Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by an Siarach)
    The eye argument is a complete joke and is completely and utterly destroyed by the very basic biology studied at the start of a degree.
    how so?
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Revenged)
    what is the thoery though... because you can't create something out of nothing. There must have been some form of energy that was converted into matter in the big bang because you can't create energy after all.

    Though Big Bang I accept as fact due to the microwave background radiation, I just find it difficult to conceive what was before and what would have caused the Big Bang.
    Well, one idea offered is that prior to the big bang event a series of higher dimensional membranes were floating around in a bulk space, string out sort of like links in a chain. Two of these branes drift into each other, and the energy resulting from the collision causes our universe to form in one of the branes.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ferret_messiah)
    Well, one idea offered is that prior to the big bang event a series of higher dimensional membranes were floating around in a bulk space, string out sort of like links in a chain. Two of these branes drift into each other, and the energy resulting from the collision causes our universe to form in one of the branes.
    I can't understand how anyone can even start to formulate a theory on what was around before the big bang. Even the concept of energy may be something that is a characteristic of our universe alone. There is a theory involving a number of universes (a multiverse) that states that each universe will be governed by completely different laws of physics. If u could send a probe into one of these other universes, the laws that govern the probes existence may be different, so it could cease to exist.
    Just imagine how different the laws (if there are any) of the bulk space/membranes could be to ours (I can't). Also, it produces the question of how did the membranes get there?
    I'm not having a go. I just don't understand :confused:
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    When you start to ask questions such as "why are we here?" and keep asking them, we have to say "we don't know" eventually. After all, we know what happened from 0.03 seconds after the big bang, which is pretty good going since we've only been around for about 70,000 years (and not in our present form).
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Revenged)
    that just sounds like a scientific conclusion to explain something that we know nothing about (similiar to god being used to explain something we know nothing about)
    Difference:
    The science is logical, God is not.
    We have evidence for the scientific theories concerning The Big Bang. We have none for God.
    One of my biggest frustrations is that the "big bang" theory i so complex. I dont understand it. It is degree level physics. i guess you can place your trust in fellow man or you can place your trust in an imaginery pink elephant...(sorry, I mean God!).

    (Original post by Revenged)
    it doesnt make sense... though I'm not saying there is a higher being, i'm just saying for all we know there may be Big Bangs every few trillion years and it's just a repeating cycle that has always been
    It doesnt make sense. but we can hope to make sense of it all one day with science.
    With religion we already have an (unsatisfactory) answer: it was God! this is spineless.

    Yes, I have heard the collapsing and expanding universe theory. It is quite plausible. It would mean that you would EXPECT us to exist! because there are an infinite number of these Big Bangs and Big Crunches.
    The wonder of life would be no more, should this theory ever be prooved...

    (Original post by zaf1986)
    I didn't infer that. It does however suggest to a creator, a higher being. Whether or not you call it God is a moot point.
    sorry...what suggests a creator?
    our lack of knowledge on how we got here?
    It is not logical to say, "we dont know how th universe was created, therefore something must have created it.."!

    The point is, guys, that no matter how imperfect scientific theory may be, God does not automatically become logical. He cannot become a scapegoat for our ignorance of the universe. Debating scientific theory is useful scientifically but not philosophically. In order to conclude a creator did anything, you need evidence or a sound thought experiment. "We don't know, therefore there must be a creator/an omnipotent force behind it" is not logical.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    sorry...what suggests a creator?
    our lack of knowledge on how we got here?
    It is not logical to say, "we dont know how th universe was created, therefore something must have created it.."!

    The point is, guys, that no matter how imperfect scientific theory may be, God does not automatically become logical. He cannot become a scapegoat for our ignorance of the universe. Debating scientific theory is useful scientifically but not philosophically. In order to conclude a creator did anything, you need evidence or a sound thought experiment. "We don't know, therefore there must be a creator/an omnipotent force behind it" is not logical.
    I know this isn't going to convince you, but I'm not here to convince you

    Anyway, the existence of something (to me) infers a creator. Something cannot come from nothing, as far as I am concerned. Hence there is a creator/designer of the universe. What name you give the creator is a moot point, as I say before.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Well humans decide to call the creator God, dont they?!
    God does very little to use, apart from create us and allow us to live...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Assuming that this God does more than just creating us, would we even be aware of it? This is all rather fuzzy. But anyway, I think this debate has gone down the wrong path. Evolution vs. creationism?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    darwin was a devout catholic. believe that ?




    111111111111111111111111111111
    111111111111111111111111111111
    111111111111111111111111111111
    111111111111111111111111111111
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jack_Bauer)
    darwin was a devout catholic. believe that ?




    111111111111111111111111111111
    111111111111111111111111111111
    111111111111111111111111111111
    111111111111111111111111111111
    Why not? He wasn't out to disprove God. He was just trying to make sense of the observations he saw. Besides, it wasn't him who found the numerous hominid fossils that suggested that humans were not "made" as Homo sapiens sapiens as stated in genesis but instead evolved over time from something primitive organism. Primitive does not mean less complex in this case. I just used it to intend the organism preceeded humans. Anyway, you can read "The Ancestor Tale" by Dawkins to find out what he thinks on this issue.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Talking about fossils... Did you hear about all these different species of humans that existed on the planet millons of years ago?

    Apparently there have been loads of different species of human found but it's difficult to place where these different species are in the evolution of apes to man. It's not even known if in fact they are involved in this at all and it's also incredibly difficult to prove if these are infact different species of human. THis is because they may be just individuals who suffered from an unknown genetic disorder thus had a different body shape due 'normal' Homo sapiens due to the shear lack of bones found... How can people say that these are actually different species without considerable proof?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Revenged)
    Talking about fossils... Did you hear about all these different species of humans that existed on the planet millons of years ago?

    Apparently there have been loads of different species of human found but it's difficult to place where these different species are in the evolution of apes to man. It's not even known if in fact they are involved in this at all and it's also incredibly difficult to prove if these are infact different species of human. THis is because they may be just individuals who suffered from an unknown genetic disorder thus had a different body shape due 'normal' Homo sapiens due to the shear lack of bones found... How can people say that these are actually different species without considerable proof?
    Yes. Indeed the study of early man is a huge in science at the moment. It is hugely divided. On a topic which has such a big impact on religon (although religious folks will no doubt say that Genesis is metaphorical or whatever), it is bound to cause controversy.
    All we know, is that we dont know.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Genesis is metaphorical... what's that mean?

    PS. (referring to another thread) Wtf is text speak by the way pd,

    your a hypocrite as well as a wannabe lawyer, what a fantastic combination!
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Revenged)
    lol,

    does raise the important question (whilst badly taking the p*** out of the beautiful theory of evolution) of what was there before the bigbang... does anyone really know?
    The Big Crunch of the previous universe, of course!
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    ok... i'm sort of leaving that whole argument now because no-1 really knows and everything people are suggesting is unsubstanciated guess work
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Revenged)
    ok... i'm sort of leaving that whole argument now because no-1 really knows and everything people are suggesting is unsubstanciated guess work
    At least science has theories not just assumptions that cannot be changed or contradicted, like religion
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Revenged)
    Genesis is metaphorical... what's that mean?
    Some christians claim, unconvincingly, that Genesis is not meant to be taken literally. It is just a cut little story to illustrate how the Earth was made. it is an easy way for more liberal christians to accept that the world wasnt made in 6 days and that dinosaurs did actually once roam the earth. :rolleyes:
    So not all the bible is true then?! :eek: :rolleyes:

    PS. (referring to another thread) Wtf is text speak by the way pd,

    your a hypocrite as well as a wannabe lawyer, what a fantastic combination!
    wtf r u on abt?

    (wtf is, to be fair, an easy way of beating the filter.

    Which, of course, is also against the rules )
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kavanne)
    At least science has theories not just assumptions that cannot be changed or contradicted, like religion
    Not true... notice how Genesis turned from being completely factual that god created the world in 6 days a few hundred years ago

    To now, where in order to account for the fact that dinosaurs exsisted and that the world was scientifically proven to be created in a few millions of years ago, it is now interpreted metaphorically as pd is saying. Thus religion is intrepreted differently as the one thing religious people won't do is to say... actually this is a pretty rubbish story that is the equivalent to a myth...
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Revenged)
    Not true... notice how Genesis turned from being completely factual that god created the world in 6 days a few hundred years ago

    To now, where in order to account for the fact that dinosaurs exsisted and that the world was scientifically proven to be created in a few millions of years ago, it is now interpreted metaphorically as pd is saying. Thus religion is intrepreted differently as the one thing religious people won't do is to say... actually this is a pretty rubbish story that is the equivalent to a myth...
    They've had to because scientific evidence is so overwhelming. I don't think the person who wrote the bible knew about evolution though, and probably believed what they were writing.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Its amazing how people can stand by religion when time after time science undermines it.

    Any religious folk like to comment on this page?
 
 
 

2,945

students online now

800,000+

Exam discussions

Find your exam discussion here

Poll
Should predicted grades be removed from the uni application process
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.