Back to Home

God & Science Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | God and Science | Post

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
Immortality Through Our Genes

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by S.H. Le on September 29, 2000 15:39:03 UTC

"First of all we must accept the thought of immortality." Lance

Evolutionist recognize that our genes are the only part of us that is immortal (that we know of) because it`s passed on to our progeny, and their progeny, and so on. An understanding of evolution clearly indicates that death is necessary to keep a species adaptive. That is the whole point of reproduction, death. If an organism didn`t die, and it`s cells continually divided throughout it`s lifetime without ever dying, then it stands to reason that this species wouldn`t have to reproduce (it can live forever) and the genes for that species wouldn`t be variable. So if some virus or any other external factor entered the situation, the entire species would be wiped out - this would be an inflexible strategy in nature. Conversely, evolution indicates that through the cycle of reproduction and death, a species remains adaptive through mutation, recombination, etc. traits which are then selected by the environment. Furthermore, different species have an optimum age for reproduction. Flies for instance have a life span of only about 9 days, then again, that`s perfectly adequate time for them to find a nice warm area for them to lay eggs and reproduce in. Humans reach sexual maturity pretty early in life, so 100 years old (with the advent of medical science) really is pushing it, even thought it is possible to extend the life span further.

"So if a culture somewhere beyond our vision reached immortality maybe a guy named god traveled here and started our small solar system. Not hard to concieve for me!" Lance

Ok, that`s certainly possible. However, most people don`t define that sort of a being as God. For most people, God is something/someone that`s omnipresent throughout the entire universe, and knows exactly what everybody`s thinking before they even think it. Before you try to forward your evidence for God, it might be useful to define just exactly what you mean by God. Furthermore, you said this theory wasn`t hard to conceive. A lot of things are easy to concieve, that doesn`t make them true. I can conceive of unicorns and a giant mountain of jello... catch my drift?

"But most scientists must have proof before believing anything.Remember our ancient anstronomers were thought by others to be heretics for the theory`s they had!" Lance

Pretty much everybody requires proof of any type of theory before they accept anything. If i told you that posting messages on this forum was a direct cause of mad cows disease, you would most certainly demand proof before you accepted it. Unfortunately, most people do not show the same skepticism when applied to religion. The true scientist realizes the innate uncertainty in science and is consequently never sure of anything... thus this breeds a sense of doubt within the scientist.

You`re right, our ancient astronomers we believed to be heretics. By who exactly? Christains. The dogmatic view simply dismisses new facts that contradict their pre existing view on the world. That i might add, is very inflexible.

Follow Ups:

    Login to Post
    Additional Information
    About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
    Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2023 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
    Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
    "dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
    are trademarks of John Huggins