Remarkably complete’ 3.8-million-year-old cranium of human ancestor discovered in Ethiopia

[PruePhillip]

Actually in context it all reflects an ancient world view and does not remotely reflect the contemporary science of billions of years of history, and, of course, evolution.

MAYBE, but here's the odd thing - the ancients could not get their mind around
the seas bringing forth life. They had no idea about evolution, but the Hebrews
would still tell you birds came out of the sea.

 

[PruePhillip]

No, 'let's not think about it' has nothing to do with science.

"Before the Big Bang" is one that comes to mind.
And yes, maybe it has nothing to do with science.

If I recall, how gravity "pulls" things together is
something that's a conceptual issue, right back
to Newton. Of course, you don't want to think about
quantum either - leave it to the maths.
I posed this to my brother, "Is there an ultimately
largest number?" seeing nothing in the universe
is infinite. And yes, are numbers real or just descriptors
of the universe?

 

[shunyadragon]

ps 1 - a miracle
Any phenomena which doesn't come from physics, but created its own
physics, has to be a miracle.

No, nothing has to be a miracle, and the claim of miracles is simply not in the realm of science at all, and cannot determine whether a claim of a miracle is true nor false. Though at times science can demonstrate that claims of miracles are natural phenomenon.

As a Theist I believe miracles are possibly true, but represent things without a science explanation. My belief in God is not remotely grounded in the belief that the claim of miracles is true.

 

[PruePhillip]

No, nothing has to be a miracle, and the claim of miracles is simply not in the realm of science at all, and cannot determine whether a claim of a miracle is true nor false. Though at times science can demonstrate that claims of miracles are natural phenomenon.

As a Theist I believe miracles are possibly true, but represent things without a science explanation. My belief in God is not remotely grounded in the belief that the claim of miracles is true.

"Miracles" can happen through probability. It has been calculated that it's "possible"
for you to vanish off the earth, walk on the sun and return to the earth. But the odds
are slightly fantastical - ten to the power one hundred (a googol) to the power one
hundred again.
But that's not a miracle - it's just probability and quantum - like running around both
sides of a tree at the same time.
A miracle, to me, is when things happen outside of physics.

 

[shunyadragon]

MAYBE, but here's the odd thing - the ancients could not get their mind around
the seas bringing forth life. They had no idea about evolution, but the Hebrews
would still tell you birds came out of the sea.

Claiming Birds came from the sea is not remotely related to evolution. and the claim 'the seas bring forth life' is simple a statement in context of the time and not a big deal. The problem is you have not put the whole context of Genesis in perspective of the ancient views of Creation and the contemporary science of today.

Your neglecting the fact that many creation myths describe life coming from the sea, some older than any known Biblical record, and, of course, represent a mythical creation not remotely related to contemporary science.

 

[shunyadragon]

"Miracles" can happen through probability. It has been calculated that it's "possible"

Absolutely no, in science you must have objective verifiable evidence to use statistical probability. It has not been calculated as possible. In fact without objective verifiable evidence probability is "0."

for you to vanish off the earth, walk on the sun and return to the earth. But the odds
are slightly fantastical - ten to the power one hundred (a googol) to the power one
hundred again.
But that's not a miracle - it's just probability and quantum - like running around both
sides of a tree at the same time.
A miracle, to me, is when things happen outside of physics.

Without objective verifiable evidence the probability remains "0."

The word after 'miracle' in the dictionary is 'mirage.'

 

[PruePhillip]

Absolutely no, in science you must have objective verifiable evidence to use statistical probability. It has not been calculated as possible. In fact without objective verifiable evidence probability is "0."
Without objective verifiable evidence the probability remains "0."

I understand that probability can never be zero.
Yes, you can become an inadvertent solar astronaut through
quantum mechanics. In the quantum world all things are
possible. If you ran towards a tree slowly enough you can go
either side of it - but the time taken will be longer than the
universe.
Or it might just happen tomorrow. You WILL surprise that
squirrel. We use this weird stuff in designing integrated
circuits. But it isn't a miracle.

 

[We Never Know]

Ask any scientist "What does an expanding universe 'push into'?"
and he or she will tell you there's "nothing" out there - no time, no
space... nothing. The concept of something "outside" the universe
is "nonsensical."
And yet... out of this nonsensical nothing sprang the universe.
Simply put, we cannot answer the question of God, OR ANYTHING
ELSE, "outside" our universe. We can't observe it, theorize it --- or
try to figure out where itself came to be. This is not "special pleading"
but an observation of reality.

Magic and imagination is all you have. But that's not always a bad thing.

 

[PruePhillip]

Magic and imagination is all you have. But that's not always a bad thing.

And what do YOU have?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

"Miracles" can happen through probability. It has been calculated that it's "possible"
for you to vanish off the earth, walk on the sun and return to the earth. But the odds
are slightly fantastical - ten to the power one hundred (a googol) to the power one
hundred again.
But that's not a miracle - it's just probability and quantum - like running around both
sides of a tree at the same time.
A miracle, to me, is when things happen outside of physics.

How would you know if something was a miracle and not just some low probability event, that has a rational explanation?

 

[We Never Know]

How would you know if something was a miracle and not just some low probability event, that has a rational explanation?

He said "A miracle, to me, is when things happen outside of physics."

Now I'm not a physicist but I would think if things happen outside of physics, it won't have a rational explanation.

 

[PruePhillip]

How would you know if something was a miracle and not just some low probability event, that has a rational explanation?

It's an excellent point. Essentially you can't tell. Raising the dead could be just
a statistical fluke, I suppose.
But a miracle is something outside of the universe, where no quantum world
exists would be legit. Thus the universe springing into life would have to be a
miracle.

 

[We Never Know]

And what do YOU have?

Scientific evidence, evolution, DNA, natural selection, fossils, dating technics, BBT, CMBR, geology, biology, etc.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

It's an excellent point. Essentially you can't tell. Raising the dead could be just
a statistical fluke, I suppose.
But a miracle is something outside of the universe, where no quantum world
exists would be legit. Thus the universe springing into life would have to be a
miracle.

I wonder how one would be observed then?

 

[PruePhillip]

I wonder how one would be observed then?

It would be all down to probability. The chances of you walking on the sun
(ten to the power one hundred to the power one hundred) is so fantastically
remote that I suppose you would say that was a miracle. A pointless miracle
to be sure, but a "miracle."

 

[We Never Know]

It's an excellent point. Essentially you can't tell. Raising the dead could be just
a statistical fluke, I suppose.
But a miracle is something outside of the universe, where no quantum world
exists would be legit. Thus the universe springing into life would have to be a
miracle.

Do you think life is a miracle or a chemical reaction? If life is more than a chemical reaction, tell me what makes life, life.

God done it isn't an answer.

 

[PruePhillip]

Scientific evidence, evolution, DNA, natural selection, fossils, dating technics, BBT, CMBR, geology, biology, etc.

That's fine. The bible says life came from the sea and the land.
There's just one problem - figuring out how the world came to
be is fundamentally different to figuring out how the universe
came to be. Here we must toss out evidence, evolution, geology,
biology and science itself.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

It would be all down to probability. The chances of you walking on the sun
(ten to the power one hundred to the power one hundred) is so fantastically
remote that I suppose you would say that was a miracle. A pointless miracle
to be sure, but a "miracle."

But if there is a chance and an explanation, it would not fall outside of physics and, thus, not meet your criteria. Perhaps a better definition would include defiance of natural law, rather than external to it. But no observations of this are known either. Just unverified claims.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

That's fine. The bible says life came from the sea and the land.
There's just one problem - figuring out how the world came to
be is fundamentally different to figuring out how the universe
came to be. Here we must toss out evidence, evolution, geology,
biology and science itself.

Only if one views the biblical account as literal. An unnecessary criteria without support and accepted only on the demands of some individual belief and not an established fact.

 

[PruePhillip]

Only if one views the biblical account as literal. An unnecessary criteria without support and accepted only on the demands of some individual belief and not an established fact.

It makes no difference to me that my view is not an "established" one.
I call Genesis 1:20 the "orphan verse" as both religious people and
atheists find it confronting.

And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature
that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament
of heaven.

Indeed most translations now say that the seas "teemed" with life instead of
producing life. An altogether different and deceptive translation.