Quote from: Whirlingdervish(Q2C) on January 25, 2007, 09:51:29 AMYou should also take into account what you actually mean by "perfect".If we happened to breath hydrogen sulfide instead of oxygen, our atmosphere would be poisonous to us.You only see our world as perfect, because you are the result of millions of years of adaptations that made creatures more adept at surviving on this planet.good point.
You should also take into account what you actually mean by "perfect".If we happened to breath hydrogen sulfide instead of oxygen, our atmosphere would be poisonous to us.You only see our world as perfect, because you are the result of millions of years of adaptations that made creatures more adept at surviving on this planet.
Quote from: metal on January 25, 2007, 10:29:55 AMbut im sorry, i do not feel that i am the result of "millions of years of adaptations".what sort of biology have you been studying?
but im sorry, i do not feel that i am the result of "millions of years of adaptations".
it's only a valid concept if you can identify what existed prior to that "one big bang" that started our universe.
You pretty much have to support the cold-death theory of the end of the universe in order to agree with the "one big bang" theory..
if by millions he meant only 2 than i would agree. i just do not believe homo sapiens evolved from the earliest of monkeys, sorry. and just to humor you, i've studied mainly anatomy, physiology, structure and evolution of vertebrates, and animal behavior for the most part, among other subjects.
Quote from: whirlingit's only a valid concept if you can identify what existed prior to that "one big bang" that started our universe.valid concept? to who?
to anyone who requires actual evidence based on observation. (for example.. scientists)
Quote from: quadzStephen Hawking, what a total random a-hole!yeah, the same guy who speaks as if global warming exists (to the extent it causes problems). if this guy says something, it doesn't mean it's right.
Stephen Hawking, what a total random a-hole!
Quote from: whirlingto anyone who requires actual evidence based on observation. (for example.. scientists)there's many reasons why you would hypothesis there could only be one big bang, belief in god would be only one. reasons for one big bang, of course there are many. i'm not going to get into this, because it's not the point i'm making. scientists have to a lot of things without observable evidence, especially when you are talking about theoretical physics.
You've never responded to my questions about how any theist can possibly believe there could be only one Big Bang.What's God going to do when this Universe ends? Twiddle His thumbs? Seriously...
and Hawking discovered, not only does God play dice, he even hides them where we can't see them.
I haven't researched Hawking's position on global warming. However, unless he's getting senile, I'm willing to bet any case he's making for it is based on data from scientific research. He may or may not be right, but I presume he is taking a position based on scientifically sound evidence.
Thus the multiple big-bang theory survives Occam's Razor pretty admirably by comparison to the single big bang theory.
yes indeed, a good point that further supports my claim! the fact that our air is 79% nitrogen, roughly 19-20% oxygen, and a minimal amount of argon, helium, etc. INSTEAD of some poisionous gas just makes the "chances" athiests talk about even more improbable.
If you can explain to me what happens to the universe after it stops expanding, then I'll drop this.
Quote from: quadz You've never responded to my questions about how any theist can possibly believe there could be only one Big Bang.What's God going to do when this Universe ends?
You've never responded to my questions about how any theist can possibly believe there could be only one Big Bang.What's God going to do when this Universe ends?