i just wanted to bring this up and maybe this is the right board.
religous fanatics have complete faith that god created the universe and man, and when asked, "well who created god" or what came before; you guys just accept the fact that no one did, and that god WAS JUST ALWAYS THERE! correct me if i'm wrong. but:
when an astronomer is like, "then there was a singularity event or big bang, and the recreation of our universe began again", people want to know what happened before and WHEN OR WHO started the process in the first place. this sounds unplausable to religous people. you can't have something from nothing!!!!!!! right? when:
in actuality they both kind of sound the same to me. could "god" be an outdated word for "universe"? please do not burn me at the stake. it was just bothering me for a while now. am i making sence? please respond back.
chimpanzee's and human's genes are more related to each other than a mouse's are to a rat's. every single inch on your body is covered with hair. it may be small but it's still there. (hey that was a rhyme ).
evolution doesn't sound all that far fetched as people make it sound.
1st- we did NOT evolve from bloody monkeys. dude, we share a common ancestor, that branched off into separate groups, shiznet how many times... the same thing... over and over... and over... NEway you know, two beasties had slightly different DNA due to mutation (don't say 'yea like mutation' mutation IS very common in our cells) one was better off living one way and procreated, the other was better off living another and procreated.
2nd thanx kg
3rd- SIMPLE REFERENCES FOR THE SIMPLE MINDED *to learn about the basics of orbits go on encarta (97 i think has it) and do the hands on activity thing about... orbits, that's right *to learn about how the universe came to be read the book "The Bigger Bang" it's short, not too hard to understand and full of phenomenal ideas and explanations *to learn about the evolution of speciesrefer to a high school biology book
DO IT! Uneducated people sound like fools when they speak, i was only trying to help u
What it comes down to for me is whether it's harder to beleive in a supernatural being creating us, or molecules of non living matter managing to form into living beings and evolving to become creatures that think they're fantastic because they have methods of killing 50,000 people with a single bomb.
I'll put it like this..... No one with the possible exception of those with time machines, can prove that evolution is correct. No one, with the exception of those with time machines, can prove that Creationism is correct. For both sides, it's innocent until proven guilty.
quote:positive and negative do cancel each other out, however, we're simply little bubbles of negative entropy that are slowly increasing in value.
Nonetheless, I am here now, you are too, everyone else is, ect. The Earth is not nothing, the trillions of tonnes of matter in the universe are not nothing.
just because something can't be proved wrong doesn't make it right atomatically. i'm not against the bible or an athiest, but i just wanted you to know that your reasoning is a fallacy. about monkeys. have you seen a bushbaby. they have eyes in the front of their heads, opposable thumbs, climbs in trees and are little primates. monkeys are larger primates and apes larger primates with no tail and highly intelligent social creatures. i think that when we started branching off into humans was when we became nomadic. that is started roaming (probably for survival) to other locations. this would mean that our ancient ancestors are likely scattered all over the world in very ambiguous locations that may now be lakes or even cities. as humans progressed and moved they left their past deep in the ground. finding it is like looking for a hair in the haystack. they have (by luck mostly) found *****s here and there of ancient humans though and that's reason enough for me to believe in evolution. creatures evolve on a generation basis!!! on a hundred year timeline you can see the process at work!!!! it's a sound theory to me. (darwin probably converted because he got sick of asking the questions he knew he'd never find the answers too. science is stressful and tiring- i'd give up and leave it in god's hands to eventually).
I did...well at least the Book of Revelations. It's blatently wrong, bias, and basically nothing but propaganda disguised as a "great vision." That's BS.
Check it out in the "End of the World" topic.
Being a realist, if there is not scientific proof, I have a hard time believing in it. I need proof. Solid proof. Not some book that states: "it happened because some higher being that you can't see nor know exists said so."
So until one of you has solid proof, I will stick with evolution.
Acer "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds." -Ralph Waldo Emerson
Well I just want to add to this little debate. 1, tell me if we did in fact evolve from monkeys apes or what ever then why havent they evolved? Did they just stop and we kept going? 2, for all of you darwin fans here is a little known fact, Darwin converted to christianity after trying to prove the bible wrong! Why well maybe because he thought it was the truth. 3, Tell me what is the most debated book in the world? The bible and can any of you honestly say the bible is wrong? Many have tryied and none have been able to do it? Why ? Well maybe because the book is right. If you can prove the bible is wrong then please elaborate for the rest of the world!
quantum mechanics is a fun topic, but - sorry sinope - special relativity is the extent of my mathematical understanding of light mechanics. and while lorentz transformations are really really cool (how a pole can be too long and yet too short to properly fit in a barn depending on what frame you're in - one of the most confounding examples of realitve lengths for me) quark stratification, general relativity, and certainly string theory, really exceed my capablities - i can only understand what the lay press reports. it will be fascinating if all this stuff ever gets sorted out.
ps - if you like light mechanics mixed with quantum theory, you should check out the xenon/argon laser experimentation done in 2001, i think done at stanford but i could be wrong - in which physicists (supposedly) recreated a laser in front of itself, suggesting that perhaps light itself can move faster than the speed of light. has some intriguing implications for causality and event horizons dictating reality scenarios. fascinating stuff.
ahhh. the m-theory. scientist have been debating between supergravity and supersymetrical strings to explain the universe and they're trying to prove that it's both. i don't understand string theory as well as supergravity masses....... when matter and antimatter collide and cancel each other out, the product is a burst of energy that travels in waves across the universe?? (i think that's the idea).sooooooooo where does a solid come from? is it a wave?(i can see photons and leptons, radiation and S***, but solid objects would come from where??? kg, we should start a quantum physics board. thysics is perty cool, uhh huh, huh.
quote:That doesn not mean that they cancel each other out. If they did, I wouldn't exist and thus be typing this right now.
positive and negative do cancel each other out, however, we're simply little bubbles of negative entropy that are slowly increasing in value. eventually when we're completely atomized, we become equal to zero. current physics calculations (at least, for the next 15 minutes) hold that, there being at least 12 dimensions and i forget how many universes, there are bound to be little pockets of negative entropy amidst an entire reality equaling zero. how astrophysics is involved in evolution, i am not sure, but you can't say that the laws of physics don't hold just because they are not apparent at a microcosmic level.
the other thing about planets pulling on each other and all is largely explained by einstein's general relativity - the holes in unifying general relativity and light mechanics will hopefully be explained by string theory. but you're right, there's a lot of holes to fill. i prefer to fill such holes with academic experimentation vs. creationist explanation, but i see where it can get shaky.
balognia sandwiches!!!!!Eureka!!!! funny pie. feebie. the mass of jupitor is pretty extordinary. mars and venus may have different density's and that's why they are WHERE they are. if earth is trying to fly out into outer space and the only thing holding us in is the sun, wouldn't we just fly into the sun? there's another (other forces too of other objects in space-including mars and venus) that are keeping us in balance (attracting us or attracted to us, like the moon). i'm not making this up; i heard on the discovery science channel.
it's also a general rule in physics that the larger the mass the greater the gravitational pull......... all the subatomic particles drifted in space, collided and fused, matter formed, then mass form3d until larger matter gained gravitational pull collecting more and more and more atoms andddddddd vola`. stars, planets, universes, you and me. i dont' know if thats true but i think that's how it probably went down..... or not. i'm just simple star dust that exists as a pecosecond in the billeniums of time pilled up. humans are dumb for thinking they know anything.
you know how some creationists say well, science has even proven that there was a great catastrophy a long time ago and a bottleneck in the population, that was the great flood man. Well we were reduced to a few thousand not one man's extaended family and that happened over 10 thousand years ago, before you think that man ever popped up. I personally think the bible is a cryptic history book.
Next... Pie anyone? The first "If" about smaller than the headpin. Well, I'm an evolutionist and i'll tell you that in the beginning... there was nothing. and you know what? there still is nothing. there is an equal amount of negative and positive force in the universe today. For instance gravity is n and we as matter are p and that is naturally why it acts upon. These essentially cancel each other out so there is still nothing, only nothing split apart. The nothing spliting apart has been observed in labratory expiriments, still this is an "If" (if it splits) just not the one you were thinking of
Finally sinope, that's not so smart Unless of course i missunderstood you in which case i apologize. See, yea we are in between the pull of jupitar and the sun, as well as mars and venus. what i'm saying is don't think that jupitar has much to do with keeping us in orbit, pluto is way out there and still stays in it's crazy orbit. It is inertia that keeps us going, momentum, we keep trying to fling out, the sun keeps us close.
Topics 
).
