https://twitter.com/LKrauss1/statuses/413110311160266752
I rather enjoy the irony of being told that my film is "nonsense", by a man who has not only never seen it, but who just wrote a book about how everything comes from nothing that is really something.
But I do very much appreciate Lawrence Krauss' contribution to our film. It is a hum dinger, regardless of whether one agrees with him or not.
UPDATE: Lawrence has responded, and I have asked him a very simple question.
I encourage everyone to go and have a look at the trailer.
Lawrence, it seems to me your views were quite accurately presented.
Of course, if your objection boils down to us declining to only present views which agree with yours, well that's a bit of a problem, since there are, after all, other contributors whose views do not necessarily agree with yours.
They get to speak for themselves too.
Saturday, December 28, 2013
Monday, December 23, 2013
What Is "The Principle"?
Five hundred years ago, you were crazy if you thought the Earth was going around the Sun.
Today, you’re crazy if you think it isn’t.
What changed?
That turns out to be a fascinating question, one which involves profound issues of science, of faith, of identity.
While most people assume that it has long since been experimentally proven that the Earth is orbiting the Sun, a simple challenge to name the specific experiment which measured that motion will yield an easily-won bar bet (at least until “The Principle” is released!).
It may come as a surprise to some, but no such experimental proof has ever been obtained.
Remarkably, physics had to be entirely re-conceptualized by Albert Einstein at the beginning of the 20th century; in part because no experiment had been able to directly measure this universally-assumed motion of Earth around Sun.
So, two of our greatest scientific revolutions- the Copernican Revolution and Relativity- are intimately associated with this question of Earth’s place in the larger scheme of things.
The Copernican Principle simply states that Earth is not in any special or central location in the cosmos. It is generalized, in modern cosmology, as the “cosmological principle”; there are no special locations in the cosmos. Under this fundamental assumption, on large enough scales, the universe will look pretty much the same everywhere, and it will look pretty much the same everywhere no matter where you might be looking from.
If this principle is wrong, then everything we think we know about our universe is wrong.
“The Principle” includes interviews with several leading discoverers and theorists wrestling with the implications of recently obtained observational evidence that this foundational assumption of our scientific world view may be wrong, and that our Earth may be very special after all.
Could this question, which has already launched two great scientific revolutions, be coming back around to haunt us yet again?
If we consider the dramatic changes in culture and world-view which accompanied these earlier revolutions, it is not too early to begin to consider........what would it mean for our future, and the future of our children, if it were to be established that the Earth is in a special position in the cosmos; that we are, truly, in some sense, the “center of the universe”?
Saturday, December 21, 2013
Paper Trails............
Mr. Shea alludes to "paper trails" in his article.
It really would not have occurred to me to treat an intellectual debate as if it were a KGB matter for investigation against enemies of the State.
But since Mr. Shea has suggested that he and Mr. Palm have embarked upon this approach........
Let me say that we have discovered some very interesting paper trails ourselves ;-)
Stay tuned.
It really would not have occurred to me to treat an intellectual debate as if it were a KGB matter for investigation against enemies of the State.
But since Mr. Shea has suggested that he and Mr. Palm have embarked upon this approach........
Let me say that we have discovered some very interesting paper trails ourselves ;-)
Stay tuned.
Thursday, December 19, 2013
Response to a Scientist Inquiring About "The Principle"
I reproduce below a portion of an exchange with a scientist posting on a private list about "The Principle", in order to correctly situate the intention and content of our film:
Mr. P----------:
Mr. P----------:
I want to be careful to distinguish my personal affirmation of geocentrism as the correct view of the cosmos, from the message of "The Principle".
"The Principle" is simply, so far as I can tell, the very first full-length documentary treatment of the history, development, scientific and theological impact of, and present-day observational challenges to, the Copernican Principle.
It surprises me a great deal that no one had ever undertaken this before, but then again, there are certain things we just assume are so obvious, that we cease to even look at them.
For Newton, this was absolute space.
For us, it is the Copernican Principle.
There are many viewpoints in the film which are non-Copernican, and also non-geocentric; Ron Hatch for one, John Hartnett for another.
There is a firmly atheist Copernican in the film who concludes that the Earth is incredibly special; in fact the only place in the entire universe with intelligent life- but he arrives at this conclusion via rigorous adherence to the Copernican Principle, in its logical conclusion to a multiverse (Max Tegmark).
In short, the actual content of the film is not nearly as controversial, or threatening to any particular coalition of thinkers, as your concerns above might indicate.
Simply put, "The Principle" is not a film designed to convince anyone that geocentrism is necessarily shown to be true based on existing observations.
It is, however, quite clear about establishing that no experiment has ever shown the Earth to be in motion, and Relativity is brought into the world, in part, as a means of explaining that fact.
Geocentrism is treated both in its historical aspects (indispensible, after all, to the treatment of our subject) and in its modern re-appearance, as an hypothesis which demands considerably more respect than it will be given until it takes off its gloves and bloodies a few noses. Which it has, and will.
I regret not having had the chance to discuss this with you in the conference, but please feel free to contact me at any point along the way should you find the film, or geocentrism, to raise a question or observation in your mind.
Wednesday, December 18, 2013
Response to Mark Shea on "The Principle"
UPDATE 12/18:
Mark has deleted my response from his blog.
I reproduce it below.
In any event, "The Principle" on Michael Voris' "Mic'd Up", January 8, 2014, at 8PM Eastern time, just became the must-see show of the New Year in the Catholic blogosphere ;-)
Pull up a chair and pop some popcorn.
You DO NOT want to miss this one!
Mark has deleted my response from his blog.
I reproduce it below.
In any event, "The Principle" on Michael Voris' "Mic'd Up", January 8, 2014, at 8PM Eastern time, just became the must-see show of the New Year in the Catholic blogosphere ;-)
Pull up a chair and pop some popcorn.
You DO NOT want to miss this one!
I am the Producer of "The Principle".
I wish to inform you that Stellar Motion Pictures, LLC, and our legal counsel, are in possession of full, standard releases, signed by all participants in our film.
The text of these releases make it quite clear that "The Principle" involves an examination of the Copernican Principle, including mainstream and non-mainstream views, including controversial views.
Your insinuations to the contrary are malicious. I will leave it to our counsel to determine whether they are in fact libelous.
Be advised.
Your (telepathically obtained?) alleged "knowledge" of the content of "The Principle" will be adequately debunked by the film itself, which includes interviews with a wide-ranging group of theorists, discoverers, and, yes, dissidents and mavericks who challenge the Copernican Principle, upon which all of our cosmology is predicated, and which, as the intellectually fearless will see, is now under serious observational challenge.
I know better than to expect you to be ashamed of yourself for your continued, vicious campaign against Bob Sungenis.
But as for your false and malicious insinuations about "The Principle"?
I do anticipate that you will experience true regret for these.
Tuesday, December 17, 2013
Copi, Huterer, Starkman, Schwartz Confirm: Planck Shows 99.6% CMB Alignment With Dipole
The Planck data has been fine-tooth-combed by the Copi, Huterer, Starkman, Schwartz team, and the MNRAS preprint is just up tonight on arxiv.
Bottom line: As expected, the Axis is real, the alignments persist, and they are extremely unlikely within LCDM assumptions.
Excerpts:
(i) the Ecliptic plane is seen to carefully thread itself between a hot and cold spot and there is a clear power asymmetry across the Ecliptic plane;
(ii) the planarity of the octopole and the alignment of the quadrupole and octopole planes is clearly visible – note the re- markable near-overlap of the quadrupole and octopole maximum angular momentum dispersion axes;
(iii) the area vectors lie near each other, near the Ecliptic plane, and also near the dipole direction.
Bottom line: As expected, the Axis is real, the alignments persist, and they are extremely unlikely within LCDM assumptions.
Excerpts:
At the present time in cosmology there are no compelling alternative models that can account for the anomalies.
(i) the Ecliptic plane is seen to carefully thread itself between a hot and cold spot and there is a clear power asymmetry across the Ecliptic plane;
(ii) the planarity of the octopole and the alignment of the quadrupole and octopole planes is clearly visible – note the re- markable near-overlap of the quadrupole and octopole maximum angular momentum dispersion axes;
(iii) the area vectors lie near each other, near the Ecliptic plane, and also near the dipole direction.
......alignments persist at the 95 to 99.9 per cent level, with the strongest alignment occurring with the dipole direction (99.6 per cent).....
In all cases the observed alignments reside far in the tail of the expected distributions.
.....even given the relative location of the quadrupole and octopole area vectors (i.e. their mutual alignment), the Ecliptic plane and dipole alignments are unlikely at the 95 per cent level.
In all cases the observed alignments reside far in the tail of the expected distributions.
.....even given the relative location of the quadrupole and octopole area vectors (i.e. their mutual alignment), the Ecliptic plane and dipole alignments are unlikely at the 95 per cent level.
In summary, the quadrupole and octopole alignments noted in early WMAP full-sky maps persist in the WMAP seven-year and final (nine-year) maps, and in the Planck first-year full-sky maps. The correlation of the quadrupole and octopole with one another, and their correlations with other physical directions or planes – the dipole, the Ecliptic, the Galaxy – remain broadly unchanged across all of these maps. Consequently, it is not sufficient to argue that they are less significant than they appear merely by appealing to the uncertainties in the full-sky maps – such uncertainties are presumably captured in the range of foreground removal schemes that went into the map making.
Monday, December 9, 2013
What Is "The Principle"?
Five hundred years ago, you were crazy if you thought the Earth was going around the Sun.
Today, you’re crazy if you think it isn’t.
What changed?
That turns out to be a fascinating question, one which involves profound issues of science, of faith, of identity.
While most people assume that it has long since been experimentally proven that the Earth is orbiting the Sun, a simple challenge to name the specific experiment which measured that motion will yield an easily-won bar bet (at least until “The Principle” is released!).
It may come as a surprise to some, but no such experimental proof has ever been obtained.
Remarkably, physics had to be entirely re-conceptualized by Albert Einstein at the beginning of the 20th century; in part because no experiment had been able to directly measure this universally-assumed motion of Earth around Sun.
So, two of our greatest scientific revolutions- the Copernican Revolution and Relativity- are intimately associated with this question of Earth’s place in the larger scheme of things.
The Copernican Principle simply states that Earth is not in any special or central location in the cosmos. It is generalized, in modern cosmology, as the “cosmological principle”; there are no special locations in the cosmos. Under this fundamental assumption, on large enough scales, the universe will look pretty much the same everywhere, and it will look pretty much the same everywhere no matter where you might be looking from.
If this principle is wrong, then everything we think we know about our universe is wrong.
“The Principle” includes interviews with several leading discoverers and theorists wrestling with the implications of recently obtained observational evidence that this foundational assumption of our scientific world view may be wrong, and that our Earth may be very special after all.
Could this question, which has already launched two great scientific revolutions, be coming back around to haunt us yet again?
If we consider the dramatic changes in culture and world-view which accompanied these earlier revolutions, it is not too early to begin to consider........what would it mean for our future, and the future of our children, if it were to be established that the Earth is in a special position in the cosmos; that we are, truly, in some sense, the “center of the universe”?
Sunday, December 8, 2013
For All You Nightowls........
"The Principle" trailer just went up at YouTube!
Enjoy!
Facebook, Twitter, and website go live tomorrow.
Enjoy!
Facebook, Twitter, and website go live tomorrow.
Important Note Concerning the Blog
I will be spending a lot of time in future- God permitting!- addressing posts to "The Principle" Facebook page, website, and, soon to come, blog.
This is my personal blog, and expresses my personal viewpoint on matters pertaining to its foundational hypothesis.
"The Principle" includes the expression of many viewpoints which do not agree in all, or possibly in any, respects with my own.
I will reserve the more polemical expressions of my own viewpoint, especially concerning scientific and theological issues, to this blog.
Thanks!
This is my personal blog, and expresses my personal viewpoint on matters pertaining to its foundational hypothesis.
"The Principle" includes the expression of many viewpoints which do not agree in all, or possibly in any, respects with my own.
I will reserve the more polemical expressions of my own viewpoint, especially concerning scientific and theological issues, to this blog.
Thanks!
Friday, December 6, 2013
Links to "The Principle" Trailer, Launching Monday, December 9!
A two-week viral marketing test of "The Principle" trailer will commence on Monday, December 9, 2013.
The trailer will be available for viewing on Facebook, YouTube, and our website:
www.theprinciplemovie.com
The Facebook page can be searched as of Monday- "The Principle movie"- and the website will go live with a temporary splash page the same day.
UPDATE 12/8: Here are the links to the Facebook page, and our Twitter account. These will not go live until Monday December 9:
http://www.facebook.com/ theprinciplemovie
http://twitter.com/ PrincipleMovie
Please spread this far and wide through your own networks.
The success of this viral campaign will secure a platform theatrical release for "The Principle" in the United States.
A true viral explosion will secure us even more than that ;-)
And thanks to James and Lucas below for the reminder that there is one thing you can do for our project that is even more important.......
The trailer will be available for viewing on Facebook, YouTube, and our website:
www.theprinciplemovie.com
The Facebook page can be searched as of Monday- "The Principle movie"- and the website will go live with a temporary splash page the same day.
UPDATE 12/8: Here are the links to the Facebook page, and our Twitter account. These will not go live until Monday December 9:
http://www.facebook.com/
http://twitter.com/
Please spread this far and wide through your own networks.
The success of this viral campaign will secure a platform theatrical release for "The Principle" in the United States.
A true viral explosion will secure us even more than that ;-)
And thanks to James and Lucas below for the reminder that there is one thing you can do for our project that is even more important.......
Wednesday, December 4, 2013
Discovery Institute on the Multiverse as the Ultimate Extension of the Copernican Principle
Spot on, and this matter is explored in detail in some of the additional footage from interviews from "The Principle", which additional footage will be made available on our website.
In order to save the Copernican Principle, some theorists consider themselves logically compelled to assert the existence of a multiverse which itself cannot be subjected to the procedures of experimental science.
It is a remarkable paradox, and one which heralds the coming revolution in science.
In order to save the Copernican Principle, some theorists consider themselves logically compelled to assert the existence of a multiverse which itself cannot be subjected to the procedures of experimental science.
It is a remarkable paradox, and one which heralds the coming revolution in science.
Sunday, December 1, 2013
The Astonishing Scandal of "Mary's Bones"
I post this link referencing the recent paper by Mary Schweitzer, who has "solved the problem."
I point out that this episode has now reached the stage of outright, grotesque scandal.
If there is anyone who is prepared to understand why the entire research program into soft tissue preservation is a profound departure from the authentic scientific method; that is, if anyone can see what experiment was *not* done, which renders this entire episode scandalous and a true perversion of scientific method, I would like to hear from you.
If I do not, then my next post will explain why this is so.
UPDATE DECEMBER 2 2013:
"The game of science is, in principle, without end. He who decides one day that scientific statements do not call for any further test, and that they can be regarded as finally verified, retires from the game."---Karl Popper
I want to let you in on a dirty little secret.
According to Karl Popper's Theory of the Scientific Method above, Mary Schweitzer and team have retired from the game.
They have decided that scientific statements do not call for any further test; specifically, the scientific statement that Mary's Dino Bones are scores of millions of years old.
They have also departed from the scientific method as elaborated by Popper in these specific ways:
"Every "good" scientific theory is a prohibition: it forbids certain things to happen. The more a theory forbids, the better it is."
>>Evolution forbids Cretaceous fossils to be significantly <65mya.
"A theory which is not refutable by any conceivable event is non-scientific."
>>If evolution is not refutable by the conceivable event that a Cretaceous fossil is found to be <<65mya, then it is non-scientific, that is: it is a metaphysical, not a scientific, research program.
"Irrefutability is not a virtue of a theory (as people often think) but a vice."
>>If evolution is not refutable by ANY conceivable event then it is non-scientific, that is: it is a metaphysical, not a scientific, research program.
"Every genuine test of a theory is an attempt to falsify it, or to refute it."
Any genuine test of evolution in the face of Mary's Bones will be seen to be an attempt to falsify it, or to refute it. If the test is seen to be, instead, an attempt to defend or support evolution, then we are dealing with a metaphysical, not a scientific, research program.
"Testability is falsifiability; but there are degrees of testability: some theories are more testable, more exposed to refutation, than others; they take, as it were, greater risks."
>>Evolution forbids Cretaceous fossils to be significantly <65mya.
This represents a testable, risky part of the theory of evolution if and only if:
Any genuine test of evolution in the face of Mary's Bones will be seen to be an attempt to falsify it, or to refute it. If the test is seen to be, instead, an attempt to defend or support it, then we are dealing with a metaphysical, not a scientific, research program.
C14 testing Mary’s Bones is a genuine attempt to falsify, or refute, the risky prediction of evolution that Cretaceous fossils cannot be <<65mya. “Long age biopreservation” is not a genuine attempt to falsify, or refute, the risky prediction of ToE that Cretaceous fossils cannot be <<65mya.
Therefore, if “long age biopreservation” research is chosen over C14 testing of Mary’s Bones, then: we are dealing with a metaphysical, not a scientific, research program.
“Long age biopreservation” research has in fact been chosen over C14 testing- therefore:
we are dealing with a metaphysical, not a scientific, research program.
"Confirming evidence should not count except when it is the result of a genuine test of the theory; and this means that it can be presented as a serious but unsuccessful attempt to falsify the theory. (I now speak in such cases of "corroborating evidence.")
>>Since attempts to explore long-age biopreservation are not a genuine test of the theory, they should not count as confirming evidence, because they cannot be considered a serious attempt to falsify the theory.
Therefore, “long age biopreservation” research, chosen in preference to C14 dating, and excluding C14 dating altogether, confirms we are dealing with a metaphysical, not a scientific, research program.
“Some genuinely testable theories, when found to be false, are still upheld by their admirers — for example by introducing ad hoc some auxiliary assumption, or by reinterpreting the theory ad hoc in such a way that it escapes refutation. Such a procedure is always possible, but it rescues the theory from refutation only at the price of destroying, or at least lowering, its scientific status. (I later described such a rescuing operation as a "conventionalist twist" or a "conventionalist stratagem.")
>>“Long age biopreservation” is, exactly, a “conventionalist twist”; a “conventionalist strategem”. It is justifiable only on the basis of a metaphysical conception of science- “leading paradigm”- which is directly contradictory to the actual, distinctive characteristic of science: falsifiability of “leading paradigm”.
Therefore any preference of “long age biopreservation” research, over the crucial experimental test of C14 dating, confirms:
we are dealing with a metaphysical, not a scientific, research program.
[I]“One can sum up all this by saying that the criterion of the scientific status of a theory is its falsifiability, or refutability, or testability.”[I]
In the face of the refusal to C14 date Mary’s Bones, it is established that the theory of evolution, the neo-Darwinian synthesis and its timeline, is not the result of a scientific research program.
It is a metaphysical research program, and should be assessed as such.
<<65mya Cretaceous fossils cannot be accounted for within the consistent predictions of the ToE.
I conclude:
The Darwinian theory is a metaphysical, not a scientific, research program.
I point out that this episode has now reached the stage of outright, grotesque scandal.
If there is anyone who is prepared to understand why the entire research program into soft tissue preservation is a profound departure from the authentic scientific method; that is, if anyone can see what experiment was *not* done, which renders this entire episode scandalous and a true perversion of scientific method, I would like to hear from you.
If I do not, then my next post will explain why this is so.
UPDATE DECEMBER 2 2013:
"The game of science is, in principle, without end. He who decides one day that scientific statements do not call for any further test, and that they can be regarded as finally verified, retires from the game."---Karl Popper
- Ch. 2 "On the Problem of a Theory of Scientific Method", Section XI: Methodological Rules as Conventions
I want to let you in on a dirty little secret.
According to Karl Popper's Theory of the Scientific Method above, Mary Schweitzer and team have retired from the game.
They have decided that scientific statements do not call for any further test; specifically, the scientific statement that Mary's Dino Bones are scores of millions of years old.
They have also departed from the scientific method as elaborated by Popper in these specific ways:
"Every "good" scientific theory is a prohibition: it forbids certain things to happen. The more a theory forbids, the better it is."
>>Evolution forbids Cretaceous fossils to be significantly <65mya.
"A theory which is not refutable by any conceivable event is non-scientific."
>>If evolution is not refutable by the conceivable event that a Cretaceous fossil is found to be <<65mya, then it is non-scientific, that is: it is a metaphysical, not a scientific, research program.
"Irrefutability is not a virtue of a theory (as people often think) but a vice."
>>If evolution is not refutable by ANY conceivable event then it is non-scientific, that is: it is a metaphysical, not a scientific, research program.
"Every genuine test of a theory is an attempt to falsify it, or to refute it."
Any genuine test of evolution in the face of Mary's Bones will be seen to be an attempt to falsify it, or to refute it. If the test is seen to be, instead, an attempt to defend or support evolution, then we are dealing with a metaphysical, not a scientific, research program.
"Testability is falsifiability; but there are degrees of testability: some theories are more testable, more exposed to refutation, than others; they take, as it were, greater risks."
>>Evolution forbids Cretaceous fossils to be significantly <65mya.
This represents a testable, risky part of the theory of evolution if and only if:
Any genuine test of evolution in the face of Mary's Bones will be seen to be an attempt to falsify it, or to refute it. If the test is seen to be, instead, an attempt to defend or support it, then we are dealing with a metaphysical, not a scientific, research program.
C14 testing Mary’s Bones is a genuine attempt to falsify, or refute, the risky prediction of evolution that Cretaceous fossils cannot be <<65mya. “Long age biopreservation” is not a genuine attempt to falsify, or refute, the risky prediction of ToE that Cretaceous fossils cannot be <<65mya.
Therefore, if “long age biopreservation” research is chosen over C14 testing of Mary’s Bones, then: we are dealing with a metaphysical, not a scientific, research program.
“Long age biopreservation” research has in fact been chosen over C14 testing- therefore:
we are dealing with a metaphysical, not a scientific, research program.
"Confirming evidence should not count except when it is the result of a genuine test of the theory; and this means that it can be presented as a serious but unsuccessful attempt to falsify the theory. (I now speak in such cases of "corroborating evidence.")
>>Since attempts to explore long-age biopreservation are not a genuine test of the theory, they should not count as confirming evidence, because they cannot be considered a serious attempt to falsify the theory.
Therefore, “long age biopreservation” research, chosen in preference to C14 dating, and excluding C14 dating altogether, confirms we are dealing with a metaphysical, not a scientific, research program.
“Some genuinely testable theories, when found to be false, are still upheld by their admirers — for example by introducing ad hoc some auxiliary assumption, or by reinterpreting the theory ad hoc in such a way that it escapes refutation. Such a procedure is always possible, but it rescues the theory from refutation only at the price of destroying, or at least lowering, its scientific status. (I later described such a rescuing operation as a "conventionalist twist" or a "conventionalist stratagem.")
>>“Long age biopreservation” is, exactly, a “conventionalist twist”; a “conventionalist strategem”. It is justifiable only on the basis of a metaphysical conception of science- “leading paradigm”- which is directly contradictory to the actual, distinctive characteristic of science: falsifiability of “leading paradigm”.
Therefore any preference of “long age biopreservation” research, over the crucial experimental test of C14 dating, confirms:
we are dealing with a metaphysical, not a scientific, research program.
[I]“One can sum up all this by saying that the criterion of the scientific status of a theory is its falsifiability, or refutability, or testability.”[I]
In the face of the refusal to C14 date Mary’s Bones, it is established that the theory of evolution, the neo-Darwinian synthesis and its timeline, is not the result of a scientific research program.
It is a metaphysical research program, and should be assessed as such.
<<65mya Cretaceous fossils cannot be accounted for within the consistent predictions of the ToE.
I conclude:
The Darwinian theory is a metaphysical, not a scientific, research program.
Saturday, November 30, 2013
"The Principle" Update!
On Friday, November 15, I screened "The Principle" for a very influential film financier, who has put up the initial financing for the theatrical release of some of the most successful films in history.
In order to determine the "want to see" which exists "out there", we have decided to conduct a two week viral marketing test of the film.
We are scheduled to release our trailer, launch our Facebook page, and commence the marketing test on Monday, December 9 (fingers crossed that we can have everything ready!).
If we are able to secure a strong degree of interest as demonstrated by visits to our page and views of our trailer, we will receive a funding commitment for a theatrical release of "The Principle".
Please visit here for the link, probably by the latter part of next week, and please help us achieve our target by visiting our page and viewing our trailer.
I expect a quite animated discussion will quickly commence on the Facebook page as well ;-)
In order to determine the "want to see" which exists "out there", we have decided to conduct a two week viral marketing test of the film.
We are scheduled to release our trailer, launch our Facebook page, and commence the marketing test on Monday, December 9 (fingers crossed that we can have everything ready!).
If we are able to secure a strong degree of interest as demonstrated by visits to our page and views of our trailer, we will receive a funding commitment for a theatrical release of "The Principle".
Please visit here for the link, probably by the latter part of next week, and please help us achieve our target by visiting our page and viewing our trailer.
I expect a quite animated discussion will quickly commence on the Facebook page as well ;-)
Tuesday, November 26, 2013
Quasar Polarization Shows Preferred Direction- The Equatorial Plane of Earth!
This new paper digs more deeply into earlier observations reported on this blog, concerning the evidence that optical polarization vectors for quasars are not random, as the Copernican Principle predicts (assumes).
Instead, the preferred direction is related to the equatorial plane of Earth- aligned with the cosmological dipole, now known to define a preferred direction observed to span the entire universe, not only in the CMB, but in large scale structure including quasar and radio source distributions, and Type 1aSupernovae distributions.
Excerpt:
"The Principle" trailer and Facebook page will launch in the next ten days.
Watch here for links.
Instead, the preferred direction is related to the equatorial plane of Earth- aligned with the cosmological dipole, now known to define a preferred direction observed to span the entire universe, not only in the CMB, but in large scale structure including quasar and radio source distributions, and Type 1aSupernovae distributions.
Excerpt:
Thus the u1 and u2 Maxwell vectors of the 183 QSO sample determine a near-Equatorial
coordinate system which has directions determined by the plane of the Earth’s equator.
Other planets have other equatorial planes, so the coincidence suggests a local deflection of
polarization vectors, which without convincing corroboration must be deemed unlikely. The
interesting outcome is that a preferred coordinate system is determined by QSO polarization
vectors.
"The Principle" trailer and Facebook page will launch in the next ten days.
Watch here for links.
Friday, November 22, 2013
You Can Kiss The Cosmological Constant Explanation for Isotropic GRB's Goodbye.....Yet Another Observational Evidence for Earth at the Center of the Universe
Those of you who have read "Galileo Was Wrong" know about a puzzling observation concerning the isotropic distribution of Gamma Ray Bursts:
"No longer could astronomers hope that the Copernican dilemma would disappear with improved data. The data were in hand, and their implication inescapable: we are at the center of a spherically symmetric distribution of gamma-ray-burst sources, and this distribution has an outer edge. Beyond this edge the density of burst sources decreases to insignificance."---Jonathan Katz, The Biggest Bangs, p. 111.
Well, you can kiss that argument goodbye.
And so yet another Copernican dilemma returns front and center, just in time for "The Principle".
UPDATE 12/8: A letter to the editor submitted to Astronomy and Astrophysics in January of 2013 suggests that the Copernican challenge for GRB's is even much, much greater than this.......
"We observe that the dipolar and quadripolar moments of the selected subsamples of FREDs are found more than two standard deviations outside those of random isotropically generated samples. The most probable degree of contamination by Galactic sources for the FRED GRBs of the Swift catalog detected until February 2011 that do not have a known redshift is about 21 out of 77 sources, which represents roughly 27%. Furthermore, we observe that by removing from this sample those bursts that have any type of indirect redshift indicator and multiple peaks, the most probable contamination increases to 34% (17 out of 49 sources).
Conclusions. It is probable that a high degree of contamination by Galactic sources occurs among the single-peak FREDs observed by Swift. Accordingly we encourage additional studies on these type of events to determine the nature of what could be an exotic type of Galactic source."
Tuesday, November 12, 2013
Discovery Institute on Another Challenge to the Copernican Principle
h/t to Velika Bluna......
You've heard about the 8.8 billion Earths out there, right?
Well now.
Eight point eight billion Earths, some of which would be billions of years older than us, under Copernican Principle assumptions.......
Where is everybody?
Discovery Institute has started to focus on the Copernican Principle.
The timing is certainly right ;-)
You've heard about the 8.8 billion Earths out there, right?
Well now.
Eight point eight billion Earths, some of which would be billions of years older than us, under Copernican Principle assumptions.......
Where is everybody?
Discovery Institute has started to focus on the Copernican Principle.
The timing is certainly right ;-)
Sunday, November 10, 2013
"Struck By The Quality Of Nothingness The Experiment Had Revealed....."
An absolutely epic insight into the exact nature of the post scientific method.
“They have not found dark matter,” said one particle theorist, who was struck by the quality of the nothingness the experiment had revealed.
Tuesday, November 5, 2013
Friday, October 25, 2013
Adam and Eve and Ted and Alice
Dogmas are lost, not through reversal, but through abandonment.
We lost the Catholic oekonomia through the abandonment of the condemnation of usury.
The entire world totters on the brink of economic collapse because of the metastasis of usury.
We lost the Catholic cosmos through the abandonment of the condemnation of heliocentrism.
Our children laugh at the stupidity of the idea that we are special, or significant, because of the logical development of Copernicanism.
We are losing the Great Commission through the abandonment of the dogma of original sin.
How is it that no one can see that when the Church accommodates Herself to the world, the world is plunged into darkness?
Make no mistake. The modernists are targeting original sin.
It is the last obstacle to the New Pantheon.
Only the Traditionalists will resist.
Everyone else will compromise, until the time comes for full surrender.
Adam and Eve and Ted and Alice.
Trust me, most will find a way to persuade themselves that this is Catholic.
Tuesday, October 22, 2013
New Sci Am Article: "Leading Dark Energy Theory Incompatible with New Measurement"
"The latest observations of exploding stars could call into question the cosmological constant explanation of dark energy"
The tragic beauty of science is most poignant when the violation of a beautiful theory by ruthlessly incompatible observations reaches the tipping point.
We are there.
The tragic beauty of science is most poignant when the violation of a beautiful theory by ruthlessly incompatible observations reaches the tipping point.
We are there.
Saturday, October 19, 2013
"The Cosmological Principle Assumes..........."
This one slipped by somehow, late last month.
Herewith, yet another in a now rapidly-accumulating series of papers addressing the observed existence of an intrinsic, preferred direction in the Universe, one which is aligned with the CMB dipole, but which cannot be attributed to the assumed motion of the Earth.
As the introductory paragraphs affirm, the Copernican/cosmological Principle- the bedrock assumption underlying our present, Big-Bang, LCDM cosmology- is finding itself seriously challenged by the observations of modern, precision cosmology:
What needs to be kept in mind during the discussion is the Elephant in the Room, which is only rarely mentioned.
The preferred direction detected in the CMB, and in the radio sky, is not jes' any ol' little preferred direction.....
This direction points at Earth- at US.
Our equator.
Our ecliptic.
Which is manifestly impossible to predict, or explain, under Big Bang LCDM assumptions.
Stay tuned.
The Big Guns, aka Copi, Huterer, Starkman, Schwartz, have a new paper coming soon, based on the Planck satellite data, and addressing these "Axis of Evil" alignments in the CMB.....
Herewith, yet another in a now rapidly-accumulating series of papers addressing the observed existence of an intrinsic, preferred direction in the Universe, one which is aligned with the CMB dipole, but which cannot be attributed to the assumed motion of the Earth.
As the introductory paragraphs affirm, the Copernican/cosmological Principle- the bedrock assumption underlying our present, Big-Bang, LCDM cosmology- is finding itself seriously challenged by the observations of modern, precision cosmology:
The Cosmological principle assumes that the universe is homogeneous and isotropic on large
distance scales. It asserts that there is no special direction in the universe. This assumption
leads to the Standard Big Bang Cosmology. But with the modern era of precision cosmology,
evidence has been collecting indicating towards deviation from this assumption.
What needs to be kept in mind during the discussion is the Elephant in the Room, which is only rarely mentioned.
The preferred direction detected in the CMB, and in the radio sky, is not jes' any ol' little preferred direction.....
This direction points at Earth- at US.
Our equator.
Our ecliptic.
Which is manifestly impossible to predict, or explain, under Big Bang LCDM assumptions.
Stay tuned.
The Big Guns, aka Copi, Huterer, Starkman, Schwartz, have a new paper coming soon, based on the Planck satellite data, and addressing these "Axis of Evil" alignments in the CMB.....
Thursday, October 3, 2013
The Evidence Continues to Come In- The Universe Has a Special Direction, Pointing At Earth!
Today's contribution includes the following observations:
Translation: If the Universe is expanding, then its expansion is with respect to the "Local Group" (that is, where we are), rather than with respect to the Cosmic Microwave Background (which the Copernican Principle would allow).
Translation: The cosmic rest frame appears to be the Local Group (where we are), since the CMB dipole cannot be attributed to the supposed motion of the Earth/LG through space. This is a dramatic and potentially conclusive falsification of the fundamental assumption of cosmology: The Copernican Principle.
With no cosmological
assumptions other than the existence of a suitably averaged linear Hubble law, we find with decisive
Bayesian evidence (lnB ≫ 5) that the Hubble constant averaged in independent spherical radial
shells is closer to its asymptotic value when referred to the rest frame of the Local Group (LG),
rather than the standard rest frame of the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB).
Translation: If the Universe is expanding, then its expansion is with respect to the "Local Group" (that is, where we are), rather than with respect to the Cosmic Microwave Background (which the Copernican Principle would allow).
Our results clearly show, however,
that for spherical (monopole) averages the Hubble flow
is closer to being uniform in the frame of the LG or LS,
rather than the frame indicated by treating the CMB
dipole as being entirely due to a boost.
Translation: "Boost" above, means the assumed motion of the Local Group through space.
This is completely unexpected in the standard framework, since the cosmic rest frame and the frame of minimum Hubble flow variance should be one and the same.
Translation: "Boost" above, means the assumed motion of the Local Group through space.
These results are difficult to reconcile with the standard kinematic interpretation of the Local Group moving in response to the gravitational attraction of the
clustering dipole.
Translation: These results are difficult to reconcile with the foundational assumption of modern cosmology, the Copernican Principle.
Translation: These results are difficult to reconcile with the foundational assumption of modern cosmology, the Copernican Principle.
This is completely unexpected in the standard framework, since the cosmic rest frame and the frame of minimum Hubble flow variance should be one and the same.
Translation: The cosmic rest frame appears to be the Local Group (where we are), since the CMB dipole cannot be attributed to the supposed motion of the Earth/LG through space. This is a dramatic and potentially conclusive falsification of the fundamental assumption of cosmology: The Copernican Principle.
This suggestion challenges a basic assumption of observational cosmology, and if upheld by future investigations, will clearly have important consequences.
"The Principle" is the most important film you are going to see next year. We have been telling you that all of modern cosmology is faced with observations so dramatically at odds with the "we're nothing special" Copernican Principle, that we could be on the verge of the most profound shift in our view of the cosmos and our place in it since......well, since Copernicus!
I am forwarding this paper to several cosmologists and physicists who appear in, or have consulted with, "The Principle", and hope to have more soon........
"The Principle" is the most important film you are going to see next year. We have been telling you that all of modern cosmology is faced with observations so dramatically at odds with the "we're nothing special" Copernican Principle, that we could be on the verge of the most profound shift in our view of the cosmos and our place in it since......well, since Copernicus!
I am forwarding this paper to several cosmologists and physicists who appear in, or have consulted with, "The Principle", and hope to have more soon........
Saturday, September 28, 2013
Apologies for Not Being Able to Repeat the Sneak Peak.......
We had a security problem with the Vimeo platform when we put the opening of "The Principle" up last week.
Thankfully, this was a case of a friend of the film who was trying to allow others who had missed the Sneak Peak a chance to see it, and everything is back under control now.
We simply cannot risk any compromise of the film before we are ready.
Very serious negotiations are underway for a theatrical release of "The Principle", and so we will be unable to repeat the Sneak Peak on Vimeo.
Thanks to the many, many viewers who not only accessed the Sneak Peak, but told their friends, and our apologies to those that missed it that we will be unable to repeat the process on Vimeo.
Thankfully, this was a case of a friend of the film who was trying to allow others who had missed the Sneak Peak a chance to see it, and everything is back under control now.
We simply cannot risk any compromise of the film before we are ready.
Very serious negotiations are underway for a theatrical release of "The Principle", and so we will be unable to repeat the Sneak Peak on Vimeo.
Thanks to the many, many viewers who not only accessed the Sneak Peak, but told their friends, and our apologies to those that missed it that we will be unable to repeat the process on Vimeo.
Wednesday, September 25, 2013
Stonehenge as Geocentric Cosmology
One of the things that I think is important about "The Principle" is that it introduces, sometimes very briefly, ideas and concepts which can be further investigated by those who are introduced to them through the film.
Those of you who saw the opening sequence the other night will recall the beautiful animation of Stonehenge by BUF Compagnie, Paris, which proposes that Stonehenge was in fact an astronomical observatory, constructed as a sort of "proof of principle" demonstration of the geocentric cosmos.
This thesis was developed recently by the UK researcher and writer Jon Morris.
Jon's remarkable research into Stonehenge led to a very extensive exchange of emails between us as we were developing the Stonehenge animation sequence, and I was happy to receive news from Jon today that his thesis is progressively gaining more and more acceptance within the academic world.
We hope to have Jon on at "The Principle" website when we launch.........soon!
Those of you who saw the opening sequence the other night will recall the beautiful animation of Stonehenge by BUF Compagnie, Paris, which proposes that Stonehenge was in fact an astronomical observatory, constructed as a sort of "proof of principle" demonstration of the geocentric cosmos.
This thesis was developed recently by the UK researcher and writer Jon Morris.
Jon's remarkable research into Stonehenge led to a very extensive exchange of emails between us as we were developing the Stonehenge animation sequence, and I was happy to receive news from Jon today that his thesis is progressively gaining more and more acceptance within the academic world.
We hope to have Jon on at "The Principle" website when we launch.........soon!
Monday, September 23, 2013
Many Thanks To All Who Viewed "The Principle" Opening!
We wanted to show some distribution/marketing folks that there is a lot of "want to see" out there, and boy did we!
Thanks to all, and please spread the word.......I will post an update concerning the outcome of upcoming screenings for theatrical distribution soon!
Thanks to all, and please spread the word.......I will post an update concerning the outcome of upcoming screenings for theatrical distribution soon!
Sunday, September 22, 2013
Saturday, September 14, 2013
"The Principle" Update
At long last!!!
"The Principle" fine cut is complete.
This is essentially the finished film, except:
1. The music score is temporary
2. The sound mix is temporary
3. There is minimal sound design/sound effects
4. There is no color correction
5. There are no end titles/credits
We save these things for last, in case we decide to make final changes as a result of screenings for distributors, which begin next week!
Please keep our project in your prayers.
The rubber is about to meet the road ;-)
"The Principle" fine cut is complete.
This is essentially the finished film, except:
1. The music score is temporary
2. The sound mix is temporary
3. There is minimal sound design/sound effects
4. There is no color correction
5. There are no end titles/credits
We save these things for last, in case we decide to make final changes as a result of screenings for distributors, which begin next week!
Please keep our project in your prayers.
The rubber is about to meet the road ;-)
Thursday, August 29, 2013
Chinese Water Torture, Or, How The Axis Of Evil Is Coming Back To Haunt Consensus Cosmology
Drip.........drip.....drip.............
A interesting paper (re)appeared on the arxiv.org preprint site a few days back, on August 26, 2013.
When you want to know about the Axis of Evil, how it has been claimed to be a foreground, a scanning beam error, a data reduction error, an artifact of the attempt to clean the CMB maps, etc.....
You will quickly find yourself looking very carefully for any papers on the subject from the team Copi, Huterer, Starkman, Schwarz.
These guys have been doing the heavy lifting on the Axis for years.
What is interesting about the new paper is that it is not new.
It is a revision.
The paper appeared in the Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society back in 2008.
Here is a very interesting excerpt:
Nota bene: iii and iv are both ruled out by Planck. Which leaves i and ii :-)
My guess- it is no more than that- is that the Copi Huterer Starkman Schwarz team are about ready to come out with new papers incorporating the Planck data, and this revision is part of the groundwork.
Stay tuned!
A interesting paper (re)appeared on the arxiv.org preprint site a few days back, on August 26, 2013.
When you want to know about the Axis of Evil, how it has been claimed to be a foreground, a scanning beam error, a data reduction error, an artifact of the attempt to clean the CMB maps, etc.....
You will quickly find yourself looking very carefully for any papers on the subject from the team Copi, Huterer, Starkman, Schwarz.
These guys have been doing the heavy lifting on the Axis for years.
What is interesting about the new paper is that it is not new.
It is a revision.
The paper appeared in the Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society back in 2008.
Here is a very interesting excerpt:
"One is therefore placed between a rock and a hard place. If the WMAP ILC is a reliable reconstruction of the full-sky CMB, then there is overwhelming evidence (de Oliveira-Costa et al. (2004); Eriksen et al. (2004); Copi et al. (2004); Schwarz et al. (2004); Copi et al. (2006); Copi et al. (2007); Land & Magueijo (2005a,b,c,d); Raki ́c & Schwarz (2007); for a review see Huterer (2006)) of extremely unlikely phase alignments between (at least) the quadrupole and octopole and between these multipoles and the geometry of the Solar System — a violation of statistical isotropy that happens by random chance in far less than 0.025 per cent of random realizations of the standard cosmology. If, on the other hand, the part of the ILC (and band maps) inside the Galaxy are unreliable as measurements of the true CMB, then the alignment of low-l multipoles can- not be readily tested, but the magnitude of the two-point angular correlation function on large angular scales outside the Galaxy is smaller than would be seen in all but a few of every 10,000 realizations.
We can only conclude that (i) we don’t live in a standard ΛCDM Universe with a standard inflationary early history; (ii) we live in an extremely anomalous realization of that cosmology; (iii) there is a major error in the observations of both COBE and WMAP; or (iv) there is a major error in the reduction to maps performed by both COBE and WMAP. Whichever of these is correct, inferences from the large-angle data about precise values of the parameters of the standard cosmological model should be regarded with particular skepticism."
Nota bene: iii and iv are both ruled out by Planck. Which leaves i and ii :-)
My guess- it is no more than that- is that the Copi Huterer Starkman Schwarz team are about ready to come out with new papers incorporating the Planck data, and this revision is part of the groundwork.
Stay tuned!
Tuesday, August 27, 2013
On The Hypotheses Which Underlie the Digital Areopagus..........
The disaster at the Digital Areopagus continues.
Having silenced all the interesting voices- well, not all- the site is collapsing, at least as measured in volume of comments and contributors.
Why?
Because the site is premised upon a false assumption.
The site desires to excommunicate all those who passionately believe the difference between atheism and Catholicism matters, and matters enough to fight for.
Brandon has failed because Brandon is an Abandon-The-Bastions neo-Catholic.
The world has already rejected this Neo-Catholicism, and why not?
It is a disgraceful perversion of the Faith; its triumph in the post-conciliar age has coincided with the most awful collapse of Catholic Faith and morals in history.
By their fruits you shall know them.
Now.
I have a contrary hypothesis.
I believe we need, not a Digital Areopagus, but a Digital Lepanto.
I would be willing to join with atheists and agnostics in financially contributing to a site, the moderation of which would be in the hands of a council of contributors, each of whom contribute equally financially toward the upkeep of the site, and all of whom must agree in order for any Memoryholing of any kind to take place.
Brandon's idea was great.
His execution was profoundly poor.
This offer stands.
Any takers?
Having silenced all the interesting voices- well, not all- the site is collapsing, at least as measured in volume of comments and contributors.
Why?
Because the site is premised upon a false assumption.
The site desires to excommunicate all those who passionately believe the difference between atheism and Catholicism matters, and matters enough to fight for.
Brandon has failed because Brandon is an Abandon-The-Bastions neo-Catholic.
The world has already rejected this Neo-Catholicism, and why not?
It is a disgraceful perversion of the Faith; its triumph in the post-conciliar age has coincided with the most awful collapse of Catholic Faith and morals in history.
By their fruits you shall know them.
Now.
I have a contrary hypothesis.
I believe we need, not a Digital Areopagus, but a Digital Lepanto.
I would be willing to join with atheists and agnostics in financially contributing to a site, the moderation of which would be in the hands of a council of contributors, each of whom contribute equally financially toward the upkeep of the site, and all of whom must agree in order for any Memoryholing of any kind to take place.
Brandon's idea was great.
His execution was profoundly poor.
This offer stands.
Any takers?
Monday, August 19, 2013
Copernican Principle, RIP, Continued: Earth-Oriented Preferred Direction Confirmed at 8 Sigma!
Extending recent studies on the radio sky dipole, this one reports the preferred direction to be detected at 8 sigma in flux-density measurements.
Excerpt:
"There now exist many independent observations which indicate a preferred direction pointing roughly towards Virgo. It is unlikely that all of them can be explained by some systematic effect. For example, the NVSS data is more likely to pick a preferred axis pointing towards the poles due to systematic effect arising due to sources with low flux (Blake & Wall 2002). The direction observed, however, is nearly perpendicular to that. The dependence of direction with the cut on flux density might be explained by this systematic effect. This is consistent with our observation that the direction parameters are stable for the case of flux weighted (Kothari et al. 2013) and polarization flux weighted number counts. Furthermore it seems very unlikely that systematic effects would pick the same direction in so many different observations, i.e. radio polarizations orientations (Jain & Ralston 1999), optical polarizations (Hutsem ́ekers 1998), CMBR quadrupole and octopole (de Oliveira-Costa et al. 2004), radio number counts (Blake & Wall 2002; Singal 2011) and radio polarization flux (present work). In all likelihood this alignment of axes (Ralston & Jain 2004) is caused by a physical effect."
Excerpt:
"There now exist many independent observations which indicate a preferred direction pointing roughly towards Virgo. It is unlikely that all of them can be explained by some systematic effect. For example, the NVSS data is more likely to pick a preferred axis pointing towards the poles due to systematic effect arising due to sources with low flux (Blake & Wall 2002). The direction observed, however, is nearly perpendicular to that. The dependence of direction with the cut on flux density might be explained by this systematic effect. This is consistent with our observation that the direction parameters are stable for the case of flux weighted (Kothari et al. 2013) and polarization flux weighted number counts. Furthermore it seems very unlikely that systematic effects would pick the same direction in so many different observations, i.e. radio polarizations orientations (Jain & Ralston 1999), optical polarizations (Hutsem ́ekers 1998), CMBR quadrupole and octopole (de Oliveira-Costa et al. 2004), radio number counts (Blake & Wall 2002; Singal 2011) and radio polarization flux (present work). In all likelihood this alignment of axes (Ralston & Jain 2004) is caused by a physical effect."
Friday, August 16, 2013
REPOST: How Civil Unions Destroyed Marriage In America
To mark the final abdication of the rule of law in the Former Republic of California, a repost.
This is how we lost marriage in this disintegrating nation.
I reproduce my response below, from the comments section of this blog , to a decent, compassionate, Christian commentator "Anonymous", whose comments provide an insight into why it is that we now stand on the very knife's edge of surrendering the power to rewrite the marriage laws into the hands of a very dark, very violent, very fascist movement determined to use those laws to indoctrinate children into homosexualist anti-values in public schools, without the slightest ability on the part of the children or the parents to do a single thing about it.
The tactic is an old one.
Ask the Trojans.
About the Horse.
****************************************
"I think much of the support for redefining marriage comes from a sense of compassion for the rights of others."
>> Exactly. It was framed as a civil rights issue from the beginning, by very smart and committed people who understand how to push the right buttons in an electorate (as well as a Catholic Church) which has a long and proud history of responding to civil rights issues.
Of course, it never was a civil rights issue at all. I will prove it in a moment.
A: "However, truth matters as well,"
>> Truth can never be opposed to truth. If it were ever the case that a civil right was being denied SSA individuals, then truth would be on the side of the same sex marriage movement.
Truth has never been on the side of the SSM movement, because there was never a civil rights issue involved in the first place.
I will prove it in a moment.
A: "and the truth is that the sexual union of a man and a woman potentially can produce a child. There is a level of responsibility that exists in this particular type of relationship that is unique because of that. The commitment made by a man and a woman in marriage provides the best situation for raising the children produced by their sexual union in a stable and loving relationship."
>> Now *that* is the truth. Every syllable.
A: "On the other hand, there are rights that should be available to those in loving and committed relationships, but I would like to suggest that these relationships extend to a broader group than those in sexually active relationships. There are widows who live together after the deaths of their husbands, adult siblings who form a household, divorced mothers who support each other in raising their children together who just as much as same sex couple would benefit from many of the rights given to married couples."
>> Sigh.
There it is.
This is why we now stand at the very precipice of handing the power to rewrite the marriage laws to a movement that is implacably determined to employ those laws as the basis for sophisticated indoctrination of every public school pupil in America in homosexualist anti-values, *values which are profoundly in opposition to both Faith, and reason.*
The SSM movement insists that, somehow, the rights society has always extended to married couples,, *ought to be extended to ____________ (fill in whatever category you are sympathetic to, it doesn't matter which)........once the idea that marriage *rights* ought to be given to *non-married* people, the list will have no end. It cannot possibly have an end, because the foundational assumption of SSM has been implicitly granted, and that point is this:
There is no such thing as marriage!
Marriage is simply another word for Federal Friendship Benefits. Or widow benefits. Or couples benefits. Or any other kind of Federal benefits.
Marriage is simply a word that refers to (for now) two *people* who want to *commit* to each other (until they don't).
*Having bought into this, defeat is utterly certain*.
The SSM movement *always knew it, it was their strategy from the beginning to manipulate the compassion of people of Faith so they would surrender their religious liberty, and their children as well, before finally waking up to the scam- too late.
Here we get to the point where I can demonstrate the proof I promised earlier, that SSM was *never in any way about civil rights*.
A: "That does not mean we should redefine marriage to include all these loving and committed relationships, but perhaps we do need to find a way to extend rights without diminishing the importance of marriage for the stability and future of our children and our society."
>> God bless you and your Christian heart, Anonymous. You have been duped, effortlessly.
*All of those rights were specifically granted, in the form of civil unions, and the very next morning the lawsuit challenging marriage on 14th Amendment grounds was filed*.
*It was always planned that way*.
Because, you see, if the law limits marriage to gender-complementary couples *for good reason*- the very reasons you outline above!- then there *is no civil rights question involved for same sex couples concerning marriage!
*But*- and please admire the true sophistication and ferocious intelligence behind this ploy- *but* as soon as the principle has been established, in law, of the entitlement of same sex couples to the *rights and privileges previously extended by society only to married couples*.........
Now there *IS* a civil rights issue!
If they are entitled to the same rights and privileges, *there can be no basis at law to deny them the title MARRAIGE, since marriage has been defined out of existence in the very act of extending its benefits to non-married couples!
Of course these lawsuits succeeded.
It was always intended to dupe softhearted and compassionate and decent Catholics (and others) like you, Anonymous- into proposing the very solution which would doom marriage altogether.
It is my sad duty to have to tell you this.
It is my even sadder duty to tell you that in a better age, Catholic Bishops- REAL CATHOLIC BISHOPS- would have seen this coming ten miles off (that is what a Shepherd does- he sees the wolf before the flock does).......
Instead our bishops were completely blind.
As blind as you.
But it is not your fault.
It is, however, their fault.
May God, through the merciful intercession of His angels and saints, sealed with the irresistible plea of the Blessed Virgin Mother of God, protect us now.
Friday, August 9, 2013
Big Bang "Dipole Modulation" Model Cannot Account for Observations That Show the Universe Aligned With Earth
Here is the latest paper from the team previously reported on this blog, which has been examining the remarkable fact that the universe seems to be aligned with the equinoctial plane of supposedly-insignificant Earth.
First, a reiteration of the problem:
Second, a reference to the proposed solution from within the assumptions of consensus "Big Bang" cosmology:
Third, the bad news for the Copernicans:
Blood in the water, folks.
Young scientists are beginning to put things together.
Watch for "The Principle", almost complete now with incredible new animations, superb narration by Kate Mulgrew, and the first-ever high-definition visuals incorporating the observational evidence that our place in universe is very, very special......indeed, in important ways, very much like what we would have expected to see if the Scriptures and the Church had been right all along!
First, a reiteration of the problem:
"These observations suggest a violation of the
cosmological principle and might indicate that one needs a revision of the Big Bang cosmology."
Second, a reference to the proposed solution from within the assumptions of consensus "Big Bang" cosmology:
"It has been suggested that the anisotropic
modes, generated during the pre-inflationary phase might re-enter the horizon before the current
time [15–18]. Hence these might explain the observed anisotropy even within the framework of the
inflationary Big Bang model. "
Third, the bad news for the Copernicans:
"This suggests that the
hemispherical anisotropy found in [7–12] cannot be consistently attributed to the dipole modulation
model, Eq. 1.1. The true anisotropy model is likely to be more complicated and might contain higher
order multipoles."
Blood in the water, folks.
Young scientists are beginning to put things together.
Watch for "The Principle", almost complete now with incredible new animations, superb narration by Kate Mulgrew, and the first-ever high-definition visuals incorporating the observational evidence that our place in universe is very, very special......indeed, in important ways, very much like what we would have expected to see if the Scriptures and the Church had been right all along!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)