Moontanman

No Mike, you are asserting mythology as fact. Crowding is meaningless in the context you are using. Humans are social animals, we generally like to have lots of other humans around us and live longer healthier lives when we cooperate in groups. Some other animals are not social and live their lives alone. Using mythology to understand the past is not completely off the mark but to assume mythology describes anything but fantasy needs evidence. Mythology cannot all be true, but it all can be wrong assuming any of it is true just because people appeared to write about it as though it was real is like someone 5,000 years in the future going through the ruins of New York City assuming the New York Giants was a race of giant people whom the inhabitants of the city worshipped... We really don't have much more than that in our knowledge of people of the past...

I know I said I was out but Mike, what on Earth makes you willing to assert your beliefs as facts? A hierarchy, like the one you are proposing, would require a similar level of evidence that I have a invisible dragon in my basement. Why on Earth would anyone accept my dragon as real? Your hierarchy is much less believable, spirit beings? Really? Invoking baseless assertions to explain other baseless assertions? You really need to show there is a hierarchy not to mention that there are, what are for all practical purposes, super beings. I would like to see evidence that there are superbeings, then possibly we can talk about some sort of order and arrangement. My own take on this is there are no superbeings, super civilizations possibly, but made up of normal beings that would be just as helpless as us if dropped down in the jungle naked with no tools. Think of it like us taking an adult neanderthal from 75,000 years ago and trying to "uplift" him to our level. Then think of a neanderthal baby raised in our society, no reason to think he could not grow up to grasp our society as well as we do yet we are separate species separated by 75,000 years of time. A Being 75,000 years ahead of us could be inexplicable to us but if one of us was raised by them from a baby I'd bet we could stand among them as equals. Yet you want us to accept your claims as fact with no evidence whatsoever!

You have this bass ackwards, if you are asserting the universe is intelligently designed then the burden of proof is on you! Personally I really don't know, I do know that science has little to nothing to say about before the big bang. You however appear to be claiming knowledge no one else has. I am excited to hear your knowledge and the evidence that supports it..

Clay on the bottom of the ocean catalyse these large molecules..

I wash my hands of this thread, it makes no sense, is based on belief, and the OP despite numerous at attempts to explain how reality works and has turned into nothing but a blog for him to spout his beliefs and unsupported assumptions.

Well they were there. Yes, the jury thinks that homo sapiens might be a lot older, not younger. No, they were civilizations, quite advanced and predate the Abrahamic religions. You used the word "steeped" I was just trying to show many other civilizations has been steeped as well. No they do not, in fact other than oral tradition all they have is a couple holy books that do not accurately describe reality. In fact Jewish scholars have realized the Jews were never slaves in Egypt, there was no exodus and no one named Moses. It is all nothing but mythology. It's still wrong, there was no first human, no adam and eve and no garden. What on earth does the Higgs Boson have to do with this? You assume design where they isn't any. That is because God has no supporting evidence and there are so many! All cannot be correct but the all can be wrong.. Well the Bible says it was seven literal days, how did you come to the conclusion it was not? Complex life has been around for more than 500,000,000 years, it started out with nothing we would recognise today. Not proto rabbits, or lions, the earth would have appeared rto be an alien plane to us back then. Why do you consider these writings to be true Mike? You assert a high altitude canopy, simply not possible, and you have to ask where did all the water go? Killing all those people, babies included was morally wrong. No he could not, inside a fish's stomach is nothing but digestive juices, no air no oxygen and to suggest divine intervention brings us back the unsupported assertion there is a god. Again with the assumption of a god with no evidence to back it up. Slavery is morally wrong, in the Bible it says a man can beat his slaves as long as they don't die within a couple days. Slavery was not about making a living it was about owning humans like cattle and forcing people against their will to work for free all their lives. There is no reason to think any of that is true Mike...

Mike you do realize there was a civilization in north and south america at that time too... right? You do realize that evidence for the existence of homo sapiens goes back 150,000 years or more right? India had a civilization before the middle east, as did china. In fact many areas of the Earth is "steeped" in history, some much more than the ignorant goat herders whose word you seem to think are gods words. God is taking care of his people the Jews, he promised them land, the holy land, Palestine, which is about the only place in the middle east with no oil, that is really intelligent. You should really think about what you are saying Mike, Adam? There was never a first human, no evidence of a garden of eden either. God only fits because you want it to, BTW, which god is the real god and why? Of course a scientist can believe in god, many do, you can believe anything you want it's when you start asserting your belief as reality we have a problem... BTW Mike, do you believe a god created the heavens and the earth in seven days? Do you believe he created everything we see, animals and plants, as they are now? Do you believe a world wide flood drowned the Earth? Do you believe a man could be swallowed by a large fish or whale and live for several days? Do you think snakes can talk along with donkeys? Do you believe it's moral to own another human as property? Real questions Mike, think of the ramifications of these events compared to science...

You are incorrect we have no writings about Jesus that were contemporary, the first time he is mentioned is nothing more than his name and the first writings were decades after the death of Jesus and some cases centuries. The Romans keep quite good records yet Jesus was never mentioned, no record of a crucifixion, no record of hours of darkness, no record of an earthquake even close to the that time and certainly no record of the dead waking and walking the streets of Jerusalem. You say he is believed to be both god and man.. so what, belief is not knowledge. The character of god? You mean the monomaniacal monster that demanded genocide? The one that allowed sex slaves of young virgins as spoils of war? The one who sent bears to kill children because they called his prophet baldy? The one who not only allows slavery but details how you must go about it? The one is described in a book that is 100% wrong about anything it asserts that can be tested? The one who says he creates both good and evil? http://biblehub.com/isaiah/45-7.htm A genie in lamp could be proven to exist. There is no evidence anyones prayers are answered any better than sheer chance. Because god allows good and bad to happen to everyone, good things happen to bad people and bad things happen to good people. No evidence whatsoever for a god or gods.

And therein lies the problem, you are asserting things as part of reality there is no evidence of, no need for, and plenty of reasons not to believe. At no time in history has the supernatural ever shown science to be wrong... You feed them Mike, they associate you with food, my fish do the same thing... But my fish are wild caught, it takes a while for them to figure out I am not a threat. Some take longer than others but food is a powerful incentive. And BTW goldfish had their behavior altered by selected breeding to be bold.

Canopy? Are you a follower of Ken Ham now? Rainbows are quite common, I can create a rainbow easily, we understand why a rainbow forms and that the effect is a result of a fundamental property of matter and light. No need for a god apologizing for a flood that cannot have happened... Mike, to continue this conversation with any hope of making sense you first must provide evidence for gods or goddesses or for anything supernatural. So far you have done nothing but spout nonsensical assertions like a religious creationist caught between a rock and a very hard place. Come back to reality Mike, the feelies are taking control of your mind...

Are you suggesting there were no rainbows until a god destroyed the world and made rainbows to signify his promise? Really? A rainbow is part of the behavior of matter under specific circumstances, are you asserting an imaginary god created it to signify that it would not destroy the world by flood? A flood that can be proven never to have happened supposedly caused by a entity there is no evidence for to begin with?

No. methodological naturalism means that if you were to give evidence for god it would have to be real, not someone claims in a book. Methodological naturalism can only study that which is real, or has a measurable effect on reality. We used to think that thunder and lightning was supernatural, didn't keep us from studying them and finding out how they work. If you cam up with 10 instances of divine intervention you would need more than simple claims. Yes methodological naturalism requires evidence no matter what is being studied. So far the supernatural/religion/god has yet to provide any evidence than can be shown to be a part of reality. https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Methodological_naturalism Methodological naturalism makes no truth claim, it follows the evidence, you must have read Conservapedia's definition. In the future it would be wise to avoid sites with a religious ax to grind... http://www.conservapedia.com/Methodological_naturalism This is quite simply dishonest, a knowing lie used by religious conservatives to deceive people looking for answers... To be honest, you bitch about neg rep when I am surprised you haven't been buried in it due to people thinking you are dishonestly arguing your point. Having read your stuff on here for quite some I have given you the benefit of the doubt and assumed you simply didn't know how dishonest most of your arguments were. The more you complain about neg rep the more likely you are to receive it. What you believe is personal and as long as it harms no one else feel free to believe it but if you are going to assert your belief as reality then you have a burden of proof and what an old book says is not proof...

I am from WV, I grew up in hillbilly heaven.... But to be honest I never thought of the civil war as something other than history, the past, something difficult to understand. WV seems to be caught up in this "worship" of the good old days except nowadays they've switched sides. Technically WV was part of the North, WV citizens fought for the north. It always seemed like some sort tall tail, then when I moved south there seemed to be statues every place. I felt it quite odd the see statues of men who were really traitors, I got over it, but it did seem odd...

List some effects of god that are not explained by methodological naturalism... You sling around the word "if" as though it was evidence. If a frog had wings he wouldn't bust his little slimy ass every time he jumps..

How much energy is radiated from the sun in the form of neutrinos? https://futurism.com/60-years-since-they-were-first-observed-theres-much-left-to-learn-about-neutrinos/

Citation Please!

It would appear I am correct, you do not understand what I am saying...

Heavy Metal is reborn in this Canadian group!

I think maybe this one is the best: It's interactive.

That is a good tree of life but I think this one best represents hierarchies:

Why should what some fairy tale claims have anything to do with reality Mike? The Bible is demonstrably wrong about everything it asserts about the natural world that can be confirmed one way or another. Why should anyone give any credence to what any ancient book of mythology says about anything? I will again say, show me evidence for a god, then we can talk about evidence for your god. What some (not so) ancient book says is meaningless unless it can be confirmed in some way. The Bible is not evidence of anything, the Bible is a book of claims that need supporting evidence...

I am more than willing to entertain the idea of god, fairies (and all the other pagan things), angels, demons, the supernatural in general just as soon as someone offers some evidence a bit more substantial than "what else could it be" or feelies, or a hunch. Mike, be serious, I can make a much better case for aliens visiting the Earth than your "feeling of connection" Would you be willing to believe such an improbable thing as the Hollow Earth just because I said I had a feeling it was true? Your idea of god sounds quite a bit like the idea of ancient astronauts crossed with magic. I cannot in good faith even meet you .1% of the way on this Mike...