Nobel Prize winners who steal from God

 

They've been building their careers all their lives, and anyone who spends 70-80 years of their life on themselves is not going to waste eternity on God.

Luke 17:10 ... We are useless servants, we only did what we owed.

When the inventor, entrepreneur and businessman Alfred Nobel died, his will stated that his fortune should be used to reward "those" who had brought the greatest benefit to humanity in the previous year. 

Do Nobel laureates glorify God? Show me a Nobel Prize winner who does not steal the glory from God! Nobel Prizes do not come easy, though. As for health and science, they are only awarded to real, ground-breaking researchers who improve the quality of life. 

To improve quality of life, you need quality of life, or life. Where does life come from? Do scientists know? They don't know, yet they are stuck in their self-proclaimed god image, which they proclaim as abiogenesis. For them, it is the gap-god that makes them deny the real God. But real knowledge begins where science ends, drowning in a morass of false theories.

IN TRACK THE ORIGIN OF THE UNIVERSE

"Today, the most accepted theory is that the Universe was created in the Big Bang about 13.8 billion (± 200 million) years ago. It then began to expand, and this expansion continues today." -https://hu.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vil%C3%A1gegyetem/

"The phases of the Big Bang: During the first fraction of a second of the explosion, the Universe was actually inflated, and only then did it settle into the expansion rate that we see today. By the end of the first second, the first building blocks of atoms had already been formed; quarks and leptons. The four forces that define the Universe are created. Strong force - acting between quarks; Weak force - acting between quarks and leptons (hence beta decay); Electromagnetic force - such as light, the magnetic force; Gravitational force - acting between all bodies of mass.

By the end of the third minute, the nuclei of the simplest few elements of the periodic table were formed, mainly hydrogen and helium nuclei, but electrons were still free to move. It was not until the end of the three hundred thousandth year that the free electrons were in place, forming the very first atoms. The world was then nothing but a dense, hot cloud of hydrogen and helium. It then took billions of years for the expanding nebula to "clump", form pre-galaxies and, under gravitational attraction, start star formation at their centres." - Today's scientific view

The 2023 Nobel Prize in Physics was awarded for "experimental methods for generating attosecond light pulses to study the dynamics of electrons in matter".

Think about it, if the universe was created by blind forces of unknown origin for no intelligent reason, how can the development of a tool to study the dynamics of electrons in matter alone be the basis for any kind of attention, while the existence of the entire atomic system and the fine-tuning of the universe to support life is unremarkable. Why does the identification and measurement of intelligent material motions resulting from a meaningless big bang not extend to the fact that the world of atoms cannot have an unintelligent background if a Nobel Prize is awarded for measuring intelligent motions in it?!

If measuring the dynamics of the electrons in matter requires extraordinary intelligence - just to measure it - why is the system - of which only a millionth part has been magnified - not worthy of extraordinary attention? What is used to provide the material for the measurement - the dynamics of electrons in matter - has perhaps nothing to do with the specific atomic structure that provides the basis for the measurement in the first place?

If only the measurement of the dynamics of electrons in matter is prized, why is the something /atomic structure/ from which the measurement is derived in the first place not prized? If the intelligent recognition and measurement of the dynamics of electrons in matter is worthy of an award, why is the structure of matter itself, which is the basis of the whole measurement, not worthy of an award, or even of attention?

Mainstream science and physics don't see any intelligence behind it either, they think it's just ad hoc, it just fell into the lap of the scientific experts who make a great effort to find out the very subtle manifestations of the meaningful manifestations of the meaningless matter/universe, and they consider it the highlight of their individual careers if they find out something that happens in it and can even show it. They can even profit from it, see in this case medicine profiting from the background result of random forces on a completely meaningless force basis of dynamic particles of matter to the benefit of disease eradication. And they reap the moral rewards for themselves.

EGYPTIAN HIEROGLYPHICS

As an illustration, those who once spent time and effort deciphering the Egyptian hieroglyphs are rewarded by posterity - as much as they are. In any case, the value of their efforts is recognised. And how do the rewards for deciphering and the existence of the hieroglyphs themselves relate to each other?

Do they just exist? Did they just fall out of the sky? Were they created by the laws of physics and then carved in stone by the forces of nature? After all, what can happen by itself, does happen. It's just a matter of time.

Do the creators of hieroglyphics deserve any recognition? None at all. What about their interpreters? They do. Is there no correlation between the intelligence behind the hieroglyphs and the intelligence of their interpreters? If it took intelligence to decipher it /even to decipher a few words/, then those few words reflect intelligence to have been created in the first place. In particular, all the hieroglyphs found prove the intelligence of the underlying origin, that it is needed, because without it, under the influence of blind forces they cannot be created.

Didn't the creation of the atomic structure /as hieroglyph/ require intelligence just to decipher its individual subunits and show how they work? "For experimental methods to create attosecond light pulses to study the dynamics of electrons in matter." Isn't that like deciphering some part of the hieroglyphic tree? It sounds like it might.

Mainstream science seems not to have noticed. The physicists don't seem to have noticed. Why not? Perhaps they don't have the instruments, or perhaps their vision is not inclined to notice it?

Well, we are certainly not all the same, especially in our perceptions and conclusions. And we disagree with certain conclusions. For example, Max Planck's conclusion does not match the conclusion of today's elite scientists in physics. Because what did the German physicist Max Planck, the founder of quantum mechanics, who laid the foundations of modern physics alongside Albert Einstein, say:

Max Planck /who, along with Albert Einstein, the founder of quantum mechanics, laid the foundations of modern physics/ says: "As a man who has devoted his whole life to the purest science, the study of matter, I can say that as a result of my research on atoms, matter as such does not exist! All matter comes into being and exists only because of a force that makes the particles of the atom vibrate and holds this smallest solar system of the atom together. Behind this force we must assume the existence of a conscious and intelligent spirit. This mind is the matrix of all matter." /Das Wesen der Materie [The Nature of Matter], speech in Florence, Italy (1944) (in Archiv zur Geschichte der Max-Planck-Gesellschaft, Abt. Va, Rep. 11 Planck, No. 1797)/

In other words, behind the dynamics of electrons in matter, "we must assume the existence of a conscious and intelligent spirit. This mind is the matrix of all matter." Says he, who nevertheless understood physics on some level. After all, he won the Nobel Prize. Scientists are being honoured for their efforts, reaping the Nobel prizes. And the public never ceases to shower them with their distinguished attention and acclaim.

[Whether Max Planck also stole glory from God as a Nobel laureate is left to God, whom Max Planck identified as a conscious and intelligent spirit, to decide.]

Here, no one gets any attention, recognition or honours. Especially the One who created the entire atomic system and fine-tuned the universe.

In fact, the prevailing ideology today is that the universe started with a random bang, and not a creative act at all. "The chain of events leading up to man began suddenly and sharply, at a specific moment in time, in a flash of light and energy." /Robert Jastrow/

However, the laws of physics describe forces that are neither too strong nor too weak. The speed of light is not too fast, not too slow. The expansion rate of the universe is not too fast, not too slow. These are astronomically incredibly improbable.

Nevertheless, most modern cosmologists are convinced that traditional scientific progress ultimately leads to an independent understanding of the origin and evolution of the universe, without the need for God or any other supernatural involvement. Nevertheless, "If the universe had not been created with the utmost precision, we would never have come into existence," says John A. O'Keefe, a NASA astrophysicist at Harvard.

Is it the individual opinion, insight or intuition of each person that decides whether something is black or white, whether it came about on its own or whether it had to be created by an intelligent background planning and execution apparatus? Well, that seems to be the way it is handled by those concerned. Otherwise, it should be decided by the bare facts and the objective conclusions drawn from them.

And the facts speak for themselves:

As with the fine-tuning of physics, the Earth's position in the universe and the intricately choreographed geological and chemical processes work together with great efficiency to create a safe place for humans.

Astronomer Guillermo Gonzalez and philosopher of science Jay Wesley Richards, for example, argue that a star with the highly unusual properties of our Sun - right mass, right light, right age, right distance, right orbit, right galaxy, right place - would be needed to support living organisms on an orbiting planet. Many factors make our solar system and our place in the universe just right for a habitable environment.

There are appropriate background factors, the recognition of which is obvious, only their intelligent origins do not meet scientific public taste. For their origin is questionable.

Quantum mechanics scientists say that the physical universe is created from information. Information is fundamental, and the physical universe is in the process of being created, and it is from this information that the physical universe is derived.

Seth Lloyd, professor of quantum information at MIT, says in an interview with Robert Lawrence Kuhn on Closer to the Truth:

"So what is the universe? The universe is a physical system that systematically contains and processes information and can do everything a computer can do." He sees the universe as a computer as a scientific fact, not just a metaphor.

According to Raphael Bousso, a string theorist at the University of California, Berkeley, information is not just a measurement tool, but a primary component of what happens in the world.

Physicist Paul Davies says: "Historically, matter has been at the bottom of the explanatory chain, and information has been a kind of secondary derivative of that." He added: "Now there is a growing interest among at least a small group of physicists to turn that on its head and say maybe at the bottom the universe is about information and information processing and that matter is a secondary concept."

Vlatko Vedral, University of Oxford. "It's suggestive to find the information processing of everything." If these scientists are right, where does this information come from? They don't come from natural or physical processes. The information comes from the mind. Quantum mechanics shows that the materialistic worldview of space-time is wrong. It comes from information. In our everyday experience we know that all information comes from the mind. A program on a computer first comes to the mind of the computer programmer. The writer of this book first conceives the idea in his mind. If information is fundamental to the universe, and the universe is formed from this information, where does this information come from? It is reasonable to conclude that it came from a universal mind. We can call this universal mind the mind of God." /The conclusion that information is fundamental, from which space/time emerges -https://medium.com/@stuartz2727/the-implication-that-information-is-fundamental-from-which-space-time-emerges-ba7d6727eae2

We know from experience that information in digital or alphabetic form - what we call series-specific - always comes from an intelligent source. The designer must have anticipated the universe because fine-tuning was created at the very beginning of the universe. Fine-tuning problems point to a transcendent design that predates matter, space, time and energy.

If this is true, then all credit, praise and thanks are due to God, who created the universe, the nest of life that pulsates within it, and lined it with the principle of eternal love. For as it is written in the Bible, "Out of him proceeds, through him passes, into him all things flow." (Romans 11:36, translated by Károly Balázs)

IN TRACK OF THE ORIGIN OF LIFE

"It is essential for life that nucleotides are joined together, but the chances of a nucleic acid (DNA) being created are minimal - ten to the minus 158th power (to be clear about the ratios, ten to the minus second power is one hundredth). This could not have happened by chance, without conscious intervention...

Suppose you have 100 nucleotides. You accidentally hit that structure on the first try. And then what? You have one piece. And you need tens of millions! Pretty sure it will never happen again. The random creation of nucleic acids with a precise structure is NOT POSSIBLE! Without it there is no material life structure. This frog must be swallowed by materialism. And nucleic acid is only one of the tasks, we have to produce proteins, hormones, sugars, fats, everything... It takes nearly a hundred thousand nucleotides to make a non-poisonous snake into a poisonous snake, for example... This is the living chemical picture. There can be no coincidence behind causal events!" /Prof. Miklós Baumann, biochemist, Creation or creation?/ - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVcPGUrgMNg

„Materialistic ideology has subverted the study of biological and cosmological origins so that the actual content of these sciences has become corrupted. The problem, therefore, is not merely that science is being used illegitimately to promote a materialistic worldview, but that this worldview is actively undermining scientific inquiry, leading to incorrect and unsupported conclusions about biological and cosmological origins.” -https://uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/on-the-impossibility-of-abiogenesis/

David Alan Plaisted is a computer science professor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. It says: „According to the theory of evolution, taken in the broad sense, living matter arose at some point in the past from non-living matter by ordinary chemical and physical processes. This is called abiogenesis. Creationists often attempt to calculate the probability of this occurring, which is difficult to do. However, it is possible to give an estimate based on reasonable assumptions. Amino acids and nucleic acids are the building blocks of life, and they come in two forms, which spiral left and right. All life consists of only one of these forms. Since both forms are generated equally by inorganic chemical processes, it seems hard to imagine that life could have originated having only one of these forms. Recently it has been claimed that meteorites have an excess of one form over another. But due to racemization, these forms tend to equalize over time, so we can expect that in a primitive earth, there would have been essentially equal numbers of both forms.

Biologists currently estimate that the smallest life form as we know it would have needed about 256 genes. (See Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Volume 93, Number 19, pp. 10268-10273 at http://journals.at-home.com/get_doc/1854083/8551). A gene is typically 1000 or more base pairs long, and there is some space in between, so 256 genes would amount to about 300,000 bases of DNA. The deoxyribose in the DNA ``backbone'' determines the direction in which it will spiral. Since organic molecules can be generated in both forms, the chance of obtaining all one form or another in 300,000 bases is one in two to the 300,000 power. This is about one in 10 to the 90,000 power. It seems to be necessary for life that all of these bases spiral in the same direction. Now, if we imagine many, many DNA molecules being formed in the early history of the earth, we might have say 10 ¹⁰⁰ molecules altogether (which is really much too high). But even this would make the probability of getting one DNA molecule right about one in 10 to the 89,900 power, still essentially zero. And we are not even considering what proteins the DNA generates, or how the rest of the cell structure would get put together! So the real probability would be fantastically small.

Biologists are hypothesizing some RNA-based life form that might have had a smaller genome and might have given rise to a cell with about 256 genes. Until this is demonstrated, one would have to say that the problem of abiogenesis is very severe indeed for the theory of evolution.” /The Improbability of Abiogenesis -https://www.cs.unc.edu/~plaisted/ce/abiogenesis.html

Why is Abiogenesis Such a Tought Nut to Crack? - https://fortuneonline.org/articles/why-is-abiogenesis-such-a-tough-nut-to-crack.pdf

WHY DOES THE WORLD NOT WORK ACCORDING TO GOD'S WILL?

Could it be that the world doesn't work according to God's will /directing principle/ because people translate and appropriate everything that can be moved into their own language and vision and then supplement it with instructions of their own devising? It is very possible.

However, as far as the dynamics of matter are concerned, they are not exempt from the control imposed on them. There is no problem with the way they function. They even bring Nobel prizes to those who invent them. Because they have no free will.

Like people who use their free will largely to choose a life without God, which they use and exploit at their own pleasure. They cherish their own career, for life.

THE DEFAULT POSITION, WHICH SCIENCE DENIES WITH FULL AWARENESS

Man was originally created for a life without death on a paradisiacal earth to spread it to the whole planet. He has all the anatomical endowments to do so. The human brain is the most complex structure in the universe, containing some 86 billion neurons, 85 billion other cells and over 100 trillion connections. Hundreds of millions of dollars of research have failed to fully map its structure, which shows that it was created for a conscious purpose and not by blind chance for a lifespan of about 70-80 years.

The human brain is programmed to learn any language. The human body has the ability to heal itself, it has an immune system, its bones are stronger than concrete, the appendix is important for our immune system, especially in young children. It acts as a reservoir of good bacteria, helping the intestinal tract to recover after illnesses that cause diarrhoea. Our eyes make up only about 2% of our body weight, yet we can see 10 million different colours and detect a single photon of light in total darkness. Millions of unparalleled functions make everyday life easier. Why have this ability if you're barely going to live a few decades?

According to atheism, any part of the human body is programmed - if the scientist were to create it - otherwise it is not! Man designs all his creations, the entire outfit he wears daily, but the anatomical wonders beneath are not designed by anyone, they are completely purposeless, meaninglessly spontaneously formed!

Nobel Prizes are awarded for some small discovery of the wonders of the universe, but the GREAT WHOLE UNIVERSE is insisted by atheist scientists to have no Creator. But why?

They steal from God so that they can reap the glory for themselves. How would you like it if your intelligent creations were attributed to chance by industrial spies and thieves, and they were to gain fame and enormous financial gain for themselves, and you were to be given nothing? Would you not be outraged? Yet that is what you are taught, that there is no meaning to life! Especially since there is no one behind it from whom it can come.

WHO HAS BENEFITED HUMANITY THE MOST?

Luke 19:10 For the Son of man came to seek and to save that which was lost.

What was lost? The true purpose of life is to live your life consciously in accordance with God's will. And not to be at the mercy of false ideas, propaganda, self-serving party ideologies, false church philosophies.

Churches are even unable to identify God. Their ideology is that God is in three persons, yet one. But if all three persons /Father-Son-Holy Spirit/ are real God, then there are three Gods and not one!

John 17:3 Now this is eternal life, that they may know you, the only true God, and the one you sent, Jesus Christ.

Jesus spoke of one God, who is his heavenly Father, to whom he prayed, who sent him, whose teachings he brought, and with whom he wants to reconcile you, so that you may live according to his will forever on a recreated earth. Jesus is the mediator between God and man.

Repentance is like taking a cresk test in traffic. You learn and obey the traffic rules. God's moral principles are based on love. All men are originally your neighbours, for we are created of one blood. But people have become alienated from each other. In school they start misleading you with propaganda of evolution replacing God.

But God did not create with the biological law of survival the winners of the life-and-death evolutionary contest, that was instituted after the Fall. Originally there was perfect peace between humans and animals!

The coming of Jesus and the promise of a new world are not taught to you by the popular media, because they don't know it themselves. Where does the light of understanding begin? The Bible says: "For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life." (John 3:16) What you do with this love is up to you.

He who spends his 70 or 80 years on himself will not waste eternity on God. Whether God will waste eternity on them, we shall see.

Impermanence is the scandal of eternity, and atheists are taking thoroughly their fair share.

Are you a Nobel Prize winner and an atheist? Salvation is available to all, but grace is not reserved for atheists, but for believers.

The atheistic scientist who does not seek personal glory from his scientific achievement has a soul a hair's breadth away from Christ to touch. Or has already touched it.

„Now consider this, ye that forget God, lest I tear [you] in pieces, and [there be] none to deliver. Whoso offereth praise glorifieth me: and to him that ordereth [his] conversation [aright] will I shew the salvation of God.” (Psalms 50:22-23, KJV)