Why i belive in a higher power....

[SlaveOfTheBeast]

Think about it....
Where did it all come from?
The universe, everything, the materials in space....
The basis of everything...
People say the earth was from materials, and then the scientist try to explain where that stuff came from....so on and so on....

Ok...
So would you rather believe:
1. Everything was just there and BAM earth, planets, everything was just there...

2. There is a greater power who is eternal and forever will be, and he created the universe...


I go with option 2.

 

[dpunk]

1, but with some variation. I don't know whether the big bang actually occurred, and I doubt anyone will for a long time, if ever. Some scientists are starting to think that there are "multiverses" which would further complicate things. This topic is one of the main reasons people still hold onto religion. Myths were created in all civilizations to explain what people couldn't. Humans have a natural tendency to want to feel like they know everything, and the concept of a God fits in perfectly with that nature. Also, death plays an important role. What makes humans different from every other animal is that we know that we are going to die, and want to avoid it. Our egos are so huge that we think since we are the most intelligent species on the planet, that we have some higher purpose. Once science can explain how everything came to be, and even what happens when we die, the world will truly be free of mythology, and move on to more important things.

 

[SlaveOfTheBeast]

Well, i meant where did those "multi universes" come from?

See, that's what i'm trying to point out, no one can just keep saying they were formed by something else.....where did that come from...?

If the universe and all the other ones, and all this science stuff is true, what exactly do YOU think happens when we die, dpunk?


Edit: What is the origin of electrons, protons, and all quantum matter? Where did this matter come from? How did we end up with these nice building blocks called atoms? Why are there approximately 100 unique atoms (elements) in the universe and not say millions or only one? It all seems to ordered and convenient.

Energy/matter is never created or destroyed, only transformed (1st Law of Thermodynamics). It would seem to be consciousness is a form of or analogous to a type of energy and therefore it is reasonable to think it cannot be destroyed and at most, only change form. The immortality of the soul may be the spiritual equivalent of the conservation of energy.

 

[Live]

I would rather stick to the big bang theory.

 

[Shadow Ninja]

yo slaveofthebeast, i agree with you(i myself a christain), Where did all This come from???I refuse to believe that it just popped up out of no where.I mean look at all the food, cocanuts have three slot things to poke holes in for us to drink...who do you think did that for us? and not just cocanuts, alot more things that were made for us to use.

 

[SlaveOfTheBeast]

yo slaveofthebeast, i agree with you(i myself a christain), Where did all This come from???I refuse to believe that it just popped up out of no where.I mean look at all the food, cocanuts have three slot things to poke holes in for us to drink...who do you think did that for us? and not just cocanuts, alot more things that were made for us to use.

Yes, looking at nature...it's amazing. I refuse to belive it all was just BAM! There.
And the simplicity and perfect balance of nature and the uses for it, i stand amazed by creation.

And, as evolution states, it all started with one, ONE cell. So long ago.

I ask you this, why now, with all our technology, and "superior knowledge", why can't we make ONE living cell?

No replys....

 

[irrelevant]

God.

Our god.

Respect him, quit this nonsence.

 

[SlaveOfTheBeast]

What do you mean?
I'm simple discussing why i believe in god.

 

[Shredderbeam]

Think about it....
Where did it all come from?
The universe, everything, the materials in space....
The basis of everything...
People say the earth was from materials, and then the scientist try to explain where that stuff came from....so on and so on....

Ok...
So would you rather believe:
1. Everything was just there and BAM earth, planets, everything was just there...

2. There is a greater power who is eternal and forever will be, and he created the universe...


I go with option 2.

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring."
-- Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World

Where did everything come from? The Big Bang.
[/FONT]

 

[Pimpinballa]

Its simple. God. God created everything. Believe in one. Ohh god I hope I didn't get to religious there.

 

[SlaveOfTheBeast]

Its simple. God. God created everything. Believe in one. Ohh god I hope I didn't get to religious there.

It's not wrong to get religious. God is the ONLY answerer in this seemingly impossible problem.

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring."
-- Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World

Where did everything come from? The Big Bang.
[/FONT]

Delusion?
A higher power creating this perfectly working universe....
Delusion?


What i call delusion is believing that some big big mass of energy came forth and BAM, all the materials for life, the earth, the distance between planets, sun, gravity, and atmospheres on planets, just came to be. If the gravity/pull/distance from the sun/ of earth was off a little bit, there would be no life on earth. And believing that the millions of conditions that make life and earth, and this galaxy possible....came about by a big "bang."
For god's sake, with all out technology and knowledge, NO ONE can make one living cell....and i think it is hard to picture how a single self-replicating cell could have come about. Taking this one step further, how would one cell replicate itself into the different cell types required in a multi-cellular organism. These cells have to be made in the right sequence and have to go in the right spatial location (eg. form a brain in the head only) and have to be able to regulate the size (cells have to know when to stop producing more cells) and shape (cells have to know how to orient themselves spatially so that the correct shape results).
How probable is it that sexual reproduction started out of nowhere? It seems so unlikely even considering there were so many organisms replicating to have started about by chance. In the most probable scenario, one organism would have to have produced both male and female offspring at about the same time and it is too hard to imagine this happening by mere chance.When looking for evidence of how a species might have come about through evolution, one often sees small steps (which only explain micro-evolution) and large jumps with nothing in between (which are too large to be explained by evolution since the intermediate steps are not found). These intermediate forms predicted by evolution are 'missing'.

The fossil record does not show the gradual change from one species into the next that we would expect from the theory of evolution. These intermediate varieties are no where to be found! {Darwin himself noted, "The number of intermediary varieties, which have formerly existed on the earth, (must) be truly enormous...Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graded organic chain; and this, perhaps is the most obvious and gravest objection which can be urged against my theory"}.

Wana believe in evolution/big bang?

That's what i call delusion.

And so i assume you atheist's just believe the universe was and always will be?
You have a god of your own.....

 

[Shredderbeam]

It's not wrong to get religious. God is the ONLY answerer in this seemingly impossible problem.

I find the Big Bang to be an equally serviceable answer.

 

[SlaveOfTheBeast]

I find the Big Bang to be an equally serviceable answer.

Explain against my arguments in the post above yours.

 

[Shredderbeam]

Delusion?
A higher power creating this perfectly working universe....
Delusion?

Yes, a delusion. You are ignoring the vast body of evidence that indicates otherwise.

What i call delusion is believing that some big big mass of energy came forth and BAM, all the materials for life, the earth, the distance between planets, sun, gravity, and atmospheres on planets, just came to be. If the gravity/pull/distance from the sun/ of earth was off a little bit, there would be no life on earth. And believing that the millions of conditions that make life and earth, and this galaxy possible....came about by a big "bang."

If any of these conditions were off, yes, there would be no life as we know it. Life is extremely resilient, and can appear wherever there is an opportunity.

For god's sake, with all out technology and knowledge, NO ONE can make one living cell....

A cell is incredibly complicated. Obviously, technology is limited, and some 100 years after the curve of learning increased exponentially, I would not expect people to be able to create a cell.

and i think it is hard to picture how a single self-replicating cell could have come about. Taking this one step further, how would one cell replicate itself into the different cell types required in a multi-cellular organism.

Life came about after certain proteins in the early Earth replicated themselves. It was a survival advantage to coat themselves in a covering, so they did this, and there you go: Primitive cells.

These cells have to be made in the right sequence and have to go in the right spatial location (eg. form a brain in the head only) and have to be able to regulate the size (cells have to know when to stop producing more cells) and shape (cells have to know how to orient themselves spatially so that the correct shape results).

Yes. All the product of millions of years of evolution. By the way, recent studies in the areas of self-organization and chaos theory show that this is not improbable.

How probable is it that sexual reproduction started out of nowhere? It seems so unlikely even considering there were so many organisms replicating to have started about by chance.

Sexual reproduction has a massive advantage over asexual reproduction: More mutations occur, therefore change occurs faster.

In the most probable scenario, one organism would have to have produced both male and female offspring at about the same time and it is too hard to imagine this happening by mere chance.

It actually began when cells began swapping genetic material with each other through little bubbles of lipids.

When looking for evidence of how a species might have come about through evolution, one often sees small steps (which only explain micro-evolution) and large jumps with nothing in between (which are too large to be explained by evolution since the intermediate steps are not found). These intermediate forms predicted by evolution are 'missing'.

Actually, there really aren't any missing links (a surprise, given how incredibly difficult it is to create a fossil). Can you give an example?

The fossil record does not show the gradual change from one species into the next that we would expect from the theory of evolution.

In most cases, large changes in an organism happen relatively quickly, during a time of upheaval. Usually, the conditions do not change for a very long time afterwards, so there is no need to evolve.

That's what i call delusion.

I still feel that a delusion is accepting a human-minded super-being floating around outside the universe, creating us for no discernible reason.

And so i assume you atheist's just believe the universe was and always will be?

No, I feel that it began 13.7 billion year ago, and it will never end (the rate of expansion is accelerating).

You have a god of your own.....

If that god is reason, logic, and science, then yes, we do.

 

[SlaveOfTheBeast]

Yes, a delusion. You are ignoring the vast body of evidence that indicates otherwise.

What evidence? Proof?

If any of these conditions were off, yes, there would be no life as we know it. Life is extremely resilient, and can appear wherever there is an opportunity.

So, all these conditions happened by chance?
Or do you go with the "chaos theory".
I think the chaos theory is bullshit. Look at the earth for example. It started...no wars...no pollution...now look at earth. War, massive death, pollution.....it has progressively gotten WORSE.

A cell is incredibly complicated. Obviously, technology is limited, and some 100 years after the curve of learning increased exponentially, I would not expect people to be able to create a cell.

But it was made by random chance?

Life came about after certain proteins in the early Earth replicated themselves. It was a survival advantage to coat themselves in a covering, so they did this, and there you go: Primitive cells.

Even if one is to conclude that macro-evolution occurs as stated in the theory of evolution, it is only the appearance on the surface that it does. More detailed investigation should lead one to believe that for it to be an adequate explanation, somehow, genetic changes essentially equivalent to miracles are taking place every time macro-evolution occurs. There is no substantial evidence to support the viewpoint that a cumulative series of mutations, each favoured by natural selection, is the explanation. A possible explanation might be that an external intelligent Designer is at work and directs these 'miracles' to happen (ie. creation of new species).

Yes. All the product of millions of years of evolution. By the way, recent studies in the areas of self-organization and chaos theory show that this is not improbable.

Evolution has almost no proof along with it.There are two parts to the theory of evolution by natural selection: (1) that species change through random mutation and natural selection over time to form new complex structures and species over many generations and (2) that species evolve within a species and better adapt to their environment. Because everyone accepts (2), then many who believe (1) and (2), put forward (2) as their evidence to convince us that the theory of evolution as a whole is the best explanation for life on earth as it exists today. This is being deceptive because (2) can be true even if (1) is not. There is only evidence for (1) where there is a slight change to a new but very closely related species (speciation). The rest is pure speculation and unproveable extrapolation and in fact is a leap of faith. There is no doubt natural selection plays a part in evolution but there seems to be something else (some other mechanism) at play which we have not yet discovered. That in my opinion takes more faith than higher design.

Sexual reproduction has a massive advantage over asexual reproduction: More mutations occur, therefore change occurs faster.

That's why all humans are basically the same in appearance. Let me remind you all mutations that have happened in humans have been of a NEGATIVE affect.

It actually began when cells began swapping genetic material with each other through little bubbles of lipids.

As you say, it started with ONE cell....so it must be asexual, right?

Actually, there really aren't any missing links (a surprise, given how incredibly difficult it is to create a fossil). Can you give an example?

As i said, there are have been no missing links found. We have found fossils from FOREVER ago. And some from very recently....
No missing links in between. I wonder why the call it missing links...

In most cases, large changes in an organism happen relatively quickly, during a time of upheaval. Usually, the conditions do not change for a very long time afterwards, so there is no need to evolve.

Most scientist's say evolution works by accumulating small genetic changes. Large jumps are too improbable and look more like miracles. Each gene would have to be moulded one small step at a time. However, if a gene (and thus the organism) can tolerate little or no change, having a line of evolutionary predecessors is very unlikely.

I still feel that a delusion is accepting a human-minded super-being floating around outside the universe, creating us for no discernible reason.

I, nor no one, can answerer that.

No, I feel that it began 13.7 billion year ago, and it will never end (the rate of expansion is accelerating).

"From nothing, can come nothing."

If that god is reason, logic, and science, then yes, we do.

 

[Shredderbeam]

What evidence? Proof?

Google "evidence for evolution", and "evidence against creationism".

So, all these conditions happened by chance?
Or do you go with the "chaos theory".
I think the chaos theory is bullshit. Look at the earth for example. It started...no wars...no pollution...now look at earth. War, massive death, pollution.....it has progressively gotten WORSE.

They did happen by chance, if there was no intelligence making the decisions.

Worse? By whose standards? The Earth today is the best it has been at any part during history. Yes, there have been wars that have claimed tens of millions of lives, but the bigger they are, the harder they fall. This is actually the best time to be alive, in terms of comforts and life span.

But it was made by random chance?

Sort of. You see, life tries to survive. It makes every effort on its part to stay alive.

Given the approximately one billion years that life had to first develop, I would say that chance is a fair argument to make.

Even if one is to conclude that macro-evolution occurs as stated in the theory of evolution, it is only the appearance on the surface that it does. More detailed investigation should lead one to believe that for it to be an adequate explanation, somehow, genetic changes essentially equivalent to miracles are taking place every time macro-evolution occurs. There is no substantial evidence to support the viewpoint that a cumulative series of mutations, each favoured by natural selection, is the explanation. A possible explanation might be that an external intelligent Designer is at work and directs these 'miracles' to happen (ie. creation of new species).

Actually, all life on Earth is amazingly similar. Humans and single-celled organisms share about 90% of the same DNA, which leads us to the conclusion that a small genetic change can make a large physical difference.

Evolution has almost no proof along with it.There are two parts to the theory of evolution by natural selection: (1) that species change through random mutation and natural selection over time to form new complex structures and species over many generations and (2) that species evolve within a species and better adapt to their environment. Because everyone accepts (2), then many who believe (1) and (2), put forward (2) as their evidence to convince us that the theory of evolution as a whole is the best explanation for life on earth as it exists today. This is being deceptive because (2) can be true even if (1) is not. There is only evidence for (1) where there is a slight change to a new but very closely related species (speciation). The rest is pure speculation and unproveable extrapolation and in fact is a leap of faith. There is no doubt natural selection plays a part in evolution but there seems to be something else (some other mechanism) at play which we have not yet discovered. That in my opinion takes more faith than higher design.

It is not a leap of faith to assume that trends continue. When you see very small changes happening in organisms, it is natural to assume that, over millions of years, these changes will compound to create a new organism.

That's why all humans are basically the same in appearance. Let me remind you all mutations that have happened in humans have been of a NEGATIVE affect.

We look the same because we interbreed so much.

When I say faster, I mean on a scale of millions of years versus hundreds of millions of years for change to occur.

All mutations? What about the opposable thumb?

As you say, it started with ONE cell....so it must be asexual, right?

In the beginning, yes, it was asexual. However, the cell that could reproduce sexually was at a massive advantage.

As i said, there are have been no missing links found. We have found fossils from FOREVER ago. And some from very recently....
No missing links in between. I wonder why the call it missing links...

Au contraire, there have been missing links found.

Also, a species tends to stay unevolved unless it needs to evolve. When it needs to, it does so extremely quickly, for the ones that do so slowly die out.

Most scientist's say evolution works by accumulating small genetic changes. Large jumps are too improbable and look more like miracles. Each gene would have to be moulded one small step at a time. However, if a gene (and thus the organism) can tolerate little or no change, having a line of evolutionary predecessors is very unlikely.

Yes, in most cases, mutations end up putting the animal at a disadvantage. However, in extremely few, they put it at an advantage.

From nothing, can come nothing."

Indeed. Science has not yet been able to answer why we are all here, so this is where it turns to philosophy/religion

 

[Magics]

I will be going with option 1 although it wasen't really like that there was a "BIG BANG"

 

[Awezum]

Um, option 1, then i duno lol, its hard..
Ok.. im not sure, but i'd stick to number 1 untill proved to believe otherwise. Sorreh

 

[SlaveOfTheBeast]

Google "evidence for evolution", and "evidence against creationism".

Ahaha, i look at that stuff basically all day, and i have found no PROOF.

They did happen by chance, if there was no intelligence making the decisions.

Chance simply cannot create the conditions that are found in out universe.

Worse? By whose standards? The Earth today is the best it has been at any part during history. Yes, there have been wars that have claimed tens of millions of lives, but the bigger they are, the harder they fall. This is actually the best time to be alive, in terms of comforts and life span.

Ah, but not on a scale of the planets "health". The natural conditions have gotten steadily worse.

Sort of. You see, life tries to survive. It makes every effort on its part to stay alive.

I agree.

Given the approximately one billion years that life had to first develop, I would say that chance is a fair argument to make.

Still, look at the thousands upon thousands of widely diverse species. Shouldn't one cell simply make copies of it's self? As it all started with one cell, correct? Asexual reproduction is a cell making an exact copy of it's self. That doesn't explain the thousands of species does it? And, the first life...evolved...right? Why must it evolve into a sloth? Or say, an ant? Adaption? There are things that have no apparent pour purpose on earth. And do NOT flourish, and sometimes where they live is to THE NEGATIVE AFFECT of their health. That goes against the root beliefs of evolution.

Actually, all life on Earth is amazingly similar. Humans and single-celled organisms share about 90% of the same DNA, which leads us to the conclusion that a small genetic change can make a large physical difference.

We share 98% (after accounting for variations within the species) of the same DNA as chimpanzees. Yet our advanced consciousness (animals are aware and humans are aware that we are aware) it seems to me should be at least 2% of the DNA to be fully accounted for by genetics alone. In fact, differences other than consciousness are what probably account for this 2% difference. Is it likely that consciousness would require hardly any DNA for it?

It is not a leap of faith to assume that trends continue. When you see very small changes happening in organisms, it is natural to assume that, over millions of years, these changes will compound to create a new organism.

I see no change looking to the first human records to present day.

We look the same because we interbreed so much.

When I say faster, I mean on a scale of millions of years versus hundreds of millions of years for change to occur.

All mutations? What about the opposable thumb?

1 example of a positive mutation. A RARE one. 99% are bad...makes evolution look like the odd one out..

In the beginning, yes, it was asexual. However, the cell that could reproduce sexually was at a massive advantage.

Let me put it this way. After a cell is reproduced asexually, it is an exact copy. Why would it not do the same as it's parent, and reproduce asexually?

Au contraire, there have been missing links found.
Also, a species tends to stay unevolved unless it needs to evolve. When it needs to, it does so extremely quickly, for the ones that do so slowly die out.

Adaption is not evolution.

Yes, in most cases, mutations end up putting the animal at a disadvantage. However, in extremely few, they put it at an advantage.

But evolution is supposed to constantly improve organism's.
My point exactly.

Indeed. Science has not yet been able to answer why we are all here, so this is where it turns to philosophy/religion

And science never will.


Another point i would like to bring up....

Vicki told Dr. Ring she found herself floating above her body in the emergency room of a hospital following an automobile accident. She was aware of being up near the ceiling watching a male doctor and a female nurse working on her body, which she viewed from her elevated position. Vicki has a clear recollection of how she came to the realization that this was her own body below her. The following is her experience.

I knew it was me ... I was pretty thin then. I was quite tall and thin at that point. And I recognized at first that it was a body, but I didn't even know that it was mine initially.

Then I perceived that I was up on the ceiling, and I thought, "Well, that's kind of weird. What am I doing up here?"
I thought, "Well, this must be me. Am I dead? ..."

I just briefly saw this body, and ... I knew that it was mine because I wasn't in mine.

In addition, she was able to note certain further identifying features indicating that the body she was observing was certainly her own.

I think I was wearing the plain gold band on my right ring finger and my father's wedding ring next to it. But my wedding ring I definitely saw ... That was the one I noticed the most because it's most unusual. It has orange blossoms on the corners of it.

There is something extremely remarkable and provocative about Vicki's recollection of these visual impressions, as a subsequent comment of hers implied.

"This was," she said, "the only time I could ever relate to seeing and to what light was, because I experienced it."

Seems amazing, considering she was blind....since birth.

 

[Shredderbeam]

Ahaha, i look at that stuff basically all day, and i have found no PROOF.

You cannot prove either one. Actually, you cannot prove anything in the real world.

Chance simply cannot create the conditions that are found in out universe.

It can, and it does.

Ah, but not on a scale of the planets "health". The natural conditions have gotten steadily worse.

What makes you think that?

Still, look at the thousands upon thousands of widely diverse species. Shouldn't one cell simply make copies of it's self? As it all started with one cell, correct? Asexual reproduction is a cell making an exact copy of it's self. That doesn't explain the thousands of species does it? And, the first life...evolved...right? Why must it evolve into a sloth? Or say, an ant? Adaption? There are things that have no apparent pour purpose on earth. And do NOT flourish, and sometimes where they live is to THE NEGATIVE AFFECT of their health. That goes against the root beliefs of evolution.

Life evolves into species that can exploit a niche in the environment.

Evolution, being what it is, cannot think through what would be best for the environment. If an individual is more able to survive in an environment, it will have a greater chance of passing on its genes, thus propagating its own kind.

We share 98% (after accounting for variations within the species) of the same DNA as chimpanzees. Yet our advanced consciousness (animals are aware and humans are aware that we are aware) it seems to me should be at least 2% of the DNA to be fully accounted for by genetics alone. In fact, differences other than consciousness are what probably account for this 2% difference. Is it likely that consciousness would require hardly any DNA for it?

Consciousness arises from the interactions of trillions of cells in our body, mainly our brain. It is nothing more than an illusion that has come to be aware of itself.

I see no change looking to the first human records to present day.

If you're talking about Homo Sapiens Sapiens, then yes, you are correct, because this species has only lived for about 250,000 years. That is not enough time for an entirely new species to develop.

1 example of a positive mutation. A RARE one. 99% are bad...makes evolution look like the odd one out..

Alright. A lion is born with a natural tendency towards increased muscle density. It is therefore faster, stronger, and better able to feed, thus survive, and thus reproduce, spreading its genes.

Or, a flatworm is formed with some slightly light-sensitive cells in its head (the beginnings of an eye). It is able to tell when larger creatures are near it that would possibly consume it, and is able to flee, increasing its chances of passing on the "eye" genes.

Let me put it this way. After a cell is reproduced asexually, it is an exact copy. Why would it not do the same as it's parent, and reproduce asexually?

That's what cells did for about two billion years. However, slight variations in its environment caused it to be able to reproduce in slightly different ways.

Adaption is not evolution.

It is, on a small scale.

But evolution is supposed to constantly improve organism's.
My point exactly.

By its very nature, evolution will produce mostly useless mutations, however, once in a while, it will produce a useful mutation.

And science never will.

Consider what we knew about the world 100 years ago.

Consider what we knew 20 years ago.

Every day, our knowledge multiplies at an unbelievable pace. One day, we will finally answer that question.

Seems amazing, considering she was blind....since birth.

Personal experiences cannot be accepted as proof. Some people have experiences that there show them a holy place, others have experiences that indicate nothing.

There are any explanations, perhaps she was lying, in tune with the energy of the universe, she really did leave her body, who knows?