0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
how did the big bang create our universe against the laws of physics that sustain it
Surely science must investigate the how?, why? where? and what? and demigod forbid, even the whom research all that is not yet proved by empirical scientific methodIf one could take a cell phone back to the dark ages, this unfortunate person would have been burned at the stake. Why must we simply dismiss anything not embraced by scientific fact or theories as silly nonsense
Quote from: Alan McDougall on 18/03/2009 20:39:55Surely science must investigate the how?, why? where? and what? and demigod forbid, even the whom research all that is not yet proved by empirical scientific methodIf one could take a cell phone back to the dark ages, this unfortunate person would have been burned at the stake. Why must we simply dismiss anything not embraced by scientific fact or theories as silly nonsenseI agree, Science should be opened minded , question everything and not rely on theories that can not explain 100% what they intend to. Even theories that we may think are fact should be thought about and viewed from a different perspective and in doing so we may learn more, come to the different conclusions. Even thoughts that we are unable to test at this present time should not be discarded. Someone said "Nothing is impossible it only takes longer" remembering that once we all thought the world was flat, now we know better... and in 1995 it was recorded as truth that Mary died a virgin. (don't get me wrong I don't want to get on the religious band wagon - keep religion out of science. But because a person in authority said that and recorded it as fact it is believed by hundreds of thousands of people.All I am saying is if we all go on believing things blindly we will never know the truth. We must question and find the answers to all our thoughts then question them again when we thing we have found the answer. Our ideas should not be discarded just because we do not have the ability or knowledge to test validity at that time.Without questions and new ideas nothing would have been discovered.
But postulating an intelligent designer takes us no nearer the ultimate origin of things because the ID, if, indeed, one was necessary, would have to have been designed in the first place.ID fans never seem to have an answer to that problem.
That's just a motherhood and apple pie argument.
"Motherhood and apple pie day" is celebrated each January 26 in Virginia and has been since at least 1950, though I'm not sure continuously. It is mostly used ironically to suggest things that no one could be publicly opposed to. Sometimes it was used with God and flag, but less frequently in the recent past.
echoI'm not trying to humanise it.But I can't see how you can be so attached to the word "intelligence" without humanising it yourself. It so strongly implies purpose and design whereas I am saying that you need neither. We simply have a status quo and can propose a fairly logical set of occurrences which got us here. That does not have to infer purpose or design - it does, however, give a hope of extrapolating forward.If you postulate a DD then, as things could change away from the pattern at any time, we may as well bend over and embrace Kismet as the way forward.
and can propose a fairly logical set of occurrences
Just the will to survive gives evidence to some type of intelligence.
If you throw two sixes with a die, does that imply that the die, somehow, has intelligence? If a distant solar system ends up with a rocky planet in the Goldilocks region, does that prove the presence of intelligence or intention on the part of the orbiting stuff?
Evolution does not "know" anything. Evolution is not an entity. It is a process. Different organisms merely survive and reproduce more successfully than others in certain environments, so their offspring inherit those traits that were successful.
You still imply that there is a purpose. That implies a consciousness and one can't avoid asking about the origin of that purpose.
Alanhow did the big bang create our universe against the laws of physics that sustain it -----Why should it be a stumbling block that we have not yet found an explanation for the BB which, necessarily, is not included in our present set of knowledge?
To my understanding everything has a reason and if we do not know the reason for it, then we should do our damnedest and go and find itAlan
No. Why make stuff up just so people can swallow it easier?
I am genuinely interested in your views here, Alan... and anyone else who wants to explain to me what on earth ID is, if it's not merely an attempt to dress up religion in the trappings of science
If one could take a cell phone back to the dark ages , this unfortunate person would have been burned at the stake.
There must be some sort of intelligence associated, just look around yourself, see nature.Everything here on earth co existing. Earth, air, fire, water. It seems very well planned to me.If it has nothing to do with intelligence then we who can design should be able to, replicate, produce something more wonderful from nothing, from a sneeze. WAIT where did that sneeze come from, what sneezed it?