Archeotheology

a reply to: carsforkids

Nah. We have proven beyond all doubt that we live in a universe dominated by causation. No magical God waving his hand.

originally posted by: onthedownlow

originally posted by: peter vlar
a reply to: cooperton

For things to have happened as described in Genesis, that amount of fresh water wpuld have also filled the oceans and killed all sea life and wpuld have made the land inarable for generations. Nothing wpuld have survived on land, sea or fresh water. And then there's the whole incest thing if Noah amd his small family were the only lovong humans. Its a scientific impossibility for a world wide flood as described in Genesis.

Genesis is written by a man. The OP postulates that oceans are 100 miles deep on Europa, is it not fair to assume that the man who wrote of the Great flood might have postulated as well when he said the whole of the Earth was flooded?

I think that its more than fair to attribute large scale local flooding, which would have comprised the world as it was known to them in the 10th century BCE when Genesis was likely written. It definitely wasnt written by Moses and the Pentateuch was very definitely written by more than one person.

But to be fair, the poster I was replying to interprets scripture literally and believes that the flood waters covered the Himalayas, an impossibikity because something of that magnitude would have left definitive evidence in the geological record. Hence my response.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Nah. We have proven beyond all doubt that we live in a universe dominated by causation. No magical God waving his hand.

Just to be clear you aren't saying that the universe dominated by
causation proves God does not exist?

I'm sorry but I can't help noticing the infinite amount of miracles that had
to occur for us to be here and experience life. From the harmony and rhythms
and the timing of the cosmos allowing it all.There are continuous demonstrations
of precision from the atom to the universe that bare no explanation for them
occurring as they did. And if just one had failed we wouldn't be here. From DNA
to the human body and the brain that houses the soul of all men. From a spec of
sand on a beach to the stars. It's so less likely that there is no Creator and no
reason to any of this. Than it is there is a supreme being.

In other words what you suggest not only makes less sense. It
also takes far more faith to believe IMO.

But if you're saying it's been proven that there is no Creator?
Then kick partner?

a reply to: carsforkids

Just to be clear you aren't saying that the universe dominated by
causation proves God does not exist?

Depends what kind of causation you hold to, determinism or indeterminism.

To make a purely deterministic universe you need a (hidden) outside influence to exist.

And the reason for this is you need to rectify the interministic manner of observer wave collapse in things like the two slit experiment. And then also resolve why a purely deterministic universe still records a wave pattern on an unobserved screen.

Which I gotta assume is a very literal translation of god gives us freewill.

However, the advent of quantum mechanics removed the underpinning from that approach, with the claim that (at least according to the Copenhagen interpretation) the most basic constituents of matter at times behave indeterministically. This comes from the collapse of the wave function, in which the state of a system upon measurement cannot in general be predicted. Quantum mechanics only predicts the probabilities of possible outcomes, which are given by the Born rule. Non-deterministic behavior in wave function collapse is not only a feature of the Copenhagen interpretation, with its observer-dependence, but also of objective collapse and other theories.

See also: hidden variable theory

In physics, hidden-variable theories are proposals to provide deterministic explanations of quantum mechanical phenomena, through the introduction of unobservable hypothetical entities.

It is hard to make X always equal Y without adding a hidden influence to regulate outcomes.

Just as easily, once again one could argue it could be a matrix subject to command overrides.

I'm sorry but I can't help noticing the infinite amount of miracles that had
to occur for us to be here and experience life. From the harmony and rhythms
and the timing of the cosmos allowing it all.There are continuous demonstrations
of precision from the atom to the universe that bare no explanation for them
occurring as they did. And if just one had failed we wouldn't be here. From DNA
to the human body and the brain that houses the soul of all men. From a spec of
sand on a beach to the stars. It's so less likely that there is no Creator and no
reason to any of this. Than it is there is a supreme being.

I will argue the inverse version of that fallacy.

Just because we don't know of many existing as of yet, doesn't mean ours is a rare occurrence.

I think it's a false dilemma to assume our planetary system is special by going off such a miniscule data set to conclude as much.

A conclusion than can be made now is: water is everpresent and everywhere in our universe.

That said, It is very difficult to spot any other Earth-like systems because the orbital periods, precise line of sight, and timing required to catch a planet with a transit method is limited. The wobble method has it's own set of limitations.

You can find exoplanets around red dwarfs all day.

Still, Kepler (using transit method) found KOI 456. It is being described as a mirror image of earth/sun system only 3140 Ly away, which isn't really that far. The other side of the neighborhood in the megaopolis that is our home galaxy.

earthsky.org...

The drake equation is dead. Now we can just observe exoplanetary systems.

Closer to home water has been found (or has existed) on the following places in our solar system:

Mars.
Europa. (3X more than we have)
Enceladus.
Ganymede.
Ceres.
Ice giants.
Pluto.
Vesta (speculated - past)
Venus (speculated - pre runaway greenhouse effect)

And now with better spectroscopy readings exoplanets as well, we can search the neighborhood.

www.nasa.gov...

And this is on our cosmic street if Alpha Centauri shares the lot with us. 110 ly away is 9 houses away.

We are lucky, I will say that. We are lucky to not be in a star cluster, a binary system, at the center of the galaxy, and have large gas giants playing gravitational inner solar system protector, but can't conclude that is an anomaly.

a reply to: Degradation33

Now that's my kind of post.And I haven't even read past the first quote.
The two slit experiment is actually a little spooky at least to me.
One of the most fascinating bits I've heard about coming out of
the scientific world. For what it's worth that's what science should
be doing. Trying to answers the deeper questions about ourselves
and our existence. Before we ask anything else.
Good post thank you

a reply to: Degradation33

We are lucky, I will say that. We are lucky to not be in a star cluster, a binary system, at the center of the galaxy, and have large gas giants playing gravitational inner solar system protector, but can't conclude that is an anomaly.
edit on 6-8-2020 by Degradation33 because: (no reason given)

I think that's fair enough and I appreciate your lack of ridicule. lol
I very much agree with you on Drake. Altho I doubt it's for the same reasons.

a reply to: carsforkids

I am saying God is irrelevant. This is a closed system.

Even God cannot intercede here.

a reply to: Degradation33

Find a single example of an event without a lime of causation, and ill entertain the idea.

Its a law of our universe. An object in motion stays in motion until another object alters it.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

I am saying God is irrelevant. This is a closed system.

Even God cannot intercede here.

Okay
I would agree that in general the creator is never captive to the creation.
If that makes any sense to you. Anything you create you of course have ultimate
power over it. You decide everything about it.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

I can of think of one.. but it's not without causation, the causation is unknown..

And other than the grand unification epoch (the split nanosecond before inflation) I have nothing.

When the system closed, as it may have been

And there are so many competing (sometimes multiversal) theories here beyond causeless zero point fluctuations.

Even including the prospect of not requiring causation at all.

Which invariably ends up as, "if _____ always existed; so can the universe in some form".

I am actually a very statistic minded non-compatiblist (hard interminism) and I don't even believe in free will beyond a range of choices based on antecedence.

And in this indeterminism, the very set ranges we observe, comes the balance, the anamolies, and all the things that give the appearance of intelligent design. The antecedence itself, and the entire range of those possible events (both beneficial and destructive) is "the god" of this universe, at least that's my opinion.

Still, if the determinist X always leads to Y, I can't see a way to hold that position without holding some metaphysical opinion.

Addendum:

At the end of the day it kind of feels like choosing between indeterminism and determinism is like choosing between:

A. We have no ultimate control because our choices are limited to the ones allotted by circumstance of indeterminate causation.

A. We have no ultimate control because our choices are limited to the ones allotted by circumstance of an ultimate will.

Don't even have freewill there either it seems.

a reply to: Degradation33

Accept your forgetting underground water and clouds

a reply to: Degradation33

I've given up on trying to sort out determinism, indeterminism, compatiblism, non-compatiblism, etc. I'm sure that they are very important for meta-physics, but they are a foreign language to me.

On the other hand, there are people who study comparative religion. They write books, sometimes comparing one to another. Then there are people who read those books and see certain connections. And then some of those people who read those books tell me things.

So consider:

Proverbs 8:

1Does not wisdom call out?
Does not understanding raise her voice?
17 I love those who love me,
and those who seek me find me.
22“The Lord brought me forth as the first of his works,
before his deeds of old;
23 I was formed long ages ago,
at the very beginning, when the world came to be.

Obviously a female character. The one that can be found if sought.

Now within Judaism, she is known as The Sabbath Bride.

Within Mandaeism, she has been imprisoned somehow.

Jesus said, "The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath."

Tao te Ching

GIBBS, TAM
The tao that can be talked about is not the Absolute Tao.
If it can be named, it is not an Absolute name.
That which has no name is the origin of heaven and earth;
That which has a name is the Mother of all things.
Thus, if always without desire, one can observe indescribable marvels;
If always desirous, one sees merest traces.
These two come from the same source but are differently named.
Both are called Mysterious.
The mystery of the Mysterious is the gateway to all indescribable marvels.

I don't know where to find the Mandaen sources, or the Judaism either.

but

Suppose that the quest for a creator god, even a Deistic creator god is a quest for that which can never be found. That quest therefore, which preoccupies people's minds, is a distraction from the Mother (per Tao te ching ) who is also the Sabbath Bride. That distraction is the prison ( Mandaeism ). The prison does not exist as objective reality, but rather an eclipsing in the mind of that which can be found by that which cannot.

I would propose therefore that the Jesus saying be revised "The Sabbath Bride gave birth to all. And we live and work in Her and by Her."
John 5:16 "And therefore did the Jews persecute Jesus, and sought to slay him, because he had done these things on the sabbath day. 17But Jesus answered them, My Father worketh hitherto, and I work."

The concept of creation as a continuous process is very Zoroastrian.

So "The Sabbath Bride gave birth to all and is still working, and can be found by those who seek."

The Tao te Ching connects all this together.

originally posted by: Akragon

fact is the flood didn't happen... fullstop

Polystrate fossils are tree trunks that are deposited into rock layers vertically. This indicates there was a rapid deposition process, rather than the gradual one that is popularly taught. Hydrologic sorting can account for the strata of fossilized remains that have different densities. The fact that these layers are less than 100,000 years old is confirmed by carbon dating. C-14 has been found in everything from petrified wood, coal tar, graphite and even natural gas - indicating these have formed in a much more recent past than we were told by the school system:

Carbon-14 found in "old" rock layers

Don't be biased against Hebrew history, they were matter-of-factly describing what they went through.

originally posted by: carsforkids
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

I am saying God is irrelevant. This is a closed system.

Even God cannot intercede here.

Okay
I would agree that in general the creator is never captive to the creation.
If that makes any sense to you. Anything you create you of course have ultimate
power over it. You decide everything about it.

That control would have had to be expressed through the initial design. There is no control in a system that cannot be touched.

If we can find examples of truly random events beyond isotope decay, where we can identify action without causation, then we can begin to entertain the "unseen hand" that a god would represent.

Otherwise, we are left with either no God at all...or a God that is unable to (or uninterested in) interacting within this system. That means miracles can't happen, and prayers are not answered. We are just up to the whims of causation.

a reply to: Degradation33

Free will....its one of those subjects that takes you to the edge of the uncanny valley, it seems.

I like to think I have free will...and ability to choose when and when not to act.

But I have this nagging voice in my head that tells me I do not. That the end result is already known, at least to the universe. Time is the great mediator in that regard, i'd suppose. Or, if nothing else, the great barrier.

It certainly lends itself to the notions of purpose, that is for sure.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

That control would have had to be expressed through the initial design

Exactly and the Bible itself along with the dictionaries very definition
of God seems to pre empt your no touch no control position.

The very definition of God gives him the power to SPEAK things into
existence. So in my mind if you are going to argue his existence it
has to be done at least with that much consideration. We aren't discussing
God at a limited capacity of just whatever rendering?

I see a big problem with this discussion comes when people don't want God
to exist for who knows why? I sense only some of that from you. Not as strong
as from others? Take some time in your head. And truthfully answer do you just
not want God to exist? I ask because I have never heard a convincing argument
against it from anyone ever. Including yours. And if I did I would definitely
reconsider.

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: Akragon

fact is the flood didn't happen... fullstop

Polystrate fossils are tree trunks that are deposited into rock layers vertically. This indicates there was a rapid deposition process, rather than the gradual one that is popularly taught. Hydrologic sorting can account for the strata of fossilized remains that have different densities. The fact that these layers are less than 100,000 years old is confirmed by carbon dating. C-14 has been found in everything from petrified wood, coal tar, graphite and even natural gas - indicating these have formed in a much more recent past than we were told by the school system:

Carbon-14 found in "old" rock layers

Don't be biased against Hebrew history, they were matter-of-factly describing what they went through.

which means there was a flood... it wasn't global... there has never been a global flood in the history of the planet...

local floods have been recorded since the beginning of recorded history... every one was local...

a reply to: carsforkids

For what its worth, i am completely agnostic. I approach it from a point of science and true curiosity. If God exists, and we can prove something about that, i would be eager to explore it.

My mother is very spiritual. I spent my life exploring religion. Attended Hardin Simmon University (southern baptist university). Im not averse to God at all. I've just seen no sign of anythign that would support its existence.

originally posted by: Out6of9Balance
a reply to: TzarChasm

That's "the" assumption

The "conclusion"

It's a lie, it's a myth, folklore, legacy, something of our ancestors to be forgotten.

But what if the assumption is wrong, in which case your conclusion has no merit. Of course a "global flood" is impossible, but a rise in the sea level due to global warming isn't, like during the collapse of the last ice age. And if the rise was sudden, then every sea-level civilization on Earth would have been inundated, which is pretty much what the myths state. The folks living higher up would have survived, but any infrastructure on which they relied for trade would be gone, and that bunch was unlikely to be the most educated compared to people on the coast. Add "God" to the mix and you got yourself the "universal" flood story. Add about 10,000 years to screw the story up and you've got Noah and his boat. Not such a stretch, really.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Your amicable reply made me smile.

For what its worth, i am completely agnostic. I approach it from a point of science and true curiosity. If God exists, and we can prove something about that, i would be eager to explore it.

The eager part is where I'm at and without sounding like a holy roller
( Because I'm not). I do want to tell you it is the final frontier far
more than George Lucas could possibly put to screen.

Im not averse to God at all. I've just seen no sign of anythign that would support its existence.

I'm sure you have. The key for me was figuring that out in my own
mind. There is by no means at all a lack of evidence. Only a lack
or willingness to understand the evidence' By this you can remove
all doubt in your own mind. That's when it happens. What is referred to
as a personal relationship because it happens in your now more
receptive mind. I hope I don't sound like a nut trying to describe
this. But this is how I've moved beyond believing to knowing. And
knowing is personal and that's how it became personal at least
for me.

Then the exciting part comes next but I digress apologies you've been so kind.