One God?

Discussion in 'Comparative Religion' started by mathman, Jan 12, 2016.

  1. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,320
    Superhuman intelligence is just a euphemism for God. It is far less probable than known natural processes.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. mathman Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,388
    "Earth was still subject to constant asteroid bombardment, then there would have been little opportunity for prebiotic evolution of simpler chemical replicators to result in the origin of the first procaryotic cell." How do you know that? I've seen theories which have life starting in the ocean depths around some sort of volcanic activity. Asteroid bombardment might not have had much impact.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Bowser Life is Fatal. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,662
    The genesis of life is an assumption--not as though we were there or that we can replicate it.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Bowser Life is Fatal. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,662
    Science is nothing more than an objective observation of our environment. It's limitations are defined by our limitations. At present, it is incapable of duplicating the process that sparked life. We've traveled far and beyond the limitations of our world, yet the simplest question can't be answered or observed by experiment. It's all theory. Until that day when science makes that determining leap and produces life, life itself will remain magical in essence.
     
  8. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,320
    The existence of life is a fact. The chemical processes that make up life are fact. We just don't know which specific processes in which specific order created life.

    The existence of an intelligence that could create life is NOT a fact. For that reason, life by natural processes is more probable than life by fantasy magical processes.

    You're welcome to believe what you want but don't try to use probability to back it up.
     
  9. Bowser Life is Fatal. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,662
    We are left with the idea that a complex system can just happen, no matter how improbable it might be, right?
     
  10. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    29,690
    No. Complex systems might evolve from simple systems.
     
  11. timojin Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,946
    "
    The existence of an intelligence that could create life is NOT a fact.

    How can you be so sure ? were did you read that ?
     
  12. mathman Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,388
    The burden of proof is on those who claim existence of a creator.
     
  13. Bowser Life is Fatal. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,662
    I never claimed it to be fact. Just looking at the amazing complexity of life gives me doubt that it happened by chance. Evolution in itself is a mechanism of nature (or god by any other name).
     
  14. timojin Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,946
    The same to you prove there is no creator . I believe majority of people believe there is a Creator and the minority are non believe .
     
    Bowser likes this.
  15. Bowser Life is Fatal. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,662
    I would agree with you here. Much of our knowledge comes from a desire to better understand creation.
     
  16. Bowser Life is Fatal. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,662
  17. timojin Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,946
    Is not that true . Entropy tells us it increases by reducing complex systems into a more simple system unless work is done to organize it ?
     
  18. mathman Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,388
    There is plenty of energy on earth (sun, volcanoes) to do work.
     
  19. mathman Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,388
    Belief doesn't make it so.

    In general, the burden of proof is on the claim of existence. If I assert that there are unicorns, I believe it would not be proper to insist that someone prove that there are none.
     
  20. Waiter_2001 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    459
  21. Waiter_2001 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    459
    "What, no singing?"-Top Gun.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  22. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,498
    If: One can not know "GOD"
    Then: One cannot specify as to quantity.
     
    sideshowbob likes this.
  23. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    29,690
    Bowser:

    Evolution by natural selection is not just chance. Neither are chemical reactions, for that matter.

    That probably depends on what you mean by a protocell. If you're referring to a cell that contains lots of proteins that would be extremely unlikely to assemble by chance, then it's probably fair to describe it as a complex system. Life, however, would not have started with that kind of protocell.

    timojin:

    As mathman said, there's plenty of energy available for life on Earth to organise itself. It comes in the form of sunlight and heat from the Earth's interior, for example.
     

Share This Page