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.
If there is nothing of substance to add, don't add anything. Thanks for all the offers, but June and I can take care of the Moderating duties. Please keep the comments constructive so we don't have to delete any more.
I would not use the term 'universe' because it is vague - for example the universe as we see it now is not the same as it was 1 billion years ago, and the universe that was 1 billion years ago was not the same as it was 13 billion years ago.
I prefer to use matter/energy as that which is eternal and is the fundamental nature of all things physical - matter/energy transform but was not created.
So, no Big Bang?
10-25-2014, 02:55 PM
2K5Gx2km
n/a posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmiej
So, no Big Bang?
Not necessarily! There are models that are cyclical. I have told you this before. In fact go to youtube and watch a debate between William Lane Craig and Sean Carroll. Carroll will give you eternal BB models. He will also show you why WLC misunderstands the model he cherry picks to make his argument that there must have been a creator.
And BB models are not the only models out there.
As aside, I am not fully convinced of a BB since I kinda take heart to the idea that red shift is intrinsic and not a result of the expansion of space-time.
Also, no model says that there was absolutely nothing (in a philosophical sense) and then it started to expand - that is not what science has concluded - that is a misunderstanding primarily by creationists.
Not necessarily! There are models that are cyclical. I have told you this before. In fact go to youtube and watch a debate between William Lane Craig and Sean Carroll. Carroll will give you eternal BB models. He will also show you why WLC misunderstands the model he cherry picks to make his argument that there must have been a creator.
And BB models are not the only models out there.
So there was a beginning (possibly), to the universe. If that's the case, our only choices are design or accident. And we're back to step one...
10-25-2014, 03:04 PM
2K5Gx2km
n/a posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmiej
So there was a beginning (possibly), to the universe. If that's the case, our only choices are design or accident. And we're back to step one...
Possibly there was a beginning to this universe from other universes or a collapsing of a previous one - no need for a creator who designed it though. But that is a cyclical model that still has matter/energy as eternally existing usually in some quantum state.
Possibly there was a beginning to this universe from other universes or a collapsing of a previous one - no need for a creator who designed it though. But that is a cyclical model that still has matter/energy as eternally existing usually in some quantum state.
Since the universe displays such an amazing design, there must have been ID. For example, if the Earth were significantly closer or farther away from the sun, it would not be capable of supporting much of the life it currently does. If the elements in our atmosphere were even a few percentage points different, nearly every living thing on earth would die. The odds of a single protein molecule forming by chance is 1 in a gazillion.
(bolding mine) Not necessarily. There have been many, many, many, many mistakes along the way. Thousands of species of plant and animal have died out throughout the course of Earth life. "Intelligence" would not seem to be indicated where life forms crop up only to be totally unsustainable and die.
I'm not saying the universe isn't amazing - it is. However, one planet out of literally billions of planets just in the Milky Way alone happening to "hit it just right" doesn't speak of intelligent design to me, it speaks of chemicals eventually being in a certain combination to produce life, which, moving around as they do, it's hardly weird that eventually SOMETHING would come of all that...if not life as we knew it, then something else.
(And of course this doesn't discount the possibility of life we haven't discovered yet in some form on other planets - in fact I feel it's very possible, given the way the "chemicals" spoken of do act.)
Where did you get the one in a gazillion data? And how about the atmospheric elements and percentage points different? By "percentage points" do you mean in fractions of a whole? Again, this is intelligently designed...why? Because those atmospheric elements aren't known to move around? Because there was no way they were ever going to combine and exist in a certain combination unless someone's "hand," so to speak, moved them there?
The fact that we're here now is STILL either accident or design.
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.
