A thought experiment....

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 06:07 PM
link   
I want to do a little thought experiment here. Imagine that you lived 3 or 4 thousand years ago. You are a commoner. You have little schooling if any. You do not know what causes earthquakes, nor do any scientists of your time. You have no idea why the sun comes up and goes down, because your culture is simply not that advanced. You cannot even concieve the concept of molecules and atoms. No-one has any clue as to why the moon has phases. Lightning and thunder are complete mysteries to your culture. You don't have any idea why things are hot or cold, or why the wind blows. Diseases rampage through your society, and you don't know why or how to stop them. You basically have none of the scientific knowledge that we do today. Imagine this scenerio, involve yourself in it for a minute.

Now, imagine that you are standing at the beach and a huge tsunami wave comes into shore. Killing nearly everyone along the specific coast you are on. You luckily manage to escape by grabbing onto a makeshift log raft. When it is all over, you gather with the few others that survived like you. All of your friends are dead. Everything you have was destroyed. Imagine this hard, and involve yourself in it.

Now, remember that you have absolutely no scientific knowledge that we have today. I want you, to describe to me as if you are living in that long past time what your explanation at the time would be. What caused this wave to come to shore? Why did it happen?

Try describing why a solar eclipse happens without the knowledge we have of them today.

Try describing anything that has a somewhat complicated scientific answer without science. It would almost be without choice that you would assume something or someone was the reason for this. You would likely assume it was something of intelligence, because at that time, you have no idea of the set rules of the universe, and all you know is that you also can create effect with cause. What are you left with? With no science, what is the necessary answer?

Can anyone see what I am getting at?




posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 06:10 PM
link   
Without science we would turn towards an outside force - a God and religion. There would be no other explanation. I believe that is how things originally were so many thousands of years ago.

or the Pixies of course



posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 06:13 PM
link   
I hope other people see this and think about it. I have honestly been sitting here trying to find another way someone would be able to explain it. I can't. I think that their is absolutely no other way.



posted on Jan, 27 2005 @ 08:46 AM
link   
And thats how we made religion folks!
Fear leads to respect which in turn leads to love. They feared the unknown phenomenon and prayed to it. Nature worshipping starts. If i bring the sun wave-god some food he wont do that again. Its no wonder that most pagan gods were personifications of natural phenomenons.
We as humans can never be comfortable with unexplained things. We absolutely HAVE to explain it away. What better way to do that than to know that we as humans are one hell of a special race and we're soo friggin god dang special that someone has nothing better to do but towatch over our silly pathetic selves and make a whole universe for us to live in. Sorry now i'm ranting...
Another scenario. LEts assume that UFO's did exist. If a flying saucer lands on a desert or some such place and out come the grey with their A-probes how would a person react in that time and age?



posted on Jan, 27 2005 @ 09:27 AM
link   
I guess people do see things the way I do.....

Isnt that the darndest thing!!



posted on Jan, 27 2005 @ 04:28 PM
link   
yes, u do bring up a point- author of this topic. God is needed. but what if God does exist, and lest say a story like Adam and Eve are true. then no, God is just there, they didnt have to make them all up.

and plus, how do u no that people back 5K years ago arent more technologically advanced than us today? u wouldnt no, cause we got no written record beyond bout 4K years ago. none at all. sure, we got carbon dating methods and all (which arent for sure) but we dont have PROOF of anything beyond 4K years ago. maybe their not so stupid as u think, but we as mankind are the stupidest generation of all, and keep getting dumber thru every generation.



posted on Jan, 27 2005 @ 05:24 PM
link   
Did you just ask the question "how do I know that 5K old civilizations are not more technologically advanced than we are today"? How about we have never found any freeking electronics underground. Something that we have been doing for many years now is time capsules, where people bury things with the intent of them being found in the future for future civilations to understand us better. Where are they? Why havent we found any? Tell me, where are the satelite message beacons they would have easily sent out into space? Why are the writings and such from that time written on freeking rocks and cave walls? Why is their no evidence of their "supperior technology".

Ask those questions of yourself, then try to ask me "how we don't know" with a straight face. That was not a thought out question, which honestly is more and more typical on this board every day now.

As far as the existence or non-existance of a god. My previous post did something. It shows that there was and still is motive for inventions such as God. It shows that people, in those scenerios would have had no choice but to come to that conclusion. It doesnt mean that their isnt a god. All it means is that people should question things more.

If the story of adam and eve is true, then yes, a god exists. Is it logical to believe in that story? Not literally, no. Is it logical to imagine, people with know idea about life and biology would, AS A NECESSITY, develop and make up such a story? Yes, it is.

[edit on 1/27/2005 by Seapeople]



posted on Jan, 28 2005 @ 06:27 AM
link   
A person would have explained something like lightning to be an act of God, but hey withought God none of science or anything would be possible.
Praise him!



posted on Jan, 28 2005 @ 07:49 AM
link   

and plus, how do u no that people back 5K years ago arent more technologically advanced than us today?

I beg to differ just a bit with Seapeople's response. Yes we dont have time capsules from the past but what about the gigantic sturctures found all over the world? Take the pyramids for ex. I still dont buy the men dragging stones with ropes theory. Egypt itself is ONE of the many wonders of the world.
THe time capsules we buried in NY...what if its all under water for like thousands of years. Does that prove that there was no civilization in NY? No...
There have been several compasses and an ancient battery found that was thousands of years old.
Well...here's an idea. What if there WAS an ancient civilization that was technologically advanced enough to teach the primitives(us) some cool stuff. Coming back to your Q: How would we see these advanced guys? OH AS GODS!!!!!!

God is needed. but what if God does exist, and lest say a story like Adam and Eve are true. then no, God is just there, they didnt have to make them all up.

Why is god needed? To make us stroke our egos? Be dilusional? Just cuz there MIGHT have been an advanced civilization in the past, why do we have to assume its god's doing? Where's the logic there?

As far as the existence or non-existance of a god. My previous post did something. It shows that there was and still is motive for inventions such as God. It shows that people, in those scenerios would have had no choice but to come to that conclusion. It doesnt mean that their isnt a god. All it means is that people should question things more.

I completely agree. But there's motives at any time frame if we dont THINK! No matter how technologically advanced we are. Heck people still say the tsunami was gods doing. We have complete scientific evidence of what exactly happened. BUT NO! If we dont evolve we're doomed.

A person would have explained something like lightning to be an act of God, but hey withought God none of science or anything would be possible.

Uh you do know you're in the year 2005 right?



posted on Jan, 30 2005 @ 01:44 AM
link   
Good post. An excellent example of God of the Gaps. Today, the gaps are becoming smaller and less and less "God" is no longer an acceptable answer for natural phenomona that we are capable of understanding. This of course doesnt negate the existence of a God, but it does show the intentions/reasons behind religion. Which is trying to explain things they had no knowledge of. We understand nature a lot better now, back then, it was magic.



posted on Jan, 31 2005 @ 10:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Alec Eiffel
Good post. An excellent example of God of the Gaps. Today, the gaps are becoming smaller and less and less "God" is no longer an acceptable answer for natural phenomona that we are capable of understanding. This of course doesnt negate the existence of a God, but it does show the intentions/reasons behind religion. Which is trying to explain things they had no knowledge of. We understand nature a lot better now, back then, it was magic.

Yes ofcourse it does not reject the concept of god. It does however reject the foundation of religion( whichever it might be) But then it makes you think what "god" really is? Do we need a "god"? Once the purpose of religion becomes basic common sense then what can we hold "god" responsible for? If one day , we have all the answers to the questions in the universe, will god still be needed( Its an honest question..no mockery intended)



posted on Feb, 1 2005 @ 03:19 PM
link   
seapeople- great new avatar! your going all out now are ya??? sad to me...! how about if you were god? what would you have done? maybee you are mad that your not, and that your opinon does not change the fact... we were put here to love, love envolves choice, choice is free will, free will is how we fell. the flood is the tip of the iceberg for you, you read the bible skepticly and with negative intentions, you look only to proove your own theory, and yet ignore all other reaserch pointing to the contrary. the flood has scientific backup, (christian science i should say)... what is your theory exactly? where are we from? when did we start? why did we begin? how is it we are here from nothing? you want to dis-proove the flood so that you can stand by your theory of carbon dating, wich means the earth is old, which discredits the bible,and removes the need for god from your concience. your theory of carbon dating has a faulty score of 50% accuracy in a constant, but take out the constant and your left with zippo!!! and adding a flood to your theory would throw everything off would it not? well be thrown, it did happen.



posted on Feb, 1 2005 @ 04:24 PM
link   
Excellent post nikki, I tried to tell him that yesterday in the thread I created, but he tried to deflect his theories and interject his thoughts on me like they were my very own.



posted on Feb, 2 2005 @ 09:55 AM
link   
Ninki, please reread your thread before reading this post.

I never once claimed to know how we got on this planet, or what created life or the universe. I have even gone to the extent of trying to teach people, that the actual creation of life and the universe is where they should look for a God. In particular, I was speaking to YOU when I was saying these things. Quite obviously, you forgot. Please, go review some of my posts. Take time to read what I say, without jumping to typical conclusions.

Now, to show how narrowminded people in defense of something they don't understand can be, I will point out the intent of this thread. The intent of this thread was not regarding the flood at all. It was a thought experiment to try to put your thoughts to a time when we did not know tsunami's were created by earthquakes.

Tell me Ninki. If you had no idea that earthquakes caused these waves, and one came ashore killing all of your family. What would you think? What would you think, if you had no scientific experience at all?

As little as 500 years ago, most of the world was completely UNAWARE of the causes of tsunamis. Most had absolutely NO IDEA. What were they supposed to think or say? What about an earthquake. 200 Years ago, the cause of one of those was unknown. Just 200 years ago. Now what would you think, with no scientific knowledge whatsoever?

In regards, your flood that you love so much (so nice of God to kill people he loved), rose 15 cubits according to the bible. 15 cubits and the mountains were covered? Well, thats what the bible says. It was not until the 1920's that the bible was revised to say that the water rose above the mountains. nearly 2000 years before what? Before the sceintific revolution. Before people started to question the bible with contradictions and scientific evidence. It wasnt until the previous century, that revisions to this large book took such an undertaking. Not until people got smart enough to realize things like 15 cubits equals app. 22.5 feet. Many mountains in that region over their exceed 10000 feet. Oops, typo maybe? Or maybe they just were not thinking anyone would bother questioning.

Tell me Ninki, honestly. If you were alive 5000 years ago, and a disaster of natural causes occured....... Who would you blame? An undersea earthquake which you had no knowledge of even existing...or a God?

When I say I feel you would blame God's.....am I interjecting thoughts True?

P.S. I knew you would like the avatar Ninki. Don't you just hate it when we find in tact whale skeletons with legs.....



posted on Feb, 2 2005 @ 03:13 PM
link   
seapeople -actually i have never seen a whale with legs! nor has anyone for that matter, actually the apendages you call vestigal legs are absolutely necassary for reproductive purposes. they are found in the male whale only, and are used to support the muscle surrounding his male organ! so nope they dont have legs and never did, unless you think that the female was too inferior to develop legs....i dont think so, not only that but the so called legs are internal and used as structure for muscle to cling to, so that the whale can reproduce!
your above statement clearly pointed to the flood! as to the statement about revision in the 1920s sorry, god said the waters rose up to Cover the highest mountains to 15 cubits, 6.9 meters,or 20 feet. read that again ..to (cover) the highest mountain !!!!
as to the issue of death and god not loving us because he let people die, uum have you ever given birth? i dont think so! the world has 2 doors for humans birth and death...both can be painfull, both are part of the circle....



posted on Feb, 2 2005 @ 05:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by ninki
seapeople -actually i have never seen a whale with legs! nor has anyone for that matter, actually the apendages you call vestigal legs are absolutely necassary for reproductive purposes. they are found in the male whale only, and are used to support the muscle surrounding his male organ! so nope they dont have legs and never did, unless you think that the female was too inferior to develop legs....i dont think so, not only that but the so called legs are internal and used as structure for muscle to cling to, so that the whale can reproduce!
your above statement clearly pointed to the flood! as to the statement about revision in the 1920s sorry, god said the waters rose up to Cover the highest mountains to 15 cubits, 6.9 meters,or 20 feet. read that again ..to (cover) the highest mountain !!!!
as to the issue of death and god not loving us because he let people die, uum have you ever given birth? i dont think so! the world has 2 doors for humans birth and death...both can be painfull, both are part of the circle....


I just read and almost word for word copy of your work Ninki! It was on answersingenesis.com. You better sue them, because I know you wouldn't let them speak for you. You do your own research. So they must have copied you.

Pretend that it doesn't have legs, what about its shoulder structures? Wait, nevermind. Instead of asking you questions, I will just go to answers in genesis.com for word for word answers. That way you don't have to type.

By the way, why don't you read the earliest version of the bible translated into english. The only one that was not intentionally changed for many reasons including readability, contradictions, and culture. KLV 1611 does not say the water rose above the mountains at all. But you know God said that of course......



posted on Feb, 2 2005 @ 10:01 PM
link   
I hate when people cant think for themselves and copy/paste.
Birth and death are regarded the same and part of the cycle in EASTERN relgions..
I dont remember Christianity ever phrasing it that way?



posted on Feb, 3 2005 @ 11:01 AM
link   
i hate when people are too narow minded to look into the other side of the argument and assume that i must have copied it from somewhere! look for yourself again at the post! then look into it on the web, or text for that matter, but you wont because the only thing you will take as fact is secular theology and text! will you read the bible? the christian science text? creation evedence text? creation websites? no! and where do you get your information? are you an archeologist? are you a teacher? if not then it sounds to me like you read your information from somewhere or else i am sure that you are born smarter than the rest of the population and do not need to read or be tought.....everyone learns from a source you just dont like mine! the fact does not change! you guys just dont like it that the little legs you refer to have a purpose and are only found on the male!



posted on Feb, 3 2005 @ 05:40 PM
link   
When people are too narrowminded to look at the other side of the argument? HMMMMM

Lets see here:

I ask people to show me evidence from the other side.

You dont even look at evidence from the other side unless its on answersingenesis.com, which even at that you do not question.

I acknowledge the fact that God may exist.

You refuse to acknowledge that no matter how much you believe, he may not.

I admit when I see evidence that is compelling.

You go to answersingenesis.com to find out why the evidence that seems compelling is not.

I read the bible, study it, and its history as well as science books.

You refuse to read science, and accept everything in the bible because you are told to even though sometimes things just don't add up.

I admit when things don't add up, even researching as to why.

You refuse to admit things don't add up.



Now, who is too narrowminded to see the other side?



posted on Feb, 3 2005 @ 05:53 PM
link   
It is a pity that even with so much technology and knowledge at our disposal some just avert their eyes when asked questions that might make them uncomfortable.
How much better are they than those people 3K years ago?





new topics
top topics
 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join