Originally Posted by fdpaq0580 (Post 2127724)

First paragraph: I am familiar with the principle. It seems to me same concept as "if a tree falls in the forrest and there is no one there to hear it, does it make a sound". Greater minds than mine will have to do the math. As to the multi-verses, wouldn't God be an observer? Since God is everywhere the only way he wouldn't observe it would mean he doesn't exist.
Second paragraph: Evolution is an adaptation/mutation passed on to the next generation. If one changes their diet, exercise they may improve their health and fitness, but that is not evolution, it is just change of a single entity. Evolution, over time will allow one species to become a different species.
"Read you Bible". I have. A book with many tales, many of which are retelling of earlier tales from other cultures. There are many contradictions, and lots of missing parts inaccuracies and ambiguities. What about other religious texts as evidence? Do you totally dismiss them? And sacrificing himself to stop the messy killing of animals? How about all the messy killing of one another?

Originally Posted by Blueblaze (Post 2127889)

Well, in the case of Quantum Mechanics, if you don't get the math, I guess you'll just have to take it from me. If a particle isn't observed, it doesn't exist. "Multiple Universes" is just a sci-fi idea that grew out of popular misunderstanding of the math.

I don't get your second comment about evolution. What does exercise have to do with evolution? I never said I disagreed that evolution changes species from one to another.

The reason I mentioned the Bible wasn't to hold it up as authority. I don't care if you believe it or not. I mentioned it because YOU claimed that an omnipotent God can't change. The God in the Bible has changed many times. The god of every religion I know of changes. You are the only one who seems to confuse omnipotence with static perfection, and I merely used the Christian God as an example to refute that idea.

I'm not sure if any human religion has all the answers -- I doubt it. But I will say that the religion of Western Civilization produced the best results of any I know of, since we were the first to grant liberty to ordinary people, and the first to harness enlightened self-interest in the form of capitalism, to raise the human condition out of abject poverty and misery. So if I had to guess, I would guess the Christians must be closer to the truth than most.

Originally Posted by Blueblaze (Post 2127889)

Well, in the case of Quantum Mechanics, if you don't get the math, I guess you'll just have to take it from me. If a particle isn't observed, it doesn't exist…

Originally Posted by Davonu (Post 2127893)

Ooohh. Slightly condescending response considering that Quantum Mechanics is accepted in general by most of the scientific community, but many of the specifics are hotly debated by those same scientists…including the “if a particle isn’t observed, it doesn’t exist” part. It is far from proven.

Originally Posted by manaboutown (Post 2127894)

What about all the particles generated by the Big Bang and comprising the early universe before any life existed to observe them?

Originally Posted by Blueblaze (Post 2127889)

Well, in the case of Quantum Mechanics, if you don't get the math, I guess you'll just have to take it from me. If a particle isn't observed, it doesn't exist. "Multiple Universes" is just a sci-fi idea that grew out of popular misunderstanding of the math.

I don't get your second comment about evolution. What does exercise have to do with evolution? I never said I disagreed that evolution changes species from one to another.

The reason I mentioned the Bible wasn't to hold it up as authority. I don't care if you believe it or not. I mentioned it because YOU claimed that an omnipotent God can't change. The God in the Bible has changed many times. The god of every religion I know of changes. You are the only one who seems to confuse omnipotence with static perfection, and I merely used the Christian God as an example to refute that idea.

I'm not sure if any human religion has all the answers -- I doubt it. But I will say that the religion of Western Civilization produced the best results of any I know of, since we were the first to grant liberty to ordinary people, and the first to harness enlightened self-interest in the form of capitalism, to raise the human condition out of abject poverty and misery. So if I had to guess, I would guess the Christians must be closer to the truth than most.

Originally Posted by Blueblaze (Post 2127889)

Well, in the case of Quantum Mechanics, if you don't get the math, I guess you'll just have to take it from me. If a particle isn't observed, it doesn't exist. "Multiple Universes" is just a sci-fi idea that grew out of popular misunderstanding of the math.

I don't get your second comment about evolution. What does exercise have to do with evolution? I never said I disagreed that evolution changes species from one to another.

The reason I mentioned the Bible wasn't to hold it up as authority. I don't care if you believe it or not. I mentioned it because YOU claimed that an omnipotent God can't change. The God in the Bible has changed many times. The god of every religion I know of changes. You are the only one who seems to confuse omnipotence with static perfection, and I merely used the Christian God as an example to refute that idea.

I'm not sure if any human religion has all the answers -- I doubt it. But I will say that the religion of Western Civilization produced the best results of any I know of, since we were the first to grant liberty to ordinary people, and the first to harness enlightened self-interest in the form of capitalism, to raise the human condition out of abject poverty and misery. So if I had to guess, I would guess the Christians must be closer to the truth than most.

Originally Posted by ThirdOfFive (Post 2127975)

Odd, the direction that this discussion has taken. It started as a discussion of creation/intelligent design as opposed to evolution), which then somehow devolved into bringing a guy with a long beard and white robes holding court somewhere beyond the clouds, his assumed capabilities, motivation, etc.

Why does "intelligent design" have to include a God-person involved in in it?

Originally Posted by DAVES (Post 2126678)

Taught in schools? "Science is fact not fictional theories." So much Science taught in schools is not fact but SPUN current thought. We all know the earth is flat and the planets revolve around the earth. Much of education is indoctrination. Few teachers are educated enough, bright enough or have the time to discuss these things.

Originally Posted by manaboutown (Post 2127894)

What about all the particles generated by the Big Bang and comprising the early universe before any life existed to observe them?

Originally Posted by fdpaq0580 (Post 2128045)

From the perspective of a believer, they could say that the God that created the gigantic firework, ignited and observed it.

Originally Posted by ThirdOfFive (Post 2128071)

Interesting.

What is the difference, really between "The big bang", and "Let there be light"?

Originally Posted by fdpaq0580 (Post 2128110)

Oh, my. Lets see what my pea brain can come up with. How about this: "Let there be light" was the spoken command of God, a sentient entity, which created light from nothing. The big bang, in over simplified terms, was produced when a "singularity" exploded for, as yet, unknown reasons, expelling vast quantities of energy as light, heat, matter,etc.
In the first scenario, the religious one, a supreme entity lights the fuse, essentially. In the second, spontaneous combustion. No supernatural entities were involved.

Well?

Originally Posted by ThirdOfFive (Post 2128159)

Aye. But the RESULT is the same, no matter who lit the fuse.

Isn't that really all that matters?

Originally Posted by Rich Iwaszko (Post 2126616)

hi,
the theory of evolution has never been proven. There is no missing link. Yet we teach it in schools. Why? In Darwins book, he left a bail out to his theory. It was the one thing he could not answer and he admitted it would be proof his conclusions were incorrect. Pre Cambrian fossils showed no signs of evolution to explain the over abundance of many animals in fossils in the Cambrian period. Animals just showed up out of nowhere in the Cambrian period. Why do we cont If inue to believe this incorrect theory as well as aliens, Bigfoot, and the Loch Ness monster. Are we all that dumb or are we just looking for entertainment. Regardless, Darwins theory should not be taught in schools as it is not fact. Just tell them we don't know. We have enough fiction in the world today. Science is fact not fictional theories.

Originally Posted by ThirdOfFive (Post 2126623)

So is the choice between evolution and creation? Did things "just happen" and then bumbled along haphazardly from there, resulting in the world we have today? Sorry, I don't buy it. The reason is as follows.

"Most people know about DNA (aka deoxyribonucleic acid) as the molecule that holds the information, i.e. the genetic codes, within our bodies. What some people don’t realise is that this equates to a seriously large amount of information being stored within a single biomolecule. DNA molecules can store up to 215 petabytes, or 215 million gigabytes, of data in a single doubled stranded molecule, making it one of the highest storage density mediums in the world. Simply put, the information storage devices within our bodies are much more capable than we can currently create, so there has been a lot of focus in trying to harness the power and data storage capabilities of DNA for our own man-made data storage systems." (Electro pages: storing information and data with DNA). ONE petabyte contains 500 billion pages of standard printed text. Multiply that by 215... I am not sure I can comprehend a number that large. That number is contained in a "database" if you can call it that, that exists on a submicroscopic level. Asking somebody to believe that that "just happened" is beyond ludicrous. The watch proves the existence of the watchmaker

That said, I'm not convinced that the fossil record is solid proof of anything. So few living things become fossils; conditions have to be just right for fossilization to happen. I recall hearing something recently that may be one in 100,000 animals or plants become fossils, and even with the ones that do become fossils, there is no guarantee that they will be found, or that they will not be destroyed in some natural event such as a flood, volcano, or whatever. To me, expecting the fossil record to be a reliable chronology of development is like depending on a calendar with maybe five numbers on it to be the reliable chronology of the number of days in a decade.

But we can use reasoning. We know, or think we know, two things. Fossils exist, and the earth changes. Oftentimes those changes in the earth are widespread and drastic. Assuming the existence of a creator God, we can also assume intelligence and foreknowledge on the part of that God. If God created the physical environment to change, as it does, then is it not reasonable to assume that God also provided the life he created to adapt according to the changes of the physical environment? Again, assuming the existence of that God, the answer cannot be no. The proof is that we are here.

I have never seen evolution versus creation as an either/or thing. In my mind they exist together working perfectly in tandem. They always have.

Originally Posted by Blueblaze (Post 2127889)

Well, in the case of Quantum Mechanics, if you don't get the math, I guess you'll just have to take it from me. If a particle isn't observed, it doesn't exist. "Multiple Universes" is just a sci-fi idea that grew out of popular misunderstanding of the math.

I don't get your second comment about evolution. What does exercise have to do with evolution? I never said I disagreed that evolution changes species from one to another.

The reason I mentioned the Bible wasn't to hold it up as authority. I don't care if you believe it or not. I mentioned it because YOU claimed that an omnipotent God can't change. The God in the Bible has changed many times. The god of every religion I know of changes. You are the only one who seems to confuse omnipotence with static perfection, and I merely used the Christian God as an example to refute that idea.

I'm not sure if any human religion has all the answers -- I doubt it. But I will say that the religion of Western Civilization produced the best results of any I know of, since we were the first to grant liberty to ordinary people, and the first to harness enlightened self-interest in the form of capitalism, to raise the human condition out of abject poverty and misery. So if I had to guess, I would guess the Christians must be closer to the truth than most.

Originally Posted by Stu from NYC (Post 2126662)

Why do we need a deep thinkers two?

Originally Posted by fdpaq0580 (Post 2128176)

For some that may be enough. For others it is not enough. For some it is enough that their belly is full. Others, once their hunger has been satisfied, begin to realize that they get hungry at regular intervals, and they begin wondering where their next meal will come from. This is the beginning of curiosity. After some time they are wondering about all sorts of things. Now we are wondering about the creation of, not just the world, but the entire universe. We wonder about creation itself. Pretty amazing what we are capable of. Only about 150,000 years ago we were small apeish creatures whose only concerns were food and predators. Now we think amazing thoughts, do amazing things. If we could quit squabbling and manage to survive another 150,000 years, I wonder what we might become. What thoughts will they be thinking. And what amazing things will they be doing.
I wonder! Don't you?

Originally Posted by jimbomaybe (Post 2128192)

Good news for people in hell, god can be wrong, " The God in the Bible has changed many times. The god of every religion I know of changes. You are the only one who seems to confuse omnipotence with static perfection, and I merely used the Christian God as an example to refute that idea." There should be no problem finding lawyers in the same place who will help you file an appeal, but then I am still stuck on the watch has to have a watchmaker idea, that somehow you don't then need a creation source for the watchmaker , to my poor logic god is and always was doesn't explain

Originally Posted by ThirdOfFive (Post 2128269)

Something I've pondered.

"Always was" presupposes a beginning date or event. Call it the Big Bang, call it the Creation, call it whatever. But in order to define "always" we have to have a beginning. Our reality begins with that beginning. Our perception cannot extend beyond, or outside, that reality, because it is all there is.

Therefore to ask "what happened BEFORE the beginning?" is illogical. There is no way we can ever know.

Originally Posted by fdpaq0580 (Post 2128366)

Disagree with your definition of "always was". To me "always" indicates infinity. If you presuppose a starting date then to say something has "always" been would be incorrect. It has only been "since the starting date".
To ponder what happened before is actually possible. We haven't mentioned it yet, but there is a theory that the universe oscillates. The universe will expand, slow to a stop, then collapse then start over again.

Originally Posted by Davonu (Post 2128426)

Agree. But it still doesn’t answer the question of how/when the oscillations started.

But the oscillations have been there forever! Forever? What’s that? We’re back to the beginning of the discussion again. :D