Dad disowns his gay son in handwritten letter

Page 19 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Retro Rob

Diamond Member
Apr 22, 2012
8,150
108
106
Still... why is some "creator" entity more believable than any of the other mathematically rooted theories for the origin of the universe?
Because... even logically, nothing this organized can be a product of something random.

Even now, no structure or anything we use/enjoy can just become without an idea, plan, then execution. Our planet is really a gem in space. And when we are on it, we see the supreme organization.
 

Retro Rob

Diamond Member
Apr 22, 2012
8,150
108
106
Almost as absurd as believing some dude in the sky is watching every move every one makes, and keeps a list. Almost as absurd as a "loving god" who would send infants to hell (or purgatory, equally stupid) for being born outside of wedlock. Almost as absurd as thinking a supreme being would stick around, pining for our "worship," and sending you to hell if you don't toe the line. Sounds like a couple of people who killed millions in Europe and Russia a almost 70 years ago. What happens to all the billions of people who never heard the word of "Christ," before the modern age? Are they all going to hell? Sounds like they have a pretty good excuse, to me. It's not their fault that Jesus didn't miracle his ass around the world to talk to everyone, simultaneously. He was "God," right?
Hey, I don't know what to tell ya...

Just don't believe everything you hear...
 
Oct 25, 2006
11,036
9
91
Because... even logically, nothing this organized can be a product of something random.

Even now, no structure or anything we use/enjoy can just become without an idea, plan, then execution. Our planet is really a gem in space. And when we are on it, we see the supreme organization.
You mean like how in those experiments, where they put together light, basic chemicals and water together in a jar, and complex amino acids and the precursor to RNA and DNA start forming within a very short time frame?
 

zsdersw

Lifer
Oct 29, 2003
10,560
2
0
Because... even logically, nothing this organized can be a product of something random.
Wrong. What proves that it is "random"? It appears to follow and appears to be the result of laws... laws that we're only beginning to understand.
 
Last edited:

ch33zw1z

Lifer
Nov 4, 2004
35,281
14,408
146
Ahh, so we are here by sheer coincidence, eh? I mean essentially, that's what I am hearing.

We just happened to live on the planet with the perfect distance from the Sun, the perfect size/circumference, right mixture of gases to support us, while these other planets, from a human standpoint, are uninhabitable,... all by a random sequence of events?

It's the "greatest Mystery of all time" because of the absurdity of that theory. It's the equivalent of saying this computer I am typing on just appeared by a few chips, a circuit board, plastic caps, and a CD all exploding and resulting in a robust, usable product.

Really, how silly is that?
Two separate ideas. You've now moved onto the origin of the universe, not synonymous with the Theory of Evolution.
 

alzan

Diamond Member
May 21, 2003
3,860
2
0
My bad, I was talking about the origin of our universe.
No problem.

I also accept the Big Bang theory as an explanation of how our universe, galaxy, solar system and planet began and were formed. I don't pretend to know all of the details, either of the theory or how planets and stars are formed but I find them fascinating.

Could life as we know it exist on other "Earth"-like planets in other galaxies? Quite possibly; though with our current methods of looking for them and our limited modes of space travel it'll take quite a while to discover. But we currently have a possibility within our solar system; one of Jupiter's moons (Io) has water on it. It's possible that the beginnings of carbon-based life are present there now. The Curiosity rover on Mars may find the remnants of life on the planets' surface. Exciting stuff.

Did an extra-/multi-dimensional being have a hand in creating the universe and everything in it? Unknowable and unprovable using our established methods of observation and testing.
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
462
126
Stuff like fish with legs are pretty damn good evidence of evolution too, showing the fins -> legs evolutionary scenario as well as showing the gills -> lungs scenario considering they can breath on both land and water.


That's not actually a fish, but your point is well taken. We often hear the question of why are there no transitional species, but to me most species are transitional species, intergrade between something more advanced and something more primitive. Thus we have egg-laying mammals such as the platypus among the nominally viviparous but also live-bearing ovoviviporous species such as the garter snakes among the nominally oviparous reptiles. And it's why we see the mudskipper (undeniably a fish) able to spend long periods outside of the water while a hellbender (undeniably an amphibian) unable to do the same. Most everything is on its way to becoming something else to adapt to a constantly changing environment, exploit a new food source, or foil a predator, to the point that the truly ancient creatures such as turtles or coelacanths are notable for their relative immutability.

Among individual features the same progression within the seemingly random variability can be seen. We often hear the eye cited as proof on intelligent design, and I do have some skepticism that such intricate organs could evolve purely on the basis of chance and natural selection, at least on a scale necessary to provide a viable new species, but the eye is not so singular as some might think. We see everything from the simplest eye spots in flat worms, recording only the absence or presence of light, to the incredibly evolved and intricate eyes of geckos and cuttlefish. We also know from observation that many of the proteins required to build such a complicated are quite similar to other proteins - in fact, the same genes which create the required proteins can create completely different proteins given slightly different environmental stimuli. Evolution is an ongoing, well-documented, and wondrous process.
 
Nov 30, 2006
15,456
389
121
Evolution does not preclude the existence of a creator...and the existence of a creator does not preclude the existence of evolution. Why is this so hard, for so many, to understand?
 

ch33zw1z

Lifer
Nov 4, 2004
35,281
14,408
146
Evolution does not preclude the existence of a creator...and the existence of a creator does not preclude the existence of evolution. Why is this so hard, for so many, to understand?
Not sure, but it is.

Mostly those "Earth is 10,000 years old" nuts.
 

Retro Rob

Diamond Member
Apr 22, 2012
8,150
108
106
No problem.

I also accept the Big Bang theory as an explanation of how our universe, galaxy, solar system and planet began and were formed. I don't pretend to know all of the details, either of the theory or how planets and stars are formed but I find them fascinating.

Could life as we know it exist on other "Earth"-like planets in other galaxies? Quite possibly; though with our current methods of looking for them and our limited modes of space travel it'll take quite a while to discover. But we currrently have a possibility within ou solar system; one of Jupiter's moons (Io) has water on it. It's possible that the beginnings of carbon-based life are present there now. The Curiosity rover on Mars may find the remnants of life on the planets' surface. Exciting stuff.

Did an extra-/multi-dimensional being have a hand in creating the universe and everything in it? Unknowable and unprovable using our established methods of observation and testing.
I read about Titan. I also read how it doesn't get nearly the amount of Sun we do here and the temp can be hundreds of degrees below freezing. I don't think terrestrial life can make it there.

I just appreciate the orbits and our distance from the sun, gases that are present (if the planet was smaller, certain gases would escape, if lager, they wouldn't be allowed to escape) and how the moon keeps us from wabbleing in our orbit and keeps us at this nice tilt. Other planets have similar tilts, but not quite like this one for life to be enjoyable.

Either extreme would kill life here. No other planets are suitable for humans... particularly Venus, Neptune, Uranus, Mercury, etc. Too hot/too cold or gas giants.
 

ch33zw1z

Lifer
Nov 4, 2004
35,281
14,408
146
Either extreme would kill life here. No other known planets are suitable for humans... particularly Venus, Neptune, Uranus, Mercury, etc. Too hot/too cold or gas giants.
ftfy, space...the final frontier!
 

JKing106

Platinum Member
Mar 19, 2009
2,193
0
0
Europa is the moon of Jupiter that's most likely to have life. It's a water planet, covered in a thick layer of ice. Underneath, however, is theorized to be liquid.
 

alzan

Diamond Member
May 21, 2003
3,860
2
0
I read about Titan. I also read how it doesn't get nearly the amount of Sun we do here and the temp can be hundreds of degrees below freezing. I don't think terrestrial life can make it there.

I just appreciate the orbits and our distance from the sun, gases that are present (if the planet was smaller, certain gases would escape, if lager, they wouldn't be allowed to escape) and how the moon keeps us from wabbleing in our orbit and keeps us at this nice tilt. Other planets have similar tilts, but not quite like this one for life to be enjoyable.

Either extreme would kill life here. No other planets are suitable for humans... particularly Venus, Neptune, Uranus, Mercury, etc. Too hot/too cold or gas giants.
Terrestrial life as we know it, probably. Life; highly possible.

The moon keeps us from wobbling? To a certain extent; I could be wrong but I think the Earth, with the moon's presence, wobbles 23 degrees on it's axis as it rotates. It has a strong enough pull to affect our tides and to be at least partially responsible for the tectonic plate shifting that happens daily/hourly; but not so much that we don't wobble at all.

Europa is the moon of Jupiter that's most likely to have life. It's a water planet, covered in a thick layer of ice. Underneath, however, is theorized to be liquid.
My bad.
 

alzan

Diamond Member
May 21, 2003
3,860
2
0
That's not actually a fish, but your point is well taken. We often hear the question of why are there no transitional species, but to me most species are transitional species, intergrade between something more advanced and something more primitive. Thus we have egg-laying mammals such as the platypus among the nominally viviparous but also live-bearing ovoviviporous species such as the garter snakes among the nominally oviparous reptiles. And it's why we see the mudskipper (undeniably a fish) able to spend long periods outside of the water while a hellbender (undeniably an amphibian) unable to do the same. Most everything is on its way to becoming something else to adapt to a constantly changing environment, exploit a new food source, or foil a predator, to the point that the truly ancient creatures such as turtles or coelacanths are notable for their relative immutability.

Among individual features the same progression within the seemingly random variability can be seen. We often hear the eye cited as proof on intelligent design, and I do have some skepticism that such intricate organs could evolve purely on the basis of chance and natural selection, at least on a scale necessary to provide a viable new species, but the eye is not so singular as some might think. We see everything from the simplest eye spots in flat worms, recording only the absence or presence of light, to the incredibly evolved and intricate eyes of geckos and cuttlefish. We also know from observation that many of the proteins required to build such a complicated are quite similar to other proteins - in fact, the same genes which create the required proteins can create completely different proteins given slightly different environmental stimuli. Evolution is an ongoing, well-documented, and wondrous process.
I've always thought that, in a way, it was the different types of eyes in different species that fit well within the evolutionary theory. The eye is a simple - complex structure within different species who have their own structure and different requirements for survival.
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
107,764
23,850
146
Because... even logically, nothing this organized can be a product of something random.

Even now, no structure or anything we use/enjoy can just become without an idea, plan, then execution. Our planet is really a gem in space. And when we are on it, we see the supreme organization.
ah, you assume it is all randomness.

ROFL.

sky fairies.
 

Retro Rob

Diamond Member
Apr 22, 2012
8,150
108
106
Terrestrial life as we know it, probably. Life; highly possible.

The moon keeps us from wobbling? To a certain extent; I could be wrong but I think the Earth, with the moon's presence, wobbles 23 degrees on it's axis as it rotates. It has a strong enough pull to affect our tides and to be at least partially responsible for the tectonic plate shifting that happens daily/hourly; but not so much that we don't wobble at all.
I hear you about the moon. It keeps us from extreme wobbling to where one side of the earth is in total darkness for long (or short) periods of time while the other side is facing the Sun and getting extremely high temps.

My point: it is serving it's purpose.
 

alzan

Diamond Member
May 21, 2003
3,860
2
0
I hear you about the moon. It keeps us from extreme wobbling to where one side of the earth is in total darkness for long (or short) periods of time while the other side is facing the Sun and getting extremely high temps.

My point: it is serving it's purpose.
And what purpose do the largest moons of Jupiter serve? Other than one likely containing water and possibly life. They are comparable in size to our own moon, yet the planet they orbit could swallow up 88,000 "Earths". No offense but in that context I find your use of "purpose" as compared Earth and it's moon as somewhat misinformed. <Mental image> G-d (in a pitcher's uniform and standing on an extra-dimensional mound) has just created the solar system; sees that Earth (his host for the human experiment) is wobbling too much and says "Dang, I need to stabilize that puppy!" and let's loose with a knuckleball that falls into Earth orbit and somewhat stabilizes the planet.

I'm no astronomer or cosmologist but I agree with them and see our moon and other planetary moons as captured objects; in the Earth's case a chunk of rock gouged out of the Earth by an asteroid and captured in orbit by gravity.
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
462
126
I've always thought that, in a way, it was the different types of eyes in different species that fit well within the evolutionary theory. The eye is a simple - complex structure within different species who have their own structure and different requirements for survival.
I think so too, in that each species has the eyes it needs. Statistically it seems unlikely to me that natural selection and spontaneous mutations alone can explain this, but it doesn't bother me because we are in the infancy of understanding genetic coding. Fifty years from now we may find the statistics of this no more inexplicable than lighting or a blue sky, so I don't let it bother me. If it turns out that natural selection and spontaneous mutations alone can explain the huge diversity and complexity of eyes, great. If it still seems unlikely, that's great too. Whether it's purely evolution or evolution guided by the lightest of touches is really academic to us.

One more thing here - we see blind cave tetras that are genetically (at the level we can discern anyway) identical to sighted tetras of the same species. When there is no competitive advantage to having eyes, there is a competitive disadvantage to growing eyes from the wasted metabolic energy, so the genes simply don't express the proteins to grow eyes. Since the genes that control eyes are complex and capable of coding for many different proteins, it's entirely possible that in situations where better eyesight becomes necessary, these genes may try many, many different combinations of proteins within the same individual, almost at random, receiving feedback from the complexity of the neural images received, and thereby short circuit the normal process of natural selection and spontaneous mutations. Since there would be no significant genetic difference between the sighted (or better sighted) individual, there would be no commensurate difficulty in breeding with the base population. We may one day understand that a species may be capable of considerable stable change without randomly suffering mutations at all. Or conversely, we may one day understand that a species may be capable of considerable stable change due to viruses swapping out and/or adding genetic material. Or we may find some third mechanism that handily explains the statistics. Whatever, a little mystery in life is a good thing.
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
462
126
I read about Titan. I also read how it doesn't get nearly the amount of Sun we do here and the temp can be hundreds of degrees below freezing. I don't think terrestrial life can make it there.

I just appreciate the orbits and our distance from the sun, gases that are present (if the planet was smaller, certain gases would escape, if lager, they wouldn't be allowed to escape) and how the moon keeps us from wabbleing in our orbit and keeps us at this nice tilt. Other planets have similar tilts, but not quite like this one for life to be enjoyable.

Either extreme would kill life here. No other planets are suitable for humans... particularly Venus, Neptune, Uranus, Mercury, etc. Too hot/too cold or gas giants.
But to a degree, that's observational bias. Life evolved on (or designed for) a very stable, 100+ C volcanic planet where life's building blocks are arsenic, silicon and copper rather than phosphorus, carbon and iron would look at Earth and say "My G-d, what a miserable frozen planet with all that poisonous free oxygen! And don't even get me started on that crazy wobble, what's up with that?"
 

Retro Rob

Diamond Member
Apr 22, 2012
8,150
108
106
And what purpose do the largest moons of Jupiter serve? Other than one likely containing water and possibly life. They are comparable in size to our own moon, yet the planet they orbit could swallow up 88,000 "Earths". No offense but in that context I find your use of "purpose" as compared Earth and it's moon as somewhat misinformed.


All I mean is that it has a unique purpose to our planet, due to the fact that this is the only one that has any lifeforms on it.

I'm no astronomer or cosmologist but I agree with them and see our moon and other planetary moons as captured objects; in the Earth's case a chunk of rock gouged out of the Earth by an asteroid and captured in orbit by gravity.
It was once believed that the earth was flat. Now it has been established for a certainty that it is spherical in shape. That is a fact. It was once believed that the earth was the center of the universe and that the heavens revolved around the earth. Now we know for sure that the earth revolves in an orbit around the sun. This, too, is a fact.

What if they're wrong? They (people, scientists, astronomers) make some sweeping assertions for a race that wasn't here to see any of this... and love to conclude "fact" based on evidence that they haven't come near to fully understanding.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY