Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Really? Let's say there is some kind of creator how do you know it's the God of the Bible as interpreted by American evangelicals in the South? Why not Allah? Why not the Norse gods? Why not a Deist God? Why not a progressive Christian God that could have used natural processes such as the big bang and evolution to bring about our current universe?
It takes far more faith to be a fundamentalist Christian, asserting that you know exactly how it happened (and that happens to contradict everything we know about science) than to simply say "I don't know." The nice thing about being an agnostic atheist is you don't have to have an answer for everything.
Actually, the portion in bold is pretty much exactly what I believe. I see no reason why the existence of God and the validity of science should be mutually exclusive. I think who and how are two different questions. Also, there's nothing wrong with saying "I don't know." It only becomes a problem when a person doesn't WANT to know, and is hostile to any kind of new knowledge.
Reading many of the posts here, I have a feeling this POV is probably going to draw fire from all sides...
It is amazing and gives a good perspective of how small and also how lucky we are to exist. Surviving in an orbit after the big bang, not to close to the sun and not to far away, water, carbon and atmosphere and the origin of life.
not to mention a large moon that stabilizes our axial tilt at 23 degrees.
I have a master's degree in science and an extensive religious background. Even if one believes God created the universe, where did He come from? Such answers were unimportant even when I was a college student because the answers were irrelevant to living my life. There are no answers to some questions.
It is amazing and gives a good perspective of how small and also how lucky we are to exist. Surviving in an orbit after the big bang, not to close to the sun and not to far away, water, carbon and atmosphere and the origin of life.
We're not lucky. Just remember if the parameters had been different you wouldn't be here to look at the sky and contemplate your luck.
It's like the old "how do we know dolphins push drowning sailors to shore, when the sailors who could be pushed out to the ocean aren't around to tell us" metaphor.
22 billion light years is travel time or distance for light to travel, not actual time.
I understand that. However from what I've heard scientusts use the speed of light to measure how old the universe is. If a star is 22 billion light years away then shouldn't the claim be that the universe is 22 billion years old?
Quote:
They recently detected cosmic waves from two stars that collided 130 Million years ago when dinosaurs roamed the earth. Amazing and gives you a small perspective on the size of the universe.
remember that the universe is expanding in all directions, not just one.
second we are not at the edge of the universe, but rather out in the suburbs as it were, there are galaxies beyond where we are.
third you have to take into account more than just the speed of light when trying to figure the actual diameter of the universe.
That begs another question, how do we know that the universe is 13 billion years old if the speed of light is not the limiting factor as to how far we can see?
We're not lucky. Just remember if the parameters had been different you wouldn't be here to look at the sky and contemplate your luck.
It's like the old "how do we know dolphins push drowning sailors to shore, when the sailors who could be pushed out to the ocean aren't around to tell us" metaphor.
Luck played no part, just random chance.
Also known as survivor bias. The puddle of water exclaims "of course it is not chance look at this perfectly shaped pothole, exactly the right size and shape for me to fit into it perfectly!"
If the conditions for life are rare, any life that develops anywhere in the universe will be astounded at the odds once they are intelligent enough to understand them. And then when it gets a little smarter it will realize there is literally no other way it could be.
Last edited by zzzSnorlax; 10-27-2017 at 08:57 PM..
That begs another question, how do we know that the universe is 13 billion years old if the speed of light is not the limiting factor as to how far we can see?
The universe is apparently expanding, under the Big Bang theory, has always been expanding from the monobloc @ the beginning of time. Read through any good article on stellar mechanics - you'll see that we've worked out stellar lifetimes for various kinds of suns & how they progress & how they wind up.
Are these the same scientists that said 70% of us should be under water by now due to global warming?
Do you have a reference for that ?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
One billion, two billion, three ...
