|
Post by Niklianos on May 20, 2008 13:58:50 GMT -5
Just trying to get a feel for your beliefs.
|
|
|
Post by terroreign on May 20, 2008 14:21:01 GMT -5
For some time I played with the thought that we humans were just organisms created through a sudden random chain of events in the solar system and here we are
But I stopped believing in that because its like believing that the lightbulb was created by random chance, a creator is essential
Now my theory on "God" and humans, is that the "Creator" has been trying to create the earth for almost an infinite amount of time, (other planets as examples), many times failed, few planets have life on them, some water
But looks like Earth was the only planet that succeeded in the experiment, the perfect ingridients were used, and from that the life experiments started, from bacteria to fish to dinosaurs to birds to, ect ect, all the way to humans
An experiment like any other scientists do, where they start out with a formula or hypothesis and work there way in research and tests until they reach perfection.
And naturally a being who can create us, is usually superior, so that gives you a little heads up on "God", the rest you can leave to your imagination. ;D
|
|
|
Post by c0gnate on May 20, 2008 14:25:20 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by jerryspringer on May 20, 2008 15:54:48 GMT -5
I see nothing that says she's Vlach. I see no evidence indicating that she helped him in his studies, the way you want to imply. C0gnate, as a Gypsy, you shouldn't tell lies, unless you can earn a penny or two.
|
|
|
Post by c0gnate on May 20, 2008 16:05:57 GMT -5
I see nothing that says she's Vlach. I see no evidence indicating that she helped him in his studies, the way you want to imply. Anittas, you couldn't tell your arse from a hole in the ground.
|
|
|
Post by ILIRI I MADH on May 20, 2008 19:13:44 GMT -5
did the creator create creations or did the creations create the creator? think about it?
and Christopher Hitchens is a freakin GENIUS read his work, and search for him on youtube!
|
|
Panos
Membrum
Epicurus: Founder of Secularism & Developer of the Scientific Method
Posts: 69
|
Post by Panos on May 20, 2008 19:41:57 GMT -5
The belief in a personal god who; 1) Created the universe & 2) Cares how you live, eat, have sex is nothing but childish superstition.
In a Brief History of Time Steven Hawking brilliantly explains how the universe came to be & there is no god in the picture, it is also backed up by something called evidence. He explains the big bang happened in a big white heat, to test if this were true the light from the initial reaction would of red shifted so far as to be microwave signals, which if you point a special device in any direction of the universe you pick up on this microwave signal as 'noise'. Universe origins QED.
The religious "explanation" is nothing but an assertion based on a series of bad assumptions about "holy books" with dubious origins.
As to needing a creator, the galaxy is filled with failed systems and planets. Our planet is on a climatic knife edge, the moving plates & ever cooling crust cause devastation from floods to earth quakes. This is some creation! Or how about the 99.9% failed species? At the very least this creator could be called inept or at the worst malevolent.
The problem I have with religion (the Abrahamic kinds) is this;
You have to believe god made you in her/his image and that is to enjoy all these things ranging from anger to lust. Now, this very creator has commanded you to love your neighbour AS yourself & to be sexually deprived until marriage. God has created you sick and commanded you to be well. Either god is a sadist or this is wicked teachings from the infancy of our species when our understanding of the natural world was meagre, at best. I am grateful it is the latter. Were it not, we would be living in an unalterable permanent dictatorship with a benign ruler who knows what is best for us, whereas we are to believe we haven't a clue.
I am happy to say I live in a godless universe, but just to clarify I remain agnostic to the idea of a higher power who doesn't favour one race of humans over another and does not intervene but in practice I am an Atheist to all kinds of gods.
|
|
|
Post by epiroti on May 20, 2008 19:57:17 GMT -5
terroreign, the logic you mentioned that 'we are too complex to have come into existence by ourselves therefore a creator must exist' defeats itself. Because then the question 'who created the creator' pops up! So instead of making things simpler by assuming the existence of a creator, we make them more complicated.
On the other hand, we are a species that have a need to make sense of things, partially in order to feel more comfortable. (Notice even how vulnerable people/animals feel when suddenly put in an environment or situation that they have not encountered before, or feel familiar with) So we couldn't explain what created us, what caused thunder and rain and earthquakes, etc, and we feeled in the vacuum. No suprise - makes perfect sense when you know how the human mind works.
It takes b@lls to be an atheist - no one is looking after you spiritually, and when you die, that's it, it's over for real!!
I personally think that religion takes away necessary pressure from people. Pressure that life must be lived to the fullest, because we will die one day, and there's no afterlife. Pressure that motivates (and that we need to master, instead of letting it paralyse us).
|
|
|
Post by terroreign on May 20, 2008 20:26:38 GMT -5
Actually there can be a creator who wasn't created. In this world almost everything was created from another thing, but there exists the possibility that there is something/someone absolute/infinite, that would be the creator, something with an infinite amount of time, something that we cannot easily understand through our own consciousnesses
Something that has been around forever, and will be forever, literally.
I am not saying this is some personal God, or that when we die we go to meet him even, just saying there is a creator whether you're okay with it or not.
|
|
|
Post by epiroti on May 20, 2008 20:39:15 GMT -5
So if you can accept the existence of something (God) without questionin its beginning, then why can't you accept the creation of terrestrial life just by random chance?
And I agree with you that we might have to accept the existence of something without ever knowing how it came about. Mine is the acceptence of energy-matter. We know it exists, but we don't know how it came about - or how its predecessor (the theory that the universe was created from a singularity (?)) came about. But at least I trust my senses enough to know that the energy-matter is real, whereas the possibility of there being a creator behind all this neither serves a purpose to help out my comprehension of things , nor is it believable from facts presented by those who argue in its favour.
|
|
Panos
Membrum
Epicurus: Founder of Secularism & Developer of the Scientific Method
Posts: 69
|
Post by Panos on May 20, 2008 20:50:07 GMT -5
The singularity was probably the size of a tennis ball and had infinite density, the "big bang" was the expansion of that singularity, which is speeding up even today. In the early stages the heat of the universe was so intense (now it has decreased to 2.7 degrees above absolute zero), this heat is said to of created the gasses responsible and needed for the formation of planets.
From this heat, Quarks were formed. These are the individual energy signatures that make up the proton of atoms. An irony because atom in Greek meant indivisible, which we now know isn't true as they are divisible into 2 types at 9 sub types.
Their signatures are shorter than a wave of light and when certain quarks merge, certain atoms are made. As we all know, all matter is made of these basic building blocks. Add in the (at least) 100 billion year old universe and it explains how simple matter can merge to form more complex matter. No god needed.
|
|
|
Post by philopoemen81 on May 20, 2008 21:08:49 GMT -5
Actually there can be a creator who wasn't created. In this world almost everything was created from another thing, but there exists the possibility that there is something/someone absolute/infinite, that would be the creator, something with an infinite amount of time, something that we cannot easily understand through our own consciousnesses Something that has been around forever, and will be forever, literally. I am not saying this is some personal God, or that when we die we go to meet him even, just saying there is a creator whether you're okay with it or not. allow me to play 'devil's advocate' Why is it possible that a creator being is eternal, but that the universe could not possibly be eternal? Clearly, the universe being eternal without a creator is the simpler explanation, therefore it passes the test of ocham's razor. The simpler example is usually the correct one.
|
|
Panos
Membrum
Epicurus: Founder of Secularism & Developer of the Scientific Method
Posts: 69
|
Post by Panos on May 20, 2008 21:25:19 GMT -5
Actually there can be a creator who wasn't created. In this world almost everything was created from another thing, but there exists the possibility that there is something/someone absolute/infinite, that would be the creator, something with an infinite amount of time, something that we cannot easily understand through our own consciousnesses Something that has been around forever, and will be forever, literally. I am not saying this is some personal God, or that when we die we go to meet him even, just saying there is a creator whether you're okay with it or not. allow me to play 'devil's advocate' Why is it possible that a creator being is eternal, but that the universe could not possibly be eternal? Clearly, the universe being eternal without a creator is the simpler explanation, therefore it passes the test of ocham's razor. The simpler example is usually the correct one. The universe is not eternal, time did not exist prior to space. Hence, space-time: the only universally applicable measure of time. As to a higher power being the simplest explanation, it most certainly is not. If god is of this universe she or he must of had a beginning. What we know of evolution and cosmology is that simple things slowly and steadily become more complex, so for something as powerful & complex as a god to appear at the beginning makes it the least simplest and most unlikely scenario.
|
|
|
Post by philopoemen81 on May 20, 2008 21:40:58 GMT -5
allow me to play 'devil's advocate' Why is it possible that a creator being is eternal, but that the universe could not possibly be eternal? Clearly, the universe being eternal without a creator is the simpler explanation, therefore it passes the test of ocham's razor. The simpler example is usually the correct one. The universe is not eternal, time did not exist prior to space. Hence, space-time: the only universally applicable measure of time. As to a higher power being the simplest explanation, it most certainly is not. If god is of this universe she or he must of had a beginning. What we know of evolution and cosmology is that simple things slowly and steadily become more complex, so for something as powerful & complex as a god to appear at the beginning makes it the least simplest and most unlikely scenario. isn't that what i said? oh, and this current physical universe had a set beginning. but it was followed by a contraction and expansion so that previous to the singularity, there were an infinite number of previous big bangs. thats a theory at least.
|
|
Panos
Membrum
Epicurus: Founder of Secularism & Developer of the Scientific Method
Posts: 69
|
Post by Panos on May 20, 2008 21:50:02 GMT -5
Yes it was, I was hoping it wouldn't do a quote in a quote. I was addressing the other guy. As to it being a theory, the universe is stranger than we suppose or can suppose. We can deduce if their is a god(s) they don't care about us, the Andromeda galaxy is heading for us, the sun will expire extravagantly and one theory (among 3 contenders) is that the universe will reach a point where it decides to head back over travelled ground, leaving us rather squashed.
|
|
|
Post by ILIRI I MADH on May 20, 2008 23:23:24 GMT -5
In physics, the law of conservation of energy states that the total amount of energy in any isolated system remains constant but cannot be recreated, although it may change forms, e.g. friction turns kinetic energy into thermal energy. In thermodynamics, the first law of thermodynamics is a statement of the conservation of energy for thermodynamic systems, and is the more encompassing version of the conservation of energy. In short, the law of conservation of energy states that energy can not be created or destroyed, it can only be changed from one form to another.Everythig in the universe is energy, so energy, time and space always existed, the big bang created everything else!
|
|
|
Post by terroreign on May 21, 2008 0:09:25 GMT -5
So if you can accept the existence of something (God) without questionin its beginning, then why can't you accept the creation of terrestrial life just by random chance? Something that is infinite has no beginning, and no end. We humans obviously have beginnings, and ends. That's why I dont accept that chance theory. I believe that when we find an infinite energy source, we are one step closer to the Creator. The creator is essential for we humans/animals are just too complex, too articulate that creation is essential. The human brain is the most complex working device on the planet, yet according to you its all chance.
|
|
|
Post by philopoemen81 on May 21, 2008 0:14:16 GMT -5
So if you can accept the existence of something (God) without questionin its beginning, then why can't you accept the creation of terrestrial life just by random chance? Something that is infinite has no beginning, and no end. We humans obviously have beginnings, and ends. That's why I dont accept that chance theory. I believe that when we find an infinite energy source, we are one step closer to the Creator. The creator is essential for we humans/animals are just too complex, too articulate that creation is essential. The human brain is the most complex working device on the planet, yet according to you its all chance. With an infinite amount of time, eventually a room full of chimpanzees on typewriters will write Hamlet.
|
|
|
Post by terroreign on May 21, 2008 0:23:58 GMT -5
The universe is negligible to our creation, it's just the playground.
Basically, if you really believe that some unconcious inanimate form of energy can create something we thinking humans cannot no matter how smart we are, than you go right on ahead
Please believe that the winds and the rocks can build super-computers, or make babies.
OBVIOUSLY space is something created, there is no point to space if we are not in it.
Hence, you need space to make planets, you need atmosphere to have water, you need oxygen to have life, you need plants to have animals, you need animals to have humans.
Now just think to yourself, who can be behind all of this? There can be one being, maybe 2, maybe an infinite amount! But they must be infinite and everlasting, and they must be smarter and more powerful than we can ever dream of being, and they must have conciousness!
Just think about it, don't let your egos get in the way.
|
|
|
Post by terroreign on May 21, 2008 0:27:01 GMT -5
Yes, and they must have a motivation to do so, and a consciousness!
|
|