< > Energy
A Challenge : Test your beliefs.
We will discuss and analyze that we regard as common beliefs. You are welcome to differ. The final choice is still yours and we respect that.
One of the most prominent "origin of life" researchers come to the following conclusion about the genetics and chemistry that are postulated about the origin of life" IF PIGS HAD WINGS" ,a otjer way to reg=fer to "lucky accidents'.
How do you test your beliefs? A very important test is to analize all opposing views. Why do they differ from yours? On what ground do you differ form them? Are you convinced beyond reasonable doubt? (only you will know if you are completely honest with yourself.
How biased are you? ALLL OF US ARE BIASED !!!!!!! No matter what the topic
Our basic aim is to anylize the following question. Do we excist in a materialistic world where everything we observe is the result of a random, coincidentical realignment of force fields or is our world part of a larger invisble spiritual world? Where do we find the answer , in modern science ( physics and chemistry) or in theology?
Semiotics control every aspect of our being. We are semiotic robots. What are the semiotics ( signals) the control you?
How much of our environment is observed through our senses and the scientific tools used to enchance our observational skills?
Is science able to answer the following questions?
Can it define "nothing"? Lawrence Krause tried but his attempt failed because a fluctuating quamtum vacuum contains energy. To prohpesy the non existence of energy in such a system is unfalsifiable speculation. We have no idea about and can not imagine "nothing". Even the most remote corner of our universe will have something, energy. Even if you need special equipment, some form of energy ( or electromagnetic waves) will be identified. The back ground noise marking the beginning of the universe will accompany you to every part or corner of the universe.
Can it (science) proof that nothing created something? Is there any examples except perhaps the very beginning of everything?
Was the beginning of life a coincidence? Can science proof it beyond reasonable doubt? As far as we know nature only developed one coding system, the genetic code. This code has remarkable similarities with the binary code used in modern computers. I don't know of any other coding system in nature able to capture, store, duplicate and re-use information but the genetic code All other coding systems originated through human intelligence.
Human intelligence developed a variety of coding systems Why did nature only developed one? We refer to the genetic code, the blue print of life , stored in the DNA and RNA molecules. A fantastic , fasinatiing coding system , that worked perfenctly from the instance the first gene e came into being. It expand over milenia but the basic mechanism stayed unaltered. ,
Science however proved (through the efforts of Louis Pasteur) that only life begets life. No biologist will doubt this theorem that only life begets life although modern science belief that this theorom was once ( only once) violated. Is there any scientific proof that this violation really occured?
Only you can be the judge about honesty of your answers!
This site will touch the following subjects:
The genetic code.
The binary code
A comparison between binary code, genetic code, binary hard- and software and genetic hard- and software. Object orientated progrmming.
The orign of life as we know it.
Pasteur's therom : Only life begets life.
Statistical anylasis and it's role as a guiding tool
Ethic, morality and integrety.
We hope that this site will constantly change and expand.
Why no forums? This a site to promote self examination and honesty towards oneself. We are all agitated when someone attacks our beliefs and tend to jump to the nearest communication tool to defend our beliefs and to attack the moroons who have the odessity to attack them (our beliefs), with their idiotic and provocative attitude.
Accept the challenge ! Test your beliefs! HERE!
Read all the pages in the first section and than test it again... HERE