Rant on Theories, Laws & Misconceptions Options

[j0e_p3t]

i believe man evolved from monkeys which evolved from blah blah blah which evolved from a fish which evolved from more blah which evolved from the tiniest single-celled organism. but then where did those things come from? evolution can only go so far back.

[Supersprynt]

Evolution doesn't pretend to explain from what did the first single-cell organisms start. It merely explains how the vast range of millions of different animals across the land and sea came to be so perfect in their environments.

We never evolved from monkeys though. They aren't primates.

[jgreening]

Deductive reasoning (the scientific method) is not the opposite of belief - its just different. There are many many people (me included - undergrad philosophy major, lawyer by trade) that tend to be very rational yet also have faith in God.

I once struggled with reconciling the whole issue myself. Even in my most agnostic days (during college) there were two questions that I could never answer purely from a scientific perspective.

1. If the world was created in a "big bang" (followed by evolution), how and why did the big bang occur?

2. In a universe full of various forms of "matter", how can we explain how and why some things are living?

I would argue that the most logical among us might conceed that there is something bigger than us that holds the answers to these questions.

[97lestyousay]

My sons step dad told him dinosaurs never existed, because
there is no mention of them in the bible. Some
people get too closed minded.

[j0e_p3t]

Evolution doesn't pretend to explain from what did the first single-cell organisms start. It merely explains how the vast range of millions of different animals across the land and sea came to be so perfect in their environments.

We never evolved from monkeys though. They aren't primates.

exactly. science doesn't explain anything it cannot. i'm saying that evolution only goes so far back. science can only explain so much. something (which i believe to be God) created those single-celled organisms and placed them all over earth, which then evolved into different species in order to adapt to their constantly changing environment. i'm one of those who believe in both science and God. and yes, humans evolved from primates.

[Supersprynt]

Agreed. But the big bang is only a hypothesis, if that. Its still highly debated. The big bang merely describes the current universe setup. Whose to say there wasnt just another universe before that and it imploded?

If science is observation and deductive reasoning, what would the the opposite? I'd say it would be blind faith, the following of mere feelings and beliefs based on highly circumstantial and very thin stories. You can say that I "believe" in evolution as someone would "believe" in god, but its not just different, its so different I would still conclude its the opposite.

When you say how can we explain why and how some things are living? What things are you talking about? We're a young species, why do the answers have to be provided here and now? Its as if because we cant explain everything now it has to be god. As a philosophy major you definately should know how wrong that would be.

There is very much we just plain old don't know yet. Think about the scientific knowledge 200 yrs ago compared to today. God helps keep people secure. Makes people feel warm and cozy inside. Makes things easy to understand, cut and dry. No wondering, no worry about things because its in gods hands. God has a plan.

I firmly believe there is no single "being" that has all the answers, all the power and a plan to carry out. We are but an insignificant part of a gigantic world. There is infinite space bigger and unexplained, but it would be unwise to say it never will be explained.

My sons step dad told him dinosaurs never existed, because
there is no mention of them in the bible. Some
people get too closed minded.

This reminds me of a girl who told me that dinosaur bones were put in the ground by people trying to ruin christianity.

I also found something today, I forget where, stating that some fundamentalists are stating that the earth not only does not rotate, it doesnt revolve. Now this is scientific fact, and people are still denying it. This is the stuff that drives me up walls.

This post has been edited by Supersprynt: Feb 26, 2007 - 12:13 AM

[j0e_p3t]

This reminds me of a girl who told me that dinosaur bones were put in the ground by people trying to ruin christianity.

lol. i've actually heard someone say that.

[Nate]

Agreed. But the big bang is only a hypothesis, if that. Its still highly debated. The big bang merely describes the current universe setup. Whose to say there wasnt just another universe before that and it imploded?

If science is observation and deductive reasoning, what would the the opposite? I'd say it would be blind faith, the following of mere feelings and beliefs based on highly circumstantial and very thin stories. You can say that I "believe" in evolution as someone would "believe" in god, but its not just different, its so different I would still conclude its the opposite.

When you say how can we explain why and how some things are living? What things are you talking about? We're a young species, why do the answers have to be provided here and now? Its as if because we cant explain everything now it has to be god. As a philosophy major you definately should know how wrong that would be.

There is very much we just plain old don't know yet. Think about the scientific knowledge 200 yrs ago compared to today. God helps keep people secure. Makes people feel warm and cozy inside. Makes things easy to understand, cut and dry. No wondering, no worry about things because its in gods hands. God has a plan.

I firmly believe there is no single "being" that has all the answers, all the power and a plan to carry out. We are but an insignificant part of a gigantic world. There is infinite space bigger and unexplained, but it would be unwise to say it never will be explained.

My sons step dad told him dinosaurs never existed, because
there is no mention of them in the bible. Some
people get too closed minded.

This reminds me of a girl who told me that dinosaur bones were put in the ground by people trying to ruin christianity.

very well put... as i was reading the posts before this i was trying to think of how to say what i was thinking. you pretty much hit the nail on the head for me

[97lestyousay]

This reminds me of a girl who told me that dinosaur bones were put in the ground by people trying to ruin christianity.

Hopefully shes not raising your kids.

[OrbitalGT95]

umm the flying angelic beings that people with small minds who couldn't describe what they saw thousands of years ago saw aliens and the wings we see in illustrations just suggest flight since all the people could comprehend was that birds fly. the aztecs saw boats when the Spanish came and killed them all and they described the boats as floating mountains not knowing what a boat was how would they call them boats, get it. smart. reigion is just a belief to try and explain where we came from and the stories were poorly translated and crap loads of books where left out of the bible because it wasn't in the interest of the roman catholic church to put those books in. also in the great vast of time humans have been on earth the bible is new, to get the real info look further back in history.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSB4QRjt8fM...256&index=0
the nemesis theory because backs this theory up with the idea of being in a double star system. id rather learn whats older than religion and thats the universe.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=45...mp;q=physics+10
go to 35:00 in that video ^

also i believe in a God, not in the sense of Jesus or Budda or Shiva who ever. but more in the creator of the universe. The great architect of the universe.
Thats just my belief though :x

I saw these videos awhile back, really makes you think, specially with that nemesis theory of a planet/comet thats comes in and out every so many thousands of years. I wasn't going to post this at first cause to argues both religion and evolution, but yeah...

[jgreening]

Whose to say there wasnt just another universe before that and it imploded?

Tthe big bang theory is generally accepted as the most prevalent scientific thought on how the universe started. I agree that it hasn't been proven.

If science is observation and deductive reasoning, what would the the opposite? I'd say it would be blind faith, the following of mere feelings and beliefs based on highly circumstantial and very thin stories. You can say that I "believe" in evolution as someone would "believe" in god, but its not just different, its so different I would still conclude its the opposite.

Reducing faith to "feelings" would only come from someone who has no faith. If you took those first two philosophy classes, you may have learned that Descarte and his successors never suggested that because something could not be proved did not mean that it was untrue.


When you say how can we explain why and how some things are living? What things are you talking about? We're a young species, why do the answers have to be provided here and now? Its as if because we cant explain everything now it has to be god. As a philosophy major you definately should know how wrong that would be.

I am talking about the fundamental difference between living things and things which are not living. "Life" is certainly a strange thing if you think of the world just made up of bunch of matter created from an explosion. Does the fact that we can't explain it mean there was a creator? No, but alternative theories just seem silly to me.

There is very much we just plain old don't know yet. Think about the scientific knowledge 200 yrs ago compared to today.

Agreed.

God helps keep people secure. Makes people feel warm and cozy inside. Makes things easy to understand, cut and dry. No wondering, no worry about things because its in gods hands. God has a plan.

For some, you are definitely correct. There are many sheep in the world. However, that does not apply to all people who believe in God.

I firmly believe there is no single "being" that has all the answers, all the power and a plan to carry out. We are but an insignificant part of a gigantic world. There is infinite space bigger and unexplained, but it would be unwise to say it never will be explained.

How is your belief here subject to any less critism than you have leveled on people who do believe in God?

[Supersprynt]

I honestly have no opinion of the big bang theory. Discussing it further would render only speculation. I need a better understanding of the idea before passing judgement on it.

When I included feelings with my description of faith, it was meant as the inclusion of a love for (a) god(s). Faith is merely a strong belief. If you want to play with words about how someones feelings are seperate from their beliefs go ahead. I don't think its a far cry to say that ones love for god leads them blindly.

What alternative theories seem silly to you? What I have a hard time wrapping my hands around is if some theories are silly, why does one in which a being who has ultimate power, knowledge and wisdom to create, control & change a seemingly huge universe not seem silly?

When I think about why someone would believe in god several reasons come about. First and foremost is parents. Religion is taught as truth as a child for many and it is wrong to be debated. I dont think its any secret what many at least christian organizations did in the last 1,000 years to the people who refused to believe. Second is that people like the cozy, secure feeling etc. A distant third comes the "its the most plausible explanation" reason. This is because theres no evidence. So when I at least weigh things that can be explained to something that someone long ago decided existed, its no contest.

I'm also not saying my belief here is subject to any less criticism. You can criticize it all you want. The problem is, the argument science vs. creationism can never fully blossom because people who argue for god have little argument. Theres no evidence, theres hardly anything to go on besides, "if it doesnt exist prove it" or "because the bible says so" or "beings are so complex it had to be thought out by a super-being." None of that is valid argument. So it ultimately goes no where.

This post has been edited by Supersprynt: Feb 26, 2007 - 1:11 AM

[soven]

just jump on youtube and search videos by brettkeane.

[jgreening]

"beings are so complex it had to be thought out by a super-being." None of that is valid argument.

Whats invalid about that argument? I think its a damn fine one.

[Supersprynt]

Its not an argument because its 100% opinion.

I'll add: if I say, ok: let's take the eye for example. Why can't that have been created naturally. Why do you think it had to have been created "intelligently?"

For me personally; I like keeping things simple. That eye has millions of rods and cones and if I were to create the perfect eye I'd include lets parts.

This post has been edited by Supersprynt: Feb 26, 2007 - 1:29 AM

[lagos]

1. If the world was created in a "big bang" (followed by evolution), how and why did the big bang occur?

i skimmed through most of this thread.... but there are explanations for what happened before the big bang. i believe one of them is called M-Theory.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M-theory

[Rayme]

Now what I'm about to say is very interesting if you strongly beleive in the evolution theory. Well...I find it very interesting.

They say the whole world started as a single organism that spawned into all that exists, over millions and millions of years.

what is the most simple living organism? A cell? yes!

but wait a minute..a single cell.. how do you get to a cell?

A cell contains various but very simple mechanisms, exterior membrane, reproduction system, suicide system..etc..

If you beleive the cell "evolved" from something else, there goes the problem, you just cannot remove one of the cell's system, the cell just cannot function properly without one of those very simple mechanism...it could live without the reproductive system, but eh...that would be the end...

I'm going to stop and make you think now



Just looking at the cell diagram..Its hard to visualize how everything started from zero.

This post has been edited by Rayme: Feb 26, 2007 - 5:40 PM

[Supersprynt]

Pardon my haste but, just because you have a hard time visualizing what started from very little (not 0) and changed in a time period of billions of years doesnt change a single thing.

After re-reading your post, which I guess you think makes someone think about things except the fact that your implying a cell isnt a cell unless it has all those things inside. Your looking at a contemporary model of a cell. What your saying is that if a part of the contemporary model doesnt exist, the cell cant function or "live." And that maybe correct, but doesnt change the fact that it started out as something different and improved and changed function as time went by.

Whats the most simple thing RIGHT NOW? Maybe a cell. But billions of years ago it could have been the most complex...

This post has been edited by Supersprynt: Feb 26, 2007 - 5:51 PM

[celicaST]

Now what I'm about to say is very interesting if you strongly beleive in the evolution theory. Well...I find it very interesting.

They say the whole world started as a single organism that spawned into all that exists, over millions and millions of years.

what is the most simple living organism? A cell? yes!

but wait a minute..a single cell.. how do you get to a cell?

A cell contains various but very simple mechanisms, exterior membrane, reproduction system, suicide system..etc..

If you beleive the cell "evolved" from something else, there goes the problem, you just cannot remove one of the cell's system, the cell just cannot function properly without one of those very simple mechanism...it could live without the reproductive system, but eh...that would be the end...

I'm going to stop and make you think now



Just looking at the cell diagram..Its hard to visualize how everything started from zero.

animal cells (like you pictured) are not very simple. you make it sound as though the single cell had to just appear. it took millions of years for the first cells to evolve, and they were very primitive. bacteria will give you a better example. more complex cells, such as plant/animal cells evolved from these earlier cells. even the mitochondria (organelles in animal cells) are believed to have been independent cells that then became part of the larger animal cell.

[pepsiman]

http://www.godexistence.com/five.htm

I am a Christian and at one point i doubted the existance of God and you all got some good points but this website has ALOT of good points

lol and I believe in dinosaurs

This post has been edited by pepsiman: Feb 26, 2007 - 7:14 PM