Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
The gaps keep getting smaller... and the beat goes on.Oh goody -- something new for the fundies to panic over.
What thread have you been reading? The question has been answered repeatedly. The answer is, "We don't know." We don't know everything, so why should we know this?GB - you again asked a question that no naturalist can answer (the other being how did fruit evolve?). Why it takes 16 pages of mostly off-topic responses to dodge a question is, well, boring.
We don't have the technology. No wondering needed. Cells are quite complex structures, and we have no way of assembling anything that complex at that scale. No wondering needed.Given what science knows and can do, I often wonder why life cannot be created in a lab. We know the components and how they are assembled. Maybe we just don't have the technology to arrange everything correctly
No one knows how likely it is for life to start naturally under the appropriate conditions. Anyone who tells you that there are hundreds of perfect arrangements needed, and that the probability of life starting is any particular number, is lying to you.At any rate, the obvious answer to the question of life origins to a naturalist is "I have no idea." Strangely, when potential reasons are brought up that explain why a naturalist has no idea, those points are dismissed as non-points. For example, when scientists discuss the unlikelihood of a natural random occurrance of the correct arrangement of components as a reason why natural processes may not be the answer, naturalists argue that 10^50+ isn't that big of a deal. Wash, rinse, repeat for every other perfectly dialed-in 'natural' occurance needed for life to even exist. There are literally hundreds of perfect arrangements identified and required to be 'just so' for the existance of life.
We're also vastly similar to other animals.How did humans become so vastly different than animals?
The earth is not coming to an abrupt end, at least not that science is aware of. Massive changes to the earth's environment, caused by humans, are occurring, but nothing beyond the range of things that have happened in the past.How did the earth last for 4B years, but now is certainly coming to an abrupt end? Ironically, just after humans appear but not necessarily because humans appeared.
The earth is not coming to an abrupt end, at least not that science is aware of. Massive changes to the earth's environment, caused by humans, are occurring, but nothing beyond the range of things that have happened in the past.
There are numerous 'just so' values that define the universe and life. You may not know, but scientists most certainly do know the correct arrangements and each's likelihood of occurance. The 'odds' are staggering beyond comprehension. Again, it happened so it is what it is or otherwise no big deal or, to add your input, the calculations are meaningless. No doubt, the perfect arrangements necessary are an incredible coincidence or occurance.Actually, we are arguing that no one knows what the correct arrangements are, nor how many there are, so these calculations are meaningless.
You are failing to realize our true position. If the universe was created we would be extremely excited to find that out. What we require is EVIDENCE. So far, we can't find any evidence for the supernatural. What we keep finding are natural mechanisms. There is every expectation that this trend will continue, and following this trend has been spectacularly successful.
Hardly the same for obvious reasons.We don't even know if a universe has to create itself. Asking how a universe can create itself is a bit like asking how a cloud can create itself.
Mechanism = Creator, you're getting itIt ignores the possibility that there are mechanisms outside of the universe that are responsible for new universes coming about.
Is that a joke?Firstly, we aren't that different from other animals.
You mean, we're 98% physically the same as a monkey yet, and I'll say it again, we're vastly different?Secondly, the differences that do exist are due to a difference in DNA. Of the DNA that we share through common ancestry only 2% of the bases have changed, and we are 5% different if you include DNA that has been inserted or deleted since we shared a common ancestor. The answer to your questions is that we are different because our DNA is different, and evolution is responsible for those differences.
Oh, I thought maybe global warming effects may kick in before then. . .my bad.The Earth has lasted for 4B years because nothing has destroyed it, and I am unaware of any impending catastrophe that will destroy the Earth. The only upcoming catastrophic event that I am aware the expansion of the Sun into a red dwarf which will occur in about 5 billion years.
Certainly, the potential for an abrupt end is and has always been with us -- asteroid impact, supernova, nuclear war... but that's nothing new.
I realize you did answer the question. . .it's the other's who took 16 pages to not answerWhat thread have you been reading? The question has been answered repeatedly. The answer is, "We don't know." We don't know everything, so why should we know this?
I know with certainty that life arising from non-life is highly, highly improbable. That's no lie, try it yourself. Start with a large vacuum and go from there to life. . .No one knows how likely it is for life to start naturally under the appropriate conditions. Anyone who tells you that there are hundreds of perfect arrangements needed, and that the probability of life starting is any particular number, is lying to you.
Show me one single living chemical compound or element that comprises your body; Just one will do...I realize you did answer the question. . .it's the other's who took 16 pages to not answer
I know with certainty that life arising from non-life is highly, highly improbable. That's no lie, try it yourself. Start with a large vacuum and go from there to life. . .
Show me one single living chemical compound or element that comprises your body; Just one will do...
There are numerous 'just so' values that define the universe and life. You may not know, but scientists most certainly do know the correct arrangements and each's likelihood of occurance. The 'odds' are staggering beyond comprehension.
Again, it happened so it is what it is or otherwise no big deal or, to add your input, the calculations are meaningless. No doubt, the perfect arrangements necessary are an incredible coincidence or occurance.
QV please:
And since "backwater" means "unique", I'll take this statement ...
... with a grain of salt.
And yet, they are pretty easily comprehended.
No, I was completely serious - not trying to be dramatic - the whole system of components and the way it works as a seemingly perptual motion machine is beyond my comprehension. I could never fathom getting started at making a system like that. OK, so it's not completely perfect from a naturalist's perspective, ergo imperfect, I'll give you thatYou use terms like "beyond comprehension" and "perfect" for dramatic effect, but they end up undermining your credibility.
I realize you did answer the question. . .it's the other's who took 16 pages to not answer
I know with certainty that life arising from non-life is highly, highly improbable. That's no lie, try it yourself. Start with a large vacuum and go from there to life. . .
There are numerous 'just so' values that define the universe and life. You may not know, but scientists most certainly do know the correct arrangements and each's likelihood of occurance.
No doubt, the perfect arrangements necessary are an incredible coincidence or occurance.
Science does NOT 'keep finding [evidence of] natural mechanisms' as to the creation of the universe, the creation of life, and the creation of humans.
Hardly the same for obvious reasons.
Mechanism = Creator, you're getting it
You mean, we're 98% physically the same as a monkey yet, and I'll say it again, we're vastly different?
Oh, I thought maybe global warming effects may kick in before then. . .my bad.
We're not, it's just the OP asked a specific question requesting an opinion of each respondent. They never asked for the factual answer, just each person's opinion.Why are we required to repeat the same thing over and over?
True. But, if we had to pick 100B correct numbers from a pool of 100B values, nobody would have won it.Winning the lottery is higly improbable as well, and yet people do it all of the time.
Also, why would we need to start with a vacuum? You are aware that the pre-biotic Earth was not a vacuum, right?
True. But, if we had to pick 100B correct numbers from a pool of 100B values, nobody would have won it.
Oh, I used a vacuum as a starting point because that is close to the conditions 14B years ago that resulted in life.
Oy vey. Science does know that changing one of hundreds of values results in non-existance. Can the universe be different? Probably, but it does depend on a plethora of values to be extremely precise for the universe to exist. I know you know that, are you being coy?No, they don't know this. Not even close. We don't know if the universe can be any different than it is. We certainly don't know all of the arrangement of chemicals that will give rise to life. You are making this up.
I guess you are unaware of all of the other phenomenon that science has found natural explanations for that were once considered to be caused by the supernatural? At one time the seasons, fermentation, rain, lightning, etc. were all thought to be caused by gods. Time and again science has demonstrated that these beliefs are false. No single phenomenon in the universe has been demonstrated to be caused by a supernatural deity. Not a single one. Every verified mechanism we find is natural.
Because something from nothing is quite different than something from something. Being coy again?So why would the creation of the universe, life, and humans be any different?
Cloud creation is something from something. Universe creation is something from nothing. Now I know you're being coy.And what are those reasons? [the OP is asking for the reasons that the creation of the universe is different than the creation of clouds]
Clouds are merely part of a designed system built to sustain life. Oh, that wasn't a serious question or was it? Maybe you're not being coy. . .So clouds are poofed into being by a Creator as well?
I guess science, having nearly identical DNA between monkeys and humans, will find the 'switch' that gives us our super-intellect and flip it in a monkey. Seriously, surely you know I'm talking about cognitive differences don't you?We are vastly similar.
How would global warming destroy the Earth? The Earth was once completely molten and it survived just fine. I don't see how warming the current Earth by 10 degrees is going to destroy it. Care to explain?
Sure, make up a hypothetical infinite time and infinte plays and throw that in to support your response and change the premise. . .whatever works for ya.Given enough time and enough people, yes they would. [Referring to a lottery with 10^1,000 chance of winning]
Oh shoot, you misunderstood the premise. I'm talking about starting just before the creation - ya know, before there was anything. Are you an infinite existance of matter and energy subscriber? Maybe that's why we keep missing each other's fine points. . .It's not even close. The universe started with all of the energy and mass that it has now. It was not a vacuum.
I mean for me, not necessarily you or anyone else.
And imperfect is -- but life is improving... in that it's adapting better and better to the particles, elements, and the etc., etc....The 'odds' of a universe coming into existance, the particles, elements, and the way they behave, gravity, forces, and interactions, stars, planets, dirt, and that stuff and their properties all, OK, imperfectly arranged just for life to have it's imperfect chance of existing.
So start simple: How do you define "life"?Not to mention, the particular arrangement needed for life to be life and not just stuff and what must be a highly improbable mutation that turns a normal animal brain into a human brain that functions on the order of magnitudes better than any 'common' animal brain. All of this from hydrogenNot easy for me to comprehend from a naturalistic perspective.
The universe (as far as we know, is a perpetual motion machine -- but who says life is?No, I was completely serious - not trying to be dramatic - the whole system of components and the way it works as a seemingly perptual motion machine is beyond my comprehension.
If you assume that it was designed in the first place -- let alone designed for us.I could never fathom getting started at making a system like that. OK, so it's not completely perfect from a naturalist's perspective, ergo imperfect, I'll give you that- But I'm going to go out on a limb and say that it all works exactly as designed, so in that sense it is perfect.
Early man thinks, 'Well, because there's only one sort of being I know about who makes things, whoever made all this must therefore be a much bigger, much more powerful and necessarily invisible, one of me and because I tend to be the strong one who does all the stuff, he's probably male'. And so we have the idea of a god. Then, because when we make things we do it with the intention of doing something with them, early man asks himself , 'If he made it, what did he make it for?' Now the real trap springs, because early man is thinking, 'This world fits me very well. Here are all these things that support me and feed me and look after me; yes, this world fits me nicely' and he reaches the inescapable conclusion that whoever made it, made it for him.
This is rather as if you imagine a puddle waking up one morning and thinking, 'This is an interesting world I find myself in - an interesting hole I find myself in - fits me rather neatly, doesn't it? In fact it fits me staggeringly well, must have been made to have me in it!' This is such a powerful idea that as the sun rises in the sky and the air heats up and as, gradually, the puddle gets smaller and smaller, it's still frantically hanging on to the notion that everything's going to be alright, because this world was meant to have him in it, was built to have him in it; so the moment he disappears catches him rather by surprise. I think this may be something we need to be on the watch out for.
Sure, make up a hypothetical infinite time and infinte plays and throw that in to support your response and change the premise. . .whatever works for ya.
I'm talking about starting just before the creation - ya know, before there was anything.
Are you an infinite existance of matter and energy subscriber?
Some of us walked, some drove themselves and maybe a few took the bus.How did we get here?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?