Saturday, March 15, 2014

Beautiful Affirmation Of the Importance of the Question Which Lies at the Heart of "The Principle"

The conversation seems to be expanding, as it often does when a given world view has reached the end of its rope, and the sense of an ending, of a dead end, suffuses a civilization.

"Cosmos" is the swan song of a dying and collapsing Scientism.

"The Principle" is the opening aria of that which will, of necessity, replace it.

This issue is not limited to the scientific front.

“You will sometimes hear people say that they have no metaphysics. Well, they are lying. Their metaphysics are implicit in what they take for granted about the world. Only they prefer to call it ‘common sense.’” Much of the burden of that little book, and indeed of most of what Barfield wrote, was to point out, and then call into question, what he considered the assumptions of the scientific view—to point out and then call into question, that is to say, its metaphysics, which for him formed the “subliminal boundaries of the contemporary mindscape.”


  1. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    1. I think you have posted on the wrong thread. Try again on the correct one.

  2. On The Principle fb page someone just posted a video of Neil deGrasse Tyson bloviating about how "stupid" design is. Basically, it is an adolescent rant about all the dumb things that show bad design: like, how most places kill life instantly; how all kinds of disasters happen on our planet; how we get sick & die etc... And therefore he is somehow mocking the idea of a Designer. I was reminded of your comment above that we are hearing Scientism's swan song, and it sounds hideous. This irrational rant, for example, is from a man who believes in the multiverse.

  3. I would say that Neil deGrasse Tyson has some very poor arguments against design, but what is MUCH MORE interesting is to notice that he is running out of time, on his "Cosmos" propaganda mission, to steal "The Principle"s thunder and tell the world that the CMB is aligned, and is pointing out a preferred direction across the cosmos, aligned with us.

    Now if the Big Guns intend to tell us the truth, then more power to them.

    If they don't, then "The Principle" is going to deliver to them a perfectly just and righteous smack down.

    We paid for this research, and we deserve to hear ALL the evidence.

    Not just the cherry picked evidence that supports the atheist materialist metaphysical worldview, which is, of course, laughably false were it not so massively destructive of the truth about humanity and our place in the cosmos.

    Tick tock, Neil and Seth……..


      The CMB Dipole and Quadripole; alignments from the farthest reaches of the known universe to the earth’s equator and ecliptic; artifacts of creation that reveal Gods handiwork.

      I just watched Bob Sungenis and Rick DeLano again for the third time on MilitantTv. Watching them, gets me so pumped up. At about 49:42 into it, Rick was talking about the earths’ 23.5 degree angle, and how it’s not just a phenomenon of our solar system, but that 23.5 degrees is built into the entire cosmos, but according to "big-bang" theory, the cosmos shouldn't have any idea how our earth and "local group" are oriented.

      So they have to somehow explain these alignments in terms of "big-bang" cosmology, but as Rick stretched out his arms, while describing these cosmological alignments, it occurred to me, what these alignments really are; these are really an artifact from creation; when "God stretched out the Heavens". Cool huh?

  4. It almost seems like a desperate strategy of noise distraction (not consciously, but perhaps there is some awareness of the fact that it's now an intensifying battle of competing word views more than anything): even if they can't deal with CMB alignment, they can create screaming anti-theist slogans through entertainment disguised as science. And on another front, the creation of screaming headlines about polarization, knowing well that the imminent release of Planck data may invalidate the 'discovery'.