D wiltshire

Joined

• started 131 topics
• posted 1,414 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by D wiltshire

• 
  35

  Neanderthals Not Human!

  by metatron in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  scientists have concluded that neanderthals were not the same species as modern.

  humans.

  they were a separate species entirely.. www,ananova.com/news/story/sm_365081.html.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  D wiltshire

  I've read that they are still not sure if neanderthals became extinct or assimilated into the human race.
• 
  18

  Crow's right to die...Euthanasia in UK?

  by Brummie in

  1. jw
  2. experiences

  dont know if this has been discussed so sorry if it has... .

  just watched the interview with the 70 year old mr crow who is paralysed from the neck down and will soon loose his voice.

  today he is flying from england to switzerland to die....very moving.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  D wiltshire

  I feel that we should respect a persons rights to the extent that they do not harm others in the process.

  If someone has young children and they are in fair health they should not be allowed to euthanize themselves until after their children are old enough to take care of themselves or they have someone who has agreed to to do so legally.

  So if they have no obligations then they should be allowed to end thier life without governement interference. They should be checked to see if they have a form of depression that can be treated thus improving their life. If after being checked and treatment given (if needed) they still wish to be euthanized,.. their wishes should be respected.
• 
  46

  Evolution vs. Creation (on Earth)

  by StinkyPantz in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i didn't necessarily start this thread as a debate but moreso as kind of a survey.

  i just wanna know what people think and a brief reason why.

  i want to know how you think life originated on the earth.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  D wiltshire

  Q) Why is the sky blue?

  A) Because that's just the way it is.

  Q) Why are there laws of nature?

  A) Because that's just the way it is.

  I think we can say laws of nature just don't come out of nowhere. We know these are not answers that resolve the questions. And to be fair we can ask, Why is there a God? too.

  The way I see it to believe or not to believe are not so much based on conclusive proof because both sides have their so called "proof". It is more of a choice, based on how you interpit the evidence, which may be prejudiced by what a person is wanting to believe.

  Me personally, I get a measure of comfort in beleiving in God, and I feel such beleif is waranted based on my research and examination the evidence.
• 
  46

  Evolution vs. Creation (on Earth)

  by StinkyPantz in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i didn't necessarily start this thread as a debate but moreso as kind of a survey.

  i just wanna know what people think and a brief reason why.

  i want to know how you think life originated on the earth.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  D wiltshire

  Funky,

  Why? The laws are simple, and it is therefore more reasonable to conclude that they happened randomly, rather than that they were put into place by a super-powerful invisible creature unlike any other whose existence has never been verified.

  The laws at present are not simple, but many Physicsist intuitively feel that when the find the underlying reason behind the 4 forces, for a GUT(grand unification theory), that this will be beautifully simple, for now though it is proving anything but simple. In fact with all the sub-atomic particle that they are discovering the picture seems to be very complicated.

  The other problem with the "superior intelligence" hypothesis is that we then have something even more complicated to explain. Where did the "superior intelligence" come from? Was it created? Did it evolve? Was its evolution inevitable due to its universe having emergent properties embedded in it by another superior intelligence?

  Both for believers in a superior Intelligents and those who don't dilemmas exist.

  Why is the universe even comprehensible? Why do we have physical laws that are so perfectly balanced to allow life to even exist. Why is it that mathematics can be used explain these physical laws?These things pose questions that science can not explain and leave both sides uncertain. Quamtum Mechanics is telling us uncertainty is part of the equation.
• 
  46

  Evolution vs. Creation (on Earth)

  by StinkyPantz in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i didn't necessarily start this thread as a debate but moreso as kind of a survey.

  i just wanna know what people think and a brief reason why.

  i want to know how you think life originated on the earth.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  D wiltshire

  Carmel,

  For those of you who are aware of the many complexities of biological life that cannot be explained by natural selection (evolution) you are justified in believing that some external input (creator) may well be at work programming.

  I agree I think natural selection may play a part in evolution,.. but it is not the only means which causes evolution to proceed.

  When I study the subject of Chaos, it becomes evident to me that self organization is deeply inbeded in the laws that govern the Universe. I think it reasonable to conclude that a superior intelligence may have made these laws, that make life and consciousness possible. Maybe these laws were some how froozen in to the Universe at 10 to the -43 second of creation when phyicsist tell us this law(s) may have been formed???

  To me evolution if a fact of life,.. it is all around us and still observable. DNA is now giving so much evidence that I think die hard creationist will not be able to refute it any more than the Catholic church could refute the earth was not the center of the universe after Galileio, and Newton came on the scene.
• 
  46

  Evolution vs. Creation (on Earth)

  by StinkyPantz in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i didn't necessarily start this thread as a debate but moreso as kind of a survey.

  i just wanna know what people think and a brief reason why.

  i want to know how you think life originated on the earth.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  D wiltshire

  Here an essay that deals with the first 2 chapters of Genesis.

  http://www.asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/1999/PSCF12-99Held.html

  While you may not agree with everything in this essay I'm sure you will find it interesting.
• 
  46

  Evolution vs. Creation (on Earth)

  by StinkyPantz in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i didn't necessarily start this thread as a debate but moreso as kind of a survey.

  i just wanna know what people think and a brief reason why.

  i want to know how you think life originated on the earth.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  D wiltshire

  I beleive the Bible in the Genesis account is in harmony with the currant theories of evolution. I read some very interesting explanations of the first 2 chapters of Genesis that make sense. I think Fundy Christians do a lot of harm to discredit the Bible by sticking to a litteral 7-24 hour days of creation.

  Matter in the Universe is evolving, and this is according to the natural laws that govern matter, if God made these laws that make matter evolve from sub-atomic particles to hydrogen to cooking up more complicted atoms of heavier element by fussion in the cores of stars, and this taking billions of years. Why would he not use a similiar process on Earth to make Life.

  Genesis 2:4 said that this is the History of the Generations. Genesis is a word that is related to generation, and isn't that what evolution is a generation from lifeless matter to more and more complex life.

  If God invented the process of evolution then he could also be said to have created life, and man.
• 
  53

  Bible is God's word?

  by Moxy in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  id like to hear some *reasoned* explanations for why you believe the bible is gods word.

  ive been so fascinated by the study of *real* biblical scholarship since i began educating myself, i now find it incredulous that i used to take the bible as divine, along with all jws and tons of christians, including a good number here.

  so id like to entertain your very best lines of evidence that this is the real deal.. mox

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  D wiltshire

  I do feel parts of the Bible are inspired not all of it. Those that were responsible for the cataloguing of the different books may have made mistakes.

  I think the first 3 chapters of Genesis are inspired, but the translation of the original may be incorrect in different spots. Much of the translation of these first three chapters may be according to preconceived ideas that now are shown to be incorrect.

  The amazing thing about the Genesis account is that it can be translated to conform to the evolutionary theories about the universe and life on our planet. The fact that they can be harmonized has been a major factor for me to still put faith in it.

  I dont see the Genesis account as teaching Adam was the first man, or that God did an instantaneous creation of the Earth, stars, or existing forms of life. It seems clear that these things were generated over billions of years in some cases (Genesis 2:4).

  Even the account of Noah and the flood is not about an earth wide flood. That is the way some may interpret it but not what the Bible was describing.
• 
  21

  A Picture of the Universe at 300,000 Years Old

  by D wiltshire in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  .

  for those who are interested here is a picture of the universe at around 300,000 years old.. this is concidered the discovery of the century (1992).. http://www.lbl.gov/lbl-pid/george-smoot.html.

  there is of coarse much written about this discovery "wrinkles in time" by george smoot himself is a very good book on the subject.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  D wiltshire

  Rem,

  I'm glade you found it interesting.

  I just came across it about a year ago, even though it has been around since 1992.
• 
  21

  A Picture of the Universe at 300,000 Years Old

  by D wiltshire in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  .

  for those who are interested here is a picture of the universe at around 300,000 years old.. this is concidered the discovery of the century (1992).. http://www.lbl.gov/lbl-pid/george-smoot.html.

  there is of coarse much written about this discovery "wrinkles in time" by george smoot himself is a very good book on the subject.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  D wiltshire

  On,

  The expansion theory seems to be getting more supporters, among physist. They think this happened during the first microsecounds of the universe when one of the four forces of froze out of the original one and caused an expansion that went from the size smaller than a proton to the size of a grape fruit in a very almost unimaginable small amount of time. This they think is responcible for all the structure they see in the Universe.

  Because if the Universe started as a Singularity that was just a point, then its expansion should be perfectly homogeneous with no structure, no forming of suns or galaxies.

  Anyway this Cobe picture has caused a lot of excitement for Physists. It's no hoax, and will help further man's knowledge of the origin of his universe.

  PS: as far as answering the question of does God exist or doesn't exist, science does not at this time have the answer, only opinions

  Edited by - D wiltshire on 24 December 2002 12:28:27

  Edited by - D wiltshire on 24 December 2002 12:30:30