It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The big scientific problem with the idea of Creationism

page: 5
37
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 12 2011 @ 05:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by filosophia
Some problems with your logic of the dreamer. If it only sees, it can not move. And if it sees, it still has some contact with the appearances, this also ignores the plain fact that you can move your hand at will.


The certainty that "you" are consciously and intentionally moving your hand isn't as clear cut as you seem to think.

There is a lot of reason to see that we may only consciously rationalize events after the fact of their happening, but never consciously cause them.

Link

Science is a fantastic tool, that has been running full steam ahead into ancient metaphysics for the last century.




posted on Apr, 12 2011 @ 05:34 PM
link   
The BIG scientific problem with creationism is that they started with a conclusion and then went looking for facts to support it.

The beauty of Science is that it has a fact, and then attempts to draw conclusions from it.

I like religion and creationism. I consider it a type of test. Kind of like the Mirror test that is used to gauge self awareness in animals. You put a mark of some kind on an animal and then put a mirror in front of them. If they look in the mirror and see the mark and then attempt to remove it from themselves then they can recognize that the mirror is just a reflection.

It is very similar in humans. Once you reach a certain stage in human thinking, once you mind is capable of rising above the fear of death, and the willingness to believe anything that supports the notion of a continued existence after death in the form of a spirit/soul continuing on towards a god's afterlife, only THEN will you be free to ask questions that completely contradict the utter fear of death that most humans are stricken with.

Creationism and indeed religion are the next level up from the self awareness test. Creationism and religion are the way that we can gauge how far a human mind is capable of exploring. For the majority of the humans on Earth they will never pass this test. They come to a complete stop at the mention of Death and immediately cling to the first thing that they can get their hands upon, which is usually a person with a book about religion promising a way to cheat death and to live on afterwards.

When you can accept the truth, no matter how scary or awful it is, then you passed the second test of self awareness. The awareness of truth, logic, rationality, critical thinking. Only a very small percentage of us have made it this far. I am proud to be among them.



posted on Apr, 12 2011 @ 05:57 PM
link   
reply to post by idonotcollectstamps
 


The next level of awareness is to realize that the traditional scientific "take" on creationism is based on a very simplistic and almost childish version. Granted this is because organized religions have created a childish version in an effort to control their population... but it is not the full story.

Then you start to realize that mark on your own forehead (I know, I found it myself after being an ardent Science Uber Alles!! person myself for most of my life). Then you start to face that same scary prospect that all these texts and perspectives you've been mocking and laughing are far more insightful than you were led to believe and you realize you were just following a different leader than the organized religionists.

The creationism of your average Christian, Muslim, etc is most certainly worthy of criticism for its lack of reason, thought, and plausibility... but most of all lack of recognition of metaphor. However digging deep into the concept of TRUE Infinity, what the ancient texts were *trying* to communicate via metaphor, a realization is possible. However it requires a similar breaking through for the person who believes science as taught to the "average folk" is fundamental and the source to truth... as a religious fundamentalist who only knows what is taught of their religion to the "average folk".

Most people who put their confidence in science have never put it through the true critical scrutiny and are much closer to couch potato scientists... watching the news pages and constantly saying "Ohhh isn't that cool!" and waiting to be told the next new thing they are allowed to believe is possible.

Science is wonderful and amazingly useful. There is a lot of scientific understanding within ancient mythology, if one is willing to discard the childish literalism and seek the deeper meaning and understanding embedded in the metaphor and see how it stands side by side with scientific understanding. Especially the understanding gained in the last century.

Namaste



posted on Apr, 12 2011 @ 07:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Aggie Man
 


God is outside of time, no one created God. God just is.



posted on Apr, 12 2011 @ 07:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
reply to post by infojunkie2
 


...no. That's just silly. Understanding how something came about doesn't mean you can necessarily recreate the process or even create an entirely new process with the same end result. We've got a pretty good idea about how self-sustained nuclear fusion works...yet we're not able to make that happen either.

But we can use the knowledge gained from that understanding. Understanding human evolution helps us understand a lot in medicine. Understanding nuclear fusion...well, we've made bombs with that one.


Fair enough,and even though I know that my God has helped me in ways that science can't desribe.
I am willing to admit, that science has in many ways, made my life easier too, so all you scientist
can take a bow for the many ways that you have helped humanity.

edit on 12-4-2011 by infojunkie2 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 12 2011 @ 08:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Aggie Man
 


The evidence of the creator is all around you... hell, you're living in it and living it



posted on Apr, 12 2011 @ 09:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lionhearte
Factual Science explains how God works.


It's that simple.



Why is this so hard for people to understand?


Please do tell, how "God" "works"...and how "factual science" "explains" this.

Because I actually thought that "science" proved that the pink unicorn in my room is the one true God from which everything in the universe came...It's really very simple...I don't "get" why people have such a hard time accepting as "fact" all these delusions in my head...they seem very "real" to me!



posted on Apr, 12 2011 @ 09:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Faith2011
reply to post by madnessinmysoul
 


Can Science Know the Mind of God? (YES)


" With truth, understanding, and reason in the balance, UC Berkeley's Phillip Johnson makes a persuasive case for the reality of the mind of God arguing against the naive idea that all reality can be explained in terms of purely physical and material causes. His lecture is thought-provoking.
Series: "Focus on Origins" [3/2002] [Humanities] [Show ID: 6290]"




There's still no scientific evidence that proves ID or Creationism...just saying "science can prove it" in and of itself does not "prove" anything, 'cause you know, you have to actually offer some tangible evidence when you offer up a claim like that.


You can get an assessment from the rational people on the side of evolution, like Shalini, John Pieret, and Joe Meert. I think Larry Moran summarized it most succinctly.

" Like most IDiot arguments, this one relies on two main points: (1) evolution is wrong, (2) the bad guys are picking on us. There isn't one single scientific argument in favor of intelligent design. "

Johnson whines and whines and whines, and is disappointed that "influential scientific organizations formed a solid bloc of opposition to the consideration of whether evidence points to the possible involvement of intelligent causes in the history of life." There's a reason they've opposed ID; the proponents never get around to offering any of that evidence we're supposed to consider, and Johnson's latest emission is no exception. Instead, we get a lot of nonsense about how Anthony Flew converted, sorta, and how we shouldn't be afraid to let God into our science.
Source

Next.



posted on Apr, 12 2011 @ 09:15 PM
link   
reply to post by madnessinmysoul
 


Science is the explanation of creation, the understanding of the creation. The more we know, the easier it gets for us to manipulate things around us for our own benefit. Similarly the more you know about a computer, the more you can manipulate it for your own benefit.

There is more than one way of looking at science.



posted on Apr, 12 2011 @ 09:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by freedish
reply to post by Aggie Man
 


God is outside of time, no one created God. God just is.



How do you know? Can you test for this? How is this verified?

Please, do tell.



posted on Apr, 12 2011 @ 09:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by PieKeeper
How do you know? Can you test for this? How is this verified?

Please, do tell.


Why are you waiting for someone else to figure it out for you?

Here are places to start:
What does science have to say about time at its most fundamental understanding?
What does science have to say about matter at its most fundamental understanding?
What is infinity... really?

Finally: What is one of the primary things that most people leave out of their concept of infinity? Infinity being aware of itself... both as a whole and as infinite smaller portions of itself. If someone tries to describe infinity as not having awareness... YOU can prove to yourself this is mistaken because YOU have awareness therefore awareness/consciousness must exist within infinity.

Take these items and start putting them together. Read... imagine... read some more... imagine some more... do some legwork rather than waiting for someone to "do tell". Expect your understanding to continually be refined over and over... just like how science works. Be the scientist yourself... rather than the couch potato scientist.

It's there waiting for you to discover... it truly is meant to be discovered. Whatever word you want to use... God/Tao/TRUE Infinity/42... the word isn't important and is only a portion of infinity because any word or description is merely a subset of TRUE infinity by necessity.

EDIT: Also remember what it might have been like to look at Galileo and someone telling you "Someday we'll be able to download his manuscripts from a flying vehicle from anywhere in the world to anywhere in the world". It was virtually impossible to imagine then... much less prove and "do tell" how it would have happened. But a person stating it wouldn't have been *wrong*. It was just as possible then as it is now, the only part that was missing was our understanding of the possibilities.

Remember that you live at a similar time now relative to what people will know and be able to prove in the "future". Keep this humbling perspective in mind when you come across something that seems "impossible" or unverifiable.

Namaste.
edit on 12-4-2011 by ErgoTheConfusion because: Typos and added "EDIT" section.



posted on Apr, 12 2011 @ 10:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by PieKeeper
How do you know? Can you test for this? How is this verified?

Please, do tell.


Originally posted by ErgoTheConfusion
Why are you waiting for someone else to figure it out for you?

Um. No. That's not how it works. YOU are the one who asserted that "God is outside of time, no one created God. God just is." ... Therefor it is up to YOU to provide the necessary evidence to support YOUR claims. It's not the job of everyone else here. Typical Creationist asking everyone else to prove THEM wrong, (specifically those of us who ask for scientific evidence of things before just blindly accepting them as truth)...Well no, you see that's not how it works. Science cannot prove a negative. YOU are making the claims, then YOU need to provide the evidence. Otherwise your theory, be it "Creationism" or the assertion that "God is outside of time" is assumed to be unproven and unsubstantiated until shown otherwise. Make sense? So let's try that again. Please provide your scientific, verifiable, factual evidence for why you believe in these specific claims that you mention. And you can now add to the list the following other assertions that you have made:


Originally posted by ErgoTheConfusion "Infinity being aware of itself"


Originally posted by PieKeeper
How do you know? Can you test for this? How is this verified?

Please, do tell.

-----------------------------

Originally posted by ErgoTheConfusion If someone tries to describe infinity as not having awareness... YOU can prove to yourself this is mistaken because YOU have awareness therefore awareness/consciousness must exist within infinity.

How is this even logical. Please explain, how does one make the leap to "humans having conscious thought" to "infinity having awareness" again:

Originally posted by PieKeeper
How do you know? Can you test for this? How is this verified?

Please, do tell.

-------------------------

Originally posted by ErgoTheConfusion Read... imagine... read some more... imagine some more

Seems a lot of the assertions you are making require quite some bit of imagination...and I'm not talking about the creative inventive type of imagination that lead to discoveries like "electricity" and "radio waves", I'm talking about the type of imagination that causes 8 year olds to believe in things like "monsters under the bed", the "tooth fairy" and "pink unicorns". I believe when adult exhibit this type of behavior, psychiatrists call it "delusions".

(DSM-IV-TR) It defines delusions as false beliefs based on incorrect inference about external reality that persist despite the evidence to the contrary

From the DSM iv (Source)



posted on Apr, 12 2011 @ 10:31 PM
link   
reply to post by infojunkie2
 


I would describe science like this. I know what parts go in a car, but could I build a car now? I could tell you what the engine does and where it goes but nothing really complicated. Science is like that at the moment I believe, where we understand only the fairly simple and semi complicated processes. leaving a huge wealth of others that we just cant explain



posted on Apr, 12 2011 @ 10:42 PM
link   
What happens to Creationism and Evolution if / when extraterrestrial beings appear and they are very similar to us?



posted on Apr, 12 2011 @ 11:13 PM
link   
reply to post by goddesslovr88
 

Evolution is perfectly compatible with similar life forms on other planets. Many of the most eminent scientists in the field would suggest organisms here and everywhere have survived due to mechanisms that attribute to biological optimality. (Eyes are a necessity for organisms exposed to sunlight in a transparent spectrum who are motile, autonomous metabolism is inevitable, appendages are a must...)

The location of head atop neck and anus in the rear seems like a good idea for earthlings, but its possible there could be another alternative that compares in efficiency. Obviously some organisms could use echo location as opposed to eyes for navigation. If they do have eyes, hopefully the nerve endings are situated on the appropriate side of the lens this time.



posted on Apr, 12 2011 @ 11:35 PM
link   
reply to post by uva3021
 


Evolution means change, just a thought which most people forget when they are drowned in their godless fantasies.



posted on Apr, 12 2011 @ 11:43 PM
link   
reply to post by madnessinmysoul
 


Scientist haven't proven evolution just as Creationists haven't proven that we were created. Whether you place your faith in Science or God, it's still blind faith. Just because Creationism doesn't explain why we are here, doesn't mean that a God or higher power didn't create us. Maybe there is no point to anything at all. Maybe we were created for the entertainment purposes of a being. Maybe we were created just to experience feelings, thoughts and experiences themselves... or maybe we are a serendipitous accident as science suggests. Either way, life is a gift. I will live every second like it is my last.



posted on Apr, 12 2011 @ 11:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by meeneecat
Therefor it is up to YOU to provide the necessary evidence to support YOUR claims. It's not the job of everyone else here.


I did. However in the rest of your response you made it very clear you don't understand the evidence yet... and aren't willing to do the legwork.


Originally posted by meeneecat
Typical Creationist asking everyone else to prove THEM wrong, (specifically those of us who ask for scientific evidence of things before just blindly accepting them as truth)...


Typical couch potato scientist asking everyone else to think for them.


I didn't in any way shape or form ask you or anyone else to take anything blindly. I offered some items for personal research further. I might suggest you hold the mirror up to yourself to consider whether you've put the approach to understanding you purport to use under the same scrutiny and what you might be taking blindly from what you've been taught without *truly* knowing it for a fact.

I offered three significant points of information that give a good foundation for a *scientific* mind to use to understand how the claim the other person made can be understood. I'm sorry you don't understand yet, and that's ok. We all find our path in our own way. To give a metaphor... you are currently looking at Davinci's drawings (time, matter, infinity, consciousness) and saying "Pfffft! Those flying machines don't make no sense!"

I am completely comfortable with you tossing around assertions of delusion. One of us has been on both sides of this coin we're debating.


As for your partial attack upon imagination... please spend more time reading what the highest minds in scientific history have had to say about imagination and/or faith (not blind religious dogmatic faith, though I fear you may have a hard time reading that word and understanding it in any other context).

I am not religious. Nor do I believe in "God" as per what you probably presume.

Best of luck on your journey through life, growth, and understanding. I imagine it will be just fine.


Namaste.



posted on Apr, 12 2011 @ 11:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by DocWicked

Scientist haven't proven evolution


[citation needed]

.



posted on Apr, 12 2011 @ 11:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by goddesslovr88
What happens to Creationism and Evolution if / when extraterrestrial beings appear and they are very similar to us?


Creationism and Evolution are not as incompatible as both sides want everyone to believe. Both are going to eventually prove themselves true to each side. For those of us who are lucky/cursed enough to already get it... it's a simultaneously extremely funny and extremely heart breaking "war" to watch.

EDIT: However, for the science fundamentalists... they are going to have to stop thinking about Creationism as only the Children's Story version they are currently swatting around... and start approaching it more from a fractal, time and matter are illusions, and mathematical understanding... not a "Big Dude said Ahhh Hah!" perspective.

Namaste
edit on 13-4-2011 by ErgoTheConfusion because: Typos



new topics

top topics



 
37
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join