By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Important prefatory notes: I do not accept the description of “God” in any religious writing in the nature of a “bible.” Nor do I accept the description of “heaven,” “hell,” “angels,” or any other tangentials in any religious writing. I do not disrespect the person or opinions of anyone who believes any formal religious tenets, nor anyone who does not.
In my view, all religions have been created by mankind in order to (1) explain the inexplicable, and (2) to provide a set of principles and rules for the conduct of life. I do not disrespect any religion for doing so.
This essay is not about religion, but rather about the source of everything in existence, and in particular about the source of “life.” ____________________
I have been studying religion and religion as philosophy almost all my life. I remember as a 6- or 7-year old boy in Religious Instruction classes being taught from a Catechism. [A catechism is a form of teaching and learning by rote from a logically-arranged series of questions and answers.]
I still remember the first questions in my catechism:
“Q: Who made thee? “A: God made me.
“Q: Why did God make thee? “A: God made me to love him and serve him in this life, and to be with him in the next.”
For something being taught to such a young person, with the expectation that it will be understood on his level, that’s actually not a bad start to explaining the inexplicable.
Later in life, however, as I expanded my study of religions of the world and philosophy, it became clearer and clearer to me that those who wrote and taught about religion were trying to explain what they thought they understood to people who did not have the intellect or education to understand it on a philosophical level, so the teachers brought it down to a level they could understand, and often resorted to stories as images of something theoretically more concrete. Importantly, however, the teachers did not tell the faithful that these were poetic stories [fables?] and not reality.
While accepting the concept of a creator and sustainer of life, they were unable to visualize that creator as anything but “a person-like being” with a human-like body, emotions, and thoughts, but with supernatural power, as a simpler description for something so far beyond our ability to conceive.
To complicate my learning process, my study of the sciences and the empirical evidence science provides, gave me an uncomfortable sense that while I could easily reject the fabulous in religious teaching, science kept increasing my conviction that there had to have been a creator and sustainer of life. The longer I lived and the more I learned, the more inescapable that conviction became, as did the other conviction that bible versions of creation were not viable.
I could write for an hour about the observations of Nature which make their origin from a creator beyond question for me. Let me give just a few.
We live in a universe which is literally beyond our comprehension. An untold number of planets are orbiting an untold number of stars in an untold number of galaxies extending across a universe whose immensity is incalculable and actually beyond our imagination. The last numbers I heard are hundreds of billions of galaxies, each containing hundreds of billions of stars. We can’t even imagine the sense of “a billion” anything, let alone hundreds of billions, let alone hundreds of billions of galaxies.
The notion that all of that matter came from nothing is even more difficult to accept; as is the notion that it all came from a “uniformity” — a completely made-up word to name (but not to define, and without proof) what supposedly existed before the universe exploded into existence — and which came into existence all by itself without a creating force named or even defined.
At the same time, we live in a universe which is also small beyond our comprehension. One-celled creatures too small to be seen with the naked eye, yet have life. Bodies in all forms which come into existence from matter that starts with eggs or seeds or parts thereof, also so small as to be unseen with the naked eye, yet having life. Animal bodies which are formed according to a plan to be found in DNA in chromosomes too small to be seen with the naked eye and having distinct parts even smaller. Imagine a distinct life beginning with just two of these chromosomes which combine to begin a process of self-replication followed by self-modification and self-differentiation to make all of the highly-specialized cells in the body.
And those highly-specialized cells cause the most amazing behaviours! Some cells are specifically created to become parts of an eye with connections to other cells which are specifically created to become parts of a brain and allow the animal to “see” everything around it. Others become internal organs which take organic material and turn it into energy, others which burn energy, and others which turn it into waste material, and others which expel it. Others self-differentiate into organs that provide for self-reproduction into organisms exactly like themselves, or more amazingly, into organisms which are not exactly like either parent.
Every organ of the body has its own amazing life story, and all of the “decisions” for all of these characteristics are handed down from the parents within a set of sub-microscope genes within microscopic chromosomes.
And the resulting organisms can live for anywhere from 24 hours (certain insects are hatched, mate, and die within 24 hours) to others which can live for centuries.
[I have not yet scratched the surface of the amazing special characteristics of innumerable astonishingly different species. It would take a good-size library to contain all of the information about distinctive characteristics of different species of animals, plants, and other life forms, all from one lightning strike on some enzymes in a pool of primordial ooze?]
And so we know of things in existence that range in size from sub-atomic to incomprehensibly huge. And we see the outward manifestations of “life” without the faintest knowledge of what life is, where it is, where it came from, or where it goes.
I do know that my body has lived for more than 77 years and that it replaces its own cells in a complex schedule that we can sometimes calculate but can never explain. And it has co-operated in producing three new life forms directly and several others in the next generation, in a process which I can trace in my family back 300 years and which will — or has the capacity to — go on to an unknown moment in future time, and can be expected to continue forward as long as its history is behind.
Did you know that “Otzi,” the man whose frozen body was found in the Alps, who lived over 5,000 years ago, has living “relatives” today, as evidenced by elements of his DNA which have remained unchanged over that time? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-24477038
Now. With even that brief statement of the size, complexity, and wonder of this tiny sliver of all creation that we know, how can I imagine that it came about — in all its magnificent complexity — from no cause, or as the result of an accidental lightning strike?
And so I am left with what is difficult for some to accept — a creator and sustainer of life with powers even more beyond our comprehension. [I must repeat here that I am not referring to any biblical “god.”] Some believe that, because we cannot conceive of such powers, and therefore of the nature of any such entity, they must not exist. Tragically, the people who survived the atomic bombs at Hiroshima and Nagasaki could not conceive of such power — or who could have “created” it — yet nevertheless they had empirical evidence that it did exist, and had to have been created by someone. The survivors, like you and me, still don’t know how it works.
I was alive at that time and remember vividly that no-one in my experience had ever heard of an “atomic bomb,” and had no idea what an atomic bomb was, or how it worked, or how much destruction it caused.
This creator/sustainer clearly must be omnipotent — with powers whose effect we can see [if we look with an open mind] but not comprehend — and omnipresent — meaning being everywhere, even within every living organism and thing — and omniscient — knowing all. As a result of having read a number of philosophers on the subject, I see that this creator/sustainer must also exist without reference to time, or is “omnitemporal” in the word I have coined to name it.
Inasmuch as creation continues, with the known creation of more planets, stars, and galaxies, and life itself, it is at least likely that the creator continues also, unless all of creation was set in motion and is simply continuing as designed.
Part of the bewilderment I see in some who do not accept the notion of a creator/sustainer comes from the fact that they cannot comprehend or even imagine such powers; and if they cannot understand the immensity and complexity of creation, they cannot understand a power commensurate with that immensity and complexity. The atomic bomb outcome.
I listen to any of the great pieces of classical music and in my amazed appreciation of what the composer did with nothing but sound, I cannot comprehend how he did it. Imagine Beethovan composing exquisite music while completely deaf, writing on paper the music that he heard only in his mind.
Inventors who were able to use their knowledge of science and their purely awe-inspiring imagination have invented things that we cannot believe can work. Who knew that there was a way to make “radio” waves carry sound across miles — now far out into space and back, demonstrably beyond the limits of our solar system? Who first imagined that radio waves even exist? Or how to harness them, send sound across them, receive them, and turn them back into sound again for our ears? I could go on identifying things man has “discovered” and turned into something useful.
Then explain to me that all of these discovered things — and more — came to be by accident, and how, and from what? Electricity, for example. It’s not a physical entity, but it exists and shocked same puddle of primordial ooze from which life itself emerged, from a random lightning strike?
I first learned from a philosopher whose name has escaped me that it is not the least bit difficult to know that a powerful creator/sustainer brought all of this into existence and sustains it. Just look around you, he suggested. There is nothing but endless empirical evidence that it had to have been created. I add that you have a couple of options — pure chance without impetus, a puddle of ooze, or an unknowable but obvious creator/sustainer.
Some of you will ask me where this creator/sustainer comes from. I don’t know. Neither does anyone who prefers some kind of “big bang” theory know where matter came [comes] from. That the answer, if known, would be astonishing beyond our puny understanding is not a reason to doubt it. The history of mankind is filled with answers beyond our ability to grasp at first, and which have been proven and accepted when known and understood, and those questions are far easier to answer than the source of the creator/sustainer.
Finally, this. Some of you will ask how I know this. I reply by asking how I know that it snowed overnight, inasmuch as it registered in none of my senses, and no-one reported it to me. Well, last night before I retired, the streets, sidewalks, and buildings were clean and dry. This morning everything was covered with snow. I didn’t see the snow fall, but I know it did. Empirical evidence and inductive reasoning. There is no other explanation.
Except perhaps the ever-available puddle of primordial ooze with enzymes struck by lightning — the puddle, the enzymes, and the lightning having come into existence all by themselves in the first place, apparently.
I think dav is a smashing fella. I have to say also that whilst I don't really agree with catullus very often, he at least approaches this whole thing in the correct spirit.
Of course it does but again I will say there are so many freakky things in science and physics we don t understand....none of us know the truth...
Before I respond, I have the same respect for you that I have expressed about others, and have said it before.
You responded to a thoughtful question from "yescomeon," as follows: "Would this 'organized' nature of the universe that you believe exists not violate the same laws of science and logic that you say the big bang and evolution do?"
To both of you I reply that I addressed those questions in my response to Catullus, above. I add that I think that you and I basically agree that "there are so many freaky things in science and physics we don't understand....none of us know the truth..." I wrote above that it's not Nature's rules that are being broken, but mankind's "rules," which are admittedly limited by our intelligence and understanding. Same thing, I think.
Would this "organized" nature of the universe that you believe exists not violate the same laws of science and logic that you say the big bang and evolution do?
My response is a bit out of order. Thanks for the thoughtful question.
Where what I perceive as the "organized" nature of the universe and mankind's "laws of science and logic" differ is that the former are fixed but not nearly fully understood, whereas the latter are flawed for the same reason, curiously enough.
What frustrates me is that some people are too willing to accept mankind's "rules." The most recent half-dozen exchanges in this thread are between people who can and do remain open-minded and are, to me, most welcome - even when they disagree or question as you did. Especially when they disagree and question as you did.
My response is a bit out of order. Thanks for the thoughtful question.
Where what I perceive as the "organized" nature of the universe and mankind's "laws of science and logic" differ is that the former are fixed but not nearly fully understood, whereas the latter are flawed for the same reason, curiously enough.
What frustrates me is that some people are too willing to accept mankind's "rules." The most recent half-dozen exchanges in this thread are between people who can and do remain open-minded and are, to me, most welcome - even when they disagree or question as you did. Especially when they disagree and question as you did.
Please stop preaching ur crap Dav. Would really appreciate it, we're not at school now.
First up Davillin, Though I tend to go with "anything that can happen will happen. I just have no way of knowing what, when or where" The official description is "a state of disorder due to absence or non-recognition of authority or other controlling system"
FAO jackanapes, I think what sets some of us apart from others on this board is that while we can entirely disagree with someone, we can still respect their opinion and answer without the need to resort to abuse.
When it comes to the internet the best rule is probably "treat others as they treat you"
My response is a bit out of order. Thanks for the thoughtful question.
Where what I perceive as the "organized" nature of the universe and mankind's "laws of science and logic" differ is that the former are fixed but not nearly fully understood, whereas the latter are flawed for the same reason, curiously enough.
What frustrates me is that some people are too willing to accept mankind's "rules." The most recent half-dozen exchanges in this thread are between people who can and do remain open-minded and are, to me, most welcome - even when they disagree or question as you did. Especially when they disagree and question as you did.
I am in agreement that the "rules" are possibly fixed a little to rigidly. However they exist because the work and can and have been tested. I do keep an open mind and I am always ready to give an ear to any new theories that are proposed even those that may be considered to be outside of the realms of conventional thinking as often this is where the most important breakthroughs come from. If someone comes along with an explanation for the origins of our universe that includes a god which is testable then I am more than happy to listen but I am someone who needs proof, faith alone is not enough for me. I do not agree personally with the reasoning you use to come to the conclusion that there is a god but I do respect the though put in to it.
I was shown a talk the other day that I found interesting and that I am sure that you will to as it seems relevant to some of the discussion on this thread. Can't say that I agree with all that he says but some of it is interesting.
Another TED talk that I came across recently is to do with intelligence which again I feel is somewhat relevant and absolutely fascinating although not something that I know a great deal about. It may be of interest to some of the posters that have contributed to this thread.
Why some people believe in intelligent design and how it s all just too good to be true the way things are organised for life just on this planet for instance....
The Earth...its size is perfect. The Earth's size and corresponding gravity holds a thin layer of mostly nitrogen and oxygen gases, only extending about 50 miles above the Earth's surface. If Earth were smaller, an atmosphere would be impossible, like the planet Mercury. If Earth were larger, its atmosphere would contain free hydrogen, like Jupiter.3 Earth is the only known planet equipped with an atmosphere of the right mixture of gases to sustain plant, animal and human life.
The Earth is located the right distance from the sun. Consider the temperature swings we encounter, roughly -30 degrees to +120 degrees. If the Earth were any further away from the sun, we would all freeze. Any closer and we would burn up. Even a fractional variance in the Earth's position to the sun would make life on Earth impossible. The Earth remains this perfect distance from the sun while it rotates around the sun at a speed of nearly 67,000 mph. It is also rotating on its axis, allowing the entire surface of the Earth to be properly warmed and cooled every day.
And our moon is the perfect size and distance from the Earth for its gravitational pull. The moon creates important ocean tides and movement so ocean waters do not stagnate, and yet our massive oceans are restrained from spilling over across the continents.4
Water...colorless, odorless and without taste, and yet no living thing can survive without it. Plants, animals and human beings consist mostly of water (about two-thirds of the human body is water). You'll see why the characteristics of water are uniquely suited to life:
It has an unusually high boiling point and freezing point. Water allows us to live in an environment of fluctuating temperature changes, while keeping our bodies a steady 98.6 degrees.
Water is a universal solvent. This property of water means that various chemicals, minerals and nutrients can be carried throughout our bodies and into the smallest blood vessels.5
Water is also chemically neutral. Without affecting the makeup of the substances it carries, water enables food, medicines and minerals to be absorbed and used by the body.
Water has a unique surface tension. Water in plants can therefore flow upward against gravity, bringing life-giving water and nutrients to the top of even the tallest trees.
Water freezes from the top down and floats, so fish can live in the winter.
Ninety-seven percent of the Earth's water is in the oceans. But on our Earth, there is a system designed which removes salt from the water and then distributes that water throughout the globe. Evaporation takes the ocean waters, leaving the salt, and forms clouds which are easily moved by the wind to disperse water over the land, for vegetation, animals and people. It is a system of purification and supply that sustains life on this planet, a system of recycled and reused water.6
The human brain...simultaneously processes an amazing amount of information. Your brain takes in all the colors and objects you see, the temperature around you, the pressure of your feet against the floor, the sounds around you, the dryness of your mouth, even the texture of your keyboard. Your brain holds and processes all your emotions, thoughts and memories. At the same time your brain keeps track of the ongoing functions of your body like your breathing pattern, eyelid movement, hunger and movement of the muscles in your hands.
The human brain processes more than a million messages a second.7 Your brain weighs the importance of all this data, filtering out the relatively unimportant. This screening function is what allows you to focus and operate effectively in your world. The brain functions differently than other organs. There is an intelligence to it, the ability to reason, to produce feelings, to dream and plan, to take action, and relate to other people......."
I believe a "chaotic" disorganised universe left to its own devices could not work.
[Post edited 11 Feb 2014 16:58]
PROUD RECIPIENT OF THE THIRD PLANET SWANS LIFETIME ACHIEVEMENT AWARD.
"Per ardua ad astra"
Why some people believe in intelligent design and how it s all just too good to be true the way things are organised for life just on this planet for instance....
The Earth...its size is perfect. The Earth's size and corresponding gravity holds a thin layer of mostly nitrogen and oxygen gases, only extending about 50 miles above the Earth's surface. If Earth were smaller, an atmosphere would be impossible, like the planet Mercury. If Earth were larger, its atmosphere would contain free hydrogen, like Jupiter.3 Earth is the only known planet equipped with an atmosphere of the right mixture of gases to sustain plant, animal and human life.
The Earth is located the right distance from the sun. Consider the temperature swings we encounter, roughly -30 degrees to +120 degrees. If the Earth were any further away from the sun, we would all freeze. Any closer and we would burn up. Even a fractional variance in the Earth's position to the sun would make life on Earth impossible. The Earth remains this perfect distance from the sun while it rotates around the sun at a speed of nearly 67,000 mph. It is also rotating on its axis, allowing the entire surface of the Earth to be properly warmed and cooled every day.
And our moon is the perfect size and distance from the Earth for its gravitational pull. The moon creates important ocean tides and movement so ocean waters do not stagnate, and yet our massive oceans are restrained from spilling over across the continents.4
Water...colorless, odorless and without taste, and yet no living thing can survive without it. Plants, animals and human beings consist mostly of water (about two-thirds of the human body is water). You'll see why the characteristics of water are uniquely suited to life:
It has an unusually high boiling point and freezing point. Water allows us to live in an environment of fluctuating temperature changes, while keeping our bodies a steady 98.6 degrees.
Water is a universal solvent. This property of water means that various chemicals, minerals and nutrients can be carried throughout our bodies and into the smallest blood vessels.5
Water is also chemically neutral. Without affecting the makeup of the substances it carries, water enables food, medicines and minerals to be absorbed and used by the body.
Water has a unique surface tension. Water in plants can therefore flow upward against gravity, bringing life-giving water and nutrients to the top of even the tallest trees.
Water freezes from the top down and floats, so fish can live in the winter.
Ninety-seven percent of the Earth's water is in the oceans. But on our Earth, there is a system designed which removes salt from the water and then distributes that water throughout the globe. Evaporation takes the ocean waters, leaving the salt, and forms clouds which are easily moved by the wind to disperse water over the land, for vegetation, animals and people. It is a system of purification and supply that sustains life on this planet, a system of recycled and reused water.6
The human brain...simultaneously processes an amazing amount of information. Your brain takes in all the colors and objects you see, the temperature around you, the pressure of your feet against the floor, the sounds around you, the dryness of your mouth, even the texture of your keyboard. Your brain holds and processes all your emotions, thoughts and memories. At the same time your brain keeps track of the ongoing functions of your body like your breathing pattern, eyelid movement, hunger and movement of the muscles in your hands.
The human brain processes more than a million messages a second.7 Your brain weighs the importance of all this data, filtering out the relatively unimportant. This screening function is what allows you to focus and operate effectively in your world. The brain functions differently than other organs. There is an intelligence to it, the ability to reason, to produce feelings, to dream and plan, to take action, and relate to other people......."
I believe a "chaotic" disorganised universe left to its own devices could not work.
[Post edited 11 Feb 2014 16:58]
For me personally I don't really buy this (just my opinion). Life as we know it only exists on this planet, so of course the conditions are perfect for life as we know it, it has evolved over millions of years to live in these conditions. Who's to say that there isn't life out there of a completely different form that lives in conditions that we could not as that form of life has evolved to live in those conditions. This is of course speculation. There other, more meaningful, and more abstract relationships that exist that point towards intelligent design. For example the ratio of the strength of gravity compared to the strength of the electromagnetic force or the ratio of the number of electrons to protons, tiny changes in these ratios would have a profound effect on the way the universe formed and therefore make life practically impossible.
I will say that I don't personally think that life is a particularly important part of the universe. We are here because the conditions are right for us to be here. If they weren't then we wouldn't be, perhaps something else would be, perhaps nothing would be. Either way I don't think it matters all that much in the grand scheme of things. I think we should just enjoy and appreciate the fact that we are here with out concerning ourselves too much with thoughts of an afterlife which may not even exist.
[This is in response to the post two above this one from "yescomeon." I don't want to make this post too long]
Many thanks for the link to the Sheldrake video!
Not all truths are "testable" by humans. That does not mean that they are not "truths" or do not exist. For me, the fundamental one is this. "Life" exists and turns inanimate elements into beings that have intelligence, can reproduce themselves, etc., etc., but we do not know - nor can we test - what it is, where it is, where it came from, or where it goes upon death.
We are left, therefore with either faith, logic and reason and empirical knowledge, or hypotheses cleverly disguised as "science" [sorry for the snotty humour there].
I have chosen logic, reason, and empirical knowledge.
Your two YouTube videos:
I found the Sheldrake piece very alluring, with some exceptions. I can't buy into "morphic resonance" completely because I don't have enough evidence about it.
I will, however, tell you this absolutely true experience. I have had a dog pack for over 40 years, and during one period there were six dogs in it. Except when my bed was in double occupancy, the dogs were always allowed to sleep with me if and when they chose.
Countless times - and I mean countless - I watched as one dog started to have rem sleep and make running movements and muffled sounds, always the same; and before long all of them were doing it. Then one stopped, and before long all of them stopped. That's a very believable morphic response that I experienced.
I was deeply interested in his comments on what I wrote about above - the human element in "scientific laws." I did not know that the speed of light apparently changes, as does gravity, but I do believe that it is more likely the result of man's flawed and arrogant notion that he can measure them. Sheldrake's explanation of these differences as "intellectual phase locking" made it perfectly clear. Again, "scientific laws" are tainted by the human element.
[I have several times commented on the "scientific" basis for "climate change" based on more very human elements making the "results" unscientific, but I don't want to get into that, please. We've done that to death.]
I found his discussion of the nature of the mind very interesting, but, like "life," we do not know where it is, how it got there, how it works, etc., etc., and we can only imagine and postulate.
Short shrift for Alex Wissner and his talk on intelligence. I reject it in its entirety, not least because he tries to explain his theory with a scientific-looking equation which is not convincing.
At the bottom, intelligence is, exactly like "life" and "the nature of the mind," not amenable to scientific explanation as we are now capable. Same questions go unanswered - where is it, how did it get there, etc.?
[Again, in the interest of space, I don't quote the entire post - Lord Bony's beginning with "Why some people believe in intelligent design and how it s all just too good to be true the way things are organised for life just on this planet for instance.... "]
It is hard to argue that those elements you describe are all accidental. The post in response from yescomeon does try, and I'll address it below, as part of my response to your post.
For me personally I don't really buy this (just my opinion). Life as we know it only exists on this planet, so of course the conditions are perfect for life as we know it, it has evolved over millions of years to live in these conditions. Who's to say that there isn't life out there of a completely different form that lives in conditions that we could not as that form of life has evolved to live in those conditions. This is of course speculation. There other, more meaningful, and more abstract relationships that exist that point towards intelligent design. For example the ratio of the strength of gravity compared to the strength of the electromagnetic force or the ratio of the number of electrons to protons, tiny changes in these ratios would have a profound effect on the way the universe formed and therefore make life practically impossible.
I will say that I don't personally think that life is a particularly important part of the universe. We are here because the conditions are right for us to be here. If they weren't then we wouldn't be, perhaps something else would be, perhaps nothing would be. Either way I don't think it matters all that much in the grand scheme of things. I think we should just enjoy and appreciate the fact that we are here with out concerning ourselves too much with thoughts of an afterlife which may not even exist.
As with everything we have been discussing in the latter part of this thread, one may accept or not accept any of these explanations - even the so-called "scientific" explanations.
You make several fundamental errors. "Life as we know it only exists on this planet..." is the first and seminal error. We do not know what kind of life exists elsewhere in the universe [or, to be candid, whether life exists elsewhere in the universe].
"Life as we know it" on Earth is so awesomely diverse as to be literally incomprehensible - plant, animal, fungal, insect, one-celled, etc. - in every way. And even if everything the evolutionists say is true [except when they try to use that theory to explain the origin of life], it is still instructive.
I agree with you that it's more likely than not that there is life out there.
I disagree that life is not important. It is so different from the physical world that it must be important.
The question of an afterlife is a whole other matter. I guess I'll know some day, but I also guess that I won't know that I know - or the physical me in this present will not know.
As with everything we have been discussing in the latter part of this thread, one may accept or not accept any of these explanations - even the so-called "scientific" explanations.
You make several fundamental errors. "Life as we know it only exists on this planet..." is the first and seminal error. We do not know what kind of life exists elsewhere in the universe [or, to be candid, whether life exists elsewhere in the universe].
"Life as we know it" on Earth is so awesomely diverse as to be literally incomprehensible - plant, animal, fungal, insect, one-celled, etc. - in every way. And even if everything the evolutionists say is true [except when they try to use that theory to explain the origin of life], it is still instructive.
I agree with you that it's more likely than not that there is life out there.
I disagree that life is not important. It is so different from the physical world that it must be important.
The question of an afterlife is a whole other matter. I guess I'll know some day, but I also guess that I won't know that I know - or the physical me in this present will not know.
[Post edited 11 Feb 2014 18:02]
'evolutionists' ( I prefer scientists, or people wit more than half a brain) do not use it to explain origins but creationists do keep trying to discredit it with that weak , false argument - but then they do know a lot about weak, false arguments!
There are two parts to the universe ...physical and spiritual.
Science can easily explain the physical,material universe because it is what we can see with our own eyes.
The spiritual or supernatural side cannot be explained very well by science because we cannot see it or measure it so therefore it is dismissed as nonsense with some scientific explanation to back that up.
For example ghosts,Ufos,paranormal activity,extra terrestrials,telepathy etc even though millions of people through history have some experience of these.
That is not even taking into account our new discovery in quantum physics and mechanics of the fact of at least 14 dimensions.for instance we are in the third dimension we can move up,down,forward,back sideways etc. the fourth dimension according to Einstein means we can move forwards and backwards through time....the other dimensions?....well most people could nt even get their head around that so don t even go there! The notion of time and billions of years goes straight out of the window for starters...
So for me personally for scientists to proclaim they know the answer to it all and we understand how it all works in the universe(es) and all the laws that govern it is just well...laughable....we have only just knocked on the door....
PROUD RECIPIENT OF THE THIRD PLANET SWANS LIFETIME ACHIEVEMENT AWARD.
"Per ardua ad astra"
There are two parts to the universe ...physical and spiritual.
Science can easily explain the physical,material universe because it is what we can see with our own eyes.
The spiritual or supernatural side cannot be explained very well by science because we cannot see it or measure it so therefore it is dismissed as nonsense with some scientific explanation to back that up.
For example ghosts,Ufos,paranormal activity,extra terrestrials,telepathy etc even though millions of people through history have some experience of these.
That is not even taking into account our new discovery in quantum physics and mechanics of the fact of at least 14 dimensions.for instance we are in the third dimension we can move up,down,forward,back sideways etc. the fourth dimension according to Einstein means we can move forwards and backwards through time....the other dimensions?....well most people could nt even get their head around that so don t even go there! The notion of time and billions of years goes straight out of the window for starters...
So for me personally for scientists to proclaim they know the answer to it all and we understand how it all works in the universe(es) and all the laws that govern it is just well...laughable....we have only just knocked on the door....
We are on the same page.
Except for one word. In the second sentence, I would change "easily" to "glibly."
There are two parts to the universe ...physical and spiritual.
Science can easily explain the physical,material universe because it is what we can see with our own eyes.
The spiritual or supernatural side cannot be explained very well by science because we cannot see it or measure it so therefore it is dismissed as nonsense with some scientific explanation to back that up.
For example ghosts,Ufos,paranormal activity,extra terrestrials,telepathy etc even though millions of people through history have some experience of these.
That is not even taking into account our new discovery in quantum physics and mechanics of the fact of at least 14 dimensions.for instance we are in the third dimension we can move up,down,forward,back sideways etc. the fourth dimension according to Einstein means we can move forwards and backwards through time....the other dimensions?....well most people could nt even get their head around that so don t even go there! The notion of time and billions of years goes straight out of the window for starters...
So for me personally for scientists to proclaim they know the answer to it all and we understand how it all works in the universe(es) and all the laws that govern it is just well...laughable....we have only just knocked on the door....
I think you may be misunderstanding the meaning of dimensions possibly confusing it with the many worlds idea or parallel universes.
We aren't in the 'third dimension' there isn't a third dimension per se, the universe has three spatial dimensions + one dimension of time.
As for the 'fact' of 14 dimensions being discovered in quantum physics that's simply not a fact. There are plenty of theoretical physicists that predict extra dimensions, string theory predicts 9 dimensions + 1 time I think M-theory predicts 12+1 etc, but nobody has actually found them or (I think) been able to actually test for them at all.
If man evolved from monkeys why do we still have monkeys?
First off....greetings to all. I used to post infrequently to the forum at the old site and have been lurking for a few weeks or so (probably since I belatedly realized that the Swansea "swagger" was missing).
Thank you to the OP for bringing up such a well written and stimulating topic in a football forum of all places. I haven't had the chance to read through all of it so apologies if my comments might appear a little out of the flow as it were.
God or no god? My belief is that it doesn't really matter. That's certainly not to say that its not worth exploring. I say this because ultimately you cannot use logic to explain the illogical.
The most honest answer that can be given is simply "I don't know". Its a mystery.
Consider this; You're a little boy sitting in a toy car running on a set of rails and in your hand is the steering wheel. You believe that when you turn the wheel to the right the car will move to the right - not an unreasonable assumption for a five year old to make. Anyway you have lots of fun "driving" this car along the track. At some point you might realize that even when you turn the wheel to the right, the car goes to the left. Hey, this is even more fun. Sooner or later you figure out that you can hold both hands up in the air and the car drives itself. Even more fun...its a magic car! Now imagine that that the car is actually your life and the steering wheel represents your destiny - or perhaps the control you believe that is necessary to navigate through life. A multitude of questions will probably arise, such as; Where is this thing going and why? How do I steer this thing or who is really driving it? How do I stop and get off? What is making this thing go? Who built this car and what is the track made out of? Who's collecting the fare and how much is it?
etc, etc ad infinitum.
Might it not be easier to throw your hands up in the air, kick back and enjoy the ride?
There are two parts to the universe ...physical and spiritual.
Science can easily explain the physical,material universe because it is what we can see with our own eyes.
The spiritual or supernatural side cannot be explained very well by science because we cannot see it or measure it so therefore it is dismissed as nonsense with some scientific explanation to back that up.
For example ghosts,Ufos,paranormal activity,extra terrestrials,telepathy etc even though millions of people through history have some experience of these.
That is not even taking into account our new discovery in quantum physics and mechanics of the fact of at least 14 dimensions.for instance we are in the third dimension we can move up,down,forward,back sideways etc. the fourth dimension according to Einstein means we can move forwards and backwards through time....the other dimensions?....well most people could nt even get their head around that so don t even go there! The notion of time and billions of years goes straight out of the window for starters...
So for me personally for scientists to proclaim they know the answer to it all and we understand how it all works in the universe(es) and all the laws that govern it is just well...laughable....we have only just knocked on the door....
last paragraph (I wish we could edit quotes!)
You have that last para completely arse over tits - scientists don't proclaim they know the answer to it all - they proclaim what they know to be provable or put forward a hypothesis to explore and prove or disprove - that's science you know. They are open to more knowledge and to theories being improved.disproved - that's science. Science does not claim to know all the answers - just the facts
There is one group of people you could fit that last para to - theists. Now that is eminently laughable!
Why some people believe in intelligent design and how it s all just too good to be true the way things are organised for life just on this planet for instance....
The Earth...its size is perfect. The Earth's size and corresponding gravity holds a thin layer of mostly nitrogen and oxygen gases, only extending about 50 miles above the Earth's surface. If Earth were smaller, an atmosphere would be impossible, like the planet Mercury. If Earth were larger, its atmosphere would contain free hydrogen, like Jupiter.3 Earth is the only known planet equipped with an atmosphere of the right mixture of gases to sustain plant, animal and human life.
The Earth is located the right distance from the sun. Consider the temperature swings we encounter, roughly -30 degrees to +120 degrees. If the Earth were any further away from the sun, we would all freeze. Any closer and we would burn up. Even a fractional variance in the Earth's position to the sun would make life on Earth impossible. The Earth remains this perfect distance from the sun while it rotates around the sun at a speed of nearly 67,000 mph. It is also rotating on its axis, allowing the entire surface of the Earth to be properly warmed and cooled every day.
And our moon is the perfect size and distance from the Earth for its gravitational pull. The moon creates important ocean tides and movement so ocean waters do not stagnate, and yet our massive oceans are restrained from spilling over across the continents.4
Water...colorless, odorless and without taste, and yet no living thing can survive without it. Plants, animals and human beings consist mostly of water (about two-thirds of the human body is water). You'll see why the characteristics of water are uniquely suited to life:
It has an unusually high boiling point and freezing point. Water allows us to live in an environment of fluctuating temperature changes, while keeping our bodies a steady 98.6 degrees.
Water is a universal solvent. This property of water means that various chemicals, minerals and nutrients can be carried throughout our bodies and into the smallest blood vessels.5
Water is also chemically neutral. Without affecting the makeup of the substances it carries, water enables food, medicines and minerals to be absorbed and used by the body.
Water has a unique surface tension. Water in plants can therefore flow upward against gravity, bringing life-giving water and nutrients to the top of even the tallest trees.
Water freezes from the top down and floats, so fish can live in the winter.
Ninety-seven percent of the Earth's water is in the oceans. But on our Earth, there is a system designed which removes salt from the water and then distributes that water throughout the globe. Evaporation takes the ocean waters, leaving the salt, and forms clouds which are easily moved by the wind to disperse water over the land, for vegetation, animals and people. It is a system of purification and supply that sustains life on this planet, a system of recycled and reused water.6
The human brain...simultaneously processes an amazing amount of information. Your brain takes in all the colors and objects you see, the temperature around you, the pressure of your feet against the floor, the sounds around you, the dryness of your mouth, even the texture of your keyboard. Your brain holds and processes all your emotions, thoughts and memories. At the same time your brain keeps track of the ongoing functions of your body like your breathing pattern, eyelid movement, hunger and movement of the muscles in your hands.
The human brain processes more than a million messages a second.7 Your brain weighs the importance of all this data, filtering out the relatively unimportant. This screening function is what allows you to focus and operate effectively in your world. The brain functions differently than other organs. There is an intelligence to it, the ability to reason, to produce feelings, to dream and plan, to take action, and relate to other people......."
I believe a "chaotic" disorganised universe left to its own devices could not work.
[Post edited 11 Feb 2014 16:58]
On the points about Earth, it's size and orbit etc, no one can deny those facts. But I cannot see any form of design on earth. Part of what our planet is comes from so many collisions. Many many heavenly bodies have collided with this planet and that made it what it is today. Those collisions are entirely accidental. Or so I believe. Our moon is drifting away from the planet at about 2cm a year. the time will come when the moon no longer has a gravitational effect on our seas and oceans. That's when life will start to fade on our planet. Our oceans will stagnate and die. The levels of poisonous gases in the atmosphere will rise and we will eventually all suffocate. That will be long after my time. And it will happen unless science finds a way to harness the moon or to travel to another planet that can support our form of life. So mankind on planet Earth has limited shelf life. Why would a God who supposedly loves us design things that way. It's not really logical, not to me anyway. There is so much we don't, and never will know. I happen to believe there are probably beings existing on a higher plane, in other dimensions and those dimensions probably carry identical versions of us who's lives take different courses. There is a scientific theory that proposes this. I watched a program with Dr Brian Cox who explained it. That everything is so complicated is an oft used argument for intelligent design. Yet is there is a being (whatever you may wish to call it) clever enough to design all this, why are there so many flaws? Could something, somebody, clever enough to design our brains really make so many basic errors? That I believe in higher beings does not correspond to a god. I dont believe these beings are in any sort of control, just that they have evolved just as we continue to do so. And after all, if (and I believe there is) intelligent life elsewhere in the universe and they have travelled here then they would have to be vastly more intelligent than us, advanced beings with the knowhow to travel vast distances in a relatively short time. Finally, there could well be a sort of intelligent design that developed in nature over the course of millenia. Mother nature as we call her could hold a collective intelligence without it actually being a deity in itself. If I am ever going to pray to anything or anyone, it will probably be mother nature. Not a god dreamed up by man.
On the points about Earth, it's size and orbit etc, no one can deny those facts. But I cannot see any form of design on earth. Part of what our planet is comes from so many collisions. Many many heavenly bodies have collided with this planet and that made it what it is today. Those collisions are entirely accidental. Or so I believe. Our moon is drifting away from the planet at about 2cm a year. the time will come when the moon no longer has a gravitational effect on our seas and oceans. That's when life will start to fade on our planet. Our oceans will stagnate and die. The levels of poisonous gases in the atmosphere will rise and we will eventually all suffocate. That will be long after my time. And it will happen unless science finds a way to harness the moon or to travel to another planet that can support our form of life. So mankind on planet Earth has limited shelf life. Why would a God who supposedly loves us design things that way. It's not really logical, not to me anyway. There is so much we don't, and never will know. I happen to believe there are probably beings existing on a higher plane, in other dimensions and those dimensions probably carry identical versions of us who's lives take different courses. There is a scientific theory that proposes this. I watched a program with Dr Brian Cox who explained it. That everything is so complicated is an oft used argument for intelligent design. Yet is there is a being (whatever you may wish to call it) clever enough to design all this, why are there so many flaws? Could something, somebody, clever enough to design our brains really make so many basic errors? That I believe in higher beings does not correspond to a god. I dont believe these beings are in any sort of control, just that they have evolved just as we continue to do so. And after all, if (and I believe there is) intelligent life elsewhere in the universe and they have travelled here then they would have to be vastly more intelligent than us, advanced beings with the knowhow to travel vast distances in a relatively short time. Finally, there could well be a sort of intelligent design that developed in nature over the course of millenia. Mother nature as we call her could hold a collective intelligence without it actually being a deity in itself. If I am ever going to pray to anything or anyone, it will probably be mother nature. Not a god dreamed up by man.
Respectfully, although I tend to agree with most of this post, I think you're having a problem with putting aside historical "beliefs" about a personal god - "personal" meaning "having the characteristics of a person," as taught in all "bibles" that I know of.
You're far better off, in my opinion, with what you wrote here: "That I believe in higher beings does not correspond to a god." That's an attitude not encumbered with "religion."
When humans, in their very early innocent lack of knowledge of nearly everything, were trying to explain what they believed [thought that they knew] about existence, they had no real alternative but a "person" god. That led irrevocably to a full panoply of person-like attributes, emotions, and activities - like "supposedly loving us."
There's a notion that when faced with different explanations for something, the most simple explanation is usually the best one. If you sat all of the religions of the world down together, most would reject every other one's teachings. But they have a common denominator - that there is a creator and sustainer of life - and they teach that. They teach that in their own construct, or with their own details and coloration, which is the problem with religions and an attempt to use a religious explanation for existence.
That's why, when the discussion turns to a creator and sustainer of life, some cry out in pain that they don't believe in pixies and fairies. For them, the fluff has become the core.
Azjack, I do not reproduce your entire post here because I want to deal only with your image of the noddy car.
In Moby Dick, Herman Melville explained the relationship of Fate, Chance, and Free Will in man's life by comparing it to a loom - which was used by sailors of that time to weave mats used extensively in their work.
He compared the "warp" - those threads that are fixed in place on the loom in order to be the foundation of the mat - to Fate. Like Fate, they are immutable, with reference to that mat.
Free Will, he write, is like the weft or woof in the weaving process - the loose thread attached to a shuttle and woven back and forth by hand in between the threads of the warp as separated rhythmically by use of a foot-operated treadle, and creating the specific pattern of that mat.
Chance, in Melville's image, is what happens when the weaver uses a piece of wood to tamp the weft down and tighten up the weave. Because this was done freehand and more-or-less randomly, the pressure was not even from strike to strike, nor from side to side, thereby giving the weave another aspect of individuality.
For Melville, this described the interactions of Fate, Chance, and Free Will that make up the fabric of our lives.
Later, "Pip," the young cabin boy became entangled in a harpoon line and was accidentally dragged deep by a whale. He was saved from death, but was never the same again mentally. The men asked him what he had seen down there, and he said that he saw God's foot working the treadle on a loom.
Thus, Melville wove the role of God in man's existence with Fate, Chance, and Free Will.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
