• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Evolution vs Intelligent design/creationism

proudpagan

proudpagan

Member
Universe not being eternal is abrahmic concept not vedic. Even quantum equation also predicts that Universe has no beginning. This is an eternal cycle of creation and dissolution of the universe, which is controlled by Ishwara by the eternal laws of cosmos. This is called maya in Sanskrit meaning extraordinary power / energy and wisdom.
 
Truly Enlightened

Truly Enlightened

Well-Known Member
The idea model of a steady state universe with no beginning or end, that stretches infinitely into the past and the future, is an idea that never really took off. Although our universe may look as if it has a beginning, it is the multiverse that may not need to have a beginning. All models of the Origin of the Universe, mathematically suggest that our Universe MUST have had a beginning. Both the cyclical Universes and the eternal inflation models expand in a specific way.Therefore, they cannot be eternal in the past and MUST have had a beginning. Even the, "emergent" model of the Origin of the Universe can't avoid the problem of "quantum collapse", and must also have had a beginning.

I am familiar with the new revised "eternal" model of the Universe. This model tries to fill/accommodate for the gap where Einstein's formulation(General Theory of Relativity) and the laws of physics actually breakdown before the BB's singularity is reached. This is done by formulating a, "Quantum Correction" in the math to provides a way to calculate the trajectory of sub-atomic particles, and avoid the uncertainty principle. But scientists still extrapolate backward as if the physics equations still hold. The jury is still out and we will just have to wait and see the results. Can you give me an example of the Quantum equation that predicts that the Universe of eternal? Don
 
viole

viole

Ontological Naturalist
Premium Member
BilliardsBall said:
I suggest there is strong evidence to show mechanistic, mindless evolution is true and strong evidence suggesting ID.

Read, pray, choose.
Click to expand...

I think that within the "design" premise, there is more evidence of SD than ID.

Ciao

- viole
 
Guy Threepwood

Guy Threepwood

Mighty Pirate
scott777 said:
First of all, I’m sure there are lots of such links, but let’s say they are rare.

Because a tree of life has many many branches, and most branches stop (become extinct). Also, 99.9999% of animals DO NOT fossilise. Fossilisation is basically random. So if you pick some random points on the tree (my red points – fossils), in order to show a link to the current living animals (blue points), they need to be on the same branch.
View attachment 19252
The real tree of life would have millions of branches, only a small fraction of which have survived.
Click to expand...

As always the discussion begins with skeptics being called crazy for not accepting the 'mountains of undeniable evidence'. Then before long, they are crazy for expecting there should even be any?!

I take your point, but 'the dog ate my homework' does not earn a passing grade, we can come up with plenty excuses for why the scientific evidence for Aliens & Bigfoot is so thin also..
 
Truly Enlightened

Truly Enlightened

Well-Known Member
Looncall said:
That's just a sign of a highly-developed scam.

It is not evidence that "there must be something to it".
Click to expand...

It is not evidence that there is nothing to it as well. Even superstitions and fairy tales are based on some facts, no matter how remote they may seem. Don
 
Truly Enlightened

Truly Enlightened

Well-Known Member
ImmortalFlame said:
It is not required to demonstrate that something is not, it is required to demonstrate that something is. The prevalence of a myth cannot make a myth true.
Click to expand...

I agree that legends, superstitions, and fairy tales may not be true. But weren't all these things, at one time, based on the misunderstandings and misinterpretations of the facts(changes in seasons, heroic acts, observed miracles, etc.)? Things that were not fully understood at the time. Things that were not solely based on imagination and wishful thinking. We are not talking about who do you believe will win the super bowl, we're talking about a belief that 3/4 of the world's population are willing to devote their entire lives to. I think that alone is worth a look. Don
 
ImmortalFlame

ImmortalFlame

Woke gremlin
Truly Enlightened said:
I agree that legends, superstitions, and fairy tales may not be true. But weren't all these things, at one time, based on the misunderstandings and misinterpretations of the facts(changes in seasons, heroic acts, observed miracles, etc.)?
Click to expand...
True. But the question is how we go about determining which parts of a myth are true and which are false.

Truly Enlightened said:
Things that were not fully understood at the time. Things that were not solely based on imagination and wishful thinking. We are not talking about who do you believe will win the super bowl, we're talking about a belief that 3/4 of the world's population are willing to devote their entire lives to. I think that alone is worth a look.
Click to expand...
Except very few of those 3/4 of people can agree on what it is that they actually believe in, much less what it means in their day-to-day lives. Fact is, I have given it a look, and I have concluded that there is nothing in it.
 
Truly Enlightened

Truly Enlightened

Well-Known Member
I believe that there is a general consensus among believers as to what they generally believe in. It is in the particulars where there may be some disagreement and discussion. Remember, it is our personality that is shaped by our experiences, beliefs, and how we see our role in society. Scientifically controlled experiments involving testing the power of prayer can be set up and studied. Can the power of prayer really heal the sick or control the future? I think this would be a good start. I think that our psyche can benefit from a sense of purpose, community, security and belonging. Otherwise, life itself can be a very long time. Don
 
Sapiens

Sapiens

Polymathematician
Truly Enlightened said:
I believe that there is a general consensus among believers as to what they generally believe in. It is in the particulars where there may be some disagreement and discussion. Remember, it is our personality that is shaped by our experiences, beliefs, and how we see our role in society. Scientifically controlled experiments involving testing the power of prayer can be set up and studied. Can the power of prayer really heal the sick or control the future? I think this would be a good start. I think that our psyche can benefit from a sense of purpose, community, security and belonging. Otherwise, life itself can be a very long time. Don
Click to expand...
The "power" of pray has been scientifically tested and found wanting. I often ask why your God so hates amputees.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top