It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by randomname
just like your car is proof that ford built it, the universe is proof God created it.edit on 20-2-2011 by randomname because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by mrphilosophias
BTW I'm not sure if anyone noticed but the anthropic principal got owned up there and I am curious who understands why the anthropic principle is essentially redundant misdirection in these questions of Origins and probability.edit on 21-2-2011 by mrphilosophias because: ammended post
Originally posted by mrphilosophias aka M.F. Alexander
A proof of Intention and Design in the Creation of a Universe Hospitable to Life
•A universe which is hospitable to life, and the conditions which were necessary for life to emerge from non-life, assumes a precise and particular co-occurrence of variables:
1.These variables are innumerable.
2.The probability of these variables being met and also co-occurring is consequently incalculable.
3.Supposing knowledge of every variable, and the probability that each particular variable should occur, it would be theoretically possible to calculate the probability that the precise variables would exist and coincide, but the probability would be almost 0.
4.:.It is inconceivably improbable that all of the variables necessary for life to exist should precisely co-occur.
•A universe exists which is hospitable and host to an abundant diversity of complex living organisms.
1.The variables required for such a Universe precisely coincide.
2.Life emerged in a distant past present on planet Earth.
3.Life survived, reproduced, evolved, and thrived to the present where we find this diversity of complex life forms.
•Every possible reality exists as a present moment.
•Every present moment is inextricably connected.
1.The present moment is the culmination of all past presents.
2.Every future moment is the culmination of all past presents.
3.Every past moment is the culmination of all past presents.
4.Every present moment depends upon the first moment.
5.Every possible moment culminates in a last moment. (
6.The first moment inevitably leads to every consecutive present moment and ultimately to a last moment.
7. The past moment in which life first emerged was the culmination of every moment which unfolded from the very first moment.
R14.) From the very first moment the events which unfolded culminated in the existence of a Universe with a precise co-occurrence of variables which are necessary for life to exist and emerge.
1.The Universe was either intended by an efficacious creative being or it was not intended.
2.If it was not intended then:
R4.) It is inconceivably improbable that all of the variables necessary for life to exist should precisely co-occur, absent intention.
1.:. It is inconceivably more probable that any Universe which is hospitable to life was intended by an efficacious creative being, than that it happened absent intention or design.
Copyright © 2011 Matthew F. Alexander
Originally posted by Gradius Maximus
Random mutation? Sorry - I think a little bit higher of ourselves then that.
I believe that life is abundant - that the universe is full of it and its not random.
Life is inevitable - From the lowest cavern, the most toxic water source, or the most freezing climate.
What creates life in all its varieties, what is the pressing force of that flowing spiral that coaxes a seed to grow or a mutation to inspire itself into being?
My belief is that the center of our galaxy emits a wave of energy that is so powerful and despite what others may think - So intelligent - that it cannot help but arrange parts of itself into more complex, living organisms.
So now I wonder, are we truly the children unique to the earth, or are we the children of the galaxy?
When we begin to find planets that are capable of supporting us - it is my belief that people like us, will already be there, waiting to be found, or perhaps they have already found us?
Regardless of what science informs - I have strong feelings in this.
Until civilians play a role in the exploration of deep space - you will never be informed scientifically with the truth.
What do you feel is truth?
Life is inevitable,
Originally posted by Gradius Maximus
I'm seeing an automaton for data correlation.
What are you going to do when new information or new facts rises up and completely replaces the truths you defend so adamantly?
Do you really think its unreasonable to assume that science cannot explain or divulge everything they know to the general public?
I dont need to write a paper with citations to debate what you believe, I only need to trust in mine.
Only when all the pieces are on the chess board can the real game really begin.
Right now, we only have a few pawns each. Lets wait til we know more.
Originally posted by Gradius Maximus
I just dont see the purpose of debate when everyone is just playing a guessing game.
We dont have concrete explanations for anything,
and every decade the facts of the previous are replaced by new discoveries.
Science is all we have, and its foundation is constantly shifting, writhing and recycling.
Would it not make sense to keep an open mind as we move into this new era of technology and discovery that we have never seen before?
Now more then ever the public has the time, ability and education to say "What is that" and to demand the answers from those who control the flow of information, which yes, even you are subject to eating the scraps and wrestling with the rest of us for what is real.
I havent said my way or the highway, I've merely suggested that what we currently believe must surely follow the same trend of the past, movement towards a different understanding.
Now we get lots of self righteous folks defending theories because they wrote a thesis related to the subject so I can understand that you would stand beside what you know to be real, defending it to your grave.
I'm sure Democritus's vision of a flat planet was defended dearly by him - I wonder how he would have felt, if he were alive when we realized the world was indeed a sphere.
So I ask you sir, when the day comes where we are shown a universe teeming with life - Will you gracefully step down and accept a new truth? I think you will, but yes, we certainly need some facts.
But for now - I have a feeling - One that says we are part of a much larger family then we realize - calling this galaxy home.
Originally posted by Gradius Maximus
We're not talking about computers - We are talking about unproven theories here - Guessing games.
Like whats inside our planet - when we've never been there.
Whats on the surface of the sun when we've never been there.
Whats on the planets in other solar systems, when we've never been there!
I hardly see how these concepts relate to the use of a computer, to which I am gratefully indebted to science, but excuse me if I dont bother with their theories about the unknown.
Often in science - things are indeed thrown away, when proven to be false.
Surely I dont need to site these.
But hey heres an example, leeches in medicine. They were replaced.
So now with our current view of human beings as the only intelligent species in our universe, this is possibly nearing replacement.
There is a rift between you and I - You believe the most outstanding feats of science and discovery are in the public eye
- I believe that they are hiding anything that would rock the boat, and research grants are only given to the public groups in subjects that are considered tame. Let me guess, Citation needed?
So we have someone not even a student of science up in arms over the possible unknowns of a mystical universe.
Let me tell you something - A real scientist would say "We dont know".
A google major and a reader of scientific journals says "THIS IS HOW IT IS"
I'm sharing my opinions,
its not about ignorance for I consider myself very well informed from the same pools of information that you are drinking.
I merely choose to go beyond the current safe place of understanding, and make theories according to how I feel
- Since when is this a crime?
So using Democritus as an example and the earth as the scale.
Do you think we have more information then he did, when we consider the vast scale of the universe in relation to how much data we have and how much we know to be true?
No my friend, Democritus was closer to the truth by saying the world is flat - Then we are close to the truth by saying "We know whats out there in space"
We have so much yet to learn...Come on, we're finding planets by looking for their shadows overtop of the light from the star - Thats nearly stone aged compared to going there and finding life.
So we can at least agree on humanoid figures developing on other planets
- perhaps they may be darker skinned or have webbed toes, maybe even gills.
But we can at least play it safe and assume for a difference in body shape, for we can at least look at ourselves and the diversity of the human beings on this planet alone. 7 foot tall to 3 foot tall, yet all of them considered human.
So when we see a blue person, all of a sudden 'they' are the alien. Yet when we look at each other from black, yellow, red to white, we think we are the normal ones.
I am humble enough to say that my feelings are theories,
I'm willing to let go of the obsession to facts and make hopes for the future.
Through this practice, perhaps when we are surprised the shock will be less for me to accept the dawn of a new reality, or new friends.
Originally posted by bargoose
So some will have us believe that life is purely biochemical.
No spirit element to life.
Has science created life yet?
Seeing as it's just chemicals then i assume it must have.
Our knowledge in chemical composition is very advanced, so take something relatively simple like a blade of grass.
Mockler and his colleagues targeted Brachypodium because of its small size and genomic simplicity. Standing at around eight inches tall at maturity, Brachypodium is much more suited for study in the lab than wild grasses like switchgrass, which can grow up to ten feet tall. Its genome is also relatively small and simple, consisting of only 270 million base pairs.
Lets see science gather the ingredients and create some living grass in the lab.
Because, as far as i am concerned, science needs to demonstrate what it claims.
I claim that life comes from life. Not inanimate chemicals.
Originally posted by majestictwo
Anyone given any thought that all those galaxies out there don't exist at all.
We can't touch them or get to them so why should we believe that they exist at all.
When the Hubble telescope exposed the so called earliest galaxies from the deep space exposure I have to ask are they there.
The mysterious dark matter and dark energy could be nothing more than a substrate that everything we see is attached similar to that used in electronics. Are we just playing the game.
Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by randomname
1. The universe always existed.
2. The universe created itself from nothing.
3. The universe was created.
There is no other option to choose from.
Science and physics prove options 1 and 2 are impossible.