Anyone else very interested in The DaVinci Code?

[Edge]

I've been reading through all the information in the book...everything to do with Phi numbers. It all seems more than a coincidence, doesn't it? All of the evidence that's supported in the book points to this phi number...from life to architecture to math, music, the universe, geometry, theology, etc...

Is there really something or someone divine out there who is making everything based on this phi number? I find it rather odd that all aspects of human life and the universe follow this number...and it's more than just a coincidence.

What are your thoughts?

In case for those who don't know about this topic, please go to this website and it'll put it all in a nutshell: http://goldennumber.net/index.html

It's worth the read. Trust me.

[right is wrong]

1. great book

but not too surprising that nature follows patterns. Evolution has had billions of years to perfect life. SHHHHH - don't tell the creationists

[Edge]

2. I'm a creationist.

[ProudGerman]

3. be a little more specific

are you a god created everything creationist, or are you a god created everything 6000 years ago and put dinosaur bones here to test your faith creationist?

[Edge]

6. I'm a "God created everything" creationist.

I'm not an extreme creationist.

I'd be shunned out of the geology department if I believed the Earth is only 6000 years old.

[A HERETIC I AM]

5. You're a Creationist?

Then you are of the opinion that "Poof, it suddenly appeared" is a valid scientific concept?

You have GOT to be kidding.

Science and reason over myth and superstition

[Edge]

7. All science and reason shows for the formation of the universe...

is "poof, it suddenly appeared." The big bang is explained that very way.

You've got to use a better arguement. And please, respect my beliefs and don't knock me for them. :grr:

[Journeyman]

8. Excellent response, Edge. . .

May not agree with your beliefs and all that, but everyone is entitled to an opinion, and even those without an opinion are entitled to respect (at the least).

[A HERETIC I AM]

9. I never said the Big Bang theory was the only explanation ...

but i can tell you this, The story of Genesis is nothing but a story that, in the end, involves magic. If you want to think that magic had a hand in all this, please dont run for school board.

And by the way, i DONT have to "Respect your beliefs". If i find your beliefs to be outdated and unscientific then i am going to say so. If your beliefs cant stand that...TOUGH! Find some beliefs that can.

Better yet, try knowledge. Know things. Dont just wish they were so.

[Exultant Democracy]

10. Your response is not suitable

All that Edge said is that 15 billion years ago there was nothing and then, poof, "god" made the big bang. There is very little chance that science will ever be able to discover what happened before the big bang.

Better yet, try knowledge. Know things. Dont just wish they were so.

You had better try reading someone's post before you tear them apart for no reason.

[A HERETIC I AM]

11. "Not suitable"????!?!!?!?!?!!

All that Edge said is that 15 billion years ago there was nothing and then, poof, "god" made the big bang. There is very little chance that science will ever be able to discover what happened before the big bang.

I read the entire thread again and Edge NEVER said "15 billion years ago there was nothing and then, poof, "god" made the big bang."
If that is his/her opinion, then fine, i wont argue. But most cosmologists would admit that what occurred at the beginning is still open to debate. Thats why it is called a "Theory". It is my understanding that there are several schools of thought regarding that subject. It has been theorized that there may have been many many "Big Bangs" and that there may be many universes existing concurrently. That is the nature of physics. It is theoretical

and if posting my opinion of someone else's opinion is "Tearing them apart" then i guess i misjudged how thick the skin is of certain members of this forum.

[Exultant Democracy]

12. My inference was a very small leap

since they stated that they didn't think the world was made 6000 years ago, and since Edge is obviously a scientist, it is safe to assume that by "creationist" Edge means that 15 billion years ago "god" happened.

Your inference on the other hand was ludicrous. After Edge plainly stated that he is not a literal creationist, you tried to argue genesis with him. Then you told edge that you couldn't respect his beliefs, which I do consider tearing someone apart. Especially since you never once established any reason for the outright dismissal of his beliefs.

I am all for piling on the fundies, but if someone want to think that "god" got mixed up in the universe 15 billion years ago I see no reason to ridicule them for that.

[Journeyman]

13. Well put, LeviathanCrumbling. . .

am all for piling on the fundies, but if someone want to think that "god" got mixed up in the universe 15 billion years ago I see no reason to ridicule them for that.

[A HERETIC I AM]

15. Let me establish a reason for the dismissal of his beliefs.

Belief in a "God" is intellectually primitive. Thinking that a naturally occurring process had to have had a devine origin is, IN MY OPINION childish and seeks a simple answer for a complex, but ultimately scientifically explainable phenomena.

I was raised Christian. I bought all this stuff for a long time, i really did. But I have come to the conclusion, after much study and consideration, that the stories on which Christianity is based have no more validity or basis in historical fact than the stories of the Greek or Roman pantheons. God is a mythical construct. THAT is a fact. God is no more real than are unicorns or leprechauns. God is only real in the minds of those that choose to manufacture that reality or have it indoctrinated into them.

Suggesting "God did it" is, well, silly. If that is ridicule, oh well. I think clinging to the idea that there is an all powerful, all knowing creator deity in charge of everything is just simplistic and naive and using it as a basis for a scientific discussion is pointless. We must agree to disagree, i suppose.

[Exultant Democracy]

17. This is a prime example of a straw man argument.

Christianity is a myth, ok nice point, but the fact is I never argued that it wasn't. In fact none of my argument had anything to do with any mythology, so there is no point in bringing it into a discussion if your only goal is to disprove it.

I myself have no problem with the ideal that the universe came from nothing, but it is not "intellectually primitive" by a long shot to believe that it is possible for an intelligence to artificially create a universe. In fact the creating of an artificial singularity is a physicist dream, it doesn't take much imagination to think that it may one day be within out power to make pocket universes.

If we accept the fact that it may be possible to artificially create a pocket universe, then we must accept that we may in fact dwell in a universe that is of artificial and not natural origin.

Simply put "creationism" with a lower case not capital ,c, has it's own merits.

[Name removed]

18. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Exultant Democracy]

19. give me a break

maybe I'm daffy, but I'm pretty sure I never once supported the notion of "Biblical Creationism" if you read my post all I said was that their is an argument that could be put forward to a universe of artificial origin. You quote me but you don't seem to understand me because "creationism" with a lower case ,c, is incompatible with "Biblical Creationism."

At best it could be considered deism, but even that isn't necessary, because the artificial origin could be mundane instead of divine.

Don't accuse me of working for Sean Hannity unless you read my posts first.

edit: Because one personal attack should not be responded to with another.

[StClone]

4. Fibonacci Numbers

If you need a code this one fits the bill.

http://ccins.camosun.bc.ca/~jbritton/fibslide/jbfibslide.htm

[tkmorris]

14. Actually I haven't read it yet

Which is rather bizarre because I am an avid reader and a total nutball for this kind of book. It interests me that there is this number idea in the plot. I've been avoiding a lot of threads about the book, didn't want to spoil it.

It sounds familiar though. I read a sci-fi book years ago that contained the idea of messages hidden deep within universal constants. Pi itself I believe had a pictorial message hidden several million digits to the right of the decimal. Having trouble pinning it down though, was that Cosmos, by Carl Sagan? Or something else? Anyone remember that one?

[Lostmessage]

16. I find it extremely interesting

Is there another book out about the subject?