Bill Dembski on censorship of books at Amazon

_{Denyse O'Leary

March 6, 2019

Academic Freedom, Intelligent Design}

Share: Facebook; Twitter; LinkedIn; Flipboard; Print; Email

You think you’re free to read what you want? Think again:

Three days ago on this forum, I raised the question how long would it be before Amazon, which has now started banning videos skeptical of vaccines, starts banning books. I thought books would be safer.

But no. Tommy Robinson’s book Mohammed’s Koran has now been banned on Amazon. For the story, see here. For the Tommy Robinson page at Amazon showing that the book has indeed been removed (proof by absence), see here.

Barnes and Noble has likewise removed it.

… Bill Dembski, “Censorship of Books at Amazon” at billdembski.com

The Big Shuddup was bound to happen in monopoly markets. It is much easier to stop a single leak than hundreds of them.

One naturally hopes it won’t spread to ID or whatever we want to read or watch but who knows? Today, for those in power, the big thing is not to win a debate but stop it from happening.

Follow UD News at Twitter!

Comments

BB “Exactly. Isn’t that what morality is? “ I find your response to be quite odd and your question nonsensical. Your asking what is that which does not exist? It’s like asking “Isn’t that what nothing is?There can be no “is” for that which “isn’t. Vividvividbleau_{March 8, 2019
March
03
Mar
8
08
2019
10:47 PM
10
10
47
PM
PDT}

Vivid
But morality has no objective existence the only thing that you have pointed out that objectively exists is that people sense and feel a certain way about certain things, period , full stop. Jaboworky!!!
Exactly. Isn’t that what morality is? Now, if you can explain how the extremely variable moral values that we see are objectively derived, I would be interested.Brother Brian_{March 8, 2019
March
03
Mar
8
08
2019
08:09 PM
8
08
09
PM
PDT}

BB “Which is what our sense of morality is” But morality has no objective existence the only thing that you have pointed out that objectively exists is that people sense and feel a certain way about certain things, period , full stop. Jaboworky!!! Vividvividbleau_{March 8, 2019
March
03
Mar
8
08
2019
02:30 PM
2
02
30
PM
PDT}

Vivid
The only thing you have established is that people sense and feel a certain way about things.
Which is what our sense of morality is. I haven’t suggested any different. What I haven’t seen is an argument that our moral values are objectively derived that doesn’t crumble upon the weight of evidenceBrother Brian_{March 8, 2019
March
03
Mar
8
08
2019
02:19 PM
2
02
19
PM
PDT}

BB “Vividnleu, our sense of morality has the same level of existance as our sense of emotion “ To cite three things that have objective existence(persons,these persons sense and these persons experience feeling) does not magically bring morality into existence . The only thing you have established is that people sense and feel a certain way about things. Vividvividbleau_{March 8, 2019
March
03
Mar
8
08
2019
02:10 PM
2
02
10
PM
PDT}

Vividnleu, our sense of morality has the same level of existance as our sense of emotion (like, hate, anger, envy, jealousy, etc.). There is no doubt that they exist. And our sense of morality is as strong, if not stronger, than any of these. But that doesn’t make our moral values objective in nature. For example, I think it is fair to say that the idea of beauty is universal amongst humans. Just as a sense of morality is universal. But what we consider to be beautiful is not objectively derived. It varies from culture to culture and throughout time. Just like moral values.Brother Brian_{March 8, 2019
March
03
Mar
8
08
2019
01:19 PM
1
01
19
PM
PDT}

BB You use the term morality but unless something exists independent of what we think it has no existence. To slap a word on to that non existent thing does not magically bring it into existence. I have taken the liberty to rewrite your statement “I have never said that our sense of jaboworky does not exist in an objective sense. I am not aware of anyone, even psychopaths, who do not have their own sense of jaboworky. It is how our individual jaboworky are derived that I am claiming is subjective. The great variation in these jaboworkies that we see in the world, and throughout time, fully supports this. All the navel gazing that I have read on this web site and others about this subject does little to change this.” Vividvividbleau_{March 8, 2019
March
03
Mar
8
08
2019
12:46 PM
12
12
46
PM
PDT}

Vividbleu
Well cough cough you did. How can something exist if it does not exist objectively?
I have never said that our sense of morality does not exist in an objective sense. I am not aware of anyone, even psychopaths, who do not have their own sense of morality. It is how our individual morals are derived that I am claiming is subjective. The great variation in these morals that we see in the world, and throughout time, fully supports this. All the navel gazing that I have read on this web site and others about this subject does little to change this.Brother Brian_{March 8, 2019
March
03
Mar
8
08
2019
12:18 PM
12
12
18
PM
PDT}

"Bob (and weave)" is getting old, in my opinion. Sort of juvenile to keep this going.hazel_{March 8, 2019
March
03
Mar
8
08
2019
11:31 AM
11
11
31
AM
PDT}

Whatever Bob. If nothing else of substance comes along, I am done with this thread. I am more than confident that the unbiased reader can see who is being forthright and who is, as usual, 'bobbing and weaving'.bornagain77_{March 8, 2019
March
03
Mar
8
08
2019
11:05 AM
11
11
05
AM
PDT}

ba77 @ 38 - who said anything about me believing that morality is objective? Certainly not me, so I've no idea why you're trying to tilt at that windmill.Bob O'H_{March 8, 2019
March
03
Mar
8
08
2019
10:45 AM
10
10
45
AM
PDT}

BB “Who said that morality doesn’t exist?” Well cough cough you did. How can something exist if it does not exist objectively? BTW this book banning business reminds me of the abortion debate. We have gone from safe,legal and rare to ,yippee ,infanticide .Yes slopes are slippery indeed. Vividvividbleau_{March 8, 2019
March
03
Mar
8
08
2019
09:36 AM
9
09
36
AM
PDT}

BB:
I don’t doubt that you believe that your evidence is compelling. But I don’t think that everyone believes that it is.
That does not surprise me one bit. If scientific evidence ever actually ever mattered to atheists then Darwinian evolution would have been tossed to the wayside long ago.bornagain77_{March 8, 2019
March
03
Mar
8
08
2019
09:20 AM
9
09
20
AM
PDT}

BB, subjectivity of morality is irrelevant to whether it is also objective. If you mean it is ALSO non-objective, then you are actually undermining the moral government of our intellectual life by duties to truth, right reason, prudence, fairness etc. -- opening the door to amorality and nihilism. On which, we are entitled to lock you out as self-excluded from responsible discussion. Do you really want to go there? KF PS: I suggest you look here in the current series: https://uncommondescent.com/ethics/logic-and-first-principles-10-knowable-moral-truth-and-moral-government-vs-nihilistic-manipulation/kairosfocus_{March 8, 2019
March
03
Mar
8
08
2019
09:14 AM
9
09
14
AM
PDT}

Brother Brian:
I believe that morality is subjective.
And that is as good as no morality at all.ET_{March 8, 2019
March
03
Mar
8
08
2019
09:07 AM
9
09
07
AM
PDT}

BA77
Thus BB is obviously not being forthright in his debating style in that he switches positions at the drop of a hat whenever he feels it advantageous for him to do so. But he obviously leans heavily towards wanting to somehow prove that morality is illusory and subjective rather than it being objective and real.
I have been very consistent in my discussions. I believe that morality is subjective. Didn't I make that clear?
Yet in post 25 and 26 I laid out the compelling scientific evidence that morality is indeed objective and real.
I don't doubt that you believe that your evidence is compelling. But I don't think that everyone believes that it is. C'est la vie.Brother Brian_{March 8, 2019
March
03
Mar
8
08
2019
08:59 AM
8
08
59
AM
PDT}

Bob post 11
BA77: "Are you or are you not an atheist who believes in evolution?" Bob: "Yes,"
You may misunderstand what the exact implications of your own atheistic evolutionary worldview are, but I am certainly not misrepresenting those implications when I point out that you cannot possibly ground objectively real morality within your atheistic worldview. If you have found a way to do so then I am sure quite a few leading Christian philosophers would love to see your exact philosophical proof that you have done so. William Lane Craig being among them:
The Moral Argument https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OxiAikEk2vU
If you think objective morality and your Atheism are somehow compatible, then by all means share how you have managed to solve this irresolvable direct contradiction in logic. You are either being disingenuous or you are thoroughly confused. Since you apparently are sticking up for BB when he disingenuously switched positions on this very thread, I hold that you are being disingenuous. Prove me wrong!bornagain77_{March 8, 2019
March
03
Mar
8
08
2019
08:11 AM
8
08
11
AM
PDT}

Islam is not a race. And those 3 incidences do not warrant the claim that he is violent. Followers of Islam hail from many different countries with many different ethnic backgrounds.ET_{March 8, 2019
March
03
Mar
8
08
2019
06:54 AM
6
06
54
AM
PDT}

ET - this is what Wikipedia says about his criminal convictions:
In April 2005, Robinson was convicted of assaulting an off-duty police officer who had intervened to protect Robinson's girlfriend from Robinson. He was imprisoned for 12 months. In July 2011, at Luton and South Bedfordshire Magistrates' Court, Robinson was convicted of using threatening, abusive or insulting behaviour, for leading a group of Luton Town F.C. supporters into a brawl involving 100 people in Luton on 24 August 2010. In September 2011, at Preston Magistrates' Court, Robinson was convicted of assault for headbutting a man in Blackburn on 2 April 2011. In November 2011, he was given a 12-week jail term, suspended for 12 months.
I think that covers the violence pretty well. On racism, let's simply start with his political affiliations: he was a member of the BNP, which is the traditional home of British racists. He left to found and lead the EDL, a far-right, Islamophobic organisation, which sounds pretty racist. Then there are his actions surrounding the Finsbury Park terrorist attack:
It was revealed in court that the perpetrator of London's 2017 Finsbury Park terrorist attack received emails from Robinson and read Robinson's tweets in the lead-up to the attack. Robinson's tweet mocking people for responding to terrorism with the phrase "don't look back in anger" was found in the note at the scene of the attack. An email from Robinson's account to the attacker Darren Osborne shortly before read, "Dear Darren, you know about the terrible crimes committed against [name redacted] of Sunderland. Police let the suspects go… why? It is because the suspects are refugees from Syria and Iraq. It's a national outrage…" Another email read, "There is a nation within a nation forming just beneath the surface of the UK. It is a nation built on hatred, on violence and on Islam." Robinson responded on Twitter to the Finsbury Park attack, writing, "The mosque where the attack happened tonight has a long history of creating terrorists & radical jihadists & promoting hate & segregation," and, "I'm not justifying it, I've said many times if government or police don't sort these centres of hate they will create monsters as seen tonight." Robinson's statements were widely criticised in the media as inciting hatred. Appearing the next morning on Good Morning Britain, Robinson held up the Quran and described it as a "violent and cursed book". The host, Piers Morgan, accused him of "stirring up hatred like a bigoted lunatic", and Robinson's appearance drew a number of complaints to Ofcom. Commander Dean Haydon of Scotland Yard's counter-terrorism command said that online material from Robinson had played a "significant role" in how Osborne was radicalised and "brainwashed". Mark Rowley, the outgoing Assistant Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police and the UK's most senior counter-terror officer said that there is "no doubt" that material posted online by people including Robinson drove the Finsbury Park terror attacker to targeting Muslims. In response, Robinson said "I'm gonna find Mark Rowley."
So, yes. He rails against Muslims and Islam, which is racism pure & simple. (yes, there are extreme Muslims who should be condemned, but they are only a minority. Just like white racists such as Stephen Yaxley-Lennon are in the minority in the UK, so we shouldn't use him as an example to say that all white people are violent racists.)Bob O'H_{March 8, 2019
March
03
Mar
8
08
2019
06:49 AM
6
06
49
AM
PDT}

ET @20: “Just because humanity has gone to hell in a handbasket has no bearing on whether or not objective morality exists.” Spot on.PaoloV_{March 8, 2019
March
03
Mar
8
08
2019
06:34 AM
6
06
34
AM
PDT}

Bob- What is your evidence that Tommy is a violent racist? Wikipedia doesn't support that claim.ET_{March 8, 2019
March
03
Mar
8
08
2019
06:24 AM
6
06
24
AM
PDT}

bs77 @ 30 - you're back to mis-representing my views. I guess I shouldn't be surprised. Still less that after mis-representing my views (after I've repeatedly pointed out that this is what you're doing), you then go on to accuse Brother Brian of being disingenuous. Ig you're going to bleat on about objective morality, it might help if you were less unpleasant about it.Bob O'H_{March 8, 2019
March
03
Mar
8
08
2019
06:18 AM
6
06
18
AM
PDT}

Brother Brian:
No. I am definitely an atheist (or, at least, an agnostic), but a materialist? One doesn’t necessitate the other.
No, it doesn't. The only atheists who are not materialists accept Intelligent Design as the only viable scientific position for our existence. Do you?ET_{March 8, 2019
March
03
Mar
8
08
2019
05:08 AM
5
05
08
AM
PDT}

Brother Brian is disingenuously casting about like a leaf tossed around in the wind. In post 15 BB stated
“This presupposes that objective morality exists. Contrary to what we see in the world around us.”
In post 21 BB asked
“Who said that morality doesn’t exist?”
The again in post 28 BB stated
"is it more accurate to say that morality is subjective? As all of history has shown."
Thus BB is obviously not being forthright in his debating style in that he switches positions at the drop of a hat whenever he feels it advantageous for him to do so. But he obviously leans heavily towards wanting to somehow prove that morality is illusory and subjective rather than it being objective and real. Yet in post 25 and 26 I laid out the compelling scientific evidence that morality is indeed objective and real. But rather than addressing that compelling scientific evidence that establishes the reality of objective morality, BB instead disingenuously tries to point to all the various worldviews and says that they 'differ significantly from traditional Christian morality. Which one is right?' Well, instead of pointing to the vast superiority of Christian morality over most all those other moralities he listed (save for Judaism), I will simply point to the fact that Christianity is scientifically true. In fact, scientifically speaking, Jesus is the 'Theory of Everything". In post 26 I pointed out,
Moreover, on top of all that, the ‘free-will loop-hole’ has now been closed in quantum mechanics thus establishing the reality of free will at the basis of reality itself, and adding further tremendous weight to the Christian’s claim that we are free moral agents whose choice whether to accept Christ or not is of unfathomably important eternal consequence:
(Feb. 2019) Quantum validation of free will https://uncommondescent.com/philosophy/neurosurgeon-asks-do-we-have-free-will-or-not/#comment-673312
Moreover, exactly as would be a priorily expected on the Christian view of reality, we find two very different eternities in reality. An ‘infinitely destructive’ eternity associated with General Relativity and a extremely orderly eternity associated with Special Relativity:
Quantum Mechanics, Special Relativity, General Relativity and Christianity – video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h4QDy1Soolo
Moreover, allowing the Agent causality of God ‘back’ into physics, as the Christian founders of modern science originally envisioned, and as quantum mechanics itself now empirically demands with the closing of the 'free-will loop hole, provides a very plausible resolution for the much sought after ‘theory of everything’ in that Christ’s resurrection from the dead provides an empirically backed reconciliation, via the Shroud of Turin, between quantum mechanics and general relativity into that quote unquote ‘Theory of Everything”
(February 19, 2019) To support Isabel Piczek’s claim that the Shroud of Turin does indeed reveal a true ‘event horizon’, the following study states that ‘The bottom part of the cloth (containing the dorsal image) would have born all the weight of the man’s supine body, yet the dorsal image is not encoded with a greater amount of intensity than the frontal image.’,,, Moreover, besides gravity being dealt with, the shroud also gives us evidence that Quantum Mechanics was dealt with. In the following paper, it was found that it was not possible to describe the image formation on the Shroud in classical terms but they found it necessary to describe the formation of the image on the Shroud in discrete quantum terms. https://uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/experiment-quantum-particles-can-violate-the-mathematical-pigeonhole-principle/#comment-673179
Thus we have empirical evidence, via the Shroud of Turin, strongly indicating that Jesus Christ, in his resurrection for the dead, actually did bridge the gulf between the ‘infinitely destructive’ eternity associated with General Relativity and a extremely orderly eternity associated with Special Relativity (and with Quantum Mechanics, i.e. Quantum Electrodynamics), and thus provides a very plausible solution for the much sought after 'Theory of Everything", and, in doing so, provided a propitiation between sinful man and the moral perfection of God, just as has been claimed by Christians all along.
The Shroud of Turin – Evidence it is authentic Below is a summary of scientific and historical evidence supporting the authenticity of the Shroud of Turin as the ancient burial cloth of the historical Jesus of Nazareth. https://www.newgeology.us/presentation24.html Why is the Turin Shroud Authentic? – Giulio Fanti* – November 2018 Conclusion excerpt: If, as discussed above, by authenticity of the Shroud is meant a funerary sheet, of very ancient manufacture, of about 2000 years ago, that wrapped the corpse of a man hard tortured and dead on a cross, all the scientific clues considered seem favorable to this hypothesis. Six [8, 10-14] out of seven independent dating methods (and [9] has been widely criticized) indicate that this linen Sheet is datable to a period including the first century after Christ. The most important Relic of Christianity wrapped a corpse. The blood traces correspond to those of a tortured man. The body image cannot be explained, but the most reliable hypotheses refer to an intense and probably very brief burst of energy. The corpse, endowed with considerable corpse rigidity, remained wrapped in the Shroud for a short period, not exceeding forty hours. All these clues therefore confirm the authenticity of the Shroud [27] https://juniperpublishers.com/gjaa/pdf/GJAA.MS.ID.555707.pdf
Moreover, the repeated ‘voluntary forgetfulness’ of established facts and the repeated ‘distortion of scientific evidence’ by leading critics of the authenticity of the Shroud are gone over in the following paper, and contrary to what the critics would prefer, actually bolsters the claim that the Shroud is authentic.
Why is the Turin Shroud Not Fake? – Giulio Fanti* – December 04, 2018 Excerpt page 5: a. As reported above, some important arguments in favor of authenticity are forgotten in an apparently voluntary way. For example the scientific fact [6,19,20,25] that the Shroud wrapped the corpse of a severely tortured man, scourged, crowned with thorns and crucified according to Roman techniques is forgotten when a painting technique to explain the body image of the Shroud is supposed. Other recent results are also forgotten, such as the numismatic dating of the Shroud through the Byzantine coins [25], which sees it already in 692 AD, while someone keeps on stating that the Shroud did not exist before 1300 AD. b. The reality of scientific experiments are distorted and the global result is forgotten at the expense of a particular detail useful for the present goal. For example the work [22] detected the presence of pigments of various colors on the Shroud, probably due to the contamination with other paintings, but only the red pigments have been mentioned in a paper [13] to sustain a particular thesis. c. Statements relative to a distorted reality can be found when for example we read that pollen grains detected by a researcher on the Shroud have not been seen afterwards [13]. In fact, the same kind of pollen grains [29] together with other particles coming from powders vacuumed from the Shroud have been recently detected thus confirming more dated results. d. Not correct statements are still frequent like that asserting that the sample of Shroud used in 1988 for radiocarbon dating had been perfectly cleaned or that the pollutant should weigh about 80% of the total weight of the fabric to reach the age in which Jesus Christ lived in Palestine.,,, https://juniperpublishers.com/gjaa/pdf/GJAA.MS.ID.555715.pdf
As well, seeing is believing
Shroud of Turin: From discovery of Photographic Negative, to 3D Information, to Hologram https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-TL4QOCiis Turin Shroud Hologram Reveals The Words “The Lamb” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Tmka1l8GAQ
Verses:
1 John 2:2 He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world. Colossians 1 15 The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. 16 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. 17 He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. 18 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. 19 For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, 20 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. 21 Once you were alienated from God and were enemies in your minds because of your evil behavior. 22 But now he has reconciled you by Christ’s physical body through death to present you holy in his sight, without blemish and free from accusation— In Christ Alone - Travis Cottrel - music https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AjR_A2pGPrY
bornagain77_{March 8, 2019
March
03
Mar
8
08
2019
04:01 AM
4
04
01
AM
PDT}

Bob (and weave) O' Hara, in post 4 you condemned Robinson as a 'violent racist'. I pointed out your moral hypocrisy in doing so in that you, (an evolutionary atheist who does not believe in objective morality, but believes in illusory subjective morality), are appealing to some objectively real and good morality that you intuitively know is right and that you, therefore, wish to uphold as your own moral standard. ,,, Morally speaking, you are not acting like an atheist at all but are acting like a Theist, even acting like a Christian. And as I further pointed out in post 14, the very fact that you are unable to live your life consistently as if objective morality does not really exist is proof that your atheistic worldview must be a delusional belief system. In post 29, you ignored that refutation of your worldview and referenced this exchange in posts 19 and 21 between BB and me,
19 BA77: Brother Brian, so you don’t think objective morality exists? Really?? Perhaps you would like to come over to my basement for a little one on one scientific test of your hypothesis? BB: That’s the Christian spirit. 21 BB, “That’s the Christian spirit.” BA77: LOL, so you refuse to scientifically test your hypothesis that morality does not exist because of Christian morality? As ET said, “Logic is a foreign concept to evos”
In 29 you stated:
no, I think Brother Brian refuses the invitation to be beaten up.
But the elephant in the living room question is "WHY" did BB think it was morally wrong for me to torture him for a scientific test for morality? He certainly could not appeal to Darwinian 'survival of the fittest' morality since, according to Dawkins, "some people are going to get hurt,,, you won't find any rhyme or reason in it, nor any justice."
"In a universe of electrons and selfish genes, blind physical forces and genetic replication, some people are going to get hurt, other people are going to get lucky, and you won't find any rhyme or reason in it, nor any justice. The universe that we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but pitiless indifference.” - Richard Dawkins, River Out of Eden: A Darwinian View of Life
Thus, since BB obviously could not appeal to YOUR atheistic amorality BOB, BB appealed to MY Christian morality to try to prove that it was objectively morally wrong for me to torture him in my basement as a scientific test to see if he really does believe in the reality of objective morality or not. The bottom line, he intuitively knows, and I intuitively know, that it is objectively morally wrong for me to torture him. Yet only I have a coherent worldview that tells me "WHY" it is morally wrong. BB bore this fact out when he, with apparently no self awareness of the irony involved, appealed to my "Christian spirit" in order to try to say that it was morally wrong for me to torture him in my basement. i.e. He certainly did not say “That’s the Darwinian spirit” to try to prove that it was morally wrong for me to torture him in my basement. And indeed, the "Darwinian spirit" has been the source of far more horrible and egregious violations of objective morality than just one person being tortured in a basement to try to prove a point.
Hitler, Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Mao – quotes – Foundational Darwinian influence in their ideology (Nov. 2018) https://uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/historian-human-evolution-theorists-were-attempting-to-be-moral-teachers/#comment-668170
bornagain77_{March 8, 2019
March
03
Mar
8
08
2019
02:47 AM
2
02
47
AM
PDT}

ba77 @ 21 - no, I think Brother Brian refuses the invitation to be beaten up. I don't know if that's what you meant by your invitation for a little one one one in your basement, but that's how it can be read. And quite how this fits into testing ideas of morality, I can only guess.Bob O'H_{March 8, 2019
March
03
Mar
8
08
2019
01:02 AM
1
01
02
AM
PDT}

ET
So Brother Brian is claiming he is NOT an atheist and materialist- really?
No. I am definitely an atheist (or, at least, an agnostic), but a materialist? One doesn’t necessitate the other. BA77
On a more serious note, I can provide scientific evidence to back up the Christian Theist’s claim that objective morality really exists.
Does that mean that Islamic morality doesn’t exist? ET might disagree because it is my understanding that he is Muslim. Or Judaic morality? Or Hindu morality? Or Seik morality? Or Nazi morality? Or Maoist morality? Or Marxist morality? Or maiyan morality? Or Incan morality, or.... I think you get my point. All of these have moralities that differ significantly from traditional Christian morality. Which one is right? Or is it more accurate to say that morality is subjective? As all of history has shown.Brother Brian_{March 7, 2019
March
03
Mar
7
07
2019
07:35 PM
7
07
35
PM
PDT}

So Brother Brian is claiming he is NOT an atheist and materialist- really?ET_{March 7, 2019
March
03
Mar
7
07
2019
05:11 PM
5
05
11
PM
PDT}

,,,findings in quantum biology go much further and gives us strong physical evidence that humans possess a transcendent component to their being on the molecular level that is not reducible to materialistic explanations.
Looking beyond space and time to cope with quantum theory – 29 October 2012 Excerpt: “Our result gives weight to the idea that quantum correlations somehow arise from outside spacetime, in the sense that no story in space and time can describe them,” http://www.quantumlah.org/highlight/121029_hidden_influences.php
That is to say, findings from quantum biology now give us very strong experimental evidence strongly suggesting we do indeed have a transcendent 'soul' that is capable of living beyond the death of our material bodies just as Christians have held all along. Moreover, on top of all that, the 'free-will loop-hole' has now been closed in quantum mechanics thus establishing the reality of free will at the basis of reality itself, and adding further tremendous weight to the Christian's claim that we are free moral agents whose choice whether to accept Christ or not is of unfathomably important eternal consequence:
(Feb. 2019) Quantum validation of free will https://uncommondescent.com/philosophy/neurosurgeon-asks-do-we-have-free-will-or-not/#comment-673312
Moreover, exactly as would be a priorily expected on the Christian view of reality, we find two very different eternities in reality. An ‘infinitely destructive’ eternity associated with General Relativity and a extremely orderly eternity associated with Special Relativity:
Quantum Mechanics, Special Relativity, General Relativity and Christianity – video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h4QDy1Soolo
Again, the implications for individual humans are fairly drastic,
Bill Wiese (Man Who Went To Hell) – 23 Minutes in Hell (8 Minute Version) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqufixPt2w0
i.e. you are literally choosing between eternal life life with God or eternal death separated from God:
Luke 16: 22 “The time came when the beggar died and the angels carried him to Abraham’s side. The rich man also died and was buried. 23 In Hades, where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his side. 24 So he called to him, ‘Father Abraham, have pity on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because I am in agony in this fire.’ 25 “But Abraham replied, ‘Son, remember that in your lifetime you received your good things, while Lazarus received bad things, but now he is comforted here and you are in agony. 26 And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been set in place, so that those who want to go from here to you cannot, nor can anyone cross over from there to us.’
Because of such dire consequences for our eternal souls, I can only plead for atheists to seriously reconsider their choice to reject God, and to now choose life, even eternal life with Jesus Christ, instead of eternal death.
Turin Shroud Hologram Reveals The Words “The Lamb” – video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Tmka1l8GAQ John 5:24 Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life. The Easter Question - Eben Alexander, M.D. - March 2013 Excerpt: More than ever since my near death experience, I consider myself a Christian -,,, Now, I can tell you that if someone had asked me, in the days before my NDE, what I thought of this (Easter) story, I would have said that it was lovely. But it remained just that -- a story. To say that the physical body of a man who had been brutally tortured and killed could simply get up and return to the world a few days later is to contradict every fact we know about the universe. It wasn't simply an unscientific idea. It was a downright anti-scientific one. But it is an idea that I now believe. Not in a lip-service way. Not in a dress-up-it's-Easter kind of way. I believe it with all my heart, and all my soul.,, We are, really and truly, made in God's image. But most of the time we are sadly unaware of this fact. We are unconscious both of our intimate kinship with God, and of His constant presence with us. On the level of our everyday consciousness, this is a world of separation -- one where people and objects move about, occasionally interacting with each other, but where essentially we are always alone. But this cold dead world of separate objects is an illusion. It's not the world we actually live in.,,, ,,He (God) is right here with each of us right now, seeing what we see, suffering what we suffer... and hoping desperately that we will keep our hope and faith in Him. Because that hope and faith will be triumphant. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eben-alexander-md/the-easter-question_b_2979741.html
bornagain77_{March 7, 2019
March
03
Mar
7
07
2019
04:53 PM
4
04
53
PM
PDT}

BB 21
"Who said that morality doesn’t exist?"
BB 15
"This presupposes that objective morality exists. Contrary to what we see in the world around us."
ET 19
“Logic is a foreign concept to evos”
:) On a more serious note, I can provide scientific evidence to back up the Christian Theist's claim that objective morality really exists. Since unguided Darwinian processes have never shown the origination of a even a single gene and/or protein,
Dan S. Tawfik Group – The New View of Proteins – Tyler Hampton – 2016 Excerpt: Tawfik soberly recognizes the problem. The appearance of early protein families, he has remarked, is “something like close to a miracle.”45,,, “In fact, to our knowledge,” Tawfik and Tóth-Petróczy write, “no macromutations … that gave birth to novel proteins have yet been identified.”69 http://inference-review.com/article/the-new-view-of-proteins
,,, Since unguided Darwinian processes have never shown the origination of a even a single gene and/or protein,,, then it is very interesting to note that the gene expression of humans are designed in a very sophisticated way so as to differentiate between hedonic moral happiness and ‘noble’ moral happiness: The following paper states that there are hidden costs of purely hedonic well-being.,, “At the cellular level, our bodies appear to respond better to a different kind of well-being, one based on a sense of connectedness and purpose.”
Human Cells Respond in Healthy, Unhealthy Ways to Different Kinds of Happiness – July 29, 2013 Excerpt: Human bodies recognize at the molecular level that not all happiness is created equal, responding in ways that can help or hinder physical health,,, The sense of well-being derived from “a noble purpose” may provide cellular health benefits, whereas “simple self-gratification” may have negative effects, despite an overall perceived sense of happiness, researchers found.,,, But if all happiness is created equal, and equally opposite to ill-being, then patterns of gene expression should be the same regardless of hedonic or eudaimonic well-being. Not so, found the researchers. Eudaimonic well-being was, indeed, associated with a significant decrease in the stress-related CTRA gene expression profile. In contrast, hedonic well-being was associated with a significant increase in the CTRA profile. Their genomics-based analyses, the authors reported, reveal the hidden costs of purely hedonic well-being.,, “We can make ourselves happy through simple pleasures, but those ‘empty calories’ don’t help us broaden our awareness or build our capacity in ways that benefit us physically,” she said. “At the cellular level, our bodies appear to respond better to a different kind of well-being, one based on a sense of connectedness and purpose.” http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/07/130729161952.htm
In fact, atheists are shown to pay a heavy price both mentally and physically for denying the reality of objective morality in particular, and for forsaking God in general: As Professor Andrew Sims, former President of the Royal College of Psychiatrists, states, “The advantageous effect of religious belief and spirituality on mental and physical health is one of the best-kept secrets in psychiatry and medicine generally.”,,, “In the majority of studies, religious involvement is correlated with well-being, happiness and life satisfaction; hope and optimism; purpose and meaning in life;,,”
“I maintain that whatever else faith may be, it cannot be a delusion. The advantageous effect of religious belief and spirituality on mental and physical health is one of the best-kept secrets in psychiatry and medicine generally. If the findings of the huge volume of research on this topic had gone in the opposite direction and it had been found that religion damages your mental health, it would have been front-page news in every newspaper in the land.” - Professor Andrew Sims former President of the Royal College of Psychiatrists - Is Faith Delusion?: Why religion is good for your health - preface “In the majority of studies, religious involvement is correlated with well-being, happiness and life satisfaction; hope and optimism; purpose and meaning in life; higher self-esteem; better adaptation to bereavement; greater social support and less loneliness; lower rates of depression and faster recovery from depression; lower rates of suicide and fewer positive attitudes towards suicide; less anxiety; less psychosis and fewer psychotic tendencies; lower rates of alcohol and drug use and abuse; less delinquency and criminal activity; greater marital stability and satisfaction… We concluded that for the vast majority of people the apparent benefits of devout belief and practice probably outweigh the risks.” - Professor Andrew Sims former President of the Royal College of Psychiatrists - Is Faith Delusion?: Why religion is good for your health – page 100 https://books.google.com/books?id=PREdCgAAQBAJ&pg=PA100#v=onepage&q&f=false
In fact, in the following study it was found that, “those middle-aged adults who go to church, synagogues, mosques or other houses of worship reduce their mortality risk by 55%.” And that "the religiously affiliated lived 9.45 and 5.64 years longer, respectively, than the nonreligiously affiliated."
Can attending church really help you live longer? This study says yes – June 1, 2017 Excerpt: Specifically, the study says those middle-aged adults who go to church, synagogues, mosques or other houses of worship reduce their mortality risk by 55%. The Plos One journal published the “Church Attendance, Allostatic Load and Mortality in Middle Aged Adults” study May 16. “For those who did not attend church at all, they were twice as likely to die prematurely than those who did who attended church at some point over the last year,” Bruce said. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2017/06/02/can-attending-church-really-help-you-live-longer-study-says-yes/364375001/ Study: Religiously affiliated people lived “9.45 and 5.64 years longer…” July 1, 2018 Excerpt: Self-reported religious service attendance has been linked with longevity. However, previous work has largely relied on self-report data and volunteer samples. Here, mention of a religious affiliation in obituaries was analyzed as an alternative measure of religiosity. In two samples (N = 505 from Des Moines, IA, and N = 1,096 from 42 U.S. cities), the religiously affiliated lived 9.45 and 5.64 years longer, respectively, than the nonreligiously affiliated. Additionally, social integration and volunteerism partially mediated the religion–longevity relation. https://uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/study-religiously-affiliated-people-lived-religiously-affiliated-lived-9-45-and-5-64-years-longer/
Moreover, although the preceding evidence is certainly very strong as to establishing the objective reality of morality, Immanuel Kant’s requirement for the moral argument to be considered valid was that influences could arise from outside space-time. He considered it a major weakness in the moral argument that such influences could not be empirically established in his day. Dr Suarez explains Immanuel Kant’s empirical requirement for the moral argument to be considered valid in this following video, and shows that Kant’s empirical requirement for the moral argument has now been experimentally met in quantum mechanics:
God, Immanuel Kant, Richard Dawkins, and the Quantum - Antoine Suarez - video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQOwMX4bCqk
And although, Dr. Suarez certainly makes a compelling case that Kant's criteria, i.e. influences arising from outside space-time, has been met for validating the moral argument for God, the physical reality of objective morality can be even more firmly established with empirical evidence than Dr. Suarez had apparently realized in the video. The following studies actually show that our moral intuition itself transcends space and time: Specifically, in the following study, They found that subjects responded strongly to emotional images compared to neutral images, and that the emotional response occurred between a fraction of a second to several seconds BEFORE the image appeared
Quantum Consciousness – Time Flies Backwards? – Stuart Hameroff MD Excerpt: Dean Radin and Dick Bierman have performed a number of experiments of emotional response in human subjects. The subjects view a computer screen on which appear (at randomly varying intervals) a series of images, some of which are emotionally neutral, and some of which are highly emotional (violent, sexual….). In Radin and Bierman’s early studies, skin conductance of a finger was used to measure physiological response They found that subjects responded strongly to emotional images compared to neutral images, and that the emotional response occurred between a fraction of a second to several seconds BEFORE the image appeared! Recently Professor Bierman (University of Amsterdam) repeated these experiments with subjects in an fMRI brain imager and found emotional responses in brain activity up to 4 seconds before the stimuli. Moreover he looked at raw data from other laboratories and found similar emotional responses before stimuli appeared. http://www.quantumconsciousness.org/views/TimeFlies.html
And in the following meta-analysis of 26 reports published between 1978 and 2010, the researchers found that your body can anticipate morally troubling situations between two and 10 seconds before it happens
Can Your Body Sense Future Events Without Any External Clue? (meta-analysis of 26 reports published between 1978 and 2010) - (Oct. 22, 2012) Excerpt: "A person playing a video game at work while wearing headphones, for example, can't hear when his or her boss is coming around the corner. But our analysis suggests that if you were tuned into your body, you might be able to detect these anticipatory changes between two and 10 seconds beforehand,,, This phenomenon is sometimes called "presentiment," as in "sensing the future," but Mossbridge said she and other researchers are not sure whether people are really sensing the future. "I like to call the phenomenon 'anomalous anticipatory activity,'" she said. "The phenomenon is anomalous, some scientists argue, because we can't explain it using present-day understanding about how biology works; though explanations related to recent quantum biological findings could potentially make sense. It's anticipatory because it seems to predict future physiological changes in response to an important event without any known clues, and it's an activity because it consists of changes in the cardiopulmonary, skin and nervous systems." http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/10/121022145342.htm
Thus, Kant’s criteria for accepting the validity of the moral argument has now been met on two levels. First, it has been met by showing that there are indeed influences arising from outside space-time as he had stipulated, and secondly, and more importantly, it has been more specifically met by showing that the human body possesses moral intuitions that transcend space and time. Moreover, in the preceding paper one of the researchers remarked that 'we can't explain (the anticipatory activity of the body) using present-day understanding about how biology works; though explanations related to recent quantum biological findings could potentially make sense.'… And, exactly as she thought, quantum biological findings do indeed shed light how it might be possible for the body to anticipate morally troubling situations before they happen. In fact, as this following video shows,,
Darwinian Materialism vs Quantum Biology - video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LHdD2Am1g5Y
bornagain77_{March 7, 2019
March
03
Mar
7
07
2019
04:52 PM
4
04
52
PM
PDT}

1 2 Next

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Leave a Reply