Why God Did Not Create the Universe

[echoes]

Originally Posted by Penn

Echoes, whats it like out there on that limb?

Chef,

Am just a person. But am striving to learn, learn, learn!

Holly

Originally Posted by Broadsword2004

Not quite, Big Bang theory holds that in the beginning, all matter, space, and time was compressed into a singularity, which then expanded outward at great speed (how time has a "beginning" is beyond me though).

IMO, I think the whole notion of theorizing about multiple universes continually forming and expanding like bubbles in water is rather silly. It is fantasizing to an extreme degree I think. YES, it could maybe be true, but it's just so far out there. When Hawking says:

As recent advances in cosmology suggest, the laws of gravity and quantum theory allow universes to appear spontaneously from nothing.

Okay, so who wrote these "laws" of cosmology and gravity that allow universes to appear spontaneously from nothing? Are those spontaneous too? I think this is a prime example of how our brains are simply too limited to understand this subject beyond a small amount.

On God's existence, I think the arguments FOR a Creator are flawed (because who created the creator? The proponents say the Creator exists outside of these "rules," and thus doesn't need a creator, well why can't the universe then? The universe itself isn't subject to rules, things within the universe are subject to rules). That is also inadverdently what Hawking is saying. HOWEVER, I also think the arguments against a Creator are flawed as well. To say that all the matter-space-time in the beginning was just "there" and no one or nothing created it, that nothing wrote the laws of physics, etc...that sounds silly as well.

Again I think it just shows the limits of our brains and the logic we use to understand the universe.

I believe if there is such a Creator, it is be something far more grandious and unimaginable then any of us can possibly conjure up. Right now I think humans trying to figure this stuff out is like chimpanzees trying to learn nuclear physics---it's beyond the capability of their brains.

I'd make a bad Si-Fi author, another failed attempt so I'm going to stick to my strengths. Maybe God was once like us.

[T-Rock]

I believe Microbiology has thoroughly debunked the theory of “Spontaneous Generation” - which debunks the theory that life arose from inanimate matter - nothing can originate from a sterile environment and if life started from nothing, from where did it come?

No matter what one believes, we can’t even cure the common cold…LOL…so we’re reduced to one common denominator which is faith….faith in whatever theory you believe in…testing theories against the evidence will never end (a good thing), and if contradictory evidence turns up, the theory must be reevaluated or even abandoned, otherwise it is not science, but myth…

What if the Earth wasn’t in its current orbit and we were 1/4 mile closer to the sun

[Richard]

RE: Post #17

Perhaps a little more exploring and reading - the more recent Hubble discoveries which actually do show events such as star formations, neighboring galaxies, and on-going changes within the universe might be of particular worth.

http://hubblesite.org/hubble_discoveries/

Gutes lesen.

Richard

[cold1]

I am not qualified to debate Hawkings thoeries, but the people I work with/for are. Theology comes up from time to time. There is a great divide between the Physical sciences and Biological sciences. On the Physical sciences side there is an abundance of non believers, on the biologies side there is an abundance of Intelligent design. This divide has been attributed to a few items of difference between the two fields.

In the physical sciences most of the phenomina that is oberved has hard physical boundaries, IE.. "if this, then that". These postulates end up being repeatable and quantifiable. There are exceptions that IMHO prove that some of this form of science is consentual BS on a grand scale.

In the biological sciences there are few hard and fast rules on complex systems. The beats are hedged with statistical data. Even simple systems will throw a curve ball every now and then. In the biological sciences you will find PhDs that will admit that for as much as they know they are still in their infancy of understanding (these have my admiration).

I will give a couple of examples to think about.
Until about two years ago it was it was believed and taught that no cosmic xray burst could possibly last for more than 30 seconds. This had been proven time and time again mathmatically. Then one day and cosmic xray burst was observed that lasted for several hours.

As a noted MD, PhD and general expert in his area of expertice once told me "its called practicing medicine for a reason, we still cant get it right 100% of the time"

[Richard]

What if the Earth wasn’t in its current orbit and we were 1/4 mile closer to the sun

http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/que...php?number=331

And so it goes...

Richard

[T-Rock]

In the biological sciences there are few hard and fast rules on complex systems. The beats are hedged with statistical data. Even simple systems will throw a curve ball every now and then. In the biological sciences you will find PhDs that will admit that for as much as they know they are still in their infancy of understanding (these have my admiration).

I haven’t kept up with current studies lately but what baffles my mind is “genomic equivalence” where a skin cell is different from a muscle cell, which is different from a nerve cell, yet all these cells contain the same genes as a fertilized egg. If the genes contained in these cells are the same, why are the cells so different Ultrabithorax doesn’t solve the paradox because it means that genes are being turned on or off by factors outside themselves. What regulating factors outside of the DNA are controlling the genes
It’s puzzling to say the least

Originally Posted by T-Rock

I believe Microbiology has thoroughly debunked the theory of “Spontaneous Generation” - which debunks the theory that life arose from inanimate matter - nothing can originate from a sterile environment and if life started from nothing, from where did it come?

No matter what one believes, we can’t even cure the common cold…LOL…so we’re reduced to one common denominator which is faith….faith in whatever theory you believe in…testing theories against the evidence will never end (a good thing), and if contradictory evidence turns up, the theory must be reevaluated or even abandoned, otherwise it is not science, but myth…

What if the Earth wasn’t in its current orbit and we were 1/4 mile closer to the sun

I heard either we would burn up or freeze to death, depending on the earth placement by less than 1/4 mile. In my younger days, I could throw a rock that far, not really, buy you get the point.

500 years ago, everything we knew about the earth, the sun, our known solar-sytem, well, we were wrong. I'm interested in thinking what our future generations might learn in the next 500 years.

It's nice being in a room with some really smart people.

Thanks, WD

[Penn]

Being a child of the sixties; Timothy Leary explained it this way; you're god, everything your think is created and infinite, and ceases, when the thought is no longer present. The universe you know is the one created by and for you by others. Thus religion is due more to geographic circumstance than to the existence of quantifiable data.

[T-Rock]

I’ll see your orbit…
http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/que...php?number=331

And raise you..

(Now, just to make sure we don't mislead you, the Earth's overall orbit or distance from the sun would make a difference if it were located say where Mercury is or where Pluto is. As Dr. Jack Hall from ecology.com's Dr. Jack's Natural World says: "It's the three bears syndrome. We're not too close to the sun, and we're not too far away. We're j-u-u-u-u-st right!)

http://ecology.com/features/tiltingearth/
http://www.nasa.gov/worldbook/earth_worldbook.html

ETA
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/milankovitch.html
http://www.usno.navy.mil/USNO/astron...vitch%20theory

[Kyobanim]

I'm interested in thinking what our future generations might learn in the next 500 years.

Just give me a warp drive.

[ReefBlue]

Originally Posted by T-Rock

I believe Microbiology has thoroughly debunked the theory of “Spontaneous Generation” - which debunks the theory that life arose from inanimate matter - nothing can originate from a sterile environment and if life started from nothing, from where did it come?

No matter what one believes, we can’t even cure the common cold…LOL…so we’re reduced to one common denominator which is faith….faith in whatever theory you believe in…testing theories against the evidence will never end (a good thing), and if contradictory evidence turns up, the theory must be reevaluated or even abandoned, otherwise it is not science, but myth…

What if the Earth wasn’t in its current orbit and we were 1/4 mile closer to the sun

Earth's orbit isn't a perfect circle with the Sun in the center. It moves us about 3 million miles further from the sun during the summer months.

94 million miles in July, 91 in January.

Additionally, the Japanese conducted experiments after some discoveries that meteor impacts would create the building blocks of life.

http://www.arn.org/blogs/index.php/l..._to_spawn_life

One of those articles mentions a "Miller–Urey experiment" which seems to be the de-facto experiment regarding the origin of life.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller%...rey_experiment

http://www.truthinscience.org.uk/sit...nt/view/51/65/

[dr. mabuse]

One wonders what Hawking's motivations truly are. Many know his feelings as do his followers, yet he insists on producing these same types of articles for what purpose? For the enlightenment of whom?

As for high I.Q. folks, sorry, I'm not at all impressed.

Hawking supposedly said, "People who boast about their IQ's are losers" yet I haven't seen him hesitate when questioned about his I.Q..

He's placed his bet, come what may.

Have a good 'un.

[T-Rock]

Earth's orbit isn't a perfect circle with the Sun in the center. It moves us about 3 million miles further from the sun during the summer months.

The tilt of its axis is the key in orbit, check out the Milankovitch Theory
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/milankovitch.html

One of those articles mentions a "Miller–Urey experiment" which seems to be the de-facto experiment regarding the origin of life.

Not really. The experiment failed to simulate conditions on the early earth and has little to do with the origin of life because it depends on life’s building blocks by lightening, and the composition of earths early atmosphere. Check out the Oparin-Haldane scenario, a theory in crisis. Oxygen that is essential to aerobic respiration is often fatal to organic synthesis, nevertheless, an electric spark in a container of swamp gas with just a little O2 will cause an explosion. Miller assembled a closed glass apparatus in Urey’s laboratory and pumped out the air (O2), and the two simplest amino acids he produced do not occur in living organisms. Miller knew that Oxygen would destroy any amino acids (the building blocks of life) that might be produced, yet as scientists dig into the Earth's crust, they find oxidized rock, indicating the Earth has always had an oxygen-rich atmosphere. Millers research was inconclusive:
http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=...001&as_sdtp=on

[olhamada]

Originally Posted by dr. mabuse

Hawking supposedly said, "People who boast about their IQ's are losers" yet I haven't seen him hesitate when questioned about his I.Q..

He's placed his bet, come what may.

Have a good 'un.

I'm curious - What does he claim his IQ is?