Soosan Khanoom

COP

by Veiled Prophet of Khorasan on Wed Jun 08, 2011 11:44 AM PDT

 

an entity on hich they can rely on, 

Indeed we rely on "hich"; I like it :-)

 

VPK

by Cost-of-Progress on Wed Jun 08, 2011 10:55 AM PDT

I understand these "answers", but I expected more from you (wink).

Look, I know that most people need there to be an entity on hich they can rely on, and if that keeps the light on for them, I am all for it.

May the force be with all of us - whatever the force may be!____________

IRAN FIRST

____________

COP

by Veiled Prophet of Khorasan on Wed Jun 08, 2011 10:11 AM PDT

 

Who created God? It is called the "no boundary" condition. Imagine a circle. There is no beginning no end. No start to the circle no end to it. That may be an explanation. Where there really is no need for the question.

Who me ... could not be : )

by Soosan Khanoom on Wed Jun 08, 2011 07:23 AM PDT

I am not Ghahr .....  

The words are misleadings and confusing and limited anyway .... besides we each have our own concerns with those words ... so we sometimes jump to conclusion when we hear them ...

Otherwise tell me what is the difference between using the word God or Mother nature or intelegent design , or brilliant mind or designer , or forces of universe , or nothing, or everything , or something , or even peach , cherry ... LOL   ....

My point is there is  a mind ... why ? it just does not make sense otherwise ....

now you call that mind whatever you like  

 : )

Haalaa chera behet bar mikhore?

by Cost-of-Progress on Wed Jun 08, 2011 06:22 AM PDT

"intelligent design" was your choice of words, not mine...ghahr nakon.

____________

IRAN FIRST

____________

COP

by Soosan Khanoom on Wed Jun 08, 2011 05:26 AM PDT

This blog has NOTHING to do with politics and the crap of right, left, religion, atheism, evolutionists, creationists, monkey trails etc ..

The topic of my blog is " There has to be a mind behind the creation "  it is a humble and simple observation of me in the field of science that i have chosen as my professional life. A non formal blog , brief and right to points.... nothing fancy and i have not even proofread in terms of the grammar or spelling  before hit the submit button ....... 

Please read all my comments in the replies sections as I also suggested to MM and Rozbeh to do so and I will to anyone who has recently joined this discussion.  I do appreciate the time you and everyone else taking and discussing things.  

The word" intelligent design " that is repeatedly coming up may have had you confused to say what you said but if that bothers you we can use terms such as " brilliant mind " which I have alternatively been using here ....

We are limited to our choices of words .... that is all .....

I hope I have been clear .... 

 

Not trying to change anything

by Cost-of-Progress on Wed Jun 08, 2011 04:46 AM PDT

It is practically impossible to change somebody's mind about a subject like this.

I am not trying to change anybody's mind - Merely stating my opinion which I feel strongly about. People believe what they believe due to various reasons, most of them personal.

Like a buddy of mine once said:

"I'm pretty sure there's no god, but I'm not gonna say anything in case there is one and he might kick my ass for it." 

Priceless!

BTW, "Intelligent Design" concept is an invention by the Religious Right to try to slip in the "creationsim" teachings in schools across the US of A - nothing more.

Oh, one more thing, it is perfectly OK to ask "who created god"? After all, if creation is the main driver, then things are just created, right, so who --- I say --- who created god?

____________

IRAN FIRST

____________

Salman

by Veiled Prophet of Khorasan on Wed Jun 08, 2011 04:24 AM PDT

 

There is no mathematical relation I know between God an "Bhor's theory. Just to be clear QM was not invented by Bhor. It was developed over a long time by a large number of people. You may Google it yourself and I am not going to go into a QM lesson here. 

You are very much able to look them up yourself. The short answer is that QM postulates that world is based on probability. Einstein did not like this as he believed "God does not play dice with the cosmos". Bohr responded "I do not presume to tell God what to do!". 

QM is not a theological matter. It is science and a theory. It may turn out that beneath the probabilities lies something we do not know. The important thing is not to be dogmatic. As Bohr said: We should not presume to tell God what to do. VPK: Go do experiments and find out the best. Then refine them as you find out more.

That's better VPK

by salman farsi on Wed Jun 08, 2011 03:30 AM PDT

So from a generic "We" it is now down to a personal "I."  While I am am mindful of your "extensive" education in theoretical physics, I am still waiting to hear from you as to how Einstein (in your opinion) brought God into his critique of Bohr's theory?

Can you  perhaps show us in lay language or if you prefer mathematically how God was formulated into Einstein's rebuttal of Bohr's theory?

 For an Islamic democracy

LOL ... VPK

by Soosan Khanoom on Tue Jun 07, 2011 08:26 PM PDT

" The world sits on an elephant which sits on a turtle which sits on a fish which in in the ocean and the ocean is obviously on Earth. Do I have to tell you people everything; God!"

 

MM

by Soosan Khanoom on Tue Jun 07, 2011 08:24 PM PDT

You probably have only read the last couple of replies other wise you would not have mentioned creationism and evolution .... I already talked about this.. furthermore I am not a christian or a follower of the church's ideology on this ....... Evolution is a valid point ... but that is not changing anything in terms of the mind behind them all ..... you can repeat what you have heard in the Darvin trail or you can expand your horizon.  That trail had never applied to the others to begin with but only the the Christian church of the time ....

Please read my comments in other pages  if you are interested ....  

thank you  

 

COP

by Veiled Prophet of Khorasan on Tue Jun 07, 2011 07:28 PM PDT

 

The truth is that we do not know. Now we can say whatever we prefer, But neither you nor I know it. Why bother trying to discuss something we cannot verify. If someone wants to think something it is their business.

As long as people do not bother me they are fine. I like Zartoshti not because of God. But because it fits into our culture. Because it has a good philosophy and a recipe for happiness. It has worked well for me.

Now if someone wants to force their God on me that is wrong. I will fight them and so should others. But if someone feels better by praying so be it. Why get into an argument that is not verifiable in any way.

Intelligent design?

by MM on Tue Jun 07, 2011 06:37 PM PDT

I have been watching these back and forth arguments for a while now.  Honestly, the arguments for and against the existence of god is a useless excercise.  If you believe in god, you have many arguments why there is / should be one (or more, if Hindu!).  In the other hand, there is also compelling evidence against the existence of god, and "the intelligent design" is a classic argument that the believers bring forth to counter evolution.

In my opinion, instead of trying to change the other's mind, the important thing to remember is to respect the other side's core beliefs as long as they keep that a private affair and not try to shove it onto others.  In a secular civil society, the religious beliefs, or lack there of, is guaranteed by the constitution.

I love it when people

by Cost-of-Progress on Tue Jun 07, 2011 03:53 PM PDT

Talk about the existence of this benevolent god. Just like religion,  his excellency is a divisive topic. What else would one expect? 

SK, this "designer" entity...where did it come from? As a layman and a non-intellectual, I wanna know. The more logical answer, of course, is that man created it as a convenient means to explain his mysterious and sometimes miserable existence on this little rock.

The more you try to complicate things, the easier it is to explain them by the unexplainable, i.e., the benevolent god who loves alll his children!

____________

IRAN FIRST

____________

Soosan Khanoom

by Veiled Prophet of Khorasan on Tue Jun 07, 2011 02:30 PM PDT

 

You and COP are all confused. The world sits on an elephant which sits on a turtle which sits on a fish which in in the ocean and the ocean is obviously on Earth. Do I have to tell you people everything; God!

I dreamt of God

by پندارنیک on Tue Jun 07, 2011 02:18 PM PDT

 

 

خود خدا بود.......گفت به اینا بگو " بابا من غلط کردم....تورو جون
مادراتون ولم کنین...بسه دیگه...قول میدم دیگه نباشم، اصلا نیستم...هرچی‌
شما میگی‌ قبوله... "

As a matter

by Veiled Prophet of Khorasan on Tue Jun 07, 2011 02:07 PM PDT

 

of fact I do have extensive education in theoretical physics yes. I do not reject God; I do reject bad science. There is a method to evaluating theories and that does not include theology. I keep my religion out of my scientific work.

There is nothing in the Gathas that deals with QM. It has more to do with how you live your life. How you treat other people and gives you a recipe for happiness. One that I followed and has brought me great joy. You should try it.

There over ritualistic religions specially Islam and Christianity and later versions of Zartoshti not the Gathas mix things up. Religion should be a guide for interpersonal relationships not theories of physics.

COP

by Soosan Khanoom on Tue Jun 07, 2011 01:12 PM PDT

you are funny ..... of course ..... why no one thought of that before?

The designer / God that we are talking about is very intelligent and scientifically speaking is a genius  ...

 now I bow down to any man who had created this designer? Just show me the man ........  that man must be GOD  himself 

 

I still want to know

by Cost-of-Progress on Tue Jun 07, 2011 12:24 PM PDT

who created god?

Simple question, isn't it?

Here's the answer:

- Mankind -

sank you berry much,

CoP

____________

IRAN FIRST

____________

A poem from Daquiqui for VPK

by Siavash300 on Tue Jun 07, 2011 11:59 AM PDT

 

 "My daughter told me she has told her friends she is a Zartoshti" Veild Prophet of Khorasan 

دقیقی چهار خصلت بر گز یده ست  به گیتی از همه خوبی  و زشتی  لب یاقوت رنگ و ناله چنگ  می چون زنگ و دین زردهشتی  

VPK

by amirkabear4u on Tue Jun 07, 2011 11:25 AM PDT

There are two misunderstandings;

1- I did not say i agree that koran is a book of threats BUT you did.

2- You should read some of the conventional ones which are printed a long time ago. It seems the new prints give readers different idea of what god words suppose to mean.

SINCE YOU CALL YOURSELF A PROPHET MAYBE YOU SHOULD EDUCATE YOURSELF MORE ABOUT THIS ISSUE BEFORE EXPRESSING YOURSELF. 

Fairness and Equality in Justice

Excuse me VPK, who is "We"?

by salman farsi on Tue Jun 07, 2011 10:16 AM PDT

"We refer to it as bad science"!

Are you a theoretical physicist? So in your wisdom, Einstein was not a "real" scientist? How do you know that Einstein rejected QM without giving it thorough thinking? Didn't you know that together with two other sceintists from Princeton they published a paper to argue against the basic assupmtions of this theory?

What makes me worried is not whether QM is right or wrong which is something outside the scope of this debate and frankly beyond the knowledge of the contributros to this debate (unless one can demonstrate that they are conversant with particle physics at a scholarly level, which I am yet to be convinced) but I am getting worried that the rest of the arguments submitted here are so readily dismissive of the works of such masters like Einstein.  I am also surprised that you support Zoroasterian faith on one hand and reject any scientist who dares to bring the name of God in scientific debate. Did Eistein reject QM on religious grounds?  It is this kind of reckless reckoning that "we" must guard against.

 For an Islamic democracy

Story time

by Soosan Khanoom on Tue Jun 07, 2011 09:53 AM PDT

I remember back in Iran we had a leftists biology teacher which was actually a nice guy 

any way ...

He used to draw the Anatomical structures of body on the blackboard and we used to copy it .... good old days ... we all were artists  

Till the day came that he was going to draw the EAR structure ( outer, inner, and middle part )  with all the detail. It became almost impossible for him so he kept erasing and redrawing untill he ran out of colored chalk. Our situation was not less dramatic than his . We kept earsing untill we all had a big hole in our notebooks...

I got tired and i loudly stated to him and the class ...

" Look what God has created we can not even draw it "   he wanted to get mad but I guess he could not .... he just said:   ok  perhaps you are right ....

true story ..... Now do not ask me for any references on him. I can not recall his name at all but he had a big stalin mustache  and he was a nice teacher ....  : )

Accidents will happen, we only hit and run

by Mash Ghasem on Tue Jun 07, 2011 09:41 AM PDT

Me thinks Elvis Costello also agrees with me, just listen to him, thanks for the book, outta here

Accidents Will Happen-Elvis Costello

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=K8JkB-OR7H4

 

...

by Mash Ghasem on Tue Jun 07, 2011 09:34 AM PDT

اسرار ازل را نه تو دانی و نه من
زین حرف معما نه تو خوانی و نه من
هست از پرده گفتگوی من و تو
چون پرده برافتد نه تو مانی و نه من

textbook

by Soosan Khanoom on Tue Jun 07, 2011 09:33 AM PDT

Great course ... Great book ... will leave you in the state of shock and owe ... speechless ....

Developmental Biology  Scott Gilbert, Sinauer Associates, Inc. – 

Bioethics and the New Embryology,. Gilbert, S., Tyler, A.L., and E.J. Zackin.  Sinauer Associates – 

 

Accident MG ?

by Soosan Khanoom on Tue Jun 07, 2011 09:27 AM PDT

That is the most funniest thing that anyone's logic can reach to !! 

Each step in the evolution as i briefly copied from the internet and posted it below was a pain in the butt course I took in college which I had hard time passing it despite all my brain's input ....   now you call it accident?  just because some one can not explain something and comes with the word accident should we buy into it .  

listen to EInstein:

God is not playing dice with the universe !! 

besides accident mostly yields to disorder rather than order ....

It just does not make sense ... 

 

Evolution

by Soosan Khanoom on Tue Jun 07, 2011 09:16 AM PDT

Evolution occurs and there are many theories for the reason behind it but can not be denied; even-though scientists are scratching their heads over it  to figure it completely out ..

Here is the wikipedia on that: 

" Evolution has led to the diversification of all living organisms from a common ancestor, which are described by Charles Darwin as "endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful".

There are four common mechanisms of evolution. The first mechanism is natural selection, a process in which there is differential survival and/or reproduction of organisms that differ in one or more inherited traits. A second mechanism is genetic drift, a process in which there are random changes to the proportions of two or more inherited traits within a population. A third mechanism is mutation, which is a permanent change in a DNA sequence. Finally, the fourth mechanism is gene flow, which is the incorporation of genes from one population into another.

Evolution may in the long term lead to speciation, whereby a single ancestral species splits into two or more different species. But it is thought to occur in multiple ways such as slowly, steadily and gradually over time or rapidly from one long static state to another. "

 

Evolution , whatever , it is .... it is not " THE GOD "  it is a calculated intelligent process  governed by the GOD now as a scientists I can not use the word God ... so I say .....  Nature instead ...

oh well .... just words .....

and words is all I have to take your breath away ...ok .... now why on earth the Bee Gees are singing here ... LOL

 

 

"Punctuated Equilibrium" and a non-mechanical view of world

by Mash Ghasem on Tue Jun 07, 2011 09:14 AM PDT

Not only is Creationist narrative, non-scienctific, it's also Teleological. Supposedly it has a begining, middle and end.

What Stephen Jay Gould adds to the debate is an appreciation of just how much our evolution, (and the evolution of the cosmos) has been shaped by a  Punctuated Equilibrium: through a series of accident, and unprecedented events,,,. This non-mechanical approach avoids a linear narrative, plus an appreciation for the complexity of life and even the unforseen, cheers

P.S. Where's the info on the book you were quoting from about embryo?

MG....

by Soosan Khanoom on Tue Jun 07, 2011 09:01 AM PDT

Thanks for the link .... I will take my time to read this more carefully whenever I get a chance but by glancing through it  I still can not find anything that contradicts with my idea of seeing the entire picture as I see....

He was more interested to discuss the reason for evolution which "he favored the argument that evolution has no inherent drive towards long-term progress. Uncritical commentaries often portray evolution as a ladder of progress, leading towards bigger, faster, and smarter organisms, the assumption being that evolution is somehow driving organisms to get more complex and ultimately more like humankind. He argued that evolution's drive was not towards complexity, but towards diversification. Because life is constrained to begin with a simple starting point, any diversity resulting from this left wall will be perceived to move in the direction of higher complexity. But life, he argued, can easily adapt towards simplification, as is often the case with parasites."

I agree with the following statement of his actually....

" Our failure to discern a universal good does not record any lack of insight or ingenuity, but merely demonstrates that nature contains no moral messages framed in human terms. Morality is a subject for philosophers, theologians, students of the humanities, indeed for all thinking people. The answers will not be read passively from nature; they do not, and cannot, arise from the data of science. The factual state of the world does not teach us how we, with our powers for good and evil, should alter or preserve it in the most ethical manner." 

That is why I am not willing to turn this to a religion discussion blog ... or any mind reading , supernatural fortune teller ability : ) 

Step by Step .....

First Step is there a creator?

that is all I am asking ... 

no religion here ......

no one to listen .....

no one to follow ......

no one even around to ask ......

no one even around to answer ....

it is only me and the amazing things  I am witnessing ...

what it has to do with good or evil ?   how can you even reach to point B if you are missing the starting point ... point A