|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total) |
| |
popoi | |
Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 6156 days) Posts: 690 From: USA West Coast Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Keep in Mind | |||||||||||||||||||
CygnusX Inactive Member |
forgot to add -
you can easly prove god wronge using the dino's. sure carbon dating is not accurate, however only by a couple of thousand years, and on a 65 billion year scale a couple o' thousand years is fairly accurate. also if u dont trust carbon dating we can look at the half life of the carbon atoms found in dino bones. the evidence is there. the fact is there. when will theist put that simple little prefix 'A'
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Mike Holland Member (Idle past 484 days) Posts: 179 From: Sydney, NSW,Auistralia Joined: |
Dear Born2preach, how do you decide how thoroughly I have to study something to form a valid conclusion? For your information, I was a Scientologist for 7 years, spent a couple of years in the Subud movement, and several years studying Gurdjieff and Ouspensky.
I have read about a quarter of the Koran, a bit of the Zend Avesta (Zoroastrianism), studied the Hindu Vedas, Vedanta, Upanishads and Bhagavad-Gita, read five translations of the Taoist Tao-Teh-Ching, studied the Sufis (read the Muntiq-ut-Tair or 'Conference of Birds' by Attar, many works by Rumi, eg the Masnavi, and Firdausi). Have also studfied Zen Buddhism, reading Daisetz T.Suzuki, Hubert Benoit and others. And then there is the Christian mystics, Jacob Boeme and others, including reading the 'Cloud of Unknowing'. That is all just from memory. This was all over 40 years ago, and I know there were many more. In my library at the moment are 'Why not Creation?', 'Scientific Creationism', 'The Creationists', 'Science and Earth History', 'Creationism, Science and the Law', 'Monday School', 'Telling Lies for God', 'Science and Creationism'. Have read them all! I have dozens of books on physics, astronomy, cosmology, evolution, relativity, geology. Does that lot qualify me to form an opinion? If not, please send me a reading list. NB. I have also had some 'mystical' experiences, astral wandering and such, but they did not convince me of anything! Mike.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Mike Holland Member (Idle past 484 days) Posts: 179 From: Sydney, NSW,Auistralia Joined: |
Slow down, Cygnusx, you are mixing up your facts. Dinos died out 65 MILLION years ago, not 65 BILLION. Slight difference. Also, Carbon dating only works to about 60,000 years ago at the most. So no-one would dream of using it on dino bones. Not even on Homo Erectus! There are many other ways to date dino bomes.
Mike.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
One_Charred_Wing Member (Idle past 6156 days) Posts: 690 From: USA West Coast Joined: |
I mentioned in the very first message that I'm not as well versed as some people.
"This was all over 40 years ago" Sheesh. That means you've studied this stuff for more than twice as long as I've been alive. I guess people just see different sides of the elephant. Education can't brainwash anybody enough to change outlooks on things like spiritual belief, some people believe and some don't I guess. What you mentioned at the end we really can't argue about, it's all about perception and what you feel, end of story. But anyways, I think this whole thing's gotten a hair off topic, the whole point of the original post was saying that Scripture can agree with science. I asserted nothing more. Maybe I should make a new thread for all these new issues. Anyway, I've got stuff to do tomorrow so I won't be back on until sunday. But I appriciate reading things from other points of view thusfar. ------------------Wanna feel God? Step onto the wrestling mat and you'd be crazy to deny the uplifting spirit.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
CygnusX Inactive Member |
thank you mike for setting me straight, when i am wronge i am wronge and i will admit to it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Mike Holland Member (Idle past 484 days) Posts: 179 From: Sydney, NSW,Auistralia Joined: |
Right! So lets have a little more respect, sonny.
Grandpa Mike.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Mike Holland Member (Idle past 484 days) Posts: 179 From: Sydney, NSW,Auistralia Joined: |
Now to get back to the topic.
The issue here is not science and/or religion, or belief and non-belief. It is in you yourself. You need to decide why you believe anything. What do you accept as a good reason for accepting anything? What are you philosophically obliged to believe from your experience of the world, and how do you progress from there? You don't need to go all the way back to 'I think, therefore I am'. But you need to work out why you accept any fact or theory. OK. Its a long haul. Once I decided Scientology, mysticism, etc were crap, it took me several years of studying philosophy and science to sort out my thinking. There are still big gaps where I just have no answers, such as 'why should a universe exist', or 'what is consciousness'. Maybe you can find an easier path to a view of 'Life, the Universe, and Everything' that satisfies you. But don't close your mind. Mike. [This message has been edited by Mike Holland, 12-07-2003]
|
|||||||||||||||||||
One_Charred_Wing Member (Idle past 6156 days) Posts: 690 From: USA West Coast Joined: |
Now that's one thing I agree with you completely about, because everyone needs to ask themselves why they believe what they believe, and it needs to be an answer other than 'because The Bible/X Scientist says so'.
A good reason for accepting something as real will vary between people as much as people will vary between favorite sports teams, in the way that a lot of people don't seem to have an answer unless a certain belief seems to be 'winning', in which case they jump on the bandwagon. Now, this is my standpoint on that issue. I DEFINETELY believe in things that I can detect with the 5 senses. It was either Plato or Aristotle(I ALWAYS mix those two up) that said the material world is false, and there is a spiritual "other side" that is the true reality. What a bunch of crap! What you can detect with your senses is real. How so? Because the majority of material nouns can be detected by all 5 different senses(which can be considered different opinions in a way) as the same thing. The eyes are not a window to a different world than your ears reveal to you. But on the subject of nouns and grammar, there are also abstract nouns. These abstract nouns themselves cannot be detected by the 5 senses. You can't see overconfidence itself, but you can see proof that it exist, as an abstract yet active influence in reality, through the senses in living things. I know I certainly saw proof of overconfidence in a wrestling tournament yesterday . I believe that the existence of a higher power beyond the boundries of explination is similar to any other 'abstract' noun. It's definetely there, I could never list how many things I see everyday that prove it. Holy Scriptures of any religion may have a few minor flaws on what happened where to our TENTATIVE current standings on history and science, but the fact remains that you can't scientifically prove the existence of overconfidence(Well,maybe by surveying fans of the Oakland Raiders)but people can agree that it's there. I think it's strange that God, as an abstract noun, is so hard to believe when His existence is in a similar category as any other abstract noun. That's a basic outline of why I personally accept things as real, you may agree or disagree about that, and I'd be more than willing to hear a different approach to that concept. You said you have a few 'big gaps where I just have no answers, such as 'why should a universe exist', or 'what is consciousness'. Just for conversation's sake this is what I personally think about those. Why should a universe exist: Same reason any life form exists.(not to reproduce, because if the being has no purpose to begin with,reproducing another organism will just make another bleak and meaningless existence.) That reason is to make a reason to exist, and I'll elaborate. Our purposes differ. Some of us want to spread the Word. Others want to create the most powerful nuclear weapon, or the best heavy metal album to ever exist. I believe, and this is excluding my spiritual belief as much as possible, that we create and decide our purpose. We ourselves are our own purpose, because for those people who are 'destined' to save the Spotted African Penguin or whatever, there had to have been someone who nearly wiped 'em out fulfilling his purpose.(The purpose being, perhaps, selling CANNED spotted african penguin) Sure, our purposes contradict, but they are purposes, the best part being that we only need ourselves and eachother to create them. It is possible that 'purpose' will ultimately create apocalyptic war, but that's where religion comes in. I am aware that religion causes as much trouble as it stops, but that's only when people disobey the golden rule of every human and spiritual philosopher. As for consciousness, I don't quite understand what you mean by that so I can't give my own 2 cents. WHEW! That was probably the longest post in history. Sorry, guys! ------------------Wanna feel God? Step onto the wrestling mat and you'd be crazy to deny the uplifting spirit. [This message has been edited by Born2Preach, 12-07-2003]
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Mike Holland Member (Idle past 484 days) Posts: 179 From: Sydney, NSW,Auistralia Joined: |
Hi, Born2preach, it was Plato that said we are trapped in a cave, only seeing the shadows of the real world passing outside. He believed in the reality of abstract ideas as existing things, like Beauty, Truth, etc. I personally don't like Idealism.
I also start off with our senses, but with a grain of salt. A stick appears bent when inserted in water, but is not 'really' bent. Some experimentation is often required to 'correct' the error or delusion of our senses. The important thing is that the resulting theory must be consistent with our sense experience, and be testable. Regarding consciousness, I have two problems. Firstly, light enters my eye and interacts with the retina to produce electrical pulses which are passed to my brain. Where does the resulting image of a flower exist? Secondly, I have a feeling of unity in my consciousness - I take in a whole symphony, or a whole scene. I do not understand how a brain cell, or group of cells, can have this experience. I have a gut feeling that this topic is not going to get anywhere. Mike.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
One_Charred_Wing Member (Idle past 6156 days) Posts: 690 From: USA West Coast Joined: |
Thanks for the correction. Those are some good questions, and nobody can really argue about them. Someone could say 'Perhaps it could be signs of a soul', but then again animals can see too. Well, then again, some cannot. And of course the arguement circles endlessly from there.
Your gut feeling is probably right, this won't get anywhere in the grand debate scene, but I'm curious to see what anybody else has to say regarding these things, and how many people even have an answer. Anybody want to pitch in their point of view? ------------------Wanna feel God? Step onto the wrestling mat and you'd be crazy to deny the uplifting spirit.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Zealot Inactive Member |
I wanted to emphasize a few words, but couldn't find an option to change my text style and use italics, so I used capitals. I did not intend to 'yell' at you.
I think calling someone ignorant in your first post is more offensive than making an abundant use of the Shift or Caps lock keys.
Regarding my reaction, Zealot, imagine that you are a heart specialist, and in the course of a conversation someone says "I don't believe the heart pumps blood around the body. That is just a theory." Do you laugh at him for being a stupid idiot, or get angry with him for being a stupid idiot? (I do not mean to imply that anyone here is a stupid idiot!). Anyway, I get annoyed with people who think they can believe whatever they like regardless of the evidence.
Your analogy is understandable. You believe beyond any doubdt in evolution, while I don't believe in it. My faith would not need to influence my belief or disbelief in evolution. I fail to conceptualise avian evolution, gaps in the fossil table and simple things such as why does a kangaroo have a pouch if it would take millions of years to evolve and essentially be useless and provide no survival benefit until fullly formed. It is the same logic I apply to avian evolution and namy other cases of evolution. Either way, I find it slightly weird for you to join a forum called 'Evolution VS Creation' and insult anyone that doubdt evolution.
So, if you know of any evidence which contradicts the theory of human evolution, and which outweighs all the evidence in favour of it, please produce it.
Thus for evidence to be a reflection of actuality, it needs to outweigh other evidence ?
We have already learned that the Earth is not the centre of the universe (or solar system), the solar system is not the centre of the galaxy, and the galaxy is just one among billions. We can no longer believe we are the "Lords of Creation".
Heard of string theory ?
But if you hold your view because of a fundamentalist interpretation of the Bible, then I guess there is nothing further to discuss.
Fortunitely I don't. So feel free to reply. stay well Z
|
|||||||||||||||||||
NosyNed Member Posts: 8996 From: Canada Joined: |
Heard of string theory ? Oh, you know about string theory? You can then show us how it results in us being the "lords of creation". I will be interested in the details. However, you will have to spell it out carefully since I'm not at all an expert. Thanks for keeping it simple. Common sense isn't
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024