Adam and Eve Theory

[Clipper]

Hey, this is my theory; I call it the ‘Adam and Eve’ theory.

You may download the word doc here: http://www.filefactory.com/file/b403a25/n/life.docx

 

Key

 

- [God]: In this theory, ‘God’ is an action, or as some as you would say, energy. In this specific theory, the action is represented by opposites. The closest present and future, the step of time, one to another – it can be described as life’s flow. The only way to describe with numbers is in this manner: 1 – 2, or in this manner: 1 – 1. This is because if you literally take one thing, anything; and then add another, you’re making two. If you were to say, “But 4+4=8”; that’s true, but it’s also a lie, because I’m saying it. If you are lost and uninspired, it will explain itself in the next part.

 

- [Oil]: I’m not 100% sure on oil, but it’s a close match.

 

1 & 2 First, God made the heaven and earth. -He’s created H and E, so at this moment, we have H and E. Along with God, who made, them, which was the action, he never named himself, he is something. The formula would be God, which is the action 1 – 1, = Heaven and Earth.

 

3 The earth was without form and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the Spirit of God was moving over the face of the waters. –The earth was without form and void, like oil and, was dark as it wasn’t see-through like water; and the ‘Spirit of God’ (time), was moving over the face of waters

 

4 And God said, "Let there be light"; and there was light . –God was lying, he didn’t say anything. He just added it, 1 – 1; ‘said’ is him producing a command. So he produced sound and light; he gave the ability to ‘Say’, or to ‘Think’; and you think in sound, you learn in sound or by using something that causes sound to learn from, the impulse even.

 

5 And God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness. –He sees it as good (1 – 1); God knows the difference between good and bad. The good would be in his image. This separated the light from the darkness as the darkness was good (1 – 1) also.

 

6 God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day. – God called light and dark, Day and Night, and by doing so created an offspring of Evening and Morning. So one day consists of Evening, Morning, Day and Night; which are both ‘Good’ 1 – 1. The calling part is when he is Evolving his creation; the light is now Day, and the dark is now Night, no longer what he had created; and by existing, granted existence to Morning and Evening.

 

7 And God said, "Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters." -God lies again, just commanding (1 – 1).

 

8 And God made the firmament and separated the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament. And it was so. – The oil and water by existing = creating solids, in-between them, the oil placed under and, above the water. Solid is in the image of oil and water, and sees through the water, but doesn’t see through the oil. So in all: 8. 1 – 1 = Solids, above and below. Solids are good! “And it was so”, (1 – 1)

 

9 And God called the firmament Heaven. And there was evening and there was morning, a second day. - He named the solid, Heaven, he lied; Heaven is what he created first. Then when the solid has evolved into Heaven, the day proceeds, a second day is Day and Night 2, And Evening and Morning 2.

 

10 And God said, "Let the waters under the heavens be gathered together into one place, and let the dry land appear." And it was so. –Again he lies, he just commands, he doesn’t say anything. By doing so he is creating Air, or the Sky, or Space. This is the creation of Water and Solids. (1 – 1)

 

11 God called the dry land Earth, and the waters that were gathered together he called Seas. And God saw that it was good. –He called them names, therefore evolving them from his creation.

 

12 And God said, "Let the earth put forth vegetation, plants yielding seed, and fruit trees bearing fruit in which is their seed, each according to its kind, upon the earth." -Again, a lie, he commanded (1 – 1)

 

13 The earth brought forth vegetation, plants yielding seed according to their own kinds, and trees bearing fruit in which is their seed, each according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. –He’s created plants in the sea and heaven; one for the morning plant, one evening plant, one for the mid-day plant and one for the mid-night plant – and one tree for each also. They also have seed, one which is to produce and other to feed, and both the feed and produce seeds must grow to become what they contain.

 

14 And there was evening and there was morning, a third day. –A mid-day, a mid-night, an evening and a morning. They’re both represented by Day because they’re exact opposites.

 

15 And God said, "Let there be lights in the firmament of the heavens to separate the day from the night; and let them be for signs and for seasons and for days and years, - God commanded 1 - 1 , he didn’t say anything. Also, talking about fire.

 

16 And let them be lights in the firmament of the heavens to give light upon the earth." And it was so. – This Fire is in lights form, and is on the face of the earth and in the heaven. 4x4, the 16th step, coincidently, he connects Light to the Heaven and Earth, at this precise stage.

 

17 And God made the two great lights, the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night; he made the stars also. –He makes the gives the light size, and this size rules over the first light (Day), and he makes one light less, which created stars.

 

18 And God set them in the firmament of the heavens to give light upon the earth, - He also placed ‘more or less size’, on the solids.

 

19 To rule over the day and over the night, and to separate the light from the darkness. And God saw that it was good. –This is incredible. The fire rules over the oil, and the oil is set alight when met with fire, and the fire brings light and rules whether it is light or if it is dark.

 

20 And there was evening and there was morning, a fourth day. - [Eve, Morn, 4MidD, 4MidN]

 

21 And God said, "Let the waters bring forth swarms of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the firmament of the heavens." - He mentions ‘Swarms’ and ‘Birds’. (1 – 1) He commands Swarms from the Water, he then needs Swarms in the sky. The plural usage also show the fact he has taken in to account, ‘more or less Swarms Water, Birds Heaven,’

 

22 So God created the great sea monsters and every living creature that moves, with which the waters swarm, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. – Every great sea monster accounts for both bird and fish, for the birds fly around the heaven, and the fish are in the heaven.

 

23 And God saw that it was good. – (1 – 1)

 

24 And God blessed them, saying, "Be fruitful and multiply and fill the waters in the seas, and let birds multiply on the earth." - He lied, he just commanded 1 – 1. He gives them the ability to eat, and breed; on the solid and in the water. (1 – 1)

 

 

This ties in with the TimeCube theory and E=MC2.

Open for dispute.

 

 

1 Now the serpent was more subtle than any other wild creature that the LORD God had made. He said to the woman, "Did God say, 'You shall not eat of any tree of the garden'?" 2 And the woman said to the serpent, "We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden; 3 but God said, 'You shall not eat of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, neither shall you touch it, lest you die.'" 4 But the serpent said to the woman, "You will not die. 5 For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil." 6

 

In the bible, anything anyone says is a lie; it's just (1 - 1).

It applies to real life also;

 

£10,000,000 says that no-one in this community disputes it, but people will dismiss it, with a lie. It's the truth, and the only reply, any one gives, is a lie.

 

 

Day people are Birds

Night people are Fish

Evening people are Darker Birds

Morning people are Lighter Fish

 

It explains the current races. This book is amazing, it explains everything. It needs to be taken seriously. The word world is an illusion and a lie.

 

 

--

 

Point 20. [4MidDay 4MidNight 4Morning 4Evening] + (1 - 1) = 20 (in the correct sense)

Edited June 6, 2010 by Clipper

[Double K]

£10,000,000 says that no-one in this community disputes it, but people will dismiss it, with a lie. It's the truth, and the only reply, any one gives, is a lie.

 

Sounds like you've already made your mind up then.

The point of a forum is discussion, but this statement already disputes all discussion as pointless.

 

In the face of that though, I do dispute your theory.

It makes absolutely no sense, it's about twice as convoluted as the bible.

For the record, I don't think the bible is "true" either, but these statements are really unrelated and placing a numerical value true/false statement on that just seems odd.

 

If you are looking for contradictions in the bible you need look no further than the start of it:

In the begginning god created heaven and earth, moon and stars and sun.

several days later, let there be light - but the sun was already created therefore light already existed when he created the sun.

[Clipper]

But sir, the bible is E=MC2.

 

God created the Heaven and Earth.

 

(1 - 1) = (1 - 1)2, squared.

 

And the earth was without form; so it wasn't solid, and was dark, like oil.

 

God didn't say "let there be light" he just existed as (1 - 1) or "was so"

 

No, he makes the stars and moon on the 17th step.

Light and Dark were represented by the water and oil, from the beginning.

 

I doubt you even read through it.

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

Step 1.

 

(1 - 1)

 

Step 2: Heaven and Earth + (1 - 1)

 

(H+E)2

 

Step 3: ((Darkness(D) + Face of the deep(F)) (((Spirit of God (1 - 1)) + ((Face of the Waters(W))))

 

(H+E)2 = ((DF)) + ((1-1) W))

 

Step 4: He lies and says let there be light! Which is just (1-1).

 

((DF)) + ((1-1) W))2

 

Step 5: He sees that the light '((DF)) + ((1-1) W))2', is 'good' (1 - 1). Separating it from the already (1-1) darkness.

 

Look, I promise you; if you put a bit of thought into it you'll be surprised. If not then it really is too late.

[mooeypoo]

Yea... no.

 

We're a science forum, not a religious dogma forum. If you have an actual scientific idea to suggest, feel free. If your intention is to start religious argument in disguise, then go elsewhere.

 

Please read our rules. Thread closed.

 

~moo

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

Fine, people seem to beg to waste their time with this. I will repeat the request, however, that Clipper avoid from *lecturing* to people and instead practice proper scientific discussion with evidence, reference and substantiation.

 

Have fun.

[ydoaPs]

That theory I brought makes no sense, as it uses false mathematics and doesn't explain things fully;

I think that's about all that needs to be said.

[AzurePhoenix]

Lies propagated by the Space Cylinder! My eyes have been opened, and it's clear to me that all Darker Birds must be put down if the Fish are to take their rightful place over all.

[Anura]

Your absolutely insane for thinking of the adam and eve story as a theory. Im sorry.

[the tree]

We're all aware that (1-1)=0, right? Or are we going for some crazy type of subtraction?

 

Of course, trying to drag sense out of numerology is significantly harder than blood out of a stone.

[swansont]

Your absolutely insane for thinking of the adam and eve story as a theory. Im sorry.

 

You can attack the conjecture without personal attacks on the person presenting it. Please do so.

[Clipper]

How would I explain it in a correct way,

Does anyone see what I'm trying to say?

 

If you literally have 1 of anything, and then you add another, you have two right?

But by saying 1, I have processed, so me add 1. Does anyone understand that?

 

If not then, as this is open, I'll spend today trying to make it science.

[swansont]

I'll spend today trying to make it science.

 

That would involve an a priori method of determining the numerical value you assign to something.

[Clipper]

That would involve an a priori method of determining the numerical value you assign to something.

 

Advice noted, I'll be back later.

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

Disclaimer

 

I am not religious – I do not follow any specific religion, however I believe in God. I don’t put a religion onto the God I believe in and I don’t follow any routine; up until two days ago I hadn’t touched, nor read the bible. I decided to read it out of curiosity as I’ve been having these extremely weird and thoughtful, yet deformed theories; which some wouldn’t class as a theory and just plain nonsense. Everything I’m about to say will probably make no sense; furthermore I have little evidence to back up anything I say. The only advantage I do have, that gives me the drive to believe – is that I’m human, and knowing what a human knows. In science I didn’t pay attention, funny enough I did 0% coursework – I used to play Copter and, draw pictures; I did not want to learn. I’m not here to offend anyone or to rip down communities; I’m here only to say my view, and my view is on life; not what I’m told life is.

 

Timeline Mathematics

 

In this speculation, I’ve substituted the normal mathematics for something I call: Timeline Mathematics; where I would write whole numbers in their most primitive form. For example: [1 + 1 = 2], would become [1 – 1]. The ‘-‘shows the process, from one number to the next. So [1 + 2 = 3], would come up as: [1 – 1 – 1], which is 3, ones.

 

Carrying on, if I were to say [1 x 4], would become, [1 – 1 – 1 – 1]. If I were to say [4x4]:

 

[1 – 1 – 1 – 1 - 1 – 1 – 1 – 1 - 1 – 1 – 1 – 1 - 1 – 1 – 1 – 1]: It would be 16 ones.

 

The symbol ‘-‘ is not subtraction, it’s purely there to show an action; and only an action. From 1, if I wanted to count to two, I would do it like this: 1 – 1, rather than, 1 – 2, as doing that in timeline math would equate 3. If I were to count to 10:

 

1 – 1 – 1 – 1 – 1 – 1 – 1 – 1 – 1 – 1

 

The ‘God’ Principle

 

In this speculation, I perceive God as an action; not a singularity. An action, using timeline math, can be described as: 1 – 1. If I were to take you back to square one, spiritually, cause our image (in this speculation), would not be accepted. Then we watched the opening moments of the universe, the first milliseconds. Nothing became something, which again can be described as 1 – 1: from one point, to another.

 

That ‘birth’ of the universe would be seen; from pure emptiness something appears, (nothing 1 – 1 something). In hope that at-least my method is understandable, I will continue.

 

Further Disclaimer

 

The next part shows extracts from the bible; this is not meant to offend or dispute anyone’s beliefs. As I said before, I am not a believer in Christianity or any other religion for that matter, and I am for sure not racist or discriminative. If anything offends you then please understand that it was not done in spite.

 

A+E Speculation

 

First, God made the heaven and earth

 

“First off, God” (1 – 1); the passage also starts with the number 1, as if it was the first step. God, then makes the heaven and earth; which immediately in anyone’s eyes is the World and the Heaven some people believe is there when you die; however I don’t believe that we should be looking at it from our view. I believe the Heaven and the Earth are extremely simple; existing as only 2 opposites. For example: Heaven – Earth (1 – 1).

 

The earth was without form and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the Spirit of God was moving over the face of the waters.

 

It explains that the Earth had no form and was dark. The “Spirit of God” was “Moving” across the face of the waters. Immediately I took the Spirit of God, as (1 – 1) and even thought of Time. Now, we understand that the Earth was without form, so therefore it wouldn’t be a Solid, and it was Dark and has a face. This makes me think of Water side by side with a darker, liquid. My first thought was Oil, only because I had read the next few parts. If I were to create a diagram for this section, it would look as follows:

 

 

Using timeline mathematics we would currently have, from step 1: (1 – 1 – H1 – E1 – DD1 – FW1 – 1) Explaining how I’ve done that is extremely hard. What I’ve done is, from the process (1 – 1) has come another process, in its image, H1 – E1 (which can also be described as 1 – 1). Now take 1 – 1, and what it stands for using Timeline Maths. Add it unto H1 – E1 (Heaven and Earth). It would look as follows (H1 – E1)(1 – 1), which can be described as squared. (H1 – E1)2. Which equates, (DD1 – FW1 – 1).

 

(H1 – E1)2 = (H1 – E1) - (DD1 – FW1 - 1). DD is the Darkness on the Face of the deep and FW is the Face of the Waters. – 1 being the Spirit of God.

 

And God said, "Let there be light"; and there was light.

 

This part is important to the stability to the speculation. When it says, he Says “Let the be Light”, it’s lying; as all he did do was command, or impulse the action: from (DD1 – FW1 – 1), came (DD1 – FW1 - 1)(1 – 1). Which can be described as: (DD1 – FW1 - 1)2.

 

And God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness.

 

Take a second here to revert back to my diagram. Place ‘Light’ on all the white that surrounds it. I don’t know, or rather I’m not too sure if what he made was fire, or just light. If you make two notes (onenote is great), one for flames coming off of the face of the deep and the other for light surrounding the whole box. (Also, ignore the box, it’s just a border). He sees that is “Good”, which is in his image (1 – 1), so he separates from the Darkness. Now we have. (DD1 – L1) – (FW1 – 1)

 

God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day.

 

On this step, it says ‘he calls’ which is a lie, he just probes the action (1 – 1); to light and darkness. By doing so he evolves light and darkness into a commencing day, by doing so, creating Evening and Morning. So , ( DD1 – L1)2. This equates, (DD2 – L2) (M1 – E1). At this step we have: (DD2 – L2) (M1 – E1) – (FW1 – 1). If you’re lost here, don’t read on; there’s no point because it won’t make sense.

 

And God said, "Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters.

 

What it says he says, is a lie; again he commands (1 – 1). So: (FW1 – 1)2.

 

And God made the firmament and separated the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament. And it was so.

 

Revert back to the diagram and place a line down the middle, separating the waters from the earth, the rotate it 90 degrees, to the right. We would now have (FW1 – 1) ( FR1 – 1) and (DD2 – L2) (M1 – E1). Which is (1 – 1) (1 – 1).

 

And God called the firmament Heaven. And there was evening and there was morning, a second day.

 

Again, he ‘calls’, so (1 – 1). ( FR1 – 1)2

 

And God said, "Let the waters under the heavens be gathered together into one place, and let the dry land appear."

 

Another intentional lie in the book, he simply commands (1 – 1). (FW1 – 1)2

 

God called the dry land Earth, and the waters that were gathered together he called Seas. And God saw that it was good.

 

Again, he calls... (1 – 1). I don’t want to keep repeating myself, but hopefully its showing some sort of rhythm. So he has evolved: (FW1 – 1) and (FR1 – 1). Making ( FW2) - (EA2). In the process, (FW – 1)(FR1 – 1)2. And he seen that is was ‘good’, (1 – 1).

 

And God said, "Let the earth put forth vegetation, plants yielding seed, and fruit trees bearing fruit in which is their seed, each according to its kind, upon the earth."

 

(1 – 1). Which would show as, (EA2)2.

 

The earth brought forth vegetation, plants yielding seed according to their own kinds, and trees bearing fruit in which is their seed, each according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.

 

(EA2)2 – (P4 - S4) (T4 – F4) and he saw that it was ‘good’.

 

And there was evening and there was morning, a third day.

 

This is the most confusing part for me. I personally think that the day consisted of four parts. A mid-day, a mid-night, morning and evening. (MidD1 – MidN1) Morn (1 – 1) Even (1 – 1)

 

God said, "Let there be lights in the firmament of the heavens to separate the day from the night; and let them be for signs and for seasons and for days and years,”

 

Before I explain this part, I think this only works if you take everything as a certain result. It’s weird because it works, that’s the only reason I’m interested. He commands (1 – 1). So: (DD2 – L2) (M1 - E1)2

 

And let them be lights in the firmament of the heavens to give light upon the earth." And it was so.

 

(1 – 1) - So (DD2 – L2) (M1 – E1) (1 – 1) (1 – 1) or (DD2 – L2) (M1 – E1)4

 

And God made the two great lights, the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night; he made the stars also.

 

As this is a discussion board, let’s discuss before I continue. The current 17th step, and the before 16; let’s focus on the 16 steps this book has taken, then together try and create the formula for step 17. If I discuss it with you, we might decipher something or come to a conclusion. If it doesn’t make sense to you, you’re either not breaking rules, or I haven’t explained it well enough. It makes perfect sense described using the technique I used. If you understand ‘Timeline Math’ you should understand. I don’t know how you wouldn’t but I’m open for questions or discussion.

 

If you don't understand the idea of Timeline math, nothing this thread says will make sense to you. Also I haven't created a Key to explain most of the variables, but if you use your brain you should be able to tell what each one represents, for example: FR1 (Firmament) and T4 (Trees), etc.

 

I've tried my hardest to make this more scientific, if it's not than in light of it, it's in the speculation section. It's not to be classed as a real theory or me poisoning your minds with nonsense. Please, let's discuss.

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

Just to add. I'm not one of those people that walks around believing in ghosts or that one day I'll fly; I'm that type of person that writes fantasy stories, and wished the world was like a dream.

Edited June 7, 2010 by Clipper
Consecutive posts merged.

[swansont]

The problem boils down to this: Why is God = 1, and not some other number? Possibly a transcendental number, like e or pi?

 

That points to one reason that this is numerology and nothing more, and why it won't be taken seriously on a science forum.

[Sayonara]

...even if it does make a truly delicious salad.

[Clipper]

The problem boils down to this: Why is God = 1, and not some other number? Possibly a transcendental number, like e or pi?

 

That points to one reason that this is numerology and nothing more, and why it won't be taken seriously on a science forum.

 

 

I understand, but as 1 - 1 it works, as pi it doesn't.

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

So you pick the number for God so that your hypothesis works? Isn't that backwards?

[Clipper]

So you pick the number for God so that your hypothesis works? Isn't that backwards?

 

I wouldn't call it picking, more like predicting, by following the pattern. If you read past that point, it goes much further, which I have worked out, but you won't be interested. It tells a story and it follows that exact pattern, through. The snake resembles a evolved fish, and it lies to her, to which she replies with a lie, in reply to Gods lie - to which the snake replies to with another lie. It continues and she bites the apple. At this turn, God lies once more, and half of him is placed on the earth. Like he just pressed go on the 'energy' button.

 

Oh, and on the 16th step, when he connects the heavens is 4x4

 

If it was true, it would mean we're doing it wrong.

Edited June 7, 2010 by Clipper

[swansont]

It's self-fulfilling (and doesn't taste great). In a similar fashion, I can say without fear of contradiction that celebrities die in threes. When #4 dies, that just starts a new grouping, or I can simply define one of the four as not a "real celebrity."

[John Cuthber]

I don't understand why nobody has taken a shot at the open goal here.

Clipper says "£10,000,000 says that no-one in this community disputes it"

OK.

I dispute your ideas Clipper.

Pay up or admit that you lied when you made that offer.

If you admit to dishonesty, why should we give you any attention?

 

I'm citing this

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/dispute

as the meaning of dispute and I'm citing the notion of the Holy Trinity as evidence that God may very well be said to equal 3

[ecoli]

I wouldn't call it picking, more like predicting, by following the pattern. If you read past that point, it goes much further, which I have worked out, but you won't be interested. It tells a story and it follows that exact pattern, through. The snake resembles a evolved fish, and it lies to her, to which she replies with a lie, in reply to Gods lie - to which the snake replies to with another lie. It continues and she bites the apple. At this turn, God lies once more, and half of him is placed on the earth. Like he just pressed go on the 'energy' button.

 

Oh, and on the 16th step, when he connects the heavens is 4x4

 

If it was true, it would mean we're doing it wrong.

 

Numerology doesn't make predictions, because its not testable.

[Clipper]

It's self-fulfilling (and doesn't taste great). In a similar fashion, I can say without fear of contradiction that celebrities die in threes. When #4 dies, that just starts a new grouping, or I can simply define one of the four as not a "real celebrity."

 

So you understand?

[mooeypoo]

What he is saying is that your math is flawed, Clipper. You are purposefully picking something that will work in your theory -- you are fitting the "evidence" to the theory. In science, things work the other way around - you fit the theory to the evidence and only *afterwards* you make predictions and see if they come true.

 

Also, what's the falsifiability condition of your theory? There must be one.

[swansont]

So you understand?

 

No, I'm saying when you can make the numbers say anything, they say nothing at all. Science has value because when it's wrong, it's verifiably wrong.

[Clipper]

No, I'm saying when you can make the numbers say anything, they say nothing at all. Science has value because when it's wrong, it's verifiably wrong.

 

[1 - God]

[Heaven - Earth]

[Deep - Water] - [Face1 - Face2] [Darkness] "Spirit of God"

1(lie) - 1(good) - [Light - Darkness]

[light - Light2] [darkness - Darkness2] [morning - evening] - 1 (day) - 1 (lie)

[FirmanentAbove - FirmanentBelow] [WTR - FCE1] 1 (Spirit of God) 1 (Spirit of God)

[FA2 FB2] - [evening - morning] - 1 (day2) - 1 (lie)

[FA4 FB4] - [Earth - Seas] - 1(good) - 1 (lie)

[FA6 FB6] - [Earth - Seas] - [Plants4 - Seed4] [Tree4 - Fruit4] - [morning - evening] 1 (day3) - 1 (lie) - 1 (lie)

 

Ok, don't worry about it then; I'm wrong - it's the only number than does fit though. The evidence I have is 'it fitting' - the same process as if I seen a screw with a cross in the middle - I'd pick up a Philips.

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

Last thing I'm gonna post on this topic; if it doesn't seem applicable I might as-well give up.

 

1. [God] [Heaven and Earth]

2. [Face of the Deep - Face of the Waters] [Darkness- "Spirit of God"]

3. *lie* *truth*

4. good*truth* [Face of the Light] [Face of the Dark]

5. [Day (x2) - Night x2] [Evening - Morning]

6. *lie*

7. [firmanentA - firminateB] *truth*

8. [firmanentA2 firminantB2] - [Day4 Night4]

 

This is the pattern I'm looking at.

Edited June 7, 2010 by Clipper
Consecutive posts merged.

[mooeypoo]

It's not applicable because you're picking the data to fit the theory, Clipper. There's no *REASON* why God=1 other than because you want it to be. There's no reason why any of the other numbers are the way they are other than because you want them to be.

 

If you could find another valid reason of why the numbers are the way they are, independent of your theory, and *then* have the theory explain them, great. But you can't. You nitpick numbers just because they fit, and the are meaningless. Why can't I choose God = 3? I can even give you more reasons why, if any number, god should be 3 or 7 ('magical' numbers in the bible, used a lot in the context of 'holiness' in the bible, blaaa blaaa) - you can't really give me a valid reason why my numbers are inferior to yours other than because they don't fit to what you want.

 

That's not how science is done. I can come up with random numbers and random mathematical gymnastics that shows something completely different, and there will be no way to test which theory is better - your or mine - because both of them rely on personal preference to numbers rather than some external evidence or connection.

 

~moo