Originally posted by: apoppin
Originally posted by: tenshodo13
Originally posted by: apoppin
Originally posted by: jackschmittusa
apoppin
Evolution is as well supported as our understanding of gravity. Would you propose teaching that gravity is only a theory also?
well, if we teach it as though we fully understand it .. that would be wrong, wouldn't you say?
.. but to answer your question about teaching that "Gravity is a Theory" -
No!, actually
a much expanded view of this phenomenon will also allow us to propel matter and also eventually allow
us to travel faster than light
.. too bad Einstein died without explaining it properly - or entirely
What do you think, by next century? Warp 1?
Humans could do it right now if we stopped warring amongst ourselves and focused on what is important - survival and care for our BioSphere
- when and IF we do, we can go and check it all out for ourselves
When do we ever teach Gravity like we know it? We teach cold hard facts about it to the extent that we know. We know that stuff falls at 9.8 m/s on earth and Mass affects the amount of gravity. Go to any physics teacher, and if you ask them why gravity exists, they'll tell you that they don't know yet.
And its impossible for mass to exceed the speed of light. Einstein explained it quite clearly to the extent that he knew it. He spent his last years looking for the Theory of Everything, which will hopefully answer all the questions we have of the universe.
The fact is Evolution+Spontaneous Generation of Life is NOT science and has absolutely no place in the classroom or a public school; it should ALSO be taught as "theory" as no one on this planet can demonstrate Spontaneous Generation of Life as actually ever happening - even under the most "ideal" and controlled conditions.
Something is a science if you can have a hypothesis and you are able to create a repeatable experiment to demonstrate it. We have already created organic molecules from the primordial soup that existed billions of years ago. That is a supporting piece of evidence, and so, the spontaneous existence of life can be considered a science.
Also, it IS taught as a theory.
i love the word *impossible*
according to the way you think - it is IMPOSSIBLE for there to be a god
right on
i get it
and actually it would be a
*Unified* Theory of Everything that will explain how to use gravity to accelerate mass [which changes]
beyond the speed of light
impossible? .. science, so far is ridiculous and barely a step above witchcraft and astrology although we have the tools of creation in front of us
[or behind or within if you believe mb] .. open you eyes .. is everyone that blind to the potential of the human race?
Traditional Science says it is "impossible" and religion says "god will take care of it"
wtf?
"organic molecules" ...
RotFL .. that is "life"
.. like "a" and maybe "m" in a 'Chinese' alphabet with of trillions of variations that must be precisely aligned and vary, grow and adapt according to an established genetic "code" ..
that just "happened"?
oooh .. that is almost "religious" belief .. actually it more ignorant because it claims "science"
First of all, capitals are your friend
How could gravity accelerate something to the speed of light when itself only influences objects at the speed of light.
According to the way I think, its impossible for there to be a God because God would be the Ultimate Boeing 747(Credit to Richard Dawkins) A "God" that can somehow completely ignore physical laws, create intelligent life, get energy from nothing, and not need to explain its own existence is supposed to be a simple belief? I say its impossible because according to physical laws its impossible, and I prefer to follow observation, not blind faith
Unified Field theory would use a combination of Relativity and Quantum mechanics. Relativity states that its IMPOSSIBLE for a object with mass to go faster than the speed of light because you would require an infinite amount of energy to get an infinite amount of mass over the barrier. The Universe is Finite, so its impossible to get the energy to do this.
What we really need the TOE for is to explain the existence of singularities, because in singularities, Quantum Mechanics and Relativity break down. A TOE would merge these two, and let us explain Black Holes, and mabye even the Big Bang
Science was created to be able to actually explain things instead of relying on a random toss of bones, or looking at the stars. The human race is incredibly limited to what we can do. However, we make do what we can. There are impossibilities. Like being able to create a Dyson Sphere, or create in real life, a Mobius strip, but we are able to THINK and OBSERVE. That is what puts science above religous mish mash.
The belief that God can take care of it is complete nonsense. What intellectual input can we garner from that? I swear, Religion is bringing America down. Instead of actual progress, we just say, God will take care of it, much like how they said that we would take care of Radioactive Waste in the 80's. It hasn't happened, and we would be fools to just wait for free hand outs.
Organic Molecules are a essential component to life. Amino Acids and Proteins are all building blocks that led to the first RNA.
There are only 4 Bases in DNA anyway, any combination of these could have lots of results.
All it needs is one membrane that came togther from Proteans that binded together in a Primoridal Soup. That membrane, if able to regulate its internal enviroment, would be the first step to life. Now if a chain of Amino Acids got into that Membrane, you could have a "cell". These instances are not far fetched, and all grouped together over billions of years, would have the result we see today.
Its like the monkey with the typewriter analogy. Given the time, the Monkey will eventually write out the complete works of Shakespeare. I would say this is THE Shakespeare of our universe.
Its inherently non religious when repeatable experiments get mixed in the foray. You are inherently being amazingly ignorant because you claim that "God will do it" instead of, I believe in this because there are repeadtable observable experiments that show what I believe.
Facebook
Twitter