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
Login

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
Lots Of Everything Exists, Including Lots Of Nothingness

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Phil.o.sofir on September 22, 1999 17:36:57 UTC

: : : *** I would like to hear differing perspectives on the subject of what we are. It is my opinion that we are animals, and that we have developed a very complex mechanism which allows us to multiply our chances of survival. : : : I have found those who belive in a supreame being who also believe that we are still a form of animal, and I have found those who reject the concept of a supreame being but maintain that we are something that could not have developed from any other animal forms. Of course then there is the general we are created as we are by a supreame being, and also the evolutionary theory that explains that we came directly from the first forms of life which branched over and over again, thus making us related to all forms of life on the planet from very recent branches like the primates to the most extreame distant reletives such as single cell life. : : : I tend to agree with Darwins theory of evolution because it has the most physical evidence supporting it, and seems to be the most probable. : : :

: : bzrd here: The probability of a functional protein forming through a random process is one in 10 to the 65th power. There are approximately the same numbers of atoms in the Milky Way Galaxy.

: RD: But bzrd, there are billuons of galaxies like our milky way in which proteins can form. On the other hand, I do not think it was entirely random. There was some intelligent creativity involved. However, it still took a billion or so years to produce the first protein. : Ten to the 65th power is a very large number. Did you create it. If not who did, and do you understand how it was created. Otherwise you are acting on blind faith in science and mathematics.

***Yes, and billions is just the tip of the iceburg if the universe is infinite. Also, the number of atoms really has no connection with the probability of life, unless it was in the order of a countable amount. for when numbers exceed our capacity to comprehend them as is actually the case with the number that was scientifically noted, then our understanding of probabilities, chaos and game theories... go out the window. Our intelligence only goes so far at this point, we can grasp enough to build theories around what we do know, enough for us to get use out of them for further theory building and practical uses, but to try to apply these to the reality of the universe as a whole is, um, I guess superstisiuos? Like you said, blind faith in science, or anything for that matter. Thanks for the good response, I've missed this place.

Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
Google
 
Web www.astronomy.net
DayNightLine
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2019 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