The Start

[Macroman]

I choose to believe it was created by a greater being, Then you don't need to try and search for a scientific reason why it occured, you will search for the reason until energy itself is destroyed. By the greater being.

Isac Newton was wrong .

 

[Shredderbeam]

I choose to believe it was created by a greater being, Then you don't need to try and search for a scientific reason why it occured, you will search for the reason until energy itself is destroyed. By the greater being.

Isac Newton was wrong .

Choosing to believe something does not make it true. The best explanation for a phenomena is the correct one, and explaining it through something else is simply incorrect.

 

[Magingzulu]

Person Opinion:
Sorry if i steal some1 else "words" or something.

If we were created from some massive "BANG" and got smarter and smarter each generation and eveolution because more sophisticated, then how do you explain everything around us? [(might not make sense easy explanation) the thoery's explanation explains that we started out as one celled organism, now if we got smarter than them then we should be smarter than our parents, grandparents, Right? Wrong. In USA new research it shows that kids are getting stupidier and stupidier.]

People are getting stupider and stupider, my quote i made, "Our generation is going to screw over the world"

Endpoint: The Big Bang theory states that we should be getting smarter.... Get we are not.

It was late when i typed it just talk pm me or something if u want...

 

[Shredderbeam]

the thoery's explanation explains that we started out as one celled organism, now if we got smarter than them then we should be smarter than our parents, grandparents, Right?

That is completely wrong.

First, learn the difference between the Big Bang theory and evolutionary theory.

Second, evolution works on the premises of natural selection. Those who cannot pass along their genes are removed from the gene pool. Since humans have effectively stopped evolution due to allowing the weak to pass along their genes, and since evolution takes place over a huge amount of time, your conclusion that children must be smarter than their parents is totally wrong.

Third, as a by the way, evolution is not necessarily geared towards more complex life. It produces life that is best fit to survive, whether it be bigger, smaller, faster, slower, more intelligent, less intelligent, etc. If a small slug can survive more effectively than a gibbon, then the gibbon will be weeded out.

 

[imnotcrazy357]

That is completely wrong.

First, learn the difference between the Big Bang theory and evolutionary theory.

Second, evolution works on the premises of natural selection. Those who cannot pass along their genes are removed from the gene pool. Since humans have effectively stopped evolution due to allowing the weak to pass along their genes, and since evolution takes place over a huge amount of time, your conclusion that children must be smarter than their parents is totally wrong.

Third, as a by the way, evolution is not necessarily geared towards more complex life. It produces life that is best fit to survive, whether it be bigger, smaller, faster, slower, more intelligent, less intelligent, etc. If a small slug can survive more effectively than a gibbon, then the gibbon will be weeded out.

I know this is getting off topic, but I just had to touch this point.

How could something "less intelligent" be more fit to survive?

 

[jebckr]

I know this is getting off topic, but I just had to touch this point.

How could something "less intelligent" be more fit to survive?

We as humans may be "too" intelligent. As a result the human race is getting dumber as we speak as to avoid destroying itself with its own technology.

That theory brought to you by Jeb, and yes I'm serious.

 

[mr n0obie2]

Ahh another philosopher in the sythe community I see. Well Ive learned alot about this in philosophy class. "Everything That Is here has always been here. nothing can come from nothing." (Socrates) This meaning that everything that exists HAS ALWAYS existed. everything is therefore everlasting. But what is everlasting? This is along the same lines as the theories of Space. How far does space go? Is there an end? If there isnt an end to space then what is out there.?but back to the Life" subject. something must have started life and if not then everything that exist has to be everlasting . and if something did create life... then what created the thing that created life??. Confusing right? Well thats about as far as people have gotten along the subject we call "life." I dont think anyone can ever get to the end of this subject because it seems that there is no end.

Well thats that

999 Posts ftw!!!

 

[jebckr]

"One might be asked "How can you prove that a god does not exist?" One can only reply that it is scarcely necessary to disprove what has never been proved." - David A. Spitz

I think that's fitting to all your questions.

As far as the universe goes and ever expanding universe(hence in the past ever contracting) seems to be the most logical idea. Static universe seems to be an outdated theory. Off topic, sorry.

As far as what started it all, who is to say. One could say "what came before that" to theorys of the universes creation, be it big bang, creations, etc.

 

[imnotcrazy357]

We as humans may be "too" intelligent. As a result the human race is getting dumber as we speak as to avoid destroying itself with its own technology.

That theory brought to you by Jeb, and yes I'm serious.

Is this the only occurance? Shredder made it seem that an evolutionary process is losing your inteligence.

So we are too intelligent, so because we are getting dumber, this is because of evolution eveolving off our intelligence in order to help us survive better? It seems more like the schooling systems aren't doing their jobs. It is also that we have so many more distractions then people had, lets say 50 years ago. We as humans are getting dumber because of ourselves, not because it is necessary to survive. This means that it is not natural selection, but our consiquences for our actions. so, my question still stands.


How could something "less intelligent" be more fit to survive?

"One might be asked "How can you prove that a god does not exist?" One can only reply that it is scarcely necessary to disprove what has never been proved." - David A. Spitz

I think that's fitting to all your questions.

Wow! you have easily just given me the dumbest quote that I have ever heard. You realize how this backfires so much agianst yourself. This quote could be applied to any scientific theory. If you believe this quote as true, then you must beleive all theories of the orgin of the universe as false, because none have ever been proven. By this quote evolution also must be false, because it is still a theory, not a fact. If evolution is false, then there must have been a creator of everything.

 

[Shredderbeam]

I know this is getting off topic, but I just had to touch this point.

How could something "less intelligent" be more fit to survive?

In most cases, it wouldn't be. However, something less complex can certainly be more fit. Say that solar output increased so as to make large scale food production impossible, and nothing bigger than, say, an amoeba would survive. In that case, larger, more complex animals would not be able to survive.

We as humans may be "too" intelligent. As a result the human race is getting dumber as we speak as to avoid destroying itself with its own technology.

That theory brought to you by Jeb, and yes I'm serious.

That implies that evolution is an intelligent force, which it is not.

Wow! you have easily just given me the dumbest quote that I have ever heard. You realize how this backfires so much agianst yourself. This quote could be applied to any scientific theory. If you believe this quote as true, then you must beleive all theories of the orgin of the universe as false, because none have ever been proven. By this quote evolution also must be false, because it is still a theory, not a fact. If evolution is false, then there must have been a creator of everything.

There is a difference between a theory and an idea based from mythology.

 

[RS2Sms]

Schredder is it not impossible for something to always have existed?

God is not "something", god is bigger than what we could ever imagine him to be. Our brains have its boundaries for thinking, and that is why we cannot answer the questions, such as how he was created, what he is, how he looks and how he have always existed.

Basically I just wanna say that, the basic laws of this universe are there for gods creations, and not actully for himself.

After reading that post about how we are not able to understand God in full capability i gotta admit i agree with him.

In MY religion (orthodox) Im not sure if catholics have the same story or not but here it goes. The burning bush appears to Moses proclaiming God is talking through it etc etc. Moses quotes " Show yourself to me ", The bush or God replies saying "Man can not see me nor know me in my full power"..

I dont know the exact sayings but he pretty much says that if Man see's God in his full power the man/woman will die..My guess is because the human brain can not handle such an ultimate bieng

I can find the exact verse's for you if you like.

 

[Shredderbeam]

After reading that post about how we are not able to understand God in full capability i gotta admit i agree with him.

Oh, if God exists, we can understand him. Do you suggest that God would transcend logic?

In MY religion (orthodox) Im not sure if catholics have the same story or not but here it goes. The burning bush appears to Moses proclaiming God is talking through it etc etc. Moses quotes " Show yourself to me ", The bush or God replies saying "Man can not see me nor know me in my full power"..

Do you think that that was actually God talking to a man in the form of a burning bush, or a piece of common mythology from that area that tried to show how hard to understand the universe was at that time?

 

[jebckr]

Wow! you have easily just given me the dumbest quote that I have ever heard. You realize how this backfires so much agianst yourself. This quote could be applied to any scientific theory. If you believe this quote as true, then you must beleive all theories of the orgin of the universe as false, because none have ever been proven. By this quote evolution also must be false, because it is still a theory, not a fact. If evolution is false, then there must have been a creator of everything.

But how could their be a creator of everything as it can't be proven...we could go in circles all day. My point was there is more evidence, atleast in my mind, backing ideas such as evolution and the big bang. Dumbest quote you've ever heard? I think not.

 

[imnotcrazy357]

But how could their be a creator of everything as it can't be proven...we could go in circles all day. My point was there is more evidence, atleast in my mind, backing ideas such as evolution and the big bang. Dumbest quote you've ever heard? I think not.

circles all day is fine with me. With this quote, evidence means nothing. It is proven facts. Theories are not facts. We tie. No winner no loser.

 

[Shredderbeam]

To not be able to prove one theory over another 100% does not mean that they are completely equal. I cannot prove that Santa Claus does not exist, yet that does not mean that opposing sides of the argument are completely equal, with no side prevailing.

 

[imnotcrazy357]

To not be able to prove one theory over another 100% does not mean that they are completely equal. I cannot prove that Santa Claus does not exist, yet that does not mean that opposing sides of the argument are completely equal, with no side prevailing.

I was pertaining to the quote, and the quote only, no logic, but the quote.

 

[Le_Dark_Lord]

You need to understand that the logic of humans, most of the time, can only go as far as what they have seen.
So walking up to a random catholic and saying, "Hey, what created god?" would utterly confuse them, even if you did give them preparation for the question, the average person would not be able to give an answer because they have not seen what created god, they have no idea what could have created god, and like me, they get very confused when reading shredderbeams intelligent posts.

I cannot prove that Santa Claus does not exist

Would a quote from my mother, confessing she put presents under the christmas tree every night, satisfy you?


For the orthodox guy, Yes, catholicism has that teaching in the "Old Testament" which i believe is similar to that of the Qu'Ran or whatever..

 

[jebckr]

I was pertaining to the quote, and the quote only, no logic, but the quote.

Ok forget the quote...I try to post a quote that I think applies and there's always someone. Despite you saying your argument is towards the quote alone, shredder still made the point i was getting at. Not being able to prove one theory 100% dosn't make it equal with another idea.

 

[mcnuggetman]

chemical reaction and adaptation to environment does that work?

 

[Fouisgras]

not sure on that one but i think e=mc(squared) is about something like energy can not be created nor destroyed... thus proving "something" or "someone" created everything.. .

You are a fucking idiot. Lol. Posting privledges should be taken away, forever.