The View From 1776

Boson Bozos

Scientists seeking ultimate answers to the origin, nature, and future of the cosmos have pursued a long series of mutually exclusive, speculative theories.  Liberals embrace these speculations as scientific truth, even though they have less basis in verifiable fact than 5,000 years of faith in God recorded in the Bible.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 01/28 at 09:27 PM
  1. There is also a great deal of the Bible that is unverifiable. For instance, due to a complete lack of supporting archeological evidence, 90% of Biblical archeologists reject the stories of the Pentateuch (first 5 books of Bible)and consider them to be mythology. Every religion has this factor. To the vast majority of biblical archeologists, The stories of Abraham, Moses, and Joshua have no evidence in reality. Like the world-wide flood story taken from tablet 11 of the Babylonian Epic of Gilgamesh, they are considered epic legends and no more.

    DECONSTRUCTING JERICHO (From The Biblical Archeology Review Special):

    And did you know that the OT was not compiled into a volume until around the 3rd century before Christianity? Before that they were scattered collections of scrolls. Like the early Church councils, men decided which scroll would be considered inspired. Importantly, there was politics behind their choices. There is no criteria for deciding which writings are divinely inspired. They are chosen by men for religious and political reasons.

    As far as there being 5000 years of faith, there has been discovered no Hebrew writing older than 2900 years old. Considering that the tablets of the Epic of Gilgamesh have been found and have been dated at around 4000 years old, there leaves a great deal of questions about 5000 year old claims. Many writings have been found in other places that are older than 900 years prior to Christianity.

    The Epic of Gilgamesh is said to have been written around 2000BCE and is about Gilgamesh, a ruler of around 2800 BCE. Are we to believe every tale that the ancients contrived?
    Posted by James Veverka  on  01/29  at  08:12 AM
  2. No. No more than the contemporary hoped-for fairy-tales developed by a 'science community' hobbled in a self-justifying carnal ego. They seek unihibited humanistic philosophies that verifies a
    subjectivity that runs out of alternative make-do ideas.

    Modern science, in several categories, is its own worst enemy and delimiting force of mediocrity.

    A scientism of morality, ethic, and integrity of purpose, is sadly lacking. And, they know it. However, their rejection of an available premise marks their turn-down of the Creator's open-ended science-friendly premise, The Word of God; The Bible.

    Faith in ignorance is their delimited choice in the face of a tractable alternative faith of insight, discovery, and verification.

    An elementary beginning suggests they climb down from their constucted pedestal and test the waters of a redirected faith - in The Creator. To maintain their uncorrected way is to perpetuate a very childish mental, second-rate, and materialistic wall of the stoic.

    + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

    Human knowledge is a fraction of the whole universe.
    The balance is a vast void of human ignorance. Human
    reason cannot fully function in such a void; thus, the
    intellect can rise no higher than the criteria by which it
    perceives and measures values.

    Humanism makes man his own standard of measure.
    However, as with all measuring systems, a standard
    must be greater than the value measured. Based on
    preponderant ignorance and an egocentric carnal
    nature, humanism demotes reason to the simpleton
    task of excuse-making in behalf of the rule of appe-
    tites, desires, feelings, emotions, and glands.

    Because man, hobbled in an ego-centric predicament,
    cannot invent criteria greater than himself, the humanist
    lacks a predictive capability. Without instinct or trans-
    cendent criteria, humanism cannot evaluate options with
    foresight and vision for progression and survival. Lack-
    ing foresight, man is blind to potential consequence and
    is unwittingly committed to mediocrity, collectivism,
    averages, and regression - and worse. Humanism is an
    unworthy worship.

    The void of human ignorance can easily be filled with
    a functional faith while not-so-patiently awaiting the
    foot-dragging growth of human knowledge and behav-
    ior. Faith, initiated by the Creator and revealed and
    validated in His Word, the Bible, brings a transcend-
    ent standard to man the choice-maker. Other philo-
    sophies and religions are man-made, humanism, and
    thereby lack what only the Bible has:

    1.Transcendent Criteria and
    2.Fulfilled Prophetic Validation.

    The vision of faith in God and His Word is survival
    equipment for today and the future. Only the Creator,
    who made us in His own image, is qualified to define
    us accurately.

    "Man cannot make or invent or contrive principles. He
    can only discover them and he ought to look through the
    discovery to the Author." -- Thomas Paine 1797

    "Got Criteria?" See Psalm 119:1-176

    - from The HUMAN PARADIGM

    semper fidelis
    Posted by Choicemaker  on  01/29  at  11:32 AM
  3. Choice,

    You illustrate the difference between humanists (both secular and religious) and religious fundamentalists: Humanists value who we are, what we are and what we can do, including our limitations. We seek to improve our species. We dismiss concepts of some garden-fall mythology with a reptile (snake also much used in other mythology) when it is much more realistic to see our faults due to our evolution as animals. Now we are animals with evolved cortexes mind you.

    The strategy of attacking what is distinctly human doesn't work with people who have values that are grounded in physical, emotional/spiritual, intellectual, social and sexual realities. The root of morality is based in a neurobiologically evolved sense of empathy. Nobody needs some belief in a God to be a person of deep conviction regarding ethics , fairness and justice. See Edward O. Wilson's article in The Antlantic called "The Biological Basis of Morality" at He makes a great deal of sense.
    Humanists don't buy the we need the pie in the sky and you're fallen and dirty routine.

    Have you read these scriptures?

    Let those fight in the way of God who sell the life of this world for the other. Whoso fighteth in the way of God, be he slain or be he victorious, on him We shall bestow a vast reward. 4:76 Those who believe do battle for the cause of God; and those who disbelieve do battle for the cause of idols. So fight the minions of the devil. Lo! the devil's strategy is ever weak.


    And know that your possessions and your children are but a trial and that surely with God is a mighty reward.


    O Prophet! Exhort the believers to fight. If there be of you twenty steadfast they shall overcome two hundred, and if there be of you a hundred (steadfast) they shall overcome a thousand of those who disbelieve, because they (the disbelievers) are a folk without intelligence.


    O ye who believe! Choose not your fathers nor your brethren for friends if they take pleasure in disbelief rather than faith. Whoso of you taketh them for friends, such are wrong-doers.


    O ye who believe! What aileth you that when it is said unto you: Go forth in the way of God, ye are bowed down to the ground with heaviness. Take ye pleasure in the life of the world rather than in the Hereafter ? The comfort of the life of the world is but little in the Hereafter.


    Whoso disbelieveth in God after his belief - save him who is forced thereto and whose heart is still content with the Faith - but whoso findeth ease in disbelief: On them is wrath from God. Theirs will be an awful doom. 16:107 That [doom[ is because they have chosen the life of the world rather than the Hereafter, and because God guideth not the disbelieving folk. God does not guide disbelievers. He seals their hearts and eyes. They are the losers in the Hereafter.


    And put forward to them the example of the life of this world: It is like the rain which We send down from the sky, and the vegetation of the earth mingles with it, and becomes fresh and green. But later it becomes dry and broken pieces, which the winds scatter. And Allah is Able to do everything.


    And strain not your eyes in longing for the things We have given for enjoyment to various groups of the heathens, the splendour of the life in this world, that We may test them thereby.


    Truly, the life of this world is nothing but a quick passing enjoyment, and verily, the Hereafter that is the home that will remain forever.


    Know that the present life is but a sport and a diversion, an adornment and a cause for boasting among you, and a rivalry in wealth and children. It is as a rain whose vegetation pleases the unbelievers; then it withers, and thou seest it turning yellow, then it becomes broken orts. And in the world to come there is a terrible chastisement, 57:20 and forgiveness from God and good pleasure; and the present life is but the joy of delusion...

    The scriptures above are from the Quran. Allah means "God".

    The Bible, the Quran and the Muslim Hadiths go to
    Posted by James Veverka  on  01/29  at  09:20 PM
  4. Your article is mind-blowingly stupid. It looks as if you are in a contest to put the highest number of misconceptions about science in one place.
    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  01/30  at  03:36 AM
  5. That is not difficult to do when 1. premises and, 2. criteria are false; delimited by the hobbles of a carnal-Ego. Add: One's IQ can rise no higher than his chosen criteria...

    Since most, if not all, of The Bible is transcendent, it is unverifiable except as criteria for choice-making. Application by faith proves its value. Non-application proves nothing. (Use does tend to inhibit one's carnal appetites and adverse domination of the individual Believer.)

    Humanistic 'realism' is limited by its man-made 'criteria' that rises no higher than the eyebrows (or belly-button) - if that - and thus cannot detect any reality or value greater than mediocrity, let alone anticipate results of choice, a priori. "Monday Morning Quarterbacking" pragmatic non-wisdom is the natural result of a maintained ignorance that reaches to the farthest edge of the physical universe. Such a faith is without reason or virtue or validation in human experience. It does cause problems...

    Animals rely strictly on flesh-based instinct. Only humans can use criteria of the mind to anticipate consequences. The better the criteria the better the choices and their results. Man-made? Small wonder humanists look for excuses in an animalistic premise. "Devolution" and cultural retardation is the result of allegiance to non-Transcendent Criteria. Lotsa luck!

    As for the Koran, I do not respect, trust, or rely on any man-made fiction (opinion) to define value and/or anticipate an unknown future. Truth does not have any source other than The Creator. The moon-god crowd proves their inadequacy by such submissive application daily.

    The greatest Nation in the history of the world, the USA, was founded on Judeo-Christian principles. Those principles (not religion) have no other Source but the Word of God; The Bible. Whether one believes it or not does not affect its Truth.

    "That human institution which is structured on the
    principle, "...all men are endowed by their Creator with
    ...Liberty...," is a system with its roots in the natural
    Order of the universe. The opponents of such a system are
    necessarily engaged in a losing contest with nature and
    nature's God. Biblical principles are still today the
    foundation under Western Civilization and the American
    way of life. To the advent of a new season we commend the
    present generation and the 'multitudes in the valley of

    "We have the gift of an inner liberty so far-reaching
    that we can choose either to accept or reject the God
    who gave it to us, and it would seem to follow that the
    Author of a liberty so radical wills that we should be
    equally free in our relationships with other men.
    Spiritual liberty logically demands conditions of outer
    and social freedom for its completion." Edmund A. Opitz

    Let us proclaim it. Behold!
    The Season of Generation-Choicemaker Joel 3:14 KJV"

    - from The HUMAN PARADIGM

    semper fidelis
    Posted by Choicemaker  on  01/30  at  11:15 AM
  6. >"Application by faith proves its value"

    Unless you value feel-good things based on unverifiable superstitions that is nonsense.

    Having value in the mind is not a criteria for being realistic. No religion's claims regarding supernaturalism can be supported by science or logical thinking. Hope and faith can be terribly unhealthy and delusional.

    Unbelief is a logical default position regarding any claim by anyone, including religious claims in ancient myths.

    It is up to the proponent to provide logical evidence. Because one doesnt have all the answers regarding the way the universe works does not give anyone an excuse to resort to supernatuiralistic mumbo jumbo that originated in non-tech, scientificly illiterate tribes in antiquity.

    Without logic or scientific evidence for anything it is perfectly logical to maintain parsimony and the kiss principle in a default position supported by Occham's Razor.

    Apologetics is not logic no matter how flowery it can get with its parade of language.



    _-_-_-_-I love it when some use the word "carnal", displaying an attitude just like those scriptures from the Quran that degrade this life. Nobody but religious extremists takes that seriously. Just walk into a Pentecostal church and you'll hear it endlessly.
    Posted by James Veverka  on  01/30  at  12:30 PM
  7. Your alternative is an ignorance-dominating opinion. Guaranteed: It will not work, unless you accept mediocrity and worse as 'work' success.

    Apart from Principle, individual scientific findings and opinions are lend no predictability to further application.

    Faith in false premises (man-made), are unworthy opinions of questionable motive. Self-justification comes at a very high cost. Corruption of science, itself, just for openers. Social regression follows. No thanks.

    "The true God is a living, intelligent, and powerful Being.

    His duration reaches from eternity to eternity.

    His presence from infinity to infinity.

    He governs all things."

    Sir Isaac Newton

    + + +

    semper fidelis
    Posted by Choicemaker  on  01/30  at  01:43 PM

    Ring Species: Unusual Demonstrations of Speciation by Darren E. Irwin, Ph.D.

    Over and over we hear from scienticly illiterate religious zealots that Evolutionary science is crumbling. In truth, this is hyperbole and dishonest propaganda from the religious right. Evolutionary science is stronger than ever. It has never been stronger in the minds of its advocates.

    Intelligent Design theory and creation science are not science because nothing they claim can be put to experiment for hypothesis verification, a prime element in the scientific method.

    ID is not science because scientific ideas can predict. ID can not predict anything because it has no set of principles that hold true and can be quantitatively observed in nature. The hypothesis of irreducible complexity is not a supportable scientific concept and is rejected by the vast majority of scientists as bunk. Pundits of this term can't even define it in scientific terms that can be tested and verified.

    On the other hand, evolutionary science predicts that speciation due to environmental pressures will give us changes in species that move to different environs or under different outside pressures. These species are the diamonds of natural selection which can be observed in nature in Ring Species (Explored in the above link). It is exactly what evolutionary science predicts and it is exactly what is observed. Our species' history, due to several branches of science is seen in the same way, with slow speciation until one branch becomes so different that it can no longer interbreed with its ring neighbors. The Ring Species of the article strongly confirm evolutionary ideas. The observation of Ring species verifies basic evolutionary theory. ID and creationism predict nothing and has no science to base any prediction on. Darwin's observations in the Galapogos Islands off the Equadorian coast is what solidified the first concepts of evolutionary science. Evolutionary science developed due to observation.

    Have you ever heard of an experiment to verify "irreducible complexity"?

    You haven't and you never will. Verification of Intelligent Design theory is as promising as verifying the existence of a supreme intelligence. It can't be done because it is outside the realm of science. Science deals with the natural world, not the hypothetical supernatural one in people's heads and evidenced nowhere else. ID is philosophy and religion, not science. Science is based on a strict method of observation, hypothesis building, experiments to verify hypotheses, and models that can predict natural phenomena. Intelligent Design theory and creation science can do none of that. They have no models that are scientific. They are pilosophical and religious hypotheses and are outside the boundaries of true science until they can adhere to the scientific method.

    For millennia, due to the ignorance and neurologically wired superstitious nature of humanity, we have always invented supernatural beings when we can't grasp the complexities of nature. All the ancient religious texts evidence this understandable ignorance. We did it with thunder and lightning. We did it with floods and droughts. We did it with quakes and volcanoes. We did it with famine and pestilence. We did it with infertility and mental illness. Now, those not enlightened regarding the strict nature of the scientific method are trying to put these primitive ideas into the classrooms of our kids.

    When we don't yet understand something, we still stick to the scientific method because it is the only way we will be able to explain something in tangible terminology. ID is not science.
    Posted by James Veverka  on  01/30  at  11:41 PM
  9. Materialism, more accurately stated, than 'scientism.' Thus, we can choose non-responsibility while pursuing satisfaction of dominant physical appetites.

    Most of the scientists I encounter, that reject Judeo-Christian values, do so as a result of revering a certain life-style that would be inhibited and/or rejected by transcendence.

    Yes, the natural man is dominated by his inborn ego and its physical appetites. A following need for self-justification lends itself to a needful and necessary leverage in opposition to a critical
    rejection of superiority.

    Thus, a very real and extensive Ignorance of valued transcendence, is built into human mediocrity and failure as a chosen way of life; the consequence of a sought-after delimited 'scale.' Science? Patty-cake in the sand-pile! Lotsa luck!

    semper fidelis
    Posted by Choicemaker  on  01/31  at  01:58 PM
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.