Theos-Talk Archives (October 2006 Message tt00004)

Sorry Mark, but I think that this is a knee jerk response to the words 
"Intelligent Design" which has become associated with dogmatic religious 
"creationism" due to the conflict between scientific evolution vs. miraculous creationism 
hacked over in the press during the past few years.   

However with reference to the real meaning behind that descriptive phrase, -- 
there are other concepts of "intelligent design" that does not require an 
outside creator with magical powers.   And those are; The metaphysical 
evolutionary theories (such as ABC, holographic paradigm, QFT, etc., and similar Eastern 
and Western philosophical concepts) proposing that; The universal seed (at 
its periodical manifestations or births) is intelligent in itself, and has -- 
holographically encoded in its abstract motion or spinergy at the zero-point 
"singularity" of its origin -- all the knowledge required to reconstruct itself, 
and prepare the metaphysical ground for progressive physical evolution (by 
lawful scientific processes) at each measurable time period (in infinite 
duration) after it manifests itself during each of its eternal cycles of life (active) 
and death (passive) existence, as one of the "sons" (multitudes of parallel 
universes) of Absolute primal SPACE.   

In this light, as explained in ABC theory, the only creator (father) is pure 
consciousness itself, while that which is receptive to creation (mother) is 
its accompanying spinergy or angular momentum -- whose single ray of ejected ED 
force weaves the overall fractally involved fields of the universe (son) -- 
that, in turn, gives birth to mankind through long and complex cosmic and 
analogous solar, planetary and organic evolutionary processes.   Could it be any 
simpler or more reasonable? 

Thus, without any religious connotations, Man can be considered as "created 
in the image of God" (the universal seed consisting of awareness, will and 
spinergy/substance).   Each such individual Man's consciousness, then, is simply a 
single ray of that original universal consciousness -- like an individual ray 
of light traveling through gravitational space that is independent of the 
substance or medium it travels through or is reflected, refracted, attracted or 
absorbed by.  And, his body is an organized agglomeration of the intelligently 
(holographic informationally and magnetically) self guided and scientifically 
involved and evolved primal substance -- consisting, initially, of the primal 
"singularity's" original spin (abstract motion) or "spinergy" -- with such 
creative information carried as frequency modulated wave interference patterns, 
initially within its spin velocities, and subsequently on the circumferential 
surface of all its subsequently involved fields of consciousness. Thus, as 
Bruno observed, the universe has its center everywhere and its circumference 
nowhere. 

In this view, it is obvious that each Universe has to be its own intelligent 
designer...   Just as each of us can be the "intelligent designer" of our own 
lives when we can overcome our ignorance of who and what we really are at the 
root of our own consciousness (i.e., the eternal one witness who, ignorantly 
or intelligently, *uses* this mind, brain and body as its thinking and acting 
vehicle in this particular lifetime).   

It's unfortunate that science has now become the inquisitional "Church" 
looking to "burn at the stake" all us "intelligent design" thinkers who have no 
divine extra spatial creator, vicarious atonement, and last judgment (just like 
Bruno, and Hermes Trismagistus, Plato, Pythagorus,   Plotinus, etc. who 
preceded him and Pascal, Blavatsky, Einstein, Pauli, Bohm, etc., who followed him ). <
/;-)>~

Leon Maurer
http://www.tellworld.com/Astro.Biological.Coenergetics/
http://users.aol.com/uniwldarts/uniworld.artisans.guild/chakrafield.html
http://users.aol.com/leonmaurer/Invlutionfldmirror2.gif
http://users.aol.com/leonmaurer/Chakrafielddiag-fig.col.jpg

In a message dated 9/30/06 11:34:24 PM, mpeaty@arach.net.au writes:

> Sorry Dr A. but as far as I know, so called 'Intelligent Design' theory is 
> just creationism by another name.
> Yes, I know, its proponents purport to be saying only:
> 'oooh look! That creature/organ/phenomenon couldn't possibly have come about 
> by chance! Oh that means there must have been an intelligence what made it!'
> 
> I think however it is plain deceit to purport that this is not an appeal to 
> divine intervention.
> 
> And, as I said, appealing to a purposeful designer simply does not answer 
> any real questions. What it does rather is constitute an assertion that 
> assumptions and beliefs from the pre-scientific universe MUST be allowed to hold 
> sway and must be allowed free passage - at taxpayers' expense - when really 
> their only claim to fame is that they existed before scientific method was 
> discovered.
> 
> As  I said , Dr A, very sorry but to me, so called intelligent design theory 
> just keeps Giordani Bruno burning at the stake.  
>  Mark Peaty
>  mpeaty@arach.net.au
>  http://www.arach.net.au/~mpeaty/
>  http://eiffel.dcc.ufla.br/focus/index.php
> 
> 
> Dr. Angell O. de la Sierra, Esq. wrote:
> --- In MindBrain@yahoogroups.com, Mark Peaty <mpeaty@...> wrote: "There
is no need to invoke so called intelligent design - which is not an
intelligent idea at all because it answers nothing and confuses many."
       Mark, why do you say that? Can't you tell the difference between
the original mathematical statistics experiment by Dr. Demsky (based on
data from Dr. Behe's "Darwin's Black Box.") and the spinning by
religious extremists that followed? The conclusions from ID never   talks
about God or any human-like   entity, it simply disqualifies evolution as
the exclusive metaphysical model to explain (not describe) complexity
such as found in living systems. It is clear that such 'black box'
entity must be endowed withAs educators and/or scientists we owe it to
our readers to be objective and dispassionate and, above all, notify the
audience when we are talking about the experiment per se or our
interpretations therefrom.   Angell.

> 
> Richard,
There is no need to invoke so called intelligent design - which is not
an intelligent idea at all because it answers nothing and confuses many.

On the other hand the advent of human 'intelligence' may well be
implicated, although I much prefer to confine the 'i' word to Howard
Gardner's 7 or so specific intelligences.

With regard to the HAR1 gene, about which I know nothing, Darwinian
thinking allows that the gene was more stringently conserved in chimps
[and Bonobos?] because all mutations except the ones observed entailed
either fatal dysfunction or reduced reproductive fitness in some way.
With our ancestors on the other hand, behavioural and/or environmental
changes allowed individuals carrying the mutations to survive. Indeed
the mutations may have been necessary to facilitate behavioural changes
needed in a changing environment. Without knowing any more about the
HAR1 gene, there is not much more to be said.

However, an evolutionary explanation is to be preferred because
ultimately far far simpler than invoking G/god/s who or which add
nothing of true explanatory value, yet always seem to demand allegiance
to an exclusive creed which is ruled over by an even more exclusive
power clique. As William of Occam said [but in his 14th C.
ecclesiastically correct format] Keep It Simple Sweetheart!

As far as I have read, mutations can be caused by high energy charged
particles devolving from cosmic rays hitting the atmosphere, background
radiation from terrestrial sources, and a variety of chemicals
produced by plants or parasitic microbes.

Regards

Mark Peaty
mpeaty@...
http://www.arach.net.au/~mpeaty/
http://eiffel.dcc.ufla.br/focus/index.php
> 
> <Snip>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]