| Author | Message | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 379 Registered: 6-2001 |
Mitch: You're right its a 1/3 of the way down the entire thread. great site. | ||
| Mitch Alsup (Mitch_alsup)
New member Username: Mitch_alsup Post Number: 17 Registered: 4-2002 |
Yes, I did, its about 1/3rd of the way down. But for those who can't navigate-- http://www.stcloudstate.edu/~lesikar/einstein | ||
| Ken (Allyn)
Member Username: Allyn Post Number: 328 Registered: 10-2001 |
Mitch; re your final statement. By definition, belief in God would be an article of faith, not a scientific endeavor. A conscience creator would be just a very intelligent, advanced alien species. If we ever create life in a laboratory (which we may have done with recombinent DNA stuff) we are indeed a creator but not a God (or are we?). I take the term God to imply some supernatural aspect, not a 'normal' organic being. My personal belief in God is still not well defined. I am sure if our universe was created by a conscience act, it was from a being outside our universe. I expect that being (or beings) are still outside our universe. Perhaps our creation is an experiment to determine the nature of a physical reality. But I would still not call this creator a God. Or, I could also belive our universe was created by a natural, scientific process that we still do not entirely understand. I actually find that somehow disappointing since we humans like "purpose" in life, but it seems to me is more likely than a conscience creator. For the believers in a specific God in our universe, I find it insulting to other religious people to have the arrogance that your God is the true God and the others are false. I would think there is one, true God that you all call by different names and worship with different rituals. Trying to claim your concept of Him is correct and the others are misguided seems to me to be inconsistent at the least, and more akin to very evil you profess to reject. | ||
| Ken (Allyn)
Member Username: Allyn Post Number: 327 Registered: 10-2001 |
Mitch, I like everything you say; we are of similar minds. I was not aware of the experiment you mentioned. It would seem to add many new questions and change a lot of old notions. In my limited knowledge it doesn't make sense it could be true so I have some catching up to do! Do you have any handy web sites that descibe this experiment? | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 376 Registered: 6-2001 |
Mitch: You didn't give me the address for the site! Thanks in advance. Art | ||
| Mitch Alsup (Mitch_alsup)
New member Username: Mitch_alsup Post Number: 15 Registered: 4-2002 |
arthur chambers (Art355): the quote was from the web site about 10 places down on the list. There are hundreds more--as the web site is devoted to the debu8nking of Einstein being a believer in God. Take it with the requisite amount of sodium chloride. I can also provide web sites for to opposite point of view--but thats a job for the other side. Ernie Bonilla (Ernie) has just reitterated Pascal's wager (in modified form). Here he postualtes that if you don't know, you might as well believe because what do you have to loose. Well, Ernie, what you have to loose is your integrety. If one believes not (like I do), then one would be a fool to take a societal postion on the believing side, it would display lack of sincerity, a wavering of memtal position, and be untrue to youreslf/myself simultaneously. There is no evidence of any extra-natural entities, events, or other things. I find it so unnatural that the very same people that believe in one god or another disbelieve in the other gods. When you understand why you don't believe in Odin, Thor, Mythras, Shiva,... you will understand why I don't believe in your god either--evidence! You have provided none. You see, science operates under the premmis that stuff either exists or it does not. If it exists, it leave evidence, if it does not it does not. Science has developed a series of models for the real world. These models are capable of predicting the behavior of just about anything the scientists can measure. The missing elements are beeing investigated. When a new theory comes along that is a better representation of reality, it is quickly adopted. The interesting thing about this process is that the older theories STILL describe (to high precision) events on the human scale of observability. In other words, Quantum mechanics suplanted Newtonian Physics, but Newtonian Physics can still represent all physics/mechanics that are not moving very fast. Quantum Chromodynamics has (similarly) suplanted Quantum mechanics, but quantum mechanics is still used when access to the sub-neucular size is not necessary. These theories have been able to postulate reasonoable means for the emersion of the Big Bang from the quantum vaccuum, describe the inflationary event that gave our universe a very flat topology, and ultimately lead to life on earth. All of the scientific theories are in agreement--no god is required to describe the state of the universe that we currently find ourselves. Christ was crucified. Indeed--he stayed dead too. You see the postualte that he returned and the assended to sit on the right hand side of god is insignificantly different from "he ain't here anymore" i.e. dead. There is no evidence to the contray. Ken (Allyn) :An experiment just a couple of months ago resulted in the transimssion of useful information at 1500 times the speed of light. This was reported in a revied scientific journal. The experiment consisted of sending a pair of photons emitted for an atomic decay that are coupled in a specific way. The two photons were emitted into two fiber optic cables (several killometers long and different length). By observing the spin of one photon the experimenters found the spin of the other coupled photon, then measured it. They used this to imply Not that they could send information faster than light, but to measure how much faster information could travel faster the speed of light. All: yes I understand what I do not know. In fact I understand well enough that I should not postulate thing into existance that are not supported by evidence. God fits into this understanding. | ||
| Ken (Allyn)
Member Username: Allyn Post Number: 326 Registered: 10-2001 |
Tim: In vacuums its a different story. Information can be transmitted faster than light i think because i remeber an article where when two particles are spinning, and you slow one down the other slows down instantaneously. I think the particles were positrons. This would lead one to beleive that it is possible for things to go faster than light (or the existance of wormholes) You have the right experiment but the wrong conclusion. This experiment, and others like it, show that two 'bonded' particles have an opposite spin and when you determine the spin on one, the other instantaniously assumes the opposite spin, even if they are millions of light years apart. This has been proven in some complicated experiments. BUT...the point is that while 'something' is moving at zero time across great distances "NO INFORMATION USEFUL TO ANYONE CAN TRAVEL FASTER THAN LIGHT". This is a key point in the nature of our universe, and a fundemental part of string theory. We do see some things sub atomic particles that seem to travel faster than light but there is no way they can carry any 'message' or any information. In the same way, the cosmic strings that are the basis for reality 'seem' to be 100% information; they *seem* to have no physical reality at all. The implications of this, to me, is mind boggeling! There is no "stuff" making up the building blocks of our physical reality! It's all just vibrational frequencies. I call it 'God's Dream' although it's not the God in the Bible, obviously, or any other religious primmer. It seems likely, if this current theory holds up, that something about our universe prohibits information travel faster than light in spite of the fact 'something' seems to be able to bridge the expanse of the universe with no time elapsing. | ||
| magoo (Magoo)
Intermediate Member Username: Magoo Post Number: 2409 Registered: 2-2001 |
Ernie, There is no one here who should feel bad about his input or his belief. It is good to question. If no one questioned and everyone followed everthing that was put before them and there was no question or reasoning about anything we wouldn't be here today. We wouldn't be in a Democracy. I am sure the other guys respect your belief as I do but we haven't been able to accept it as you have. I spent my life going to church and studied for the ministry. I was ready for seminary and decided that this was not for me. There were too many questions I had to have answered before I could commit myself to lead other people and tell them what I did or did not believe. The very thing that made me question was the study of the Christian religion. There were contradictions and I couldn't accept it with out question. As the religion says, "Accept it with the faith of a little child and you will find the way." Sorry I couldn't do that when I was in college and I still can't do it now. But I do respect your beliefs and how you find peace within it. You are much more content then those of us who question but then there are differences in people. Doesn't mean we are bad people and it doesn't mean we are going to hell. To some degree, I wish I didn't have "to doubt" but it is in my soul, as "no doubt" is in your soul. BRGDS Magoo | ||
| Ernie Bonilla (Ernie)
Member Username: Ernie Post Number: 279 Registered: 11-2001 |
My belief has brought me proof. I am sad you don't believe, and wish that you would. If you do not acknowledge GOD, when the time comes He will not acknowledge you. But my defending my faith only pushes you farther away. If somehow it is prove it too you, I hope your pride will not prevent you from accepting the truth. I don't say these things to embarase or belittle you. The things I said before where just to show how little we truely know. Even you understand how little you know. Christ was crucified. GOD Bless You Ernie | ||
| magoo (Magoo)
Intermediate Member Username: Magoo Post Number: 2371 Registered: 2-2001 |
Art and Ken, Just so we are on the same page here, I was not saying that there is less religion in our country today, I was saying as Art said that the teachings of Christ "were great". And yes Art people are interpreting their religion as they want to see it not how it was meant to be. BRGDS | ||
| Edward G. Salla (350hpmondial)
Junior Member Username: 350hpmondial Post Number: 71 Registered: 2-2002 |
Hummmmmmmmmmmmm, OK Mitch. I think I am begining to understand your point of view. And, it is valid from a scientific standpoint. I guess,,,,,, to believe in "magic" or what is "unseen." Or in an "exotic form of entity". Well,,,,, from a scientific standpoint, is full on loony. (am I getting warmer?) (You know Mitch, even my own Bible instructs me that it is better to be innocent of any knowledge of such things. Like a child.) So, as I am sitting here watching the time trials for the Long Beach GP, I am finally at a loss for words. (A rare state indeed for me, just ask my friends,,, and their bleeding ears. ha ha) I guess the best example of this would be that when you make love to your wife, when you really make a connection, is it magic? Unlike, say a one nighter with some bimbo you met in some biker bar. (Not that you have, or I have, well maybe once "my friend did", when he was in the Navy, and drunk, and it wasn't magical,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, at all. In fact, he said it was pretty much a bummer. But, I guess, the point is, I have faith. It's not scientific,,,,,, then again, neither is true love. chat back, | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 373 Registered: 6-2001 |
Mitch: Loved the quote. Do you have the source, I'd like to be able to reference this with a few friends of mine who use Einstein when discussing God. | ||
| Tim N (Timn88)
Member Username: Timn88 Post Number: 736 Registered: 6-2001 |
Things we know of move faster than light. An example of this are electrons underwater in powerplants. They move faster than light does in water. In vacuums its a different story. Information can be transmitted faster than light i think because i remeber an article where when two particles are spinning, and you slow one down the other slows down instantaneously. I think the particles were positrons. This would lead one to beleive that it is possible for things to go faster than light (or the existance of wormholes) | ||
| Mitch Alsup (Mitch_alsup)
New member Username: Mitch_alsup Post Number: 14 Registered: 4-2002 |
Edward G. Salla (350hpmondial) wrote: there is room in a rational universe for incomprehensible wonders. I write: No disagreement! My disagreement is that incomprehensiible wonders require any for of exotic entities. -------------------------------------------------- I get hundreds and hundreds of letters but seldom one so interesting as yours. I believe that your opinions about our society are quite reasonable. It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it. Albert Einstein | ||
| Edward G. Salla (350hpmondial)
Junior Member Username: 350hpmondial Post Number: 69 Registered: 2-2002 |
Thanks Ken. (You are abviously more up to date then I.) | ||
| Ken (Allyn)
Member Username: Allyn Post Number: 323 Registered: 10-2001 |
And lastly, your (our) particle mechanics theories need to include objects that move faster then the speed of light. But,, "we" can't observe them,,, for they are gone before they exist. Actually, we do observe particles moving faster than light; moving backwards in time from the future. Where do you think virtual particles that 'appear' in the 'vacuum' of space come from? They came from the future. | ||
| Edward G. Salla (350hpmondial)
Junior Member Username: 350hpmondial Post Number: 68 Registered: 2-2002 |
Arthur, You are right on about the religion topic. To have "religion" is to believe in a God. To have "Faith" is to believe in God. (In His word.) Mitch, Yes asteroids contain iridium. Yes an asteroid killed the dinosaurs.............. By 1) By blocking out the sun. (Ice age) 2) By causing a flood. The flood was from both, a tidal wave in North America and rain. (With the injection of dust into the atmosphere, the first rain fell. This caused the condensation of our protective cloud covering or canopy. This water vapor canopy used to minimize the amount of cosmic radiation that would reach the surface of the earth,,,,, and subsequently reach us. This canopy also lowered the skin cancer rate. And, this canopy lowered the amount of carbon-14 in our environment and that the plants absorbed.( Remember, lower carbon-14 levels in the plants consumed, will lead to a lower amount absorbed into pre-flood bones. Thus, pre-flood bones seem "very old" and not just 8,000 years. Also, this cloud covering made the pre-flood earths climate more temperate.(different plants, different ocean temperatures,,, etc.) Concerning your time analysis. "With God 1000 years is to one day as one day is to 1000 years." And lastly, your (our) particle mechanics theories need to include objects that move faster then the speed of light. But,, "we" can't observe them,,, for they are gone before they exist. Does mean that they never existed? (Note, This theory will then require some faith, as have most theories in this field. Why then would we invest millions in particle accelerators without some faith that we will find that missing quark.) So, there you have it, change back for your 2-cents. "The fairest thing we can experiance is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true science. He who knows it not and can no longer wonder, no longer feel amazement, is as good as dead." Albert Einstein This view point was shared by; Niels Bohr, Max Planck and Werner Heisenberg- who concluded that there is room in a rational universe for incomprehensible wonders. ?????????????????? | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 371 Registered: 6-2001 |
Magoo: I think that Christ's teaching were great, too bad the various Churchs didn't follow them. However I don't believe in the religion. I do believe that we are getting more religious in the USA and I don't think that is a good thing. (people tend to distort the religion to satisfy their own needs, desires, etc., rather than follow the original precepts) Just my thought on those issues. | ||
| Ken (Allyn)
Member Username: Allyn Post Number: 317 Registered: 10-2001 |
I disagree with both Mark and Magoo. I find in America and perhaps the world we are bcome more religious, not less. Unfortuneately we also see a rise in fanaticisim which I see as the work of evil. But I've noticed more people involved with religion than 20 years ago. I don't know if statistic bare this out. Man as a species has made great strides since the time of Christ in human relations. We have abolished slavery. Most countries have abolished the death penalty. We see racisim as bad. In the last few hundred years the planet has moved to many, many governments geared towards the welfare of all people and away from oppression. This is not to say we don't have a long way to go. Despots still arise, some people would still rather kill his enemies than embrace them, we still see injustices every day. But in the big picture, I'm quite proud and encouraged by the progress we've made. I firmly believe we're on the right track. | ||
| Mark (Study)
Junior Member Username: Study Post Number: 218 Registered: 10-2001 |
Look at trends in young people these days. How many kids (growing up with M-TV) talk about going into religion these days? To teach the word of god you better now want any of the following- Ferrari, a wife (in some cases), a nice home on the golf course. If I was in HR for the church I would be worried. | ||
| magoo (Magoo)
Intermediate Member Username: Magoo Post Number: 2365 Registered: 2-2001 |
You have to give credit to Jesus Christ though. Forget the trinity just the teachings of Christ and his love for his fellow man. It is true we are getting farther and farther away from those teachings each generation. They are good if followed, by all, but this is too much to be expected. Always was, always will be, but the thoughts people carried in their minds of those teachings helped in their relationship with their fellow man. It was not the cure all but it was more respected in years past and we have lost a lot of that. The "I" word is now foremost and "instant gratification" has taken over our young people. I think Christs' teachings carried a lot of merit. Something that seems to be much less of today. | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 369 Registered: 6-2001 |
Ernie:' I know that you have deep religious beliefs. However, i think the gist of what is being said here is that while there may be a god, science has shown that the statement in the bible, koran, tora, etc. are provably false, unless you take the time to add language to them, i.e., change the statement's meanings. None of this means that everyone is saying no diety. Who knows? What I do know is that the diety, if there is one, isn't what has been preached here for the last few thousand years. While religion tells us how to live, and does a good job with it, sometimes bad people use it to cause terrible trouble for those who don't agree with those people. Examples: Inquisition, Holocaust, perhaps what is occurring in the middle east as we write and read this. If we all followed the precepts of the various religions, i.e., the 10 commandments, or the similar instructions from all of the various forms of a bible, there would be no grief. What causes the rebellion, so to speak, is that those who believe, sometimes insist upon forfieture of ones life, that we all belief as they do. That has caused this backlash. Ernie, take some time and go to a large telescope and take a look. NASA has some very good photographs from the Hubble. Take a look at the distances those photos were taken from. Go back and read the bible, read it word for word. They don't match, don't fit. Again this doesn't mean there isn't a diety, just that the one in the various bibles probably don't exist. Best regards, Art | ||
| Ken (Allyn)
Member Username: Allyn Post Number: 316 Registered: 10-2001 |
I agree with what Tim says. All cultures in the history of civilization seem to create God in their own image. The fact that all civilizations so far have created flawed Gods does not mean there isn't a true God. Just that we humans can't be so arrogant as to think we can explain God and create the true religion based on the actual, true God like the Christians, Jews, Muslims et. al. would have you believe. I personally think the journey is more important than the answers as far as "why" (religion). The "what" is far easier (science). Man is a seeking creature so I think God wants us to ask questions. Maybe eventually we'll shed enough of our stupid notions towards the Bible, the Koran, the Talmud, etc. and be flexible enough that we'll actually start to learn something. Until then we're stuck with false notions from people who are victims of their parents beliefs and narrow interpretations. I myself am encouraging my children to reject organized religion as infallible and seek truths for themselves. | ||
| Tim N (Timn88)
Member Username: Timn88 Post Number: 722 Registered: 6-2001 |
I dont know if you were taling to me but i neer suggested that particle physics denied the existence of god. The idea of evolution doesnt deny the existence of god either, it just says that the bible is wrong. God didnt write the bible either and the people who wrote it probably didnt consult god before doing so, so the bible might be BS. What im trying to say is that evolution doesnt disprove god. | ||
| Mitch Alsup (Mitch_alsup)
New member Username: Mitch_alsup Post Number: 13 Registered: 4-2002 |
For the case supporting the contension that Einstein did not believe in god go to: http://www.stcloudstate.edu/~lesikar/einstein/ | ||
| Ken (Allyn)
Member Username: Allyn Post Number: 315 Registered: 10-2001 |
Okay, Hawkins does deny omnipotence but only some religions ascribe that attribute to their God. He seems contantly amazed that our universe is the only one that can exist...he uses the term 'God' as the force of creation; I took him literally with that. If I'm mistaken about Einstein than I'm very surprised. His philosophical papers do not espouse pure chance for the nature of physical laws. | ||
| Ken (Allyn)
Member Username: Allyn Post Number: 314 Registered: 10-2001 |
Mitch, every page of 'A Brief History Of Time' Hawking discusses God. Maybe not a Christian God however. | ||
| Mitch Alsup (Mitch_alsup)
New member Username: Mitch_alsup Post Number: 11 Registered: 4-2002 |
The best scientific theories to date indicate that a vaccuum has more energy than a large volume with things inside. Since space and time were created by the big bang, we have no reference point for what happened before the big bang. Time did not exist, at least our concept of time. In addition, the dimensions of space did not exist, so the big band did not expand into anthing (space), space was created simultaneously, and the universe grew from a hot dense kernel of energy. Erni can postulate that god did it. There is no evidence that (he or she or it) did. I for example, don't believe in farries, witches, worlocks, dragons (except kimodo), and other invisible entities. Why, evidence. Does erni believe in any other entities that there is no evidence for their existence? Why is it that if someone hears voices in their heads we call their sanity into question; But when the voice is from God, all is forgiven? Neither Einstein not Hawking believes in god. There are a variety of web sites that discus these matters. Einstein was totally gob-smacked that the entire universe could be described in 13 equations. He called this enlightenment (the 13 equations) a religious experience. Religious people have tried for 70 years to claim this indicated Einstein was a believer: he was not. Some of the most modern equations used to describe the emersion of the big bang from the soup that preceeded it actually deny the existence of god. Check out Hawkings "A brief history of time" about 3/4 through the book he discusses how the Hiesenburg uncertanty principle actually prevents omnipotence, and omniscience. Erni keeps dangling out news-bites designed to trick the unthinking that his position makes sense. It it really made sense he could dangle out evidence that this position was based upon evidence. Since he has not, one can perform a leap-of-faith and conclude that erni does not know of what he speaks. | ||
| Ken (Allyn)
Member Username: Allyn Post Number: 313 Registered: 10-2001 |
I can think of nothing in particle physics that denies the concept of a God. If you want to interpret the Bible literally you will even find some fun similarities to current scientific theory. Of course, the same can be said for 'Debbie Does Dallas' if you try hard enough. I don't see seeking scientific truths in the Bible or porn movies as a smart use of anyone's time. Who are all these arrogant scientists you mention? Not Hawkings or Greene, or Einstein for that matter. They all are (were) very religious people in fact. You do scientists a dis service with comments like that. | ||
| Tim N (Timn88)
Member Username: Timn88 Post Number: 720 Registered: 6-2001 |
I dont see how anyone could actually believe that the earth and universe wsa made in one week. Come on, dont be rediculous. I believe in god, but i really dont think the earth and all it's inhabitants were made in a week. i dont know about the string theory either, its stricly mathematical. But then again its far too confusoing for me so i dont even try to understand it. | ||
| Andrew (Mrrou)
Junior Member Username: Mrrou Post Number: 55 Registered: 3-2002 |
GOD man Man, Man made Ferrari's..Ferrari's are mans greatest accomplishment? Maybe? I think so. | ||
| Mark (Study)
Junior Member Username: Study Post Number: 217 Registered: 10-2001 |
Ernie- to pick up the flip-side of what you said about scientist. Religious folks are fun to watch also. I remember in Clearwater, Florida when a sprinkler spraying well-water on a glass-mirror office High-rise building created a stain that looked like Mary. We spent 9 months flooded with religious people that came from all over the country to sit in the parking lot at the insurance building along Hwy 19. Thousand came and it was wild! | ||
| Ernie Bonilla (Ernie)
Member Username: Ernie Post Number: 275 Registered: 11-2001 |
As I said before your evidence of GOD is in the heavens (space for you scientific ones). GOD created the big bag. As best I can remember, the Bible say that in the begining there was nothing a great void. Then GOD said let there be light. Hummm I wonder what could have cause the light? Geee to me that sounds like the big bang. There are people that do not believe in GOD. Very often, from my own observations, they use science to try and convince themselves and others of their opinion. Yet when there comes a place where they can't explain what happen (i.e. the Big Bang) they refuse to accept what people have been trying to tell them all along. It is GOD that created everything. I think science is interesting. I look at science as trying to understand how things work, kind of like reverse engineering. But what is funny to me is that scientists will unscramble something they did not create, to figure out how it works. Then when they finally understand it, act as if they are greater than the One that created it. What is even worse, is others will take that understanding and try to convince you that the One that created it doesn't exist. That is like the little kid that figured out how the majician did the trick. Then taking all the credit for the trick, telling everyone that he didn't learn it from anyone. Does that mean there was no majician? No. Just the same way it does not mean there is no GOD. Yes there is an answer of how things got here, but please do not discredit the source of how they got here. | ||
| Ken (Allyn)
Member Username: Allyn Post Number: 311 Registered: 10-2001 |
Flatworms are simpler design than snakes; in that sense they are primative. Perhaps I misunderstood the question. Snakes are indeed highly specaialized, in particular the pit vipers. I'd say they're advanced if I had to choose. | ||
| Mark (Study)
Junior Member Username: Study Post Number: 215 Registered: 10-2001 |
Ken- I would think somethings would be classified as more primitive examples of evolution. Simple segmented worms or animals without eyes or critters without advanced digestion organs. So you could argue that the snake not having arms or legs is primitive. Or you could argue that it is advanced because it is such a sleek speacial design. | ||
| Ken (Allyn)
Member Username: Allyn Post Number: 310 Registered: 10-2001 |
The snake is very specialized but it's a trick question. Nothing is of a higher or lower state of evoulution. They are either well adapted or poorly adapted for current environmental pressures. Some snake species are quite well adapted, others are in trouble from rapidly changing environmental conditions. To answer the line question you need more info. What is the indifference curve of price vs. customer volume? Genearlly, selling less units at a higher price is more efficient than generating the same gross profit at higher volume with a lower price. You need less staff, less inventory, etc. | ||
| Mark (Study)
Junior Member Username: Study Post Number: 214 Registered: 10-2001 |
Back to Darwin Evolution jokes.. Is a snake considered more specialized (advanced) or primitive? Because of its unique evolution. Seems to be a very important argument amoung evolutionary biologist. I had that question on a college test and was never sure of the answer. Also... now that I've driffted to college test stumpers. Here's another from economics class final exam- If a line outside a local bar is too long... Does that mean the price of drinks are too low?  | ||
| Edward Gault (Irfgt)
Intermediate Member Username: Irfgt Post Number: 1023 Registered: 2-2001 |
Tim, the joke is from Tim Allen on Home Improvement. He is always adding his on definition to a word that he does not understand. | ||
| Mitch Alsup (Mitch_alsup)
New member Username: Mitch_alsup Post Number: 10 Registered: 4-2002 |
Magoo has just defined "God of the gaps". Those who hold to this postulate want every little noock and cranny that science cannot explain to be "the work of God". Yet in a few years, when science has progressed (and religion has not), God is forced out of that noock and that cranny. Doesn't seem to be a very powerful God to allow himself to be pushed out of the way by (lowly) human science? No, the only real choice is NOT to believe in things for which there is no evidence! | ||
| Ken (Allyn)
Member Username: Allyn Post Number: 307 Registered: 10-2001 |
We now no all the basic sub atomic particles at least mathmatically. The next big breakthrough will be isolationg the graviton and we're close. The components of all these particles are called cosmic strings. They have a vibrational frequency and each frequency corrosponds to one of these sub atomic particles. Light speed. Nothing Einstein said means we can't go faster than light, just that we can't travel AT the speed of light. Although faster than light travel seems unlikely. Tachions and other small particles *seem* to be able to go faster than light in that they seem to travel backwards in time. Larger objects cannot do this. This is an area that is still being investigated. | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 364 Registered: 6-2001 |
Brian: As I understand it, there are many particles that science has postulated exist, but becuase our governments are cheap, we haven't been able to built a machine large enough to generate enough energy to see if they do exist. Superstring theory stattes that the smallest particle is the string and its virbration determines which particle it is. Art | ||
| magoo (Magoo)
Intermediate Member Username: Magoo Post Number: 2347 Registered: 2-2001 |
Brian, Your question is a good one. Who or what caused or created the "Big Bang". This is where man has to draw the line because this is beyond his comprehension. This is where the mystery begins and men pick and choose their Gods whatever they may be. It is the unknown and man has to create a explanation, even if it is his own. Through out time man has created and worshiped his God. It may be fire, water, a bird, a animal, no matter he has had to have that void of insecurity filled thus creating his own God. If this makes him happy and he finds calm and rest in it then so be it. | ||
| Brian stewart (Eurocardoc)
Junior Member Username: Eurocardoc Post Number: 248 Registered: 11-2001 |
OK, how about this? Science is forever telling us how they have discovered "the smallest particle" or "how big the universe is" but it changes every few years. If the big bang was the beginning, what made the big bang? Enquiring minds want to know... over to the evolutionists.... | ||
| Tim N (Timn88)
Member Username: Timn88 Post Number: 713 Registered: 6-2001 |
I guess thats a joke that went right over my head. | ||
| Edward Gault (Irfgt)
Intermediate Member Username: Irfgt Post Number: 1018 Registered: 2-2001 |
No, I've only been married once. | ||
| Tim N (Timn88)
Member Username: Timn88 Post Number: 708 Registered: 6-2001 |
Is anyone here an anthropologist? | ||
| M Grande (Grande)
New member Username: Grande Post Number: 22 Registered: 12-2001 |
Not to be a stickler Brett (well, maybe a little ;)), but I think you meant to compare apes and humans....all humans are primates as are apes. Just trying to keep it straight. Mike | ||
| BretM (Bretm)
Intermediate Member Username: Bretm Post Number: 2240 Registered: 2-2001 |
You can see the break between primates and humans in certain brain disorders. Some are specific to humans and some to apes, so we are not an evolution of them. Some though are found in both primate brains and human brains, and are therefore disorders that evolved long ago, before the two species broke. An example of such a disorder is Fragile X Syndrome, in which genes coding molecules are overexpanded, which is found in humans and chimpanzees. | ||
| Tim N (Timn88)
Member Username: Timn88 Post Number: 704 Registered: 6-2001 |
Edward, we are in the same family as apes, and i think apes are hominids too. We didnt evolve from an ape, apes and us evolved from a common ancestor. | ||
| Tim N (Timn88)
Member Username: Timn88 Post Number: 703 Registered: 6-2001 |
1 billion years? try 4.5 billion years. Life has been on it for the past 3 billion though. life has only been on land for less than a billion (i forgot). We have been on it for 30,000. | ||
| Ernie Bonilla (Ernie)
Member Username: Ernie Post Number: 274 Registered: 11-2001 |
Art, True the matter would get to great. But this doesn't talk about things already traveling fastern than the speed of light. I was just trying to stir some thought as to how it would be possible. Like I said, I don't know only GOD knows. As far as GOD lying, impossible. As far as a man lying, happens every day. | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 360 Registered: 6-2001 |
Ernie: Great theory on how time dilation turns into 6 days. HOWEVER: Can't have matter travel at the speed of light. Not possible, would cause many problems, and this has been proven by both observation and experiment. The time dilation becomes geometrically greater the closer one is to the speed of light: i.e., at 99% the time slows down by something like 1/2. at 99.9% time appears to slow down by a much greater %, I'm not sure of the actual number but 1/8 seems to stick, and at 99.99% the dilation is a greater factor still, say 15 - 20 times. In short science and religion don't mix. If the scientists are correct, the religion can't be. If the scientists are either completely wrong, or have left something substantial out, perhaps religion can be possible. Having said all of that, think about the universe as we know it: 1. Trillions of galaxies, each with trillions of stars. 2. A universe 16 billion light years across, measured in distances we understand would have so many zeros that we would spend our entire life writing them out. 3. A history of evolution which can be seen from the various artifacts and remains which we have been able to find. This is in turn supported by chemical analysis of the structure of life, i.e., DNA which further proves that we weren't created, but evolved from more primitive forms of life. This tracing can be taken back well beytond primates. 4. Lastly, if indeed a deity did exist why in the world would it have lied about our origins (the bible or various verisons of same)? If the deity didn't lie, why would it have gone to all the effort to fake evolution? Oscams Razor is the proposition that when there are several solutions, it is always preferable to take the one which is the simpliest. If we think our way through that issue, evolution and science win every time. Art | ||
| Edward Gault (Irfgt)
Intermediate Member Username: Irfgt Post Number: 1012 Registered: 2-2001 |
My theory as to why there are still Apes if we evolved from them is that the specific Ape that we evolved from is now extinct. There are all types of variations of particular species and all are still evolving. I read somewhere that humans are taller than they were several generations ago. I do not agree that we are the most intelligent forms of life either since we fight and kill over non existant beliefs. People are blowing themselves and others up over a theory. If that is intelligent then I would rather be a dog. They eat and sleep and ocasionally fetch some object and have no religious worries or afterlife concerns. Sounds the kind of life I would like. Wait a minute, that is what I do. They also love to ride in cars and could care less how much it cost or when the last timing belt was replaced. And we are the intelligent species? I think not! | ||
| Ernie Bonilla (Ernie)
Member Username: Ernie Post Number: 272 Registered: 11-2001 |
HAAHAHAHA!!! I knew that one would scramble your eggs. Oh that was too funny. It was said that man would never go faster than 100mph, yet he did. It was said man would never fly, yet he did. It was said man would never break the sound barrier, yet he did. It was said man would never go to outerspace, yet he did. Some say GOD didn't create the earth and all that inhabits it in six day, yet he did. | ||
| Mitch Alsup (Mitch_alsup)
New member Username: Mitch_alsup Post Number: 8 Registered: 4-2002 |
Those quadrillions of Quintillions of miracles/events are occuring over the ~0.5 to 1 Billion years since the formation of the earth (5.4e17 seconds). The surface of the earth has sufficient room for 3.1e34 chemical reactions per microsecond. If you assume a 1 centimeter depth to the chemical reactions, you can achieve 3.1e48 reactions per second. It seems to me that there is plenty of time for all of these miracles (ahem:events) to occur as long as the failure cases are performed simultaneously with the successful cases. No outside force is required, and there is no evidence that any outside force has participated. Six days to create earth--lets just stick with the fact that there is no evidence for your postulate. Everything science understands about planetary formation indicates that it takes a long time (short with respect to the lifetime of stars--but long in comparison to human life spans). By the way, there is no evidence for heaven (or the other places). There are misuses of the word heaven to indicate the objects visible in the universe. But this heaven and the heaven of various myths are different. One can be proven to exist (walk outside on a clear night and look up) the other has no evidence of existance from 6,000 years of looking. {Evidence not proof} | ||
| nick l (Nsxnick)
New member Username: Nsxnick Post Number: 29 Registered: 7-2001 |
ernie.. i dont even know where to begin so i wont. that theory is absolutely absurd. i just dont understand people who think religion and science can coexist. they are the epitomy of opposites. | ||
| Ernie Bonilla (Ernie)
Member Username: Ernie Post Number: 270 Registered: 11-2001 |
(steps on soap box) Ok you scientific ones just love to have your brains cooked. So turn up your bunsen burners. If you take GOD out of the equation, Quadrillions upon Quintillions of miracles have to occure in order to get to where we are now. Now lets keep it how it is. GOD remains in the equation, and all you need is one miracle, GOD, to explain the whole thing. Now that was just the appetizer. Ok you ready for this one, cause you are going to need to be good at math. Some ask how is it that the earth was made in six days. Here is a theory I have. Einstein had equations regarding quantam mechanics and physics. One of these was in reference to travelling near the speed of light. He stated that if a man in a spaceship left earth and traveled near the speed of light for only a few minutes then returned, he would only be a few minutes older, while every one else on earth whould have age several years. So take that equation and instead of only traveling near the speed of light, factor in actually going the speed of light. Now take that and multiply it by twenty four hours in one earth day. Then take that answer and mulitply it by six earth days. Why six? Cause GOD rested on the seventh. How many earth years would you have? A tremendous amount. Now keep in mind these are earth days, and the earth isn't the center of our universe. We rotate around the sun. So you may want to calculate that formula in regards to a solar day. Or better yet by universal days. That is the amount of time is takes for the universe to make one full rotation. Where is the proof of GOD someone asked. Your proof of GOD is in the heavens. I gave you a mathmatical equation to try and figure out what one day to GOD could equal to us. But keep in mind I don't know only GOD knows. | ||
| magoo (Magoo)
Intermediate Member Username: Magoo Post Number: 2337 Registered: 2-2001 |
Whew, And I thought Sunday School was tough. | ||
| Ken (Allyn)
Member Username: Allyn Post Number: 303 Registered: 10-2001 |
Mitch is correct on all counts except one: God is the nature of reality. The nature of reality is based in the exchange of information and not physical "stuff". Current theory is that our reality is just the vibrational frequencies of cosmic strings which create all the subatomic particles along with photons and the elusive graviton. Almost as if our reality is someone outside of our universe's dream. That's the hand and breath of God. | ||
| Mitch Alsup (Mitch_alsup)
New member Username: Mitch_alsup Post Number: 7 Registered: 4-2002 |
The best evidence of the day indicates that the dinosaurs died after a 10 Km asteroid impacted the earth near Chixalub (nothern middle of the Yucatan peninsula). The amount of debris and dust emitted into the air filtered out the sunlight, the plants dies, and the dinosaurs dies of starvation. There is a world wide layer of iridium* left as evidence of the asteroid. (iridium is rare on the earth, but not so rare on asteroids). There is every evidence that dinosaur life in the ocean was just as plentiful as dinosaur life on land. Why is it that only sharks, turtles, and celocanths survived? In reality, there is NO evidence that the entire world encountered a flood. The most resent evidence (Scientific American within the last 5 months) had an article about the great flood beeing the opening of the Bosphorous opening the Mediteranean sea to the Black Sea. The researchers found buildings at 300 feet down in the Black Sea, and evidence of fresh water plant life. There is no credible evidence of a world wide flood (large area flood; yes, world wide; no). By the way; there is no evidence that god exists. | ||
| Edward G. Salla (350hpmondial)
Junior Member Username: 350hpmondial Post Number: 67 Registered: 2-2002 |
Hello Andrew (enzo250gto), Note: The mass of the planet Mars is much less then the mass of Earth. Thus, less gravity on Mars. Chat back, | ||
| Brian stewart (Eurocardoc)
Junior Member Username: Eurocardoc Post Number: 246 Registered: 11-2001 |
If it's evolution, then the previous species should cease to exist? Why are there still apes? | ||
| Edward G. Salla (350hpmondial)
Junior Member Username: 350hpmondial Post Number: 64 Registered: 2-2002 |
Ok, Ok I've been waiting to see how this thread would "evolve" prior to inserting my two cents. Mitch you mentioned "21'st century morality." That sure is an oxymoron,,,,,,, like "tax savings" (Happy April to you all.) And, God did create the Dinosaurs. They died in the flood. Except for the celocanth fish (spelling?). And,,, Neanderthal Man still exists, look at the English. And Pleistocene Man?,,,,,, look at any pro football lineman. (ha ha) You know,,,,,, no PhD wannabe would get a grant nickle for digging up an old, preflood, ape. Look at the "Navada Man" tooth. This prehistoric find met all of the criteria for generating a multitude of evolutionary theories (even it's own display in a museum)& generated all kinds of grant money. Too bad, it generated enough money to find a whole "Navada Man" skull. And, too bad the skull belonged to a pig. (But, as they propose, I'm sure that most of the PhD's have evolved from the shrew,,, better known as the rat.) As a Health Physicist I have observed all kinds of genetic mutations. (remember, these are responsible for evolution to occur) And, all of them have been adverse to the proliferation of the species. And the main example used to refute this finding are the moths that changed from brown to black during the industrial revolution in Europe. But, they were not mutations, just another color of moth in the same species. Remember the 2'nd law of thermodynamics? i.e. the law of Entropy? (basically states all matter has a tendency to move toward homogenization and not organization) The only way to develop an organism, which we all qualify as, is to break this law. (Note; I said "Law" and not theory.) There you have it, my two cents, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, choose for yourself. ("How much more blessed would you be if you haven't seen, yet still believe.") | ||
| Tim N (Timn88)
Member Username: Timn88 Post Number: 694 Registered: 6-2001 |
Heres an interesting fact i learned in AP bio, we are studying evolution. Longevity has absolutely no benefits to a species. After an animal is old and can no longer reproduce it is useless and even detrimental to a species because it is using resources that a fertile animal can use. For humans this would mean that living over 50 is useless. Luckily there is an exception as it may have its benefits in social species, but still, thinking about it is weird. | ||
| Edward Gault (Irfgt)
Intermediate Member Username: Irfgt Post Number: 1007 Registered: 2-2001 |
 | ||
| Mitch Alsup (Mitch_alsup)
New member Username: Mitch_alsup Post Number: 5 Registered: 4-2002 |
Evolution has no goal; species evolve to survive. There is no direction to evolution, there is only a stopping point when the last breading (pair) of a species dies. The bible explains a lot of things. And a lot of the things it explains are just plain wrong in the light of 21st century science, and 21st century morality. | ||
| Edward Gault (Irfgt)
Intermediate Member Username: Irfgt Post Number: 1005 Registered: 2-2001 |
What if we believed every book we picked up and read? | ||
| David Jones (Dave)
Junior Member Username: Dave Post Number: 107 Registered: 4-2001 |
I think it is something like dog years... 1 day to god, is 1000 years to man... | ||
| nick l (Nsxnick)
New member Username: Nsxnick Post Number: 28 Registered: 7-2001 |
ernie.. you think it is possible to believe the accuracy of the bible and yet still believe that dinosaurs existed? according to the bible all land dwelling animals were created on the sixth day... are you saying that dinosaurs were created... then they all died... then came the cavemen... followed by the man all in one day? it really would require an all powerful god to manage that | ||
| Ken (Allyn)
Member Username: Allyn Post Number: 299 Registered: 10-2001 |
The very nature of religion is faith. You cannot question the existance of what ever God you may believe in or you can't be part of that religion. Buddhisim is good for those who question and investigate nature because there are no absolutes. For example: you can't question that Jesus died for your sins in you are Catholic. You may call yourself Catholic but you aren't. Scientists must always question; that's the basis of the Scientific Method. If you never question, you're not a scientist. Darwin had grave questions about evolution and some of his theory has since been disproven (he thought it was a gradual steady process; today we know it occurs in rapid bursts). But the core of his theory, that species arise from similar species over time, as the result of environmental pressures, is what we still believe today. | ||
| Mark (Study)
Junior Member Username: Study Post Number: 213 Registered: 10-2001 |
Ernie- well said But what I like to tease my religious friends about� is the fact that great scientist are always smart enough to say "and maybe I'm wrong" What makes Religious people seem silly� is their refusal to say "and you know�maybe there is no God?" I would respect religion 100x more if they weren't cocky to the point of losing credibility with logical, intelligent, rational folks like myself. Reminds me of a famous line by General Patton in WW II " Hell! I know I'm a primadonna! ...I'll admit it! But what I hate about Monty is he won't admit it!" | ||
| Ernie Bonilla (Ernie)
Member Username: Ernie Post Number: 269 Registered: 11-2001 |
(steps on soap box again)lol Guys I said my out look was a humerous one. There are those that believe with the faith of a little child. There are those that do not believe. There are also those that have to see it to believe it. Of the ones that have to see it first, even then they still refuse to believe. Lets take for example man landing on the moon. I 100% believe we did. Yet there are people out there that will swear it was a hoax. I have a good idea of how it was done, but I can't tell you how to build a spaceship. As far as proving it, sure you have plenty of books and people to talk to about that event. Even video of the actual event. Yet still those few insist it was all "movie majic". Darwins Theory was just that a "Thoery". One thing people like to keep out of the argument is that Mr.Darwin himself said that his own theory was not true. Oh yes, and Darwin was also a Christian, guess he too believes with the faith of a little child. As Ripley said "believe it or not!" GOD doesn't want to cram it down your throat. You get to make the choice. | ||
| Ken (Allyn)
Member Username: Allyn Post Number: 297 Registered: 10-2001 |
I actually agree with most of what Ernie says, but a few points: Evolution has no 'goal'. Species to not evolve to be 'better'; just different. It is bad science to think there is any ultimate form of any species. Just forms that are better adapted to current conditions. I agree God is responcible for how we evolve I I don't believe there is any plan. The only plan by God lies in the physical structure of the universe. Also, no scientist today says space is infinite. It is not. It has boundries based on the rate of expansion since the big bang. Even if the expansion never reverses, all matter will eventually degrade (entropy) in to the most basic sub atomic particles which are thought to be cosmic strings, which turn out to be pure information and not a physical entity at all. So the boundries of space, while quite large, are finite. | ||
| magoo (Magoo)
Intermediate Member Username: Magoo Post Number: 2319 Registered: 2-2001 |
Ernie, Your arguement is based on the belief of a little child as the bible says. I think at times this is the best way to believe. However you say Adam and Eve Were the First. Exactly God made Adam and Eve and from there came the human race. Show me where it says they were the first but not the only. I respect your belief I just don't accept some of the Bibles teachings that contradict themselves. No arguement just reasoning. BRGDS, | ||
| Ernie Bonilla (Ernie)
Member Username: Ernie Post Number: 268 Registered: 11-2001 |
Ok time for me to get on my soap box. As far as "Adam and Eve" goes. The Bible says that they were the "first", not the only. If GOD created more than one type of fish or animal, why not more than one type of Human. The Bible I read makes no statement about the Dinosaurs. Yet they still existed. The Bible doesn't make any referance to Neanderthal or any other cavemen for that matter. Yet they still exstisted. Just because it isn't in the Bible doesn't disprove anything. Here is something to cook your lil scientific noodle. The Bible talked about the great flood. So where did all the water go? Here is how you find your answer. Ask any modern geologist what would happen if the polar caps where melted? The Bible doesn't explain alot of things. It is a guild on how to live your life. Not a manual on how to build a rocket ship to the moon. Trying to prove or disprove things that aren't explained in the Bible, is like trying to work on your Ferrari using Carpentry Book. It just won't work. Yeah I beleive we evolved, but it was by the hands and design of the All Mighty. I like to have a humerous out look on it. I think that the "Cromagnon, Neanderthal, Erectus, etc." were prototype's for the final model to be released us, the "human". Cummon guy's Enzo didn't design the F40 back in the 50's. Oh no it took a long time at the drafting table to get to that level of automobile. Hence the millions of years it could have taken to get to this level of Humans. On a final note another thought to ponder while you are grunting one out on the pot, lol. Space is said to be infinant by sciencetist. So the Bible didn't talk about the Dinosaurs, or Homoerectus, but it does talk about a new place being built for us. Hummmmmmmmm? I wonder where that place could be? Maybe somewhere in the infinant space? The Bible says Adam and Even where the first, didn't say the only. What makes you genious's think we are the only ones. After all the Bible doesn't say we are the only ones. If there are others out there, you can be sure that GOD made space as big as it is to keep us apart. We can't even get along with one another. What makes you think we could get along with an entirly different planet yet alone another spiecies of intelligence, or better yet them with us? But don't cook your scientific noodle on that to much. I like to say: Sometimes people get so smart, they out smart them selves. Love one another. | ||
| Edward Gault (Irfgt)
Member Username: Irfgt Post Number: 975 Registered: 2-2001 |
I recently heard a quote that Mark Twain supposedly made. It said, "When you die,you go back to where you came from". He and Jesse Ventura have the balls to tell it like it is. | ||
| magoo (Magoo)
Intermediate Member Username: Magoo Post Number: 2259 Registered: 2-2001 |
Yes Art, Our DNA is very close. This is one of the things that leads me to believe that we have decended from the ape family. Even the story of Adam and Eve relate to this as it is told. Many people read the creation story and never really read what it is saying. Listen If there is a Creator who saw to do it that way then so be it. We are here as living breathing creatures for a while and as long as we can take our next breath we will continue on in this world as it was created and has evolved. | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 348 Registered: 6-2001 |
magoo: we're all from the ape family. That's why our DNA is 98 - 99% the same. There is an ugly rumour around that in the 70s the US government attempted to interbred people with chimps (closest genetically). I don't know if true or not, but it was a weird tale. Art | ||
| magoo (Magoo)
Intermediate Member Username: Magoo Post Number: 2258 Registered: 2-2001 |
Religion causing evolution. I guess there is something to think about in that comment. Kinda makes sense. So is it correct that those who believe that the Bible is the word and the only word to follow, believe that Cains wife could have been from the ape family???? | ||
| Mark (Study)
Junior Member Username: Study Post Number: 210 Registered: 10-2001 |
The most ironic part is that religion is causing evolution. (talk about the kettle calling the pot black!) If you combine a bit of what Art and Ken are saying below... you could sumarizes that the Arab world is at war with their religion verses the rest of the world's advances and sucesses. Not being the middle ages anymore and with half of the world not following the moslim ideas.. Evolution suggest that the Arabs must grow or fade? Thus Religion forecing a case of Evolution which it doesn't belive in | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 346 Registered: 6-2001 |
It's interesting how science is now coming into conflict with religion. The church had it right in the middle ages: no science. The next big issue with science will come with DNA discovery, and the timing of same. If you take the bible literally (and a lot of religious folk do) the science must be wrong. So I guess I should forget about the electronic ignition on the car, the flow dynamics with the 5 valves, the chemical composition on the tires, etc. NOT! If you agree that the Bible doesn't mean what it says, you have a complete license to recreate your own religion: I think they have all done that. Art | ||
| Ken (Allyn)
Member Username: Allyn Post Number: 285 Registered: 10-2001 |
Some say the human race has stopped evolving because we have eliminated the natual pressures on the species. I say F1 and racing in general have also stopped evolving because too many cool ideas to make the cars faster are illegal. If I had one wish, I would would wish that there was a racing league with almost no rules. 4 wheels, minimum/maximum weight and size, piston engine, max fuel capacity... you don't need much else. Get the Sultan Of Brunai to put up a 500 million dollar prize for the winner and see what you get! Anyone remember when USAC was like that for the Indy 500? That's when racing was real. | ||
| Edward Gault (Irfgt)
Member Username: Irfgt Post Number: 969 Registered: 2-2001 |
Enzo figured ways to remove the skin from our knuckles and the religion from our speach. | ||
| Ken (Allyn)
Member Username: Allyn Post Number: 284 Registered: 10-2001 |
More interestingly is the mitochondria, which is a structure inside our cells, started out as an independent organisim! Nature does indeed have interesting twists in the paths of evolution. You'll remember the Babel Fish: the ultimate proof for the non existance of God if you're in to Douglas Adams. | ||
| Mark (Study)
Junior Member Username: Study Post Number: 209 Registered: 10-2001 |
a puzzle The most interesting aspect of evolution is the way life has found ways to live inside of other life. There are thousands of Parasitic little animals (some harmless) but most are quite nasty. For those that lean towards the Bible and one great GOD that can do anything... you would have to wonder why he would make a super complex effort to build parasites... to torture his great creations. It would be like Enzo sitting around trying to come up with "rust" if it hadn't existed already. Not very likely. | ||
| magoo (Magoo)
Intermediate Member Username: Magoo Post Number: 2254 Registered: 2-2001 |
Ed, I never said I believed everything in the Bible I just quoted a part of it, By my own admission in another post I said I was a agnostic not a atheist. So I question for the input of discussion, not fact. As far as your neighbors were concernd I though that was a bit humerous in that you couldn't tell whether they were of Pilt down,didn't exist, or Neandrathal decendants. And no I don't feel you would be a bigot. BRGDS | ||
| Ken (Allyn)
Member Username: Allyn Post Number: 283 Registered: 10-2001 |
We can discuss the Bible or we can discuss current evolutionary theory. We cannot mix the two and do justice to either. | ||
| Mitchel DeFrancis (4re308)
Member Username: 4re308 Post Number: 470 Registered: 6-2001 |
One time when I was in band camp..... | ||
| Edward Gault (Irfgt)
Member Username: Irfgt Post Number: 964 Registered: 2-2001 |
If you believe the Bible then we are all a bunch of "Inbreeders". If I get into my neighbors habits and escapades then we will have to start a racial thread. No, I am not a bigot just a truthful observer. | ||
| Bak-a-lack-a Bak-a-lacka-lacka (Chris_n_chicago)
New member Username: Chris_n_chicago Post Number: 5 Registered: 3-2002 |
Nell Carter ? | ||
| Tim N (Timn88)
Member Username: Timn88 Post Number: 641 Registered: 6-2001 |
Bret, the one you describe is "ubermensch" I was planning on genetically engineering one of those but looks like i dont have to. | ||
| magoo (Magoo)
Intermediate Member Username: Magoo Post Number: 2250 Registered: 2-2001 |
We now have another topic to post on and I hope this can be commented on reasonably and intelligently, but let me ask this. In the Bible God made Adam and Eve as the first people on earth then the story goes that they had 2 sons. Cain and Abel. Cain killed Abel and later went into the wilderness and took unto himself a wife. "What" was the wife?????? | ||
| magoo (Magoo)
Intermediate Member Username: Magoo Post Number: 2249 Registered: 2-2001 |
Ed you first. Start off with your neighbor, that sounds like a good beginning. | ||
| magoo (Magoo)
Intermediate Member Username: Magoo Post Number: 2248 Registered: 2-2001 |
Bret, I knew a guy like that in high school. He had such a need to prove he was the best and immortal that he eventually killed himself by commiting suicide. True story. | ||
| BretM (Bretm)
Intermediate Member Username: Bretm Post Number: 2158 Registered: 2-2001 |
I think one of my friends is the missing link. I'm dead serious here, we even call him that sometime. He can hold his breath for ridiculous amounts of time, like no joke 2-3 minutes in the pool. Almost all my friends have nearly drowned at one time or another wrestling around in the pool because of his uncanny ability. He can also jump really high, is very very quick, and very strong. He is also not overly coordinated. These things lead us to believe he is in fact the missing link. | ||
| Edward Gault (Irfgt)
Member Username: Irfgt Post Number: 956 Registered: 2-2001 |
Now, let us proceed. | ||
| Anonymous |
poker casino poker 443 |