[balistic]

We'll probably never know exactly what transpired in those first few cell divisions . . . I don't know how we could figure that out without either reproducing the process in a lab or witnessing it on another planet.

We do know that organic compounds are actually fairly common in the universe . . . scientists recently discovered a cloud of interstellar alcohol, as weird as that sounds.

There are theories for panspermia, which postulate that Earth may have received its first life from fragments of other planets . . . but that doesn't really bring us closer to knowing how life started.

The central problem is that "life" is such an abstract concept . . . I tend to regard it as a gradient, not a binary step. If you look at viruses, they have some qualities of life, but we hesitate to say that they are alive . . . and when we are able to create self-replicating, evolving robots, will /they/ be alive?

We've got brains that are optimized for picking berries and finding shelter in storms . . . when you start asking questions that are too far removed from human experience, there's a wall of abstract reasoning that may never be scaled.

Anyway, its friday . . . time to go home and paint

[[Shizo]]

Damn it dudes, why think inside the box? Read my post.

[SWANY]

Hey Shizo, i totaly agree with you, just the word universe is Inconceivable.

here's my view, the universe has always been there and will always be there, it never began and will never end, with this said, time doesn't exist, because time never began.

so if nothing ever began how do we exist?

Maybe we dont exist

[Steven Stahlberg]

Shizo, most scientists agree the universe isn't infinitely large. It is endless, because it's curved, in a dimension outside of the 3 we know (4 with time), but not infinite in size. Hard to understand, I agree, but it can be conceptualized vaguely by dropping a dimension - a sphere is curved in 3 dimensions, and endless - an ant can walk around the equator of a globe forever, in what to him looks like a straight line - but the surface, the 2-d area, is not infinitely large. In fact it's quite easy to calculate it's exact size.

How big is the universe? That's the question they wrestle with. Is there enough stuff, tightly packed enough, to halt the outward expansion, start a reversal, and cause an implosion in the distant future? Or will matter simply drift apart forever, slower and slower but never reversing?

[travis travis]

I make up my own as a go along. So far so good. Excuse me, I must go rotate the golden chalice. Nah, just kidding, I'm not into props.

And P.S. to the atheists, please don't be atheist fundamentalists, you know what I mean.

[ November 30, 2001: Message edited by: travis travis ]

[Red Leader]

Sorry if I offended (If I'm one of these "Fundamentalist Athiests")

Each of us has the right to believe what we will.
I'm just honestly curious WHY people believe what they do... what motivates people to believe in a Higher Power? I ask because frankly, I don't get it? Existence of god is unproveable as far as I'm concerned. "Well, look around you at the splendor of nature" just won't cut it as a proof for me...
I read a lot of books on astrophysics, biology and world/religious history, and as I read with an open mind, I'm further and further convinced that nature governs itself.

What leads those of faith to believe? I can quite comfortably chat about why I believe what I believe (or don't belive as the case may be. )

For one thing, we as "individuals" are made up of millions and millions of cells. Each of which is living unto itself. Human beings are evolved cellular collectives, bound together in a complex symbiosis that is capable of group communication and self awareness as a group mind. But make no mistake, each cell is it's own entity. Which of these individual living cells holds our soul?

[ November 30, 2001: Message edited by: Red Leader ]

[nomad]

Apparently I was christened as an anglican before I could speak or walk or make up my mind about it.
I don't believe in a god, or in good and evil forces, or in strictly adhering to laws or texts written thousands of years ago.

[Anthony]

I believe in a God, or creator, and I tend to believe in many many many spirits of every kind and power as well. I don't think the ultimate God interferes in our existence in this life or the next, and I don't think we ever stop learning and experiencing, even when we're no longer bound by time and space. I think we existed before we came here, and indeed, we chose to come to Earth. It's free choice, and I don't see it ending, ever.

[Steven Stahlberg]

Red Leader, I appreciate your willingness to discuss these issues, that's good, but first you should try to get over this tendency to see all non-atheists as people who are subconsciously reaching for a security blanket, or alternatively just plain dumb, or unwilling to face facts. (You may not agree, but to me this is what both your posts imply.)

I can't speak for others, but as for me this definitely doesn't apply. Do I know my own subconscious? Probably not as well as I should, but I do know I'm not an insecure person, looking for some parental substitute or whatever. (I'm sure a psychologist could come up with some similar reasons why someone would subconsciously choose to be an atheist.)
Also I'm not dumb - not overly smart, but not below average either. And I've always tried to follow the principles of science, such as finding out the facts, then fitting a hypothesis to them, but always aware that I may have to change my mind and my hypothesis if(when) new facts crop up (almost inevitable).

Just wanted you to know that there are a lot of astrophysicists who used to be hard atheists, who as they studied the universe have become more and more theistic - I heard a joke once from some university - if you need an atheist for a philosophical discussion don't go to the Physics department...

Also, you seem to imply that through some sort of 'Occam's razor' test we can obviously see that the universe doesn't 'need' a creator to be explained. But any such argument can be turned around to say the opposite, without invalidating it.
What is more likely, a universe created by an eternal principle, or a universe that just sprang into being without cause? Of course, an impossible question to answer. Both alternatives seem equally absurd, so how can we choose one or another as more likely?

[LinaBo]

I wonder, maybe, if someone couldn't tell me what faith(s) my basic beliefs relate to? I don't wish to join one, as that's something against my beliefs ('strength' in joining a group that does not share my exact beliefs is weakness, to me, because it means comprimising my beliefs), but I wish to make a tangible comparison in the future, for people who ask (and they DO ask me what my religion is)

-I believe there is a god:
Who is neither male nor female, isn't vengeful or anything, who is essentially the sum of everything. Matter, souls, the whole universe, it's contents, everything. Yet, in some sense, a seperate being in our eyes with whom we communicate, on certain levels.

-that every life is a seperate spirit, that spends one cycle on earth (or wherever else), then ascends to heaven to join the soul from which it was created. A soul, to me, being a collective of spirits with the purpose of continuing to learn through reincarnation of the soul into new spirits(explaining how, for example: someone's grandmother could essentially be reincarnated, yet still be in heaven at the same time)(Spirits-form-souls-form-god)

-I don't believe in a hell. If god is powerful and forgiving, then how could god have the weakness to permit something as petty as hell to exist? Besides, I believe that good or bad, the lives of people are all meant to be that way for a reason. It is a learning experience beyond the comprehension of us, as human beings. I don't think that we are capable, being a part, and not the whole, of god, of trying to actually think like god.
Not to say that what we do doesn't matter. We should try to make the whole mortal experience a pleasant one.

-Non-interference equals non-interference:
hey, if you believe in something else, or are doing something else with your life, you have every right to, and no one should have the right to challenge that due to THEIR beliefs: that is, until what you do directly interferes with the life of someone else against their will. So don't try to convert me, I won't try to convert you.

Sometimes it's hard to follow, especially that last part, my temper still gets the better of me, but I try and will keep trying.

but anyway, to each their own.

[[Shizo]]

Steven Stahlberg: scientists are same thinkers inside the box as monkeys are.
Humans are an infinitely small pat of universe, even 'smartest' humans have just about the same understanding about universe even if they apply their most advanced knowledge about speeds, materials, distances to it. I say that if humans survive for long enough, they will look beyond current limits into outside universe as we can observe a part of it now, and discover that previous theory was complete false.
Any theory that refers to a limited size of universe indicates the limit of human mind, and is resolved by a simple question like "Then what's outside?" cause outside is the rest of infinite universe.

But hey.. by my theory also anything imaginable exists, so even the different dimentions that you talk about i say exists at one point. Even a small universe filled with glue exists somewhere, and creatures as big as planets.. yeah crazy, i know. Leave it or believe it.

[Steven Stahlberg]

LinaBo: except for the reincarnation that sounds a bit like the Baha'i Faith, see the link I posted at the beginning of this thread.

to sum it up:

* men and women equal
* science and religion equal
* all races are One (this is the most ethnically diverse religion on earth)
* education most important, especially of women
* total tolerance towards the other major religions (meaning you can be both a hindu and a Baha'i at the same time!)
* some tolerance towards any other faith (we are forbidden to 'persuade' and proselytize, people are supposed to find out by themselves, in their own time, what they think)
* no priesthood
* no hell
* no reincarnation
* monotheistic
I'm sure there's more, but I need some coffee now...

[LinaBo]

That is what I thought, I'll make a note of it

[Lemur-X]

Converted to the LDS faith just over a year ago.

Renaissance : Sounds like you did have a freakishly large number of bad experiences.

Ceenda : You beat me to it. In regards to the 'epochs'.

[Red Leader]

Steven Stahlberg-

Yeah, I know I can come off in a condescending, pushy way when I discuss religious (amongst other) issues. I just want to make clear that I don't think those who follow any given religion are lost or misguided, I just don't understand how they came to find this "knowing" of God. I have never believed in god, even though I was baptized a catholic.
I am a "hardball debator"...I tend to throw in a hard opinion with some backing evidence in the hopes that someone will reply with a similar hardball response to even my opinion out. Maybe I need to tone it down a bit

...That said, I really have to make the distinction between RELIGION, which I have problems with, and FAITH which I see is uplifting to many people.
We all believe something, who's to say which of us is right or wrong? God or no God? As long as we find peace in ourselves and we act kindly and openly to all others, regardless of what they believe, with no political agenda, I'm happy.

[Dryfire]

Eh i'll keep it short. I am as Jezebel is, agnostic.

There is no proof showing that God exists, or that he doesn't. Were any of you alive 2000 years ago to see all the prophets?(hopefully no =D)

about this underlying statement going around, most of the people on earth believe in one or more god. for you, i give you this:

Eat shit, one hundred billion flies can't be wrong.

[klaivu]

I'm an atheist. ( Heh, see my url ? ). I was a happy worshipper suffering from the group psychosis a few years back, and now I despise religion in any form. I think the final nail to my coffin as a christian was me finally reading the bible from cover to cover.

To clear up a few issues :

Atheism is not a religion. Theism : belief in god. Atheism : without belief in god.

Science is not a religion. I think what you people meant, is that science is a way to explain the world, like your religion is. However, religion requires faith, which is assuming something to be true without evidence. Scientific research is nothing without evidence, and hasn't anything to do with faith.

"If we are going to teach 'creation science' as an alternative to evolution, then we should also teach the stork theory as an alternative to biological reproduction."
- Judith Hayes

I'll say no god ever answered a prayer, no being ever lived after death and there never was any purpose in life than life itself.

It's possible, that god exists, but just because something is possible, doesn't make it true. All evidence of gods or creators are written or told by man. That makes them as good as nothing. Why don't the authors of scriptures contact us directly ?

" Imagine the ego of the human race, to consider themselves so grand, as to warrant a creator worthy of praise. "
- Robert Brunswick Jr.

Imho, no faith is worth having if it does not survive doubt.

[Awetopsy]

Dryfire: that's why all flies eat crap and why us humans dont have to. Im pretty sure there arent any flies that doubt whether they should it crap or not.

Klaivu, You said:

quote

Quote:

I'll say no god ever answered a prayer...

can you honestly prove that no God ever answered a prayer? how can you argue with people's experiences?
You also said:

quote

Quote:

"It's possible, that god exists, but just because something is possible, doesn't make it true"

Then the other side of the coin is that just because somebody thinks that its only possible that a god exists, that doesnt mean that he/she/it doesn't exist.

Here's some more general thoughts for whoever,

1)define faith. Ar you talking about just believing in something? or are you talking about the hope of something yet to come?
The biblical definition of faith is this:

quote

Quote:

Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen

2)Most of you say there's no proof of a God, What about miracles? When someone invites you to go to church where the miracles happen you say "no".
Some of you will say, "I went to church. I didnt see any miracles." My question to you is, were you in a church that beleived in, supported, or even knew what the bible said about miracles?
Some churches say they do.. but when it comes right down to it, they dont know enough about it, or havent done enough research on it.

People want to argue and say that Miracles dont happen because they havent seen any themselves, my answer is this,Thats like saying "I dont believe you have a grandma because Ive never seen her". It is commonly conceded that everybody has a grandmother because alot of people knew and or met theirs, and so it is commonly conceded amongst alot of Christians that miracles happen because they have experienced them.

3)Isnt it interesting that we all feel the need to defend our set of beliefs here? Im still finding this topic extremely interesting. Its nice that so many of us are handling this conversation maturely. Personally, I still feel the same level of respect for everyone of you that I had before this topic was started. I thik its at least good to know what you believe.

[ December 01, 2001: Message edited by: Awetopsy ]

[Dryfire]

aight, i didn't say all flies.


Im pretty sure there arent any "believers in god(s) "that doubt whether they should" believe in them "or not."

[Steven Stahlberg]

Here's an interesting link:
http://www.mercola.com/article/prayer/dossey.htm

Prayer works, it has been tested many times in randomized double-blind surveys, by real scientists. Remote intercessary prayer by strangers; one group of patients are prayed for, sometimes by people as far away as another continent; another similar group is not prayed for, none of the patients or their caretakers know which is which, etc etc, very tightly controlled and supervised.

The results have consistently been positive. Just a few months ago I heard of such a test where women at a US fertility clinic became pregnant to a much higher degree within a set time period, if they were prayed for by some people in Australia. (edit: some of the praying strangers were there anyway)

Now here's a response to this from an 'atheistic' website:

quote

Quote:

The problem with this and any so-called controlled experiment regarding prayer is that there can be no such thing as a controlled experiment concerning prayer. You can never divide people into groups that received prayer and those that did not. The main reason is that there is no way to know that someone did not receive prayer. How would anyone know that some distant relative was not praying for a member of the group that Byrd had identified as having received no prayer? How does one assess the degree of faith in patients that are too sick to be interviewed or in the persons performing the prayers?

These women at the fertility clinic weren't sick so they could be interviewed, but it doesn't matter anyway, the people praying and the patients were from all different denominations, a fairly representative random sample. The degree of faith in the receivers seemed to make little difference.

Also, the effect of prayer seems to be stronger the more people are involved, and the more specific it is, and the longer it is kept up. So if some of the relatives also prayed, we can assume that it would not be as long and hard and focused as it would have been if the women had been really sick, instead of simply trying to get pregnant, and it would be done by fewer people than in the group of praying strangers. So the above quoted objections are baseless.

[ December 01, 2001: Message edited by: Steven Stahlberg ]

[bld]

agnostic flirting with atheism.

I belive God, god, gods, whatever, is/are only a personification to something we cannot understand at this point.

Seriously tho, think outside the box, if you belive in a religion so strongly that everyone else is wrong and you have no question about whether or not you are wrong, you simply begin to die.

Einstien thought outside the box, and we now know more about time the magic 4th dimension and light waves, particles, how to travel in time.

Fook'n A. I mean, when you type your fingers are aging slower than the rest of your body is, people that realized stuff like this thought way outside the box.

Don't let your beliefs kill you, be free, and although freedom is over rated and lonely, confinement and imprisonment isn't exactly under rated correct?

Im done ranting or whatever, fuck it, no one is right, just be open to new ideas.

Maybe the 5th dimension is thought?

[Poxin]

I'm currently exploring the idea of one mind. That you, me, we, everything combined are but one mind. That this one mind that makes up everthing is "god".

So yes i'm beginning to believe in god, but not in such literal christain kinda sence. It's much more then that of a man, symbol, or idea. It goes where we can not explain,
beyond thought, and reason, too somthing we humans call: experiance.

I feel theres more to be found out side the strict rules and morals of one religion. Take what you need and move on to somthing new. If there is anything i'm truly sure of. It's that everything changes.

[Lemur-X]

BLD : Einstein stood by his religion to the very end...... Labelling spiritual people as sheep that never think outside of the box is a bit dangerous.

[travis travis]

"I'll say no god ever answered a prayer, no being ever lived after death and there never was any purpose in life than life itself."

Which means because you have no experience of something and choose not to pursue it... you totally write it off. Not such an odd thing to do, but not a basis for truth. Does it occur to anyone that there are people with spiritual beliefs in this world that are based on signifigant bodies of first hand experience and "sheep" could be the furthest thing from describing them? Why is that so many of the books on spiritualism in the bookstore are written by doctors who started out as skeptics, but exploring a certain phenomena found it to be real. If you don't believe me go to a bookstore, or a University library even, you'll find the same material, people just don't explore it.

It's a very American attitude, to be the freest people in the world, and yet accept no responsibility and find no more in life then what's set on their plate.

[Lemur-X]

Travis : I like to think of myself as former agnostic, borderline aetheist, that has had said experiences....

My life has been infinitely better since I have found my faith.

[ December 03, 2001: Message edited by: Lemur-X ]

[wayfinder]

faith to me means believing in things that cannot be proven.

a god whose existence can be proved or disproved is not worthy of faith. the existence of a god who is worthy of faith cannot be proved or disproved.

the experiments that allegedly show that prayers do work rather point in the direction of a yet undiscovered phenomenon than a sentient god. there cannot be outsmarting god, proving anything.

I seriously doubt their scientific applicabilty though. people find what they want to find (same with so-called paranomal studies)

anyway, i'm fine with every religion as long as nobody plays the missionary. i also do not think that calling atheism a belief is like calling black a color. believing that there is no god is still a belief. i think that atheists believe in something that nodody can prove or disprove - the non-existence of god. so it's a kind of faith as well. I wouldn't call atheism a religion though. Faith and belief, yes.

interesting topic, all of this. especially that afterlife thing, subjective passage of time, and so on, the list is endless. infinity is like a non-deterministic turing machine.

[Lemur-X]

It's not a matter of outsmarting God, or proving his existence in order to be faithful.

Nearly every religion out there says that God proves himself to the faithful.

There's an order to the universe, regardless of what many think. It applies to every face of existence.

[[Shizo]]

Oh yeah, my life improved a LOT since i stopped trying to imagine god and like i was praying to some force (im very imaginative hehe) and i was a troubled kid and still have some of it in me but since i stopped believing this garbage i concentrated into improving myself, getting rid of lame beliefs like "friday 13th is day of satan, and 666 is a bad number which brings evil"
I wish i was never shown and taught those stories and useless crap, be it damned cause it's such a mind-waster.

Yesterday i spoke to some hard-on christian woman who listens to christian rap/soul music and watched those TV-preachers.. hehe you know. So i asked her what she thinks about Islam or Catholicism and she said "they're wrong religions! i mean catholics pray to symbols and those islamic gods are all wrong, but i pray for those people because they dont know the true god".
And then i made her angry when i said if she was born in Afghanistan she would believe in Allah and pity all christians and catholics that are so wrong in believing wronbg god cause Allah is the only right god etc.

She started saying im evil child and stuff hehe, that devil is inside me and eating away at my monkey-brains

was funny

[Awetopsy]

[shizo]: and so thats how all christians are?

I dont believe that friday the 13th is satans day... or that 666 is a terrible number. There is a big difference between Christianity and superstition.
Just because there are people who do judge everybody else and call themselves Christian, doesnt mean all Chrsitians are like that.

[Kreuze]

I'm an agnostic. I'm a skeptic. There have been billions of different supernatural
beliefs, religious and non-religous held by people throughout the course of history.
Many once believed with great zeal have died out, and many only have a small niche of adamant believers, some even were later found to be not supernatural at all. Any specific supernatural belief I probably don't agree with anyone reading this on, but hey, we have a lot in common on things
we don't necessarily believe

Steven:
Although I agree with you on the origin of life (a huge number of possiblities, all incredibly improbable, who am I to pick one?)
I feel like adding an opposing viewpoint on the power of prayer. I don't feel it has been proven like you say, and I feel Atheists/Agnostics have been misrepresented in the article you linked to. Reading the article itself a bunch of warning signals went off.. it was filled with vague assertions, like "there is considerable evidence that neither telepathy nor psychokinesis is nonsense", stayed clear of specific details, didn't link to an opposing view (usually done so one can pick and choose arguments and change their presentation,) and took extreme positions ("it is criminally negligent for physicians not to recommend [prayer]")

Scientists aren't ignoring solid evidence because they're brainwashed, like that article suggested. In fact they don't believe prayer has an effect because the evidence is very far from conclusive.
If you want both sides, here's a link to a friendly debate between Harris (the doctor who conducted the study in question on the Mercola page.)
and Tessman, a doctor critical of the study.
http://www.csicop.org/articles/20010810-prayer/

You'll notice that Harris, far from claiming scientific proof and a criminally negligent denial in the medical establishment like the webpage on Mercola.org, isntead merely claims that his study suggests prayer has an effect, although there are still
many unknowns, and more studies are needed/welcome.

Since it's a bit long, I'll present a few highlights from the Tessman's argument against the power of prayer:
Previous study by Byrd, which had *much* stronger results in favor prayer than the Harris study was not really double blind. Mentioned a couple previous studies that didn't find any positive results for prayer. In the Harris study, Prayer groups were contacted and started praying a day after the patients were admitted to the hospital. *Before* that time 5 people dropped out
of the control group, sent home early&healthy, and 18 dropped out early&healthy of the prayer group. These patients were not included in the study.
There's a 1/1000 chance of so much of a difference... after the prayer started the patients in the prayer group only did slightly better than the control group. Since the test group did better before the prayer started, maybe prayer really made them less healthy? Very doubtful, but it illustrates how hard studies are to do on phenomena you don't understand, and how many interpretations you can make depending on what you're trying to find, and how you interpret your data.

Anyway, I'm not arguing that prayer doesn't work, the jury is still out on that one, I'm explaining why many doctors and many atheists&agnostics don't believe that it does.

[edited for spacing problems]

[ December 03, 2001: Message edited by: Kreuze ]