Big Bang Theory .... Who lit the fuse?

bionicarm

bionicarm

Active Member
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW
http:///forum/post/3083017
Ok, lets think about this. The indins had a religion and god before ever hearing of the bible. The Mayans had a form, Then their were the greek and roman gods.....There are tribes in africa that worship a god or gods...
each had their own representation.....however there still was a religion and a god or gods....so what do you think?

I was thinking more in line with what the cilivilized cultures considered who God and religion were (Jews, Catholics, Methodists, Baptists, etc.). More or less A.D. Be interesting to see how the world would have evolved with the absense of these religions.
 
uneverno

uneverno

Active Member
Originally Posted by Tizzo
http:///forum/post/3082534
Science is proven. Ideas, hypotheses and theories are religion.
Not true. The difference between the two is that science is provable, not proven. Most scientific hypotheses start with a fairly solid evidentiary foundation. Setting out to prove it is part of the scientific method.
For example:
The Higgs-Boson particle has not yet been shown to exist, but its postulation is based on logical and reasonable groundwork. Does it exist? We don't know. That's part of what the Linear Hadron Collider was built to demonstrate. If it doesn't exist however, then several thought to be known laws of physics are called into question. Does that make Higgs-Boson a religious particle? Does that make physics a religion? No. It simply means that in light of new information, our original postulations, whether they worked or not, need to be adjusted.
In answer to the "higher power" vs "god" question:
The reason I don't use the term "god" is because it connotes religions to which I don't subscribe.
There is reasonable evidence, to me, to suggest that the Universe was designed. How that came about or who "lit the fuse" is a matter of sheer speculation however. Since proving it is impossible, it therefore puts my theories in that regard into the realm of faith, not science.
 
darthtang aw

darthtang aw

Active Member
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3083052
I was thinking more in line with what the cilivilized cultures considered who God and religion were (Jews, Catholics, Methodists, Baptists, etc.). More or less A.D. Be interesting to see how the world would have evolved with the absense of these religions.
Mayan weren't civilized, look at their mathematics and astronomy....we learned much from them. Native Americans, after A.D..
 
tangman99

tangman99

Active Member
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW
http:///forum/post/3082734
Can someone explain to me the difference between a "higher power" and a "god"....does changing the term make it easier for a person to accept this concept?
Not in my case and I can't explain it for everyone. The difference to me is a God is something that everyone forms around with common rules for lack of a better world. It is something that is taught as a way of life to believe and live in a certain way to pay honor.
A higher power to me is not anything a religion would be formed around and people led to live a certain way. It's just a fact of nature or science. Nothing you can or need to do to belong or be persecuted over because it's just the way it is. To me it's not anything that represents anything human or in our form. I see it more from the point of view that Energy can't be created or destroyed. All the energy that exists has always existed and always will. When we die, the energy that is us is converted to some other for of energy. Not saying that we are conscious of it or ever aware again, but rather the collective energy of the universe itself is a higher power that is constantly converting so in a way we will always exist.
Nothing I can prove or care to as there is no point in it. It's how I see things and it can't proved or disproved any more than what the thousands of different religions try to teach us that all believe they are right. Well, they can't all be and science to me comes closer to explaining things than any religion I've ever come across.
 
geridoc

geridoc

Well-Known Member
2) Any scientist who publicly states their belief that there may be a God somehow involved is excommunicated by scientists.
That is not so. Francis Collins, a Born Again Christian, and very public about his beliefs, is probably going to be nominated to be the next head of the National Institutes of Health. However, the fate of scientists who use poor arguments to support their ideas (Michael Behe comes to mind) do get rejected, but not for their ideas, but for not supporting them well. The same thing happens to every scientist who puts forward a weak argument, as it should.
 
D

dragonzim

Active Member
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3083052
I was thinking more in line with what the cilivilized cultures considered who God and religion were (Jews, Catholics, Methodists, Baptists, etc.). More or less A.D. Be interesting to see how the world would have evolved with the absense of these religions.
Umm, the Jewish religion doesnt have anything to do with AD. Thats why they teach BCE (Before the Common Era) and not BC (Before Christ) The Jewish religion was around WAY before your "AD" thing came into play.
 
bionicarm

bionicarm

Active Member
Originally Posted by DragonZim
http:///forum/post/3083533
Umm, the Jewish religion doesnt have anything to do with AD. Thats why they teach BCE (Before the Common Era) and not BC (Before Christ) The Jewish religion was around WAY before your "AD" thing came into play.
I'm not that familiar with the Jewish faith. Are the tenets of their religion based on the Testaments at all? My understanding is, almost all faith-based religions came to being in one way or another by their beliefs and understandings of the writings of the Testaments. If those writings never occurred, would those religions exist?
 
D

dragonzim

Active Member
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3083557
I'm not that familiar with the Jewish faith. Are the tenets of their religion based on the Testaments at all? My understanding is, almost all faith-based religions came to being in one way or another by their beliefs and understandings of the writings of the Testaments. If those writings never occurred, would those religions exist?
Judaism is based on the Old Testament, the stories of which, at least to my understanding, are supposedly thousands of years old.
Personally, I think its all a work of fiction, but I was brought up Jewish.
 
geridoc

geridoc

Well-Known Member
Originally Posted by uneverno
Actually, the airplane parts being not alive, it's not comparable at all. Life defies the 2nd law of thermodynamics.
Life does not defy the second law of thermodynamics, since that law applies only in an isolated system, something which life is certainly not.
 
bionicarm

bionicarm

Active Member
Originally Posted by DragonZim
http:///forum/post/3083807
Judaism is based on the Old Testament, the stories of which, at least to my understanding, are supposedly thousands of years old.
Personally, I think its all a work of fiction, but I was brought up Jewish.
So if the Old Testament never existed, would Judaism ever exist?
 
uneverno

uneverno

Active Member
Originally Posted by GeriDoc
http:///forum/post/3083962
Life does not defy the second law of thermodynamics, since that law applies only in an isolated system, something which life is certainly not.
The Universe is not an isolated system?
 
D

dragonzim

Active Member
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3084027
So if the Old Testament never existed, would Judaism ever exist?
Couldnt tell you... Like I said, I think ALL organized religions are a crock and that the old and new testaments are works of fiction. In my opinion, the ancient pagans and celts had it right in that if you were worshiping something, it was something based in nature and not some abstract concept that someone told you is what you should believe in.
 
bang guy

bang guy

Moderator
Originally Posted by uneverno
http:///forum/post/3084152
No, that is the 2nd law.
Yet life, at least for a time, becomes more organized before it decays.
No other conglomeration of matter does that.
Would you consider the coalescing of a moon, planet, star, or asteroid to be decaying or organizing?
How about the formation of a quartz crystal?
 
coral keeper

coral keeper

Active Member
If evolution is a religion, why is it in Science books and such? Why can't they just teach Science without religion/evolution?
 
D

dragonzim

Active Member
Originally Posted by Coral Keeper
http:///forum/post/3084393
If evolution is a religion, why is it in Science books and such? Why can't they just teach Science without religion/evolution?
Who said evolution was a religion? Its a scientific theory.
 
uneverno

uneverno

Active Member
Originally Posted by Bang Guy
http:///forum/post/3084289
Would you consider the coalescing of a moon, planet, star, or asteroid to be decaying or organizing?
How about the formation of a quartz crystal?
ahhh - you raise an excellent point, which I must concede.

I retract my original statement regarding the 2nd law.
Dang, now I gotta go think. I hate that.
 
geridoc

geridoc

Well-Known Member
Originally Posted by uneverno
http:///forum/post/3084148
The Universe is not an isolated system?
Yes,the universe is an isolated system, but within the universe are many non-isolated systems where the second law does not strictly apply. Life is a perfect example of such a non-thermodynamic system. In life, energy is expended to temporarily create an energetically more organized state. Eventually the organism dies, and goes to the temperature of the surroundings as thermal energy finally flows out of the system.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top