LDS Freedom Forum

Craig Johnson wrote: ↑March 29th, 2018, 2:36 pm Three days ago I was watching a conference DVD from April 2006 by Elder Robert D,. Hales: To Act For Ourselves: The Gift and Blessings of Agency. I was not paying close attention because I have the flu, but something hit me that he said and I kind of ignored it, but I went back and re-watched it today. He said "If you have fallen into destructive, addictive behaviors, you may feel that you are spiritually in a black hole. As with the real black holes in space, it may seem all but impossible for light to penetrate to where you are."
I have therefore changed my position on whether or not black holes exist and I now believe they exist (see how easy that was?). I also recommend this talk about agency wherein he delineates the powers of satan over mortals.
https://www.lds.org/general-conference/ ... y?lang=eng

Durzan wrote: ↑March 29th, 2018, 2:44 pm

Craig Johnson wrote: ↑March 29th, 2018, 2:36 pm Three days ago I was watching a conference DVD from April 2006 by Elder Robert D,. Hales: To Act For Ourselves: The Gift and Blessings of Agency. I was not paying close attention because I have the flu, but something hit me that he said and I kind of ignored it, but I went back and re-watched it today. He said "If you have fallen into destructive, addictive behaviors, you may feel that you are spiritually in a black hole. As with the real black holes in space, it may seem all but impossible for light to penetrate to where you are."
I have therefore changed my position on whether or not black holes exist and I now believe they exist (see how easy that was?). I also recommend this talk about agency wherein he delineates the powers of satan over mortals.
https://www.lds.org/general-conference/ ... y?lang=eng

lol. This is why I compartmentalize scientific knowledge and spiritual knowledge. I generally accept both as truth unless proven otherwise. I do not know exactly HOW they might fit together, but I do know that they WILL fit together and make sense at some point in the future.

There is no conspiracy in true science (though there are individual scientists who will conspire to hide or alter scientific information). They just base what they know off of observations made through experimentation and observation. Just sometimes those experiments simply require a lot of specialized knowledge and understanding to perform properly or understand on an intimate intellectual level.

As for you, our GA's often use the science of the times to teach us spiritual truths, or as part of parables. I wouldn't put too much stock in their acceptance of black holes as meaning that black holes exist for certain. They are men of the Spirit, not of the Flesh, and as such, their understanding and intelligence is being put to use in different fields from that of the scientists. But both are being put to good use.

The official stance of the church is that it is mute on these sorts of matters, and that seeming contradictions between modern science and our understanding of the gospel will be resolved during and after the Millennium. If parts of modern science are correct, then it will be made clear, while the false parts will also be revealed to be false, and correct principles with errors will be corrected.

I would not worry about this sort of thing all that much. Accept the science at face value as well as the scriptures. They both contain Truth.

Seek the Truth wrote: ↑March 29th, 2018, 3:08 pm I don't believe in black holes, based on science or what Elder Perry said. For me to believe based on what he said he would have to indicate that God showed him they were real.

Durzan wrote: ↑March 29th, 2018, 3:14 pm All science has real, observable, and provable effects. Thus everything that science discusses is provable to at least to some extent. It just so happens that it isn't always EASILY observable (Like when dealing with sub-atomic particles, for instance) or cannot be observed within our lifetime because the time periods are ridiculously long (Like in geology or biology, for instance). In cases like that, we can observe the effects, and come up with plausible explanations through experimentation, or do the next best thing to direct observation, which is to use math/computer models in a simulation. In these situations, its not exactly as firm as being able to observe direct quanta, but its the best we can do from a scientific standpoint. There will be errors of course, but thats the nature of science... you course correct as you go through further observations, data, experiments, etc. Think how newtonian physics works relatively well and is fairly simple, but general relativity physics is far more precise... and complicated.

inho wrote: ↑March 29th, 2018, 4:02 pm Black holes do exist, there are more than enough experimental proof to convince me. So that's not my issue. I'm just surprised that you are so willing to change your mind that quickly just because an apostle says it. Especially since it is not a religious issue; he claims no inspiration.

Ad they say: “Catholics say the pope is infallible but don’t really believe it; Mormons say the prophet (or an apostle) is fallible but don’t really believe it.”

ParticleMan wrote: ↑March 29th, 2018, 4:07 pm Prophets ancient and modern use common cultural conceptions as vehicles for teaching doctrine regardless of the veracity of those conceptions. This includes geocentrism anciently and black holes in modernity.

The theory from which black holes emerge is untenable for many reasons, but perhaps most strikingly through the observation of electromagnetic phenomena and plasma effects throughout the cosmos and by experiment.

inho wrote: ↑March 29th, 2018, 4:02 pm Black holes do exist, there are more than enough experimental proof to convince me. So that's not my issue. I'm just surprised that you are so willing to change your mind that quickly just because an apostle says it. Especially since it is not a religious issue; he claims no inspiration.

Ad they say: “Catholics say the pope is infallible but don’t really believe it; Mormons say the prophet (or an apostle) is fallible but don’t really believe it.”

Seek the Truth wrote: ↑March 29th, 2018, 4:16 pm I don't believe in black holes, big bang, or relativity.

Craig Johnson wrote: ↑March 29th, 2018, 2:36 pm . . . . .
He said "If you have fallen into destructive, addictive behaviors, you may feel that you are spiritually in a black hole. As with the real black holes in space, it may seem all but impossible for light to penetrate to where you are." . . . . .

larsenb wrote: ↑March 29th, 2018, 5:04 pm

Craig Johnson wrote: ↑March 29th, 2018, 2:36 pm . . . . .
He said "If you have fallen into destructive, addictive behaviors, you may feel that you are spiritually in a black hole. As with the real black holes in space, it may seem all but impossible for light to penetrate to where you are." . . . . .

I always thought that light and even more matter could enter an existing black hole because of the intense gravitational attraction exerted by the black hole. But neither could get out of it (the event horizon, etc.) for the same reason.

So I'm wondering if you got his quote right.

ParticleMan wrote: ↑March 29th, 2018, 4:07 pm Prophets ancient and modern use common cultural conceptions as vehicles for teaching doctrine regardless of the veracity of those conceptions. This includes geocentrism anciently and black holes in modernity.

The theory from which black holes emerge is untenable for many reasons, but perhaps most strikingly through the observation of electromagnetic phenomena and plasma effects throughout the cosmos and by experiment.

brianj wrote: ↑March 29th, 2018, 8:58 pmA make-believe supermassive black hole is the only known thing

People who claim science is wrong

generally fail to provide any strong and legitimate evidence to support their position. Instead they present someone talking, thinking that his words will somehow convince someone who actually understands calculus and physics.

brianj wrote: ↑March 29th, 2018, 8:58 pm

ParticleMan wrote: ↑March 29th, 2018, 4:07 pm The theory from which black holes emerge is untenable for many reasons, but perhaps most strikingly through the observation of electromagnetic phenomena and plasma effects throughout the cosmos and by experiment.

If you wish to support your claims, I would be curious to review the equations that would support something like the orbits S stars are observed to follow in the vicinity of the Saggitarius-A. This summer the star S0-2 will pass 17 light hours, or about 11.4 billion miles, from a figment of scientific imagination at the center of the Milky Way. A make-believe supermassive black hole is the only known thing that will cause the orbit we see in S0-2, and when this close pass happens scientists will observe red-shifted light from the star they will take as proof of General Relativity and the presence of a very small object weighing about 2.6 ± 0.2 million times as much as the sun. And because these scientists want us to believe what you will dismiss as a falsehood or hoax, the rad data from ground and space based observatories will be made available to anybody who wants access.

People who claim science is wrong generally fail to provide any strong and legitimate evidence to support their position. Instead they present someone talking, thinking that his words will somehow convince someone who actually understands calculus and physics.

ParticleMan wrote: ↑March 30th, 2018, 8:40 am

brianj wrote: ↑March 29th, 2018, 8:58 pm

ParticleMan wrote: ↑March 29th, 2018, 4:07 pm The theory from which black holes emerge is untenable for many reasons, but perhaps most strikingly through the observation of electromagnetic phenomena and plasma effects throughout the cosmos and by experiment.

If you wish to support your claims, I would be curious to review the equations that would support something like the orbits S stars are observed to follow in the vicinity of the Saggitarius-A. This summer the star S0-2 will pass 17 light hours, or about 11.4 billion miles, from a figment of scientific imagination at the center of the Milky Way. A make-believe supermassive black hole is the only known thing that will cause the orbit we see in S0-2, and when this close pass happens scientists will observe red-shifted light from the star they will take as proof of General Relativity and the presence of a very small object weighing about 2.6 ± 0.2 million times as much as the sun. And because these scientists want us to believe what you will dismiss as a falsehood or hoax, the rad data from ground and space based observatories will be made available to anybody who wants access.

People who claim science is wrong generally fail to provide any strong and legitimate evidence to support their position. Instead they present someone talking, thinking that his words will somehow convince someone who actually understands calculus and physics.

Indeed, words are empty without data to back them up. This is why EU research is so compelling. Math, which is no substitute for experiment, can be applied only when every force involved is acknowledged and sufficiently understood. The issue is that gravity is still assumed by many to be the only force involved. Meanwhile, the evidence mounts for electromagnetism, which can significantly overpower gravity.

But to understand how electric and plasma forces factor in, you'll need to consider the evidence available, which is primarily observation and experiment, not math. But EU theory isn't devoid math. Here is the current model of the Birkeland current:

http://www.ptep-online.com/2018/PP-53-01.PDF

Seek the Truth wrote: ↑March 29th, 2018, 9:20 pm This guy supports my POV particularly well
.

.

But if you would like to know eg why I don't believe in the big bang I would be happy to discuss it. I should be able to debunk it in a few sentences.

brianj wrote:
You may think he supports your position particularly well, but he misrepresents relativity and modern understanding of astrophysics.

Seek the Truth wrote: ↑March 31st, 2018, 3:48 am

brianj wrote:
You may think he supports your position particularly well, but he misrepresents relativity and modern understanding of astrophysics.

lol. Who doesn't