Privacy Rights; Our Civil Rights; Our Constitutional Rights

Posted on April 3, 2014 by Will Myers

The Preamble to the U.S. Constitution gives all persons the right to seek a fulfilling life; this is our inalienable rights which means no proposal by the government or group can supersede our rights. Advancements in technology and the unfortunate event of 911 gendered the “Patriot Act”. The act innocently with the welfare of the people in mind undermined our privacy rights in the name of Americanism. Our privacy rights is now arbitrary based on the suspicion of any official of the government. A rookie cop who is working his first day on the job can do a search and seizure without a call for because the Patriot Act has provided a standing warrant for search and seizure at the discretion of an official who is suspicious even of a visiting relative.

Phone taps are constant, and has gone beyond the need for a court ordered call warrant where real evidence has to be provided to a judge justifying the issuance of a warrant to tap phones and acquire financial information. The action only need suspicion of an illegal act.

There is no safe guard against an enormous amount of personal data about private citizens being siphoned off and used by special interests. The powers that be can actively discredit any challenger for their power. Now, dissentants doesn’t stand a chance due to the ease of collecting information about the dissentants.

Special interests who target private citizens for public scrutiny is very devastating to the safety and welfare of the targeted person. If America remains on the same course, than our democratic process shall be castrated.

From my experiences I have profound opinions; I was exposed to many hard knocks.  I surmise that if private citizens collaborate with these rogue organizations with the hope of gaining upper mobility from such advantages, than our government shall move toward fascism with the large corporations gaining unprecedented powers among the people.  Our democratic government shall slide sideways toward communism because the government and corporate powers shall own the minds of the citizens. Of course, this would be into the future, but not too far! I guess between 30 to 50 years for our democracy of freedoms and liberties to be totally castrated; holler out from the inside out. At that time, persons shall not have the freedom to actually seek a fulfilling life; adversity from the public shall overwhelm with adversities any personal desires, motivated by special interests who target private citizens.

The bible implies that the world is a fraud in progress; the down side is inevitable. We do live in a fallen world, and our hope must be to have a personal relationship with Christ Jesus. Our faith shall be our savior. Our founding fathers realized that each citizen must have inalienable rights as determined by God and the person only.

*** Will Myers

Please “Donate a penny” or any amount to support the ministry’s research and development. Just click the link below:https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=DKCQUR7YG7W5U

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

New Genetic-Clock Research Challenges Millions of Years

Posted on April 1, 2014 by Will Myers

Does a 6,000-year-old earth match the findings of modern science? Secular scientists have answered forcefully in the negative for generations. However, their arguments rest on the assumption of constant natural processes and constant rates, and new discoveries from ICR’s geneticists present a strong challenge to these claims.

Genetic “Clocks”

Ticking within every species is a “clock” of sorts that measures the length of time that a species has existed on the earth. Since DNA is passed on imperfectly from parent to offspring, each generation grows more genetically distant from prior generations. Consequently, with each successive generation reproductively isolated groups within species grow more and more genetically distant from each other.

This is true for DNA found not only in the nucleus of the cell but also in the cellular energy factories termed mitochondria. Mitochondrial DNA is present in both males and females, but unlike nuclear DNA, it is inherited only from mothers. Thus, mitochondrial DNA differences among modern individuals within a created “kind” trace back to the maternal ancestor of the kind.

For kinds that survived the Flood on board the Ark, modern differences are mutated versions of the mitochondrial DNA sequence that was present in the female representative on the Ark (one representative for the unclean kinds; several representatives for the clean kinds). For kinds that survived off the Ark, modern differences may trace back to the individual females that God created during days three through six of the creation week. Since God likely created many individuals of each kind, some modern mitochondrial DNA differences for off-Ark kinds may be due to God creating DNA differences among individuals and not to mutation over time. Nevertheless, for both on-Ark and off-Ark kinds, most mitochondrial DNA differences among members of the same kind likely reflect the length of time that the kind has existed on Earth, to a first approximation, and thus represent the “ticks” of the mitochondrial DNA clock.

These biological facts create a new venue in which to compare the young-earth creation timescale to the secular timescale head to head. The true age of any given kind will be reflected in the amount of mitochondrial DNA diversity among its modern descendants. If kinds have existed on this planet for millions of years, then they should be quite genetically diverse. In contrast, if their origins trace back only 6,000 years, then they should be more genetically homogeneous.

These qualitative statements can be restated with mathematical rigor. Predicting mitochondrial DNA diversity with precision is a straightforward calculation. Secular scientists have spent many years developing the equations for estimating DNA differences over time. The mitochondrial DNA differences between isolated groups of individuals are a product of twice the DNA mutation rate and their time of separation.1,2 We can show this in mathematical notation as follows:

(1) d = 2*r*t
where
d = DNA differences between two individuals
r = the measured mutation rate in the species or lineage
t = time of origin derived from each origins model

As long as the mitochondrial mutation rate has been accurately measured in the laboratory, equation (1) can be used to predict genetic diversity.

Secular scientists have measured the mitochondrial DNA mutation rate for four species—humans, fruit flies, roundworms, and water fleas. The Bible puts the origin of each of these about 6,000 years ago, and we rounded it up to 10,000 years.3 However, the published evolutionary literature puts the origin of modern humans about 180,000 years ago; fruit flies, about 20 million years ago; roundworms, about 18 million years ago; and water fleas, about 7.6 million years ago.4

Plugging these numbers into equation (1) reveals a sharp contrast between the creation and evolutionary predictions (Figures 1 and 2). For example, the measured mitochondrial DNA mutation rate for humans is, on average, ~0.00048 mutations per year.4,5 Multiplying 0.00048 by 2 and by 10,000 years yields a prediction of about 10 mutations after 10,000 years of existence. Conversely, multiplying 0.00048 by 2 and by 180,000 years yields a prediction of about 174 mutations after 180,000 years of existence.4,6

Comparing these predictions to the range of actual human mitochondrial DNA diversity shows a striking result (Figure 1).4 On average, human mitochondrial DNA sequences differ at 10 positions. The biblical model predicts a range of diversity that accurately captures this value. In contrast, the evolutionary timescale (and, by extension, the old-earth creation timescale) predicts levels of genetic diversity that are 12–29 times off  the real DNA differences that we see today (124–290 mitochondrial DNA differences versus 10).

Similar calculations for fruit flies, roundworms, and water fleas depict the same result—evolutionary predictions that are orders of magnitude off from the real DNA differences we see today and creation predictions that either match actual diversity or are very close to it (Figures 2A–C).

The evolutionary results cannot in any way be explained by invoking a slower mutation rate in the past. First, this would be inconsistent with the assumption of constant rates and constant processes invoked in astronomy and geology. Second, for species to be as genetically similar as they are today yet as old as the evolutionists claim, they would need to mutate only once every 21,000–36,000 years and consistently so for millions of years (Table 1). This incredibly slow rate is completely counter to the actual mutation rates observed in genetics; in fact, rates this slow seem biologically impossible. These results appear to present a dramatic challenge to the millions of years espoused by evolution and old-earth creation, and they seem to powerfully confirm the biblical account.

Answering Objections

However, a case this simple and powerful will be met with some measure of opposition. Can the evolutionists find a hole in these arguments? Let’s look at their possible objections.

Objection 1: The results of this study are contradicted by the many evolutionary molecular clocks published previously.

Comparing the clock in this study to the evolutionary molecular “clock” is essentially an apples-to-oranges comparison. While both clocks are based on the same biological principles, the evolutionists have used a shortcut to determine the mutation rate in their version of the clock. Rather than measure the actual rate of genetic change in the laboratory, evolutionists have determined the “ticking” of the clock from the dates they have assigned to the layers in the fossil record. This would be analogous to a young-earth creationist determining the mutation rate by measuring the genetic differences between two species, assuming a date of origin of 6,000 years, calculating the mutation rate from the genetic differences divided by 6,000 years, and then claiming that modern genetic differences confirm a 6,000-year origin for these species. Hence, evolutionary molecular “clocks” are actually a form of circular reasoning, not independent scientific data points, and they cannot logically contradict the results noted in Figures 1 and 2.

Objection 2: The results of this study are contradicted by empirically measured molecular clocks for nuclear DNA.

The nuclear DNA clocks that evolutionists use assume that all nuclear DNA differences are the product of mutation, and this interpretation is in error. Unlike mitochondrial DNA, nuclear DNA comes in two copies and is inherited from both parents, which means that DNA differences in offspring are the result of DNA mutation and of pre-existing DNA variation in the parents. For example, under the creation model, some of this pre-existing variation in humans traces back ultimately to the two parents, Adam and Eve, whom God created with pre-existing DNA differences. When this fact is accounted for, nuclear-genetic clocks point to recent creation, not millions of years.7

Objection 3: The results of this study are based on flawed methods—too few modern individuals were represented.

Inclusion of more modern individuals when tallying actual genetic diversity fails to help the evolutionary model for two reasons. First, the rate of mitochondrial DNA mutation might be different in the lineages that led up to these additional individuals. Hence, if the evolutionists wish to better represent the worldwide diversity in mitochondrial DNA sequences, then they must also better represent the worldwide diversity in mitochondrial DNA mutation rates. Any increase in actual genetic diversity afforded by more individual sequences might be counteracted by the discovery of faster mutation rates in these new lineages. Second, the magnitude between actual diversity and predicted diversity is far too great a gap to be bridged by even a hundred more DNA sequences from additional individuals or species. Sampling error does not reconcile evolutionary predictions with reality.

Objection 4: The results of this study are based on flawed methods—too few historic/fossil individuals were represented.

Fossil DNA sequences were deliberately omitted from this study because they are too fraught with scientific uncertainty. Our own in-house analysis revealed that most fossil DNA sequences are highly degraded and unreliable. Furthermore, it is currently impossible to verify the accuracy of these sequences, even if they do not appear degraded, since we lack an independent means to verify their accuracy. (The evolutionary interpretation of the fossil record is not an independent test.) Finally, even if fossil sequences were reliable, the magnitude between actual diversity and predicted diversity is far too great a gap to be bridged by the inclusion of fossil DNA sequences. Again, sampling error simply does not reconcile evolutionary predictions with reality.

Objection 5: The results of this study falsely represent the evolutionary expectations. Mutational saturation and homoplasy (independently acquired identical mutations) would lower the absolute value of the expected DNA differences under the evolutionary model.

Mutational saturation could theoretically rescue the evolutionary model but fails to do so for lack of scientific evidence in its favor. If the individuals in this study had mutated to saturation such that every DNA position had been mutated, then the DNA identity between them should have been no different than a random alignment of DNA sequences. Since every position in a DNA sequence has four possibilities due to the four bases—A, T, G, C—in the DNA code, a random alignment matches 25% of the time by chance and mismatches 75% of the time. None of the comparisons in this study even came close to 25% identity. The lowest match was 86%—far in excess of 25%.

Likewise, independently acquired identical mutations could also theoretically rescue the evolutionary model, but this explanation strains credulity. Under the evolutionary model, these creatures have undergone hundreds of thousands to millions of random mutations to a DNA sequence that is less than 20,000 DNA bases long, yet they have maintained sequence identities of 86% or greater. To postulate that these high identities resulted from separate species arriving at the same mutation repeatedly, by chance, over millions of years is to invoke a statistical miracle—a practice evolutionists reject in other fields. Clearly, homoplasy is not a tenable scientific explanation for these results.

Objection 6: The results of this study failed to account for all evolutionary mechanisms. Natural selection would have eliminated millions of deleterious mutations over the past several million years in each of these species.

This evolutionary rescuing device could potentially solve the numerical discrepancy problem, but it is entirely ad hoc and, therefore, unscientific. Scientific explanations must make testable predictions, and if natural selection explains why the evolutionary predictions are so far off from reality, then it must also predict levels of genetic diversity in species for which diversity is currently unknown. Until evolutionists actually make these predictions, this line of reasoning does not pass muster.

Objection 7: The results of this study are simply a statistical artifact. Four species do not represent biological diversity on Earth.

This objection is perhaps the strongest that the evolutionists could raise, and it appears compelling at first pass. Four species is a far cry from the millions of species that currently exist on Earth. However, these four belong to three separate phyla (humans—Chordata; fruit flies and water fleas—Arthropoda; roundworms—Nematoda) that allegedly diverged deeply in evolutionary history. Therefore, the results from these species span a broad swath of life and of supposed evolutionary time. Any evolutionary explanation that seeks to dismiss these results has very broad implications for the history of this planet, and simple explanations will not come easily, especially in light of the fact that the mutation rates for each species were obtained independently. Hence, statistical error is not a compelling explanation, and I encourage any reader to perform mutation-rate studies on organisms for which this rate has yet to be measured. (I predict similar results to those depicted in this article.)

None of the above objections have yet to appear in peer-reviewed scientific literature—either in the creationist or secular journals. In fact, no peer-reviewed objections have been published at all to date. The objections above are ones that I anticipate or that have been expressed in popular forums such as evolutionary blogs—a common source of origins information and ideas that are unencumbered by the accountability of scientific professionals.

Will evolutionists be able to reconcile these genetic data with their millions-of-years claims in geology and astronomy? The results in this article were derived using the same assumptions pervading these latter fields—for example, the constancy of the rate of change—yet these results flatly contradict the secular conclusions in geology and astronomy. Can the evolutionary community resolve this great paradox without undermining the logical foundations of their arguments for deep time? (NJ,RTB)

*** Will Myers

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The Higgs Boson: How to Create Everything from Nothing With God Particle

Posted on March 31, 2014 by Will Myers

Physicists at CERN’s Large Hadron Collider (LHC) have reported new results showing that the “Higgs-like” boson discovered in 2012 is indeed consistent with expectations for a standard model Higgs boson (sometimes called the “God Particle”). This important particle could help explain the “how” of creation ex nihilo, or how God created everything out of nothing. The Higgs also gives mass to matter, a necessary condition for life to exist.

In 2012, when a newfound “Higgs-like” particle made international headlines, the only properties physicists had yet measured were the particle’s mass and the rate at which it was seen to decay into a number of final states (primarily into two photons).1 Yes, these properties were consistent with those expected of the Higgs boson—but there are potentially other particles that could exhibit these characteristics, too.

Thus, since 2012, physicists have been working hard to determine the true identity of this particle. Is it really the Higgs or is it some other particle? Preliminary results from these studies were recently released.2

Creating Everything from Nothing

The Bible describes God as creating the cosmos—all matter, space, time, and energy—from nothing, a scenario (known as creation ex nihilo) supported by big bang cosmology. Exploring and understanding the Higgs boson could give us a glimpse into how God went about accomplishing this awesome work. (Hence one reason why some have nicknamed the Higgs “the God Particle.”)

Without the Higgs boson, the universe as we know it would not exist. Research indicates that in the beginning of the universe, all particles were massless, so everything travelled at the speed of light. Moreover, the universe was most likely completely empty since no energy existed to create any particles. However, through a process called the Higgs mechanism, enough energy was released to help power the big bang and create matter. At the same time, the Higgs mechanism gave some particles mass, allowing them to come to rest. Without mass, life could not exist.

How the Higgs Boson Works

Most particles have a potential energy surface that looks like a bowl or valley with the lowest point at the origin, where the field of particles is zero (see figure 1). Another way of understanding this potential is to imagine standing at the bottom of an empty swimming pool. In order to get out of the pool you would need to expend energy to climb, no matter the direction. Likewise, energy is required to make a non-zero number of particles.


Figure 1: Typical energy potential
Credit: Thomas Phillips

The key to the Higgs mechanism is that the Higgs potential is shaped like what physicists refer to as a Mexican hat potential, with a peak at the origin rather than a valley (see figure 2). (For this potential, picture sitting on a bicycle at the top of a hill; any direction you roll, you will gain kinetic energy.) So, the Higgs boson’s lowest energy state is not at zero but is at some finite value of the Higgs field. In technical terms, the Higgs has a non-zero vacuum-expectation-value (VEV).


Figure 2: The Higgs potential, which resembles a Mexican hat
Credit: Gonis/Wikimedia/Creative Commons

After spontaneous symmetry breaking (in which the system “chooses” a direction for the field),3 the Higgs field has a non-zero VEV, which means that there is a Higgs field everywhere in the universe. You might say it is omnipresent. When this happened at the beginning of the universe, the process released enough energy to create matter and to help power the big bang. Additionally, because all other particles need to propagate through this Higgs field, it slows them down (similar to a person walking through water) and gives the particles mass. The stronger the coupling to the Higgs field, the more massive the particles are. Without mass, matter wouldn’t exist, and without matter, we wouldn’t exist.

Confirming the Higgs Boson Discovery

In July 2012, physicists at Fermilab announced evidence for a new particle that decays into b-quark pairs. Two days later, physicists at CERN announced the discovery of the Higgs-like boson, which decays into pairs of bosons (photons, W’s, orZ’s). Because the Higgs couples to mass, it wants to decay into a pair of the heaviest particles possible. The heaviest particles with mass less than half a Higgs (125 GeV/c2) are b quarks; most Higgs bosons decay into a pair of b’s.

There are many other processes that produce pairs of b quarks and events that look nearly the same as a Higgs decay process, making it very difficult to distinguish Higgs decays from this background. However, physicists from Fermilab and CERN have announced research results that did just that. The Fermilab team produced results with a significance of three standard deviations (3σ). In particle physics, 3σ is the threshold to claim evidence; claiming discovery requires exceeding a 5σ threshold.

Fortunately, CERN physicists were able to achieve a 5σ threshold thanks to the LHC’s higher energy and higher intensity, which allowed them to look for very rare Higgs decays (a pair of photons, for example) that had much less background interference. By analyzing new data (in addition to what was analyzed in 2012), the CERN team was able to find evidence for the Higgs particle decaying into fermions (quarks and leptons). Because each fermion has a different mass, the coupling to the Higgs is different for each fermion, thus the branching fraction for the Higgs to decay into each type of fermion is also different.

So far, all the evidence continues to support the hypothesis that this particle is the standard model Higgs. However, much work remains to be done before we can claim that the particle discovered in 2012 is really the Higgs boson that may have played a critical role in God’s creative miracles. (TP,RTB)

*** Will Myers

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Q&A: What Is the Purpose of the Numbers in the Genesis Genealogies?

Posted on March 28, 2014 by Will Myers

To whom it may concern,

I’m Jade, a second-year engineering student who’s struggling through Genesis, and I’m currently caught on the genealogies in Genesis 5. I did read your articles on them, but they all left out one problem: the numbers that the genealogies give.

The other telescoped genealogies don’t give these numbers, and even if the words can mean grandfathered, great-grandfathered, etc. wouldn’t it just mean that X was this old when Y was born regardless of how many generations between? 

Just wondering what you think these numbers mean; I’m really happy with an old-earth view of Genesis outside of these genealogies.

Regards,

Jade

****

Jade, thank you for your question. In a series of earlier articles we discuss compelling evidence that the genealogical lists in Genesis 5 and 11 are incomplete and include gaps that can be substantial chronologically. One reason is that the Hebrew wordyālad is much more general than its usual English translation of “begat.” Hence, the numbers in Genesis 5 do not necessarily record the age of the progenitor when the named descendant was born. For more detail, we encourage you to review part 5 of that earlier series, especially the section “Shelah and Eber as Typical Examples.”

But the essence of your comments raises the question, why does the Bible include the genealogical lists in Genesis 5 and 11 with such numerical detail if they do not serve a chronological purpose? After all, it is the apparent precision of these lists that has led scholars, such as Archbishop James Ussher, to attempt calculation of a creation date.

A century ago, B. B. Warfield wrote an article in The Princeton Theological Review in which he observed that Genesis 5 contains much more information than just the age of the progenitor (or father) at the birth of a descendant (or son). He opines that the reason for this inclusion “cannot have been a chronological one: for all the items of information furnished do not serve a chronological purpose.”1 He suggests that the additional detail serves “to make a vivid impression upon us of the vigour and grandeur of humanity in those old days of the world’s prime.”2 He concludes:

It is quite true that, when brought together in sequence, name after name, these notes assume the appearance of a concatenated chronological scheme. But this is pure illusion, due wholly to the nature of the parenthetical insertions which are made.3

In summary, Warfield’s point is that Genesis 5 was not meant to convey precise father-to-son genealogies, but to provide representative family lines to emphasize the long lifetimes of the pre-flood patriarchs relative to the lifetimes of subsequent eras.

We agree with Warfield, but would like to further develop his idea to make the point that one purpose of the Genesis 5 and 11 genealogies is to show that God keeps His promises.

First, in addition to the gratuitous detail that Warfield observes, Genesis 5 adds the words “and he died” (KJV, NASB) at the end of the record for each patriarch. These words do not appear in later genealogical records in the Bible; so, their inclusion for the pre-flood patriarchs must be significant. We believe it is meant to demonstrate fulfillment of God’s promise to Adam that if he ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil he would “surely die” (Genesis 2:17, NASB). Adam did not die immediately upon eating the fruit—but he did die eventually, as did his offspring. God fulfilled His promise.

Second, notice the contrast between lifetime lengths in Genesis 5 and those in Genesis 11 and later. The average lifetime of ten pre-flood patriarchs was 702 years; eight of them (including Noah) lived about 900 years or longer. But after the flood, patriarch lifetimes uniformly declined, from 438 years for Arphaxad to 205 for Terah.4Later, Moses lived 120 years, and Joseph and Joshua both died at 110.

Genesis 6:3 states that God decided to limit human lifetimes to 120 years in order to curtail wickedness. Two possible interpretations have been suggested for this verse.

  1. The wicked humans alive when God spoke the words recorded in Genesis 6:3 would all be dead in 120 years. This is not explicit from the biblical text, but it is plausible.
  2. This verse is understood as a gnomic statement or an aphorism. Because humankind’s long lifetimes enhanced the spread of wickedness, God hypernaturallymodified the human body to reduce average lifetime.

 

We tend to agree with the second interpretation—at least in part because it is consistent with the biblical data illustrated by the chart below (even though the reduced lifetimes occurred gradually, rather than immediately). If this is correct, a purpose of the genealogical lists in Genesis 5 and 11 may be to show fulfillment of God’s promise by illustrating how lifetimes shortened from pre-flood to post-flood generations. A comprehensive father-to-son genealogy is not necessary to make this point; an abbreviated list of representative family lines suffices. And we believe that is what Genesis does.

In summary, the idea that Genesis 5 and 11 are precise genealogical lists is, as Warfield says, “pure illusion.” Instead, the lifetime data is incidental to the primary purpose, which we believe is to illustrate the mortality of humans as promised by God in Genesis 2–3. A corollary purpose is to contrast the lifetimes of the pre-flood patriarchs with those post-flood, showing the hastening of mortality. God keeps all His promises.

INTRODUCING GUEST WRITERS:

Daniel J. Dyke, MDiv, MTh

Mr. Daniel J. Dyke received his Master of Theology from Princeton Theological Seminary 1981 and currently serves as professor of Old Testament at Cincinnati Christian University in Cincinnati, OH.

Dr. Hugh Henry, PhD

Dr. Hugh Henry received his PhD in Physics from the University of Virginia in 1971, retired after 26 years at Varian Medical Systems, and currently serves as Lecturer in physics at Northern Kentucky University in Highland Heights, KY.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Hypothetical Superposition; A Spiritual State

Posted on March 27, 2014 by Will Myers

Humans have almost unlimited imagination; although, the brain is locally contained in our skulls. There can exist a higher state of consciousness without the physical body. There has been numerous reports of out of body experiences, and is now considered a common phenomenon.  The brain directs one through routine activity, and the mind is potentials of the brain; the chance probabilities of future events. The mind has a quantum mechanical nature which is the physics of probabilities.

Thoughts have an electrical quantity associated with the process. The long debated question about “where is the observer” comes into play because it is our self conscious. Many scientist says that the observer can not be found. As a matter of fact, the observer has not been found even with magnetic resonance imagery and other advanced electrical detection devices even though humans can step back and see a logical sequence develop within their minds; they can imagine a natural process. It would be nonsensical to state that there is no observer. We would be denying our personal identity; our self-awareness.

One can pose hypothetically that our minds can exist out of our skulls. Our minds (brains) consist of a network of electrical circuits alone with other substances that aid in our life process of thoughts. There is no reason that our minds can not exist in an enormous space like the volume of the universe or maybe a smaller volume. We would still have the observer which could see and imagine things at any location in the space of the extended mind without time restrains.

Quantum mechanics can predict the structure of such existence. Many scientist believe that a mind can exist within one atom or nuclei. This would need much less energy, and would function on the quantum mechanical level. I believe in the vast space existence of the expanded mind with an observer who gives one self-awareness because in comparison the universe is vast without an end of space; one only run out of energy which than defines the space.

Biblical scripture takes on a more realistic view of the super-natural, and a more believable spiritual future when considering the possibility of an expanded mind. Certainly, A highly superior mind with enormous powers would be needed to expand each chosen human mind. I call the entity God. The Son of God came in the flesh to call us into the Kingdom of God, and gave us the conditions.

 

Luke 3:22;  “And the Holy Spirit descended in bodily form like a dove upon Him, and a voice came from heaven which said, “You are My beloved Son; in You I am well pleased.”

Acts 7:55;  “But he, being full of the Holy Spirit, gazed into heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God,”
Revelation 4:2;  “Immediately I was in the Spirit; and behold, a throne set in heaven, and One sat on the throne.”

2 Peter 1:16;  “[ The Trustworthy Prophetic Word ] For we did not follow cunningly devised fables when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of His majesty.”

Revelation 22:12;  “[ Jesus Testifies to the Churches ] “And behold, I am coming quickly, and My reward is with Me, to give to every one according to his work.”
“At the coming of the Son of God the chosen Ones shall be caught up in the clouds at the meeting of Him. One is left while the other who was by his side shall be taken up”, New Testament.
“At the Coming of the Lord don’t believe who says he is over there or he is in the desert because all eyes shall witness the coming of the Lord.” New Testament.

*** Will Myers

 

Please “Donate a penny” or any amount to support the ministry’s research and development. Just click the link below: https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=DKCQUR7YG7W5U Share this:

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The Higgs Boson and the Big Bang

Posted on March 25, 2014 by Will Myers

Particles can generally be classified into two categories, according to the quantum mechanical rules that they obey: fermions and bosons. The Higgs particle is called a boson because it falls into the second category.

Evidence for the Higgs boson was obtained from data collected at CERN’s Large Hadron Collider near Geneva, Switzerland, as well as at Fermilab’s Tevatron collider in the United States. Although the Higgs boson has been nicknamed the “God particle,” it is widely agreed that the name is more for publicity than accuracy, and many physicists do not like it. “I detest the name ‘God particle’. I am not particularly religious, but I find the term an ‘in your face’ affront to those who [are],” wrote physicist Vivek Sharma, a leader of the Higgs search. “I do experimental physics not GOD.”2

In order to understand the importance of the Higgs boson, it is necessary to review some modern physics. Quantum mechanics is a theory that successfully describes the behavior of matter and energy at subatomic and atomic scales, and quantum field theory is an extension of quantum mechanics. A field is a quantity that has a value at each point in space. Some fields are characterized by numbers at each point in space and are called scalar fields. A temperature field, for instance, would assign a temperature to each point in space and could, for instance, be used to show how the temperature within a room varies with location. Vector fields have both numbers and directions associated with each point in space; an example of a vector field would be the electric field surrounding a charged object.3

There is a tendency to intuitively think of particles as being like little round marbles. In modern physics, however, the reality is more complicated. Roughly speaking, quantum field theory views particles as “ripples” in the fields.4

Researchers think that one of these fields—a scalar field called the Higgs field—gives particles mass through their interaction with this field. Particles that interact strongly with the Higgs field have more mass, and vice versa. The Higgs boson, in turn, can be thought of as the smallest possible ripple in the Higgs field.5

The Standard Model is the theory that describes the relationships between elementary particles and three of the four fundamental forces (it does not include gravity). Prior to July 2012, physicists had confirmed the existence for all the elementary particles of the Standard Model except one—the Higgs boson.

There is no doubt that this discovery, if confirmed, is a triumph for the Standard Model.

Some are claiming that this discovery is a blow to Christianity. The Higgs boson is “another nail in the coffin of religion,” said one Cambridge University professor.6However, noted theoretical physicist and professing atheist Stephen Hawking lost one hundred dollars betting that the Higgs boson would not be found, as he had apparently hoped that a more “elegant” mechanism would be found that could explain how particles have mass.7

Although quantum field theories are not directly related to the creation-evolution controversy, the Higgs field is sometimes discussed within the context of Big Bang cosmology. Shortly after the supposed Big Bang, proponents speculate that as the very high temperatures in the early universe decreased, a change in the Higgs field occurred, so that it was able to interact with particles in such a way as to give them mass. (The theoretical change in the Higgs field at high temperatures is somewhat similar to the way a magnet can lose its magnetism if heated above a high temperature.)8

But, presumably, particles would have mass as a result of their interaction with the Higgs field in either a creation or an evolution scenario, provided that temperatures are sufficiently low. Why would a theoretical change in the Higgs field at extremely high temperatures necessarily imply that such high temperatures were actually present in the early universe? Moreover, a major media outlet acknowledged the lack of direct evidence for this hypothetical high-temperature transition in the Higgs field, despite the general pro-evolution bias of the popular press.9

Physicist and popular author Michio Kaku wrote:

In quantum physics, it was a Higgs-like particle that sparked the cosmic explosion [the Big Bang]. In other words, everything we see around us, including galaxies, stars, planets and us, owes its existence to the Higgs boson.10

Kaku’s statement is ambiguous because it is not clear whether he is claiming that the Higgs boson itself or another still-hypothetical Higgs-like particle would have been the cause of the Big Bang. He is apparently alluding to the fact that Big Bang cosmologists speculate that a Higgs-like scalar field, the inflaton, could have caused inflation—a phenomenon needed in order to solve serious (if not fatal) problems in the original Big Bang model.

The inflaton is still hypothetical, but Big Bang cosmologists are convinced that, given the chaotic conditions they believe prevailed in the early universe, inflation-driving scalar fields would have been present in at least some regions of space. In older inflation models, inflation occurred shortly after the Big Bang and lasted for a very brief time. Theorists have since concluded, however, that when quantum mechanical fluctuations are taken into account, inflation in different regions of space would end at different times. The result is that a bubble or pocket of space that has stopped inflating will be surrounded by a region of space that is still expanding at a much faster rate. Because the still-inflating region is expanding much more rapidly than the pocket, the pocket becomes an island “universe” in a “sea” of still-inflating space.

This process is thought to continue indefinitely, so that infinitely many of these island universes are formed, and our universe is only one. Moreover, this process never ends—once inflation starts, it continues forever in the bulk of space. In such a view, it is onlyour universe that supposedly began 13.7 billion years ago. Hence, the idea that our universe is just one of infinitely many universes in a great multiverse is a direct consequence of modern inflationary theory.11

In this view, inflation could be viewed as a cause of the Big Bang, and this is likely why Kaku suggested that a Higgs-like particle (or more precisely, a Higgs-like scalar field) was the “spark” for the Big Bang. However, the inflaton is hypothetical! Although some theoretical physicists might attempt to argue that the Higgs field is the inflaton, others have rejected this idea for technical reasons.12 Paul Steinhardt, one of the world’s leading inflation theorists, acknowledged just last year that the inflaton is hypothetical and distinct from the Higgs field:

The leading example is a hypothesized relative of the magnetic field known as a scalar field, which, in the particular case of inflation, is known as the “inflaton” field. The famous Higgs particle now being sought at CERN’s Large Hadron Collider near Geneva derives from another scalar field [emphasis added].13

Even theoretical physicist and Big Bang evangelist Lawrence Krauss has acknowledged that the discovery of the Higgs boson in and of itself does not provide an explanation for the cause of the Big Bang, saying that determining the cause for this supposed event may be beyond our present technological capabilities.14

Thus, Kaku’s editorial is confusing at best and misleading at worst.

Reuters ran a story containing a statement that the Higgs field “attracted the flying debris of the big bang and turned it into stars, planets and galaxies.”15 This statement (perhaps unintentionally) gives the erroneous impression that the Higgs field can explain star and galaxy formation within the evolutionary model.

Yes, in the Standard Model, particles have mass due to their interaction with the Higgs field, and evolutionists believe that gravitational interactions between massive particles ultimately resulted in the formation of stars and galaxies. But because of serious difficulties in their theories, evolutionists have no convincing explanations as to how gravity could do this, and the (likely) discovery of the Higgs boson has in no way changed that.

Unfortunately, some physicists (though not all) do have an atheistic agenda. At the announcement for the discovery of the Higgs particle, one of the scientists actually thanked “nature” rather than God!16 And yet, many of the properties of our universe appear to have been engineered or “fine-tuned” in order to make our existence possible. Some evolutionists believe that the multiverse of inflation theory can explain this fine-tuning apart from a Creator, but this argument is seriously flawed.17

The discovery of the Higgs boson is a triumph for modern theoretical physics. Christians can and should celebrate the accomplishments of true science, but they have no need to be intimidated by the “vain imaginations” (Romans 1:21) of those seeking to deny their Creator. (JH,ICR)

*** Will Myers

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Noah’s Flood: A Bird’s-Eye View

Posted on March 20, 2014 by Will Myers

By Dr. Hugh Ross

Ms. Johnson smiles and settles her class for the week’s lesson. She opens the Bible on her lap and begins to read the story of Noah’s flood. Her first-graders sit cross-legged on the floor, wiggling a little but listening quietly. When she comes to Gen. 8:9, some children lean forward to hear her softened voice: “The dove found no resting place for the sole of her foot, so she returned to [Noah] . . . for the water was on the surface of all the earth.”

“The whole Earth?” big-eyed Bobby squeaks.

“Yes,” Miss Johnson replies, “The whole Earth.” Thus, a Sunday school teacher often settles the question of whether the Genesis Flood was global or regional.

But the question persists. In fact, it continues to arouse great passions within the Christian community. Both biblical inerrancy and scientific credibility are at stake. A quick reading of the English text of Genesis 6-9 gives readers—at least since the time of world exploration—the impression of a global event. However, scientific evidence to the contrary seems clear and compelling. This evidence includes the lack of sufficient quantities of water and the ark’s inadequacy to hold every land-dwelling species on Earth. This dilemma produces a painful tension for those who take both Scripture and science seriously.

Following rigorous rules of biblical exegesis (discovering the original intent of text), a thoughtful reader finds that a global flood interpretation is neither as obvious nor as consistent as a superficial reading may suggest. Given a commitment to the veracity of both the Genesis text and the scientific record, a plausible scenario begins to emerge. The case for a regional flood can be divided into four general categories: theological, textual, anthropological, and geological.

A Theological Perspective

Given that Genesis 6-9 tells the story of God’s act of judgment against wholesale reprobation and spiritual ruin, scriptural integrity hinges primarily on whether the Flood killed all humanity except for the family of the one man who feared God. In other words, the key theological point is whether or not the Flood was universal in its effect, regardless of its physical extent. The original Hebrew text supports a universal flood impact and allows for a regional locus when viewed in context.

Throughout the Old Testament, God’s judgment against sin is shown to be limited by the impact and extent of human wickedness. Usually it falls upon the sinners themselves, their children for several generations, birds and mammals used in their agricultural pursuits, their material possessions, and in extreme cases, their agricultural lands. If human life had not yet spread beyond Mesopotamia, God would have no reason to destroy those distant regions and the animal life there.

Textual Considerations

Genesis 8:9 records that the dove sent out by Noah could find no place to set her feet “because there was water over all the surface of the earth.” Yet four verses prior, in Genesis 8:5, the text says that the flood waters had receded enough so that for Noah the “tops of the mountains became visible.” Correct interpretation here depends on establishing the dove’s frame of reference. Likewise, the phrase “under the entire heavens” in Genesis 7:19 must be interpreted from Noah’s perspective in Mesopotamia, not from a modern global perspective.

Several examples from other passages of Scripture demonstrate this need for careful interpretation. In 1 Kings 10:24, the reader learns that “the whole world [emphasis added] sought audience with Solomon.” Did every tribe from the Americas and the Far East send representatives? Few, if any, would make such an assumption. The most distant visitor mentioned in the biblical text is the queen of Sheba, a region near current Ethiopia (1 Kings 10:1-13). Romans 1:8 describes the faith of the Romans being reported “all over the world,” but most readers understand Paul to mean Rome’s world—“throughout the Roman Empire”—not every region of the planet.

Further help in interpreting the Flood text comes from Psalm 104. Verses 5-9 describe the recently formed Earth, a period before creation of advanced life, when oceans completely covered the globe. As the continents arose, the water collected in the ocean basins. The events described in these verses perfectly align with known geologic facts and the formation of the first land masses on creation day three (Genesis 1:9-10). The Psalm then goes on to clearly state that water would never again completely cover the planet.

An Anthropological Perspective

Treacherous mountains to the north and east, and inhospitable deserts to the south and west made the well-watered Mesopotamian Plain a difficult place for early humans to leave. Virtually all world history texts designate this area as the “cradle of civilization.”

The most repeated command of God to humanity in Genesis 1-9 is to multiply and fill the earth (Genesis 1:26, 28; 9:1; and 9:7). God’s repeated insistence is indicative of man’s consistent rebellion. People apparently resisted God’s command to fill the earth so strongly that God directly intervened at Babel (Genesis 11:9) to scatter them. As further evidence for man’s failure to expand beyond the Mesopotamian region, all people mentioned in Genesis 1-9 lived in that locale.[1] And it is a large area. Today more than 20 million people live in the modern country of Iraq, which encompasses most of the Mesopotamian Plain.[2]

A Geophysical Perspective

A regional flood interpretation fits the scientific facts about the quantity of water available in Earth’s crust and atmosphere. Genesis 7:11-12 indicates that the floodwaters came from Earth’s aquifers and atmosphere and eventually (according to Gen. 8:1-5), returned to those places. Physical scientists can calculate that Earth contains only 22% of the water required to cover every mountain on the planet.

Some interpreters have postulated radical geologic changes over the entire Earth during the Genesis flood year as a way to reduce the required quantity of water. However, such monumental rates of plate tectonics and erosion defy all geologic evidence collected over the last 200 years. Additionally, the ark could never have withstood the catastrophic forces generated.

The geologic history of Earth is well understood based upon observable tectonic processes, constantly improving radiometric dating techniques, and thousands of deep core samples taken over the entire globe.[3] Geology research findings do not support a global flood interpretation. On the other hand, a regional flood interpretation can be tested and verified.

Even a localized flood of the magnitude demanded by the text and by theological considerations depends on God’s direct action. Atmospheric and geologic processes sufficient to bring about the convergence of vast quantities of water at one place, at one time, defy explanation as “coincidental” random occurrences. Although God’s intervention is difficult to prove scientifically, certain factors can be tested to show the plausibility of such an interpretation.[4]

One factor is the geography of the Mesopotamian region. More specifically, the region’s topography combined with the Flood’s extreme meteorological conditions could support the containment of the floodwaters for several months. These floodwaters would have been deep enough to destroy all humanity and associated animals except those on the ark.

Topographers can use digital elevation data to make a shaded relief map (figure 1). Although subjectively appealing, this type of map offers limited help in analysis and measurement.

Figure Shaded Relief Map of the Middle East[5]

A more effective way to analyze topography is to create an elevation layer tint to depict bands of elevation. Using a computer and geographic information system (GIS) software, the band/elevation combinations can be adjusted to make the desired information stand out visually. The widths of the bands also provide a general indication of slope. Elevation layer tints of the Middle East region have been made in the past, but typically from data with elevation posts at only one-kilometer intervals. Although general topography can be seen with one-kilometer data, subtle details in the terrain cannot be discerned (figure 2).

Figure 2 Elevation Layer Tint of the Middle East from 1-Kilometer Data [6]

An elevation layer tint of the Mesopotamian region from 100-meter data (figure 3) created from digital elevation data with an elevation post every 3 arc seconds (~100 meters) yields significant detail.[7] The preparation of the layer tint presented here required importing 204 one-degree cells of data into ArcView GIS software. The next step was to merge the cells into one huge gridded data set covering 892,000 square miles. The data in each cell were then normalized into seven colored bands for ease of viewing and interpretation. Modern political boundaries and vectors representing the two major rivers in the area were added for reference. Finally, modern country names and map annotations were added for clarity. Because of the resolution of the elevation data, intricate topographic details can be seen at 200-, 300-, and 400-meter elevations corresponding to the probable extent of the Genesis Flood.

Figure 3 Elevation Layer Tint of the Mesopotamian Region from 100-Meter Data

Several important deductions can be made from the higher-resolution elevation layer tint (figure 3):

1. The topography of the Mesopotamian region forms a huge U-shaped bowl that stretches 600 miles from the Persian Gulf to the northwest. Steep escarpments that rise quickly from less than 200 meters to 1,000 meters set boundaries for the Mesopotamian Plain on the north and the east. Terrain that rises gradually, but consistently, to heights above 400 meters forms the southern and western boundaries. Elevations above 400 meters fully contain the Mesopotamian Plain except where it meets the sea.

2.  The biblical flood account refers to extraordinary geophysical events. Huge underground aquifers (“the springs of the great deep” in Genesis 7:11) suddenly “burst forth.” In addition, Genesis 7:12 states that “the floodgates of the heavens” opened, and rain fell for 40 days and 40 nights. In other words, hard rain fell in the region continuously for 40 days. Meteorologically, these factors constitute an unprecedented rain event in a region that averages only 10-20 inches of rainfall per year.[8] No natural explanation exists for a storm so large, intense, or persistent in this region.

A super-storm of this unprecedented magnitude would have produced an enormous surge in the Persian Gulf. During a storm surge, the force of the winds circulating around the storm’s low-pressure center pushes water ashore. A large hurricane can cause storm surges 50 miles wide and 25 feet deep.[9] Shallow coastal waters like those in the Persian Gulf only amplify a storm surge (see Figure 1). And, greater storm surges are observed with slow-moving storms. The Genesis super-storm remained stationary for at least five weeks; so the height of the storm surge must have been larger (by some incalculable amount) than any Earth has experienced since that time. A storm surge that reached 200 meters deep certainly would have been sufficient to sustain the destructive flood levels for the length of time Genesis records.

Assuming the Earth’s entire human population lived on the Mesopotamian Plain at that time, a flood that reached 200 to 300 meters deep would have destroyed all humanity on the land. The geographical extent of such a flood would have included areas that today belong to Iraq, Iran, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and Syria (see figure 3).

3. The account of the ark’s resting place also seems geographically and historically plausible. Genesis 8:4 describes that place as the “mountains of Ararat,” well below the highest probable flood elevation (~400 meters) in what is now north central Iraq. Figure 4 provides a view of the raw elevation data in the layer-tint project prior to normalization. The rugged and steeply ascending mountains of Ararat are clearly visible. On a side note, one may logically assume that no post-Flood society would have left the ark’s precut lumber unexploited; searching for the ark most likely represents a fruitless exercise.[10]

Figure 4 Elevation Data in the Mountains of Ararat Region

Although the exact geographical extent of the Genesis Flood may never be known, geologists can say with some assurance that the event described in Scripture makes sense as a localized, but universal—with respect to humans and their animals—catastrophe. This interpretation of the Genesis Flood text fits the facts in evidence. A worldview that carefully and respectfully integrates biblical data with scientific data provides coherent and testable answers to big questions of life—including questions about origins, meaning, morality, and destiny.[11] A regional flood interpretation of Genesis 6-9 provides one of the cornerstones of the truth about human history that ought to be taught in Sunday school.

Steve Sarigianis is a research engineer and retired U.S. Army officer with a master of science degree in Geography from Penn State. He has extensive experience in the field of military mapping and has taught geography and astronomy at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point.

Sidebar: Water-level Math (by Hugh Ross)

The Genesis text does not specify the exact depth of the floodwaters. It states only that the ark floated up on the waters and that the nearby hills were so inundated that from Noah’s perspective the whole face of Earth was covered with water. That is, from one horizon to the other, all Noah could see was water.

An ark 450 feet long by 75 feet wide by 45 feet high, loaded with animals and supplies, probably needed a draft of at least 20 feet. If Noah stood on top of the ark, his eye level would have been approximately 30 feet above the waters (refraction corrections included). The water level horizon for him would have been about 8 miles away. Any hill more distant than about 15 miles, sticking up even a hundred feet or more above the water, would have been invisible. Hills higher than 500 feet and 1,000 feet above water level would have been beyond the possible view of Noah if they were more than 28 and 38 miles distant, respectively.

Are there any regions in Mesopotamia where, if the Tigris and/or Euphrates Rivers overflowed their banks by a depth of 20 feet or so, water would extend to 28 or 38 miles on either side? Yes. Such regions exist in both southern and middle Mesopotamia. It would be difficult, though not impossible, to imagine how so little water could wipe out all humans and all the birds and mammals associated with them. Fifty feet, a hundred feet, or a few hundred feet depth of water would provide a more realistic scenario.

The rate at which a 50-foot, 100-foot, or higher surge of water above the banks of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers would flow out to the Persian Gulf depends upon the slope of the land. From 400 miles northwest of Ur to Ur (the location of the Persian shore at the time of Noah), the Euphrates and Tigris rivers drop just 300 feet in elevation. This drop provides a grade of only about 0.01 percent. With that gentle a slope, the Flood waters would have moved very slowly out to the Persian Gulf. Moreover, for several months after the rain stopped, any water that exited to the Gulf would have been replaced with runoff from springs and melting snow on the distant mountains that surround the Mesopotamian Plain.

Genesis 8:1 states that God removed the floodwaters by sending a wind. Given the gentle slope of the land, evaporation plays a more significant role than gravity in removing the water. Such a scenario is consistent with the worst floods that have struck the Mississippi Valley, for example. The water rose 50 feet above the banks in those Mississippi floods and then it seemed to stand still.1 Residents of the region noticed little discernable movement. They had to wait for the waters to dry up.

Just how effective is evaporation for removing flood waters? During a typical Southern California summer the swimming pools lose an average of one inch of water per day to evaporation. Lower humidity, higher heat, and a strong wind can triple or quadruple that rate. Over the 335 days during which Noah’s Flood receded, that would add up to 84-112 feet of evaporation. If gravity had removed about half that much water, the total water depth removed would have been 126-168 feet. That is easily enough water to account for Noah’s seeing nothing but water for as far as his eyes could see. That is easily enough water to destroy all of Noah’s contemporaries and their animals outside the ark. And, that is easily enough water to carry the ark to the foothills of Ararat. (SS,RTB)

*** Will Myers

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Extraterrestrials Relationship to God

Posted on March 20, 2014 by Will Myers

There is no reason in the world for any informed person not to believe in UFO’s. There are now hundred of thousands who has seen a UFO including two former presidents of the USA, and a governor plus thousands of professionals. We have hours of videos available on the internet which show one UFO after another.

A former employee of the Federal Government whose job was to distinguish the different species of aliens reported that 47 different species has been documented. The truth is that the government has a warehouse full of UFO’s alone with many alien bodies.

The question is not do they exist, but what are their intents. So far, alien presence has mostly only caused fear among us humans, and only a few destructive acts such as shooting down a fighter jet which was attacking them. Aliens have done a few mischievous acts such as temporarily knocking out the electronics on a nuclear missile military base.

The government is no longer threatening person to not speak of such occurrences, but the government is now pleading the Fifth, and strategically allowing tid bits of info to leak to the public. The question now is what are the aliens relationship to God? Are they Christ like?

My theory of Aliens is that the ones that we have observed is subject to the same physics as ourselves; of course, much advanced in applied physics and technology; therefore, they are from our future. Although, there is a possibility that the species known to the government are actually robots created by a far superior entity who is existing in a higher conscious, and the aliens who come into our environment are doing the will of those entities.

I believe that our relation to God, our Creator, encompass the same conditions as the Extraterrestrials; they just know more details than humans. Humans are working (Vspace) to develop into the fullness of a potentiality (Uspace). God is sovereign and eternal with all power; God can intervene into Uspace or Vspace at anytime, but each potentiality’s capacity is set by God; also the nature of the potentiality has been established by God; it is in our future.

Human’s with their fragmented knowledge and varying spirits will never synthesize Uspace. Any attempt by man results in a Frankenstein with many of fragmented parts. Any philosophy will only give a temporary dim shadowy view of God’s Truth Who is in Christ Jesus, His Son; only God can send His Holy Spirit to anyone. God’s Holy Spirit is whole without cracks or fragments. It’s a pure Spirit, and there is only one for us humans (symbolically represented by Uspace). It’s a continual centralized force in our lives, and applies to aliens who are in this material universe with the same physics as us.

God rewards all endeavors which are for the betterment of civilization. Science and all other disciplines has been ordained by God at the time of creation.  Man can continue infinitum or at an instant realize God’s truth. Aliens are possibly still on this infinite journey into the physical universe without discovering their higher conscious as related to God, The Creator of all. Man shall only follow the same journey until realizing God’s Truth.

There is an end to this physical universe.

John 1:33; “And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost.”

Acts 2:4; “And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.”

1 Corinthians 2:13; “Which things also we speak, not in the words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.”

Ephesians 1:13; “In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,”

1 Thessalonians 4:8; “He therefore that despiseth, despiseth not man, but God, who hath also given unto us his holy Spirit.”

Revelation 21:10; “And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and shewed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God,”

Mark 13:26; “And then shall they see the Son of man coming in the clouds with great power and glory.”

***Revelation 1:7; “Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.”

*** Will Myers

Please “Donate a penny” or any amount to support the ministry’s research and development. Just click the link below:

https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=DKCQUR7YG7W5U

Share this:

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Particle Reservoir Blunts Solar Storm Damage

Posted on March 17, 2014 by Will Myers

Our Sun looks remarkably stable, but as with all other stars, its magnetic field exhibits variability. This variability leads to events where the Sun’s magnetic field connects to Earth’s and causes an influx of charged particles. Recent observations show that Earth’s magnetic field houses a reservoir of charged particles that blunts the disruptive effects of such “reconnection” events. The implications of this research support the idea that Earth was specially designed in order to support advanced technological civilizations.

Imagine operating a telegraph in the middle of the night when, suddenly, you start receiving spark shocks from the machine. Though you disconnect the telegraph, it continues to function, driven by some unknown power source. Stepping outside, you see a brilliant aurora covering much of the sky with light strong enough to read by. Later reports reveal that the aurora was visible as far south as Hawaii.

As incredible as this scenario sounds, such conditions arose during the 1859 Carrington Super Flare. These electromagnetic “storms” occur when the magnetic fields of the Sun and Earth interact. Fortunately, as recently reported in Science, Earth’s magnetic field features characteristics that serve to blunt the impact of these storms on advanced civilization.

Earth’s Natural Shield

Day after day, the Sun moves across the sky and provides a steady source of heat and light for a large fraction of life on Earth. But despite the Sun’s seeming constancy, scientists know that a number of violent solar events (flares, coronal mass ejections, and others) do impact Earth, as was the case in 1859 when the two bodies’ magnetic fields “reconnected” (see animation here).

During these reconnection events, large amounts of hot plasma from the solar wind gain a path directly toward Earth. The efficiency of the reconnection event plays a central role in determining the amount of energy transferred from the solar into Earth’s magnetosphere and ionosphere. However, recent observations revealed that the planet’s magnetic field houses a reservoir of charged particles that rush out toward the reconnection region in such a way that dampens the efficiency of reconnection.1 Consequently, each reconnection event causes much less damage to Earth’s surface than it would without the reservoir.

Assessing Other “Habitable” Planets

This research highlights yet another feature that any putative “habitable planet” must possess in order to be truly habitable—at least for human-like life and advanced civilization. Specifically, the planet must generate a substantial magnetic field otherwise it cannot host the reservoir of charged particles to dampen reconnection events.

Scientists have expressed much interested in M-dwarf stars because they represent about 75 percent of all stars in the Milky Way Galaxy. Moreover, research indicates that many, if not all, M-dwarf stars host planets. The dimmer nature of these stars means the region where a planet could host liquid water resides much closer to the star, which results in tidal locking such that the planet has no magnetic field.

The number of known planets, as well as the number of environments where those planets reside, continues to grow. At the same time, the list of conditions required for advanced life (based, at least, on what we know from Earth) grows more stringent. Such a finding comports well with the idea of a God who fashioned Earth for human life and then commanded humanity to study creation in order to manage it well. (JZ,RTB_)

*** Will Myers

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

UNIVERSAL PROCESS OF LIFE

Posted on March 16, 2014 by Will Myers

We exist in a continuum of dynamics; nothing ever absolutely stop. We do have things that last a long time such as diamonds or stones, but after an eon of time they even change. The universe has an end as predicted by many experts. God has created this dynamic existence which is visible and temporary, but what is invisible is eternal.

Romans 1:20

King James Version (KJV)

” For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:”

We are submerged in the supernatural power of God, our Creator (Uspace). Eternal God is infinite in all respects; an Infinite Potentiality, but humans are limited and our minds must be supported by matter which God have conserved in energy packages in many ways since matter is actually a bundle of energy. Humans are capable of receiving the Uspace potentiality, a connection to God’s supernatural life; the possession of God’s Holy Spirit. Living with the Uspace potentiality called in the bible The Spirit Of Truth Who God put in the world, we know God as our Heavenly Father.

In our beginning until present we have placed emphasize on the material, and we are discovering the underlining principles of this world. As we make discoveries we are actually gaining the ability to predict the behavior of our environment (Vspace). In doing such, we are learning the nexus of nature. There is always a nexus because nature never stops. Vspace is that potential of all nexus’. These nexus’ in nature reveals the eternal character of God.

Humans make observations after observations (S: viewing something), and learns some principles (QV: immutable, unchangeable, and variance is a constant; the same thing happen over and over). Qua Variance (QV) is the set of all principles that show how God made things to work. Principles are usually invisible and abstract such as Force = mass x acceleration; we don’t see the force but we see mass and the acceleration of the object. Man builds on his knowledge (qv: a bit of information or a body of information acquire by man). We learn with each observation of the visible and the temporary.

The God Equation, QV[S(1)]qv(1) + QV[S(2)]qv(2) = QV[S(3)][qv(1) + qv(2)],  symbolically describes the universal process of each life in harmony and conjunction with the material universe. It is a metaphysically equation. We are always in the hand of God.

Isaiah 28:16; “Therefore thus saith the Lord God, Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious cornerstone, a sure foundation: he that believeth shall not make haste.” Zion means the essence of things.

Isaiah 8:14; “And he shall be for a sanctuary; but for a stone of stumbling and for a rock of offence to both the houses of Israel, for a gin and for a snare to the inhabitants of Jerusalem.”

1 Peter 2:8; “And a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence, even to them which stumble at the word, being disobedient: whereunto also they were appointed.”

Jesus, the Son of God, came from God Who is God among us in the flesh. Man would never qualify or receive the Uspace Potentiality due to selfishness which has innate sin that perpetrate strife.  God had to send a perfect life (Uspace Potentiality) to be the God standard for us to receive eternal life for all that accept Christ Jesus as a substitute in their life.

Humans are locked into the universal process, and there is no rest except they receive eternal life. Science and technology comes from this process, and God rewards in many ways; God gives partial credit, and rewards us for trying our best. Although, the path to His Kingdom is by Jesus, the Son of God. This process is inevitable whether the Lord return to the kingdom of God alone or with His flock. Jesus is the fulfillment of Vspace = Uspace; our supernatural connection to God in which all than know that God is our Father.

*** Will Myers

Please “Donate a penny” or any amount to support the ministry’s research and development. Just click the link below:https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=DKCQUR7YG7W5U

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment