Our Origins

[Stargazer]

Ok, then tell me why faith and religion would be respected the same way a scientific theory would? Where are the similarities? Also, why is it that people can never give a single reason why their particular faith or religion should be protected from other questioning it? What is so special about it, what makes them true, what is it that makes them possible to believe in? Surely it wouldn't all be baseless, would it? I will never regard religion and science at the same level and never will I consider them to be of equal value.

[Sayonara]

You're placing requirements on religious belief that we don't place on scientific belief.

[2004einstein]

I voted evolution.

The chance meeting of the right chemical building-blocks to form reprducing proteins - Which went on to evolve into ever more complex organisms is my belief. Why is there a need for an intelligent creator?.

[aguy2]

Why is there a need for an intelligent creator?.

 

The fact that rational and extensive examination of ourselves and the world around us shows no need for an 'intervening' creator, to my mind, is a tribute to the intelligence of the creator. Why would the creator design an environment that needed constant and consistant 'tinkering' with, when the priority point of creating a universe is to create something that is capable of being 'self-creating' due entirely to its own 'internal dynamics'?

 

aguy2

[Guest mattmagician]

if we evolved from monkeys or whatever people suggest, then why dont we see half fromed monkey/men and so on walking around today? surely evolution doesnt just stop does it

 

also when the creation happened god got pices of whatever he used to make earth from what was already floating in space. this can explain some odd shaped skulls and other things such as dinosaur bones

[Sayonara]

if we evolved from monkeys or whatever people suggest, then why dont we see half fromed monkey/men and so on walking around today? surely evolution doesnt just stop does it

Because that's not how it works.

 

also when the creation happened god got pices of whatever he used to make earth from what was already floating in space. this can explain some odd shaped skulls and other things such as dinosaur bones

Not only does that fail to explain anything, it actually raises more difficult questions.

[Hellbender]

Evolution. There is simply no better explanation.

[island]

Humans are specially required players in the thermodynamic game of our expanding universe, and the anthropic principle is actually an "entropic... anthropic principle".

 

There are also other scientists like, Eric Schneider and James Kay, who also think that life is actually a manifestation of the second law of thermodynamics, and they have written a number of supported peer reviewed papers on the subject. Both of these scientists are cited on the "EvoWiki" website as sources of rebuttal for misrepresented usages of the second law of thermodynamics by some creationists. Eric Schneider and science writer, Dorion Sagan have more recently teamed up to argue that 'life does indeed serve a purpose in nature, and thus life does have a meaning that transcends the self':

 

The more complex the structure the more effective is the energy dissemination. Populations are better in this respect than single individuals; ecosystems even more so, and most effective of all -- so far -- are human high-tech societies.

 

Thus, goes the argument, the second law of thermodynamics is not contrary to the existence of life; rather, it is the cause of life. That law drives evolution to higher levels of complexity and to more sophisticated societies and technologies for the sole purpose of disseminating energy gradients.

 

More on this can be found in the following article, and the author, Arne Jernelov, is professor of environmental biochemistry, an honorary scholar and former director of the International Institute of Applied Systems Analysis in Vienna and a UN expert on environmental catastrophes:

 

http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/edit/archives/2004/09/30/2003204990

 

The following is yet another more universal and independent derivation of this theory, including a clarification of the anthropic principle, and a valid natural design hypothesis:

 

http://www.anthropic-principle.ORG

 

Dung Beetles don't make antiparticles

[Hellbender]

if we evolved from monkeys or whatever people suggest, then why dont we see half fromed monkey/men and so on walking around today? surely evolution doesnt just stop does it

 

No, and why would it? Creationists are the ones that think evolution should "stop" with more complex organisms (microevolution/macroevolution). Do you know anything about the scientific theory and fact you are presuming to attack?

 

also when the creation happened god got pices of whatever he used to make earth from what was already floating in space. this can explain some odd shaped skulls and other things such as dinosaur bones

 

Yeah, god used the fossils of "space dinos" to make the earth.

[nicobudini]

suppose we wait until random combinations of elements catch the right combination to create life. well, the time this process would take exceeds the age of the universe. some basics calculations of probabilities throw a total time of about 100,000 million years while the age of the universe is supposed to be of 15,000 millions.

by the way, some basics principles of physics tell us that the entropy tends to increase or the "order" tends to decrease in every process. what about that?

[Hellbender]

suppose we wait until random combinations of elements catch the right combination to create life. well, the time this process would take exceeds the age of the universe. some basics calculations of probabilities throw a total time of about 100,000 million years while the age of the universe is supposed to be of 15,000 millions.

 

you are forgetting about the nature of chemical reactions, and the fact that evolution is not totally random.

 

by the way, some basics principles of physics tell us that the entropy or the "order" tends to grow. what about that?

 

The entropy of an organism can decrease, becasue it is not a closed system. Even I know something about thermodynamics .

[island]

suppose we wait until random combinations of elements catch the right combination to create life. well' date=' the time this process would take exceeds the age of the universe. some basics calculations of probabilities throw a total time of about 100,000 million years while the age of the universe is supposed to be of 15,000 millions.

by the way, some basics principles of physics tell us that the entropy tends to increase or the "order" tends to decrease in every process. what about that?[/quote']

 

The entropy of the universes increases "in every process"... but that's not necessarily true locally, (as Hellbender pointed out), where open systems enable entropy to decrease or counterbalance the destructive tendencies that are *normally* associated with the second law of thermodynamics.

 

Increases in complexity and order necessarily equate to an increase in the potential for disorder, and this effect gets compounded in an expanding universe whose vacuum grows via an increasing negative pressure component.

 

That means that the compounding entropic debt must be repaid, so "emergent properties" arise that enable the system to enhance the thermodynic process at a rate that is greater than the sum of the total entropies of the component parts.

 

The fact that humans are extremely well fit for this is directly proportional to the amount of complexity that's involved, and our ability to continue to increase the entropy of our universe is critical to keeping up with the game, not to mention our survival, the trick is not to get ahead of, or behind... "time".

 

~

 

Also just an FYI, but Evolutionary theory becomes "totally random" at the cosmological scale if an infinite number of *unobserved* universes are allowed into the uncertainty "equation".

 

Which, in my supported opinion... is a load of chaotic BS

[Hellbender]

Thanks for explaining that more in depth, island (welcome, BTW), In truth, I don't know much about physics, just a smattering of interesting stuff, hence the liighthearted jest at myself above.

[island]

You only have to know enough about enough and you did a good job...

 

Thanks for the welcome

[Hellbender]

You only have to know enough about enough and you did a good job...

 

thanks.

 

Thanks for the welcome

 

you're, um, welcome.