1) God.
2) Atheist intelligent Design.
3) Evolution.
4) Consciousness over matter.
5) Other.
2) Atheist intelligent Design.
3) Evolution.
4) Consciousness over matter.
5) Other.
-
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!
Why is the world?
- Thread starter robocop (actually)
- Start date
I voted other, carnage.
Why is the world?
You forgot the
"Accretion of matter caused by gravity."
Option
You forgot the
"Accretion of matter caused by gravity."
Option
*blinks*
That's exactly what i say every morning after my morning coffee!!!!!
WalterTrull
Godfella
"I am that I am" Pretty straight forward, I'd think.
Maybe we were some side effect from some alien experiment.
Maybe some higher being at a higher dimensional plane did the equivalent of taking a dump in the woods, and our universe was "created" as a result.
Maybe our universe was originally created as someone's idea of a practical joke that backfired.
Who can really say for sure? It may have been intentional or unintentional. Maybe it "just happened." Maybe it was "designed," or maybe it was an unfinished project which was abandoned.
Maybe some higher being at a higher dimensional plane did the equivalent of taking a dump in the woods, and our universe was "created" as a result.
Maybe our universe was originally created as someone's idea of a practical joke that backfired.
Who can really say for sure? It may have been intentional or unintentional. Maybe it "just happened." Maybe it was "designed," or maybe it was an unfinished project which was abandoned.
Earthling
David Henson
Atheist Intelligent Design?
I went ahead and voted God, though I almost passed on it due to the options. Though the planet earth is called the world, generally speaking there is a difference between the earth and the world. For example, the world will be destroyed but the earth will last forever. The world is the organized system, political, commercial, and religious whereas earth is the planet itself.
So, on the one hand you could say the world exists because of God's creation, it was actually created by man. The planet was created by Jehovah God. Its important to include that name because there are trillions of gods.
I'm curious as to what atheist intelligent design is.
I suspect it's
I suspect it's
Last edited:
Why does the world exist? Well, if you mean the Earth, then because of the action of gravity and solar wind on the nebula from which the sun and planets formed.
But truthfully, the question (and possible answers) come across as strange to my ears.
But truthfully, the question (and possible answers) come across as strange to my ears.
TheBannerofHomuraAkemi
Active Member
God through evolution and stuff.
Native
Free Natural Philosopher & Comparative Mythologist
??? Did the sun shine on the nebula from which the sun and planets formed???
Altfish
Veteran Member
What's this??
The sun formed a bit before the planets coalesced. The solar wind was important for separating the gas giants from the more rocky inner planets (like the Earth).
Native
Free Natural Philosopher & Comparative Mythologist
-----------
According to the strange idea in the Standard Cosmology, planets formed AFTER an explosion (and not Solar winds) in the pre-Solar System sphere where matters and gas strangely "coalesced" to planets and moons in a flat orbital motion around the Sun, believe it or not.
I don´t.
What 'explosion' are you talking about? The gas and dust in a nebula collapse under gravity (which we currently observe going on in other nebula). When the density at the center gets high enough, nuclear reactions start (not an explosion) and a new star is formed (again, we see this happening in other nebula). The disk around the star is generally flat because of conservation of angular momentum. The planets form from a (rather small amount of) gas and dust remaining in the disk, with the solar wind pushing the lighter elements farther away (so the gas giants are the more distant planets).
Exactly which parts of this do you not agree with? And can you show from other star systems the basis of your objections?
Native
Free Natural Philosopher & Comparative Mythologist
-----
Almost every part of it.
1) The suddenly collapse of a cloud of dust and gas without explaining the dynamics. (Just like Newton didn´t explained the dynamics of his gravity laws)
2) The far fetched assumption that gravitational density can cause nuclear fusion.
3) How an angular momentum can make a flat orbital motion after having been radially blown away of the "solar wind".
I though agree in your general description of planets pushed away from the Sun - just as the entire Solar System once was made in the galactic center and pushed away to its actual position.
Note: In the galactic center huge electromagnetic forces creates all stars, hence the strong gammarays observed going of the galactic poles/holes. There you can talk of nuclear forces, but of course "electricity is all over the places, but it doesn´t do anything", according to the gravitationalists.
Huh? The gravity laws for Newton *were* the dynamical laws (in conjunction with F=ma).
We actually *see * collapsing dust and gas clouds *today* in, for example, The Eagle nebula and the Orion nebula.
What's far fetched? As the central density collapsed due to gravity, it heats. The combination of heat and pressure start the fusion reactions.
Before, not after. The solar wind comes *after* the formation of the disk and ignition of the central star.
Not even close. The center of the galaxy doesn't have the heavier elements (like carbon, oxygen, iron, silicon) in abundance, like the spiral arms do. This is typical of spiral galaxies: the central bulge is formed from a very different population of stars than the arms.
They never say it doesn't do anything. E&M is quite relevant whenever there is a plasma and such plasmas are blown off by the central black hole and the 'bubbles' are quite obvious in maps of the central galaxy. But they aren't relevant for the overall dynamics simply because, again, most matter is electrically neutral. That means the dynamics are dominated by gravity, not E&M.