The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
i think that God created us!
Page:
If there is a God, what is it/he/her? I'm fed up of people telling me it's some old guy floating around in space or something, if he is every where, how does he make these things (eg. the bombadier beetle) and how has he/it/her created matter? He must have made it from something, but there is nothing to make it from, did he/her/it just make it appear? It puts the religious theory back to square 1, where did the matter come from, and for that matter (no pun intented) God.
Many people have not been able to answer a lot of the questions we have discussed, and simply came to the conclusion that it was God. A bit like that episode of the Simpsons when Xena is answering questions and cannot explain why something happened, and so said "every time something happens that you don't understand, or should not happen, a wizard did it".
Also, if there is a God, who is an entity and can think, we are probably fairly insignificant to him/her/it. Think of how much there is around you, on Earth, in our solar system, our galaxy and the Universe, surely there must be life out there somewhere, and even on our planet, although we are the dominant species, who is to say that we are the best? Without technology, we would be very weak, and would more likely be prey than predator.
Many people have not been able to answer a lot of the questions we have discussed, and simply came to the conclusion that it was God. A bit like that episode of the Simpsons when Xena is answering questions and cannot explain why something happened, and so said "every time something happens that you don't understand, or should not happen, a wizard did it".
Also, if there is a God, who is an entity and can think, we are probably fairly insignificant to him/her/it. Think of how much there is around you, on Earth, in our solar system, our galaxy and the Universe, surely there must be life out there somewhere, and even on our planet, although we are the dominant species, who is to say that we are the best? Without technology, we would be very weak, and would more likely be prey than predator.
Skorp1on wrote:
> who is to say that
> we are the best? Without technology, we would be very weak, and would
> more likely be prey than predator.
But you're assuming that everyone plays by our rules/morals/ideas. Why can't an alien race have no concept of war? What if they invented space travel first because they weren't spending time inventing weapons? On this planet we tend to create new technology from wars, but there are many other factors that push technical limitations.
> who is to say that
> we are the best? Without technology, we would be very weak, and would
> more likely be prey than predator.
But you're assuming that everyone plays by our rules/morals/ideas. Why can't an alien race have no concept of war? What if they invented space travel first because they weren't spending time inventing weapons? On this planet we tend to create new technology from wars, but there are many other factors that push technical limitations.
Jonathan Nash wrote:
> How is anyone going to explain to me that this magnificent little
> thing came about completely by chance? It's how I feel about all
> creation. I fail to believe that the wonders around each day, just
> happened.
I'll have a pop:
> Dr. Hermann Schildknecht, a German chemist, studied the bombardier
> beetle and learned the beetle makes his explosives by mixing two very
> dangerous chemicals (hydroquinone and hydrogen peroxide).
2 very dangerous chemicals. I think it's safe to say that just squiting hydrogen peroxide would be unpleasant for the receiving face. Thus a beetle which can do that has a better chance of survival, reproduction and passing on its genes to a new generation, than a beetle that can't.
Then some beetle develops genes to naturally includes the inhibitor. Just by chance. Doesn't help much, there's nothing to inhibit anyway, but it does no harm either, so the bettle survives well enough as it is.
Next step - one of the beetles develops genes to mix in the other chemical, hydroquinone. The inhibitor is there, so it doesn't blow up yet, but with another chemical, unpleasant enough on its own, to squirt at predators' faces, it has another weapon to give it a better chance of survival.
Then the big break-through, a beetle is born which squirts another chemical out of its butt, the anti-inhibitor. When the two concoctions mix, they become even more unpleasant, and give the beetle far greater protection against predators, and better chances of passing its genes to many more generations of beetles.
Of course, the other factors you mentioned (the ignition chamber, aiming, timing etc.) would have just developed gradually, improving every so often when new genes are introduced.
And since this happens slowly, over many millions of years, it doesn't seem so implausable.
Of course, this may not have been the precise order, but it shows that the developments could reasonably have happened in the course of evolution, whatever their particular order or timing.
So, in my opinion, the babel fish argument falls down.
(And even if it didn't, Adams shows it proves the non-existence of God ;^) )
> How is anyone going to explain to me that this magnificent little
> thing came about completely by chance? It's how I feel about all
> creation. I fail to believe that the wonders around each day, just
> happened.
I'll have a pop:
> Dr. Hermann Schildknecht, a German chemist, studied the bombardier
> beetle and learned the beetle makes his explosives by mixing two very
> dangerous chemicals (hydroquinone and hydrogen peroxide).
2 very dangerous chemicals. I think it's safe to say that just squiting hydrogen peroxide would be unpleasant for the receiving face. Thus a beetle which can do that has a better chance of survival, reproduction and passing on its genes to a new generation, than a beetle that can't.
Then some beetle develops genes to naturally includes the inhibitor. Just by chance. Doesn't help much, there's nothing to inhibit anyway, but it does no harm either, so the bettle survives well enough as it is.
Next step - one of the beetles develops genes to mix in the other chemical, hydroquinone. The inhibitor is there, so it doesn't blow up yet, but with another chemical, unpleasant enough on its own, to squirt at predators' faces, it has another weapon to give it a better chance of survival.
Then the big break-through, a beetle is born which squirts another chemical out of its butt, the anti-inhibitor. When the two concoctions mix, they become even more unpleasant, and give the beetle far greater protection against predators, and better chances of passing its genes to many more generations of beetles.
Of course, the other factors you mentioned (the ignition chamber, aiming, timing etc.) would have just developed gradually, improving every so often when new genes are introduced.
And since this happens slowly, over many millions of years, it doesn't seem so implausable.
Of course, this may not have been the precise order, but it shows that the developments could reasonably have happened in the course of evolution, whatever their particular order or timing.
So, in my opinion, the babel fish argument falls down.
(And even if it didn't, Adams shows it proves the non-existence of God ;^) )
Evolution rocks. Especially the bit with the black and white moths.
Pantheism:
God is Nature.
Nature evolves.
What is God?
The creational spark which drives existence.
What is existence?
The evolution of God.
Pantheism.
Could be the case?
God is Nature.
Nature evolves.
What is God?
The creational spark which drives existence.
What is existence?
The evolution of God.
Pantheism.
Could be the case?
Solipsism - I am the world.
Definitely the case.
Definitely the case.
people say god is jesuses dad so gods either a alien one of the farm animals or some old tramp.
vote now....
vote now....
yeah, It was god, hanging with his homies, the sandman, and cuba gooding junior, ALL of which has been proved to be child's stories by me.
ESPECIALLY you, cuba gooding junior.
ESPECIALLY you, cuba gooding junior.
Great. God doesn't exist because I can't think beyond the fringes of what I already know, and therefore nothing I do not know can be real.
Even Science doesn't think like that.
Even Science doesn't think like that.
pb wrote:
> Skorp1on wrote:
> who is to say that
> we are the best? Without technology, we would be very weak, and
> would
> more likely be prey than predator.
>
> But you're assuming that everyone plays by our rules/morals/ideas.
> Why can't an alien race have no concept of war? What if they invented
> space travel first because they weren't spending time inventing
> weapons? On this planet we tend to create new technology from wars,
> but there are many other factors that push technical limitations.
I agree with you, but I was trying to say that if we didn't have our technology, the other inhabitants of planet Earth would take over the role of dominante species, and Humans would be fairly low in the food chain. As for Aliens, I have no idea, maybe they don't have any concept of war. It would explain why UFO's and the like are so technologicaly advanced.
> Skorp1on wrote:
> who is to say that
> we are the best? Without technology, we would be very weak, and
> would
> more likely be prey than predator.
>
> But you're assuming that everyone plays by our rules/morals/ideas.
> Why can't an alien race have no concept of war? What if they invented
> space travel first because they weren't spending time inventing
> weapons? On this planet we tend to create new technology from wars,
> but there are many other factors that push technical limitations.
I agree with you, but I was trying to say that if we didn't have our technology, the other inhabitants of planet Earth would take over the role of dominante species, and Humans would be fairly low in the food chain. As for Aliens, I have no idea, maybe they don't have any concept of war. It would explain why UFO's and the like are so technologicaly advanced.
Page: