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.
The website shows they have a really poor understanding of "how it really works".
eg they make really dumb statements like this: "All fossils are of complete animals and plants, not works in progress "under construction"."
I can understand what they mean by that, but I think that the evidence for so much transitional formation makes it a less likely explanation. It is based on the doctrine that all animal and plant forms were all made (give or take micro - evolutionary changes) at one time. I can't buy that as all the evidence I can think of (particularly stratification with what appears to be evolutionary development in the fossils therein) causes problems for that idea.
eg they make really dumb statements like this: "All fossils are of complete animals and plants, not works in progress "under construction"."
Well, I found a fossil of an eyeball and optic nerve connected to nothing but the upper part of a spinal column. Nothing more. So I guess not all fossils are of complete animals and plants.
Oh yeah, later I found out that it was the incomplete fossil of a crocoduck.
I don't "believe in" aliens. I simply have far more reason to think alien life likely than that gods are likely.
The relevance of either is of course basically zero. I don't live my life as if either gods OR aliens exist. If aliens exist, it doesn't matter unless we make contact somehow and given this hasn't happened in recorded history, I'm scarcely going to order my life as if that might suddenly change.
What is the difference between a god and a super strong alien? In fact, given the state of scientific knowledge of astronomy a few thousand years ago, wouldn't the two be indistinguishable?
Shouldn't a near-omnipotent alien be described as a god, in the sense of the Roman and Greek gods?
What is the difference between a god and a super strong alien? In fact, given the state of scientific knowledge of astronomy a few thousand years ago, wouldn't the two be indistinguishable?
Shouldn't a near-omnipotent alien be described as a god, in the sense of the Roman and Greek gods?
Not today, no.
It was understandable if someone from ancient times saw something technologically advanced and thought it was something supernatural, something divine. But in those days, humanity lacked even the language to describe technology much less the scientific principles that would allow an understanding of how that technology worked.
Today, however, we do have the scientific method and science in general to keep us from making unfounded "leaps of faith" in considering a super-strong alien to be a god.
To my mind, at least, being a god is more than just being powerful or being advanced. There is something immortal, magical, supernatural about gods because without those parameters, then there's no reason not to assume that the God of the Bible (or any god) is just a superstrong alien and not divine in any way at all.
It was understandable if someone from ancient times saw something technologically advanced and thought it was something supernatural, something divine. But in those days, humanity lacked even the language to describe technology much less the scientific principles that would allow an understanding of how that technology worked.
Today, however, we do have the scientific method and science in general to keep us from making unfounded "leaps of faith" in considering a super-strong alien to be a god.
To my mind, at least, being a god is more than just being powerful or being advanced. There is something immortal, magical, supernatural about gods because without those parameters, then there's no reason not to assume that the God of the Bible (or any god) is just a superstrong alien and not divine in any way at all.
I believe "supernatural" is a loaded term, in that the same thing that was once considered supernatural suddenly becomes natural as soon as we understand the underlying mechanisms of how it works. The same is true of "magical". Thus one can never prove the supernatural is real, because as soon as it is seen as real we will describe it as natural.
There have been many discoveries throughout history that defied the then-known laws of nature. We never described those discoveries as supernatural. Instead we changed our definition of what is natural to include those things that would have previously been considered supernatural.
For example, the concept of "heaven" as another dimension is considered supernatural so long as it is believed not to exist. But if were to be discovered to exist, we would view it as proof of string theories other dimensions. Since we would have a scietific explanation for it's existence, heaven would not longer be considered supernatural, and we would simple accept alternate universes as part of the natural.
If we posited that a near omnipotent being from another dimension existed, one could either call that a god or an alien. If we discovered it to be real, we would include "really strong aliens from other dimensions" as part of the natural sciences, even if we were validating an idea that was previously considered supernatural.
As per the above, the distinction between the natural and the supernatural really just depends on if we happen to believe something exists or can explain why it exists. But the object itself isn't different, only what we call it. (Thus a near omnipotent alien and a god are the same thing, though what we would call it would depend on whether or not we believed it existed or could explain it's existence.)
What I know is.. I listen to my emotions.. the built-in truth detector for all of us.. man if we could get that established as a scientific theory.. it'd change the world!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boxcar Overkill
I believe "supernatural" is a loaded term, in that the same thing that was once considered supernatural suddenly becomes natural as soon as we understand the underlying mechanisms of how it works. The same is true of "magical". Thus one can never prove the supernatural is real, because as soon as it is seen as real we will describe it as natural.
There have been many discoveries throughout history that defied the then-known laws of nature. We never described those discoveries as supernatural. Instead we changed our definition of what is natural to include those things that would have previously been considered supernatural.
I believe "supernatural" is a loaded term, in that the same thing that was once considered supernatural suddenly becomes natural as soon as we understand the underlying mechanisms of how it works. The same is true of "magical". Thus one can never prove the supernatural is real, because as soon as it is seen as real we will describe it as natural.
There have been many discoveries throughout history that defied the then-known laws of nature. We never described those discoveries as supernatural. Instead we changed our definition of what is natural to include those things that would have previously been considered supernatural.
For example, the concept of "heaven" as another dimension is considered supernatural so long as it is believed not to exist. But if were to be discovered to exist, we would view it as proof of string theories other dimensions. Since we would have a scietific explanation for it's existence, heaven would not longer be considered supernatural, and we would simple accept alternate universes as part of the natural.
If we posited that a near omnipotent being from another dimension existed, one could either call that a god or an alien. If we discovered it to be real, we would include "really strong aliens from other dimensions" as part of the natural sciences, even if we were validating an idea that was previously considered supernatural.
As per the above, the distinction between the natural and the supernatural really just depends on if we happen to believe something exists or can explain why it exists. But the object itself isn't different, only what we call it. (Thus a near omnipotent alien and a god are the same thing, though what we would call it would depend on whether or not we believed it existed or could explain it's existence.)
Back when we used to call things "supernatural," there was no scientific community. There were no checks and balances to the wild-eyed claims of priests and shamans that the gods were angry (as usual). Things were declared an "act of god" or interpreted as a portent or omen without any scientific inquirey. I mean, why bother investigating something when you already KNOW it was the result of a god?
Outside of overly religious America and the Third World, MOST of the world's population thinks in scientific terms regardless of whatever else they believe. Japanese, for instance, might believe in Shintoism, Taoism, or even Christianity, but 90% of them still accept evolution and there IS no debate about teaching "intelligent design" in the classroom.
In today's world, only the uber religious still cling to supernatural explanations for things they don't yet understand, but no one else does. Therefore, the arrival of a super-alien would still be seen as something scientific, something purely natural. Since priests and shamans are no longer the final deciders when explaining our universe, and since approaching mysteries non-religiously no longer warrants a death sentence, there is simply no reason to assume that a super-alien is supernatural.
After all, how often has a supernatural explanation been proven to be correct?
As for the term "supernatural" being loaded, it's actually not. To me, something that is supernatural cannot be explained in naturalistic terms. That doesn't include things that seem supernatural due to advanced technology, but things that really are supernatural. Humanity being duped into believing an alien's technology is supernatural doesn't make it so.
And while you can rest assured that the arrival of any sufficiently advanced being will immediately see a bunch of people worshiping it, those of us who keep our wits about us will be eager to learn all they are willing to teach about their technology and knowledge - rather than receiving commandments and placating their wrath.
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.
I just don't care about this stuff.. yah know? 
I know what, I know 
they are really saying "here's how it really works" 
