You tell me
Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2015 2:13 am
Is it not true we are subject to our environment like a fish is subject to it fish bowl, as the earth is ours within it we are subjects only truly understanding the objects contained within it mostly but not fully. Yet fish cant tell you what is outside its fish tank or who or what has created it even if the fish was as smart as a human who can speak. The fish in reality cannot live outside of being within water. A fish can try to explain what he thinks is outside his fish bowl and how things work or how the fish was created but of course being only a product of the environment the fish only manifested a theory and is bound by the products that has been provided to it within the environment the fish is bound in.
Another words man cannot and will never prove how things work or how life began outside the environment we have been provided. Man believes in theory a great bang sparked the ability for life to begin and before it how the earth was formed. Yet believing the Newtons laws on energy never being created, nor energy being able to be destroyed but only being transformed. Knowing that energy is the makup that sets the possibility of mass or object felt or seen physically. Then looking at Newtons laws referring to objects, an object must first be set in motion, an object in motion tends to want to stay in motion unless physically stopped by an object equal to or greater then its physical mass.
So the real question is who or what exactly transfered energy into these two giant objects in orbit to cause them even to cross paths to even create life. We know that energy surrounds us every where while also being within us and the reason we can transfer hour energy to move our bodies and set things into motion according to our willing it. We know the food we eat the air we breath and the sleep we need is source to recharging the energy we contain.
Is it not logical to believe if an object can only be stopped by an object equal to or greater then it, then the object was obviously set in motion by something equal to or greater in its mass to ever cause it to move. If mass is the product of energy then the only thing that can move mass is some form of energy that is willing it to be first set in motion. If energy itself is not mass and if energy cant be created but or destoyed then we understand that energy has no begining or end. So if energy is not mass but is the makeup that builds mass then energy itself must first be transformed or become the makeup for an object to even be called mass to be ever set in motion by the energy that willed it to ever move. So obviously we see that energy itself is first before mass because mass cannot create energy and energy has no begining. This explains mass having a begining and energy being its reason for even existing.
It also shows without mass that everything we see or feel did not exist at one point in time space an all just a void. So this disproves the big bang theory and the theory of evolution. Firstly to even begin to evolve mass must first be created by the source being energy. Energy itself can not be evolution because to be mass, objects, star dust, even matter had shown to me mass had a begining because of energy not having a begining and how mass requires energy to ever even exist. Energy is the mother of mass or matter. Evolution stops there because all products contained within the theory are always changing, becoming more, or better due to its environment, things never stop evolving according to it.
To first be a simple or organic molecule, for this theory to be true then mass must not be born from its source energy, mass would have no begining and Newtons laws and our understanding about objects and energy would be false. The rough draft it takes energy to be existent to move an object, then it takes first energy to build mass, mass itself cannot create energy because mass would then exist before energy and it takes energy to set mass into motion. We know that mass or objects can transfer or direct sources of energy that already exists although energy itself does not will things on its own unless something with intelligence is directing how this energy is behaving or being directed.
If energy is key to all things and it always existed then who directed it to build mass then to set that object to be in motion for man then to claim evolution to be the way life began. I surely hope the intelligent director who set this mass in motion does not also stop the mass because man didn't push a little deeper due to how stupid we really are thinking we can understand whats outside our fish bowl when really the answer was given to you right here on earth with the help of Newton himself observing things he could physically touch and test from, energy to gravity we know its existence.
Stop thinking so hard, its not that hard to understand. If whatever started us isn't who we call God then it is surely something else, if I new how then I would shake a figurative hand of that being for giving me life.
Another words man cannot and will never prove how things work or how life began outside the environment we have been provided. Man believes in theory a great bang sparked the ability for life to begin and before it how the earth was formed. Yet believing the Newtons laws on energy never being created, nor energy being able to be destroyed but only being transformed. Knowing that energy is the makup that sets the possibility of mass or object felt or seen physically. Then looking at Newtons laws referring to objects, an object must first be set in motion, an object in motion tends to want to stay in motion unless physically stopped by an object equal to or greater then its physical mass.
So the real question is who or what exactly transfered energy into these two giant objects in orbit to cause them even to cross paths to even create life. We know that energy surrounds us every where while also being within us and the reason we can transfer hour energy to move our bodies and set things into motion according to our willing it. We know the food we eat the air we breath and the sleep we need is source to recharging the energy we contain.
Is it not logical to believe if an object can only be stopped by an object equal to or greater then it, then the object was obviously set in motion by something equal to or greater in its mass to ever cause it to move. If mass is the product of energy then the only thing that can move mass is some form of energy that is willing it to be first set in motion. If energy itself is not mass and if energy cant be created but or destoyed then we understand that energy has no begining or end. So if energy is not mass but is the makeup that builds mass then energy itself must first be transformed or become the makeup for an object to even be called mass to be ever set in motion by the energy that willed it to ever move. So obviously we see that energy itself is first before mass because mass cannot create energy and energy has no begining. This explains mass having a begining and energy being its reason for even existing.
It also shows without mass that everything we see or feel did not exist at one point in time space an all just a void. So this disproves the big bang theory and the theory of evolution. Firstly to even begin to evolve mass must first be created by the source being energy. Energy itself can not be evolution because to be mass, objects, star dust, even matter had shown to me mass had a begining because of energy not having a begining and how mass requires energy to ever even exist. Energy is the mother of mass or matter. Evolution stops there because all products contained within the theory are always changing, becoming more, or better due to its environment, things never stop evolving according to it.
To first be a simple or organic molecule, for this theory to be true then mass must not be born from its source energy, mass would have no begining and Newtons laws and our understanding about objects and energy would be false. The rough draft it takes energy to be existent to move an object, then it takes first energy to build mass, mass itself cannot create energy because mass would then exist before energy and it takes energy to set mass into motion. We know that mass or objects can transfer or direct sources of energy that already exists although energy itself does not will things on its own unless something with intelligence is directing how this energy is behaving or being directed.
If energy is key to all things and it always existed then who directed it to build mass then to set that object to be in motion for man then to claim evolution to be the way life began. I surely hope the intelligent director who set this mass in motion does not also stop the mass because man didn't push a little deeper due to how stupid we really are thinking we can understand whats outside our fish bowl when really the answer was given to you right here on earth with the help of Newton himself observing things he could physically touch and test from, energy to gravity we know its existence.
Stop thinking so hard, its not that hard to understand. If whatever started us isn't who we call God then it is surely something else, if I new how then I would shake a figurative hand of that being for giving me life.
over energy, as energy powering over mass. Only one of these two known things can be destroyed physically. And surely its can't be energy, so it leaves matter or that first molecule according to evolution that would first have to be willed by energy before it could move or even be a property of matter. So within this void of just energy without time and existence of space, matter and the elements we know, who directed such energy to combined a molecule on a molecular structure?