Beginning and ends are elements of time. If time is a physical property that, in fact, can be broken down (such as a black hole), there would be no duration. Hence no beginning, and no end. Trippy isn't it?Originally Posted by Bojangles69
Anabolic Member
Beginning and ends are elements of time. If time is a physical property that, in fact, can be broken down (such as a black hole), there would be no duration. Hence no beginning, and no end. Trippy isn't it?
Anabolic Member
I think you're brainwashed into believing every religion is brainwashing. You sound like one of those non-conformist kids on Southpark who are ironically conforming by non-conforming.
Religion can be a great thing when given to the proper mind. Although a lot of it can be nonsense, there are general messages that every man of every faith can embrace to better their lives and the lives of others.
Anabolic Member
Good point. Just becuase there is a beginning and an end (or cause/effect) in everything that we "know" doesn't mean that there always HAS to be.
No one asked the question, "why does there even have to be a beginning?" The universe could of always been and always will be.
Anabolic Member
I have a prob with this statement as well, but I have to go do work... I'll get back to later. But I guess my "moderate" opinion of religion also falls under me being brainwashed (see above on pg 1).
Purveyor of Thor's Hammer
right.........no not really....i form my own opinions......i live in the midwest i'm the only one around here with these opinions. and those ideas and messages that are worth anything are easily begotten somewhere else.....it's very easy to live ones life with morality and define it for themself instead of letting someone tell u what's right
Retired: AR-Hall of Famer
We have a fossile record showing modern apes and mankind evolving from a comon ancestor. The 98% comon DNA betwen us and our monkey cousins sure is convincing aswell.
Purveyor of Thor's Hammer
thank u for quoting the proof johan....unfortunately i never have those facts close at hand
Retired: AR-Hall of Famer
Exactly!!
I think alot of people, including me, are just sic of religion and religious people thinking they have a patent on moral and ethics.
Religion has generaly a good message if we exclude alot of foul hatred. But why care about all the extra shit that brings no good?
If we want a moral guide just write one without all the excess
the good messages of the bible can be summed up as
dont lie, dont steal, dont **** over people, treat others as you want to be treated, help others, be loving.
Do we realy need the other 1000 pages dictating that the above only apply if you belive this and that and if you follow this and that
Retired: AR-Hall of Famer
http://www.talkorigins.org the number one place to find info on evolution. It dispells all the bullshit ID followers try to claim is facts. It also answeres all the problems ID followers claim evolution suffers from.
Retired: AR-Hall of Famer
Science has answeres to each of those questions except the origin of the universe.
I agree. Religion try to explain it by imagining a eternal god that created the universe. To me it seems a more obvious chooise to assume the universe itself is eternal. Occams Razor.
Why do you think so? Complexity arises spontaniously all the time. A snowflake is a good example, a tornadoe another. The universe is driven to form complex structures because of the laws of thermodynamics.
The comon saying that entropy=disorder isnt quite right.
The difference beeing offcourse that science can be verified, religion can not. If you mean the ultimate begining pre big bang. Sure there science and religion is equaly clueless. But following the first briefest moement of the bigbang and up until today we have verified theories.
Depends on what you accept as facts. A very convincing fossile record and 98% comon genetics is facts to me.
We are never going to se a primate evolve into another with right before our eyes. But we will never see the sun evolve into a red gigant either. But I dont se that as a reason to distrust stellar evolution.
I think the issue is that we humans can not comprehend long timescales. We view life in 70 year periods at most. Imagining a process that gradualy takes place over 1000 years is hard enough. A billion years is just beyond us.
Retired: AR-Hall of Famer
One flaw in thinking is that people assume scientists are saying that everything around us formed by chanse.
This isnt true. A more accurate statement would be that. Everything around us formed by the laws of nature that acts as a driving force to create complexity.
Purveyor of Thor's Hammer
good point good points johan......lol u make me want to change my major to physics and get out of this engineering junk....
Anabolic Member
The morality that you claim to live your life by has been established by religious standards. I myself am also not religious and I find that organized religion has done more harm than good to the world, but I believe man has done that to himself. The basis of the teachings or organized religion, when applied, can be very beneficial.
But I did not mean to imply that you NEED religion as a roadmap to live a good life, but it can be very helpful.
p.s. I also live in the midwest, and no, you are not the only one with those opinions
Last edited by Phreak101; 11-02-2006 at 11:13 AM.
Retired: AR-Hall of Famer
Well at the university I am studying physical engineers and physicist seem to get roughly the same education. There are plenty of engineers here that after getting there engineering degree switched over and got a PhD in theoretical physicist, atomic physics ectThe masters educations in astrophysics and fundamental theoretical physics are open both for the physical engineers and physicist.
Engineers get a very solid background in maths so switching to become a scientist should be a piece of cake
Purveyor of Thor's Hammer
those standards were around before religion.....it's not like religion created them.....and i don't need to "claim" i live my life by my definition of morality cause it's MY definitionThe morality that you claim to live your life by has been established by religious standards. I myself am also not religious and I find that organized religion has done more harm than good to the world, but I believe man has done that to himself. The basis of the teachings or organized religion, when applied, can be very beneficial.
But I did not mean to imply that you NEED religion as a roadmap to live a good life, but it can be very helpful.
p.s. I also live in the midwest, and no, you are not the only one with those opinions
Anabolic Member
You don't know that to be true.....as long as man has been cogniscent, he has had a yearning to know where he came from, and witht hat yearning came gods. With gods came morals/ethics.
Not saying I'm right, but I'm not saying you are either. If I had to guess, the majority of ethics and morals practiced by people on this earth have come from one form of religion or another.
Banned- Scammer!
So..What is outside the universe then? Nothing....There dosnt HAVE to be anything? But...Then again....There HAS to be something as nothing is something...Right?
I think that gave me a headache.
Banned- Scammer!
I watched a documentary once about there being more universes than ours. Different universes, with different laws. And that one cannot travel to another universe as when you leave one, you no longer have an existance.
Anabolic Member
That's called The Elegant Universe on NOVA. It's all theory, but cool theory nonetheless...
Anabolic Member
agreed but to me...i believe religion in general is a form of cult
watch the scientology south park it explains it all LOL
CHEMICALLY ENGINEERED
tis is true. What a great man you are.
Just like all religions, people believing in something they cant prove, but just by "faith".
you have faith in one thing, scientology in the other....
let it be....the end.
dont let this come off wrong....no hard feelings yo.
i mean, scientology is whack, but doesnt rising form the dead and water into wine seem a bit whack?
Last edited by xlxBigSexyxlx; 11-02-2006 at 03:54 PM.
Anabolic Member
couldnt agree more. i guess coming from a strong scientific background i just cant make myself believe something that you cant prove or back up with some sort of physical proof ya know?
Senior Member
Hold on one minute cowboy! How can you prove God's "intentions" when it's impossible to prove God's literal existence? God, by definition, can't be proven and that's why believers speak of the need for faith.
I don't have to have "faith" that I just dropped the dish and it shattered on the floor. It's self-evident. Faith, on the other hand, means to believe in something unsupported by hard and definate evidence. So you have to start with the premise of God before you talk about his "intentions." I'll tell you in advance, you can never prove or disprove God's literal existence and therefore his intentions.
[QUOTE=Psychotron]God cannot be an absolute good as his actions must have a negative impact upon something. We may not immediately perceive the negative element, but I can prove that not only is God not an absolute good, but I can also prove that he is responsible for the problems we have now and in the past.
Anabolic Member
The premise for the argument is that one believes god exists. I would not even made a point if the first Premise was that god does not exist.
Banned
i guess we're done talking about scientology..
Dulce bellum inexpertis
I believe in all of the laws of science...However, the more sciences that I take in college, the more I begin to realise what a complex design the world and even the human body alone is...I believe that all of this has been designed by..... something/someone/etc. However, the organized idea of religion, has existed for the last 3,000 years. Homosapiens have been on the planet about 40,000 years. Where was this organized religion and 'God' for the last 37,000 years? The bible just seems like a good attempt at two things to me. 1)to control masses of people in lieu of strong government, and 2)to explain the things on earth which people had no explanation for..
At work I recently said something about God not existing, and my supervisor said "You better not let anyone hear that you might offend them.." my reply was "Well what if Im offended by someone having a cross on their desk, is that not equally as important? By saying God exists may I not be equally as offended?"... I dont like the double standards that religion creates, let alone that they all call their religions the truth...
CHEMICALLY ENGINEERED
[QUOTE=thegodfather]I believe in all of the laws of science...However, the more sciences that I take in college, the more I begin to realise what a complex design the world and even the human body alone is...I believe that all of this has been designed by..... something/someone/etc. However, the organized idea of religion, has existed for the last 3,000 years. Homosapiens have been on the planet about 40,000 years. Where was this organized religion and 'God' for the last 37,000 years? The bible just seems like a good attempt at two things to me. 1)to control masses of people in lieu of strong government, and 2)to explain the things on earth which people had no explanation for..
At work I recently said something about God not existing, and my supervisor said "You better not let anyone hear that you might offend them.." my reply was "Well what if Im offended by someone having a cross on their desk, is that not equally as important? By saying God exists may I not be equally as offended?"... I dont like the double standards that religion creates, let alone that they all call their religions the truth...[/QUOTE]
Yeah, religions wanna look at other religions and try to justify how they are right, and you are wrong. If your not gonna believe in this alien scientology stuff, then how the hell can you believe in a guy walking on water, rising from the dead, the having all animals on noah boat, water into wine, mary having a kid and not even pregnant, feeding 5000 with like 2 pieces of bread. If you ask me, aliens are alot more reasonable than that stuff.
Everyone goes to their so called "heaven", but no cathlics and ev1 for that matter, say the others are going to hell. so where is it all ****ing leading to?
Theres only been 1 thing proven about religion and its that it has led to wars and people dying......yeah people, thats really how some awesome "god" wants you to act....geezzzz...
I once heard someone say(not that I believe this or not) that religion is a crutch for people who cant manage their own lives. To try to feel "comfortable" about themselves living and when they die.
~ Vet~ I like Thai Girls
Where do I sign up
~ Vet~ I like Thai Girls
Long live Agnostics !!!
Senior Member
Just as long as you make the distinction between your believe and the world that exists in spite of your beliefs.
Banned
*seemed to pass this one byIt is a assumption that if it happens now it will always happen given the same circumstances. There is no getting around that assumption. It is on that assumption we build all of science. We assume the universe are following certain rules that does not change.
That is why scientific theories are theories and not truth.
That sentence LARGELY contradicts itself. How can that be an assumption?
Thats like saying water freezes at 0c at constant atm pressure BUT we're only assuming this because if the circumstances never change (ie: atm pressure) ... the boiling temp will?? If that confused you than you understood it. Even if a typo there is ABSOLUTELY NO assuming going on when you say
at normal atm pressure water boils at Oc.
This is not *assuming* that the "universe follows certain rules" this IS KNOWING it does. Or more properly this is KNOWING when man interacts with his environment in specific scientific ways, scientific LAWS and RULES will always be abided.
I can't even see how socrates, plato, aristotle or any philosopher could argue against the fact that the Earth follows its own laws. I can see how a philosopher would pick apart that previous statement and say man makes the laws, not earth. But not quite, the laws existed before man got here, it just took him about 6-7 million years to figure them out.
And there is absolutey no assuming the laws were different in the past. Even if atm pressure was lower or higher bac then, the boiling pt of water still follows the SAME exact laws. For every individual atm pressure there is a temperature it MUST boil at. Nothing will affect that besides pressure or temperature. That is a law the universe had always had, and man only noticed it.
Banned
http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/2.asp
a real interesting read about evolutionists, religion, and dinasours.
Banned
And I'm curious, how do we determine the age of a 7 million year old hominic? or a 6 billion year old dinasour? What the hell type of special device do we have that can "estimate" something has existed for that long? Seems like the biggest crock of BS to me.
Retired: AR-Hall of Famer
It is a assumption. If I drop a rock a million times, I can still not say that its certain that it will fall to the ground the next time I drop it. I assume it does it because I assume the world works according to rules and laws that do not change. But there is no way to prove that the world works according to rules.
Considere these 3 different universes.
We have a universe ruled by laws. Everytime you drop a rock it falls to the ground.
The other universe is ruled by chaning laws. They change every trillion years. You drop a rock a billion times and it falls to the ground, but drop it a trillion years later and it will fly into the air.
The third universe is governed by a god that toys with the laws. He watches you drop the rock a billion times and makes it fall to the ground. But decides the billion one time you drop it it will fly into the air.
There is no way to experimentaly determine which one of those 3 are correct since they all have the exact same experimental result now.
Silly example yes, but it is no less true because its silly.
We only know that the universe seems to obey laws since we have never observed it not obeying laws.
The only thing science can do is describe how nature behaves. Science can not say anything about the nature of the universe or if the behavior is absolute.
Yes it has been like that aslong as we have been around. But we can never say how its going to be a million years from now. We can resonably assume that it will be the same. But you can not guarante that because you do not know what determines the laws.
Science is based on the assumption that the universe follows laws. But thats it. Science can not make any claims above and beyond that.
I think it was Einstein that sometime expressed how remarkable it is that nature is at all comprehensible, that its unbelivable that nature indeed seem to follow laws.
Retired: AR-Hall of Famer
heres a good site for that
http://snakefly.tripod.com/Date.html
Retired: AR-Hall of Famer
There is quite some activity in theoretical physics right now examining of the "constants" of nature are indeed constant and why the laws of nature are the way they are. Offcourse there is not much data on this except speculation.
I guess that creates the question, is there laws that determine how the laws should be?
What determines that gravity drops with the square of the distance? What determines that there are 2 different kind of electric charges? What determines the value of the gravitational constant ect.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote