Cern And The Latter Days

[ttribe]

Is there any way to actually know the answer to that?  I mean, you seem to be asking whether or not we should tamper with stuff we don't know about because bad things we don't about might happen.  I don't see any way to get that information.

 

And what is a 'higher science'?  Before we discovered electricity, would that have been considered a higher science best left untampered with?  Trying to figure out the answer to your question seems incredibly subjective and arbitrary.

 

Yours is a good point.  Taken to the absurd extreme, the question could go all the way back to whether ancient humans should have ever attempted to experiment with fire.

[jkwilliams]

Is there any way to actually know the answer to that?  I mean, you seem to be asking whether or not we should tamper with stuff we don't know about because bad things we don't about might happen.  I don't see any way to get that information.

 

And what is a 'higher science'?  Before we discovered electricity, would that have been considered a higher science best left untampered with?  Trying to figure out the answer to your question seems incredibly subjective and arbitrary.

Well said. This is about scaring people with "possibilities." Why take any risks, especially if some random preacher tells you not to?

[BookofMormonLuvr]

I give up. I am sorry I ever posted this. I think I am done posting topics, let's get back to polygamy. Sorry I wasted your time.

[ttribe]

I give up. I am sorry I ever posted this. I think I am done posting topics, let's get back to polygamy. Sorry I wasted your time.

 

So, you solicited opinions and feedback.  Didn't like those opinions or feedback.  Gave up.

 

Makes sense.

[BookofMormonLuvr]

So, you solicited opinions and feedback.  Didn't like those opinions or feedback.  Gave up.

 

Makes sense.

I didn't ask for an attack on "conspiracy nuts" and a tangent on Staley's personal failings from a decade ago. Having been here 4 years I should've known better.

[ttribe]

I didn't ask for an attack on "conspiracy nuts" and a tangent on Staley's personal failings from a decade ago. Having been here 4 years I should've known better.

 

Staley's "personal failings from a decade ago" reflect on the veracity of his ongoing claims.  They are fair game, and rightfully so.

Edited August 21, 2015 by ttribe

[teddyaware]

There was a book published about a decade ago about the psychology of conspiracies (wish I could remember the title, so I could give proper atribution).  In the book, the authors offer a general rule of conspiracies -- the more people that would need to be involved, the less likely it is true.  In other words; the more people involved, the more likely one of them will spill the beans.

 

Just ask Nixon.

 

About 25 years ago I had a memorable conversation with Robert Mcnamara, former secretary of defense and former head of the World Bank, who frankly admitted to me that, as he put it, "many good men I know are working to create a one world government." He was dead serious. In light of your thinking, under what heading do you suggest I file that information?

[cynth]

I didn't ask for an attack on "conspiracy nuts" and a tangent on Staley's personal failings from a decade ago. Having been here 4 years I should've known better.

What would you have preferred to dictate if you were able to fully control all of the viewers of this thread? That's what you're referring too, right? Your getting your way through total control?

[3DOP]

There was a book published about a decade ago about the psychology of conspiracies (wish I could remember the title, so I could give proper atribution).  In the book, the authors offer a general rule of conspiracies -- the more people that would need to be involved, the less likely it is true.  In other words; the more people involved, the more likely one of them will spill the beans.

 

Just ask Nixon.

 

Dr. Steuss...hey.

 

I have little to add, other than I am glad you are alive and I hope you are well. I guess I can add a question. Nixon? Nixon who? Do you mean R. Nixon? Was he a conspiracy catcher?

[jkwilliams]

About 25 years ago I had a memorable conversation with Robert Mcnamara, former secretary of defense and former head of the World Bank, who frankly admitted to me that, as he put it, "many good men I know are working to create a one world government." He was dead serious. In light of your thinking, under what heading do you suggest I file that information?

Why would anyone be surprised that some people are working for a world government? The real question is whether there's even a remote possibility of success?

[Doctor Steuss]

About 25 years ago I had a memorable conversation with Robert Mcnamara, former secretary of defense and former head of the World Bank, who frankly admitted to me that, as he put it, "many good men I know are working to create a one world government." He was dead serious. In light of your thinking, under what heading do you suggest I file that information?

File it under "someone spilled the beans."

[Doctor Steuss]

But are there higher sciences best left untampered with while in mortality?

While I'm not sure where the line would be drawn between a "higher" and "lower" science, there are already aspects/areas of science that are generally not tampered with, even though they are theoretically possible. Just one example would be human cloning.

Edited August 21, 2015 by Doctor Steuss

[The Nehor]

About 25 years ago I had a memorable conversation with Robert Mcnamara, former secretary of defense and former head of the World Bank, who frankly admitted to me that, as he put it, "many good men I know are working to create a one world government." He was dead serious. In light of your thinking, under what heading do you suggest I file that information?

I would put it on the shelf with the many good men are working to bring about a theocracy in America worry. That is the same shelf that holds our hopes for a perpetual motion machine and an end to all disease.

[The Nehor]

I didn't ask for an attack on "conspiracy nuts" and a tangent on Staley's personal failings from a decade ago. Having been here 4 years I should've known better.

I think you would get the same result on just about any board on the internet unless you went to a conspiracy website or some forum supporting this guy no matter what. So, about 99%+ of the Internet so please do not pull this wounded pride thing that the participants here are in any way odd for pointing this out. You are the oddball for expecting anything different.

If you want an echo chamber go to Staley's forums or somewhere where casting doubts on the existence of the Illuminati is a bannable offense. Those places are out there.

[The Nehor]

Obviously, I don't believe the the Universe or Earth will get swallowed by a black hole. But are there higher sciences best left untampered with while in mortality?

There are things that can be done via technology that are best not messed with. As to pure science which is what CERN is......no, I think that is fine. It may be perverted but what part of our scientific knowledge has not been? As to it being a higher science that brings us on a level with God and releases demons or destroys the earth just...........no. That is just paranoia.

[rodheadlee]

Is there any way to actually know the answer to that?  I mean, you seem to be asking whether or not we should tamper with stuff we don't know about because bad things we don't about might happen.  I don't see any way to get that information.

 

And what is a 'higher science'?  Before we discovered electricity, would that have been considered a higher science best left untampered with?  Trying to figure out the answer to your question seems incredibly subjective and arbitrary.

Higher science of the dangerous type would be the atomic bomb.

[filovirus]

Some science should not be tampered with. Cross speciation of a human and a chimp has obvious moral implications.

But what about selecting favorable genes for children. Those who have money could afford it and those who don't, well they will fall behind. The movie "Gatica" (spelling?) might not be that far off.

Right now our population is harversting body parts from fetuses in the name of science and people are OK with it, and even promote it.

It might be better to be destroyed by a super collider than lose a soul in other forms of science.

[The Nehor]

Higher science of the dangerous type would be the atomic bomb.

 

That is technology developed from the same science that gave us nuclear power and other useful tools.

 

Some science should not be tampered with. Cross speciation of a human and a chimp has obvious moral implications.

But what about selecting favorable genes for children. Those who have money could afford it and those who don't, well they will fall behind. The movie "Gatica" (spelling?) might not be that far off.

Right now our population is harversting body parts from fetuses in the name of science and people are OK with it, and even promote it.

It might be better to be destroyed by a super collider than lose a soul in other forms of science.

 

We are nowhere near being able to blend a human and a chimp but if we were that is the same science that could allow us to cure genetic diseases.

 

I have no problem with using fetal cells.

 

I doubt God will allow us to destroy the soul of one of his children even if they are that fragile (pretty sure they are not). God sees the end from the beginning and we have been told that scientific insights are given by God. We aren't going to destroy his plan no matter what we do. 

[Yirgacheffe]

I believe people can repent and change, whether or not I agree with their positions on theology or politics. A decade is a long time. But by all means judge away, because clearly you have all the facts in your possession.

Just when I start enjoying this board again, I run into this kind of crap.

ugh.

Well during the decade he didn't pay anyone back, ignored a cease and desist order, and he didn't tell potential investors about that cease and desist order.  He hasn't done anything to indicate repentance other than some tears of late.

[Yirgacheffe]

I must say he's got a pretty good gig there in St. Louis. He earns $127,000 a year and lives, rent-free, in a house valued at over $1,000,000. Of course, living off the credulity of others is not something I could do.

And paid back a whopping $1,950.

[strappinglad]

Would someone like to point out what atrocities God has put a stop to ? At this moment North and South Korea could be lighting a match that wipes out millions. 300,000 Syrians are dead and millions displaced. Slavery is alive and flourishing. African nations are in a perpetual state of war. I don't expect the Second Coming until the entire world is like Afganistan. I hope to be dead long before that happens.

As for the OP, I actually took the time to watch the entire video. I did get one thing of note from it. All the talk about blood moons and dark suns being portents of disasters is bunk.

Edited August 22, 2015 by strappinglad

[The Nehor]

Would someone like to point out what atrocities God has put a stop to ? At this moment North and South Korea could be lighting a match that wipes out millions. 300,000 Syrians are dead and millions displaced. Slavery is alive and flourishing. African nations are in a perpetual state of war. I don't expect the Second Coming until the entire world is like Afganistan. I hope to be dead long before that happens.As for the OP, I actually took the time to watch the entire video. I did get one thing of note from it. All the talk about blood moons and dark suns being portents of disasters is bunk.

He stopped the impending massacre of the believers in the Americas at the time of his birth.

[hagoth7]

Well, this has turned out exactly how I hoped it wouldn't. Oh, well.

"Gadianton Robbers? What Gadianton Robbers?"

It baffles me that people who believe in the Book of Mormon so easily dismiss anything that hints at a secret conspiracy or tries to tie scriptural prophecy in with current events.

i agree with you brother.

[Tacenda]

I think the elephant in the room to me anyway is, that people are judging this guy like critics of Joseph Smith. Yet apologetics pitch in for JS that he wasn't perfect, well that could be said of this guy too. Joseph was in trouble with the law. Once for trying to make money in treasure digging. But I admit my trust level dropped significantly. But what if this guy and JS got it right?

Edited August 22, 2015 by Tacenda

[jkwilliams]

I think the elephant in the room to me anyway is, that people are judging this guy like critics of Joseph Smith. Yet apologetics pitch in for JS that he wasn't perfect, well that could be said of this guy too. Joseph was in trouble with the law. Once for trying to make money in treasure digging. But I admit my trust level dropped significantly. But what if this guy and JS got it right?

 

Bottom line for me: what reason do I have for believing this guy got it right? He has a minimal understanding of the science, so that's one strike. He makes his living making wild and scary predictions about the future based on dubious readings of scripture and said scientific ignorance, so that's strike two. He's just been sentenced to prison for fraud. Strike three. Nothing more to be said.

 

For someone like me, one could easily say the same things about Joseph Smith, as you rightly point out.

Edited August 22, 2015 by jkwilliams