How did we get here?

[Loudmouth]

Oy vey. Science does know that changing one of hundreds of values results in non-existance.

But science does not know how many of those settings results in a universe capable of producing life, nor does it know if those settings can even be changed. Even more, science doesn't know if this is the only universe.

Probably, but it does depend on a plethora of values to be extremely precise for the universe to exist.

Just like you need precise occurences for a specific person to win the lottery, and it happens all of the time. Just think of th exact interactions between all of those ping pong balls that has to occur just right for a specific person to win. And yet that person still won.

When something does happen do you know what the probability of that something is? 1 in 1, because it happened.

Because something from nothing is quite different than something from something.

First, you have not shown that our universe had to come from nothing in order to be natural.

Second, life from non-life is life from something.

Humans evolving from basal apes is evolving from something.

Universe creation is something from nothing.

Evidence please.

Clouds are merely part of a designed system built to sustain life.

Evidence please.

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?

Surely you know that other apes are very similar to us in cognitive ability when life as a whole is compared?

 

[AV1611VET]

I am an evidence subscriber, and I have yet to see any evidence that demonstrates that our universe came from nothing or started with nothing. Perhaps you should show us this evidence before making assertions about it.

That's about the speed of a typical scientist ... wanting evidence for a literal nothing.

They won't let nothing stop them in their quest for evidence, will they?

And for the record, it's interesting they don't seek the Truth ... they only seek evidence.

I don't care if Joe is home or not, I just want to know if his car is in the driveway ...

 

[Greg1234]

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. So why would the creation of the universe, life, and humans be any different?

So...why do birds migrate?

 

[TLK Valentine]

So...why do birds migrate?

I swear, if the answer involves coconuts in any way, shape, or form, I'm abandoning this thread.

 

[Greg1234]

I swear, if the answer involves coconuts in any way, shape, or form, I'm abandoning this thread.

I don't think it does. It's just a simple question.

 

[pgp_protector]

I swear, if the answer involves coconuts in any way, shape, or form, I'm abandoning this thread.

Monty Python Holy Grail Are you suggesting coconuts migrate? - YouTube

 

[good brother]

The science of Abiogenesis is working on it and when we have some empirical evidence then we will let you know ok?

Give it time my friend, give it time: BBC News - 'Artificial life' breakthrough announced by scientists

We don't have the technology. Cells are quite complex structures, and we have no way of assembling anything that complex at that scale. No wondering needed.

No one knows how likely it is for life to start naturally under the appropriate conditions.

It's funny how MENSA level scientists working at a fever pitch in the most ideal environments to prove abiogenesis and create life cannot either create life or replicate a life already in existence on planet Earth, all while believing that blind directionless happenstance could produce all the complex life that surrounds us.

Irony, meet thyself.

In Christ, GB

 

[Jamin4422]

It's funny how MENSA level scientists working at a fever pitch in the most ideal environments to prove abiogenesis and create life cannot either create life or replicate a life already in existence on planet Earth,

They sure like to get all worked up about things they can not prove. It is enough just to deal with what they can prove. Why do they want to waste our time on the things they speculate on.

 

[sfs]

It's funny how MENSA level scientists working at a fever pitch in the most ideal environments to prove abiogenesis and create life cannot either create life or replicate a life already in existence on planet Earth, all while believing that blind directionless happenstance could produce all the complex life that surrounds us.

Nothing funny about it. Learning about the real world takes long, hard work, sometimes decades or centuries of work. We're only beginning to understand how cells work at any deep level, and you think we should have been able to snap our fingers and instantly know how it started?

 

[Loudmouth]

It's funny how MENSA level scientists working at a fever pitch in the most ideal environments to prove abiogenesis and create life cannot either create life or replicate a life already in existence on planet Earth, all while believing that blind directionless happenstance could produce all the complex life that surrounds us.

Irony, meet thyself.

In Christ, GB

So who has proven that life was magically poofed into being by a deity? Has anyone ever seen such a thing happen?

 

[mzungu]

I don't care if Joe is home or not, I just want to know if his car is in the driveway ...

Why; You planning on stealing it

 

[Gracchus]

Oy vey. Science does know that changing one of hundreds of values results in non-existance.

Well, some values can't be changed. They have to be what they are. (e.g. zero, 1, epsilon, pi, et al.)

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?

But if they were different, then we probably wouldn't be around to notice or comment. And maybe they can't be different. (Like the values mentioned above.)

Because something from nothing is quite different than something from something. Being coy again?Nothing from nothing? OK! No demonstrate the existence of nothing. ...

Universe creation is something from nothing.

But there is no evidence that the universe was created at all, and much less from nothing.

I guess science, having nearly identical DNA between monkeys and humans, will find the 'switch' that gives us our super-intellect ...

Super intellect? Where?

... and flip it in a monkey.
Seriously, surely you know I'm talking about cognitive differences don't you?

And surely you know that flipping those switches would change more than cognitive ability. The female monkey would need a wider pelvis to accomodate the larger skull for the larger brain, for instance. In fact if you flipped all the requisite switches, that monkey would probably look a lot like you!

You can have this one. I dunno. Maybe the earth is good for another 5B years.

But the human race might only be good for another fifty years. For such a supposedly smart species it acts really, really stupid. (See, for instance, a history book.)

 

[Jamin4422]

For such a supposedly smart species it acts really, really stupid. (See, for instance, a history book.)

I have been wondering about that. How is it that people can be so smart and so stupid all at the same time. They says that One in ten people with autism has savant skills.

 

[AV1611VET]

Why; You planning on stealing it

... Okay, now that was funny!

 

[good brother]

I had originally said this:

It's funny how MENSA level scientists working at a fever pitch in the most ideal environments to prove abiogenesis and create life cannot either create life or replicate a life already in existence on planet Earth, all while believing that blind directionless happenstance could produce all the complex life that surrounds us.

Irony, meet thyself.

In Christ, GB

To which I get responses such as these:

Nothing funny about it. Learning about the real world takes long, hard work, sometimes decades or centuries of work. We're only beginning to understand how cells work at any deep level, and you think we should have been able to snap our fingers and instantly know how it started?

So who has proven that life was magically poofed into being by a deity? Has anyone ever seen such a thing happen?

I guess what my two friends here fail to realize is the irony of the situation. My statement was supposed to show that "the greatest minds of the world, working on a mystery with all the technologies and resources at their disposal, cannot come up with any kind of answer to what nature supposedly did with dirt and no direction or intelligence at all". It would seem to me that the statement speaks volumes. To me it says "The greatest minds cannot do what they believe happened with no intelligence at all".

In other words, would not the fact that the greatest minds of our day not being able to do something that supposedly took no intelligence to do the first time therefore require the existence of a far superior intelligence to do that same something?


In Christ, GB

 

[TLK Valentine]

In other words, would not the fact that the greatest minds of our day not being able to do something that supposedly took no intelligence to do the first time therefore require the existence of a far superior intelligence to do that same something?

No, it wouldn't.

 

[sfs]

I guess what my two friends here fail to realize is the irony of the situation. My statement was supposed to show that "the greatest minds of the world, working on a mystery with all the technologies and resources at their disposal, cannot come up with any kind of answer to what nature supposedly did with dirt and no direction or intelligence at all". It would seem to me that the statement speaks volumes. To me it says "The greatest minds cannot do what they believe happened with no intelligence at all".

Your statement of the situation is exactly correct; you just failed to point out what's ironic or even surprising about it. Today, July 20th, 2012, thousands of scientists are hard at work. Today they will learn all kinds of things about many subjects. Every one of those things answers a question that until today could not be answered by the greatest human minds in history. Does that make us smarter than everyone who came before (including ourselves yesterday)? Of course not. It just means that we didn't have a good enough knowledge base, or the right technology, or the dumb luck, to find out those particular things before.

Right now we know far to little about organic chemistry to even begin to guess how likely it is for life (as we know it) to start spontaneously. Yet you think it's obvious that we should have figured the whole thing out long ago. Why?

In other words, would not the fact that the greatest minds of our day not being able to do something that supposedly took no intelligence to do the first time therefore require the existence of a far superior intelligence to do that same something?

No. Why would you think that? There are countless things humans can't do, however intelligent they are.

 

[good brother]

No. Why would you think that? There are countless things humans can't do, however intelligent they are.

For the scope of our intelligence to think that nonintelligence or unintelligence made not only intelligence, but also order, beauty, structure, symbiotic relationships, design, and a myriad of other systems that work perfectly to a tee is a wee bit ironic, isn't it?

In Christ, GB

 

[TLK Valentine]

For the scope of our intelligence to think that nonintelligence or unintelligence made not only intelligence, but also order, beauty, structure, symbiotic relationships, design, and a myriad of other systems that work perfectly to a tee is a wee bit ironic, isn't it?

In Christ, GB

"Perfectly"? What is this "perfect" that you speak of? "Perfect" doesn't occur in life.

 

[sfs]

For the scope of our intelligence to think that nonintelligence or unintelligence made not only intelligence, but also order, beauty, structure, symbiotic relationships, design, and a myriad of other systems that work perfectly to a tee is a wee bit ironic, isn't it?

Not particularly ironic, no. Ugly things produce beautiful ones all the time. Disordered liquids produce ordered crystals. Parasites become symbiotes.

Which is not to say that there isn't an intelligence (or something vaguely analogous to intelligence) behind the universe, but I'm having trouble seeing an actual argument for that position here.