I would like to think that he would say that its the message that counts. You can change the origin however you want, but it still doesn't change the message which is far more important.
There is no evidence that anything in this universe was "engineered", it is more plausible that that the things man can perceive are the result of the natural processes of entropy from whatever was the beginning to whatever is the end. And I use the terms 'beginning and end' merely for illustration because it is entirely possible that there is no begining or end but just phases. The perception that it is engineered comes from the human perspective about complexity, about time, and about purpose. Is something complex or simple? You have to ask "compared to what?" Is a computer program simple or complex? If you look at the 14 million lines of code you have to say complex; but if you are an accomplished programmer you might see it as 1's and 0's...simple. Is a million years a long time or short? As a human it has to seem incomparably long but to a geologist studying the fossil records of dinosaurs it's only represents a small change in fossil types. As human beings we are faced with the joys and burdens of a conscious life and the certainty of our eventual deaths. Our perception is that our lives are ultimately important, we must be special to some higher power, there must be a purpose to this existence. We are susceptable to myth, they give us comfort. And there is nothing wrong with that, but it's not science. Happy New Year.
Actually, have you ever heard of the "golden ratio"? It's a common number that shows up all over the place, whether it be in biology, nature, math, etc. I'm not very good at explaining it, but it provides extremely interesting reading about the makeup of this world. Read up on it and tell me what you think.
The only proof that this universe works is that we're here. What's interesting is that physicists say that if a small change occured in at least one of the constants they use (light, sigma, etc...) the universe we know wouldn't exist. It's still doesn't mean anything. Maybe our theories aren't refined or universes exists on entirely unimaginable planes. We have no other comparison for simplicity or complexity....only our egos. To some he's a philosopher, to others he's much more....
I read a very good book on the golden ratio and must admit, I never thought about it from the perspective of "engineered" creation. Intriguing idea. Pi also shows up all over the place, most notably (surprisingly, anyhow) in the mandelbrot set of fractals. All that being said, many things in nature tend to be inherently mathematical, and often surprisingly so. Chaos theory and fractals are easy examples of random perturbations providing incredibly complex patterns. Is this the work of a bemused mathmatician-creator? I don't know. Some other great books on this that I have read are here and here and here . As you stated previously hotballa, I don't think the two ideals (religion and science) are mutually exclusive. Science is explaining things, and (depending on your views) god may have designed them so. But things being "too complex" to have developed naturally, is unscientific - very simple systems can result in incredibly complex behavior. Complexity is not an inherently engineered thing.
That's true. If you think about the whole history of the Universe pretty much every act is a miracle of incalculable odds. Its a miracle that I had a bean burrito for lunch and if just one tiny variable had been adjusted along the course of the history of the Universe I very likely wouldn't have had a bean burrito. Ergo all of creation and time led up to me having a bean burrito for lunch at approximately 1PM Central Time on January 3, 2005 on the Planet Earth.
I've said it before and will probably keep on saying it. Science and faith are two different things that answer different questions and its a mistake to try to prove one with the means of the other.
hmm I haven't read about Pi before, do any of those books you recommended talk about it showing up as with the golden ratio? I have a terrible case of bookwormishness when it comes to things like this. nods, I can definetely see the argument in that. On my part though, there is just too many coincidences for me to accept that all this came about accidentally. In all fairness, I would guess it's aobut as hard as it is for some to accept the concept of a higher being.
Me too. I have a rather large collection of random math-oriented books. I have not read a book on pi like the one for phi, but it is similarly facinating. Let me know if you find a book on pi . Of nerdy math-story books, one of my other favorites is Fermat's Enigma. EDIT: Ah-ha! Here's one: Pi EDIT the second: Damn, there are a ton of good Pi books - there goes my book budget... Well said. I used to feel the same as you - now I am not so sure.
There isn't a word for "evolution" in armaic. You might as well ask him which Final Fantasy game was his favorite or if he thought the Mike James trade was a good idea.
Whatever conclusion you come to, I can only hope it's something you come to on your own, and not through any vocal or silent persuasions. Due to its afterlife overtones, this is probably the most difficult decision one will make in their lifetime. Of course, you know where I stand on it. Go and do your research, check out different religions, be an ultra atheist, etc. Your decision should be entirely your own.
I can hear the soft breathing of the girl that I love As she lies here beside me asleep with the night And her hair in a fine mist floats on my pillow Reflecting the glow of the winter moonlight She is soft, she is warm, but my heart remains heavy And I watch as her breasts gently rise, gently fall For I know with the first light of dawn I'll be leaving And tonight will be all I have left to recall thegary made me think of lyrics. Sorry for the derail, but this reminds me of someone from long ago. What would Jesus think of evolution? I believe he existed, and said much of what's been handed down to us. As an agnostic, I don't think he was the Son of God, but for the sake of argument, I'll assume he was. If he were to appear today, with the power he is reported to have had, I don't think evolution would be that big a topic. Keep D&D Civil.
i think this might be the best response in any thread ever. other than my own comments on mike vick, of course.
Well if there is no Fall in the Garden of Eden, then there is no need for Jesus and the redemption of mankind. So does that not matter anymore? Am I just wrong about this? I dont' know.
you're just grasping at straws right now. Deckard gave a very rational and pragmatic answer that we can all live with. Let it go
