This is a placeholder text
Group text
by keepthefaith on 30 August 2010 - 17:08
Not meant to question one's own religious convictions - one way or the other - but here is a graphic time-line based on a single calendar year when it comes to the universe and significant events in human history.
If the Big Bang with the creation of the universe occurred on January 1, then the Milky Way formed in March of the same year. Our solar system formed in August, the first multi-cellular organisms appeared in November, the first dinosaurs appeared on December 24th and they were wiped out on December 29th.
The first apes appeared at 10:15 am on December 31 and humans appeared at 11:54 pm on the 31st.
The pyramids 10 seconds before midnight and Christopher Columbus undertook his voyage one second before midnight.
So more recent events are all microseconds before midnight!
Makes one realize how recently in time our role, as human beings, on earth began.
If the Big Bang with the creation of the universe occurred on January 1, then the Milky Way formed in March of the same year. Our solar system formed in August, the first multi-cellular organisms appeared in November, the first dinosaurs appeared on December 24th and they were wiped out on December 29th.
The first apes appeared at 10:15 am on December 31 and humans appeared at 11:54 pm on the 31st.
The pyramids 10 seconds before midnight and Christopher Columbus undertook his voyage one second before midnight.
So more recent events are all microseconds before midnight!
Makes one realize how recently in time our role, as human beings, on earth began.
by Two Moons on 30 August 2010 - 17:08
More theory,
I don't believe big bang explains the universe.
The universe is more than just what man sees looking out from Earth, our technology has not yet seen the vastness of whats really there.
Just as mans technology is still looking inward at a part of this same universe searching for the smallest piece of it.
All looking for the beginning and end.
My theory is there are no beginnings and there is no end to what I see as this thing we have labeled a universe.
I don't believe big bang explains the universe.
The universe is more than just what man sees looking out from Earth, our technology has not yet seen the vastness of whats really there.
Just as mans technology is still looking inward at a part of this same universe searching for the smallest piece of it.
All looking for the beginning and end.
My theory is there are no beginnings and there is no end to what I see as this thing we have labeled a universe.
by MVF on 30 August 2010 - 18:08
There are alternative views. For example, some serious people entertain the idea that the best explanation we have for the fact that matter is basically empty space with trivial particle mass is that we are actually a holograph. See, for example, Michael Talbot, The Holographic Universe. Or see the research of Karl Pribam (Yale) directly. I don't myself have the scientific chops to evaluate this model, so I must remain open, but it is certainly both interesting and disturbing.
We may just think we are the real thing, but instead we could be, like the holographic transmission of Princess Leah in Star Wars, just a projected message of some sort. In that case, the original question -- what is the meaning of life? -- might actually have an answer! We might be the the message itself!
We may just think we are the real thing, but instead we could be, like the holographic transmission of Princess Leah in Star Wars, just a projected message of some sort. In that case, the original question -- what is the meaning of life? -- might actually have an answer! We might be the the message itself!
by Two Moons on 30 August 2010 - 18:08
The original question,
What is the meaning of life,
is not the same question,
Why is there life.
These are two different and separate questions in my opinion.
A holograph ya think?
And what of the Princess?
What is the meaning of life,
is not the same question,
Why is there life.
These are two different and separate questions in my opinion.
A holograph ya think?
And what of the Princess?
by raymond on 30 August 2010 - 18:08
by Two Moons on 30 August 2010 - 17:08
Two Moons
Posts: 7612
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 07:21 pm
a real living god and not a god made by man...................
I rest my case.
so on what premise have you rested your case?
Two Moons
Posts: 7612
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 07:21 pm
a real living god and not a god made by man...................
I rest my case.
so on what premise have you rested your case?
by MVF on 30 August 2010 - 18:08
There is a terrible confusion among people who do not do research about what a "theory" is. There is a common misunderstanding that something is a theory only before it is shown to be true by evidence, but after it has been proven, it is somehow not a theory anymore. Some people seem to think that when something is a theory it is untested or unproven. This is not remotely true. Many theories (such as the role of the heart in circulating blood in the body, or the role of natural selection in the evolution of species) are now proven to be true, within the limits of the current state of science and data.
What makes something a theory, as opposed to something else, is therefore not whether or not it is true or false, unproven or proven. What makes something a theory is that it is an attempt to explain something by a combination of causes and effects that obey the laws of science or social science. If it is an honest attempt to do so, and honestly and correctly characterizes all known scientific knowledge on the subject, it is a good theory. If the person creating the theory began not honestly, but in a covert attempt to prove a personal/religious/political point, it is a bad theory.
Then the process of testing the theory begins. The process of testing eventually reaches a stage where the theory has either been confirmed (by all available data up to the standards of scientific proof) or disconfirmed (it just fails to make sense of too much). If the former, at that point the theory is considered proven. This is the state of evolutionary science. It is not a theory in any sense that implies it is not known to be true.
But even this is misunderstood. All scientific inquiry must be open to new data. So it is always possible, even if extremely unlikely, that a theory accepted today could be disconfirmed in the future. ALL good theories are in this position.
Ironically, bad theories cannot be disproven, because they were never designed to be honestly tested. Creationism is a body of such work. Much of the current political rhetoric (in which people think by definition that everything GWB did was bad, or everything Obama does is bad) is bad theory -- their proponents were dishonest from the outset.
Darwin was a deeply religious man who did not want to discover anything that would make theists unhappy and make him, a believer, uncomfortable in society. He was honest in his attempt to understand what we observed through years of careful work. His theories, in modified modern forms, have stood the test of time enormously well. You may not like it, but evolution is a very good theory -- and considered proven by the standards of modern science.
What makes something a theory, as opposed to something else, is therefore not whether or not it is true or false, unproven or proven. What makes something a theory is that it is an attempt to explain something by a combination of causes and effects that obey the laws of science or social science. If it is an honest attempt to do so, and honestly and correctly characterizes all known scientific knowledge on the subject, it is a good theory. If the person creating the theory began not honestly, but in a covert attempt to prove a personal/religious/political point, it is a bad theory.
Then the process of testing the theory begins. The process of testing eventually reaches a stage where the theory has either been confirmed (by all available data up to the standards of scientific proof) or disconfirmed (it just fails to make sense of too much). If the former, at that point the theory is considered proven. This is the state of evolutionary science. It is not a theory in any sense that implies it is not known to be true.
But even this is misunderstood. All scientific inquiry must be open to new data. So it is always possible, even if extremely unlikely, that a theory accepted today could be disconfirmed in the future. ALL good theories are in this position.
Ironically, bad theories cannot be disproven, because they were never designed to be honestly tested. Creationism is a body of such work. Much of the current political rhetoric (in which people think by definition that everything GWB did was bad, or everything Obama does is bad) is bad theory -- their proponents were dishonest from the outset.
Darwin was a deeply religious man who did not want to discover anything that would make theists unhappy and make him, a believer, uncomfortable in society. He was honest in his attempt to understand what we observed through years of careful work. His theories, in modified modern forms, have stood the test of time enormously well. You may not like it, but evolution is a very good theory -- and considered proven by the standards of modern science.
by Two Moons on 30 August 2010 - 18:08
The words come straight from the handbook of born again Christians.
The living god, as opposed to a man made god.
I'm glad you and Shtal found god and saved yourselves.
Thank god.
by MVF on 30 August 2010 - 18:08
I, like you all, are quite imperfect, and while my logic tells me to say open to the holographic universe theory, but my gut tells me I don't want it to be true. I would almost go so far as to say I don't believe it because I don't want to -- but that would violate one of the basic requirements of rationality.
by Two Moons on 30 August 2010 - 18:08
Theory,
Man must adapt his theories every time new discoveries are made.
Even proven theory is subject to change.
Man must adapt his theories every time new discoveries are made.
Even proven theory is subject to change.
by raymond on 30 August 2010 - 18:08
found God!!!!!!!! LOL LOL LOL I am dumbfounded that such a ridiculous statement would come from one who has read the bible from cover to cover! You make it abundantly clear that you are as ignorant about the bible as I am about schutzhund3 but this is the kicker! I am willing to expend the effort to learn and you are not! Oh the other absurity you exibit is that you seem to think God is lost and needs to be found!LO LOL LOL Moons you are a pip! No my friend you are lost and God is trying to find you! Oh and miracles never cease you also say that stahl and I have saved ourselves!!! and I thought you were brighter than that! But you keep up the good work Moons 1 Your are just another example of the deciet you are under1 Perhaps Kali will find you?
Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top