I like to believe that an infinite sea of nothing (which has always been and which I like to call "the great void") is sparcely populated by matter and energy which, over trillions+ of years, collects and coalesces into a critical mass which eventually cannot contain itself and ultimately explodes into an ever expanding "universe." The matter and energy from this expanding universe example eventually collects and coalesces with same from other similar universes. The cycle repeats itself forever.
I like to see black holes as localized collection points of matter and energy. Black holes may combine with each other. Black holes from different universes may combine with each other.
So, over a huge time scale and speeded up for our observation, I see universes winking into existance and then dispersing. Graphically similar to bubbles in water on a slow boil. The water representing "the great void."
It's easy for me to imagine "the great void" because it is nothing and therefore does not require an explanation. I have problems with the matter and energy.
I like to see black holes as localized collection points of matter and energy. Black holes may combine with each other. Black holes from different universes may combine with each other.
So, over a huge time scale and speeded up for our observation, I see universes winking into existance and then dispersing. Graphically similar to bubbles in water on a slow boil. The water representing "the great void."
It's easy for me to imagine "the great void" because it is nothing and therefore does not require an explanation. I have problems with the matter and energy.
AudioFreak said:
Elementary my dear Watson...
The long sought proof resides in finding the so-called 'missing link' betwixt Ape and Man....
This shall undoubtedly and resolutely remain 'missing' ...methinks.... 😀
One can't ever prove ANY theory true; the best you can do is heap up more and more evidence and see if it's consistent with what the theory predicts. If the pile is big enough and strong enough and there is no good evidence that shows the theory to be false (e.g., homonid fossils found in a Pre Cambrian stratum), it is deemed provisionally true.
Infinite repetition abounds all around us and being infinite has no boundaries or limits.
I will change create and distruct to evolve and distruct.
I can live with this and not give a rip what happens when I'm six feet under or in my case, blowing in the wind...............Toni
Bill, you wrote it better than I did.
I will change create and distruct to evolve and distruct.
I can live with this and not give a rip what happens when I'm six feet under or in my case, blowing in the wind...............Toni
Bill, you wrote it better than I did.
First of all, humans did not evolve from apes; instead, both evolved from the same animal. Second, there really isn't a missing link any more. Most of the gaps have been fairly well filled, with the only surprise being that instead of a single chain, there were many, many types of early humans existing simultaneously. Some died off, some of them we killed, others we probably ate.
Prune said:
Just wait a few decades and that (popular belief) will change again, it always does. I think the whole we evolved from any species thing is laughable. There is no proof that Homo sapiens were ever any different then they are now. Or should I say there is conflicting proof.
kingdaddy said:
With over 125 years of acceptance, ever-increasing evidence, and no counter-evidence, it's as likely to change as our concept of relativistic mechanics (another "popular" belief).
SY said:
Not sure exactly which part you were talking about but when I was in high school they were still teaching that man evolved from ape. I don’t even bother to keep up with the latest, it's all too illogical IMO.
As I’ve stated before the evolution of a species to adapt to it’s environment is provable and logical, but the idea that any species completely evolves into another distinct species never has been proven, or even makes sense from my understanding, no logic in that idea at all. Can anyone shed some light on why or how a single cell animal can split up into so many different species that so purposefully interact with one another? Chaos cannot create purpose can it. This is the biggest problem I have with Science, everything coming from one thing, seems harder to believe this then a God of some kind creating everything. Who is exercising more faith, a Christian or a Scientist?
Actually, I have recently read of a well-known scientist who published his theory of how his study of astronomy has lead him to believe in a God like creator. All things came from a single point and expanded outward until it reached a hypothetical limit, then collapses back to a single point in space and time. You know Alpha and Omega, just like many bible versions speak of. Have you heard of this?
Actually, I have recently read of a well-known scientist who published his theory of how his study of astronomy has lead him to believe in a God like creator. All things came from a single point and expanded outward until it reached a hypothetical limit, then collapses back to a single point in space and time. You know Alpha and Omega, just like many bible versions speak of. Have you heard of this?
The Omega Point? That's not a theory, it's a hypothesis.
The definition of "species" seems to be giving you some trouble. Read and learn before expounding.
The definition of "species" seems to be giving you some trouble. Read and learn before expounding.
Bill Fitzpatrick said:
No the facts change that was my point. At one time all the top scientist thought the world was flat and all planets revolved around the earth, just one of many errors in the scientific community. The facts in actuality do rule, but most wouldn’t know a fact if it was sitting on their head, IMO that includes most scientific theories and theorems that I can understand.
Without a known constant truth as a reference, you can never draw an logical conclusion of any unknown truth. If your reference moves then you will never know anything to be absolute, yes.
Tell me one popular scientific theory that has never changed, and is likely to never change and I will believe the theories based on it, otherwise it’s all a foolish guessing game, no less silly then turtles holding up the earth.
In addition, people just aren’t that smart, what makes anyone think we could solve the riddles of creation, can the created ever fully understand the source of its creation? This can only be true if the creator is a like entity IMO. Science for the most part is truly illogical and constantly revises it's truths.
kingdaddy said:
There are a number of views on what SPECIES means but regardless, one SPECIES does not evolve into another in a single or even a handful of steps.
SPECIES A goes through
~
millions of mutations/adaptations over millions of years.
~
the result can be called SPECIES B
By one definition of SPECIES, if A can't breed with B then they are distinct SPECIES.
Would this, then, be logical to you?
kingdaddy said:
Aren't we stretching things just a tad here? In 1492, how many people were around who could truly be called "scientists" by any conceivable definition?
Back then, the way the courts figured out if you were guilty or not was to tie you up and throw you in lake. If you didn't come back up, you were considered guilty. Or you were considered innocent, but dead. I'm not sure which. 😀
SY said:
I tried to make a simple point and I thought you would understand my meaning, guess not. Maybe you could give me a hint of which word I could use instead of "Species" so I don't have to go to college for a few more years just to convey a simple idea. Sure would save me some time and tuition.🙄
Why do you feel a need to repeatedly remind me of how you’re knowledge of science is superior to mine, I never claimed to be so smart. If there is something illogical in my statements then please point them out, I might actually learn from that.
It seems very unproductive to just tell some one to educate them selves without any attempt to correct, also a bit narcissistic on your part.
Don’t be offended, I’m not, it’s just an observation and a suggestion. 😉
The roundness of the earth was well-established over 2,000 years ago in Greece, where its diameter was calculated to great accuracy. The nonsense about Columbus is the comic book version and has no relationship to history.
Because of the accepted scientific definition of "species," an intermediate form cannot exist as a matter of logic. It is important to point out that intermediate forms CAN exist between genera, evolution predicts such forms, and indeed the fossil record is chock full of such transitions.
kd, I can't condense ten years of basic education into a couple of posts. I do the best I can, but you have to do the hard part and start cracking the books if you want your opinions to mean anything.
kingdaddy said:
or no less silly than the concept of a creator; another guess in the guessing game.
Bill Fitzpatrick said:
I guess I'm being to simple minded for you intellectual bunch, I’m being very general, never said anything about steps or how long. It all has to come back to the idea that all life as we know it came from one thing, supposable a one-cell animal, YES or NO! If it’s true that all life came from this animal then it must also be true that one (insert proper word) thingy did turn into another thingy, Yes or No. My point was simply this; How does this thingy have all the genetic information within it to eventually create such a complex interconnected set of thingy’s with such obvious connected purpose. Well that’s the best my tiny brain can do at explaining my meaning. Last time I’ll ask this question, (no one seems to want to touch it anyway), how can chaos create purpose?
It’s funny how so called smart people are in reality not able to grasp the simplest of ideas. This should be quite obvious to the most casual of observer IMO.
Thanks for the ego boost.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.