Not to be offensive but this is an appeal to ignorance and lazy thinking. You may not understand it but others do.
No one understands the origin of Big Bang/ Evolution, though. It's still theory... that is my point.
Not to be offensive but this is an appeal to ignorance and lazy thinking. You may not understand it but others do.
There is a huge amount of coincidence in the universe to make life possible, even comfortable. We don't yet know to what degree that is observer bias - we have significant knowledge of only one solar system, and even that's spotty. If we explore many solar systems and find the same order, regularity, and suitability for life, and the same general kind of life, then we can conclude the universe is designed. But even that is not a safe conclusion; we'll still be able to perceive only one universe, with no way of knowing if there are an infinite number of random universes and we just happen to be in one that encourages life as we know it.I am not good at explaining stuff, but I will try...
For instance, if you had a juicer and you were like "dang, how can it extract the juice and leave the rest of the fruit ready for disposal?" I recently brought one and am amazed by that.
Anyway, the first thing we normally think about is the person or people who designed/built the thing and give them credit for their ingenuity. We don't know how to make one of those, but we do give them credit.
Likewise, I am fascinated with outer-space, personally. And when I look deeply into it, I wonder who organized that stuff out there. I know we (humans) didn't, but I know someone did. I mean, it's just too organized (our solar system) for me to write it off as a result of nuclear chaos.
That's just how I come to conclusions...
No one understands the origin of Big Bang/ Evolution, though. It's still theory... that is my point.
Some people like to pretend they understand it. Especially high school professors.No one understands the origin of Big Bang/ Evolution, though. It's still theory... that is my point.
I wonder about space all the time as well. But why does it have to have been "put there" by anyone?
You have complex systems all around you that developed over time and were not put into place as part of any grand design. So why find it so hard to accept?
There is a huge amount of coincidence in the universe to make life possible, even comfortable. We don't yet know to what degree that is observer bias - we have significant knowledge of only one solar system, and even that's spotty. If we explore many solar systems and find the same order, regularity, and suitability for life, and the same general kind of life, then we can conclude the universe is designed. But even that is not a safe conclusion; we'll still be able to perceive only one universe, with no way of knowing if there are an infinite number of random universes and we just happen to be in one that encourages life as we know it.
I don't think we're really meant to know for sure. I think we're meant to simply feel G-d, feel the order. You either have faith that you are not the supreme accomplishment of the universe and are therefore a a product on something higher, or you are filled with rage at that thought, or you fall somewhere in between.
Then you are impatient. Just because no one understand the first fractions of a nanosecond of the big bang doesn't mean that one day somebody won't.
If you wish to assume an answer understand that your assumption is almost certainly wrong no matter how right it feels.
When we look at our planet, it serves a purpose unique just to us... and that's so we can live on it.
Read that back to yourself. Do you really believe that?
Why do I have to identify it? It seems to me sufficient to say that we don't know right now.
A man who lived 500 years ago would have no idea how a spacecraft could take off, orbit the earth and communicate with people on the surface. But that doesn't mean that those things were not possible. Just that the understanding wasn't there yet.
Sorry, but you really don't know that.
What I find fascinating is that you consider this beyond the realm of possibility, but you have no problem accepting an even more complex supernatural life form that came from... nowhere? Just magically popped into being?
I never said they would. I said we don't currently know.
The Earth is a lot older than 10 million years.
Current thinking is that life in one form or another has existed on Earth for 3.7 billion years; that's a far cry from 10 million years.
I know I just looked at this thread but you've got a be trolling.
Actually if you really believe this.... ROLFLMAO!
No one understands the origin of Big Bang/ Evolution, though. It's still theory... that is my point.
Ever heard of the Cambrian explosion? It was a period in geological history that has been estimated to have lasted anywhere from 5 to 40 million years, in which there was a very rapid and startling increase the diversity and complexity of living creatures.
So apparently, life does not need billions of years to evolve and diversify into more complex forms..
Yes I have heard of it. 35 million years is a huge amount of time. I don't find it at all odd that once you have a life forms of a given nature and maturity that through evolution you could over 35 million years have a vast array of living creatures.
But, the fact that you display "faith" that it will one day be discovered is very telling I think.
The ancients weren't as naive as you believe. Mankind has been envisioning aircraft in one form or another for centuries, or even thousands of years.
I can't say for certain that no such natural force or law exists. But I can say that there is no KNOWN natural force which would allow lifeless matter to self organize itself into far more complex and orderly structures and then gain consciousness.
Why does that distinction exist? Surely if there was a natural force capable of such feats, then it would affect inorganic matter much more readily as it wouldn't discriminate, since natural forces act upon both organic and inorganic matter alike.
Nothing material comes from nowhere. Everything in material existence has a source. On the other hand, if there is a Divine Creator, then It has always existed.
How can I say this? Because infinite regression is logically unsound and ridiculous. Questions like who or what created God, and who or what created that God and so on and so forth into oblivion is nonsensical..
At least you can admit it.
35 million years is a huge amount of time, but given the reliance of evolution on "minute, slight, successive changes" caused by random mutation, is it enough time?
Believe me, mathematical models have been done on the probability of such things occurring, and they are always lacking.
Where as intelligent design advocates believe in an Intelligent Creator to beat the odds, neo darwinian evolutions must rely on Time..
Also, while mutation can conceivably cause speciation, it has never been shown to cause an increase in information that would be necessary to create an entirely new life form.
What natural process? You first have to identify the natural process that you think is responsible for the things I listed..
But there is no natural process capable of such things, and for obvious reasons.
If you take some aluminum, steel, rubber, oil, glass etc and place them in a pile together and leave it for a 10 million years, will you get a car or an airplane?
Of course not, but thats essentially what you're saying in a way, except with living creatures it's far worse because they are a million times more complex than any machine humans have made..
That lifeless matter can spontaneously self organize into far more complex structures and become living creatures endowed with consciousness is even more absurd than the example I listed above with the pile of aluminum, steel, rubber etc turning into a car or an airplane after 10 million years..
It's also apparent that you have "faith" that Science will eventually find a natural process capable of creating such amazing and complex structures.
Again, I never expressed such a faith. There are some things that we do not know and will probably never know.
Depends on what you mean by "known", and how far back you want to go. For that matter, it depends on what you mean by "consciousness". Looking at the animal kingdom, for example, where do you draw the line between consciousness and its lack?
Don't get what you're getting at here.
You do understand that you just contradicted yourself, right? You can't say that nothing comes from nowhere, oh, except for this one thing that is the most complex and powerful thing to ever exist. It just doesn't make any sense.
I still don't get this type of thinking. How is what you call "infinite regression" any more logically unsound or ridiculous than an ominpotent, eternal being with no causal explanation?
People ask who created God not because they are trying to be nonsensical, but to demonstrate that your notion of God is the very logically unsound and ridiculous infinite regression you want to avoid!
Being willing to recognize and admit what we don't know is an important part of rationality.
Also, per the Wiki entry on Cambrian explosion; "Interpretation is difficult due to a limited supply of evidence, based mainly on an incomplete fossil record and chemical signatures left in Cambrian rocks."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambrian_explosion
The fossil record is incomplete, we don't know all of the transitional stages of a given life form. Also the Wiki entry gives a much longer period of time for the start/finish of the Cambrian explosion, 70 million years.
Those materials DONT SELF REPLICATE!
FFS.
Even if it's 70 million years, thats still a rather short amount of time geologically speaking.
At any rate, Time is only relevent if you believe that the actual natural forces behind the evolution of life (mutation and natural selection) can accomplish these amazing feats to begin with.
Like I stated earlier, mutation has never been shown to result in a completely different life form. For example, while dolphins and dogs are both mammals, one is adapted for life in the Ocean and the other for life on dry land, and those adaptations are very numerous and specific in scope.
And yet DNA and RNA are based on inorganic matter ie phosphorus, carbon, nitrogen that don't replicate either..
Ever heard of the Cambrian explosion? It was a period in geological history that has been estimated to have lasted anywhere from 5 to 40 million years, in which there was a very rapid and startling increase the diversity and complexity of living creatures.
So apparently, life does not need billions of years to evolve and diversify into more complex forms..
It is the huge leaps in the Cambrian era, along with the huge gaps in the fossile record, which finally forced evolution to accept forms of saltation and punctuated equlibrium. Rather than continue to say "oh, those fossils actually existed, but we will never find them, so just use faith and agree they existed" they came up with mechanisms to actually match the fossil record. This change turned the theory of evolution from a laughable display of idiocy into something which very well might explain what happened over the millenia.
This is good, for we should use the least amount of faith in science as possible. We can never get rid of all of it (assumptions are needed), but we should minimize its use.