Ask a physicist anything. (5)

[super animator]

I said this isn't the place to discuss evolution.

 

[godisreal36]

Jerusalem was being trodden under the gentiles feet until now. It sounds like that's what it describes to me.

 

[godisreal36]

evolution? ask a scientist anything? You're a kid yet show no respect. I'm old enough to be your father. I was just leaving.

 

[pgp_protector]

I said this isn't the place to discuss evolution.

Did you get promoted to moderator and is the tag not showing?

 

[Wiccan_Child]

God had no beginning, how can this be? And yet how can it not be? Something had to be first without a beginning, right? What could have no beginning except God?

Depends what you mean by 'beginning'.
There's no reason why the universe had to have a beginning.
And even if it has only existed for a finite period of time, there's no guarantee it had a pre-existing cause.
And even if it did have such a cause, there's no guarantee that that cause was God.
And even if that first cause was 'God', there's no guarantee it's the intelligent, concious, prayer-answering, salvation-offering, deity, that Christians believe in.

Ive also heard that the genetic code causes real problems to Darwin's theory of evolution.

I don't doubt you heard that. Suffice to say, it does not.

I'm curious as to why you're referring to Darwin's theory of evolution. What does Darwin have to do with it? We've discarded his own personal theory 150 years ago - while his ideas were groundbreaking, we've since advanced.

The genetic code does not allow for evolution to occur except in dogs, fish and plants and only by mixing them through breeding, and even then it's limited to the genetic code and what it allows.

Could you provide evidence that this limitation exists?

How can Evolution occur if the Genetic code shows no evidence of it ever happening or evidence of it even being possible?

Why indeed. Fortunately, genetics does support evolution. Darwin hypothesised that there was some unit of inheritence that was preferentially distributed by natural selection - Watson and Crick discovered that unit to be R/DNA. This constitutes evidence for evolution, since it was entirely possible that such a unit didn't exist. Yet, it did exist. And it exists in every single living organism on this Earth.

why do we still cling to an outdated theory? The only thing evolving is the theory itself, for lack of evidence it seems.

Actually, there are a great number of phenomena that occur solely because of evolution - it has, for instance, created a tentative cure for HIV. The theory enjoys a consensus by the entire scientific community (save 0.03%...). We have more evidence that evolution is true, than we do that atoms exist. And, surprisingly, you don't see religious fundamentalists complaining about atoms.

It's funny how only those scientific discoveries that seem to go against religious doctrine, are the ones railed against.

Some would use evolution to disprove Gods existence

Really? Who, exactly?

and yet it's false.

Really? Can you demonstrate that evolution (by which I assume you mean the theory of common descent) is actually false?

Just like the "man made" Global warming theory...false. Global warming was a scam like evolution is. Global warming now believed to be caused by solar flares from the sun.

The scientific consensus is still anthropogenic - solar flares do not account for climate change. But this is far to vast a topic to get into; let's stick to evolution

Reminds me of the prophecy of Luke 21:25.

"There will be signs in the sun, moon and stars. On the earth, nations will be in anguish and perplexity at the roaring and tossing of the sea."

Uhuh.

I'm sorry I'm so opinionated. Atheists have beaten God over the head with that ridiculous theory far to long.

Doubtful. I've yet to see an atheist who uses evolution as a criticism of the existence of God. Indeed, the majority of Christians - and theists in general - believe in evolution, without any qualm.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

This isn't the place to discuss evolution guys.

I said this isn't the place to discuss evolution.

I beg your pardon?

 

[godisreal36]

What came first?

 

[godisreal36]

What made the Big Bang?

 

[pgp_protector]

What came first?

No what's is on second.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

What came first?

You're begging the question: how do you know something 'came first' at all? It's entirely possible the universe has always existed.

What made the Big Bang?

The Big Bang is a description of the universe's change in shape over the past 13.5 billion years. What happened before that mark is unknown to science at this moment.

 

[godisreal36]

How can something come from nothing? Something had to be first. My mind cannot except any other conclusion. In order for something to be first it cannot have a beginning. If it came from nothing, nothing was the beginning. Nothing came first. Where did nothing come from? How can something come from nothing? Only God makes sense. God was first, he had no beginning.

Didn't Darwin say we evolved from monkeys?

 

[pgp_protector]

How can something come from nothing? Something had to be first. My mind cannot except any other conclusion. In order for something to be first it cannot have a beginning. If it came from nothing, nothing was the beginning. Nothing came first. Where did nothing come from? How can something come from nothing? Only God makes sense. God was first, he had no beginning.

Didn't Darwin say we evolved from monkeys?

no

 

[AV1611VET]

Didn't Darwin say we evolved from monkeys?

I don't think he did; but the fact that he said we evolved at all is anathema to a literal interpretation of Genesis 1.

 

[AV1611VET]

I think Darwin visited some islands or something, saw some moths change color, then wrote a book about man coming from underneath rocks or somewhere.

(Or something about alleles changing position on cells or something.)

Who really knows?

 

[godisreal36]

That sounds about right. Where does the man from ape theory come from?

 

[Wiccan_Child]

I don't think he did; but the fact that he said we evolved at all is anathema to a literal interpretation of Genesis 1.

Agreed.

I think Darwin visited some islands or something, saw some moths change color, then wrote a book about man coming from underneath rocks or somewhere.

(Or something about alleles changing position on cells or something.)

Who really knows?

AV, don't encourage him

 

[AV1611VET]

AV, don't encourage him

-- sorry.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

How can something come from nothing? Something had to be first. My mind cannot except any other conclusion.

Indeed, but reality doesn't bend to your comprehensive abilities.

In order for something to be first it cannot have a beginning.

I disagree. It could very well be the first being to begin to exist.

If it came from nothing, nothing was the beginning. Nothing came first. Where did nothing come from?

Your statements make no sense - you're treating 'nothing' as if it were a real, concrete thing, which might be why you're making these erroneous conclusions.

How can something come from nothing? Only God makes sense. God was first, he had no beginning.

Allegedly. You define 'God' as 'that which came first' - how do you know that this 'God' is actually the prayer-answering, messiah-manifesting, judgement-delivering being that you worship?

Didn't Darwin say we evolved from monkeys?

No, he did not.

 

[godisreal36]

What's the current accepted theory of mans origin?

And whats the origen of the man from ape theory?

 

[bigbadwilf]

I think Darwin visited some islands or something, saw some moths change color, then wrote a book about man coming from underneath rocks or somewhere.

(Or something about alleles changing position on cells or something.)

Or alternatively, Darwin visited the Galapagos Islands, observed that the mockingbirds varied from island to island, depending on the conditions and the available food and theorised that they had a common ancestor, in 1859. It didn't touch on human beings at all.

His later (1871) work applied his evolutionary theory to the great apes (including humans).