Where do you think we came from? - Page 13

Created

Last reply

Replies

1.1k

Views

50.7k

Users

28

Likes

1.2k

Frequent Posters

Freethinker112 thumbnail
13th Anniversary Thumbnail Sparkler Thumbnail
Posted: 12 years ago

Originally posted by: BirdieNumNum


there are two possibilities for universe/ consciousness-

1. either "God" created it all; or
2. there was no need for creation because the universe always existed.

either scenario is incredible to imagine and fraught with problems imo.

the obvious difficulty with "God created it all" is the question raised by K- who created God? The problem with the second question is that it defies almost every classical experience we've ever had which puts bounds on things...

the only answer i can think of is to conjecture that God is an Entity (separate or universal) that by "construction", does not need creation. Of course, we cant imagine that in our classical mind...

3. a third wild possibility is that the universe always existed with God being the all-pervasive Entity "occupying" all of it. Just conjectures for now, hopefully i can think up something to "support"...


Doesn't the bold part translates to existence without creation, which becomes your point #2?

This is what I have been saying all along too. Either something always existed , or that something came from nothing, and both options sound weird to say the least.

P.S. : Not just K's question, that is the logical question that arises when someone answers that God created it all. 😆
Edited by Freethinker112 - 12 years ago
CuckooCutter7 thumbnail
13th Anniversary Thumbnail Dazzler Thumbnail Visit Streak 30 Thumbnail
Posted: 12 years ago

Originally posted by: Freethinker112


I am not well versed enough in the technicality of evolution to give you an detailed answer. The overview I understood is that at some arbitrary defined point, the predecessor was separated from the chicken species. The mutation had to be in the egg. And evolution happens in populations, not individuals.

This is the science's stance and you are free to read up more. 😊


that's simply awesome buddy, the ability to pass things that are theoretical conjectures as "science stance". 😆Your own reference site further states:

"A simple view is that at whatever point the threshold was crossed and the first chicken was hatched, it had to hatch from an egg"

That seems to make it the egg coming first. Again, if you read the same source you're citing as your "science stance", you'd see there is no definite conclusion. But then maybe you're talking about the kind of science you've invented.😆.

K.Universe. thumbnail
13th Anniversary Thumbnail Voyager Thumbnail Engager Level 1 Thumbnail
Posted: 12 years ago

Originally posted by: Freethinker112

Either something always existed ,



Always -> time
Existed -> space

It will lead us to a dead end.


Originally posted by: Freethinker112

or that something came from nothing, and both options sound weird to say the least.



The only way it wouldn't sound weird is if nothing came.
CuckooCutter7 thumbnail
13th Anniversary Thumbnail Dazzler Thumbnail Visit Streak 30 Thumbnail
Posted: 12 years ago

Originally posted by: Freethinker112

Doesn't the bold part translates to existence without creation, which becomes your point #2?

This is what I have been saying all along too. Either something always existed , or that something came from nothing, and both options sound weird to say the least.

P.S. : Not just K's question, that is the logical question that arises when someone answers that God created it all. 😆


i dont think we're saying the same thing. If we postulate God as an Entity for whom the classical laws dont hold, then perhaps there is no need to require that God was created. Creationism is perhaps just a classical state of affairs. :)
K.Universe. thumbnail
13th Anniversary Thumbnail Voyager Thumbnail Engager Level 1 Thumbnail
Posted: 12 years ago

Originally posted by: BirdieNumNum

i dont think we're saying the same thing. If we postulate God as an Entity for whom the classical laws dont hold, then perhaps there is no need to require that God was created. Creationism is perhaps just a classical state of affairs. :)



Brace yourself for Occam's Razor...
CuckooCutter7 thumbnail
13th Anniversary Thumbnail Dazzler Thumbnail Visit Streak 30 Thumbnail
Posted: 12 years ago

Originally posted by: K.Universe.



Brace yourself for Occam's Razor...


i forget what it was in this context, so if someone wants to recap would appreciate it.
Freethinker112 thumbnail
13th Anniversary Thumbnail Sparkler Thumbnail
Posted: 12 years ago

Originally posted by: BirdieNumNum


that's simply awesome buddy, the ability to pass things that are theoretical conjectures as "science stance". 😆Your own reference site further states:

"A simple view is that at whatever point the threshold was crossed and the first chicken was hatched, it had to hatch from an egg"

That seems to make it the egg coming first. Again, if you read the same source you're citing as your "science stance", you'd see there is no definite conclusion. But then maybe you're talking about the kind of science you've invented.😆.


I am not trying to pass anything as anything, simply telling you what I read. And no, I have not invented science. We know that pre chicken era, eggs laying organisms existed. So, when tracing back, it's logical to assume that chicken came from an egg. The genetic change was not possible in the lifetime of the pre-chicken organism.

Of course there's no absolute truth, we are talking about the most probable scenario here.
Freethinker112 thumbnail
13th Anniversary Thumbnail Sparkler Thumbnail
Posted: 12 years ago

Originally posted by: K.Universe.



Always -> time
Existed -> space

It will lead us to a dead end.




The only way it wouldn't sound weird is if nothing came.


Is existence only limited to space time? If so, didn't singularity exist?

If nothing came then how is everything here?
Freethinker112 thumbnail
13th Anniversary Thumbnail Sparkler Thumbnail
Posted: 12 years ago

Originally posted by: BirdieNumNum


i dont think we're saying the same thing. If we postulate God as an Entity for whom the classical laws dont hold, then perhaps there is no need to require that God was created. Creationism is perhaps just a classical state of affairs. :)


Can't we substitute God with the singularity, for which also classical laws don't hold?
Vintage.Wine thumbnail
12th Anniversary Thumbnail Voyager Thumbnail
Posted: 12 years ago

Originally posted by: McNinja


So we are still at the age-old Atheism vs. Religion debate. No wonder you have wine on hand. 😆

The way I see it, whether you believe in a God, in no God, in science...you are practicing blind faith of sorts, isn't it?

Science has one thing that religion does not, the ability to carry out experiments to support their hypothesis and provide proof. Note: Even science makes no claims to prove anything, as scientists admit there is too much of the unknown that can change everything we have thought to be true. There are still things that science cannot explain. The Big Bang theory describes the universe after that moment of creation, and is supported by a lot of evidence, but it does not describe how the singularity came into existence in the first place. How does an event like that happen, randomly? What happened before that moment? It comes down to what you believe yeah... in science the belief of a zero energy universe and in religion the belief of a higher power. Still nothing is proven beyond doubt eh.

Me personally, I'm a bit of an an anomaly it seems. I studied/study science but consider myself to believe in God. To me, the two things together help explain our existence and don't believe in the notion that the two don't overlap. I have no fancy research paper to refer you to..just what makes the most sense to me. Science tries to explain most things, and I have read books from various monotheistic faiths and feel these religions agree with science. There are some things that science has shown us today, that was already written in some of these books.

So I can't argue against each side, but think that both sides really aren't that different from each other. In the end, both sides have faith in one thing or another and it's impossible to win this debate. And I have blabbered on enough, hope my thought process makes some sense.

I do agree with what someone else mentioned, solving chicken or the egg would solve all these riddles.



Well on a second reading of your post ..and this time in a sober state of mind I couldn't find anything that was objectionable / debatable there …In fact the post was a stroke of a genius..considering that you hadn't posted much in this debate before this ..So I kept nodding..incessantly until I realized that I had developed some serious neck muscle spasm … .…And since I don't like Pain Killers ...I resorted to the orthodox way of both suppressing the pain …and expressing my delight by skulling the remaining Jacob's Creek from yesterday ..Hahaha ..How the heck could ya guess it was wine so right? ..You witchy thing …. 😆

Alright on a serious note now ( Despite of a fairly high chance of me pickle fingering) : I don't practice any faith or religion blindfolded ..The debate is about what created the universe …right ? So I suggested that we engraft the best of the both branches of knowledge ( Science / Spirituality ) into an commonly acceptable hypothesis to work the problem ..Rather than worsening that by beating around the bush …As you rightly pointed out ..Many age old religious beliefs ( Most not known to a common person who follows rituals for the heck of it .. ) are becoming science ..The things told by the people that existed 1000s of years ago are being tested and found to be true ..So there is no point writing off something without a due consideration as the conundrum on hands is far too entangled to be solved without surmising a few things and trying to test their validity using science / common sense or whatever that can come handy ..

Its evident that everything is pointing to one fact that what existed before all matter was the energy that existed forever ..So rather than trying to pinpoint its current locale we must first decide whether the energy created things randomly or was the decision conscious ..If we debate this point out ..I'm pretty sure that we would be certain if the creator / destroyer was some sort of Super Power, uncanny to all current science ..ie : The God ….Its prudent and the easiest way to understand things ..before the debate reaches the page # INFINITY ..😆 ..Now doesn't the approach sound Logical ? and Straight as your Hair ? If that girl with sleek hair in your DP is indeed you ...😆

But unfortunately a few including myself have been..trudging all scraggly ways that ll lead us nowhere ..Free is a saglient debater ..But these days I see him as a a physicist turned philanthropist ..😆 who has consigned the debate to us erudite as he discusses other socially important issues ….And at the moment he is the only active atheist here ..So unless he partakes the endeavor further progress looks to me like a buckley's chance ..😛

K and Birdie have been saying the same …..Retrospective searching won't help ..Newer ideas, possibilities need to be explored …And I agree with em wholeheartedly..

Vintu 😛

PS: I forgot to disagree on one of your points..You said you were babbling ..But you weren't ..Sorry but I won't let ya snatch that honor away from me this easily …😆


Related Topics

Top

Stay Connected with IndiaForums!

Be the first to know about the latest news, updates, and exclusive content.

Add to Home Screen!

Install this web app on your iPhone for the best experience. It's easy, just tap and then "Add to Home Screen".