Reply With Quote
Whoa settle down. Great things can be made from nothing and it needs nothing to start the process. That's what your saying? Then there still would be the why.
you're the one who initially offered to share it in a pm tbh
besides, something as specific as "god chose the jews" can't be learned from some random life experience... that seems like a pretty direct message, either some sort of prophetic vision or a direct line of communication from the big guy.
Whoa settle down. Great things can be made from nothing and it needs nothing to start the process. That's what your saying? Then there still would be the why.
I guess you can definitely describe it as that
Why what?
You have a link for that?
Taking RG'S word for it that science has proven that matter can materialize out of nothing with nothing there to be a catalyst for it. Again, even IF that is the case, there would still need to be the how and of WHY that would have happened.
Would appreciate next time for some solid links on that theory, instead of RG being a about it. Clearly I'm not there only one questions how and why we are here.
Science was never made to explain all our questions, especially intent based or why questions. That's the realm of philosophy and religion. Science is limited in scope. It's silly to think science can come close to answering all of our questions. So in this way I take a very different look at science than RG. Because a huge number of questions can't be observed or tested through experiments. There is no predictive power in some of our questions. IMO science types, of which I am one, have enormous hubris about what we can know. I would stress that when new "finds" are made through science, and seem to do a better job explaining and predicting compared to old models, hundreds of new questions burst forth. There is no theory of everything in science, there is no God particle IMO. There are no set of simple equations to explain all of our questions. We have enough trouble understanding the implications new models invariably have.
And our physical world did not materialize out of nothing. Science has nothing to say about before the Big Bang as there was no before... In science...
I would add that IMO, the main source of hubris comes from physics types who don't really understand our biological brains. Physics types deal with very fundamental questions. Once variables start to pile in, they understand the models break down. The emergent properties that result from adding in new variables make things horribly difficult. They always have. We do not live at a point in our knowledge and thinking where we are the lucky ones living on the cusp of the greatest discoveries IMO. But people like to think that they do.
All of the aforementioned being stated, the discovery of the Higgs field and associated particle model, and the discovery of gravitational waves is very satisfying. But hardly the end, or, we are getting so close.... close to what... now a torrent of new questions arise.
Last edited by pgardn; 03-31-2018 at 08:44 AM.
I say we stay humble about what we think we know.
You're the one claiming purpose.
I’m not saying what I believe. I’m saying what I know.I will give you props for finally getting brave and saying what you believe in. You knew I'd make fun of you and you still did it.
And, yeah, you’ll laugh. But you’ll only do so out of ignorance. An ignorance you can’t help. So I have no ill will towards that.
And there’s nothing inherently wrong about being ignorant. We’re all ignorant to some degree & about different things.
the ghost that never lies
It's easy for folk to remain ignorant on matters when the person who "knows" everything refuses to talk about it.
it's adorable you still have an invisible friend at your age
Why is it “adorable”?
It's like little kids believing in Santa. They're adorable too.
If Allah was your invisible friend Blake would roll out the red carpet for you. Poor fella is confused about a lot of things.
If Allah was your invisible friend, Chris would be terrified of you.
Yes I'm afraid of Totalitarian terrorism. You're clearly ready to bend/roll over.
Sorry for making you use google. I will smaller words next time.
Thread discussing scientific reasoning about the origin of everything. I add that we need a why behind any how.
Pretty much standard in the science world is it not? You argue against science saying that answering why something happened is not an issue worth looking into.
Sounds like you're the one believing in fairy tales.
My sister is a scientist in a lab working on a cure for Alzheimer's. She has to talk about why a certain response happen in the lab rats. If she doesn't come up with the why, then the how is nothing noteworthy.
But she can't say, because God said so. If the intent of the rat comes down to a supernatural set of explanations, it's no use in a science setting because it can't be tested/observed. The why will involve some established neurological reaction model to a set of cir stances, chemical, environmental, both...
I thoroughly believe there there is a place for religion and philosophy in the lives of humans. The problem, in my opinion,is that religious types set down a set of inflexible rules that sometimes conflict with rational observations and models ...ex. the Earth is the center of the universe. "I don't know" is fair and perfectly reasonable response. Religion and philosophy often discuss the nature of fairness, right and wrong, etc... Unless you are dealing directly with brains and explaining this through some sort of advantage in a social hierarchy, you get nowhere in science.
Sorry to interject. This was for another poster. But I like these types of discussions.
I see the aloof nature that science can appear to bestow upon a human brain trying to reason through something the brain might never have been set up to do. We will never answer everything we want to know through science IMO. It's a restricted use endeavor. We also must realize the possible answers given by religion and philosophy will sometimes not satisfy our reason oriented brains. I also challenge my own word, reason, in the aforementioned. "We" really believe we have no flaws in logic and reasoning... that's strange to me. We believe our ability to sense and describe the world about us is immune to deep fundamental flaws... That's strange.
Last edited by pgardn; 04-01-2018 at 10:13 AM.
You're conflating "how" and "why".
And i'm not sure you know what a fairy tale is.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
