Our Origins

[YT2095]

Why?

 

Todays "Super Natural" is tomorows Science, It wasn`t too long ago that Mach one was considered Impossible and that you`de actualy Disapear!

 

sending a voice or picture through Space OH MY GOD! can you imagine!

 

and a simple Mirror or Camera can steal your Soul!

[Artorius]

just a few decades ago someone saying you could walk about with a cordless phone frying your brain out with radiation was considered ludicrous..hey! were all doing it now!!!

[Stargazer]

Why?

 

Todays "Super Natural" is tomorows Science' date=' It wasn`t too long ago that Mach one was considered Impossible and that you`de actualy Disapear!

 

sending a voice or picture through Space OH MY GOD! can you imagine!

 

and a simple Mirror or Camera can steal your Soul![/quote']

Not at all. Science is simply a set of methods to investigate the universe, so that we can understand how it works. Theories are formed to explain certain phenomena. Religion has given us a few such "theories" regarding our origin. They have been thrown out in favour of much better theories - this time based on actual observation. That is why science is much better than religion.

[Stargazer]

just a few decades ago someone saying you could walk about with a cordless phone frying your brain out with radiation was considered ludicrous..hey! were all doing it now!!!

Well surely noone believed that cell phones would work through magic, or divine intervention? It's science. Technologically, it wasn't possible to build such phones, but the basic science was certainly there. It has nothing to do with mythologies, or fairytales or supernaturalism.

[YT2095]

I don`t get your point here? are you agreeing or disagreeing with me?

 

I can`t see how anyone could Disagree as I stated facts only.

[Stargazer]

I don't understand why the idea of travelling in Mach 1 has anything to do with supernaturalistic phenomena.

[YT2095]

it was considered by Some that you`de actualy Vanish into another Dimension or the likes.

 

that`s pretty darn Supernatural sounding to me

[Stargazer]

it was considered by Some that you`de actualy Vanish into another Dimension or the likes.

 

that`s pretty darn Supernatural sounding to me

Who thought that travelling at certain speeds would cause them to enter other dimensions? And how many listened to such speculations?

[YT2095]

quite a few thought as much, and fortunately not too many listened )

 

a bit the same as the 1`st Atomic weapon tests at Los Alamos, a good many considered it would be a Cascade reaction and be unstoppable (incl` a few of the Scientists that worked on the project) and comsume the planet!

 

again, we went ahead and the fears/beleifs went away

 

 

"if you fear Monsters under your bed, the best thing you can do is get outa bed and look for yourself!" (YT2095 15/12/04)

[Stargazer]

What was their scientific reasoning to start with such fantasies? I suppose they had no basis for it at all. To build aeroplanes has to do with science, not what might happen in a badly written Star Trek episode. My point is that such speculations doesn't matter much since there is nothing that would justify them.

[YT2095]

the cascade reaction, was an Unknown!. could the Blast be so great as to compress normal matter into super critical states? I don`t know what the logic was on that one, or with the Mach 1 stuff, fact is it came about and was beleived by quite a few.

and for this point, THAT is all that matters here in the arg

 

we KNOW it was baseless NOW in Hindsight. but I`m sure it was Deeply held and very worrisome to those that beleived it at the time!

 

there`s been phenomenon explained as Supernatural in the past, that has come to light Scientificaly as NOT being being what was initialy thought as well as that mentioned above few posts of Science that took on Super Natural beleifs

[Stargazer]

Ok, you have plans to build an aeroplane with the goal to break the sound barrier. What problems do you predict? Perhaps how the structure of the aeroplane will be affected, perhaps if the pilot will lose control, etc. These are consequences that are not longshots at all. However, to introduce pararell dimensions into the mix makes no sense, simply because it doesn't follow. It would be like saying it is dangerous to go land on the moon because then you will become invisible. That doesn't follow at all. What reasonable fears might one have regarding being the first to land on the moon? Perhaps that one would sink, or that radiation levels will be much higher, or something.

[Sayonara]

What was their scientific reasoning to start with such fantasies?

I doubt there was scientific reasoning behind it - it was simply the unknown at the time (and the scientifically minded would of course have been pointing out that plenty of things travel faster than sound anyway, like military ordinance, but of course the universal common factor with crazies is that they won't listen.)

[YT2095]

well , I couldn`t agree more

 

it is indeed irrational and baseless fear, and I don`t understand where the "Other Dimension" stuff came from either, but it did!

 

and so, Now maybe you understand my point... Todays Super-Natural beleifs is Tomorrows Science

[aguy2]

Considering the context I was rather surprised to see nearly 50% expressing a belief in creation of some sort.

 

As I hope you can see from my 'signature', I am a strong theist who sees such things as biological evolution as being simultaneously reflective of and anticipatory to the core reason for such a thing as a universe to exist.

 

aguy2

[Ophiolite]

On a science forum I am appalled that 23% favoured creation. I am presuming aguy2 that you chose the third option as most closely matching your view, or more likely 'Other'.

[YT2095]

I`ve heard also that WE (mankind) is the atempt of the Universe to understand itself.

 

I like that idea, I don`t know how TRUE it is, but as an IDEA I don`t see why it shouldn`t / couldn`t be such also

[aguy2]

I am presuming aguy2 that you chose the third option as most closely matching your view, or more likely 'Other'.

 

I would have been happier with the 3rd option if had been in the present tense, but chose it anyway.

 

aguy2

[alt_f13]

I`ve heard also that WE (mankind) is the atempt of the Universe to understand itself.

 

I like that idea' date=' I don`t know how TRUE it is, but as an IDEA I don`t see why it shouldn`t / couldn`t be such also [/quote']

 

Although that is a really nifty idea, I'm skeptical as to why something the size of the universe with the ability to create life from space dust needs animals as stupid as humans to figure out the meaning of everything. Unless it planned on us creating computers... but I doubt that an occurance that unpredictable would have been predicted. I think the universe was just lonely.

 

They always said God was omnipresent right?

 

Still, any god is still as plausible as a planet made of cumquats. Although entirely possible, there's no rhyme nor reason for such beast to have been dreamed up.

 

 

Ever seen the movie "Dante's Peak?" "Drop a frog in boiling water and he'll jump right out. But, drop it in cold water and turn it up gradually, it'll stay in until it boils to death."

 

Exactly the same. If the idea of an Omnipresent, Omnipotent superbeing was introduced today, the inventor of the idea would be taken as seriously as people who claim to be abducted by aliens. In fact, I'm sure almost the entire planet would take abductees more seriously than someone like that.

 

"Hey guys, there's this thing in space that tells me what to do, and it created us in seven days and if you're good you live forever in paradise and bad people fall in lava for a while. Believe me guys, cummon. Guys?" ...

 

... and so on.

 

Frankly, I'm scared by how someone can commit their life to something entirely unprovable, based on literature thousands of years old, written by people who wiped with their hands or a pile of straw... Not entirely the best judgement.

 

I'm scared by how such tribal, cultish behavior can exist in such an age with computers and planes and spaceships and such.

 

I'm scared by how many people have died in the name of religion, and it still remains a respectable way of life whilst computer games are looked down appon as being aggressive and causing people to kill other people.

 

Now, excuse me while I stab my sisten in the eye in the name of half life.

[Stargazer]

I doubt there was scientific reasoning behind it - it was simply the unknown at the time (and the scientifically minded would of course have been pointing out that plenty of things travel faster than sound anyway, like military ordinance, but of course the universal common factor with crazies is that they won't listen.)

Exactly, that's my point, it wasn't science to begin with. It was baseless speculations and fantasies. (Funny, btw, how I'm not offending anyone by pointing this out, but when I point out other kinds of fantasies in another thread, I'm being told I lack empathy - whatever questioning has to do with that.) I do agree with you that some people simply do not listen. This goes for all pseudoscience and religion and other such things - I think it has to do with prestige, or to preserve their precious worldimage no matter how flawed.

[Stargazer]

On a science forum I am appalled that 23% favoured creation.

Oh sure it was creation. After all, it's not a violation of Ockham's razor, and it's a product, obviously, of skepticism and reason, and well-supported by observational evidence. Therefor, I now declare that the universe was created by Professor Frink (who can now be seen in "Simpsons"). You can't disprove it! Also, to anyone who wishes to point out how ridiculous that is: you lack empathy! So there.

[TWJian]

There is no such protein as "chlorophyll." Chlorophyll is a FAMILY of proteins' date=' they vary. Not all plants are green, so then by your logic how would they photosynthesize? Different chlorophylls absorb different wavelengths of light. By far the most common are the ones that absorb 680nm and 700nm wavelengths, which are green, but others exist.

Bacteria, such as cyanobacteria, perform photosynthesis with an entirely different family, the rhodopsins.

 

Also in the case of chloroplasts, it is important to discuss the endosymbiotic theory. The evidence for this theory suggests that chloroplasts were once free-living organisms that were incorporated into eukaryotic cells. This would account for teh similarity.

 

 

On respiration, the similarity lies in the efficiency; this is the most efficient system that has evolved for the needs of sentient organisms. This is the result of common ancestors. Same for the circulatory system. You can see a clear line of development in the circulatory system as organisms become more advanced. And of course there are variants in this.[/quote']

 

Hello?If chlorophyll absorbs green light,then why is it green?it absorbs the red spectrum of visible light and reflects the green ones.

[atinymonkey]

Exactly, that's my point, it wasn't science to begin with. It was baseless speculations and fantasies. (Funny, btw, how I'm not offending anyone by pointing this out, but when I point out other kinds of fantasies in another thread, I'm being told I lack empathy - whatever questioning has to do with that.)

No, it's not linked. Dismissing ideas because you simply don't understand them is one thing, mocking religion becuase you can't understand it is different.

 

There are a great number of concepts that you will never understand, from String to Chaos and including Relativity. If you mocked the physists in that same way you mock religion, you would pretty much get the same response. However a physist will not be offenced by ignorance and intolerance.

 

I doubt there was scientific reasoning behind it - it was simply the unknown at the time (and the scientifically minded would of course have been pointing out that plenty of things travel faster than sound anyway, like military ordinance, but of course the universal common factor with crazies is that they won't listen.)

That's not quite true, the sound barrier did cause planes to disintegrate or explode. I think that helped propagate the theory.

 

Oddly, the Victorians forbade railways travelling more than 70 miles an hour. The scientists assured them that a human travailing faster than that would be travelling to fast to enable them to inhale the passing oxygen. That's why the maximum speed limit is still 70mph.

[Sayonara]

That's not quite true, the sound barrier did cause planes to disintegrate or explode. I think that helped propagate the theory.

R>C>P

[atinymonkey]

It still a coherent linear post. You are a post nazi, that's your problem.