Creation

[jtay]

Does anyone know what Aquinas's 'proofs' actually prove?

Yes, they prove that some folk will believe anything if you spin enough nonsense.

[jtay]

god said incest was forbidden right?

I don't think he said anything. You've just been told he said it. (But whoever said it is still right).

so after adam and eve had children, how would the population increase?

They didn't. See Coast's post above.

where was there a mention of dinosaurs

If they had been aware of them, which they weren't, it would have blown the whole premise out of the water, so best swept under they carpet; much as creationists do now.

why is there suffering?

Because the human race is full of idiots.

[Staffordshire]

In the bible it does state that incest is a sin, ill try find where!

[Village]

We already have the answer:

The answer to the universe and everything is 42 !

I personally have an open mind and the more that I have discovered and continue to discover, I am finding that I dont totally agree with the currently heald Darwin theory of evolution through millions upon millions of years.

I believe that things can change rappidly. In seconds a new blueprint can exist for all of life and new life and new species can change the world within a few years. I also dont believe that humans evolved from Apes in the way that Darwin explained.

[NL]

Are we just living in a 'computer simulation'?

If its proven then the creators of the 'computer programme' are our Gods?

http://news.discovery.com/space/are-we-living-in-a-computer-simulation-2-121216.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/10/11/physicists-may-have-evide_n_1957777.html

[Coast]

Are we just living in a 'computer simulation'?

[knocker]

New data challenge old views about evolution of early life

UC Riverside-led research team rules out zinc as a factor in the delayed diversification of single-celled and multicellular organisms

RIVERSIDE, Calif. — A research team led by biogeochemists at the University of California, Riverside has tested a popular hypothesis in paleo-ocean chemistry, and proved it false.

The fossil record indicates that eukaryotes — single-celled and multicellular organisms with more complex cellular structures compared to prokaryotes, such as bacteria — show limited morphological and functional diversity before 800-600 million years ago. Many researchers attribute the delayed diversification and proliferation of eukaryotes, which culminated in the appearance of complex animals about 600 million years ago, to very low levels of the trace metal zinc in seawater.

As it is for humans, zinc is essential for a wide range of basic cellular processes. Zinc-binding proteins, primarily located in the cell nucleus, are involved in the regulation of gene transcription.

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2012-12/uoc--ndc122112.php

[Polar Maritime]

"DNA Nucleotides Were Present Before Origin of Life"

http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2012/12/dna-components-were-present-before-origin-of-life-holiday-feature.html

Edited January 1, 2013 by Polar Maritime

[Bobby]

"DNA Nucleotides Were Present Before Origin of Life"

http://www.dailygala...ay-feature.html

Science has given us so much knowledge and so many answers to so many questions but the very 2 biggest questions of all: how did the universe start and how did life begin - science still hasn't the foggiest (there was the big bang of course, but cosmology still doesn't understand how, why it happened). I was reading something from a famous cosmologist and he said the more we know about the universe the more realise we don't know very much at all. The more answers we get the more questions we are left with. Remember Einstein's unshaking belief in the 'theory of everything' and his refusal to believe in quantum physics (as he said, "God does not play dice with the universe"). Well quantum physics put that to bed.

We still don't know how life began is the bottom line although there are theories but nobody has demonstrated it, nobody has created life. And if we do manage to create life then doesn't that even more point to an intelligent creator? As we would then be the 'intelligent creator/designer'.

Edited January 1, 2013 by Bobby

[Barry12]

What if there is more than one universe?

[Polar Maritime]

All if's and but's Barry, but this line of thought is something scientist's do take into consideration now, but not proven just yet..

[Sprites]

If you watch the bbc documentaries they will explain all to you, using the old see touch, smell rules of physics that havent been expanded on for about three hundred years.

All life is just energy in different states, it has no purpose and it just happened because it can.

[HighPressure]

What if there is more than one universe?

There is no reason why there should only be one universe in fact physics as we understand it better fits with several or maybe countless others. We as humans can only see what we can see and hear what we can hear and what we are learning is that is not all there is? Multiple universes could exist in the same space yet never meet, like thousands of radio stations fill that feel the air you only hear them if you tune to them. Its a facinating subject for which we have much to learn.

[jtay]

If you watch the bbc documentaries they will explain all to you, using the old see touch, smell rules of physics that havent been expanded on for about three hundred years.

All life is just energy in different states, it has no purpose and it just happened because it can.

Excellent. Well said, fellow cell combo.

[A.J]

There is no reason why there should only be one universe in fact physics as we understand it better fits with several or maybe countless others. We as humans can only see what we can see and hear what we can hear and what we are learning is that is not all there is? Multiple universes could exist in the same space yet never meet, like thousands of radio stations fill that feel the air you only hear them if you tune to them. Its a facinating subject for which we have much to learn.

Ah, Decoherence, one of my favourite off shoots of quantum physics

here's another one to throw out there....we talk about the Darwinian evolution of life, but I propose to take it a stage further, with the Darwinian evolution of universes....and it's not as mad as it sounds, some theoretical physicists take this hypothesis very seriously

[stewfox]

What if there is more than one universe?

Interesting I would have thought there would have been more 'debate' on this subject from a forum such as this, there was a interesting debate far more in depth on a dance forum I once belonged to. I see string theory hasnt even been mentioned. I guess some people concentrate on the weather and little else.

[Cheshire Freeze]

Extremely intriguing but nothing more than conjecture. In fact it's pointless speculating IMO as we'll never know. I must say though, all of the different theories make fascinating reading.

What we understand is what we think we understand because it makes sense to us. In this respect 'proof' isn't proof because it's proof as we understand and interpret it. Our brains try and fit everything into neat, logical little boxes and we don't have the mental capacity to fully appreciate everything that's at work around us at any one time. All very complex and mind boggling but as I say, all good fun!

Edited January 30, 2013 by CreweCold

[skifreak]

I also dont believe that humans evolved from Apes in the way that Darwin explained.

Well you prove your theory correct, you quite clearly evolved from pond life. Oh wait you haven't actually evolved....

[Bobby]

What evidence is there for another universe? I thought science was about empirical measurement and observation though nobody has measured or observed another universe - just speculation isn't it (unlike scientifiic theories which have observation and evidence behind them). Scientists say there's no evidence for a creator and then offer alternative explanations that are no more well, scientific.

Also this obsession with life elsewhere, while I don't discount extra-terrestrial life there still actually isn't any evidence for it is there?

I read this the other day about 'Strongest evidence yet to there being life on Mars', even though no actual evidence is mentioned

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/space/9814256/Strongest-evidence-yet-to-there-being-life-on-Mars.html

I suppose the 'infinite universe' theory has come up to explain the fine tuning of the various properties of the universe (strength of gravity, strength of magnetism etc) which otherwise makes a creator the only plausible explanation.

[A.J]

What evidence is there for another universe? I thought science was about empirical measurement and observation though nobody has measured or observed another universe - just speculation isn't it (unlike scientifiic theories which have observation and evidence behind them). Scientists say there's no evidence for a creator and then offer alternative explanations that are no more well, scientific.

Also this obsession with life elsewhere, while I don't discount extra-terrestrial life there still actually isn't any evidence for it is there?

I read this the other day about 'Strongest evidence yet to there being life on Mars', even though no actual evidence is mentioned

http://www.telegraph...fe-on-Mars.html

I suppose the 'infinite universe' theory has come up to explain the fine tuning of the various properties of the universe (strength of gravity, strength of magnetism etc) which otherwise makes a creator the only plausible explanation.

A good question, IMO there is plenty of indirect evidence of a multiverse. a few examples of indirect evidence are as follows, Dark Flow, The theory of Inflation and Chaotic/Eternal Inflation, String/M Theory, Brane World Cosmology, the Anthropic Principle

[Methuselah]

A good question, IMO there is plenty of indirect evidence of a multiverse. a few examples of indirect evidence are as follows, Dark Flow, The theory of Inflation and Chaotic/Eternal Inflation, String/M Theory, Brane World Cosmology, the Anthropic Principle

I'm not sure that I'd really call any of those 'evidence', AJ? As elegant as they all evidently are, what do any of them actually prove: other than that the human species contains some highly-intelligent individuals?

Also, I tend to find that the Anthropic Principle makes me feel as almost queasy as the 'God-didits'...

[A.J]

I'm not sure that I'd really call any of those 'evidence', AJ? As elegant as they all evidently are, what do any of them actually prove: other than that the human species contains some highly-intelligent individuals?

Also, I tend to find that the Anthropic Principle makes me feel as almost queasy as the 'God-didits'...

Dark Flow's an interesting one Pete, definitely something odd going on there and it is an observed phenomena, as there is Dark Matter, the elusive 'stuff' that makes up for over 20% of the universe's mass, yet is undetectable apart from it's gravitational influences.....my favourite for dark matter is that it is simply ordinary matter in a parallel universe seperated from our universe in extra-dimensional space, hence we can only infer its existence through its gravitational tugs on ordinary matter in our universe....Some speculate that this 'gravitational tug' is what has been detected as Dark Flow....fascinating stuff!

[HighPressure]

I suppose the 'infinite universe' theory has come up to explain the fine tuning of the various properties of the universe (strength of gravity, strength of magnetism etc) which otherwise makes a creator the only plausible explanation.

Even the existence of a creator does not take away the question as to who created the creator? The more mathematics continues to show uniformity the more backing a creator gets. In my view the religious and scientific paths must inevitably meet at some point?

[VillagePlank]

I also dont believe that humans evolved from Apes.

Absolutely spot on. We didn't evolve from Apes, they are our cousins; we share a common ancestor.

[dec10snow]

Madden created the universe :p