Intelligent Design; Does Modern Genetic Research Mean Darwin's THEORY of Evolution Belongs In The..

reply to post by Brotherman


We actually do see new species all the time.

reply to post by Phage


Would you entertain a notion such as an organized cosmic energy throughout all of "the universe" that causes random occurrences all over? I ask because that is more or less a belief of mine, I do not mean speghetti monsters, deities, or aliens. I mean literally some kind of master source energy that is organized within itself that causes these things, I don't mean it to be living, or conscience, when I say intelligent I am really meaning simply an organized by structure and balance it may or may not hold with all things opposite of it that it effects. If you understand what I am trying to say

reply to post by Brotherman


If you are looking for scientific answers you will not find them in 2000 year old books.

Our understanding of our world is always expanding. Even important theorys change to match our newest observations. Religious books have not changed to keep up with our ever growing knowledge of how things work. When thise books were written they were done with the knowledge of that time. Some things seem like they make sense but you have to bend your mind to really accept most of it. This leads to mental illness.

reply to post by Woodcarver


I'm not religious I don't have these problems, I just ask lots of questions.

Brotherman
reply to post by Phage

 

Would you entertain a notion such as an organized cosmic energy throughout all of "the universe" that causes random occurrences all over? I ask because that is more or less a belief of mine, I do not mean speghetti monsters, deities, or aliens. I mean literally some kind of master source energy that is organized within itself that causes these things, I don't mean it to be living, or conscience, when I say intelligent I am really meaning simply an organized by structure and balance it may or may not hold with all things opposite of it that it effects. If you understand what I am trying to say

Actually yes. As we understand it, there are four forces that govern all of the properties of the universe. Gravity is the weakest. Electro magnetism, weak nuclear force, and strong nuclear force.

reply to post by Brotherman


Questions are good. It also helps me organize my own knowledge. I always say you never truly understand something until you start to teach others.

reply to post by Brotherman

Would you entertain a notion such as an organized cosmic energy throughout all of "the universe" that causes random occurrences all over?

I'm really going to try to not be snarky.
An organized energy that causes random events. That's sort of an oxymoron isn't it? Or I don't really get what you mean.
Frankly, I think the idea of God actually makes a little more sense.

reply to post by Woodcarver


Ive got to crash. It has been my pleasure. Hope to see you on the boards. Sorry if i got frustrated.

reply to post by Phage


Im going to screen capture that last bit and use it out of context if we ever disagree about anything.

Woodcarver

Brotherman
reply to post by Phage

 

Would you entertain a notion such as an organized cosmic energy throughout all of "the universe" that causes random occurrences all over? I ask because that is more or less a belief of mine, I do not mean speghetti monsters, deities, or aliens. I mean literally some kind of master source energy that is organized within itself that causes these things, I don't mean it to be living, or conscience, when I say intelligent I am really meaning simply an organized by structure and balance it may or may not hold with all things opposite of it that it effects. If you understand what I am trying to say

Actually yes. As we understand it, there are four forces that govern all of the properties of the universe. Gravity is the weakest. Electro magnetism, weak nuclear force, and strong nuclear force.

Yeah I understand all of those to a degree or at least acknowledge them, I am talking about an entirely different force we have not yet described. Do any of those forces explain anti-matter? I really do not know if they do or do not as I am under the understanding that is still debated as well and probably a bit off topic in this thread. Why I bring it up though is that I am sure at the least that there is a possibility for an organized energy "counter balance" somewhere in space that not only requires creation but also destruction for whatever reason. Something that started objects in motion, and like I said I am not talking about cosmic zombies, speghetti monsters, religion deities. The reason it is purtenant is that I still think how life began in the beginning is really the only way to know or understand evolution or its opposition definitively. If we observe life on another planet for some random shot in time of a fish hopping out of a pool or whatever and start walking around and we just happened to walk in on it like you walk in on your buddy and susy fooling around in the kitchen it would kind of shoot things all to hell with creation but still doesn't describe that intial burst that put things in motion. Please don't say big bang, I'm more apt to accept that the universe has simply just always been even though I can't define or comprehend the implication deeply.

reply to post by Phage


Its difficult to describe what I mean, I do not mean an angry interventionalist god that loves its creations and has to destroy them time and time again to save them from themselves. I mean literally a form originator whatever we do not comprehend or see that puts everything in motion. Besides hearing that everything came from nothing in an instant in a big bang kind of i just didn't buy that I figured that the universe and everything in it always was and that there was something kind of directing it around is what I mean but its difficult cause I am not a scientist or a keyboard warrior with cool words.

reply to post by Brotherman


As far as we know there is nothing like what you are describing. People have tried to ascribe the universe to all kinds of amazing things, conjuring up magical deities, jinn, and all sorts of characters, but none of those stories are nearly as amazing as what we know to be true. There is no story nearly as amazing as what science can already prove. It's hard to put down the fairy tales we all grew up with. Religions are divisive because they rely on your emotions and not hard facts. You cant argue with some ones emotional "it seems right". But physical things are not abstract. We can observe the world and be objective about it, we can all look at an apple and agree about its properties, if you disagree then we can break it down to its molecular structure until we understand every thing about it. but to truly move on from this culture of war, greed, and vanity. To a culture that really understands what every individual needs to feel important and worthy of this life we are living, then we need to embrace and educate ourselves as we are. People call science a religion and say that it requires faith to believe. But it does not require any more faith to believe that 1 and 2 make three. You just have to apply your brain to deal with the world around you. And stop believing in "what ifs". Its fine to speculate, thats how we make forward progress, but without substantial physical evidence and more research than most are willing to put forth, you should not accept any proposition. We all know how easy it is to be fooled. Our brains are wired to notice patterns in our environment. They are not really wired for logical reasoning. It is something you have to develop like a muscle. The more you work on it the better it will perform.

reply to post by Brotherman


These forces do describe the theoretical "antimatter" i do not think we have actually found it and observed it though. As i understand it, we only know its there because of the math involved. I also think this leads some theoretical physicists to the multiple universe theory. I am a strong believer in math. It is a tool we can use to describe things that we can not see yet. It can guide us to where we need to focus our attention. These things may be possible based on the calculations. I am so intrigued by the ideas put forth by this type of science such as black holes, multiple universes, string theory, a simulated or holographic universe. These ideas are really difficult to wrap ones head around, which is why we rely on some of the most gifted minds to work these problems out. These ideas are considered hypothetical but it is the math which leads them to these notions, not the other way around.

reply to post by Brotherman


If your talking about a force that sets everything in motion, you should look into electromagnetism.

Brotherman

I found this video interesting as well, I have not had the opportunity to view your video but I will and wanted to add this one as well. I would like at some point to Take all the claims Trey makes write them down and see if I get similar answers as well as counter answers just to satisfy my own suspicions and skepticism. Either way great post and this is a very interesting and hotly debated topic. I hope this thread turns out to be very condusive into some form of understanding. Thanks for posting!

Alright, i watched this whole video too. I have seen this guy do several other things too. But all he is doing is repeating the things stated in the op's vid. He is not a scientist. He is the definition of a keyboard warrior. If you want to understand why he is so wrong then you will have to listen to the actual scientist who work on these problems. You will have to study the work to understand the work. It is all open source and can also be found on youtube.

Jim Scott
reply to post by Woodcarver

 

You may be interested in the work by Gentry on polonium halos at www.halos.com. His thesis attempts to prove that granite was formed and cooled in the time it takes to melt an ice cube. His opposition has not had a lot of luck disproving it, either. infidels.org...

If Gentry is right, and he is currently quite considered the authority on the science above, then the Earth would have had to cool quite fast, not obeying the natural laws of physics you mention.

I suppose that's why we call these things "miracles."

Polonioum Halos have been refuted time and time again on this site.
Polonium halos refuted
Radiometric Dating a Christian Perspective

If you want your position in a discussion to be taken seriously, at least understand what you are proposing as opposed to rehashing that same garbage that has been shown to be inaccurate and misleading

Woodcarver
reply to post by Xtrozero

 

To prove a case of inteligent design you would have to show what we call causation. We know that beavers build dams because we can observe them doing it. We know pluto has an orbit of like 300 years even though we havent observed it, but we can plot its course and with the help of a little math we can come to a reasonable conclusion.

To even hold the proposition of an ID we would have to have something to observe. The best evidence put forward is that there are patterns in the universe ( the golden ratio, pi, life itself) but to the best of our knowledge of everything observable, these are natural occurances. They are following the natural course of chemistry. To propose ID as a cause you would first have to prove a deity exists and then show how he makes universes. This is how science works. Its the only way to make any positive claim. Any claim at all. Every thing else you know is based on observations of the physical world.

What I think that people just can not fathom is just what it means to be outside of our universe. This is an unknowable area that it seems people are uncomfortable with so they apply something, anything to make it knowable, and in intelligent design they apply a God of some sort.

Also once again people want to suggest we are the causation of the patterns in the universe and not just the effect. With causation it would imply that an intelligent design created perfection throughout the universe to create us and not that we just happen to be the result of how our universe works.

Woodcarver

Brotherman

I found this video interesting as well, I have not had the opportunity to view your video but I will and wanted to add this one as well. I would like at some point to Take all the claims Trey makes write them down and see if I get similar answers as well as counter answers just to satisfy my own suspicions and skepticism. Either way great post and this is a very interesting and hotly debated topic. I hope this thread turns out to be very condusive into some form of understanding. Thanks for posting!

Alright, i watched this whole video too. I have seen this guy do several other things too. But all he is doing is repeating the things stated in the op's vid. He is not a scientist. He is the definition of a keyboard warrior. If you want to understand why he is so wrong then you will have to listen to the actual scientist who work on these problems. You will have to study the work to understand the work. It is all open source and can also be found on youtube.

edit on 29-12-2013 by Woodcarver because: (no reason given)

I've emailed this guy before asking if he has research notes or source material so I can do some fact checking, I think the video that he has made is certainly interesting although I wouldn't out right say that everything is correct. I thought his views on entropy were the most interesting and insightful points.

Woodcarver
reply to post by Brotherman

 

These forces do describe the theoretical "antimatter" i do not think we have actually found it and observed it though. As i understand it, we only know its there because of the math involved. I also think this leads some theoretical physicists to the multiple universe theory. I am a strong believer in math. It is a tool we can use to describe things that we can not see yet. It can guide us to where we need to focus our attention. These things may be possible based on the calculations. I am so intrigued by the ideas put forth by this type of science such as black holes, multiple universes, string theory, a simulated or holographic universe. These ideas are really difficult to wrap ones head around, which is why we rely on some of the most gifted minds to work these problems out. These ideas are considered hypothetical but it is the math which leads them to these notions, not the other way around.

I had recently read a book called "Quantum Enigma" [Physics Encounters Consciousness] By Bruce Rosenbaum and co authored by Fred Kuttner and found chapter 17 the most interesting of them all where as they talk about Dark energy, black holes, and the anthropic principles but the most thought provoking part of it was the discussion about the big bang having to have to have been so finely tuned that the constant could not allow for one error or else all things couldn't have came to existence. For me this constant leads me to speculate an organized force of sorts that is yet undescribed that allowed all things to come into existence and begin to either evolve or live or however it went down in the way beginning.

reply to post by Brotherman

Hinting at purpose again.

Flip a coin. If you get heads you won't get tails.
If the big bang didn't do exactly what it did we wouldn't be here.

Not much difference at the core of it.