Page 3 of 10 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 100
  1. #21  
    Senior Member The Night Owl's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,586
    Quote Originally Posted by FlaGator View Post
    What caused the big bang?
    The cause of the Big Bang is yet unknown. Your guess is as good as anyone else's.
    Ubi Dubium Ibi Libertas
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #22  
    Senior Member The Night Owl's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,586
    Quote Originally Posted by gator View Post
    There are more stars in our galaxy than there are grains of sands in a giant dump truck bed. There are more galaxies in the universe than there are grains of sands on all the beaches of the earth.

    Even the most improbable event has probably been replicated billions of times.
    True. As Richard Dawkins points out... the Universe is queerer than we can suppose...

    http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/r..._universe.html

    Talks Richard Dawkins: The universe is queerer than we can suppose

    About this talk

    Biologist Richard Dawkins makes a case for "thinking the improbable" by looking at how the human frame of reference limits our understanding of the universe.
    Last edited by The Night Owl; 08-09-2008 at 11:06 AM.
    Ubi Dubium Ibi Libertas
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #23  
    gator
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by FlaGator View Post
    Probabilities are not absolutes and logic may dictate that something is possible but that doesn't make it real. Probability and chance are just fancy words meaning ignorance of initial conditions.
    God is great. He has made a wonderful universe.

    As humans we have no concept of the world that God has made. Each year we learn a little more. A few years ago we didn't even know for sure that water existed on Mars or that other planets existed.

    I cannot believe that we are God's only creation.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #24  
    gator
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by The Night Owl View Post
    Biologist Richard Dawkins makes a case for "thinking the improbable" by looking at how the human frame of reference limits our understanding of the universe.[/INDENT]
    Correct. At one time we thought the whole universe revolved around the earth.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #25  
    Senior Member The Night Owl's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,586
    Quote Originally Posted by megimoo View Post
    [SIZE="3"]The Hadron Collider will perhaps expose the 'GOD 'particle and no doubt will just lead to yet another unknown .You place a lot of faith in a bunch of people groping about in the dark and pontificating on what you call science,your science is only useful in explaining what was created and perhaps why.
    I'm not claiming that science will answer all the big questions... only that it may. And, yes, I do place a lot of faith in science. Why wouldn't I? Science has an excellent record of accomplishment.

    The original op points to the symmetry of our solar system and the Universe as a whole.The universe expanding into nothingness as it goes on.
    In an event which scientists refer to as the Big Rip, all the matter in the Universe will eventually be torn apart down to the subatomic level. Of course, just because matter will be torn apart does not mean that nothing will be left of it. There will always be something.

    As far as anyone knows, the term "nothing" or "nothingness" is... well... nothing more than an abstract concept. In other words, nothingness, as a state of reality, may not be possible.
    Ubi Dubium Ibi Libertas
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #26  
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    3,852
    Quote Originally Posted by jinxmchue View Post
    Yeah, but Intelligent Design is such bunk!
    Yes it is!

    There is a difference between the supposedly scientific theory of intelligent design and the philosophical 'argument from design'. Philosophically speaking, the argument design is pretty reasonable and natural. The 'scientific' theory of intelligent design is completely bunk as you say above. The ID proponents have been particularly effective in muddying the waters by confusing the two.

    Any ways, I think the purpose of this thread was to lend support to the 'fine tuning' argument... this is how I respond to that:

    Conversely, one can look at the universe, and all the apparent billions and billions of stars and galaxies, as see that as far as we can tell (so far), this one little tiny planet is the only one that can support life... given that life really seems only supportable on only on this one single solar system or planet it kinda of, in my view, destroys the 'fine tuning' argument. It looks like the universe is quite hostile to life to me, with only one single exception that we can count. Most definitely not a place fine tuned for fragile organic beings.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #27  
    Senior Member The Night Owl's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,586
    Quote Originally Posted by wilbur View Post
    Conversely, one can look at the universe, and all the apparent billions and billions of stars and galaxies, as see that as far as we can tell (so far), this one little tiny planet is the only one that can support life... given that life really seems only supportable on only on this one single solar system or planet it kinda of, in my view, destroys the 'fine tuning' argument. It looks like the universe is quite hostile to life to me, with only one single exception that we can count. Most definitely not a place fine tuned for fragile organic beings.
    The Earth, let alone the Universe, is hostile to life. I forget who said it but one scientist once said that if any human were dropped off butt naked on any part of a certain 90% of the Earth's surface, that person would be dead within hours or days. Then again, there is Bear Grylls.
    Ubi Dubium Ibi Libertas
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #28  
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    3,852
    Quote Originally Posted by The Night Owl View Post
    The Earth, let alone the Universe, is hostile to life. I forget who said it but one scientist once said that if any human were dropped off butt naked on any part of a certain 90% of the Earth's surface, that person would be dead within hours or days. Then again, there is Bear Grylls.
    Indeed, it is really remarkable life has arisen on this one tiny planet in spite of the universe (and the planet) being the way it is!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #29  
    An Adversary of Linda #'s
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    22,891
    Quote Originally Posted by wilbur View Post
    Indeed, it is really remarkable life has arisen on this one tiny planet in spite of the universe (and the planet) being the way it is!
    Gee Whiz do you really think it was an accident ?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #30  
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    3,852
    Quote Originally Posted by megimoo View Post
    Gee Whiz do you really think it was an accident ?
    Maybe, in the same way an apple falling from a tree is an 'accident'. I'm not sure 'accident' is the right word, when speaking about by products of the laws of physics.

    In a universe (and planet) where there is a single incomprehensibly infinitesimal tiny surface area (like a single grain of sand on the beach) in which we can actually survive without being killed instantly, do you really think it was designed with 'us in mind'?
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •