by EndofMysteries 31 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
Personally I think for the longest time mankind will retain gaps in knowledge based from the
fact of the immense size of the universe and the variable aspects contained within it.
.
Is it OK to realize and accept the unknown, sure thats also a part of being intellectually honest.
I am sorry that with all of her education she is still delusional when it comes to her personal god.
Now here's the real poop. Everything came out of the big Bang including god! Has to be right? OK I'll settle for hummmmmmmm!
The biggest best-ess bang gave us everything we can see, taste, feel you name it. So why not god? However considering it took Billions of years for IT to find Earth one has a suspicion that IT is a bit of a slacker. A bag of black energy and black matter who floated around the universe like a big blue whale half a sleep in the celestial sea feeding on black energy until it discovered earth and small pockets of mankind.
At this point in IT'S development IT knew a few things. But it had never considered the god issue. Now the IT who would be god observed that mankind had a desire for explanations and what they most desired was a god that looked like them, could talk like them and would echo what they had already decided was the truth about everything. So IT who had no explanations for anything anyway decided to become that god for everyone.......which explains why every culture has a god that looks like them, speaks like them and always knows what they know but nothing beyond what they know.
Unfortunately god does not have a very long attention span and growing bored drifted off again perhaps lured away by the serene call of the Milky Way or a black hole to rest in.
The Big Bang and god........... made for each other.
Even if someone or something did create our universe it is yet another leap to say that somone had a direct hand in creating us.
That Ph.D. lady has a big giant head
No really, it takes up the whole screen.
Evidently it's a proof. Some scientists have suggested Jehovah is the creator.
The religious have largely scoffed at the big bang for decades, just as with evolution, now they embrace it as god's work, crow barring it into verses from the bible.
As for her qualifications..... So? She still had no evidence for her ideas, just faith in an old scroll. It isn't science, its belief. It contributes nothing to our world view to take her opinion on as fact. It simply makes explaining the universe more complex not less, it is also lazy to place god in the 'x' instead of looking for the true 'x'.
The safest and most honest approach to information, is to stand by the evidence and nothing more.
lastly, the hurdles get higher if you get her assumptions and embrace them. Assume a god... now which one? Which holy book? It is dishonest to start down this path to begin with, thete is NO evidence... and it simply leads to religious OPINION. This is as far from science as you can get.
Prof Krauss has explained a mechanism for the big bang without a god with evidence thrown in, it is still just a theory, but already we are steps beyond an assumption for god. When will the religious learn? It angers me, because they know in our lifetime it wil llikely be too soon to prove wrong, so they can make the assumption. In 400 years do you really think they will still be toiling with the mechanics of the big bang? Be honest....
Keep in mind we already have a big bang re-creation machine in two countries....
snare&racket,
I am enthused by your passion and appreciate your analytical approach. And please excuse my ignorance, but what you said made me think.
Some of the greatest discoveries throughout history were made by people who pushed the envelope, and refused to accept the available evidence as being the whole story. Neither were they content to be "safe". They were often thought to be maverics unafraid to question current information and understanding, even if it made them unpopular with their contemporaries.
Evidence is fine but there just has to be room for dreamers in science. Even if it seems like a contradiction in terms.
I only mean to supplement what you say not disagree with it.
cheers
sparrowdown
Sparrow, great thinking.... But please provide an example of what you said. Please give an example of an idea brought about without any evidence, just thinking.
You can't be honest and seperate evidence from ideas. Where do we draw the line if ideas are held in the same esteem as facts or evidence?
Theoretical physics to me, is one of the most exciting uses of the human mind right now. At my bedside is s pile of books, medical (being a doctor), military history (because im a bloke) and theoretical physics, because I agree with you. The human mind is at its zenith when contemplating the universe,
Despite this, theoretical physics based on no evidence, 100% does not deserve to sit in the section labeled SCIENCE for it is FICTION or POETRY at best. Really, where do we draw the line if we don't distinguish fact and fiction?
already her words are being quoted on a forum under the question "Does the big bang offer proof if God?"
Be honest, is this a help or hinderance to finding truth? Before you answer, set aside any bias and make seeking an understanding of reality as the goal. If still you don't see my point, let's make the phd physicist a Muslim doctor, who believes is is proof of ALLAH. Now lets teach that in schools.....
Or shall we stick to EVIDENCE and FACTS?
snare x
p.s. Thanks for the kind words. I just think this stuff is important, I really, really do.
Hi snare,
I agree with you facts are important. If science were a compass, facts and evidence would be intellectual and academic "north".
Without them we are adrift in a sea of "what if's".
Facts and evidence give us the confidence to explore the possibilities that are yet to be discovered.
The foundation that allows us to play with ideas and theories.
Yes evidence and ideas are two very different things, but they often spring from each other.
Sometimes serendipitously, sometimes as a result of years of experimentation.
The example I was thinking about is Stephen Hawking and how his theories about a Big bang contradicted one of the science heavies of his day.The guy who said the universe has always been here. (I am sorry I cannot remember the other guys name, but I will look it up promise.)
It was years then before those other guys took a fresh look at radio static and linked it to left over energy from the big bang which proved Mr Hawking's theory.
I apologise for the extreme oversimplification.
But my point is sometimes an awful lot of crap needs to be waded through before we can arrive safely at a fact.
But that's ok cause it's all about this neverending journey of discovery called life.
And it's people like you who keep propelling us forward.
Thanks snare
sparrowdown
But you are right this woman with the big giant head has not helped by combining opinion and fact like they are interchangable. Good point.
sparrow
