Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo

Religion cannot be proven by worldly sciences


  • Please log in to reply
2034 replies to this topic

#1741 Sharpshooter

Sharpshooter

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,379 posts
  • Joined: 31-August 07

Posted 03 October 2012 - 08:56 PM

So does less complexity give rise to more complexity or does more complexity give rise to less?

:huh:


The universe arose out of nothing.....complex from non-complex.

The universe will fizzle out........ from complex to non-complex.


So pick your poison :)
  • 0

Posted Image Pittsburgh Penguins - CDC GML Posted Image


"My goal is to win the Stanley Cup, and after the offer I received from Buffalo, I believe this is the best place to make it happen." - Christian Ehrhoff


#1742 Nevlach

Nevlach

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,020 posts
  • Joined: 04-April 05

Posted 03 October 2012 - 09:04 PM

Well, if we take evolution as an example, we can clearly see how complexity develops slowly over time, incrementally. We have evidence of similar processes for most of the universe (galaxy formation, as another example). Something complex that gives rise to the overly simple? You have to look at the human mind to find that ;).

Oh that's actually a pretty good point.

I suppose we could also say that the process of death is an example of something complex going to something less complex (a living conscious being to dust, dirt and the simple elements from which we are made of).
  • 1
Posted Image
Posted Image

#1743 Sharpshooter

Sharpshooter

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,379 posts
  • Joined: 31-August 07

Posted 03 October 2012 - 09:21 PM

Oh that's actually a pretty good point.

I suppose we could also say that the process of death is an example of something complex going to something less complex (a living conscious being to dust, dirt and the simple elements from which we are made of).


What's more complex in your opinion? A star or a human being?
  • 0

Posted Image Pittsburgh Penguins - CDC GML Posted Image


"My goal is to win the Stanley Cup, and after the offer I received from Buffalo, I believe this is the best place to make it happen." - Christian Ehrhoff


#1744 Nevlach

Nevlach

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,020 posts
  • Joined: 04-April 05

Posted 03 October 2012 - 09:26 PM

What's more complex in your opinion? A star or a human being?

Depends I guess what we mean by complex.

The process of star formation, existence, and death is pretty cool no doubt.

The process of non-living unconscious matter making something alive with the ability to think and act is also pretty cool.

I guess if I had to pick one I would say a human being based on how our chemistry and physics manifest itself in this awesome interactive way. But I don't know if that makes humans more complex or just more awesome ;)

Edited by Nevlach, 03 October 2012 - 09:43 PM.

  • 0
Posted Image
Posted Image

#1745 Sharpshooter

Sharpshooter

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,379 posts
  • Joined: 31-August 07

Posted 03 October 2012 - 09:40 PM

Depends I guess what we mean by complex.

The process of star formation, existence, and death is pretty cool no doubt.

The process of non-living unconscious matter making something alive with the ability to think and act is also pretty cool.

I guess if I had to pick one I would say a human being based on how are chemistry and physics manifest itself in this awesome interactive way. But I don't know if that makes humans more complex or just more awesome ;)


I suppose the really 'cool' thing is that if not for stars, we wouldn't exist. That our existence is dependent on the death of a star....because that's what it takes for us to be made......a little star-dust, if you will....or, that we are all made from stars.

;)
  • 1

Posted Image Pittsburgh Penguins - CDC GML Posted Image


"My goal is to win the Stanley Cup, and after the offer I received from Buffalo, I believe this is the best place to make it happen." - Christian Ehrhoff


#1746 Nevlach

Nevlach

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,020 posts
  • Joined: 04-April 05

Posted 03 October 2012 - 09:58 PM

I suppose the really 'cool' thing is that if not for stars, we wouldn't exist. That our existence is dependent on the death of a star....because that's what it takes for us to be made......a little star-dust, if you will....or, that we are all made from stars.

;)

Thanks Carl :)
  • 0
Posted Image
Posted Image

#1747 Sharpshooter

Sharpshooter

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,379 posts
  • Joined: 31-August 07

Posted 03 October 2012 - 10:47 PM

Thanks Carl :)


Neil would have been acceptable as well
  • 0

Posted Image Pittsburgh Penguins - CDC GML Posted Image


"My goal is to win the Stanley Cup, and after the offer I received from Buffalo, I believe this is the best place to make it happen." - Christian Ehrhoff


#1748 J.R.

J.R.

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,293 posts
  • Joined: 04-July 08

Posted 04 October 2012 - 09:22 AM

The irreducibly complex argument? Oh man, when I see tripe like this it becomes very apparent that the person spouting this nonsense rhetoric is merely parroting some "aha, gotcha!" statement they've overheard, without really thinking it through.

Your argument seems logical only on the surface. But your answer to the question is just silly. The world is too complex to have happened by itself. The answer? An infinitely more complex and improbable god, for which there is absolutely no proof, that has supernatural powers.

The conviction people have when using this type of illogical dialogue is frightening. You think it's very clever, but it really is not, at all. It's surface-level thinking.


Thanks. I was laughing too hard to write anything like this ^^. That must've taken you quite thew resolve :lol:
  • 0

"Science is like an inoculation against charlatans who would have you believe whatever it is they tell you."
- Neil deGrasse Tyson

jg4428.jpg2s9up7p.jpg


#1749 Nevlach

Nevlach

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,020 posts
  • Joined: 04-April 05

Posted 04 October 2012 - 03:19 PM

Neil would have been acceptable as well


Reminds me of this awesome pic:
Posted Image
  • 0
Posted Image
Posted Image

#1750 Sharpshooter

Sharpshooter

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,379 posts
  • Joined: 31-August 07

Posted 04 October 2012 - 07:12 PM

Reminds me of this awesome pic:
Posted Image


As long as you keep that quote in mind in context with this one:

Posted Image

or this one:

Posted Image
  • 1

Posted Image Pittsburgh Penguins - CDC GML Posted Image


"My goal is to win the Stanley Cup, and after the offer I received from Buffalo, I believe this is the best place to make it happen." - Christian Ehrhoff


#1751 Sharpshooter

Sharpshooter

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,379 posts
  • Joined: 31-August 07

Posted 04 October 2012 - 09:17 PM

The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honorable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation, no matter how subtle, can (for me) change this.


For me the Jewish religion like all other religions is an incarnation of the most childish superstitions. And the Jewish people to whom I gladly belong and with whose mentality I have a deep affinity have no different quality for me than all other people. As far as my experience goes, they are also no better than other human groups, although they are protected from the worst cancers by a lack of power. Otherwise I cannot see anything 'chosen' about them.


- Albert Einstein. (Letter to Jewish Philosopher Erik Gutkind - Also known as 'The God Letter')


http://members.ebay....d=gazinauctions

http://www.reuters.c...E89117820121002


  • 0

Posted Image Pittsburgh Penguins - CDC GML Posted Image


"My goal is to win the Stanley Cup, and after the offer I received from Buffalo, I believe this is the best place to make it happen." - Christian Ehrhoff


#1752 SkeeterHansen

SkeeterHansen

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,140 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 11

Posted 04 October 2012 - 09:23 PM

As Bill was approaching mid-life, physically he was a mess. Not only was he going bald, but years of office work had given him a large pot belly. The last straw came when he asked a woman co-worker out on a date, and she all but laughed at him. That does it, he decided. I'm going to start a whole new regimen. He began attending aerobics classes. He started working out with weights. He changed his diet. And he got an expensive hair transplant. In six months, he was a different man. Again, he asked his female co-worker out, and this time she accepted.

There he was, all dressed up for the date, looking better than he ever had. He stood poised to ring the woman's doorbell, when a bolt of lightning struck him and knocked him off his feet. As he lay there dying, he turned his eyes toward the heavens and said, "Why, God, why now? After all I've been through, how could you do this to me?"

From up above, there came a voice, "Sorry. I didn't recoginize you."
  • 1

/=S=/


#1753 Nevlach

Nevlach

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,020 posts
  • Joined: 04-April 05

Posted 04 October 2012 - 09:31 PM

A few more quotes from Einstein that I've always found interesting even before this "new" one came out with the sale of his letter, "The God Letter."

"My religion consists of a humble admiration of the illimitable superior spirit who reveals himself in the slight details we are able to perceive with our frail and feeble minds. That deeply emotional conviction of the presence of a superior reasoning power, which is revealed in the incomprehensible universe, forms my idea of God."

"I'm not an atheist, and I don't think I can call myself a pantheist. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn't know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God. We see the universe marvelously arranged and obeying certain laws but only dimly understand these laws. Our limited minds grasp the mysterious force that moves the constellations."

"I don't try to imagine a God; it suffices to stand in awe of the structure of the world, insofar as it allows our inadequate senses to appreciate it."

Edited by Nevlach, 04 October 2012 - 09:31 PM.

  • 0
Posted Image
Posted Image

#1754 Bitter Melon

Bitter Melon

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,920 posts
  • Joined: 04-August 11

Posted 04 October 2012 - 09:53 PM

As Bill was approaching mid-life, physically he was a mess. Not only was he going bald, but years of office work had given him a large pot belly. The last straw came when he asked a woman co-worker out on a date, and she all but laughed at him. That does it, he decided. I'm going to start a whole new regimen. He began attending aerobics classes. He started working out with weights. He changed his diet. And he got an expensive hair transplant. In six months, he was a different man. Again, he asked his female co-worker out, and this time she accepted.

There he was, all dressed up for the date, looking better than he ever had. He stood poised to ring the woman's doorbell, when a bolt of lightning struck him and knocked him off his feet. As he lay there dying, he turned his eyes toward the heavens and said, "Why, God, why now? After all I've been through, how could you do this to me?"

From up above, there came a voice, "Sorry. I didn't recoginize you."


The moral of the story, children, is that it's whats on the outside that matters.
  • 0
"Suck it Phaneuf" -Scott Hartnell
The poster formerly known as "CAPSLOCK"
Posted Image

#1755 Sharpshooter

Sharpshooter

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,379 posts
  • Joined: 31-August 07

Posted 04 October 2012 - 10:09 PM

A few more quotes from Einstein that I've always found interesting even before this "new" one came out with the sale of his letter, "The God Letter."

"My religion consists of a humble admiration of the illimitable superior spirit who reveals himself in the slight details we are able to perceive with our frail and feeble minds. That deeply emotional conviction of the presence of a superior reasoning power, which is revealed in the incomprehensible universe, forms my idea of God."

"I'm not an atheist, and I don't think I can call myself a pantheist. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn't know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God. We see the universe marvelously arranged and obeying certain laws but only dimly understand these laws. Our limited minds grasp the mysterious force that moves the constellations."

"I don't try to imagine a God; it suffices to stand in awe of the structure of the world, insofar as it allows our inadequate senses to appreciate it."



I'm not sure what your intention here is, with the continued quoting of scientists like Einstein or Tyson, in context to this thread.

Are you insinuating something subtlety?

Einstein didn't buy into the gods or the fairy-tales associated with the world's religions.....that much should be quite clear.
  • 0

Posted Image Pittsburgh Penguins - CDC GML Posted Image


"My goal is to win the Stanley Cup, and after the offer I received from Buffalo, I believe this is the best place to make it happen." - Christian Ehrhoff


#1756 Nevlach

Nevlach

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,020 posts
  • Joined: 04-April 05

Posted 04 October 2012 - 10:26 PM

I'm not sure what your intention here is, with the continued quoting of scientists like Einstein or Tyson, in context to this thread.

Are you insinuating something subtlety?

Einstein didn't buy into the gods or the fairy-tales associated with the world's religions.....that much should be quite clear.

Just that it doesn't have to be atheism or religion and in this case Einstein understood that.

With the Tyson quote it was just reminded everyone to keep an open mind...especially after reading some of the ridiculousness in "holy books" which I will leave nameless.
  • 0
Posted Image
Posted Image

#1757 Nevlach

Nevlach

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,020 posts
  • Joined: 04-April 05

Posted 04 October 2012 - 10:26 PM

(I didn't really have an intention, just find stuff pertaining to religion, science, faith, atheism etc. all very interesting)
  • 0
Posted Image
Posted Image

#1758 Sharpshooter

Sharpshooter

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,379 posts
  • Joined: 31-August 07

Posted 04 October 2012 - 11:18 PM

Just that it doesn't have to be atheism or religion and in this case Einstein understood that.

With the Tyson quote it was just reminded everyone to keep an open mind...especially after reading some of the ridiculousness in "holy books" which I will leave nameless.


Einstein understood that it didn't have to be science or nothing, not atheism or religion. He rejected the personal god of Judeo-Christianity.

It seems to me that the idea of a personal God is an anthropomorphic concept which I cannot take seriously. I feel also not able to imagine some will or goal outside the human sphere. My views are near to those of Spinoza: admiration for the beauty of and belief in the logical simplicity of the order and harmony which we can grasp humbly and only imperfectly. I believe that we have to content ourselves with our imperfect knowledge and understanding and treat values and moral obligations as a purely human problem — the most important of all human problems.


Albert Einstein (From a letter to Murray W. Gross, Apr. 26, 1947)




This bring me back to the point I made about being able to lack a belief in a god but still able to perceive a sort spiritual experience through profoundness in, many things like, inter-connectivity, love, sex, music, nature, art, knowledge, physical exertion, etc.
  • 0

Posted Image Pittsburgh Penguins - CDC GML Posted Image


"My goal is to win the Stanley Cup, and after the offer I received from Buffalo, I believe this is the best place to make it happen." - Christian Ehrhoff


#1759 Remy

Remy

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,142 posts
  • Joined: 17-December 08

Posted 05 October 2012 - 12:54 AM

Posted Image



I can't stand to read this misquote one more time, the grammar makes me cringe and it should absolutely NOT be associated with one of the great thinkers of our time. "God is AN ever receding pocket ..."

I generally agree with your posts, Sharp, but we must be more diligent than this! ;)
  • 0

#1760 Nevlach

Nevlach

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,020 posts
  • Joined: 04-April 05

Posted 05 October 2012 - 07:35 AM

Einstein understood that it didn't have to be science or nothing, not atheism or religion. He rejected the personal god of Judeo-Christianity.

It seems to me that the idea of a personal God is an anthropomorphic concept which I cannot take seriously. I feel also not able to imagine some will or goal outside the human sphere. My views are near to those of Spinoza: admiration for the beauty of and belief in the logical simplicity of the order and harmony which we can grasp humbly and only imperfectly. I believe that we have to content ourselves with our imperfect knowledge and understanding and treat values and moral obligations as a purely human problem — the most important of all human problems.


Albert Einstein (From a letter to Murray W. Gross, Apr. 26, 1947)




This bring me back to the point I made about being able to lack a belief in a god but still able to perceive a sort spiritual experience through profoundness in, many things like, inter-connectivity, love, sex, music, nature, art, knowledge, physical exertion, etc.

I should point out he didn't reject the idea of a personal god based on his science; he rejected it based on his world-view and philosophy - it was because of evil, suffering, the abuse of religion on man, and religious authority manipulating the people. To illustrate:

"Thus I came...to a deep religiosity, which, however, reached an abrupt end at the age of 12. Through the reading of popular scientific books I soon reached a conviction that much in the stories of the Bible could not be true....Suspicion against every kind of authority grew out of this experience...an attitude which has never left me."


"I cannot imagine a God who rewards and punishes the objects of his creation, whose purposes are modeled after our own - a God, in short, who is but a reflection of human frailty. It is enough for me to contemplate the mystery of conscious life perpetuating itself through all eternity, to reflect upon the marvelous structure of the universe which we can dimly perceive and to try humbly to comprehend even an infinitesimal part of the intelligence manifested in Nature."

Now in light of the previous comments I posted here is another one that supports his stance of "science does not have to lead to atheism":
"In view of such harmony in the cosmos which I, with my limited human mind, am able to recognize, there are yet people who say there is no God. But what really makes me angry is that they quote me for the support of such views."

And even then we all agree that the historical Jesus existed (not necessarily the Son of God Jesus) here is a quote on him from an interview just because:
"You accept the historical existence of Jesus?" - Int
"Unquestionably! No one can read the Gospels without feeling the actual presence of Jesus. His personality pulsates in every word. No myth is filled with such life." - AE

Edited by Nevlach, 05 October 2012 - 07:35 AM.

  • 0
Posted Image
Posted Image

#1761 Sharpshooter

Sharpshooter

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,379 posts
  • Joined: 31-August 07

Posted 05 October 2012 - 09:40 AM

I should point out he didn't reject the idea of a personal god based on his science; he rejected it based on his world-view and philosophy - it was because of evil, suffering, the abuse of religion on man, and religious authority manipulating the people. To illustrate:

"Thus I came...to a deep religiosity, which, however, reached an abrupt end at the age of 12. Through the reading of popular scientific books I soon reached a conviction that much in the stories of the Bible could not be true....Suspicion against every kind of authority grew out of this experience...an attitude which has never left me."


"I cannot imagine a God who rewards and punishes the objects of his creation, whose purposes are modeled after our own - a God, in short, who is but a reflection of human frailty. It is enough for me to contemplate the mystery of conscious life perpetuating itself through all eternity, to reflect upon the marvelous structure of the universe which we can dimly perceive and to try humbly to comprehend even an infinitesimal part of the intelligence manifested in Nature."

Now in light of the previous comments I posted here is another one that supports his stance of "science does not have to lead to atheism":
"In view of such harmony in the cosmos which I, with my limited human mind, am able to recognize, there are yet people who say there is no God. But what really makes me angry is that they quote me for the support of such views."

And even then we all agree that the historical Jesus existed (not necessarily the Son of God Jesus) here is a quote on him from an interview just because:
"You accept the historical existence of Jesus?" - Int
"Unquestionably! No one can read the Gospels without feeling the actual presence of Jesus. His personality pulsates in every word. No myth is filled with such life." - AE


I don't know about your assertion Nevsie.....it sure seems like he's clearly contradicting you, with the part that I highlighted in blue. ;)

And I don't think anyone's suggesting that Einstein didn't believe in something, it's just that, that something was more resembling Spinoza's god than the Judeo-Christian one, which I don't have a problem with, since my contentions are based against the one created by the sheep shaggers, goat herders and desert dwellers of the bronze and iron age middle east.

He did not however, subscribe to the belief or worship of a personal god. That much is clear.

I won't be able to speak to his acceptance or view of the historicity of a person named Jesus, because I don't have access to that interview or the full context. I don't know if he's saying that he accepts the historicity of the person but rejects the divinity assigned to him, or not.

Anyways, it's clear that Einstein was brilliant, but that he didn't have access to the info we have today, which is where Neil's quote about how "God is an ever receding pocket of scientific ignorance that gets smaller and smaller as time goes." Had Einstein been alive to be able to see the scientific knowledge of today, I think it's safe to suggest that his views in rejection of a personal god would have been strengthened. He may have well still clung to Spinoza's view, but I doubt he'd be more swayed against his initial impressions and thoughts against such a personal deity.
  • 0

Posted Image Pittsburgh Penguins - CDC GML Posted Image


"My goal is to win the Stanley Cup, and after the offer I received from Buffalo, I believe this is the best place to make it happen." - Christian Ehrhoff


#1762 Nevlach

Nevlach

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,020 posts
  • Joined: 04-April 05

Posted 05 October 2012 - 10:02 AM

Well the existence of a personal god doesn't hinge on the Bible being infallible and all the stories 100% true.

Other than that I don't really disagree with anything you said...so ya :P

Edit
Here are some more quotes on this subject:
"My position concerning God is that of an agnostic. I am convinced that a vivid consciousness of the primary importance of moral principles for the betterment and ennoblement of life does not need the idea of a law-giver, especially a law-giver who works on the basis of reward and punishment."
(Philosophical not scientific objection)

Another interesting take of his on Atheism:
Einstein was more inclined to denigrate disbelievers than the faithful. Einstein said in correspondence, "[T]he fanatical atheists...are like slaves who are still feeling the weight of their chains which they have thrown off after hard struggle. They are creatures who—in their grudge against the traditional 'opium of the people'—cannot bear the music of the spheres." Although he did not believe in a personal God, he indicated that he would never seek to combat such belief because "such a belief seems to me preferable to the lack of any transcendental outlook."

"I have repeatedly said that in my opinion the idea of a personal God is a childlike one. You may call me an agnostic, but I do not share the crusading spirit of the professional atheist whose fervor is mostly due to a painful act of liberation from the fetters of religious indoctrination received in youth. I prefer an attitude of humility corresponding to the weakness of our intellectual understanding of nature and of our own being."


In anycase I like his views, they seem very honest and sincere. I do wonder if they would be different now-a-days if he was still alive.

Edited by Nevlach, 05 October 2012 - 10:13 AM.

  • 0
Posted Image
Posted Image

#1763 Sharpshooter

Sharpshooter

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,379 posts
  • Joined: 31-August 07

Posted 05 October 2012 - 10:16 AM

Well the existence of a personal god doesn't hinge on the Bible being infallible and all the stories 100% true.

Other than that I don't really disagree with anything you said...so ya :P


Actually it does, because the Bible has long been said to be infallible and divinely authored/inspired....when we all know that's malarkey, just as Einstein did at the age of 12.

The personal aspect of the Judeo-Christian god is forever connected to the what's proffered in the Bible....and one cannot, with a straight face, separate the personal god story from the rest of the fables from the bible. They're a package deal. You get it all, lock, stock and biblical fairy-tale barrel.
  • 0

Posted Image Pittsburgh Penguins - CDC GML Posted Image


"My goal is to win the Stanley Cup, and after the offer I received from Buffalo, I believe this is the best place to make it happen." - Christian Ehrhoff


#1764 Nevlach

Nevlach

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,020 posts
  • Joined: 04-April 05

Posted 05 October 2012 - 10:30 AM

Actually it does, because the Bible has long been said to be infallible and divinely authored/inspired....when we all know that's malarkey, just as Einstein did at the age of 12.

The personal aspect of the Judeo-Christian god is forever connected to the what's proffered in the Bible....and one cannot, with a straight face, separate the personal god story from the rest of the fables from the bible. They're a package deal. You get it all, lock, stock and biblical fairy-tale barrel.

Well no wonder you're an atheist. ;)

I disagree with your stance on this. For example, I don't think whether or not Noah's flood was a global flood that covered the whole world, a local flood that covered the known world, or a fictitious story written down to convey some meaning thousands of years ago change anything with regards to whether a personal god exists; even though the popular belief of religious followers who have "long thought" the flood was completely global.

Similarly there are a lot of theists who are christian and don't take the Bible as completely infallible or entirely literal.
  • 0
Posted Image
Posted Image

#1765 Nevlach

Nevlach

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,020 posts
  • Joined: 04-April 05

Posted 05 October 2012 - 11:41 AM

Reports say Richard Dawkins was one of the bidders for The God Letter.
  • 0
Posted Image
Posted Image

#1766 Buddhas Hand

Buddhas Hand

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,135 posts
  • Joined: 19-December 11

Posted 06 October 2012 - 05:50 PM

Reality: A universe of information
  • 03 October 2012 by Michael Brooks



What we call reality might actually be the output of a program running on a cosmos-sized quantum computer
Read more: "Special issue: What is reality?"
WHATEVER kind of reality you think you're living in, you're probably wrong. The universe is a computer, and everything that goes on in it can be explained in terms of information processing.
The connection between reality and computing may not be immediately obvious, but strip away the layers and that is exactly what some researchers think we find. We think of the world as made up of particles held together by forces, for instance, but quantum theory tells us that these are just a mess of fields we can only properly describe by invoking the mathematics of quantum physics.
That's where the computer comes in, at least if you think of it in conceptual terms as something that processes information rather than as a boxy machine on your desk. "Quantum physics is almost phrased in terms of information processing," says Vlatko Vedral of the University of Oxford. "It's suggestive that you will find information processing at the root of everything."
Information certainly has a special place in quantum theory. The famous uncertainty principle - which states that you can't simultaneously know the momentum and position of a particle - comes down to information. As does entanglement, where quantum objects share properties and exchange information irrespective of the physical distance between them.
In fact, every process in the universe can be reduced to interactions between particles that produce binary answers: yes or no, here or there, up or down. That means nature, at its most fundamental level, is simply the flipping of binary digits or bits, just like a computer. The result of the myriad bit flips is manifest in what we perceive as the ongoing arrangement, rearrangement and interaction of atoms - in other words, reality.
According to Ed Fredkin of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, if we could dig into this process we would find that the universe follows just one law, a single information-processing rule that is all you need to build a cosmos. In Fredkin's view, this would be some form of "if - then" procedure; the kind of rule used in traditional computing to manipulate the bits held by transistors on a chip and operate the logic gates, but this time applied to the bits of the universe.
Vedral and others think it's a little more complex than that. Because we can reduce everything in the universe to entities that follow the laws of quantum physics, the universe must be a quantum computer rather than the classical type we are familiar with.
One of the attractions of this idea is that it can supply an answer to the question "why is there something rather than nothing?". The randomness inherent in quantum mechanics means that quantum information - and by extension, a universe - can spontaneously come into being, Vedral says.
For all these theoretical ideas, proving that the universe is a quantum computer is a difficult task. Even so, there is one observation that supports the idea that the universe is fundamentally composed of information. In 2008, the GEO 600 gravitational wave detector in Hannover, Germany, picked up an anomalous signal suggesting that space-time is pixellated. This is exactly what would be expected in a "holographic" universe, where 3D reality is actually a projection of information encoded on the two-dimensional surface of the boundary of the universe (New Scientist, 17 January 2009, p 24).
This bizarre idea arose from an argument over black holes. One of the fundamental tenets of physics is that information cannot be destroyed, but a black hole appears to violate this by swallowing things that contain information then gradually evaporating away. What happens to that information was the subject of a long debate between Stephen Hawking and several of his peers. In the end, Hawking lost the debate, conceding that the information is imprinted on the event horizon that defines the black hole's boundary and escapes as the black hole evaporates. This led theoretical physicists Leonard Susskind and Gerard't Hooft to propose that the entire universe could also hold information at its boundary - with the consequence that our reality could be the projection of that information into the space within the boundary. If this conjecture is true, reality is like the image of Princess Leia projected by R2D2 in Star Wars: a hologram.
  • 0

The Real war is not between the east and the west. The real war is between intelligent and stupid people.

Marjane Satrapi

tony-abbott-and-stephen-harper-custom-da

That men do not learn very much from the lessons of history is the most important of all the lessons that history has to teach.

Aldous Huxley.


#1767 Kryten

Kryten

    Aladdin

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,818 posts
  • Joined: 02-February 12

Posted 06 October 2012 - 07:42 PM

A documentary everyone should see.





I suggest mixing NDT's drink from the following vid to wash the taste of bile from your mouth that the second trailer undoubtedly induced.


Edited by Kryten, 06 October 2012 - 07:50 PM.

  • 0
Posted Image

#1768 Remy

Remy

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,142 posts
  • Joined: 17-December 08

Posted 06 October 2012 - 08:34 PM

http://youtu.be/sP_A-DFWM0Y


I like to think I'm a fairly intelligent person, but watching that man describe the drink he created, makes me feel inadequate. It's just ... damn, Neil, you smart.
  • 0

#1769 Tortorella's Rant

Tortorella's Rant

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,183 posts
  • Joined: 11-April 12

Posted 06 October 2012 - 09:09 PM

I like to think I'm a fairly intelligent person, but watching that man describe the drink he created, makes me feel inadequate. It's just ... damn, Neil, you smart.


:lol:

He put so much thought into it. I love it.
  • 0
Posted Image

#1770 Sharpshooter

Sharpshooter

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,379 posts
  • Joined: 31-August 07

Posted 10 October 2012 - 11:54 PM

I was watching NovaScience Now, this evening, about what makes humans 'human' and different from other species on this planet. There were some interesting points covered about our evolution.

But one thing in particular stood out for me, profoundly, actually.

And as it relates to this thread and the topic of this thread, it sort of dawned on me that if science is able to turn the creation story(Adam & Eve) on its ear, even more than it has already, mind you, then perhaps science is capable, as a 'worldy' thing, to disprove the foundation of the Islamo-Judeo-Christian religions....since they're all essentially versions of each other.

And what I believe turns the creation story even moreso on its ear, was the proof, the genetic proof in the majority of the world's human population, as a whole, which can be and has been proven to contain 1-4% Neanderthal DNA.

This means, that the majority of humans today, in fact aren't 100% human.....we're almost all a product of inter-species sexual relations by our fore-fathers, or perhaps fore-mothers.

The only truly 'human' humans are Africans. Yep, their DNA is purer than yours or mine, because they didn't migrate out of Africa, into Asia and Europe, and onwards, they stayed there and continued to develop as modern day humans. Those that went North, towards Europe, evolved into the separate species 'Homo Neanderthalensis'.

Yup, Europeans and Asians are evolution's 'muggles'. Europeans moreso though. Higher muggle-blood factor.

Now, this kind of throws a bit of a monkey wrench in that whole, created in 'His' image, no? Unless 'He' was part Neanderthal too. I mean much of 'His' actions were certainly Neanderthal-like.

So,

No to the 'created in His image'....obviously.
No to the female gender being made from the male's rib....obviously.
No to the whole, it takes only two of one species to populate an entire planet, that has another species DNA mixed in....obviously.
And pretty much no, to the majority of Genesis and the Book of Genesis, something acknowledged and used by all 3 religions.

And, it can all be disproven scientifically.

Alright, I await the moving of goalposts and the making of excuses and evidence-less interpretations of so-called interpretations.

Edited by Sharpshooter, 11 October 2012 - 12:03 AM.

  • 0

Posted Image Pittsburgh Penguins - CDC GML Posted Image


"My goal is to win the Stanley Cup, and after the offer I received from Buffalo, I believe this is the best place to make it happen." - Christian Ehrhoff





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.