Comments by "thewaytruthandlife" (@thewaytruthandlife) on "Sabine Hossenfelder" channel.

2:22 the Higgs boson proves the bible RIGHT again. what did Peter, The apostle of Jesus say: in 2 Peter3:10 he says: but the Day of the Lord will come as a thief; on that day the heavens will perish with a big noise and the elements will perish by fire .... ... 12b the day of God, due to which the heavens will persih burning and the elements will melt away in fire.. What was the higgs boson called (by a JEWISH) professor....right the GOD particle.... Now remember that the Bible is a JEWISH Book all of it. And it was PETER the apostle who made this remark. And it was PETER Higgs who discovered the Higgs Boson and the Higgs field. Coincidence ???????? NOPE ! just Gods plan to tell us people ad warn us for it... Now it turns out to be that the HIGGS field is instable and when it will decays... the entire UNIVERS (heavens) will perish by releasing ALL of its enormous energy due to which will make all the elements literally be burned in this energy release. EXACTLY as the simple fisher man Peter, by Gods inspiration wrote these predictions on paper. Now Peter predicted that this would happen at the day of the Lord. We know today that this day of the Lord will come in about 1000 to 1500 years from now. Now according to secular science this will be more tha billions of yrs from now, but I am sure that science will be clever enough to find out that this instability will NOT last billions of years, but indeed wil be more in the range of 1000's of yrs... is this all coincidence nnaaaah... dont think so......there are TOO many "coincideing facts"to be coincidentially.
1
https://www.iflscience.com/space/hawking-believes-higgs-field-could-wipe-out-universe-should-we-be-worried/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-the-higgs-boson-might-spell-doom-for-the-universe/ I m not talking about our solar system.. I am talking about the complete and entire UNIVERSE.... we are currently in a false vacuum, which is a vacuum that is inbetween a real vacuum and a higher energy state of being. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_vacuum but this situation is meta stable and can be broken via somthing like quantum tunneling. If that happens the entire universe collapses to the real vacuum. Now the Higgs field plays a crucial role in this proces seemingly. well secular science predicts this to happen in billion some years from now. now we as bible believig christians know that God Will stop the entire universe by destroying it including earth and all that we know. why ?? well simple... we messed up...... so God wants to start aver again in a new heaven and a new earth. But in order to do so God has to destroy this heaven and earth first as the bible clearly teaches us. and since the bible gives us some indication that the total earths history will last about 7000 yrs and we now live in close to the 6000th year there is about 1000 yrs left. now to give a more rougher estimate lets take 1000-1500 yrs.... thats how I got it. but that God will indeed destroy heaven and earth is a fact for the future. we will not live on earth to see it, bt it will happen non the less, God said so and there for it will happen.... God does not lie about it... and it confirms with modern day science (except for the date of happening)
1
IF a fine tuned universe was the only thing that points to God then you might have been right..... but there is much more.... and THAT is what you seem to forget. the fine tune argument is just 1 of many arguments to support God and what the bible tells us... Just 1 extra example: Another argument is the existance of the Higgs field and its associated particle the Higgs particle also known as the God particle (named so by the Jewish professor Leon lederman) which is unstable and will destroy the entire universe. Peter Higgs discovered this in the 1960-70's But the Jewish apostle Peter prophesized it about 2000 yrs ago as every one can read in 2 Peter 3 in the bible and more over he also gave a periode in which this would happen.... about 1000 to 1500 yrs from now on the Day Of God... so the God particle & its field collapses on the Day of God.
1
now you're scientist. How can life be there on other planets while it is not even confirmed here on our planet, not even under the upmost conditions, that it could have developed from chemicals ... That is scientificaly absurd and indeed a religious statement.... you have to BELIEVE in life on other planets since there is no proof for it. How can smart scientists be so ignorant in this area ? Let me put it scientifically: in measuring stuff all scientists are always discarting measurements beyond 5 or 6S right ??? those are considered outliers.... correct ? YET why are serious scientist still willing, when it comes to the origin of life to accept results of 20S and beyond ????? that makes absolutely NO sense to me. You see it takes random chance a probability of 1 in 10^300 to create a protein of ONLY 137 amino acids... With reaction speeds of 10^-9 seconds (under the MOST optimal conditions that is) this means nature requirs 10^300 * 10^-9 sec = 10^291 sec = 10^291/(60*60*24*365*1000 000 000) Billions of yrs = 3,171 *10^274 billions of years And this 10^300 turns out to be a 23S result statistically spoken... so how can you as a scientist accept a 23S (and beyond) result while for all other science measuremnets ONLY accept smaller then 5 maybe 6S results that is hypocritically inconsequent. Indeed that requires religious BELIEVE since scientifically it is (very mildy said) silly.
1
2:46 NO ITS NOT AGAINST SCIENCE.... science however isnt developed enough yet to see beyond the ONLY purely materialistic explanations. Clearly Near death experiences gives us a small glimpse into the non-materialistic point of view. People have died and went to the other side and seen things that can only be experience IF and ONLY IF it is true what they experinced. and this goes WAY WAY WAY beyond modernday science... materialistc science has NO explanation. because it is focussd on ONLY materialistic aspects of existing and NOT on spritual aspects of our existence.... for example that we are Created by God and that HE gave us a spirit and soul.... spirit and sould are NOT materialistic of origin... THUS are not sensible to materialistic experimentations
1
7:50 - 8:25 yeah and we Know Him as God Almighty or Jesus Christ who is the very same... He knows indeed all past present and future since He has all that knowledge... and He ordered some (scientific uneducated people) to write that down for us, to verifie that scientifically to be correct. Like the unstable Higgs field (2 peter3 vers 10-12) that will destroy the entire univers in about 1000-1300 yrs from now. Like the splitting of the mount of olives in the future, when Jesus returns and the fauld line down from ethiopia up to Turkey is already laying there to wait that moment. Like the atom bombs or nucleair explosions (maybe even from energy production) IF nations decide to attack Israel zacharia 14 Like the return of the Jewsih people to Israel Like the river Nile that is going to run dry in the nearby future etc etc
1
1:21 and the JWT is correct... there never was a big bang... why do scientists (who are looking for the truth) refuse to acknowledge that; in the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. Which is seemingly and again another observation. Why does science get God out of their equations ??? science should accept the facts even if they are improbable just as sir Conan Doyle said via his creation Sherlock Holmes. remove all impossibilities and the results that remain, no matter how improbable they may seem, must be the crrect answer. and that is what it is: God did it....
1
7:20 today it takes weeks to get this result in 10 yrs it will take 2 nano seconds...and it knows what you want to say befor you even said it.... extremely scary....
1
@Matt Bland I dont trust secular scientists... they really make up everything as long as they can erase "God did it" from their equations..... ..Just as in this video...
1
This is realy getting scary..... together with killing robots in the militairy... this is more and more looking like the Matrix, terminator, I robot etc... i dont want such a future.... I mean .....EVER !!!
1
Hi Sabine, I just wrote a little paper a few weeks ago, where with some patience and some DIY experimenting, maybe it is possibe to bring quantum mechanics to the living rooms. Granted it is very challenging and it may only achieve to set some upper limits. But it can be fun non the less for people. www.academia.edu/43976777/The_Young_s_2_slit_experiment_with_macroscopic_particles_brought_into_DIY_levels enjoy
1
galaxies too big to exist ..... no way.... it simply does not match with secular theories !! but it matches PERFECT WITH GOD DID IT
1
so predictibility will always remain the crock of gold at the end of the rainbow for us due to heisenberg meaning that predictablilty does for us humans does not exist. we can do some predictions but they will always be limited to a certain measure. a simple examlpe can show this we know Pi to only some billion digits but not entirely. BUT Pi is governing many physical laws non the less.... so in not knowing Pi to the max we will always remain in the dark to some extend... same for e, and other constants.....and these constants combined will make that we can never 100% predict with 100% accuracy ONTOP of our measuring limitations. measuring is always accompanied by errors of measurment... well there you go....
1
quantum mechanically spoken there is a small chance depending on the thickness of your skull (your energy barrier) !
1
2:34 Who claims (correctly) that God cannot be observed ? His actions are surely being observed world wide....healings, prophesies, science predictions 1000's of yrs before they actually happen...So only people with their eyes closed are not willing to SEE/OBSERVE. and pnly people with their ears closed are NOT willing to hear..... If you lay the historical facts next to the bible they all match with the prophesies and we CAN also SEE the prophesies meant for the future ARE BEING FULLFILLED right in front of our own eyes RIGHT NOW. Many prophesies are being realised as we are speaking right NOW !!!! BUT are YOU willing to SEE them.... THAT is the question.
1
The bible already fortold it al ready : professing themselves to be wise ... they became fools....romans 1:22
1
2:35 this was science WITHOUT the gobblygook right ? well that makes YOU YOU has NOTHING to do with the arrangement of particles the atoms are nothing but the biologiocal mechanism/machinery ... what makes YOU YOU is your spirit and soul ... which is somthing that science doesnt seem to recognize to be factuall real.. and which is unbound by matter.... it is part of a non materialistic reality... not part of physical reality. therefore NOT measurable.. and thus rearranging simply only atoms will always KILL an organism. science is focussed on the matter part of personalities not on the spiritual part of a person... therefor secular scinec cannot comprehend beyond the matter..... it is mind over matter what makes all the difference in this "matter".
1
3:05. We don’t NEED to know HOW God/Jesus heals people we only need to believe that He does. to receive healing from Him... and it is STILL happening to this very day. God is almighty and controls all laws that govern the Creation so He CAN do anything including healing people miraculously by altering atoms to the deepest core.
1
@happygimp0 Non the less factual and thus testable....BUT secular science people choose to REJECT the reality of it and thus dont do anythig with it, when it comes to embrasse it to the full so by doing so it remains outside of testable science. Just as sabine is doing here. seculars people THINK they have all the answewrs and they do NOT but anything that goes a little to the more religious side of life is discared as nonsense, while it is NOT ! and THAT is not a scienctific way of thinking. science should embrasse all options when it comes to explaining things even when they dont like the Idea of a God existing, created a universe and ruling the universe. they discard it before seriousluy study it. and all people who DO study it they discard as crazies..... well we are with 2 BILLION christians and 1,5 BILLION muslims including very highly educated folks... we cannot all be crazy....
1
7:50 again your whole reasoning is based on the FALSE assumption that our consiousness is part of the physical world and it is NOT !!! So your argumentation goes crooked from the very beginning. Our consiousness is NOT part of a what you call a "simulation" ... only our bodily parts may be part of what you people call a "simulation"...
1
"where" is easy to predict "when" is hard to predict... well didnt you know ... Heisenberg uncertainty... you cannot know place and time both to a high accuracy... ooh ooh Sabine... thats basic quantum physics... ;-0 ...... ;-)..
1
shouldnt CORRECT science be a bout honesty ??? and controlable/verifiable truth finding ???? no matter what that encompases ???
1
A question that arises is: Is a (mathematical ) DESCRIPTION the same as the real deal ??? I mean for example Newton had F = -G *M1M2 / R^2 it described gravity ... BUT not completely, so it was NOT the real deal... A description can be close but not the proverbial: real cigar.... it is nothing more that an description...
1
1:20 OH I though mutations stimulated the supposed prosesses of evolution; so how can you be against that ???? how inconsequently contradictive scientists can be....you should be glad that the ozon layer is decreasing since it supposedly stimulates mutations and hence evolution ... right ???? So either you are in favor of mutations (for the purpose of evolution) OR you are against mutations because they are dangerous... which of it will it be ???? make up your MINDS you secular scientists !! Well as is known mutations can never IMPROVE genetic information only destroy it. Mutations do NOT favor a hypothetical process known as evolution... it never did and never will do...mutations destroy genetic information
1
@nwogamesalert thing is mutations are 100% random and carry NO information what so ever withrespect to improve genetci materials... so they cannot be different than destructive..... BUT first abiogenesis is an impossible suggested process as well and chronologically speaking if abiogeneis never took place there was nothing TO evolve.... and since both suggested processes are impossible statistically and chemically etc it did NOT happen... no matter how much you wanted it to have happend... it bullshit poored over with a "scienctific" SOUNDING sause....in short abiogenesis/evolution is 100% PSEUDO science... its a hoax... you have been duked...just as I was before 2004 and neither of them should NOT be taught in any schools on planet earth....
1
3:45 the energy was NOT too small in the 2nd example... its position wasnt correct to go over the wall. Because the height of the ball was high enough to go over it...but before it did it bounced back on the floor..in other words its position wasnt matching... not its energy, the energy was matching
1
Here watch this: www.youtube.com/watch?v=zU7Lww-sBPg and put a lid on your claims
1
unavoidable....
1
7:00-7:30 and there lays the biggest error of all time. You THINK you can back calculate but if one does, many things go wrong. Let me show some a) calculating back the moon was sweeping over the surface of the earth 1-1,5 billion yrs ago and even crossed the Roche limit even far sooner b) calculating back the earth was rotating at 3,5 hours per rotation some billions yrs ago c) calculating back oceans MUST have been way way much more saltier today then they are d) calculating back the mountains would have all been eroded flat entirely in the last 10-20 millions of yrs yet they are not e) calculating back the oceans must have far far more sedimentys deposited from all kinds of rivers all over the earth and they are not f) calculating back the deserts must have been way much bigger as they are g) calculating back the corral reefs must have been way much bigger as they are today h) calculating back the world population of people must have been way way way much bigger then they are today etc So no you cannot alsways calculate back accurately and assume that your ideas are correct. thats not how it works. that is a scientific high risk assumption.
1
Under the protein folding issue lays another deeper problem: protein formation.....of which I wrote a paper: academia.edu/42979330/Is_mathematical_probability_the_same_as_physical_reality_the_power_of_the_average_and_how_life_began Proving that secular scientists are highly untrustworthy when it comes to the subject of where our life came from. Normaly scientists accept only results within the +/- 7S limits BUT when it comes to the emerging of life from chemicals they are willing to accept +/- 20 to 100S results since they like these idea's better that true science results. In other words: when it comes to the question where we come from science became a religion. No wonder that 80% (yes your read well 80%) of peer reviewed and published science papers (in renomated science magazines) is false and need to be retracted.... www.youtube.com/watch?v=42QuXLucH3Q&t=594s
1
This is ONLY the issues for environmental issues BUT you forget at least 1 big problem with nucleair power: there will always be people who are highly interested in stealing the stuff for nuke bombs making. So there is also a weapon indusytry that is highly interested (either from the good or bad side) in Nukes. appart from the fact that IF people in war time can MISUSE nucleair powerplants as potential explosives. look at what happend by sadam hoessain when he set the petrol sources in kuwait on fire. so nucleair sites are SALSO potentialldy dangerous in cases wars breaks out. And indeed in history things have been terribly gone wrong with nuceair power plants big time. That can bring the whole society in immediate danger so Nucleair power ??? thanks but NO THANKS long term dangers are too big... FUSION yes that would be great FISSION NO THANKS
1
So 6sigma is a major discriminator between scientifically interesting valid (< 6sigma) or not scientifically interesting (> 6Sigma) Then please explaine me this why is abiogenesis with a 23+ Sigma chance accepted as scientific correct ??? while NORMALLY all that is bigger than 6 sigma as scientific irrelevant ????
1
@olbluelips well unfortunately for you this is not factuall. science should be based on facts not on false and unproven speculations.... buit so far abiogenesis/evolution is not science based but only speculation and false interpretetaions based... hence the 23+ S acceptation of these speculations...
1
0:00- 0:22 and some people live on an other planet in their minds..... making up these kinds of fantasies.......
1
@Kirrily to give you an example: let me tell you. Nature has the posibility of creating at least 40 different amino acids in Urey Miller style according to Jeffrey Bada et all. This means to start the formation of 1 functional protein of lets say 20 amino acids (ature has about 100.000 proteins ranging from a few 10's to a few 10.000 's of aminio acids), nature has to pick each time fom these 40 amino acids randomly 1 of them to add on at a new position. So a random chance of 1 in 40 to pick each time the correct one BUT each amino acid has 2 configurations, like a left and right hand a D & L configuration based on this nature has thus a random chance of 1 in 80 of picking the correct one for each new amino acid BUT each poly peptide has 2 reactive sides to choose from the NH2 side and the COOH side. so each new amno acid has 1 in 160 chance to be te correct one. except the very first amino acid (1 in 80) Now it is scientifically correct that each peptide bond is created in about 1 nano second so 10^-9 sec. Unfortunately for you people nature has NO objective to create life. by itself. That is an outside of nature desire. Therefor nature is forced to check all possible poly peptides on their functionality. so for a teeny weeny peptide of only 20 amino acids nature requires 0,5*(160^20) * 10^-9 sec = 6,04463*10^34 seconds = 1,91674E+18 BILLIONS of years to have all poly peptides being check on their funtionality and composition since nature ONLY has L configuration amino acids in its proteins. Now since your ind set is on science facts you surely know that the secular age of the universe is estimated to be 13,8 billion yrs old. but take a comparison: 1,91674E+18 BILLION years that is: 1.916,740.000.000.000.000,0 BILION YEARS To 13,8 BILLION yrs see the difference ???? our smalles human protein is 44 amino acids big... nature would require for that: 1,5186E+71 BILLIONS of yrs to find it or 151.800.000.000.000.000. 000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000. 000.000.000. 000.000.000.000.000.000.000,0 BILLLIONS of yrs 13,8 BILLIONs of yrs I cannot imagine that you dont see the difference of these numbers. catalysis I hear you thinking OK lets take that inconsideration: lets speed up the chemistry. and lets do that to ridiculous even unscientific proportions to rule out all things: lets ASSUME (incorrectly but just for the sake of argument) that the chemical reaction time is at the level of planck time so in the order of magnitude of 5,39 *10^-34 sec... which is according to science the shortest time possible. then STILL you require: 3,93875E+36 BILLIONS of yrs for a human protein of ONLY 44 amino acids. and 3,58227E+14 Billion yrs for a 30 aminoacid peptide. You like science ??? you based your opinion of science facts I agree fine with me.. But secular science facts prove to us that we could NOT have arizen without Supernatural intelligence or without supernatural intervention.... we know Him as God
1
@janerussell3472 non believers dot understand probabilities ??? A) I never said that, they should since I try to beat them up at their own ground and B) I dont know since I dont know all of them so I make no comment about that. Irreducible complexity indeed thats an argument too. Speed is no argument since speed doesnt solve that problem that is mentioned. And yes there are in the grand total about 100.000 different proteins ranging from several 10's to several 10.000's of amino acids in rough numbers. what came first protein or protein... good question.... nice idea...
1
some things in life are realy local thats for sure.....
1
Yes we do have evidence: read the bible and put it next to reality....... you see that the biblical writtings are historically & scientifically correct (as far as the bible discusses science facts).....
1
The earth is about 6000 yrs old NOT 4,5 billions of yrs as secular science wants us to believe... radioactive dating you say ??? well sorry fellow that does not work... scientific contradictions ??? like what ??? proof for Gods reality ? a) the scientific impossibility of spontaneous origin of life, b) the hyper fine tuning of the entire UNIVERSE so that we can live here c) the 2500 prophesies of the bible that have become historically true d) the remaining 500 prophesies that are for the future of which several are becomming true in our own days e) the healings that happen in Jesus names f) the deads that are being raised in Jesus's name g) the construction of life itself how the machenery of living organisms function h) the laws that govern the universe they show of highly super intelligent design i) Historical blessings if people followed God/Jesus (the golden ages) j) godless cultures that disappeared by NOT listening to God/Jesus k) Noahs ark that has been found On he other hand l) the misery of people who do NOT recognize God/Jesus as Creator of the universe.....( only the western christian nations are being blessed the rest lives in misery) m) the economic disaster that is happeing to Europe and the US due to discarting God/Jesus right now in our days.... you see its ALL in the bible and it is reality...or becoming reality and there is more
1
2:12 Its weird that mutations lead to sicknesses ... according to the idea of evolution it should lead to improvements right ??? or are you saying that mutations dont support an idea as evolution ??? Well I can only agree to that one... mutations only lead to A) neutral effects OR B) sicknesses. Which makes sense if one knows what are the driving forces of mutations: in general mutations are pushed into existence by agressive destructive influences 1) internal radioactive decay of elements (C14 -> N14) 2) cosmic radiation 3) agressive chemicals 4) cross overs ( the only harmless form of mutations) 5) UV light 6) radioactive radiation from out side all of them are a) random b) have no purpose of enhancing living organisms c) has no intelligence behind it to push existing systems in to more advanced systems. c) are usually highly energetic Now random enegry inputs are a) destructive b) neutral at best. This concept is written down in another article of mine: www.academia.edu/38591420/The_4th_law_of_thermodynamics_docx
1