Intelligent Design

[davewhite04]

Then why did you post it here, and greet my reposting of its content with questions and doubts?
It's not an example of anyone's earliest writing, it's not Sumerian, and it's about the awesomeness of a Babylonian king.
To revisit:

That is, this:
is a false claim.

I was questioning your knowledge because your original post does not agree with the actual facts.

 

[iceaura]

I was questioning your knowledge because your original post does not agree with the actual facts.

And you were wrong about that - as you can read in your own links.

 

[davewhite04]

And you were wrong about that - as you can read in your own links.

Wrong about what?

 

[iceaura]

Wrong about what?

The actual facts.

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

What evidence?

I have been through that with you already.

Our current best cosmology, the big bang theory, cant take us to a point in the evolution of the universe where there was nothing...you must note the theory talks of a hot dense something rather than nothing...what more do you need?

I'm sure it is supported, but not by mainstream science man.

The big bang theory clearly supports the proposition that there has always been something.

Everything we see always comes from something...a birth...comes from something...stuff does not appear out of nothing which is the suggestion made by your god creation myths.

Do you know who the first brewers of beer according to history/mythology? were?

Adam and Eve?

Do you mean the man didn't exist? or the other stuff?

All we can reliably say is the JC story is just one of many human god stories that did the rounds in ancient times...that is supported by historical evidence.

As to an actual person that we call JC I think we are met with a lack of evidence that someone by that name existed...there is no birth certificate which seems so important to many believers given their past protests about a former president.

The bible.

Yes if you want crazy notions that is the place to find them.

Man you can make a list.

I was going to make a list but I would end up with a book near as big as the bible.

If you want to discuss a religious text you can't keep on responding with "it's a myth", it's pointless.

I dont recall that I ever said that I wanted to discuss religious text...why would I its a myth.

Do you know you act like a one man band religion?

Rubbish...firstly a band requires more than one human...that is the very meaning of the word.

Secondly to qualify as a religion there must be central a supernatural deity and perhaps you have not noticed my well asserted claim is there is no deity...no not a band and not a religion.

Now if you get something like this so wrong does it not occur to you that you could be wrong on many more matters...particularly those matters that you do not have any evidence to support a claim based on belief.

Alex

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

That’s exactly what Alex is.

Jan you have a propensity to support ideas that are just wrong.
You must know what a band is ...its the group drummers like to hang out with☺ sorry I expect you have heard most of the drummer jokes...more than one human is required for a band...and as for me presenting as a religion you need to saddle me with a supernatural deity and you have no chance there...
And so as I said to Davewhite04 just think if you can get such a simple matter so wrong ( two out of two wrong) does that not cause you to wonder just how many other things you have got wrong.
Sure "one man band religion" sounds catchy but its wrong...and you certainly get taken in by stuff that sounds catchy but is just dribble. Think it through...dont just bang away man...think.

He has this strange notion that he is advocating science.

Well tell me where I have the science wrong.
I assert that our current cosmology can not and does not start at a point where there was nothing. ..if I am wrong it will be a simple matter to show my error so please...knock yourself out.

Maybe if one of his atheist chums, give him a gentle nudge, he may wale up.

I think all will agree that the theory cant take us past a hot dense something to nothing...the theory expressly deals with the evolution of the universe from a hot dense something and never mentions an evolution from nothing.

The beauty of science is if I am wrong there will be a line of folk happy to point out my error...so lets see what comes shall we...and if I am not shown to be wrong will you acknowledge such?

Alex

 

[davewhite04]

The actual facts.

What facts? Provide your evidence that dates these Sumerian tablets that you talk about.

Do you see that the earliest tablets talked about gods?

https://www.ancient-origins.net/hum...-beings-according-ancient-sumerian-texts-0065

If that's not good enough for you, provide your evidence to teach me something.

 

[davewhite04]

I have been through that with you already.

Yes. https://phys.org/news/2015-02-big-quantum-equation-universe.html I found some good evidence.

Our current best cosmology, the big bang theory, cant take us to a point in the evolution of the universe where there was nothing...you must note the theory talks of a hot dense something rather than nothing...what more do you need?

I don't know Alex. So anyone's belief is as good as the others. I am pretty sure the universe is eternal My argument is as exactly what you said below and what I've said before. Why would there be an exception to the golden rule, everything starts and ends. So that means the universe will end. But you say eternal?

The big bang theory clearly supports the proposition that there has always been something.

What created that something? Was it a bunch of atoms just being in darkness stuck in nowhere?

The way I look at the eternal universe is that its laws are not bound by our science, our finite brains cannot overcome the wall science has framed our world in. I respect your belief.

Adam and Eve?

The Sumerians

Yes if you want crazy notions that is the place to find them.

Man you can make a list.

I was going to make a list but I would end up with a book near as big as the bible.

You asked, I answered.

I dont recall that I ever said that I wanted to discuss religious text...why would I its a myth.

Thought you might be interested.

Rubbish...firstly a band requires more than one human...that is the very meaning of the word.

one-man band
noun

1. a street entertainer who plays many instruments at the same time.
   • a person who runs a business alone.

Secondly to qualify as a religion there must be central a supernatural deity and perhaps you have not noticed my well asserted claim is there is no deity...no not a band and not a religion.

No, not every religion have a central deity. Monotheism is probably what you mean?

Now if you get something like this so wrong does it not occur to you that you could be wrong on many more matters...particularly those matters that you do not have any evidence to support a claim based on belief.

I guess you are all the same.

Dave

 

[billvon]

I don't know Alex. So anyone's belief is as good as the others.

That's the politically correct thing to say, but it's not actually true. Some people DO understand things better than other people. "Bothsiderism" is populist nonsense.

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

Yes. https://phys.org/news/2015-02-big-quantum-equation-universe.html I found some good evidence.

Thanks for the link I found it most interesting...plus I was particularly interested in the part re gravity.

Why would there be an exception to the golden rule, everything starts and ends.

The important aspect to note is that in every case the start comes from something ... we see a star form and so we can say it has a start but it did not just appear from nothing.
Creation implies the start came from nothing which is just not possible...there is no need to even consider if the creation is from "natural" forces or the work of an inteligent designer or god...
The golden rule could be better expressed as ...although we observe a start it comes from something that has already existed.

So anyone's belief is as good as the others

Well that is nice but I think we must recognise that some beliefs are reasonable and others are unreasonable.

What created that something?

My contention is there has always been something and therefore we do not have to ask your question.
There has never been a point of creation...why is it difficult to accept an eternal universe yet the idea of an eternal entity seems reasonable.
The eternal entity approach is most difficult to reconcile. ..it exists in eternity but at some point comes out of eternity to create a finite universe does not seem at all reasonable...

But you say eternal?

Yes as any other approach really wont makes sense.

What created that something?

There was no creation...why is that difficult to grasp and why would an eternal god solve the uneasy feeling one gets when trying to imagine eternal...an eternal being is a lot hatder to get your head around than an eternal universe.
Moreover it becomes clear that the idea of an eternal entity or god/creator has been made up because humans cant get their head around the reality of an eternal universe but after you think about the two alternatives the idea of a eternal creator god just becomes silly...try thinking about the two alternatives...you can only arrive at the conclusion the universe has more chance of being eternal than some entity being eternal.

The Sumerians

I need to check but I think they invented Adam and Eve ...but yes they did and their recipe still exists.

You asked, I answered

And I thank you for your honesty but I cant respond any other way...well I could but I do enjoy the lack of self restraint ...

Thought you might be interested.

Thanks for thinking of me.

one-man band
noun

1. a street entertainer who plays many instruments at the same time.
   • a person who runs a business alone.

Mmmm just does not seem right.

I guess you are all the same.

I dont know what you mean.

Anyways nice post.


Alex

 

[davewhite04]

Thanks for the link I found it most interesting...plus I was particularly interested in the part re gravity.

The important aspect to note is that in every case the start comes from something ... we see a star form and so we can say it has a start but it did not just appear from nothing.
Creation implies the start came from nothing which is just not possible...there is no need to even consider if the creation is from "natural" forces or the work of an inteligent designer or god...
The golden rule could be better expressed as ...although we observe a start it comes from something that has already existed.


Well that is nice but I think we must recognise that some beliefs are reasonable and others are unreasonable.

My contention is there has always been something and therefore we do not have to ask your question.
There has never been a point of creation...why is it difficult to accept an eternal universe yet the idea of an eternal entity seems reasonable.
The eternal entity approach is most difficult to reconcile. ..it exists in eternity but at some point comes out of eternity to create a finite universe does not seem at all reasonable...

Yes as any other approach really wont makes sense.

There was no creation...why is that difficult to grasp and why would an eternal god solve the uneasy feeling one gets when trying to imagine eternal...an eternal being is a lot hatder to get your head around than an eternal universe.
Moreover it becomes clear that the idea of an eternal entity or god/creator has been made up because humans cant get their head around the reality of an eternal universe but after you think about the two alternatives the idea of a eternal creator god just becomes silly...try thinking about the two alternatives...you can only arrive at the conclusion the universe has more chance of being eternal than some entity being eternal.

I need to check but I think they invented Adam and Eve ...but yes they did and their recipe still exists.

And I thank you for your honesty but I cant respond any other way...well I could but I do enjoy the lack of self restraint ...

Thanks for thinking of me.

Mmmm just does not seem right.

I dont know what you mean.

Anyways nice post.


Alex

Who knows Alex? I put it down to humans not being able to comprehend eternity properly. The concept cannot be answered by science.

I can't remember mentioning God.

We agree on a lot of stuff Alex.

"but I cant respond any other way...well I could but I do enjoy the lack of self restraint ... "

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

I can't remember mentioning God.

You probably did not but I have been watching the Atheist Experience, Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchins so I am probably reading stuff in....I really like each of them.


It would be wonderful to know what is really going on with the universe.

A god is too simple an explanation but I understand humans have difficulty with the complexity of reality.

Something that I find interesting is the way gallaxies line up "like buttons on a string"...

It seems that the jets from gallactic centers join up with the next gallaxy...I have asked here for opinions but folk just say no more than "thats what we could expect as a product of the big bang" which seems to me odd...and it suggests a determination not to think about something that may cause the current paradigm to not be the central issue....what is going on should be the question not it supports what we know.

There seems a relationship but that raises no interest ...I feel to understand what is going on and why would be neat to know.

I wonder what passes from gallaxy to gallaxy via these jets and does anything travell the length...from gallaxy to gallaxy to gallaxy etc.

As to enternity and or infinity...it is said that it is a wise man who can imagine a stick without out ends. .. one will try but I think the wisdom comes from an acceptance that although one can comptemplate the exercise one must know that such is impossible to imagine....I like to sit under the stars and try (I let the stick pass thru imaginary worlds and places so as to think of everything that could be, may be and could never be) and then I introduce a stick for every trajectory through every point... try and hold that in your imagination☺..and then one realises that at any point it can be realised that each and every point is conected to every other point in the universe...so from me to you a set of trajectories connect us..as it goes between everyone ....then I like to imagine all the particles and or packets of energy travelling in each direction on each tradgectory.

I like to use these trajectories as lines of communication to everyone else in the universe....

You could try it sometime.
Alex

 

[iceaura]

What facts? Provide your evidence that dates these Sumerian tablets that you talk about.

You did, dude. That's why I asked you if you read your own links.
I also quoted Wikipedia on the subject, in 85.
Turns out when I threw in the Wiki they were clay cones, not flat tablets (flat tablets came later) - my memory slipped. But that's hardly the point, eh?

If that's not good enough for you, provide your evidence to teach me something.

It's obviously not good enough to indicate what the earliest writings were about, because it doesn't date anything or place the writing it quotes in any sequence.
It implies, sort of, by suggestive association, that the Creation account it quotes was written by Sumerians around or shortly after 4500 BC, but that is not possible: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_writing

The oldest surviving literary texts date from a full millennium after the invention of writing to the late 3rd millennium BC. The earliest literary authors known by name are Ptahhotep (who wrote in Egyptian) and Enheduanna (who wrote in Sumerian), dating to around the 24th and 23rd centuries BC, respectively. In the early literate societies, as much as 600 years passed from the first inscriptions to the first coherent textual sources: i.e., from around 3100 to 2600 BC.

The quotes in 85 were from one of those first textual sources in Sumerian cuneiform, and note that the language of the society involved was Akkadian, not Sumerian. Wiki et al tell us Sumerian is thought by most scholars to have been a dead language by then - used by scribes and priests only, much as Latin in the Roman Catholic Church.

 

[davewhite04]

You probably did not but I have been watching the Atheist Experience, Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchins so I am probably reading stuff in....I really like each of them.

You've reminded me of that, will watch it in a sec.

It seems that the jets from gallactic centers join up with the next gallaxy...I have asked here for opinions but folk just say no more than "thats what we could expect as a product of the big bang" which seems to me odd...and it suggests a determination not to think about something that may cause the current paradigm to not be the central issue....what is going on should be the question not it supports what we know.

Philosphy is ideal for them thoughts. You never know who's reading sciforums right?

I wonder what passes from gallaxy to gallaxy via these jets and does anything travell the length...from gallaxy to gallaxy to gallaxy etc.

Maybe a spaceship superhighway? Who knows, but are you thinking the universe is self aware?

As to enternity and or infinity...it is said that it is a wise man who can imagine a stick without out ends. .. one will try but I think the wisdom comes from an acceptance that although one can comptemplate the exercise one must know that such is impossible to imagine....I like to sit under the stars and try (I let the stick pass thru imaginary worlds and places so as to think of everything that could be, may be and could never be) and then I introduce a stick for every trajectory through every point... try and hold that in your imagination☺..and then one realises that at any point it can be realised that each and every point is conected to every other point in the universe...so from me to you a set of trajectories connect us..as it goes between everyone ....then I like to imagine all the particles and or packets of energy travelling in each direction on each tradgectory.

Various snake cults from ancient history till probably now used a snake eating it's tail as a symbol of eternity.

Yes, it's all in the mind

You could try it sometime.

I don't use that form of communication

 

[davewhite04]

You did, dude. That's why I asked you if you read your own links.
I also quoted Wikipedia on the subject, in 85.
Turns out when I threw in the Wiki they were clay cones, not flat tablets (flat tablets came later) - my memory slipped. But that's hardly the point, eh?

It's obviously not good enough to indicate what the earliest writings were about, because it doesn't date anything or place the writing it quotes in any sequence.
It implies, sort of, by suggestive association, that the Creation account it quotes was written by Sumerians around or shortly after 4500 BC, but that is not possible: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_writing
The quotes in 85 were from one of those first textual sources in Sumerian cuneiform, and note that the language of the society involved was Akkadian, not Sumerian. Wiki et al tell us Sumerian is thought by most scholars to have been a dead language by then - used by scribes and priests only, much as Latin in the Roman Catholic Church.

The earliest known written Sumerian accounts of gods or myths date to about 1600 BCE, more than a thousand years after the first known Sumerian writing. It was probably written by a specially educated class of priests, after spoken Sumerian had become extinct in general society, as Latin was used by priests in the Christian religion long after the Roman Empire was dust.

The earliest known Sumerian writing - by a thousand years - is stuff like this:


"Enlil, king of all the lands, father of all the gods, by his firm command, fixed the border between Ningirsu and Šara."

"Mesilim, king of Kiš, at the command of Ištaran, measured the field and set up a stele there."

"Ush, ruler of Umma, acted unspeakably."

"He ripped out that stele and marched toward the plain of Lagaš."

"Ningirsu, warrior of Enlil, at his just command, made war with Umma."

"At Enlil's command, he threw his great battle net over it and heaped up burial mounds for it on the plain."

"Eannatum, ruler of Lagash, uncle of Entemena, ruler of Lagaš"

"fixed the border with Enakale, ruler of Umma"

Are you for real?

 

[davewhite04]

You probably did not but I have been watching the Atheist Experience, Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchins so I am probably reading stuff in....

The irony is is that Dawkins has become a Godlike figure to many.

He does hold a lot of venom and hate! I can't understand fundamentalists.

 

[iceaura]

The irony is is that Dawkins has become a Godlike figure to many.

Nobody you've ever met or talked to.

 

[billvon]

The irony is is that Dawkins has become a Godlike figure to many.

Who?

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

Maybe a spaceship superhighway?

Deep.

are you thinking the universe is self aware?

No I thinking " whats for dinner".

Various snake cults from ancient history till probably now used a snake eating it's tail as a symbol of eternity.

If you look at the Eygptian symbol for eternity thats rather cool and particularly how they came up with their symbol...it was written by their god and is still written once a year...the god (the Sun) that all the human gods tried to claim to be the offspring of...thats the deal about all the human gods and the personification thing....JC just a Sun god take off...astrology becomes religion.


A snake eating its tail would be a good symbol for hate.

I don't use that form of communication

Maybe when you reach enlightenment☺

I have spent some time looking at youtube videos on speaking in tounges. ..I would zay its harmless but they have the little kids doing it...so cruel.

The irony is is that Dawkins has become a Godlike figure to many.

He is better than that...he is real and his words make sense.

He does hold a lot of venom and hate!

Pity everyone could not be as controlled and polite as that wonderful man.

I can't understand fundamentalists

I expect that you are now not talking about Richard Dawkins but about the various rat bags who support honor killing, genital mutilation, speaking in tounges, threatening others with hell, paying 10% of their income to a church, rejecting evolution, claiming the Earth is flat, asserting racial superiority, supporting intelligent design, claiming the world is 6000 years old, believing the flood story, believing a human could be god and believing a human could rise from being dead just to mention a few traits of most fundamentalists.

I like Christopher Hitchins most of all as he is the only person that I have heard lay the blame for the anti semetic murders in Nazi Germany at the feet of the real criminals...not the Nazi but the Catholic church preaching anti semetic hatred for generations prior to the Nazi party ever being thought of...those killers were trained by the church to hate and given the chance would have committed their crimes under any flag.

Christopher Hitchins is the only person to call out the church for their actions of preaching hatred over generations.

I suppose those facts must be swept under the carpet because they are just too terrible to entertain....and you can bet if one looked to find where anti semitism comes from today you may well find that the churches preaching still haunts us.

Alex

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

Now here is a young hopeful.
Alex