Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
TX_Made713;1100926 said:your response makes sense, but its saying there is no true way to prove gods existence by science...like its futile to even try.
I said with that logic then your right
BiblicalAtheist;1100756 said:That is proof by inference. But there is no actual proof of god anymore than there is tangible proof of the mind and/or consciousness. You can study and observe all that god has created and thus conclude that is proof god exists, but as far as finding god itself in the material world that god created, is not possible. God cannot be the creator and in the creation itself in the sense that you can say "AHA! Here is god!" at any one singular spot. Imo anyway.
BiblicalAtheist;1100968 said:It is futile and serves no real greater purpose. To me, it is our endless taking of the knowledge instead of life. The age old garden of eden story playing out endlessly until we each one of us dies.
VIBE86;1101119 said:Jeremiah 23:24
Can any hide himself in secret places that I shall not see him? saith the Lord. ]Do not I fill heaven and earth? saith the Lord.
whar67;1100290 said:I love the irony of posting 'no lazy readers' and then cut and pasting a bunch of near nonsense from Lee Strobel.
The vast majority of these observation are answered by the Anthropic principle. Several of them are canards like the shift in gravity eliminating life. It has been shown that gravity is not needed for life to arise. Certainly not our life but some form of life could.
Imagine a person who won the lottery and then decided that the lottery must have wanted him to win. This is crux of the arguement.
Further it relies on ignorance. Many of the 'amazing' numbers created are belioeved to be controlled by processes we do not fully understand yet. Faced with our ignorance it become easy to insert an 'Intelligent Designer' to balance these numbers. It is just a new version of the God of Gaps arguement.
In the past thirty five years, scientists have been stunned to discover that the universe is finely tuned to an incomprehensible precision to support life.
"It would be very difficult to explain why the universe would have begun in just this way except as the act of a God who intended to create beings like us."
Because our moon is the right size and distance to stabilize Earth's tilt.
VIBE86;1101119 said:Jeremiah 23:24
Can any hide himself in secret places that I shall not see him? saith the Lord. ]Do not I fill heaven and earth? saith the Lord.
ThaChozenWun said:Alright I just did the first part so far, took a little while to gather all the math and shit to put it together so Ill drop it we can discuss it, then if you want Ill start going over the second part.
The first thing I'm going to start off with is the first sentence.
Okay this I have issue with. The universe is not fined tuned to support life. Outside of hydrogen, the universe is a death trap for life. No oxygen, too much pressure, etc... They could say Earth was more finely tuned to support life, but again this is false. The Earth is constantly trying to destroy life, not create it. Humans and the Earth do not get along.
Life Definition said:a : the quality that distinguishes a vital and functional being from a dead body b : a principle or force that is considered to underlie the distinctive quality of animate beings c : an organismic state characterized by capacity for metabolism, growth, reaction to stimuli, and reproduction
ThaChozenWun said:The second part of Hawking's statement saying that a fraction smaller would have resulted in a fireball is unproven to begin. This again does not signal divine planning. If your mom swallowed one more time you would not be here right? Does this mean divine intervention took place, did god say "enough swallowing, this one shall recieveth thy cream pie this time" Does that mean it was Divine intervention that pops chose to nut inside her instead? The world is full of IF's, saying this is divine intervention would be saying everything is divine intervention because everything has an IF to go with it. Had the universe boomed there would be no life true, but it didn't. Because it didn't we evolved because the system on Earth and Mars was stable enough to sustain life. A likely scenario all throughout space in the infinite number of Galaxies with solar systems.
ThaChozenWun said:The last sentence in the first paragraph.
For organic life to exist, the fundamental regularities and constants of physics must all have values that together fall into an extremely narrow range.
To make this statement we must know beyond our world. We don't. There are creatures in the bottom of caves and seabeds being found every year that go against what we are saying is impossible. Life forms surviving with no oxygen, organisms surviving with no wonder. Fish being found under miles of ice cover that live off of oxygen alone. The plants that we have here couldn't form elsewhere... Well duh because they were brought forth by the conditions on the Earth. The giant rock was here before it. It didn't change to fit us, we evolved to live off of and adapt to what it has gave us. Now I know you will say, "where is life on other planets if this is true!!!!!" We haven't explored them yet. For all we know there were thriving civilizations on multiple planets. Dried up lake beds and streams prove there was running water, this to our knowledge means there is a 100% chance life was there, why? Because all the water on Earth has organisms living inside of it. Where are they now? I think our current self destruction might be a sign of history repeating itself. If they were advanced enough to stop global climate change, who's to say they didn't pack up and leave the planet. We estimate the Universe is about 13 1/2 billion years old, Earth is about 4.5 Billion years old. We as our modern species are anywhere between 120,000-180,000 years old. Imagine a civilization with a Billion year head start on us. Imagine what they could have done given a 5-6 billion year head start.
ThaChozenWun said:1,000 years ago it was difficult to explain the Earth was round. 30 years ago it was difficult to explain how a computer would work. In 1994 it was impossible for an internet like network to exist. When men like Franklin, Edison, Da' Vinci, Tesla was pushing the limits of truth and dream things were impossible. It's not that it has to be god because its hard to explain. It simply means as of right now we don't have the knowledge of it. It's hard to explain things until you study them up close.
Hawking's also says "there are religious implications". Being such a smart man I find it hard to believe he typed this. He would know religion and God are two very different things. For him to say it has religious implications is saying every religion is right, which could not be true.
ThaChozenWun said:Just like your sun talk, the moon is far from the right size and distance to where it cannot move.
ThaChozenWun said:Size? The moons mean radius is 1,737.10 kilometers. It could be as little as 928 kilometers and as big as 3,423 Kilometers before it throws the Earths axis of tilt because of gravitational pull. And 3,850 before it messes up the tides.
Distance? Again this "perfect" distance is not "perfect". It is roughly 385,000 kilometers. It could move 23% closer before it throws the gravity and tides off. 43% away from the Earth before it has a negative effect on Earth. That's almost 192,500 kilometers before any effect takes place, and its not an effect on Earth, but rather the suns reflective rays that it directs away. The temperature at approximate 450,000 kilometers would drop globally by about 2.3 degrees.
How the moon and the earth Interacts said:Tides
Perhaps the most obvious manifestation of the influence of the Moon on the Earth are the ocean tides, particularly the spring tides where the gravitational pull of the Sun and Moon combine to give the greatest effect. The regular rise and fall of sea level creates an unique environment in the Solar System, where life is exposed to both immersion in water and exposure to air in the space of a few hours. This interface between two distinct ecological niches is thought by many to be crucial in evolutionary terms.
This is an environment in which organisms can experience the stresses and strains of an alien world before safely returning to their aquatic habitat, such changes possibly promoting the alteration and/or migration of organisms from one environment to the other. Hence the presence of the Moon to cause tides may well have sparked the spread of organisms from the sea to the land.
Earth Moon System The Moon also raises tides in the solid body of the Earth and in the past, when the Moon orbited much closer to the Earth than at present, these tides are estimated to have produced displacements in the Earth's solid surface of up to a kilometre. This would have produced intense stress and deformation within the Earth which, coupled with the decaying heat of accretion and the higher content of radioactive (U, Th and K) elements would have greatly promoted melting of the early Earth. This melting may well have had an important role in the early differentiation of the Earth, in particular producing the earliest evolved crust which would then be available for recycling by nascent plate tectonic processes.
Stable Axial Tilt
It is considered likely by many authors that the current circa 23.5 degree tilt of the Earth's axis of rotation is a relic of the oblique collision which produced the Moon. Furthermore it is argued that the presence of the orbiting Moon has, through a large part of geological time, stabilised this axial tilt or obliquity of the Earth. This has had important ramifications for life on the Earth as major and frequent shifts in this obliquity would have led to significant and rapid changes in the Earth's climate due to changes in insolation values at the poles and equator. A similar mechanism has been suggested to explain the apparent contradictions in the climate record of Mars.
The current relatively moderate axial tilt of the Earth ensures that the difference in heating between the poles and equator is sufficient to promote a healthy and diverse range of climatic zones without veering from one extreme to another (e.g. Snowball Earth hypothesis). In particular the stability of the Earth's axial tilt produced by the Moon, coupled with the break up of the Pangean supercontinent in the late Mesozoic produced a diverse set of climate zones (with their associated ecological niches) compared with what had gone before during the time of the dinosaurs. This helped set the stage for the rise of the mammals, including Man.
Metals
Perhaps one of the least obvious but most significant contributions from the Moon to life on Earth has been the gift of workable metal deposits at the surface of the planet. Ever since the first samples of lunar rock were returned by the Apollo astronauts and the geochemical data were made available, scientists have been intrigued by the relatively high abundance of siderophile and chalcophile metals in the silicate Earth compared with the Moon. Current theory suggests that if the Earth had once been entirely molten then these metals should have been locked up in the Earth's metallic core as the Earth cooled. The current abundance of these elements in the Earth's mantle should be much lower, similar to those of the Moon (part of which was derived from the Earth's original mantle).
Computer modelling of the collision between the Earth and the Mars sized impactor shows that the bulk of the mantle of the impacting object and a proportion of the Earth's silicate mantle were ejected into Earth orbit and coalesced to form the Moon. However the metallic core of the impactor was not ejected into orbit but instead fell into the main body of the Earth. This impacting core material, in some models, is the 'wedding ring' of metals deposited into the Earth's silicate mantle after collision and subsequently recycled into workable ore deposits by plate tectonic processes over geological time. Without this gift of metals, the so called 'late veneer', it is very unlikely that a technological civilization could have developed on the Earth.
Maths, Art and Eclipses
The Moon has also encouraged the development of intelligence in less quantifiable ways. What did primitive man make of the luminous orb that lit the night sky for half a month and changed its phase and brightness over 28 days? Did the regular procession of the lunar cycle combined with the wanderings of the planets and the stately progression of the stars and Sun with the seasons underpin and prompt thinking about the nature of the Universe? Certainly the earliest astronomers observed and calculated calendars based on those observations and planned their agriculture accordingly. The lore, mythology and literature of the Moon, from illuminating star crossed lovers to turning men into werewolves permeates human culture and society. When Galileo turned his telescope towards the Moon and recognized mountains, craters and 'seas' did this not spur humankind into thinking about the 'plurality of worlds'? In a perhaps more direct fashion the Moon has spurred technological development. Clearly the 'Race to the Moon' which, arguably, helped prompt some of the most rapid advances in tracking, propulsion, electronics, life support and other high technology industries as well as transform humanities view of itself, could not have happened without a Moon!
Perhaps the most beautiful and eloquent symbol of our dependence on the Moon is that of the total solar eclipse, that chance coincidence of distance and angular size which not only allows us to see and understand the true extent of our star but also allowed the first observational confirmation of Albert Einstein's theories which, arguably, transformed our understanding of the Universe.
The conclusion reached is that the Moon, itself born in a unique and random event, has been essential for the emergence of intelligent life on Earth and as a result such intelligence is probably a very rare occurrence itself.
BiblicalAtheist;1101761 said:"in the sense that you can say "AHA! Here is god!" at any one singular spot."
TX_Made713;1102225 said:A star is born...literally.
supaman4321;1101492 said:od sees all because he knows all He is the All-Knowing All-Aware He doesn't need to be a part of his creation to know everything about it, He created it! I agree with the guy you quoted, there isn't anything in existence that we can point to and say "that's God" that would be shirk in Islam because there is nothing co-equal or comparable to Him
Wa Alaikum
KTULU IS BACK;1102249 said:stars are not literally born
ugh
christ tx, you have been repeatedly shown to be wrong about all your key assertions
KTULU IS BACK;1102274 said:stars are born FIGURATIVELY
damn, son, you stubborn as shit
you keep saying shit like "if the earth was ANY closer or further..."
then you get shown that you're wrong and you play the retarded "says who?" card as if you didn't copy/paste from a creationist, Lee Strobel
L
TX_Made713;1102282 said:and when I say born i dont mean like a human or animal would be born...i figured that much you'd be intelligent enough to understand.
KTULU IS BACK;1102290 said:you said "literally"
dummy
