PoliticalGroove Forums

Welcome to the PoliticalGroove Forums

We offer discussion, social groups and blogs in an open and free environment. Our free community you will have access to post topics, post blogs, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!



Go Back   PoliticalGroove Forums > Issue Forums > Religion
Share PG Forum Register Blogs FAQ Members List Social Groups Mark Forums Read

Sponsors
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-03-2008, 01:32 PM   #21 (permalink)
Senior Member
Points: 6,877, Level: 54 Points: 6,877, Level: 54 Points: 6,877, Level: 54
Activity: 7% Activity: 7% Activity: 7%
 
mentor's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Northern California
Posts: 1,945
My Mood:
Thanks: 62
Thanked 123 Times in 88 Posts
mentor is a famous PG member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Environment Man View Post
It is not prudent or logical to assume energy has always existed in an inanimate state. A more Occam's Razor explanation would be sentience existing with the power to make energy. Sentience is more appropriate than just matter. For the is order in that energy and matter. Systems and designs. And inanimate energy cannot design systems or build complex structures.
Sentience is not a requirement for the existence of matter. Rather the inverse is true. Matter is required for the existence of sentience.
__________________
Now the hard work begins...
mentor is offline   Top Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2008, 01:51 PM   #22 (permalink)
Free Market Anarchist
Points: 1,952, Level: 26 Points: 1,952, Level: 26 Points: 1,952, Level: 26
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
 
Brainpolice's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Euclid, Ohio
Posts: 378
My Mood:
Thanks: 2
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Brainpolice is a normal PG member
As I've said before, any attempt to prove the creation of the universe, either religious or scientific, falls back into a paradox. If a deity created the universe, where did the diety come from? And if you can point to another entity that it derived from, where did that derive from? The problem keeps reasserting itself. In order to escape the paradox, your only option is to play the eternity card without any evidence to back it up. The same is true of the big bang and "the singularity". Multiverse theory has attempted to get around the problem by asserting that the creation of a given universe is the result of a cosmic collision between universes, but it hasn't solved anything because the question still arises as to how the multiverse came into existance.
Brainpolice is offline   Top Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2008, 01:57 PM   #23 (permalink)
Senior Member
Points: 45,965, Level: 100 Points: 45,965, Level: 100 Points: 45,965, Level: 100
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
 
Environment Man's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Catalina Island
Posts: 19,983
Thanks: 0
Thanked 37 Times in 33 Posts
Environment Man is a famous PG member
Quote:
Originally Posted by mentor View Post
Sentience is not a requirement for the existence of matter. Rather the inverse is true. Matter is required for the existence of sentience.
But matter cannot form itself into complex systems such as stars, atoms and even the Earth. That requires sentience.
Environment Man is offline   Top Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2008, 01:58 PM   #24 (permalink)
Senior Member
Points: 45,965, Level: 100 Points: 45,965, Level: 100 Points: 45,965, Level: 100
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
 
Environment Man's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Catalina Island
Posts: 19,983
Thanks: 0
Thanked 37 Times in 33 Posts
Environment Man is a famous PG member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brainpolice View Post
As I've said before, any attempt to prove the creation of the universe, either religious or scientific, falls back into a paradox. If a deity created the universe, where did the diety come from? And if you can point to another entity that it derived from, where did that derive from? The problem keeps reasserting itself. In order to escape the paradox, your only option is to play the eternity card without any evidence to back it up. The same is true of the big bang and "the singularity". Multiverse theory has attempted to get around the problem by asserting that the creation of a given universe is the result of a cosmic collision between universes, but it hasn't solved anything because the question still arises as to how the multiverse came into existance.
Logic dictates that there had to be an entity that always has been and always will be and is all powerful. That ends the chicken and egg conundrum and explains the Big Bang and the laws of physics.
Environment Man is offline   Top Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2008, 02:02 PM   #25 (permalink)
Senior Member
Points: 9,401, Level: 65 Points: 9,401, Level: 65 Points: 9,401, Level: 65
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
 
slowhand's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,600
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 59
Thanked 92 Times in 58 Posts
slowhand is a spectacular PG memberslowhand is a spectacular PG member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Environment Man View Post
People who do not believe in God are NOT serious people so I have no need of their affectations.

NASA has not found ANY life on the Moon or any other planet it has visited. So that is a scientifically established fact. And that supports my postulation. Mars is a particularly glaring example.
You didnt really think they would find life on the moon did you?..

The jury is still out as to whether life existed on Mars or not..As vast as the universe is, the possibility of life is more probable than not..But your "religion" wont allow you to go there
slowhand is offline   Top Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2008, 02:04 PM   #26 (permalink)
Senior Member
Points: 6,877, Level: 54 Points: 6,877, Level: 54 Points: 6,877, Level: 54
Activity: 7% Activity: 7% Activity: 7%
 
mentor's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Northern California
Posts: 1,945
My Mood:
Thanks: 62
Thanked 123 Times in 88 Posts
mentor is a famous PG member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Environment Man View Post
But matter cannot form itself into complex systems such as stars, atoms and even the Earth. That requires sentience.
There is no evidence of sentience ever producing one atom. But lots of evidence of all kinds of sentience evolving from matter. "Requires sentience" is a hypothesis only, and one with far less support than it's inverse: "Sentience requires matter"
__________________
Now the hard work begins...
mentor is offline   Top Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2008, 02:05 PM   #27 (permalink)
I Drank Your Milkshake
Points: 5,852, Level: 49 Points: 5,852, Level: 49 Points: 5,852, Level: 49
Activity: 1% Activity: 1% Activity: 1%
 
Curator's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Ohio
Posts: 730
My Mood:
Thanks: 15
Thanked 178 Times in 106 Posts
Curator is a normal PG member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Environment Man View Post
Natural selection is a very poor designer and builder. Natural selection in reality has on two paths. Survival and extinction. There are not new organs and limbs grown due to natural selection. Each species is finished. That is obvious to ANY observer. A constant if you will.
So then in your mind nothing has evolved? Necks do not get longer to reach the tender new shoots at the tops of trees, nor do tongues get longer to reach for insects buried in their holes?

I guess certain moths did not change the pattern on their wings due to pollution discoloring the bark on trees on which they roosted.
__________________
“I truly believe that at this point in America’s history we need a president who will not just continue ... basically the policies we have followed in recent years. We need a president with transformational qualities.”

"For that reason, I will be voting for Barack Obama.”

- Former Secretary of State Colin Powell

“You can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska.”
Gov Palin explaining her national security credentials.
Curator is offline   Top Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2008, 02:24 PM   #28 (permalink)
Field of Cheese
Points: 12,204, Level: 72 Points: 12,204, Level: 72 Points: 12,204, Level: 72
Activity: 4% Activity: 4% Activity: 4%
 
Titanium Cat's Avatar
 
Tetris Champion!
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Oz
Posts: 5,050
My Mood:
Thanks: 10
Thanked 103 Times in 64 Posts
Titanium Cat is a famous PG member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Environment Man View Post
What about SETI?
SETI examines radio transmissions, there are many life forms that don't use or are capable of making long distance radio transmissions. And since most earth like planets will be thousands or even millions of light years away, it would take a very long time for their signals to reach earth. We might have to wait a long time.

Quote:
Nothing there either. Hubble Space Telescope?
The Hubble Telescope cannot see planets, how do you expect it to see actual life forms.

Quote:
Nothing. Everywhere woman has looked. Nothing. Science supports me.
No it does not, science has only began to seriously search for other planets and that search is in its infancy. It is highly unscientific to draw a conclusion of that sort at this point.
__________________

Where the hell is E-man?
Titanium Cat is offline   Top Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2008, 02:50 PM   #29 (permalink)
Senior Member
Points: 45,965, Level: 100 Points: 45,965, Level: 100 Points: 45,965, Level: 100
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
 
Environment Man's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Catalina Island
Posts: 19,983
Thanks: 0
Thanked 37 Times in 33 Posts
Environment Man is a famous PG member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Titanium Cat View Post
SETI examines radio transmissions, there are many life forms that don't use or are capable of making long distance radio transmissions. And since most earth like planets will be thousands or even millions of light years away, it would take a very long time for their signals to reach earth. We might have to wait a long time.

The Hubble Telescope cannot see planets, how do you expect it to see actual life forms.

No it does not, science has only began to seriously search for other planets and that search is in its infancy. It is highly unscientific to draw a conclusion of that sort at this point.
Well it supports my creation fact MORE than it supports your spontaneous generation of life theory.
Environment Man is offline   Top Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2008, 02:52 PM   #30 (permalink)
Senior Member
Points: 45,965, Level: 100 Points: 45,965, Level: 100 Points: 45,965, Level: 100
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
 
Environment Man's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Catalina Island
Posts: 19,983
Thanks: 0
Thanked 37 Times in 33 Posts
Environment Man is a famous PG member
Quote:
Originally Posted by mentor View Post
There is no evidence of sentience ever producing one atom. But lots of evidence of all kinds of sentience evolving from matter. "Requires sentience" is a hypothesis only, and one with far less support than it's inverse: "Sentience requires matter"
Well explain how the atom evolved into existence. You will say that it always has been but there is structure and design there. Order. It did not self construct and it is the basic building block of your matter. Sentience HAD to come first to design and build the atom.
Environment Man is offline   Top Reply With Quote
Reply

Sponsors

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:24 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0 RC8
PoliticalGroove.com General political and social discussion