|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: What is design? Can we not find evidence of design on earth or in the universe? | |||||||||||||||||||||||
1.61803 Member (Idle past 1754 days) Posts: 2928 From: Lone Star State USA Joined: |
quote:Virtual particles appearing and the disappearing from a vaccum constitute "something from nothing." There is nothing, and then something. Is it created? Or does it happen because empty space is not really empty after all? 2+2=5 is nonsense, and yet theist expect others to believe that 1+1+1=1 and not the sum of 3. They call this The Trinity. Show me a universe where 1+1+1=1 and I will show you a unverse where 2+2=5. Edited by 1.61803, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
1.61803 Member (Idle past 1754 days) Posts: 2928 From: Lone Star State USA Joined: |
Hello.
Agobot writes: quote:Nothing. Just as 2+2=4 has nothing to do with created laws of the universe. It is humanity that assigns significance, and lables how the universe manifest reality. If the Earth were inhabited by cockroaches or bacteria as the most intelligent creatures the concept of 2+2=4 would still apply and yet most likely cockroaches would not be doing addition. The physical laws of the universe are what they are because if it where any other way then that would be the status quo. In other words, reality exist because 'it' does. Not because it must. Existance is the status quo because it is. And if it where not, then there would be nothing to comptemplate the 'why' we are here. Energy has for whatever reason, or no reason has become sentient in the form of human conciousness. Agobot writes: quote:Well I do not agree that scripture is BS. It is actually does have some good knowlege and messages contained within it. Even if not factual still contains some truth. As far as Jesus becoming one with God is concerned was a matter hotly debated during the council of Nice. The cardinals finally concluded that Jesus is one with the Father and same substance. This I suspect was to quell the notion of 3 separate entitys which smacked of Paganism to the Church. The Big Bang giving rise to the cosmos and eventually humans is a mystery. Even if someday humanity gleens the answer of how it happened the question of why will always persist. The harden atheist will be content to say there is no why. The agnostic will say there may be a why, and the faithful will say God is the why. It is only when people claim to have the one and only answer does the argument commence in my opinion.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
1.61803 Member (Idle past 1754 days) Posts: 2928 From: Lone Star State USA Joined: |
Agobot:
quote: Wat? The inherent intelligence of the universe? So the universe is intelligent because we are? And the universe would be intelligent regardless of humanity exist or not because the universe has intelligent laws I suppose? Bahahhhaahawwahha!!
quote:Some never do. The universe is only intelligent because that is a quality you assigned it and nothing more. Agobot:quote:I agree about the scientific discovery...but disagree it is anything other than human intelligence that is responsible for the discovery and knowlege gained. A snowflake is a amazing crystaline structure. But it is not intelligent. quote: All these things are possible because of the intelligence of humanity to manipulate matter to suit his needs. From shard of flint to a fine clovis point. From sand to glass, it is mans intelligence that discovers the principals and properties of matter in order to use them for his purpose.
quote:Wat? Edited by 1.61803, : redundant
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
1.61803 Member (Idle past 1754 days) Posts: 2928 From: Lone Star State USA Joined: |
1.61803 writes:
quote:The above quote attributed to me is not my quote but a statement from Agobot.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
1.61803 Member (Idle past 1754 days) Posts: 2928 From: Lone Star State USA Joined: |
Hi Agobot!
Agobot writes: quote: No I did not make myself. I am a product of the same stuff that composes the periodic table of elements.
quote: Umm your doing it again, assigning intelligence to the universe.Agobot writes: quote: I only comprehend the necessity you have to attribute "intelligence" to the universe in order to assert there is a intelligent law maker that created it. This is fine to believe, but does not mean it is so.Things may just simply be the way they are just because. I like the third grader comparison you made. Children most often cut through alot of the stupidity some adults tend to come up with. Agobot writes: quote: Agobot writes:quote:Hmmm extremely sophisticated, I like that. Coming into existance by chance. Oh come now you know that is not so, I was planned by the creator that eventually the atoms that compose me would be used to let me type these words. BahHhwahhwwwaahhhaa!!! Agobot asserts:quote: And you know this to be true because?...because it just has to be that way. because? Because that is how it is. It must be because of the intelligence of the Universe that uses intelligent laws. Oh ok.I am convinced now. Thanks for clearing that up. If you want to believe the Universe is intelligent because it uses intelligent laws that were created by a Intelligent being. And...that humanity may someday obtain God status, except that the limiting factor will be the universe itself. More power to you. I for one do not. This does not make me a atheist. It simply makes me a doubter kooky ideas.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
1.61803 Member (Idle past 1754 days) Posts: 2928 From: Lone Star State USA Joined: |
Hello Agobot, I do appreciate you not resorting with ad hominims this time. Ok here we go....
quote:As far as I know the known atoms that the body of science has thus far identified are what are charted on the periodic table. Those are the atoms the universe is composed of as well. If you have knowlege of more types of atoms please share with me what they are. quote:I am indeed concious, and I do have eyes. And although I do agree that if one where to think of the universe as a collective conciousness then yes your statement of me being the eyes and conciousness of the universe would hold some validity. However, I am simply a collection of atoms and universal forces (there are but 4 we know of). As is everything that exist in the cosmos. And try as I might, I can not accept that just because it gives one a warm fuzzy feeling of certainty that it all might just be arbitrary. At least I have the intellectual fortitude and honesty to consider that dreaded possibilty. quote:I am saying that is a possibilty. And the orderly physical laws contain strange quirkyness that is not orderly in the least but caotic and random in some instances. quote:those apparent orderly physical laws contain strange quirkyness that is not orderly in the least but caotic and random in some instances. Wave functions and fields propagate in a apparent determnistic fashion. But the uncertainty principal still prevades. And any moment Cave Diver and Son of Goku will be chiming in. But I still contend that stoichiastic randomness is a element of nature. The math can get you there and thats all that counts...pun intended. quote:Thomas Aquinas very elegantly argued the Proofs of God and the Prime Mover et al... does not hold water. Cause and effect does not hold water. I challenge you to explain how you can conclude based on just your observations how a cause effects another. You can only assume and conclude there is a relationship. You can not KNOW because you are dependant on your own perceptions and are a part of the system that is doing the observing. Yes common sense and physics etc.. tells us if you push a domino over it will cause the next one to fall. But you can not KNOW it will. Even if you do it a million times you still can not know the millonth and one time if will cause the others to fall. Mathmatically any possible outcomes can occur. All our calculations and knowlege must approximate. Initial conditions can not be duplicated to the exact degree. And the Uncertainty principal will not allow 100 percent accuracy. Reality refuses to be pinned down. So let us just agree to disagree when it comes to complete and certain knowlege that the universe is created from a intelligent creator. We are in good company, many of us do not dismiss this possiblity, we simply withold judgement until further data comes to light. Edited by 1.61803, : change the word (to) to (with)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
1.61803 Member (Idle past 1754 days) Posts: 2928 From: Lone Star State USA Joined: |
Hello onifire, I agree with a great deal with your views and opinions. Except this one.
quote: How we define conciousness may differ, but I am of the opinion that my dog is concious. My birds are concious as well, I am almost sure there are other organisms that are concious. Conciousness is not confined to humans in my opinion, but rather a emergent property of the brain. I could of course be wrong. It seems to me once a organism begins to interact with it's environment it exhibits varying levels of conciousness. There is some point I think where instinct and chemistry overidden and the organism makes a choice in how to respond, react to external stimulius. This would be concious behavior I think.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
1.61803 Member (Idle past 1754 days) Posts: 2928 From: Lone Star State USA Joined: |
Hello,
quote:All I can say is that there may or may not be a reason. I do not know the answer, nobody does. If you insist you know the answer thats fine, but it does not convince. I for one derive meaning from my life. I do not assign meaning to why or how the universe came to be as it is. Because I do not know the answer to those questions. I do not want to insist that the evidence of incredible complexity of the universe is undeniable proof of design or designer. I ok with that, your not so we disagree. But your certainty does not trump my skepticism. quote:Everything that exist in nature is natural as far as I am concerned. Because if it exist in our universe then how can it be otherwise? Something that exist outside our cosmos is supernatural, and who knows maybe such things exist, but if it does exist outside the cosmos how are we able to decern it? Primitive man once thought many things where supernatural. Fire, Lightening etc. quote:The Earth is natural. It is composed of atoms as well and has mass and gravity and is not empty space. If you believe the Earth is nothing but empty space fine, but your wrong. Look up the Higgs field and Higgs boson to find out why things obtain mass. And yes I am aware the particle and associated field has not been found yet. I am also aware the graviton has not been discovered yet either. But we have mass and occupy spacetime trust me on that one. Or maybe we are in the clutches of Descartes demon. quote:Short answer, everything. Example if the electrons and atoms of the microtubuals on the flagellum of your fathers spermatazoa suddenly decayed before fertilization, you would not be concious now. You would not be here reading this. Everything affects everything. Quantum events within the sun {nuclear fusion} create He from H and the Photons from the sun are inevitably responsible life evolving on Earth. Unless of course your a creationist then the answer is much simpler.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
1.61803 Member (Idle past 1754 days) Posts: 2928 From: Lone Star State USA Joined: |
quote: I thought I had responded adequatley to this. So I will simply say I think that the universe is a natural process. Maybe it is not. But I think it is, and since I do then I think the formation of galaxies and planets and life are natural processes as well. And if another planet supports other life that will be natural as well since it is occuring in our cosmos. Everything that exist is part of the cosmos.If you can refute that go ahead and try. Time did not even exist until the big bang. If God does indeed exist then it will be the only exception since God is a self existance, undifferentiated, uncreated reality. Supernatural. At least according to the Angelic Doctor. I kind of liked his definitions of God. quote:? quote:I thought that the temperature and energy states of atoms was responsible for which state matter takes..gas,solid, liquid, plasma. And then of course gravity. I thought it was the Higgs field allows for matter to clump allowing for things to be things. Do you have some more recent information? quote:Hmmmm. See my above response. quote:All athiest, if you are arguing from authority at least find some belivers. quote:Energy is the radiation emitted when mass is converted to energy using the c2 conversion factor in special relativity equations, whether it be relativistic or total energy being describe. So energy as photons have no mass. So what, the only time that formula is cranked for real is in singularitys,the center of stars, and nuclear reactors and weapons. Let me guess, you think because matter on a quantum level is really nothing then our existence is dependant on God. Okee dokee. I have been looking into this shit a long time dude. I am more moved to the possibilty of God when I see a babys smile, or a sunrise. I respect fundalmentalist more than ID'ers. If your gonna have a God, have a big one.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
1.61803 Member (Idle past 1754 days) Posts: 2928 From: Lone Star State USA Joined: |
(A) Einstien was a athiest. true or false
Main Entry: ATHEIST !A-thE-ist YahooPronunciation: \ -th-ist \ Function: noun Results one who believes that there is no deity Main Entry: DEITY Yahoo Function: nounInflected Form(s): plural de·i·ties, Etymology: Middle English deitee, from Anglo-French deité, from Late Latin deitat-, deitas, from Latin deus god; akin to Old English Tw, god of war, Latin divus god, dies day, Greek dios heavenly, Sanskrit deva heavenly, god Date: 14th century Results 1 a. 1 a the rank or essential nature of a god : divinity b. b capitalized god supreme being 2. 2 a god or goddess - the deities of ancient Greece 3. 3 one exalted or revered as supremely good or powerful "I do not believe in a personal god and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it."[57] In his book The World as I See It, he wrote: "A knowledge of the existence of something we cannot penetrate, of the manifestations of the profoundest reason and the most radiant beauty, which are only accessible to our reason in their most elementary forms”it is this knowledge and this emotion that constitute the truly religious attitude; in this sense, and in this alone, I am a deeply religious man."[58]The question of scientific determinism gave rise to questions about Einstein's position on theological determinism, and whether or not he believed in a God. In 1929, Einstein told Rabbi Herbert S. Goldstein "I believe in Spinoza's God, who reveals Himself in the lawful harmony of the world, not in a God Who concerns Himself with the fate and the doings of mankind."[54] In a 1950 letter to M. Berkowitz, Einstein stated that "My position concerning God is that of an agnostic. I am convinced that a vivid consciousness of the primary importance of moral principles for the betterment and ennoblement of life does not need the idea of a law-giver, especially a law-giver who works on the basis of reward and punishment."[55] Einstein also stated: "I have repeatedly said that in my opinion the idea of a personal God is a childlike one. You may call me an agnostic, but I do not share the crusading spirit of the professional atheist whose fervor is mostly due to a painful act of liberation from the fetters of religious indoctrination received in youth." Main Entry: AGNOSTIC ag-!n@s-tik YahooPronunciation: \ ag-ns-tik, g- \ Function: noun Etymology: Greek agnstos unknown, unknowable, from a- + gnstos known, from gignskein to know - More at - know Date: 1869 Results 1. 1 a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable broadly one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god 2. 2 a person unwilling to commit to an opinion about something - political agnostics So based on the above definitions and Einsteins statements I would conclude that he was a Athiest and latter in life became more Agnostic. By his own statements and not your opinion that he believed in God. (B) Another Earth exist and is support life in the form of dinosaurstrue or false This is false. If you have evidence that another Earth exist with dinosaurs please post a link. (C)Matter is composed of 100 percent empty space: true or falseThe answer to this is false. Matter is composed of fermions [fermions] =[Matter - Wikipedia] (D) Energy has mass is false. *I already addressed this last post. Agobot writes:quote:You think the universe is dependant upon God. I do not know the answer. So what. Positive negative charges turning to conciousness may be a emergent property of energy and have nothing to do with a diety. Who knows the answer? You?
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024