    Excerpt: “Since we are creatures of natural selection, we cannot totally trust our senses. Evolution only passes on traits that help a species survive, and not concerned with preserving traits that tell a species what is actually true about life.”
    Richard Dawkins – quoted from “The God Delusion”
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4QFsKevTXs

    Philosopher Sticks Up for God
    Excerpt: Theism, with its vision of an orderly universe superintended by a God who created rational-minded creatures in his own image, “is vastly more hospitable to science than naturalism,” with its random process of natural selection, he (Plantinga) writes. “Indeed, it is theism, not naturalism, that deserves to be called ‘the scientific worldview.’”
    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12.....wanted=all

    The Absurdity of Inflation, String Theory and The Multiverse – Dr. Bruce Gordon – video
    http://vimeo.com/34468027

    Here is the last power-point slide of the preceding video:

    The End Of Materialism?
    * In the multiverse, anything can happen for no reason at all.
    * In other words, the materialist is forced to believe in random miracles as a explanatory principle.
    * In a Theistic universe, nothing happens without a reason. Miracles are therefore intelligently directed deviations from divinely maintained regularities, and are thus expressions of rational purpose.
    * Scientific materialism is (therefore) epistemically self defeating: it makes scientific rationality impossible.

    BRUCE GORDON: Hawking’s irrational arguments – October 2010
    Excerpt: Clearly, embracing the multiverse idea entails a nihilistic irrationality that destroys the very possibility of science.
    http://www.washingtontimes.com.....arguments/

  8. Another reason I find your ‘We will go down the wrong path’ sentiment strange is that Naturalism has led us severely down the wrong path. For instance, besides the absurdity that is Darwinism and the multiverse, we are faced in quantum mechanics with the absurdity of many worlds in trying to explain the ‘simple’ double slit experiment in which every time an observation is made you split off into a quasi infinite number of other selves. Call me unscientific if you want but I consider that absurd consequence of the Many Worlds hypothesis to be a self refutation of the hypothesis. Though others not so wedded to common sense don’t:

    ‘I tentatively accept the consequences of such a theory, including that I would also be a multiversal object, which includes at least 10^500 versions of myself’ – Scott – Many Worlds proponent
    http://darwins-god.blogspot.co.....8409346277

    i.e. “if you don’t believe in God you will believe in anything!”

    Now selvaRajan to try to be fair to your position, the belief that you think belief in God hinders science, perhaps you feel the insatiable curiosity that is inherent in man will somehow be quenched if theism is assumed as true in science, but I find that conjecture to be an extremely weak position since the fact is that science flourishes when Theistic considerations are strong in a society:

    Bruce Charlton’s Miscellany – October 2011
    Excerpt: I had discovered that over the same period of the twentieth century that the US had risen to scientific eminence it had undergone a significant Christian revival. ,,,The point I put to (Richard) Dawkins was that the USA was simultaneously by-far the most dominant scientific nation in the world (I knew this from various scientometic studies I was doing at the time) and by-far the most religious (Christian) nation in the world. How, I asked, could this be – if Christianity was culturally inimical to science?
    http://charltonteaching.blogsp.....-wife.html

    supplemental notes:

    Mathematics is the language with which God has written the universe.
    Galileo Galilei

    An Interview with David Berlinski – Jonathan Witt
    Berlinski: There is no argument against religion that is not also an argument against mathematics. Mathematicians are capable of grasping a world of objects that lies beyond space and time ….
    Interviewer:… Come again(?) …
    Berlinski: No need to come again: I got to where I was going the first time. The number four, after all, did not come into existence at a particular time, and it is not going to go out of existence at another time. It is neither here nor there. Nonetheless we are in some sense able to grasp the number by a faculty of our minds. Mathematical intuition is utterly mysterious. So for that matter is the fact that mathematical objects such as a Lie Group or a differentiable manifold have the power to interact with elementary particles or accelerating forces. But these are precisely the claims that theologians have always made as well – that human beings are capable by an exercise of their devotional abilities to come to some understanding of the deity; and the deity, although beyond space and time, is capable of interacting with material objects.
    http://tofspot.blogspot.com/20.....-here.html

    Bohemian Gravity – Rob Sheldon – September 19, 2013
    Excerpt: Quanta magazine carried an article about a hypergeometric object that is as much better than Feynman diagrams as Feynman was better than Heisenberg’s S-matrices. But the discoverers are candid about it,
    “The amplituhedron, or a similar geometric object, could help by removing two deeply rooted principles of physics: locality and unitarity. “Both are hard-wired in the usual way we think about things,” said Nima Arkani-Hamed, a professor of physics at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, N.J., and the lead author of the new work, which he is presenting in talks and in a forthcoming paper. “Both are suspect.””
    What are these suspect principles? None other than two of the founding principles of materialism–that there do not exist “spooky-action-at-a-distance” forces, and that material causes are the only ones in the universe.,,,
    http://procrustes.blogtownhall.....vity.thtml

    General Relativity, Quantum Mechanics, Entropy, and The Shroud Of Turin – updated video
    http://vimeo.com/34084462

    The absorbed energy in the Shroud body image formation appears as contributed by discrete values – Giovanni Fazio, Giuseppe Mandaglio – 2008
    Excerpt: This result means that the optical density distribution,, can not be attributed at the absorbed energy described in the framework of the classical physics model. It is, in fact, necessary to hypothesize a absorption by discrete values of the energy where the ‘quantum’ is equal to the one necessary to yellow one fibril.
    http://cab.unime.it/journals/i.....802004/271

    Verse and Music:

    Colossians 1:15-20
    The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and for him. He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross.

    Empty (Empty Cross Empty Tomb) with Dan Haseltine Matt Hammitt
    http://www.godtube.com/watch/?v=F22MCCNU

  9. Richard Lewontin said, “materialism is an absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.” Because of such commitments to materialism, theism and the concept of intelligent design are not “science stoppers.” Rather they could be great incentives to scientific research that offers the potential to overcome the weaknesses in materialist explanations. However that assumes the critics and skeptics have the ability and motivation to focus on the difficult research that would be necessary to prove their point, rather than on the sophistries and ad hominem attacks that we so often see.

  10. 10
    TheisticEvolutionist

    Do you believe in psychic powers bornagain77?

  11. Two words: reverse engineering. The objection falls of its own weight as a gross, stereotypical caricature. KF

    PS: Lovely piece of music, and a suitable subject for reverse engineering indeed.

  12. TheisticEvolutionist

    Do you believe in psychic powers bornagain77?

    And why do you ask me personally? Will my personal opinion in the matter change your personal belief that ‘psychic powers’ are pseudoscience? If you were hoping for a quick yes answer from me, so as to smugly write off my answer as pseudoscience before examining the evidence itself, that, as you should well know by now, is not what you will get from me. But as to what the empirical evidence itself says, well that is another matter altogether isn’t it, since the evidence has a much more authoritative voice that is quite apart from my own?:

    This following experiment extended the double slit experiment to show that the ‘spooky actions’, for instantaneous quantum wave collapse, happen regardless of any considerations for time or distance i.e. The following experiment shows that quantum actions are ‘universal and instantaneous’:

    Wheeler’s Classic Delayed Choice Experiment:
    Excerpt: Now, for many billions of years the photon is in transit in region 3. Yet we can choose (many billions of years later) which experimental set up to employ – the single wide-focus, or the two narrowly focused instruments. We have chosen whether to know which side of the galaxy the photon passed by (by choosing whether to use the two-telescope set up or not, which are the instruments that would give us the information about which side of the galaxy the photon passed). We have delayed this choice until a time long after the particles “have passed by one side of the galaxy, or the other side of the galaxy, or both sides of the galaxy,” so to speak. Yet, it seems paradoxically that our later choice of whether to obtain this information determines which side of the galaxy the light passed, so to speak, billions of years ago. So it seems that time has nothing to do with effects of quantum mechanics. And, indeed, the original thought experiment was not based on any analysis of how particles evolve and behave over time – it was based on the mathematics. This is what the mathematics predicted for a result, and this is exactly the result obtained in the laboratory.
    http://www.bottomlayer.com/bot.....choice.htm

    “Thus one decides the photon shall have come by one route or by both routes after it has already done its travel”
    John A. Wheeler

    Alain Aspect speaks on John Wheeler’s Delayed Choice Experiment – video
    http://vimeo.com/38508798

    Genesis, Quantum Physics and Reality
    Excerpt: Simply put, an experiment on Earth can be made in such a way that it determines if one photon comes along either on the right or the left side or if it comes (as a wave) along both sides of the gravitational lens (of the galaxy) at the same time. However, how could the photons have known billions of years ago that someday there would be an earth with inhabitants on it, making just this experiment? ,,, This is big trouble for the multi-universe theory and for the “hidden-variables” approach.
    http://www.asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/2.....r.html.ori

    Here is a recent variation of Wheeler’s Delayed Choice experiment, which highlights the ability of the conscious observer to effect ‘spooky action into the past’, thus further solidifying consciousness’s centrality in reality. Furthermore in the following experiment, the claim that past material states determine future conscious choices (determinism) is falsified by the fact that present conscious choices effect past material states:

    Quantum physics mimics spooky action into the past – April 23, 2012
    Excerpt: The authors experimentally realized a “Gedankenexperiment” called “delayed-choice entanglement swapping”, formulated by Asher Peres in the year 2000. Two pairs of entangled photons are produced, and one photon from each pair is sent to a party called Victor. Of the two remaining photons, one photon is sent to the party Alice and one is sent to the party Bob. Victor can now choose between two kinds of measurements. If he decides to measure his two photons in a way such that they are forced to be in an entangled state, then also Alice’s and Bob’s photon pair becomes entangled. If Victor chooses to measure his particles individually, Alice’s and Bob’s photon pair ends up in a separable state. Modern quantum optics technology allowed the team to delay Victor’s choice and measurement with respect to the measurements which Alice and Bob perform on their photons. “We found that whether Alice’s and Bob’s photons are entangled and show quantum correlations or are separable and show classical correlations can be decided after they have been measured”, explains Xiao-song Ma, lead author of the study.
    According to the famous words of Albert Einstein, the effects of quantum entanglement appear as “spooky action at a distance”. The recent experiment has gone one remarkable step further. “Within a naïve classical world view, quantum mechanics can even mimic an influence of future actions on past events”, says Anton Zeilinger.
    http://phys.org/news/2012-04-q.....ction.html

    In other words, if my conscious choices really are just merely the result of whatever state the material particles in my brain happen to be in in the past (deterministic) how in blue blazes are my choices instantaneously effecting the state of material particles into the past?,,,

    In fact, both consciousness, and free will, are now shown to play a central (axiomatic) role in quantum mechanics,

    Can quantum theory be improved? – July 23, 2012
    Excerpt: However, in the new paper, the physicists have experimentally demonstrated that there cannot exist any alternative theory that increases the predictive probability of quantum theory by more than 0.165, with the only assumption being that measurement (*conscious observation) parameters can be chosen independently (free choice, free will, assumption) of the other parameters of the theory.,,,
    ,, the experimental results provide the tightest constraints yet on alternatives to quantum theory. The findings imply that quantum theory is close to optimal in terms of its predictive power, even when the predictions are completely random.
    http://phys.org/news/2012-07-quantum-theory.html

    * What does the term “measurement” mean in quantum mechanics?
    “Measurement” or “observation” in a quantum mechanics context are really just other ways of saying that the observer is interacting with the quantum system and measuring the result in toto.
    http://boards.straightdope.com.....p?t=597846

    Now this is completely unheard of in science as far as I know. i.e. That a mathematical description of reality would advance to the point that one can actually perform a experiment showing that your current theory will not be exceeded in predictive power by another future theory is simply unprecedented in science! And please note that free will and consciousness are axiomatic to Quantum Theory in the experiment. This is hashed out in more detail here:

    Free will and nonlocality at detection: Basic principles of quantum physics – Antoine Suarez – video
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhMrrmlTXl4

    What Does Quantum Physics Have to Do with Free Will? – By Antoine Suarez – July 22, 2013
    Excerpt: What is more, recent experiments are bringing to light that the experimenter’s free will and consciousness should be considered axioms (founding principles) of standard quantum physics theory. So for instance, in experiments involving “entanglement” (the phenomenon Einstein called “spooky action at a distance”), to conclude that quantum correlations of two particles are nonlocal (i.e. cannot be explained by signals traveling at velocity less than or equal to the speed of light), it is crucial to assume that the experimenter can make free choices, and is not constrained in what orientation he/she sets the measuring devices.
    To understand these implications it is crucial to be aware that quantum physics is not only a description of the material and visible world around us, but also speaks about non-material influences coming from outside the space-time.,,,
    https://www.bigquestionsonline.com/content/what-does-quantum-physics-have-do-free-will

  13. But quantum mechanics goes much further than just showing us that our free will choices effect the state of material particles into the past, quantum mechanics shows us that physical reality does not even materialize (i.e. quantum wave does not collapse to its particle state) until we make a conscious observation of it. For years, This possibility that material reality did not exist until we looked at it was hinted at in the double slit experiment,,,

    Quantum Mechanics – Double Slit Experiment. Is anything real? (Prof. Anton Zeilinger) – video
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ayvbKafw2g0

    But now this ‘hint’ has been verified to a stunning degree of accuracy (80 orders of magnitude)

    Quantum physics says goodbye to reality – Apr 20, 2007
    Excerpt: They found that, just as in the realizations of Bell’s thought experiment, Leggett’s inequality is violated – thus stressing the quantum-mechanical assertion that reality does not exist when we’re not observing it. “Our study shows that ‘just’ giving up the concept of locality would not be enough to obtain a more complete description of quantum mechanics,” Aspelmeyer told Physics Web. “You would also have to give up certain intuitive features of realism.”
    http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/27640

    Lecture 11: Decoherence and Hidden Variables – Scott Aaronson
    Excerpt: “Look, we all have fun ridiculing the creationists who think the world sprang into existence on October 23, 4004 BC at 9AM (presumably Babylonian time), with the fossils already in the ground, light from distant stars heading toward us, etc. But if we accept the usual picture of quantum mechanics, then in a certain sense the situation is far worse: the world (as you experience it) might as well not have existed 10^-43 seconds ago!”
    http://www.scottaaronson.com/democritus/lec11.html

    Quantum Physics – (material reality does not exist until we look at it) – Dr. Quantum video
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1ezNvpFcJU

    If you have trouble accepting the implications of the preceding articles and video, don’t feel alone, Nobel prize winner Anthony Leggett, who developed Leggett’s inequality to try to prove that an objective material reality exists when we are not looking at it, still does not believe the results of the experiment that he himself was integral in devising, even though the inequality was violated by a stunning 80 orders of magnitude. He seems to have done this simply because the results contradicted the ‘realism’ he believes in (realism is the notion that an objective material reality exists apart from our conscious observation of it).

    A team of physicists in Vienna has devised experiments that may answer one of the enduring riddles of science: Do we create the world just by looking at it? – 2008
    Excerpt: In mid-2007 Fedrizzi found that the new realism model was violated by 80 orders of magnitude; the group was even more assured that quantum mechanics was correct.
    Leggett agrees with Zeilinger that realism is wrong in quantum mechanics, but when I asked him whether he now believes in the theory, he answered only “no” before demurring, “I’m in a small minority with that point of view and I wouldn’t stake my life on it.” For Leggett there are still enough loopholes to disbelieve. I asked him what could finally change his mind about quantum mechanics. Without hesitation, he said sending humans into space as detectors to test the theory.,,,

    (to which Anton Zeilinger responded)

    When I mentioned this to Prof. Zeilinger he said, “That will happen someday. There is no doubt in my mind. It is just a question of technology.” Alessandro Fedrizzi had already shown me a prototype of a realism experiment he is hoping to send up in a satellite. It’s a heavy, metallic slab the size of a dinner plate.
    http://seedmagazine.com/conten....._tests/P3/

    Thus the proper question is not to ask ‘do you believe in ‘psychic powers?’ but the proper question to ask is why do not physicists follow the evidence where it leads? I think Prof. Richard Conn Henry does an excellent job of summing up the current situation in quantum mechanics as far as the evidence is concerned and people’s reaction to it:

    Alain Aspect and Anton Zeilinger by Richard Conn Henry – Physics Professor – John Hopkins University
    Excerpt: Why do people cling with such ferocity to belief in a mind-independent reality? It is surely because if there is no such reality, then ultimately (as far as we can know) mind alone exists. And if mind is not a product of real matter, but rather is the creator of the “illusion” of material reality (which has, in fact, despite the materialists, been known to be the case, since the discovery of quantum mechanics in 1925), then a theistic view of our existence becomes the only rational alternative to solipsism (solipsism is the philosophical idea that only one’s own mind is sure to exist). (Dr. Henry’s referenced experiment and paper – “An experimental test of non-local realism” by S. Gröblacher et. al., Nature 446, 871, April 2007 – “To be or not to be local” by Alain Aspect, Nature 446, 866, April 2007 (i.e. Leggett’s Inequality)
    http://henry.pha.jhu.edu/aspect.html

    Quantum Enigma:Physics Encounters Consciousness – Richard Conn Henry – Professor of Physics – John Hopkins University
    Excerpt: It is more than 80 years since the discovery of quantum mechanics gave us the most fundamental insight ever into our nature: the overturning of the Copernican Revolution, and the restoration of us human beings to centrality in the Universe.
    And yet, have you ever before read a sentence having meaning similar to that of my preceding sentence? Likely you have not, and the reason you have not is, in my opinion, that physicists are in a state of denial…
    http://www.uncommondescent.com.....-designer/

    Verse and Music:

    Colossians 1:17
    And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.

    Evanescence – The Other Side (Lyric Video)
    http://www.vevo.com/watch/evan.....tantsearch

  14. Hi bornagain77, Judge for yourself:

    …a storage container and a radio like receiver for signals from the immaterial world

    … I interpreted it to mean it showed multiple souls can exist in one body or a single soul can exist in multiple persons

    …behavior is not always entirely controlled by the ghost in the machine

    …I believe the human brain has certain physical properties that makes interactions with a human spirit possible. Even non-human spirits (demons) can take over a person’s brain if the human spirit is too weak to fend off an invasion

    ….In traditional cosmology the standard “layering” of the macro-micro cosmos is “spiritus-anima-corpus“. This means that a newborn birth is always a vertical causation crossing the three layers

  15. selvaRajan, so???

    Disconnected facts and personal assertions, without reference to actual empirical evidence? What am I suppose to do with that? I get that from Darwinists all the time. i.e. remember such unsupported argumentation is rampant from both sides. The important point in science is which assertions can be supported with observational evidence and which cannot. And in that most important distinction Theism wins hands down.

  16. Re: post #5

    Why would any sane person assume that three space dimensions and time were created from a fourth (then, simply a point) dimension?

    If God created the universe, including space, mass-energy, and time, from a “fourth” dimension, then where did God exist before creating that dimension?

    The Quantum Zeno effect seems to indicate a strong possibility that our human consciousness transcends space and time. Also, that our physical existence in space and time is a networked logical/mathematical simulation imposed on our consciousness.

    In the beginning was the Word (Greek: Logos – logical concept), and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

    He was with God in the beginning. All things came to be through him, and without him nothing made had being.
    - John 1:1-4

  17. #10: TheisticEvolutionist

    Next question, TE….?

  18. #3
    ‘“given” Should have said “givens”. There is a lot to be said for discovering how something works, as opposed to where something came from. That is how science has delivered the most benefit. Where it came from is irrelevant to discovering, imitating and benefitting.’

    Tell that to the materialists, BB. Maybe you can persuade them.

  19. 19
    TheisticEvolutionist

    Those papers don’t really mention psychic powers bornagain77. You also need to look more carefully at the papers you are citing, they are pseudoscience published in the Journal of Scientific Exploration a journal which publishes papers claiming Bigfoot, UFOs and astrology have been proven.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J.....xploration

    So psychic powers have no empirical evidence.

  20. TheisticEvolutionist, you will have to be more specific as to which paper I cited from the Journal of Scientific Exploration

    was it this one?
    http://www.bottomlayer.com/bot.....choice.htm
    this one?
    http://www.asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/2.....r.html.ori
    this one?
    http://phys.org/news/2012-04-q.....ction.html
    this one?
    http://phys.org/news/2012-07-quantum-theory.html
    this one?
    http://boards.straightdope.com.....p?t=597846
    this one?
    https://www.bigquestionsonline.com/content/what-does-quantum-physics-have-do-free-will
    this one?
    http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/27640
    this one?
    http://www.scottaaronson.com/democritus/lec11.html
    this one?
    http://seedmagazine.com/conten....._tests/P3/

    Of course, It is not really about where the papers are published anyways is it TE???, or else why you have made such a superfluous blanket disparaging assertion against the many reputable references I listed that can be easily checked by anyone who cares to? The only reasonable conclusion is that you don’t care what the evidence actually says and that you will resort to being dishonest if furthers your agenda. ,,,, Denial in 5, 4, 3, 2,…

Leave a Reply