- This topic is empty.
- Posts
H t8
Quote Wow a single celled creature grew bigger
Cells don’t grow bigger, they multiply (and differentiate)Quote and came out of the water and could breathe
Lungs evolved in fish, the adaptation driven by the advantages of amphibianism.Quote and then grew hair
You have missed out hundreds of million of years there, but OKQuote and ate yellow fruit over millions of generations,
not millions of generations. For the great apes it has been far fewer than thatQuote lost lots of hair and created the Internet and here we all are.
I have a friend in IT who is balding rapidly. I suppose that could be evidence for your hypothesis.Stuart
Hi,
Clever little fish to figure that out.
So he got out of the water and discovered to his surprise that he could breathe.
Wow that takes faith.Quote (Stu @ Dec. 20 2007,21:11) Cells don’t grow bigger, they multiply (and differentiate)
OK, a singled cell animal became a multi celled animal. Grew bigger. Get it?I am looking at the big picture of what you believe. So I didn't go into the detail in that analogy.
Quote (Stu @ Dec. 20 2007,21:11) H t8 Quote Wow a single celled creature grew bigger
Cells don’t grow bigger, they multiply (and differentiate)Quote and came out of the water and could breathe
Lungs evolved in fish, the adaptation driven by the advantages of amphibianism.Quote and then grew hair
You have missed out hundreds of million of years there, but OKQuote and ate yellow fruit over millions of generations,
not millions of generations. For the great apes it has been far fewer than thatQuote lost lots of hair and created the Internet and here we all are.
I have a friend in IT who is balding rapidly. I suppose that could be evidence for your hypothesis.Stuart
Talking about the incredible journey of the modern human who started off as a single celled animal grew bigger, crawled out of the water to breathe air, grew hair, ate bananas, lost hair, created the Internet, all the while finding a matching partner in order to pass on DNA, then the only thing left in your theory is what happened before. Not immediately before, but way before that.Did everything originate in:
– nothing
– something
– someone
– or what?I await your answer and then I can add the answer to the one above and there we will have it the complete theory of why God doesn't exist according to Stu.
Hi Nick
Quote Clever little fish to figure that out.
So he got out of the water and discovered to his surprise that he could breathe.
Wow that takes faith.You’re right. What you write above is mythology. Or a strawman. Take your pick.
Stuart
Hi t8
Stu: Cells don’t grow bigger, they multiply (and differentiate)
Quote OK, a singled cell animal became a multi celled animal. Grew bigger. Get it?
I am looking at the big picture of what you believe. So I didn't go into the detail in that analogy.
You need to do better biology then. Otherwise we might doubt the credibility of what you write.
Quote Talking about the incredible journey of the modern human who started off as a single celled animal grew bigger, crawled out of the water to breathe air, grew hair, ate bananas, lost hair, created the Internet, all the while finding a matching partner in order to pass on DNA, then the only thing left in your theory is what happened before. Not immediately before, but way before that.
Did everything originate in:
– nothing
– something
– someone
– or what?
I await your answer and then I can add the answer to the one above and there we will have it the complete theory of why God doesn't exist according to Stu.
Science can’t prove a negative.t8, as you have already posted stuff this several times, I have given you my detailed answer, you are posting about the origins of matter in a thread that you yourself have entitled with the subject of the Theory of Evolution, and as you have no valid argument against Evolution nor a falsifiable predictive theory to rival it, can I take it you concede defeat? It is a pretty typical creationist trick to move the goal posts. Sure sign of a lost argument.
Stuart
Quote (Stu @ Jan. 05 2008,23:15) Hi t8 Stu: Cells don’t grow bigger, they multiply (and differentiate)
Quote OK, a singled cell animal became a multi celled animal. Grew bigger. Get it?
I am looking at the big picture of what you believe. So I didn't go into the detail in that analogy.
You need to do better biology then. Otherwise we might doubt the credibility of what you write.
Quote Talking about the incredible journey of the modern human who started off as a single celled animal grew bigger, crawled out of the water to breathe air, grew hair, ate bananas, lost hair, created the Internet, all the while finding a matching partner in order to pass on DNA, then the only thing left in your theory is what happened before. Not immediately before, but way before that.
Did everything originate in:
– nothing
– something
– someone
– or what?
I await your answer and then I can add the answer to the one above and there we will have it the complete theory of why God doesn't exist according to Stu.
Science can’t prove a negative.t8, as you have already posted stuff this several times, I have given you my detailed answer, you are posting about the origins of matter in a thread that you yourself have entitled with the subject of the Theory of Evolution, and as you have no valid argument against Evolution nor a falsifiable predictive theory to rival it, can I take it you concede defeat? It is a pretty typical creationist trick to move the goal posts. Sure sign of a lost argument.
Stuart
While, I agree that the goal post has been moved Stu.I think that t8, like most of us here, are not “scientists” so even though the topic says “evolution” I believe t8 meant more than just biological evolution. I think he means evolution of all things not just flesh this extends as far as the evolution of the cosmos.
The funny part for me is that I agree with Stu on biological evolution and with t8 on cosmology. The way I see it, Stu has a pretty good answer for every evolution question thrown his way. However, I don't think he gives t8's cosmology as much credit as he should. He admits his conundrum but just shrugs his shoulders, calls it a gap of knowledge. True it is a gap, but that gap is not just a question it is THE question of all questions.
Hi Son of Light
Have you voted in favour of Evolution in the poll?
Quote The funny part for me is that I agree with Stu on biological evolution and with t8 on cosmology. The way I see it, Stu has a pretty good answer for every evolution question thrown his way. However, I don't think he gives t8's cosmology as much credit as he should. He admits his conundrum but just shrugs his shoulders, calls it a gap of knowledge. True it is a gap, but that gap is not just a question it is THE question of all questions. If you can explain t8's 'cosmology' for me then I would be grateful As I have said already, he has not actually framed a question that can be answered, and he certainly has not provided any answers himself.
Here is a quote of Douglas Adams, from 'Mostly Harmless':
The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy has, in what we laughingly call the past, had a great deal to say on the subject of parallel universes. Very little of this is, however, at all comprehensible to anyone below the level of advanced god and, since it is now well established that all known gods came into existence a good three-millionths of a second after the universe began rather than, as they usually claimed, the previous week, they already have a great deal of explaining to do as it is, and are therefore not available for comment at this time…'
Stuart
Quote (Nick Hassan @ Jan. 06 2008,17:25) Hi stu,
Still luxuriating in the realm of useless philosophy?
Get real.
Can you explain what you mean by this, or are you luxuriating in a meaningless rant, without bothering to explain yourself?Stuart
Quote (Stu @ Jan. 06 2008,17:12) Hi Son of Light Have you voted in favour of Evolution in the poll?
Quote The funny part for me is that I agree with Stu on biological evolution and with t8 on cosmology. The way I see it, Stu has a pretty good answer for every evolution question thrown his way. However, I don't think he gives t8's cosmology as much credit as he should. He admits his conundrum but just shrugs his shoulders, calls it a gap of knowledge. True it is a gap, but that gap is not just a question it is THE question of all questions. If you can explain t8's 'cosmology' for me then I would be grateful As I have said already, he has not actually framed a question that can be answered, and he certainly has not provided any answers himself.
Here is a quote of Douglas Adams, from 'Mostly Harmless':
The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy has, in what we laughingly call the past, had a great deal to say on the subject of parallel universes. Very little of this is, however, at all comprehensible to anyone below the level of advanced god and, since it is now well established that all known gods came into existence a good three-millionths of a second after the universe began rather than, as they usually claimed, the previous week, they already have a great deal of explaining to do as it is, and are therefore not available for comment at this time…'
Stuart
Hi Stu,
What is seen is only the last and least amazing aspect of God's creation.
Why does the creation of the sons of God or gods need the presence of a visible universe?
The sons of God rejoiced when the foundations of earth were laid and it seems unlikely that was at another time from the formation of the rest of the universe.
Jb 38 ff
2Who is this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge?3Gird up now thy loins like a man; for I will demand of thee, and answer thou me.
4Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.
5Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it?
6Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof;
7When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?
8Or who shut up the sea with doors, when it brake forth, as if it had issued out of the womb?
9When I made the cloud the garment thereof, and thick darkness a swaddlingband for it,
10And brake up for it my decreed place, and set bars and doors,
11And said, Hitherto shalt thou come, but no further: and here shall thy proud waves be stayed?
12Hast thou commanded the morning since thy days; and caused the dayspring to know his place;
13That it might take hold of the ends of the earth, that the wicked might be shaken out of it?
14It is turned as clay to the seal; and they stand as a garment.
15And from the wicked their light is withholden, and the high arm shall be broken.
16Hast thou entered into the springs of the sea? or hast thou walked in the search of the depth?
17Have the gates of death been opened unto thee? or hast thou seen the doors of the shadow of death?
18Hast thou perceived the breadth of the earth? declare if thou knowest it all.
19Where is the way where light dwelleth? and as for darkness, where is the place thereof,
20That thou shouldest take it to the bound thereof, and that thou shouldest know the paths to the house thereof?
21Knowest thou it, because thou wast then born? or because the number of thy days is great?
22Hast thou entered into the treasures of the snow? or hast thou seen the treasures of the hail,
23Which I have reserved against the time of trouble, against the day of battle and war?
24By what way is the light parted, which scattereth the east wind upon the earth?
25Who hath divided a watercourse for the overflowing of waters, or a way for the lightning of thunder;
26To cause it to rain on the earth, where no man is; on the wilderness, wherein there is no man;
27To satisfy the desolate and waste ground; and to cause the bud of the tender herb to spring forth?
28Hath the rain a father? or who hath begotten the drops of dew?
29Out of whose womb came the ice? and the hoary frost of heaven, who hath gendered it?
30The waters are hid as with a stone, and the face of the deep is frozen.
31Canst thou bind the sweet influences of Pleiades, or loose the bands of Orion?
32Canst thou bring forth Mazzaroth in his season? or canst thou guide Arcturus with his sons?
33Knowest thou the ordinances of heaven? canst thou set the dominion thereof in the earth?
34Canst thou lift up thy voice to the clouds, that abundance of waters may cover thee?
35Canst thou send lightnings, that they may go and say unto thee, Here we are?
36Who hath put wisdom in the inward parts? or who hath given understanding to the heart?
37Who can number the clouds in wisdom? or who can stay the bottles of heaven,
38When the dust groweth into hardness, and the clods cleave fast together?
39Wilt thou hunt the prey for the lion? or fill the appetite of the young lions,
40When they couch in their dens, and abide in the covert to lie in wait?
41Who provideth for the raven his food? when his young ones cry unto God, they wander for lack of meat.
Hi Nick
Quote What is seen is only the last and least amazing aspect of God's creation.
Why does the creation of the sons of God or gods need the presence of a visible universe?
Because if it is ‘invisible’ then we cannot know anything about it. That includes the fantasy world invented by the religious. There is nothing that you can see that I cannot.Quote The sons of God rejoiced when the foundations of earth were laid and it seems unlikely that was at another time from the formation of the rest of the universe.
It is known for a fact that the universe is just over 13 billion years old and the earth is 4.5 billion years old. So it would seem that you are wrong.Stuart
Albert Einstein and Religion
(The following quotes are taken from The Quotable Einstein, Princeton University Press unless otherwise noted)
“My religion consists of a humble admiration of the illimitable superior spirit who reveals himself in the slight details we are able to perceive with our frail and feeble minds. That deeply emotional conviction of the presence of a superior reasoning power, which is revealed in the incomprehensible universe, forms my idea of God.”
(The following is from Einstein and Religion by Max Jammer, Princeton University Press)
“I'm not an atheist, and I don't think I can call myself a pantheist. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn't know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God. We see the universe marvelously arranged and obeying certain laws but only dimly understand these laws. Our limited minds grasp the mysterious force that moves the constellations.”(The following is from The Quotable Einstein)
“Thus I came…to a deep religiosity, which, however, reached an abrupt end at the age of 12. Through the reading of popular scientific books I soon reached a conviction that much in the stories of the Bible could not be true….Suspicion against every kind of authority grew out of this experience…an attitude which has never left me.”“I don't try to imagine a God; it suffices to stand in awe of the structure of the world, insofar as it allows our inadequate senses to appreciate it.”
“Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.”
“I cannot imagine a God who rewards and punishes the objects of his creation, whose purposes are modeled after our own – a God, in short, who is but a reflection of human frailty. It is enough for me to contemplate the mystery of conscious life perpetuating itself through all eternity, to reflect upon the marvelous structure of the universe which we can dimly perceive and to try humbly to comprehend even an infinitesimal part of the intelligence manifested in Nature.”
“The scientist is possessed by the sense of universal causation. His religious feeling takes the form of a rapturous amazement at the harmony of natural law, which reveals an intelligence of such superiority that , compared with it, all the systematic thinking and acting of human beings is an utterly insignificant reflection.”
“. . . In spite of all this, I don't let a single opportunity pass unheeded, nor have I lost my sense of humor. When God created the ass he gave him a thick skin.” Einstein: The Life and Times by Ronald W. Clark, Avon Books.
“Where dull-witted clansmen of our tribe were praying aloud, their faces turned to the wall, their bodies swaying to and fro. A pathetic sight of men with a past but without a future.” (Regarding his visit to the Wailing Wall in Jerusalem, February 3, 1923)
“Should we be unable to find a way to honest cooperation and honest pacts with the Arabs, then we have learned absolutely nothing during our 2,000 years of suffering and deserve all that will come to us.”
“I appeal to all men and women, whether they be eminent or humble, to declare that they will refuse to give any further assistance to war or the preparation of war.”
“It is my belief that the problem of bringing peace to the world on a supranational basis will be solved only by employing Gandhi's method on a larger scale.”
The following is from Elsa Einstein, Albert Einstein's wife, regarding Einstein's development of the theory of general relativity. It's taken from the outstanding book Einstein and Religion by Max Jammer. It's originally taken from Charles Chaplin's autobiography.
The Doctor came down in his dressing gown as usual for breakfast but he hardly touched a thing. I thought something was wrong, so I asked what was troubling him. “Darling,” he said, “I have a wonderful idea.” And after drinking his coffee, he went to the piano and started playing. Now and again he would stop, making a few notes then repeat: “I've got a wonderful idea, a marvelous idea!” I said: “Then for goodness' sake tell me what it is, don't keep me in suspense.” He said: “It's difficult, I still have to work it out.”
She told me he continued playing the piano and making notes for about half an hour, then went upstairs to his study, telling her that he did not wish to be disturbed, and remained there for two weeks. “Each day I sent him up his meals,” she said, “and in the evening he would walk a little for exercise, then return to his work again. Eventually,” she said, “he came down from his study looking very pale. “That's it,” he told me, wearily putting two sheets of paper on the table. And that was his theory of relativity.”
Quote (Nick Hassan @ Jan. 07 2008,14:01) Hi Stu,
Really? You were there?That would be better science.
The fool in his heart says there is no such thing as forensic science. He will be caught.Stuart
Hi stu,
Forensics apply to the tent.
The tent gets folded up and some awake to see the second death
The mansions of Christ are far more attractive.Hi Son of Light
Interesting post on Einstein. The overall message you get is that he simply hated being labelled. His supreme intelligence metaphor I think is best interpreted as his (and other's) attempts to unify the description of the laws of physics. There is a set of principles that seem to apply to forces and their effect on matter/light and the 'holy grail' is a unified theory. That does not mean he actually believed there was a real being dictating all this. He is very clear about that in what you post, too.
From the site you link to:
“Deism has a lot to offer you! It also has a lot to offer society! Deism is belief in God based on the application of our reason on the designs/laws found throughout Nature. The designs presuppose a Designer.”I don't think for a minute that Einstein would have identified with this.
Stuart
Quote (Nick Hassan @ Jan. 10 2008,12:21) Hi stu,
Forensics apply to the tent.
The tent gets folded up and some awake to see the second death
The mansions of Christ are far more attractive.
The fantasy is reality, eh Nick?Stuart
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
