YZGI;1143196 wrote: If evolution were true, wouldn't all women have large breasts?
In another 10 yrs there will be 1 plastic surgeon for every 6.7 women.
Not that I think thats evolution.
big bang theory
big bang theory
I AM AWESOME MAN
big bang theory
Nomad;1143108 wrote: Well you cant scientifically dismiss that our species was created.
Evolution is clear.
The rub is we dont know if we were created then evolved.
That would indicate some errors in much of societies current understanding of our beginnings.
I dont particularily find that to be such a horrible thing. Its just more evolution...of the mind.
It would require more tolerance than many have because it would shake their foundation.
If you take the Bible word verbatim word then this theory isnt for you.
Those individuals would not be capable of entertaining such a possibility.
If you are open to all possibilities then its worth a look.
That you say and I assume you are speaking of creationism as magic then your mind is closed. Odd statement for a scientist, yet understandable because in your words scientists are also human.
People find thinking outside the proverbial box such a monumental task.
Let me put is this way.
All the evidence suggests that the universe works on the basis of cause and effect (or causality). Simply put, this is the principal that things happen for a reason, breakfast doesn't pop onto the table out of thin air, babies don't turn up in cabbage patches, presents don't arrive under a christmas tree by accident. This is a principal most people accept, until they start confronting emotional subjects such as where people come from, or why the world is the way it is. However, in reality, you can follow this very clear pattern of cause and effect right back to about 1 X 10 to the minus 47 seconds after the moment of the big bang.
In truth, the planet, and everything in it, all the matter and energy (including Human beings) was not "created' in a sense that someone didn't sit down, and draw out a blue-print for it, the planet was created through the process that created the sun, and slowly formed and cooled about 4.5 billion years ago, seas of water eventually formed, and the complex molecules in the sea started to form more complex molecules (until a moment when a self-replicating organic molecule was created), this led to a process of destructive-creation that has gone on unchecked till the present day, humans being just one more example of this incredible (but non-mysterious) process, they evolved based on very specific processes of natural selection, if the environmental conditions or events surrounding the evolution of homo-sapiens, chimpanzees, and gorillas from a common primate ancestor had been even a little different or events had worked out slightly differently, then people would be different or would not exist at all.
But the process we call "life" would have gone on, just as it has, for billions of years, creating new species and removing old ones, as the environment changes around them. That chain of life evolving from very simple creatures, to all the wonderous diversity you see around you, can be fully explained by darwinism, and genetics, right back to single-celled creatures living 4 billion years ago.
Thats the true power of Darwin, natural selection seems like a very simple idea, yet its able to provide a rational and powerful explanation of how the very simple, can self-assemble into the very complex on a universal scale, no other theory we have can do that without requiring some form of "intervention" by a concious "creator". That involves a process that is unexplainable by cause and effect, which is essentially "magic".
You see, as humans we are surrounded by lots of complicated things, that have come about by the result of "intelligent design" in that someone sat down and worked them out, and then made them. Therefore its always been the natural assumption that anything as complicated as a human eye, or a bird simply could not have come about through some sort of haphazard process of natural selection, but the miracle is that in fact they have.
The reason why it has taken so long to understand this, is that firstly it goes against our own natural prejudices to believe it, and secondly because human beings find it very hard to understand the true length of time that has passed since the moment of creation. Life has had 4,000,000,000 years to evolve, over that time millions of species have come and gone, continents have risen up and fallen down, oceans have dried up and also drowned the land, and trillions upon trillions of individual animals and plants have lived and died, and passed their genetic legacy onto their descendents.
Its impossible to grasp really, even thinking past say 2,000 years to the time of Caesar, back 4,500 years to Ramses II in Egypt (as far removed from Rome as Rome is from us), or 8,000 years to Mesopotamia, then go back 15,000 years, when Ireland and most of Europe was covered in 2km of ice.
Go back 7 million years, when our continents first started to look the way they did, to our early ancestors in the rift valley in Africa, or 70 million years ago to a world that was semi-tropical, where all the continents were one great land mass and massive lizards ruled the planet, then go back another 250 million years ago, to the Cambrian epoch, when the land and sea was dominated by amphibious creatures before a massive extinction event, 700 million years ago to another even stranger world containing creatures and landscapes none of us would recognize, then go back a billion, two billion, 3 billion years ago.
Life was here then, mostly in the oceans, billions of years of very simple life forms in the ocean, while the land was covered with rudimentary plants, mostly mosses and lichen, for billions of years, slowly converting the suphur and other noxious chemicals in the atmosphere into oxygen, its impossible for humans now to really get their heads around this, as we can only perceive the world on our own short lifespans.
But think about it, just imagine it, then dwell on it for a while; all that time passing back through all those unimaginable eons, imagine the time it takes for a mountain to rise and fall, or all that life billions of summers, winters, springs and autumns, all living briefly and dying, each unique from the humblest mollusc to the mightiest mammal or reptile, each adding something to the tapestry of life, its a head-spinning but somehow liberating and humbling experience.
The other thing most people fail to understand is the sheer scale of the universe. Our sun is 93 million miles from us, thats a long way, light can travel 7 times across the world in a second, but it takes light 8 minutes to get from the sun to us. Imagine having to walk the entire circumfrence of the Earth, now try and imagine travelling to the sun at a walking pace, how long would it take? It would take hundreds of thousands of years, just to get to the sun.
However, it takes light 4 years to get from the sun, to the next star over, (proxima centuri) our next door neighbour. That journey would take the space shuttle 40,000 years. Thats the nearest star to us, the nearest, in a galaxy of 400 billion stars, which is so large it would take 100,000 years for light to cross from one edge of the milky way to the other. It would take an astronaut in the space shuttle, billions of years to make that journey, billions of years, at 80,000 kilometers an hour, to get from one side of the milky way to the other.
But thats only the start, there are 400 billion other galaxies, and the nearest one (Andromeda), would take light 2 million years to get to. It would take far longer than the age of the universe for the fastest human craft we now have (which can do about 80,000 kph) to get there. Think about that, try and relate it to the length of time it would take you to walk from LA to New York or the 3,500 mile distance involved, its impossible, your head is just not designed to understand intuitively those distances of scale or those lengths of time. Which is why we can only use mathematics to describe them.
The powerful mystery of life in this incredible universe is that, despite the fact that in general the matter and energy in the universe is moving from a point of very high order (entropy) to a very low order state of being, life seems to defy this by continually self-assembling into ever more complex ordered forms. Yet it appears that this is one of the great organizing principals of the Universe, along with symmetry, causality, and a structure and order based on probability.
As scientists we can say how this has happened, its very clear and needs no requirement for god to step in. However, why it is so, why the universe works on these lines, why simple molecules and the laws of physics and chemistry and biology lead to these things happening, why there are not different laws, no person can answer these questions.
This is the real mystery of life and reality, the real question of existence itself, and I find it a far more thrilling thing to ponder than to wonder whether a taking snake tempted a young couple into having sex in a garden, or some dude build a big wooden boat a couple of thousand years ago and put giraffes and tigers in it, or whether we can talk to the dead, or see into the future.
The truth is that science has revealed a universe that exists on a scale, far grander, for more beautiful, and far more mysterious than anyone, anyone, could have ever have even of conceived of 200 years ago.
In truth, most people are still unaware, or simply afraid of this vista that modern science has opened up for us though, and want to retreat into the comfortable cave with their human-centered world, with their human-focused god, because they are unable to confront the grandeur and scale of what is out there, and are not ready yet to submit to it intellectually, as its too painful to accept that perhaps humans are not the be all and end all of everything.
To my mind, that is the true testament to god, that the scale, sublimity, and beauty of his creation is something beyond the ability of the human imagination to really fully grasp. No religion comes close to telling the full story of the scale and power of god, or the humble place of humans within it, perhaps one day more people will revel in the true glory of creation all around them, and not shelter in their own bubbles of hubristic self-importance.
It's not surprising that human ideas tend to fail when they try to explain the full reality of creation around them, after all, we are just another species of earth bound animals, no matter how adaptable or intelligent, and we are not half as clever or important as we like to think we are.
Evolution is clear.
The rub is we dont know if we were created then evolved.
That would indicate some errors in much of societies current understanding of our beginnings.
I dont particularily find that to be such a horrible thing. Its just more evolution...of the mind.
It would require more tolerance than many have because it would shake their foundation.
If you take the Bible word verbatim word then this theory isnt for you.
Those individuals would not be capable of entertaining such a possibility.
If you are open to all possibilities then its worth a look.
That you say and I assume you are speaking of creationism as magic then your mind is closed. Odd statement for a scientist, yet understandable because in your words scientists are also human.
People find thinking outside the proverbial box such a monumental task.
Let me put is this way.
All the evidence suggests that the universe works on the basis of cause and effect (or causality). Simply put, this is the principal that things happen for a reason, breakfast doesn't pop onto the table out of thin air, babies don't turn up in cabbage patches, presents don't arrive under a christmas tree by accident. This is a principal most people accept, until they start confronting emotional subjects such as where people come from, or why the world is the way it is. However, in reality, you can follow this very clear pattern of cause and effect right back to about 1 X 10 to the minus 47 seconds after the moment of the big bang.
In truth, the planet, and everything in it, all the matter and energy (including Human beings) was not "created' in a sense that someone didn't sit down, and draw out a blue-print for it, the planet was created through the process that created the sun, and slowly formed and cooled about 4.5 billion years ago, seas of water eventually formed, and the complex molecules in the sea started to form more complex molecules (until a moment when a self-replicating organic molecule was created), this led to a process of destructive-creation that has gone on unchecked till the present day, humans being just one more example of this incredible (but non-mysterious) process, they evolved based on very specific processes of natural selection, if the environmental conditions or events surrounding the evolution of homo-sapiens, chimpanzees, and gorillas from a common primate ancestor had been even a little different or events had worked out slightly differently, then people would be different or would not exist at all.
But the process we call "life" would have gone on, just as it has, for billions of years, creating new species and removing old ones, as the environment changes around them. That chain of life evolving from very simple creatures, to all the wonderous diversity you see around you, can be fully explained by darwinism, and genetics, right back to single-celled creatures living 4 billion years ago.
Thats the true power of Darwin, natural selection seems like a very simple idea, yet its able to provide a rational and powerful explanation of how the very simple, can self-assemble into the very complex on a universal scale, no other theory we have can do that without requiring some form of "intervention" by a concious "creator". That involves a process that is unexplainable by cause and effect, which is essentially "magic".
You see, as humans we are surrounded by lots of complicated things, that have come about by the result of "intelligent design" in that someone sat down and worked them out, and then made them. Therefore its always been the natural assumption that anything as complicated as a human eye, or a bird simply could not have come about through some sort of haphazard process of natural selection, but the miracle is that in fact they have.
The reason why it has taken so long to understand this, is that firstly it goes against our own natural prejudices to believe it, and secondly because human beings find it very hard to understand the true length of time that has passed since the moment of creation. Life has had 4,000,000,000 years to evolve, over that time millions of species have come and gone, continents have risen up and fallen down, oceans have dried up and also drowned the land, and trillions upon trillions of individual animals and plants have lived and died, and passed their genetic legacy onto their descendents.
Its impossible to grasp really, even thinking past say 2,000 years to the time of Caesar, back 4,500 years to Ramses II in Egypt (as far removed from Rome as Rome is from us), or 8,000 years to Mesopotamia, then go back 15,000 years, when Ireland and most of Europe was covered in 2km of ice.
Go back 7 million years, when our continents first started to look the way they did, to our early ancestors in the rift valley in Africa, or 70 million years ago to a world that was semi-tropical, where all the continents were one great land mass and massive lizards ruled the planet, then go back another 250 million years ago, to the Cambrian epoch, when the land and sea was dominated by amphibious creatures before a massive extinction event, 700 million years ago to another even stranger world containing creatures and landscapes none of us would recognize, then go back a billion, two billion, 3 billion years ago.
Life was here then, mostly in the oceans, billions of years of very simple life forms in the ocean, while the land was covered with rudimentary plants, mostly mosses and lichen, for billions of years, slowly converting the suphur and other noxious chemicals in the atmosphere into oxygen, its impossible for humans now to really get their heads around this, as we can only perceive the world on our own short lifespans.
But think about it, just imagine it, then dwell on it for a while; all that time passing back through all those unimaginable eons, imagine the time it takes for a mountain to rise and fall, or all that life billions of summers, winters, springs and autumns, all living briefly and dying, each unique from the humblest mollusc to the mightiest mammal or reptile, each adding something to the tapestry of life, its a head-spinning but somehow liberating and humbling experience.
The other thing most people fail to understand is the sheer scale of the universe. Our sun is 93 million miles from us, thats a long way, light can travel 7 times across the world in a second, but it takes light 8 minutes to get from the sun to us. Imagine having to walk the entire circumfrence of the Earth, now try and imagine travelling to the sun at a walking pace, how long would it take? It would take hundreds of thousands of years, just to get to the sun.
However, it takes light 4 years to get from the sun, to the next star over, (proxima centuri) our next door neighbour. That journey would take the space shuttle 40,000 years. Thats the nearest star to us, the nearest, in a galaxy of 400 billion stars, which is so large it would take 100,000 years for light to cross from one edge of the milky way to the other. It would take an astronaut in the space shuttle, billions of years to make that journey, billions of years, at 80,000 kilometers an hour, to get from one side of the milky way to the other.
But thats only the start, there are 400 billion other galaxies, and the nearest one (Andromeda), would take light 2 million years to get to. It would take far longer than the age of the universe for the fastest human craft we now have (which can do about 80,000 kph) to get there. Think about that, try and relate it to the length of time it would take you to walk from LA to New York or the 3,500 mile distance involved, its impossible, your head is just not designed to understand intuitively those distances of scale or those lengths of time. Which is why we can only use mathematics to describe them.
The powerful mystery of life in this incredible universe is that, despite the fact that in general the matter and energy in the universe is moving from a point of very high order (entropy) to a very low order state of being, life seems to defy this by continually self-assembling into ever more complex ordered forms. Yet it appears that this is one of the great organizing principals of the Universe, along with symmetry, causality, and a structure and order based on probability.
As scientists we can say how this has happened, its very clear and needs no requirement for god to step in. However, why it is so, why the universe works on these lines, why simple molecules and the laws of physics and chemistry and biology lead to these things happening, why there are not different laws, no person can answer these questions.
This is the real mystery of life and reality, the real question of existence itself, and I find it a far more thrilling thing to ponder than to wonder whether a taking snake tempted a young couple into having sex in a garden, or some dude build a big wooden boat a couple of thousand years ago and put giraffes and tigers in it, or whether we can talk to the dead, or see into the future.
The truth is that science has revealed a universe that exists on a scale, far grander, for more beautiful, and far more mysterious than anyone, anyone, could have ever have even of conceived of 200 years ago.
In truth, most people are still unaware, or simply afraid of this vista that modern science has opened up for us though, and want to retreat into the comfortable cave with their human-centered world, with their human-focused god, because they are unable to confront the grandeur and scale of what is out there, and are not ready yet to submit to it intellectually, as its too painful to accept that perhaps humans are not the be all and end all of everything.
To my mind, that is the true testament to god, that the scale, sublimity, and beauty of his creation is something beyond the ability of the human imagination to really fully grasp. No religion comes close to telling the full story of the scale and power of god, or the humble place of humans within it, perhaps one day more people will revel in the true glory of creation all around them, and not shelter in their own bubbles of hubristic self-importance.
It's not surprising that human ideas tend to fail when they try to explain the full reality of creation around them, after all, we are just another species of earth bound animals, no matter how adaptable or intelligent, and we are not half as clever or important as we like to think we are.
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
big bang theory
Galbally;1143443 wrote: Let me put is this way.
All the evidence suggests that the universe works on the basis of cause and effect (or causality). Simply put, this is the principal that things happen for a reason, breakfast doesn't pop onto the table out of thin air, babies don't turn up in cabbage patches, presents don't arrive under a christmas tree by accident. This is a principal most people accept, until they start confronting emotional subjects such as where people come from, or why the world is the way it is. However, in reality, you can follow this very clear pattern of cause and effect right back to about 1 X 10 to the minus 47 seconds after the moment of the big bang.
In truth, the planet, and everything in it, all the matter and energy (including Human beings) was not "created' in a sense that someone didn't sit down, and draw out a blue-print for it, the planet was created through the process that created the sun, and slowly formed and cooled about 4.5 billion years ago, seas of water eventually formed, and the complex molecules in the sea started to form more complex molecules (until a moment when a self-replicating organic molecule was created), this led to a process of destructive-creation that has gone on unchecked till the present day, humans being just one more example of this incredible (but non-mysterious) process, they evolved based on very specific processes of natural selection, if the environmental conditions or events surrounding the evolution of homo-sapiens, chimpanzees, and gorillas from a common primate ancestor had been even a little different or events had worked out slightly differently, then people would be different or would not exist at all.
But the process we call "life" would have gone on, just as it has, for billions of years, creating new species and removing old ones, as the environment changes around them. That chain of life evolving from very simple creatures, to all the wonderous diversity you see around you, can be fully explained by darwinism, and genetics, right back to single-celled creatures living 4 billion years ago.
Thats the true power of Darwin, natural selection seems like a very simple idea, yet its able to provide a rational and powerful explanation of how the very simple, can self-assemble into the very complex on a universal scale, no other theory we have can do that without requiring some form of "intervention" by a concious "creator". That involves a process that is unexplainable by cause and effect, which is essentially "magic".
You see, as humans we are surrounded by lots of complicated things, that have come about by the result of "intelligent design" in that someone sat down and worked them out, and then made them. Therefore its always been the natural assumption that anything as complicated as a human eye, or a bird simply could not have come about through some sort of haphazard process of natural selection, but the miracle is that in fact they have.
The reason why it has taken so long to understand this, is that firstly it goes against our own natural prejudices to believe it, and secondly because human beings find it very hard to understand the true length of time that has passed since the moment of creation. Life has had 4,000,000,000 years to evolve, over that time millions of species have come and gone, continents have risen up and fallen down, oceans have dried up and also drowned the land, and trillions upon trillions of individual animals and plants have lived and died, and passed their genetic legacy onto their descendents.
Its impossible to grasp really, even thinking past say 2,000 years to the time of Caesar, back 4,500 years to Ramses II in Egypt (as far removed from Rome as Rome is from us), or 8,000 years to Mesopotamia, then go back 15,000 years, when Ireland and most of Europe was covered in 2km of ice.
Go back 7 million years, when our continents first started to look the way they did, to our early ancestors in the rift valley in Africa, or 70 million years ago to a world that was semi-tropical, where all the continents were one great land mass and massive lizards ruled the planet, then go back another 250 million years ago, to the Cambrian epoch, when the land and sea was dominated by amphibious creatures before a massive extinction event, 700 million years ago to another even stranger world containing creatures and landscapes none of us would recognize, then go back a billion, two billion, 3 billion years ago.
Life was here then, mostly in the oceans, billions of years of very simple life forms in the ocean, while the land was covered with rudimentary plants, mostly mosses and lichen, for billions of years, slowly converting the suphur and other noxious chemicals in the atmosphere into oxygen, its impossible for humans now to really get their heads around this, as we can only perceive the world on our own short lifespans.
But think about it, just imagine it, then dwell on it for a while; all that time passing back through all those unimaginable eons, imagine the time it takes for a mountain to rise and fall, or all that life billions of summers, winters, springs and autumns, all living briefly and dying, each unique from the humblest mollusc to the mightiest mammal or reptile, each adding something to the tapestry of life, its a head-spinning but somehow liberating and humbling experience.
The other thing most people fail to understand is the sheer scale of the universe. Our sun is 93 million miles from us, thats a long way, light can travel 7 times across the world in a second, but it takes light 8 minutes to get from the sun to us. Imagine having to walk the entire circumfrence of the Earth, now try and imagine travelling to the sun at a walking pace, how long would it take? It would take hundreds of thousands of years, just to get to the sun.
However, it takes light 4 years to get from the sun, to the next star over, (proxima centuri) our next door neighbour. That journey would take the space shuttle 40,000 years. Thats the nearest star to us, the nearest, in a galaxy of 400 billion stars, which is so large it would take 100,000 years for light to cross from one edge of the milky way to the other. It would take an astronaut in the space shuttle, billions of years to make that journey, billions of years, at 80,000 kilometers an hour, to get from one side of the milky way to the other.
But thats only the start, there are 400 billion other galaxies, and the nearest one (Andromeda), would take light 2 million years to get to. It would take far longer than the age of the universe for the fastest human craft we now have (which can do about 80,000 kph) to get there. Think about that, try and relate it to the length of time it would take you to walk from LA to New York or the 3,500 mile distance involved, its impossible, your head is just not designed to understand intuitively those distances of scale or those lengths of time. Which is why we can only use mathematics to describe them.
The powerful mystery of life in this incredible universe is that, despite the fact that in general the matter and energy in the universe is moving from a point of very high order (entropy) to a very low order state of being, life seems to defy this by continually self-assembling into ever more complex ordered forms. Yet it appears that this is one of the great organizing principals of the Universe, along with symmetry, causality, and a structure and order based on probability.
As scientists we can say how this has happened, its very clear and needs no requirement for god to step in. However, why it is so, why the universe works on these lines, why simple molecules and the laws of physics and chemistry and biology lead to these things happening, why there are not different laws, no person can answer these questions.
This is the real mystery of life and reality, the real question of existence itself, and I find it a far more thrilling thing to ponder than to wonder whether a taking snake tempted a young couple into having sex in a garden, or some dude build a big wooden boat a couple of thousand years ago and put giraffes and tigers in it, or whether we can talk to the dead, or see into the future.
The truth is that science has revealed a universe that exists on a scale, far grander, for more beautiful, and far more mysterious than anyone, anyone, could have ever have even of conceived of 200 years ago.
In truth, most people are still unaware, or simply afraid of this vista that modern science has opened up for us though, and want to retreat into the comfortable cave with their human-centered world, with their human-focused god, because they are unable to confront the grandeur and scale of what is out there, and are not ready yet to submit to it intellectually, as its too painful to accept that perhaps humans are not the be all and end all of everything.
To my mind, that is the true testament to god, that the scale, sublimity, and beauty of his creation is something beyond the ability of the human imagination to really fully grasp. No religion comes close to telling the full story of the scale and power of god, or the humble place of humans within it, perhaps one day more people will revel in the true glory of creation all around them, and not shelter in their own bubbles of hubristic self-importance.
It's not surprising that human ideas tend to fail when they try to explain the full reality of creation around them, after all, we are just another species of earth bound animals, no matter how adaptable or intelligent, and we are not half as clever or important as we like to think we are.
What is 'god' to you Galbally? Having read your post it all makes sense until you bring in 'god'. To me 'god/ess' etc is the 'power behind the act of creation and destruction and then recreating from the ruins of the destruction', it is neither male nor female. But what is god to you? You refer to 'him' which of course implies your belief in a male creator, or is this a man thing, a preference that you prefer.
All the evidence suggests that the universe works on the basis of cause and effect (or causality). Simply put, this is the principal that things happen for a reason, breakfast doesn't pop onto the table out of thin air, babies don't turn up in cabbage patches, presents don't arrive under a christmas tree by accident. This is a principal most people accept, until they start confronting emotional subjects such as where people come from, or why the world is the way it is. However, in reality, you can follow this very clear pattern of cause and effect right back to about 1 X 10 to the minus 47 seconds after the moment of the big bang.
In truth, the planet, and everything in it, all the matter and energy (including Human beings) was not "created' in a sense that someone didn't sit down, and draw out a blue-print for it, the planet was created through the process that created the sun, and slowly formed and cooled about 4.5 billion years ago, seas of water eventually formed, and the complex molecules in the sea started to form more complex molecules (until a moment when a self-replicating organic molecule was created), this led to a process of destructive-creation that has gone on unchecked till the present day, humans being just one more example of this incredible (but non-mysterious) process, they evolved based on very specific processes of natural selection, if the environmental conditions or events surrounding the evolution of homo-sapiens, chimpanzees, and gorillas from a common primate ancestor had been even a little different or events had worked out slightly differently, then people would be different or would not exist at all.
But the process we call "life" would have gone on, just as it has, for billions of years, creating new species and removing old ones, as the environment changes around them. That chain of life evolving from very simple creatures, to all the wonderous diversity you see around you, can be fully explained by darwinism, and genetics, right back to single-celled creatures living 4 billion years ago.
Thats the true power of Darwin, natural selection seems like a very simple idea, yet its able to provide a rational and powerful explanation of how the very simple, can self-assemble into the very complex on a universal scale, no other theory we have can do that without requiring some form of "intervention" by a concious "creator". That involves a process that is unexplainable by cause and effect, which is essentially "magic".
You see, as humans we are surrounded by lots of complicated things, that have come about by the result of "intelligent design" in that someone sat down and worked them out, and then made them. Therefore its always been the natural assumption that anything as complicated as a human eye, or a bird simply could not have come about through some sort of haphazard process of natural selection, but the miracle is that in fact they have.
The reason why it has taken so long to understand this, is that firstly it goes against our own natural prejudices to believe it, and secondly because human beings find it very hard to understand the true length of time that has passed since the moment of creation. Life has had 4,000,000,000 years to evolve, over that time millions of species have come and gone, continents have risen up and fallen down, oceans have dried up and also drowned the land, and trillions upon trillions of individual animals and plants have lived and died, and passed their genetic legacy onto their descendents.
Its impossible to grasp really, even thinking past say 2,000 years to the time of Caesar, back 4,500 years to Ramses II in Egypt (as far removed from Rome as Rome is from us), or 8,000 years to Mesopotamia, then go back 15,000 years, when Ireland and most of Europe was covered in 2km of ice.
Go back 7 million years, when our continents first started to look the way they did, to our early ancestors in the rift valley in Africa, or 70 million years ago to a world that was semi-tropical, where all the continents were one great land mass and massive lizards ruled the planet, then go back another 250 million years ago, to the Cambrian epoch, when the land and sea was dominated by amphibious creatures before a massive extinction event, 700 million years ago to another even stranger world containing creatures and landscapes none of us would recognize, then go back a billion, two billion, 3 billion years ago.
Life was here then, mostly in the oceans, billions of years of very simple life forms in the ocean, while the land was covered with rudimentary plants, mostly mosses and lichen, for billions of years, slowly converting the suphur and other noxious chemicals in the atmosphere into oxygen, its impossible for humans now to really get their heads around this, as we can only perceive the world on our own short lifespans.
But think about it, just imagine it, then dwell on it for a while; all that time passing back through all those unimaginable eons, imagine the time it takes for a mountain to rise and fall, or all that life billions of summers, winters, springs and autumns, all living briefly and dying, each unique from the humblest mollusc to the mightiest mammal or reptile, each adding something to the tapestry of life, its a head-spinning but somehow liberating and humbling experience.
The other thing most people fail to understand is the sheer scale of the universe. Our sun is 93 million miles from us, thats a long way, light can travel 7 times across the world in a second, but it takes light 8 minutes to get from the sun to us. Imagine having to walk the entire circumfrence of the Earth, now try and imagine travelling to the sun at a walking pace, how long would it take? It would take hundreds of thousands of years, just to get to the sun.
However, it takes light 4 years to get from the sun, to the next star over, (proxima centuri) our next door neighbour. That journey would take the space shuttle 40,000 years. Thats the nearest star to us, the nearest, in a galaxy of 400 billion stars, which is so large it would take 100,000 years for light to cross from one edge of the milky way to the other. It would take an astronaut in the space shuttle, billions of years to make that journey, billions of years, at 80,000 kilometers an hour, to get from one side of the milky way to the other.
But thats only the start, there are 400 billion other galaxies, and the nearest one (Andromeda), would take light 2 million years to get to. It would take far longer than the age of the universe for the fastest human craft we now have (which can do about 80,000 kph) to get there. Think about that, try and relate it to the length of time it would take you to walk from LA to New York or the 3,500 mile distance involved, its impossible, your head is just not designed to understand intuitively those distances of scale or those lengths of time. Which is why we can only use mathematics to describe them.
The powerful mystery of life in this incredible universe is that, despite the fact that in general the matter and energy in the universe is moving from a point of very high order (entropy) to a very low order state of being, life seems to defy this by continually self-assembling into ever more complex ordered forms. Yet it appears that this is one of the great organizing principals of the Universe, along with symmetry, causality, and a structure and order based on probability.
As scientists we can say how this has happened, its very clear and needs no requirement for god to step in. However, why it is so, why the universe works on these lines, why simple molecules and the laws of physics and chemistry and biology lead to these things happening, why there are not different laws, no person can answer these questions.
This is the real mystery of life and reality, the real question of existence itself, and I find it a far more thrilling thing to ponder than to wonder whether a taking snake tempted a young couple into having sex in a garden, or some dude build a big wooden boat a couple of thousand years ago and put giraffes and tigers in it, or whether we can talk to the dead, or see into the future.
The truth is that science has revealed a universe that exists on a scale, far grander, for more beautiful, and far more mysterious than anyone, anyone, could have ever have even of conceived of 200 years ago.
In truth, most people are still unaware, or simply afraid of this vista that modern science has opened up for us though, and want to retreat into the comfortable cave with their human-centered world, with their human-focused god, because they are unable to confront the grandeur and scale of what is out there, and are not ready yet to submit to it intellectually, as its too painful to accept that perhaps humans are not the be all and end all of everything.
To my mind, that is the true testament to god, that the scale, sublimity, and beauty of his creation is something beyond the ability of the human imagination to really fully grasp. No religion comes close to telling the full story of the scale and power of god, or the humble place of humans within it, perhaps one day more people will revel in the true glory of creation all around them, and not shelter in their own bubbles of hubristic self-importance.
It's not surprising that human ideas tend to fail when they try to explain the full reality of creation around them, after all, we are just another species of earth bound animals, no matter how adaptable or intelligent, and we are not half as clever or important as we like to think we are.
What is 'god' to you Galbally? Having read your post it all makes sense until you bring in 'god'. To me 'god/ess' etc is the 'power behind the act of creation and destruction and then recreating from the ruins of the destruction', it is neither male nor female. But what is god to you? You refer to 'him' which of course implies your belief in a male creator, or is this a man thing, a preference that you prefer.
big bang theory
Amber Sun;1143482 wrote:
What is 'god' to you Galbally? Having read your post it all makes sense until you bring in 'god'. To me 'god/ess' etc is the 'power behind the act of creation and destruction and then recreating from the ruins of the destruction', it is neither male nor female. But what is god to you? You refer to 'him' which of course implies your belief in a male creator, or is this a man thing, a preference that you prefer.
Yes, its hard to find words that don't seem to suggest some prejudice. To me there is a something underlying everything that I perceive internally to be "sacred" or "divine" I use those words as they are the only ones I can think of to describe it.
To me, God is not a man or a woman, or anything, God is simply God, the underlying principal behind why things are as they are. I believe the universe works on rational lines, but I don't think its a random or chance event that it exists.
It exists as it does, because God intended it to be so, that's just a feeling I have, there is a deep beauty and "correctness" in the order of things, everything is just as it should be, this to me is God. I suppose you would call that Deism, though I am actually a Catholic.
What is 'god' to you Galbally? Having read your post it all makes sense until you bring in 'god'. To me 'god/ess' etc is the 'power behind the act of creation and destruction and then recreating from the ruins of the destruction', it is neither male nor female. But what is god to you? You refer to 'him' which of course implies your belief in a male creator, or is this a man thing, a preference that you prefer.
Yes, its hard to find words that don't seem to suggest some prejudice. To me there is a something underlying everything that I perceive internally to be "sacred" or "divine" I use those words as they are the only ones I can think of to describe it.
To me, God is not a man or a woman, or anything, God is simply God, the underlying principal behind why things are as they are. I believe the universe works on rational lines, but I don't think its a random or chance event that it exists.
It exists as it does, because God intended it to be so, that's just a feeling I have, there is a deep beauty and "correctness" in the order of things, everything is just as it should be, this to me is God. I suppose you would call that Deism, though I am actually a Catholic.
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
big bang theory
Galbally;1143490 wrote: Yes, its hard to find words that don't seem to suggest some prejudice. To me there is a something underlying everything that I perceive internally to be "sacred" or "divine" I use those words as they are the only ones I can think of to describe it.
To me, God is not a man or a woman, or anything, God is simply God, the underlying principal behind why things are as they are. I believe the universe works on rational lines, but I don't think its a random or chance event that it exists.
It exists as it does, because God intended it to be so, that's just a feeling I have, there is a deep beauty and "correctness" in the order of things, everything is just as it should be, this to me is God. I suppose you would call that Deism, though I am actually a Catholic.
Then you believe that the universe was created by a supreme, omnipotent being?
What would you describe this 'being' as made out of, or perhaps I should say, what does this being consist of?
I'm not trying to be smart or argue Gal, I really want to know.
To me, God is not a man or a woman, or anything, God is simply God, the underlying principal behind why things are as they are. I believe the universe works on rational lines, but I don't think its a random or chance event that it exists.
It exists as it does, because God intended it to be so, that's just a feeling I have, there is a deep beauty and "correctness" in the order of things, everything is just as it should be, this to me is God. I suppose you would call that Deism, though I am actually a Catholic.
Then you believe that the universe was created by a supreme, omnipotent being?
What would you describe this 'being' as made out of, or perhaps I should say, what does this being consist of?
I'm not trying to be smart or argue Gal, I really want to know.
big bang theory
Amber Sun;1143588 wrote: Then you believe that the universe was created by a supreme, omnipotent being?
What would you describe this 'being' as made out of, or perhaps I should say, what does this being consist of?
I'm not trying to be smart or argue Gal, I really want to know.
I can't answer that question because I don't know, and its unanswerable by any intellectually honest person who has a belief in God or a faith.
I don't know if there are any terms of reference that could describe what God is, whether God could be described as a "being" at all, or a "conciousness" a "creator" or any of those things. They are all human frames of reference you see, based on our language and our species experience of reality, none of that prepares us to understand what God is.
The only way I can dimly percieve God is through the reflection of God in the grandeur of creation and my own concious and emotional reaction as a human being to that (which I belief is an expression of God's purpose), but any being that caused the Universe to be is so beyond our understanding as to make trying to categorize what "God is" in terms we could understand as being pointless.
We are part of this universe, however, God is not, God is outside that frame of reference. Words in English (or any other human language) simply fail at that point, and attempt to use them to understand God turns to tautology very quickly. I'm just a person and my mind is not capable of grasping the truth of these questions, all I have is my own very limited perception of what I believe to be a deep emotional truth about all things, its like a dim flashlight far away in a fog, but its there.
What would you describe this 'being' as made out of, or perhaps I should say, what does this being consist of?
I'm not trying to be smart or argue Gal, I really want to know.
I can't answer that question because I don't know, and its unanswerable by any intellectually honest person who has a belief in God or a faith.
I don't know if there are any terms of reference that could describe what God is, whether God could be described as a "being" at all, or a "conciousness" a "creator" or any of those things. They are all human frames of reference you see, based on our language and our species experience of reality, none of that prepares us to understand what God is.
The only way I can dimly percieve God is through the reflection of God in the grandeur of creation and my own concious and emotional reaction as a human being to that (which I belief is an expression of God's purpose), but any being that caused the Universe to be is so beyond our understanding as to make trying to categorize what "God is" in terms we could understand as being pointless.
We are part of this universe, however, God is not, God is outside that frame of reference. Words in English (or any other human language) simply fail at that point, and attempt to use them to understand God turns to tautology very quickly. I'm just a person and my mind is not capable of grasping the truth of these questions, all I have is my own very limited perception of what I believe to be a deep emotional truth about all things, its like a dim flashlight far away in a fog, but its there.
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
big bang theory
Thank you for your effort and time Dr Gallbladder.
I understand as best my simple self can your explanation and I accept the reasoning behind the conclusions we have come to in understanding our world.
The thing you are omitting though in my opinion is that we didnt know what atoms were until the moment we did know. We wont have a grasp on non earth resource energy consumption until we do.
In other words admitedly we have only begun to scratch the surface in understanding the matters of our universe.
We dont know what we dont know yet.
To imply we have a definitive blueprint for this magnificently divine world we find ourselves in is a little on the presumtive side.
Can you explain the initial nano thing that started the big bang reaction ?
Can you explain the nothingness that existed before the initial nano thing ?
Cany you comprehend infinity and then describe nothing in the same vein ?
In other words we are in the beginning stages of the evolution of our minds.
One day we might find that we ourselves are not only made of the particles of space but that we are heaven and God is us. We may one day through the letting go of meaningless wars and prejudices universally come to an understanding beyond our capabilities as they stand now.
Thats exciting dont you think ?
I understand as best my simple self can your explanation and I accept the reasoning behind the conclusions we have come to in understanding our world.
The thing you are omitting though in my opinion is that we didnt know what atoms were until the moment we did know. We wont have a grasp on non earth resource energy consumption until we do.
In other words admitedly we have only begun to scratch the surface in understanding the matters of our universe.
We dont know what we dont know yet.
To imply we have a definitive blueprint for this magnificently divine world we find ourselves in is a little on the presumtive side.
Can you explain the initial nano thing that started the big bang reaction ?
Can you explain the nothingness that existed before the initial nano thing ?
Cany you comprehend infinity and then describe nothing in the same vein ?
In other words we are in the beginning stages of the evolution of our minds.
One day we might find that we ourselves are not only made of the particles of space but that we are heaven and God is us. We may one day through the letting go of meaningless wars and prejudices universally come to an understanding beyond our capabilities as they stand now.
Thats exciting dont you think ?
I AM AWESOME MAN
big bang theory
Galbally;1143626 wrote: I can't answer that question because I don't know, and its unanswerable by any intellectually honest person who has a belief in God or a faith.
I don't know if there are any terms of reference that could describe what God is, whether God could be described as a "being" at all, or a "conciousness" a "creator" or any of those things. They are all human frames of reference you see, based on our language and our species experience of reality, none of that prepares us to understand what God is.
The only way I can dimly percieve God is through the reflection of God in the grandeur of creation and my own concious and emotional reaction as a human being to that (which I belief is an expression of God's purpose), but any being that caused the Universe to be is so beyond our understanding as to make trying to categorize what "God is" in terms we could understand as being pointless.
We are part of this universe, however, God is not, God is outside that frame of reference. Words in English (or any other human language) simply fail at that point, and attempt to use them to understand God turns to tautology very quickly. I'm just a person and my mind is not capable of grasping the truth of these questions, all I have is my own very limited perception of what I believe to be a deep emotional truth about all things, its like a dim flashlight far away in a fog, but its there.
I tend to think of god/ess as the universe itself that we simply live in and are a part of. A 'power or force' if you will accept that limited terminology. I guess to be a little more explicit, I believe that 'we live inside' in your words god/ess.
I don't know if there are any terms of reference that could describe what God is, whether God could be described as a "being" at all, or a "conciousness" a "creator" or any of those things. They are all human frames of reference you see, based on our language and our species experience of reality, none of that prepares us to understand what God is.
The only way I can dimly percieve God is through the reflection of God in the grandeur of creation and my own concious and emotional reaction as a human being to that (which I belief is an expression of God's purpose), but any being that caused the Universe to be is so beyond our understanding as to make trying to categorize what "God is" in terms we could understand as being pointless.
We are part of this universe, however, God is not, God is outside that frame of reference. Words in English (or any other human language) simply fail at that point, and attempt to use them to understand God turns to tautology very quickly. I'm just a person and my mind is not capable of grasping the truth of these questions, all I have is my own very limited perception of what I believe to be a deep emotional truth about all things, its like a dim flashlight far away in a fog, but its there.
I tend to think of god/ess as the universe itself that we simply live in and are a part of. A 'power or force' if you will accept that limited terminology. I guess to be a little more explicit, I believe that 'we live inside' in your words god/ess.
big bang theory
nomad;1143980 wrote: thank you for your effort and time dr gallbladder.
I understand as best my simple self can your explanation and i accept the reasoning behind the conclusions we have come to in understanding our world.
The thing you are omitting though in my opinion is that we didnt know what atoms were until the moment we did know. We wont have a grasp on non earth resource energy consumption until we do.
In other words admitedly we have only begun to scratch the surface in understanding the matters of our universe.
We dont know what we dont know yet.
To imply we have a definitive blueprint for this magnificently divine world we find ourselves in is a little on the presumtive side.
Can you explain the initial nano thing that started the big bang reaction ?
Can you explain the nothingness that existed before the initial nano thing ?
Cany you comprehend infinity and then describe nothing in the same vein ?
In other words we are in the beginning stages of the evolution of our minds.
one day we might find that we ourselves are not only made of the particles of space but that we are heaven and god is us. We may one day through the letting go of meaningless wars and prejudices universally come to an understanding beyond our capabilities as they stand now.
thats exciting dont you think ?
:-6:-6:-6:-6:-6
I understand as best my simple self can your explanation and i accept the reasoning behind the conclusions we have come to in understanding our world.
The thing you are omitting though in my opinion is that we didnt know what atoms were until the moment we did know. We wont have a grasp on non earth resource energy consumption until we do.
In other words admitedly we have only begun to scratch the surface in understanding the matters of our universe.
We dont know what we dont know yet.
To imply we have a definitive blueprint for this magnificently divine world we find ourselves in is a little on the presumtive side.
Can you explain the initial nano thing that started the big bang reaction ?
Can you explain the nothingness that existed before the initial nano thing ?
Cany you comprehend infinity and then describe nothing in the same vein ?
In other words we are in the beginning stages of the evolution of our minds.
one day we might find that we ourselves are not only made of the particles of space but that we are heaven and god is us. We may one day through the letting go of meaningless wars and prejudices universally come to an understanding beyond our capabilities as they stand now.
thats exciting dont you think ?
:-6:-6:-6:-6:-6
-
Clodhopper
- Posts: 5115
- Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 5:11 pm
big bang theory
I tend to think of god/ess as the universe itself that we simply live in and are a part of. A 'power or force' if you will accept that limited terminology. I guess to be a little more explicit, I believe that 'we live inside' in your words god/ess.
I have wondered if all that exists is simply a thought-bubble in the mind of God...seems a similar sort of idea...
I have wondered if all that exists is simply a thought-bubble in the mind of God...seems a similar sort of idea...
The crowd: "Yes! We are all individuals!"
Lone voice: "I'm not."
Lone voice: "I'm not."
big bang theory
]Thank you for your effort and time Dr Gallbladder.
Not at all Nomie, thanks for reading it, it took a while to write it down.
I understand as best my simple self can your explanation and I accept the reasoning behind the conclusions we have come to in understanding our world.
The thing you are omitting though in my opinion is that we didnt know what atoms were until the moment we did know. We wont have a grasp on non earth resource energy consumption until we do.
In other words admitedly we have only begun to scratch the surface in understanding the matters of our universe.
Certainly on your last point you are entirely correct, we really know very little as of yet, what we do know is astounding enough, what else is to come, who can say?
We dont know what we dont know yet.
To imply we have a definitive blueprint for this magnificently divine world we find ourselves in is a little on the presumtive side.
Can you explain the initial nano thing that started the big bang reaction ?
I sort of can, kinda, but it would take another hour, so maybe another time, its got to do with quantum mechanics, and its only a postulation at present, no one really has a clear picture yet, and obviously trying to build up evidence is extremely difficult, thats one of the reasons why the large hadron collider is so exciting, it may help us understand these precise questions better.
Can you explain the nothingness that existed before the initial nano thing ?
No, no idea.
Cany you comprehend infinity and then describe nothing in the same vein ?
No, and neither can anyone else, they are abstract mathematical terms, and its impossible to grasp them based on any sort of physical analogy or metaphor.
In other words we are in the beginning stages of the evolution of our minds.
Yep, hopefully, either that or this is as clever as we get, and its all downhill from here.
One day we might find that we ourselves are not only made of the particles of space but that we are heaven and God is us.
Maybe, who knows? I certainly don't.
We may one day through the letting go of meaningless wars and prejudices universally come to an understanding beyond our capabilities as they stand now.
Thats exciting dont you think?
Yes, I sure do, the world is a trip, the more you learn about the reality of it, the more awesome and magnificent it becomes, not less.
Not at all Nomie, thanks for reading it, it took a while to write it down.
I understand as best my simple self can your explanation and I accept the reasoning behind the conclusions we have come to in understanding our world.
The thing you are omitting though in my opinion is that we didnt know what atoms were until the moment we did know. We wont have a grasp on non earth resource energy consumption until we do.
In other words admitedly we have only begun to scratch the surface in understanding the matters of our universe.
Certainly on your last point you are entirely correct, we really know very little as of yet, what we do know is astounding enough, what else is to come, who can say?
We dont know what we dont know yet.
To imply we have a definitive blueprint for this magnificently divine world we find ourselves in is a little on the presumtive side.
Can you explain the initial nano thing that started the big bang reaction ?
I sort of can, kinda, but it would take another hour, so maybe another time, its got to do with quantum mechanics, and its only a postulation at present, no one really has a clear picture yet, and obviously trying to build up evidence is extremely difficult, thats one of the reasons why the large hadron collider is so exciting, it may help us understand these precise questions better.
Can you explain the nothingness that existed before the initial nano thing ?
No, no idea.
Cany you comprehend infinity and then describe nothing in the same vein ?
No, and neither can anyone else, they are abstract mathematical terms, and its impossible to grasp them based on any sort of physical analogy or metaphor.
In other words we are in the beginning stages of the evolution of our minds.
Yep, hopefully, either that or this is as clever as we get, and its all downhill from here.
One day we might find that we ourselves are not only made of the particles of space but that we are heaven and God is us.
Maybe, who knows? I certainly don't.
We may one day through the letting go of meaningless wars and prejudices universally come to an understanding beyond our capabilities as they stand now.
Thats exciting dont you think?
Yes, I sure do, the world is a trip, the more you learn about the reality of it, the more awesome and magnificent it becomes, not less.
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
big bang theory
Amber Sun;1144010 wrote: I tend to think of god/ess as the universe itself that we simply live in and are a part of. A 'power or force' if you will accept that limited terminology. I guess to be a little more explicit, I believe that 'we live inside' in your words god/ess.
I can't say Amber, my own perception is an entirely personal thing, its not based on evidence or anything like that, just my own emotional subjective reaction to my own existence. I wouldn't presume to disagree with you, your way of thinking about it does seem poetic and beautiful to me.
I can't say Amber, my own perception is an entirely personal thing, its not based on evidence or anything like that, just my own emotional subjective reaction to my own existence. I wouldn't presume to disagree with you, your way of thinking about it does seem poetic and beautiful to me.
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
big bang theory
Clodhopper;1144093 wrote: I have wondered if all that exists is simply a thought-bubble in the mind of God...seems a similar sort of idea...
A little bit like Bishop Berkely then, its something we all have thought at some stage. I think when it comes to this stage of trying to discuss our concepts of godhead or God, then language really breaks down.
Its why I generally prefer science to philosophy or religion, not because its superior, just because its more satisfying to work on things we have some hope of finding answers to, and slowly build up a bigger picture, I find that using that approach makes life more tractable to investigation by using our limited abilities to stick to the material aspect of the reality we all experience.
Not that speculation on this grand scale is not also very rewarding and fun of course.
A little bit like Bishop Berkely then, its something we all have thought at some stage. I think when it comes to this stage of trying to discuss our concepts of godhead or God, then language really breaks down.
Its why I generally prefer science to philosophy or religion, not because its superior, just because its more satisfying to work on things we have some hope of finding answers to, and slowly build up a bigger picture, I find that using that approach makes life more tractable to investigation by using our limited abilities to stick to the material aspect of the reality we all experience.
Not that speculation on this grand scale is not also very rewarding and fun of course.
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
-
Clodhopper
- Posts: 5115
- Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 5:11 pm
big bang theory
Gall: Yes. Language just isn't designed for this.
To be clear: I don't believe in god. I just hope He exists.
To be clear: I don't believe in god. I just hope He exists.
The crowd: "Yes! We are all individuals!"
Lone voice: "I'm not."
Lone voice: "I'm not."
big bang theory
Clodhopper;1144093 wrote: I have wondered if all that exists is simply a thought-bubble in the mind of God...seems a similar sort of idea...
Well perhaps Ch, but that view puts 'god/ess' on the outside somewhere, separate and apart from us. I see us as in the middle of that power/force, a part of, inside of, where all is one. As an example picture one of your red blood cells in your body. Now if it could think and be aware do you thing that it would recognize being inside you, or do you think it would feel that you were separate from it?
I guess that is the best description of my view that I can give Ch. Many religions, and the ancients, believed that god/ess lives in our hearts, that we are the temple. But maybe it's the other way around and we live inside of him/her/it. Maybe we are the red blood cell in a grander body, the body being the universe and all that we know.
Well perhaps Ch, but that view puts 'god/ess' on the outside somewhere, separate and apart from us. I see us as in the middle of that power/force, a part of, inside of, where all is one. As an example picture one of your red blood cells in your body. Now if it could think and be aware do you thing that it would recognize being inside you, or do you think it would feel that you were separate from it?
I guess that is the best description of my view that I can give Ch. Many religions, and the ancients, believed that god/ess lives in our hearts, that we are the temple. But maybe it's the other way around and we live inside of him/her/it. Maybe we are the red blood cell in a grander body, the body being the universe and all that we know.
-
Clodhopper
- Posts: 5115
- Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 5:11 pm
big bang theory
Well perhaps Ch, but that view puts 'god/ess' on the outside somewhere, separate and apart from us.
Hmm. Does it?
If I have a thought, is that thought separate from me or a part of me?
If we are a thought of God's, are we not a part of God? And if we are a part of God, can we really be separate from Him?
All speculation, of course...
Hmm. Does it?
If I have a thought, is that thought separate from me or a part of me?
If we are a thought of God's, are we not a part of God? And if we are a part of God, can we really be separate from Him?
All speculation, of course...
The crowd: "Yes! We are all individuals!"
Lone voice: "I'm not."
Lone voice: "I'm not."
big bang theory
Clodhopper;1144585 wrote: Hmm. Does it?
If I have a thought, is that thought separate from me or a part of me?
If we are a thought of God's, are we not a part of God? And if we are a part of God, can we really be separate from Him?
All speculation, of course...
I would say that the thought is separate from you because it originated in your 'mind' and is not a physical thing. Your 'thought' can not be taken out of your mind, laid on Gals lab table and analyzed. A thought must 'generate' from somewhere, so in this way your idea of god/ess etc., is a separate entity who has generated the thought. So no, you are not a 'part' of him/her/it.
All speculation, of course...:-6
If I have a thought, is that thought separate from me or a part of me?
If we are a thought of God's, are we not a part of God? And if we are a part of God, can we really be separate from Him?
All speculation, of course...
I would say that the thought is separate from you because it originated in your 'mind' and is not a physical thing. Your 'thought' can not be taken out of your mind, laid on Gals lab table and analyzed. A thought must 'generate' from somewhere, so in this way your idea of god/ess etc., is a separate entity who has generated the thought. So no, you are not a 'part' of him/her/it.
All speculation, of course...:-6
-
Clodhopper
- Posts: 5115
- Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 5:11 pm
big bang theory
I would say that the thought is separate from you because it originated in your 'mind' and is not a physical thing.
Ok, do you really mean a thought is separate BECAUSE it originated in the mind? Why does originating in a mind make it separate from that mind?
You are saying our thoughts have an independent existence? I disagree: If I have a thought, and tell no-one of it, and then die, that thought does not continue on without me. Can it therefore be called separate from me?
If a thought is not part of me because it is not a physical thing, then none of my thoughts or emotions are part of me. I am just a physical lump with no thoughts or feelings of my own?
Do you think YOU have no thoughts or feelings of your own?
Ok, do you really mean a thought is separate BECAUSE it originated in the mind? Why does originating in a mind make it separate from that mind?
You are saying our thoughts have an independent existence? I disagree: If I have a thought, and tell no-one of it, and then die, that thought does not continue on without me. Can it therefore be called separate from me?
If a thought is not part of me because it is not a physical thing, then none of my thoughts or emotions are part of me. I am just a physical lump with no thoughts or feelings of my own?
Do you think YOU have no thoughts or feelings of your own?
The crowd: "Yes! We are all individuals!"
Lone voice: "I'm not."
Lone voice: "I'm not."
big bang theory
Clodhopper;1145597 wrote: Ok, do you really mean a thought is separate BECAUSE it originated in the mind? Why does originating in a mind make it separate from that mind?
You are saying our thoughts have an independent existence? I disagree: If I have a thought, and tell no-one of it, and then die, that thought does not continue on without me. Can it therefore be called separate from me?
If a thought is not part of me because it is not a physical thing, then none of my thoughts or emotions are part of me. I am just a physical lump with no thoughts or feelings of my own?
Do you think YOU have no thoughts or feelings of your own?
I guess first of all we would have to decide what 'mind' is. To me mind and the thought forms in it are not material things like the brain. Mind is illusive and is generated from the brain but has no substance of it's own until you create physically what mind created.
If you are looking out the window and thinking about an orchard an orchard will not appear. But if you have that thought and then go out and buy the trees to plant as an orchard then your thoughts generated from your brain become matter and you have your orchard.
You are saying our thoughts have an independent existence? I disagree: If I have a thought, and tell no-one of it, and then die, that thought does not continue on without me. Can it therefore be called separate from me?
If a thought is not part of me because it is not a physical thing, then none of my thoughts or emotions are part of me. I am just a physical lump with no thoughts or feelings of my own?
Do you think YOU have no thoughts or feelings of your own?
I guess first of all we would have to decide what 'mind' is. To me mind and the thought forms in it are not material things like the brain. Mind is illusive and is generated from the brain but has no substance of it's own until you create physically what mind created.
If you are looking out the window and thinking about an orchard an orchard will not appear. But if you have that thought and then go out and buy the trees to plant as an orchard then your thoughts generated from your brain become matter and you have your orchard.
-
Clodhopper
- Posts: 5115
- Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 5:11 pm
big bang theory
To me mind and the thought forms in it are not material things like the brain.
Agreed.
Mind is illusive and is generated from the brain but has no substance of it's own until you create physically what mind created.
Not clear on this. Firstly I'm not sure what you mean by "illusive". I can guess you mean "not possessed of physical substance" but it's just a guess. Then you imply that mind gains (physical?) substance if you create what your mind prompted. I'm guessing you are thinking of your painting or sewing?
I would say Mind may be developed by creating physically what your mind saw, but it remains impalpable. The thought remains part of you in a way the painting or dress doesn't: the thought does not have external physical reality in the way the product of the thought - the painting or dress you create - does. But the dress is not the same thing as the thought which gave rise to its creation.
I would say the thought is and remains entirely part of you, whereas the dress is not part of you in the same way. You are not a dress.
Anyway, since I began by saying I was not entirely sure of what you were getting at, I'll leave it there in case I'm heading resolutely off down the wrong track.:wah:
Agreed.
Mind is illusive and is generated from the brain but has no substance of it's own until you create physically what mind created.
Not clear on this. Firstly I'm not sure what you mean by "illusive". I can guess you mean "not possessed of physical substance" but it's just a guess. Then you imply that mind gains (physical?) substance if you create what your mind prompted. I'm guessing you are thinking of your painting or sewing?
I would say Mind may be developed by creating physically what your mind saw, but it remains impalpable. The thought remains part of you in a way the painting or dress doesn't: the thought does not have external physical reality in the way the product of the thought - the painting or dress you create - does. But the dress is not the same thing as the thought which gave rise to its creation.
I would say the thought is and remains entirely part of you, whereas the dress is not part of you in the same way. You are not a dress.
Anyway, since I began by saying I was not entirely sure of what you were getting at, I'll leave it there in case I'm heading resolutely off down the wrong track.:wah:
The crowd: "Yes! We are all individuals!"
Lone voice: "I'm not."
Lone voice: "I'm not."
big bang theory
First Make note that they , the scientific community refer to the '' The Big Bang '' as a Theory . When You LQQk Up The Word '' Theory '' The American Heritage Dictionary '' , It Is Defined As Such ;
the - o - ry , N. , pl . the - o - ries . 1 . a Systematically Organized Knowldge Applicable In A Relatively Wide Variety Of Circumstance , especially A Systems Of Assumption , Accepted Principles . And Rules Of Procedure Devised To Analyze , Predict , Or Otherwise Explain The Nature Or Behavior Of A Specified Set Of Phenomena .
The word Theory comes from the Late Latin Theoria , from Greek , from theoros , meaning '' spectator '' ; from thea , a viewing + -oros , '' seeing '' Make note that , though they call it a Theory , they say '' seeing is believing '' . When in actulity hearing and reading is believing , and seeing is knowing .
( Where Did They Get The Word Theory From ? )
,Their word Theory as the Greek say Theoris becomes Thehos for God in Greek , taken from Taweret , The Tama - Rean Goddess of women in childbirth and this birth is of the Sun ( sons ) . Taweret was hated by The Greeks because she was the center of The Iunet or Tantere , Called by The Greeks Denderah Calendar And She Represented Mitochondria DNA In The Center Of The Denderah ( Zodiac ) .
So The Big Bang Is Not A Theory ?
Although they call the Big Bang a Theory contact is a reality , as the sperm hiitting the ovum , Though , the human ear can't hear it , it is a Big Bang to microscopic existing entities . When positive and negative charges clash , though you don't hear it , it is a Big Bang to minute energy . So in actuality the Big Bang is a reality .
But is it '' The Big Bang , or '' A '' nother Big Bang .
Just another '' Big Bang , as an incident that occurs and re-occurs .
So There Is More Than one Big Bang ?
Yes , As things come into Existence , or where things become somethings , the Sum Of A Thing, A Thing Would Need Another Thing To Bang Into To Have A Big Bang . Their problem is , comprehending matter and anti - matter as the things that Clash to bring about , alternate things .
So What They Call It , Is True ?
It is untrue by their title . There was no single one '' Big Bang '' as the statement would imply that something just went '' Bang '' without a reason or Cause or under control , direction or command .
So Then , The Original Black Dot Was Not Alone ?
No , for it existed in a states of existence .
Which '' Big Bang '' Is The Most Important ?
It depends on the beings that is affected by it .
Which One Affects Earth People ?
In your beginning this '' Big Bang '' was twenity four billuion years ago when Nibira , a craft under the control of the Neteru Anunnaqi collided into the planet Tamtu or Tanen called Tiamat and Qi , and caused a '' Big Bang '' ...
Was There One Before That One ?
Indeed ! There Were Others . This Incident Was Not At The Very Beginning Of All Things , But In The Beginning Of An On-Going Event . As You Know , This Planet Earth Is Just One Of Many In This Solar System , And Even Less Important In The Universe . It Is Egotistical And Naive To Think That No Other Intelligent Life Exists In The Boundless Universes . Except Here On The Seventh Planet, The Third From Your Sun .
Is It Possible For A Chain Of Events To Occur By Accodent ?
If It Is A Chain Of Events Then Each Action Has A Previous Cause . So You Can't Have A Chain Of Events To Occur By Accident . It Is Impossible For A Chain Of Event To Have Occurred By Accident The Same Way Eact Time , Year In And Year Out Many Thousands Of Years . In That Case , Accident Would Still Be The Rule In Our Universe And They Are Not . They Are Also A Part Of The System Of Things .
( Why Are We Taught That ? )
,Because The Luciferians And Reptiulians , The Serpent Children ( Genesis 3 ; 14 ) Must Keep You Ignoring True Scientific Data To Enforce Religious Beliefs , And Keep You Worshipping Them ( Revelation 13 ; 15 ) , And In Their Image , So As Not To Alarm The God With ( Psalms 82;6 ) And ( John 10 ; 34 ) .
Do They Know These Facts ?
Indeed ! They Do , And Of The Many Bangs And The Biggest Bang . The Dragon's Seed Comes In All Races . They Could Be Anybody ; Maybe Your Reading This Book Are One .
What Sound Did It Make ?
The Bang Created A Vibration , A Friction That Results In Sound , Each Additional Bang Had A Different Time And Distance And Magnitude That Created A Harmony Of Music Heard By The True Litener Of Om Or Aum As Amun '' The Amen '' . It Vibrates At A Rate Of 144 , And It Is The Letter '' D '' Of The 1st Center '' C '' Octave Bass , Its Color Is Green ,
So Which Is The '' Biggest Bang '' ?
This Event Still Happen To This Day. It Is A Result Of The Expanding . Then Collapsing Of A Universe . In Your Case , This Universe Which Caused The Explosion Of Positive And Negative Forces , Cause The Negative And Positive Forces To Clash Into Each Other , Matter And Anti -Matter .
What Happens In This Event ?
H 1 - Hydrogen Becomes He - Helium , From E , 1 - Ether To E2 , - Ether Two , Onto O 8 - Oxygen Liquid And E 8 , - Ether Liquid Gas . This Was The Birth Of Your Sun , Which Is 93 , 000,000 , Miles Away .
Black Book
M.Z.York 33 / 720
the - o - ry , N. , pl . the - o - ries . 1 . a Systematically Organized Knowldge Applicable In A Relatively Wide Variety Of Circumstance , especially A Systems Of Assumption , Accepted Principles . And Rules Of Procedure Devised To Analyze , Predict , Or Otherwise Explain The Nature Or Behavior Of A Specified Set Of Phenomena .
The word Theory comes from the Late Latin Theoria , from Greek , from theoros , meaning '' spectator '' ; from thea , a viewing + -oros , '' seeing '' Make note that , though they call it a Theory , they say '' seeing is believing '' . When in actulity hearing and reading is believing , and seeing is knowing .
( Where Did They Get The Word Theory From ? )
,Their word Theory as the Greek say Theoris becomes Thehos for God in Greek , taken from Taweret , The Tama - Rean Goddess of women in childbirth and this birth is of the Sun ( sons ) . Taweret was hated by The Greeks because she was the center of The Iunet or Tantere , Called by The Greeks Denderah Calendar And She Represented Mitochondria DNA In The Center Of The Denderah ( Zodiac ) .
So The Big Bang Is Not A Theory ?
Although they call the Big Bang a Theory contact is a reality , as the sperm hiitting the ovum , Though , the human ear can't hear it , it is a Big Bang to microscopic existing entities . When positive and negative charges clash , though you don't hear it , it is a Big Bang to minute energy . So in actuality the Big Bang is a reality .
But is it '' The Big Bang , or '' A '' nother Big Bang .
Just another '' Big Bang , as an incident that occurs and re-occurs .
So There Is More Than one Big Bang ?
Yes , As things come into Existence , or where things become somethings , the Sum Of A Thing, A Thing Would Need Another Thing To Bang Into To Have A Big Bang . Their problem is , comprehending matter and anti - matter as the things that Clash to bring about , alternate things .
So What They Call It , Is True ?
It is untrue by their title . There was no single one '' Big Bang '' as the statement would imply that something just went '' Bang '' without a reason or Cause or under control , direction or command .
So Then , The Original Black Dot Was Not Alone ?
No , for it existed in a states of existence .
Which '' Big Bang '' Is The Most Important ?
It depends on the beings that is affected by it .
Which One Affects Earth People ?
In your beginning this '' Big Bang '' was twenity four billuion years ago when Nibira , a craft under the control of the Neteru Anunnaqi collided into the planet Tamtu or Tanen called Tiamat and Qi , and caused a '' Big Bang '' ...
Was There One Before That One ?
Indeed ! There Were Others . This Incident Was Not At The Very Beginning Of All Things , But In The Beginning Of An On-Going Event . As You Know , This Planet Earth Is Just One Of Many In This Solar System , And Even Less Important In The Universe . It Is Egotistical And Naive To Think That No Other Intelligent Life Exists In The Boundless Universes . Except Here On The Seventh Planet, The Third From Your Sun .
Is It Possible For A Chain Of Events To Occur By Accodent ?
If It Is A Chain Of Events Then Each Action Has A Previous Cause . So You Can't Have A Chain Of Events To Occur By Accident . It Is Impossible For A Chain Of Event To Have Occurred By Accident The Same Way Eact Time , Year In And Year Out Many Thousands Of Years . In That Case , Accident Would Still Be The Rule In Our Universe And They Are Not . They Are Also A Part Of The System Of Things .
( Why Are We Taught That ? )
,Because The Luciferians And Reptiulians , The Serpent Children ( Genesis 3 ; 14 ) Must Keep You Ignoring True Scientific Data To Enforce Religious Beliefs , And Keep You Worshipping Them ( Revelation 13 ; 15 ) , And In Their Image , So As Not To Alarm The God With ( Psalms 82;6 ) And ( John 10 ; 34 ) .
Do They Know These Facts ?
Indeed ! They Do , And Of The Many Bangs And The Biggest Bang . The Dragon's Seed Comes In All Races . They Could Be Anybody ; Maybe Your Reading This Book Are One .
What Sound Did It Make ?
The Bang Created A Vibration , A Friction That Results In Sound , Each Additional Bang Had A Different Time And Distance And Magnitude That Created A Harmony Of Music Heard By The True Litener Of Om Or Aum As Amun '' The Amen '' . It Vibrates At A Rate Of 144 , And It Is The Letter '' D '' Of The 1st Center '' C '' Octave Bass , Its Color Is Green ,
So Which Is The '' Biggest Bang '' ?
This Event Still Happen To This Day. It Is A Result Of The Expanding . Then Collapsing Of A Universe . In Your Case , This Universe Which Caused The Explosion Of Positive And Negative Forces , Cause The Negative And Positive Forces To Clash Into Each Other , Matter And Anti -Matter .
What Happens In This Event ?
H 1 - Hydrogen Becomes He - Helium , From E , 1 - Ether To E2 , - Ether Two , Onto O 8 - Oxygen Liquid And E 8 , - Ether Liquid Gas . This Was The Birth Of Your Sun , Which Is 93 , 000,000 , Miles Away .
Black Book
M.Z.York 33 / 720
Never Argue With An Idiot. They Drag You Down To Their Level Then Beat You With Experience.
When An Elder Passes On To Higher Life , Its Like One Of The Library Have Shut Down
To Desire Security Is A Sign Of Insecurity .
It's Not The Things One Knows That Get Him Or Her In Trouble , Its The Things One Knows That Just Isn't So That Get Them In Trouble
When you can control a man's thinking you don't have to worry about his action ...:driving:
When An Elder Passes On To Higher Life , Its Like One Of The Library Have Shut Down
To Desire Security Is A Sign Of Insecurity .
It's Not The Things One Knows That Get Him Or Her In Trouble , Its The Things One Knows That Just Isn't So That Get Them In Trouble
When you can control a man's thinking you don't have to worry about his action ...:driving:
big bang theory
oscar;1107933 wrote: :yh_rotfl
I thought this was a thread on gang bangs......... I really must get my specs changed :yh_rotfl
Miss '' O ''
I thought this was a thread on gang bangs......... I really must get my specs changed :yh_rotfl
Miss '' O ''
Never Argue With An Idiot. They Drag You Down To Their Level Then Beat You With Experience.
When An Elder Passes On To Higher Life , Its Like One Of The Library Have Shut Down
To Desire Security Is A Sign Of Insecurity .
It's Not The Things One Knows That Get Him Or Her In Trouble , Its The Things One Knows That Just Isn't So That Get Them In Trouble
When you can control a man's thinking you don't have to worry about his action ...:driving:
When An Elder Passes On To Higher Life , Its Like One Of The Library Have Shut Down
To Desire Security Is A Sign Of Insecurity .
It's Not The Things One Knows That Get Him Or Her In Trouble , Its The Things One Knows That Just Isn't So That Get Them In Trouble
When you can control a man's thinking you don't have to worry about his action ...:driving:
big bang theory
Personally, I think the only way to logically explain getting 1 from zero is through temperature. Let's face it, even if we talk about the cosmic egg being infinitely small such would still demand the question "from where did the cosmic egg form?". The term "infinitely small" is inconceivable. Nothing can be infinitely small. Something either exists or it doesn't.
The only way I can logically explain the existence of everything is through temperatures. Energy is defined by the exertion of heat. The heat had to come from somewhere(Please, let's not get into "spontaneous human combustion"!:yh_eyerol)
Seeing as how heat is what's essential for life(Not light, light is heat. It's the photons that creates the word "photosynthesis") I believe cold, in this speculation, is what would have to be the underlying contributor in the very definition of "beginning" in this context.
What is true is that non existence is apparently considered unimaginably cold. From which in any defined space nothing exists, hypothetically speaking, would ultimately have to mean "infinitely small" in the very same context. "Infinitely small" is, in fact, "infinitely cold", and vice versa.
My suggestion is, in a defined space you have infinitely cold would ultimately define "infinitely hot". This means both concepts are exactly the same. Which also means that one cannot coincide without the other. Which would ultimately prove, in theory, that matter is not expanding at all, you see, but "dark matter" is actually contracting back into the stage of nothingness.
This theory would ultimately coincide with the oscillation theory.
The only way I can logically explain the existence of everything is through temperatures. Energy is defined by the exertion of heat. The heat had to come from somewhere(Please, let's not get into "spontaneous human combustion"!:yh_eyerol)
Seeing as how heat is what's essential for life(Not light, light is heat. It's the photons that creates the word "photosynthesis") I believe cold, in this speculation, is what would have to be the underlying contributor in the very definition of "beginning" in this context.
What is true is that non existence is apparently considered unimaginably cold. From which in any defined space nothing exists, hypothetically speaking, would ultimately have to mean "infinitely small" in the very same context. "Infinitely small" is, in fact, "infinitely cold", and vice versa.
My suggestion is, in a defined space you have infinitely cold would ultimately define "infinitely hot". This means both concepts are exactly the same. Which also means that one cannot coincide without the other. Which would ultimately prove, in theory, that matter is not expanding at all, you see, but "dark matter" is actually contracting back into the stage of nothingness.
This theory would ultimately coincide with the oscillation theory.