I was referring specifically to the majority of people in our society today.

I was not speaking for the whole planet, let alone people living thousands of years ago.
===========================================================
Well, unfortunately, it’s a direct thread, through history, and through all societies.

Once people are materially well-off, there is more of a tendency towards moderation, but as soon as that material well-being is threatened, the intolerance returns. There is a direct correlation , for example, between economic recession and the rise of nationalism, racism, etc.

I agree that by international standards, this would probably be regarded as a relatively tolerant country, but it’s only relative, and for a country that is so tolerant, we’ve been in an awful lot of wars.

We are more often at war than not, often for reasons that are not all that easy to fathom, on an empirical or rational basis.

This conversation is so DEEP

what if the big bang is really a very small bang and has happened billions of times and is nothing more than the 'engine' that powers a single cell in a being existing in a macro universe 10 to the ?nth times bigger than ours.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

comment by Be A Grizzly (U2206)
posted 2 minutes ago
MUDD : "Immediately I mocked atheism grizzly jumped in. "
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cool your ego !

My first post was "Why doesn't "God" put in an appearance?

Just one 200ft + being appearing in every capital city world-wide simultaneously would do it. Should be easy enough for an all powerful omnipotent being.

Then "He" could tell us all what we should call him, and whether he actually gives a toss about whether we worship him and where and how we do so if he really insists on it.


My answer to this question is quite simple. Either
1. HE DOESN'T CARE or
2. HE DOESN'T EXIST."

Nothing to do with anything you posted.

You then got rather defensive in your reply to me by posting "So, he should put in a performance to satisfy your specific need? Right? "

For someone who claims to be a scientist, you don't seem to pay attention to detail very well, and repeatedly jump to conclusions about other people's thoughts and beliefs.

IU am not religious, nor am I an atheist.

I, like everybody else who has ever lived (including you), don't know whether there is a god or not.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I was not being defensive but trying to understand your position as I have heard similar arguments

Paying attention to detail of a forum is not a key requirement for my job


I do not know if there is a creator. My issue was with people who categorically stated there wasn't. Which is why I took atheists to task

comment by The Kaiser's Trainers (U5676)
posted 45 seconds ago
what if the big bang is really a very small bang and has happened billions of times and is nothing more than the 'engine' that powers a single cell in a being existing in a macro universe 10 to the ?nth times bigger than ours.

---------

Don't be a moron

comment by The Kaiser's Trainers (U5676)
posted 47 seconds ago
what if the big bang is really a very small bang and has happened billions of times and is nothing more than the 'engine' that powers a single cell in a being existing in a macro universe 10 to the ?nth times bigger than ours.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

These are the sort of thoughts swirling through my head

comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 50 seconds ago
comment by The Kaiser's Trainers (U5676)
posted 47 seconds ago
what if the big bang is really a very small bang and has happened billions of times and is nothing more than the 'engine' that powers a single cell in a being existing in a macro universe 10 to the ?nth times bigger than ours.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

These are the sort of thoughts swirling through my head

------------

Also a moron then

Wessie, I agree.

However, you have to bear in mind that the vast majority of wars throughout our history were started by one or two individuals in power. Ironically this is the opposite of what you said (though I don't actually disagree with you, I am playing devil's advocate...).

I.e. some King decided he wanted a chunk of France to add to his playground and all of a sudden the country is at war!

In any case I agree with your point but I was just saying that people only argue about religion in our modern Western society when someone feels strongly about it and starts challenging others instead of tolerating them.

comment by The Kaiser's Trainers (U5676)
posted 3 minutes ago
what if the big bang is really a very small bang and has happened billions of times and is nothing more than the 'engine' that powers a single cell in a being existing in a macro universe 10 to the ?nth times bigger than ours.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I wish there was another big bang so it could show us that it exists

I also can't believe something just exists by chance

-

Everything exists by chance. Every living human is a product of chance; about 1 in half a billion.

comment by Red_Warrior (U18607)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by The Kaiser's Trainers (U5676)
posted 3 minutes ago
what if the big bang is really a very small bang and has happened billions of times and is nothing more than the 'engine' that powers a single cell in a being existing in a macro universe 10 to the ?nth times bigger than ours.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I wish there was another big bang so it could show us that it exists

----------

I don't, I don't want something to be proven factual only for it to kill us all and destroy the planet

OK, I'll tone it down a half step

what if the big bang is really a very small bang and has happened billions of times and is nothing more than the 'engine' that powers a single atom in a piece of matter existing in a macro universe 10 to the ?nth times bigger than ours.

comment by The Kaiser's Trainers (U5676)
posted 42 seconds ago
OK, I'll tone it down a half step

what if the big bang is really a very small bang and has happened billions of times and is nothing more than the 'engine' that powers a single atom in a piece of matter existing in a macro universe 10 to the ?nth times bigger than ours.

--------------

That is super stupid

higher level 'macro' physics might just be too big for us to see in other words.

comment by He's French, He's Flash... The Artist Formerly Known As Ryan Wilson (U9335)
posted 14 seconds ago
I also can't believe something just exists by chance

-

Everything exists by chance. Every living human is a product of chance; about 1 in half a billion.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I should have rephrased that and said I can't believe the world was created just by chance

comment by Golem [CLEGANEBOWL 2K16 CONFIRMED!] #HYPEISREAL (U17162)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Red_Warrior (U18607)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by The Kaiser's Trainers (U5676)
posted 3 minutes ago
what if the big bang is really a very small bang and has happened billions of times and is nothing more than the 'engine' that powers a single cell in a being existing in a macro universe 10 to the ?nth times bigger than ours.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I wish there was another big bang so it could show us that it exists

----------

I don't, I don't want something to be proven factual only for it to kill us all and destroy the planet
-------------------------------------------------------------
It was a tongue in cheek comment
We're doing a good job of destroying it ourselves

I should have rephrased that and said I can't believe the world was created just by chance
_____________

That's how I felt when I studied cosmology. So many coincidences over such a long period of time...It didn't sound random to me.

Laters lads
Home time

Pub time!

"In 1966 Time magazine ran a cover story asking: Is God Dead? Many have accepted the cultural narrative that he’s obsolete—that as science progresses, there is less need for a “God” to explain the universe. Yet it turns out that the rumors of God’s death were premature. More amazing is that the relatively recent case for his existence comes from a surprising place—science itself.

Here’s the story: The same year Time featured the now-famous headline, the astronomer Carl Sagan announced that there were two important criteria for a planet to support life: The right kind of star, and a planet the right distance from that star. Given the roughly octillion—1 followed by 24 zeros—planets in the universe, there should have been about septillion—1 followed by 21 zeros—planets capable of supporting life.

What happened? As our knowledge of the universe increased, it became clear that there were far more factors necessary for life than Sagan supposed. His two parameters grew to 10 and then 20 and then 50, and so the number of potentially life-supporting planets decreased accordingly. The number dropped to a few thousand planets and kept on plummeting.

Even SETI proponents acknowledged the problem. Peter Schenkel wrote in a 2006 piece for Skeptical Inquirer magazine: “In light of new findings and insights, it seems appropriate to put excessive euphoria to rest . . . . We should quietly admit that the early estimates . . . may no longer be tenable.”

As factors continued to be discovered, the number of possible planets hit zero, and kept going. In other words, the odds turned against any planet in the universe supporting life, including this one. Probability said that even we shouldn’t be here.

Today there are more than 200 known parameters necessary for a planet to support life—every single one of which must be perfectly met, or the whole thing falls apart. Without a massive planet like Jupiter nearby, whose gravity will draw away asteroids, a thousand times as many would hit Earth’s surface. The odds against life in the universe are simply astonishing.

Yet here we are, not only existing, but talking about existing. What can account for it? Can every one of those many parameters have been perfect by accident? At what point is it fair to admit that science suggests that we cannot be the result of random forces? Doesn’t assuming that an intelligence created these perfect conditions require far less faith than believing that a life-sustaining Earth just happened to beat the inconceivable odds to come into being?

There’s more. The fine-tuning necessary for life to exist on a planet is nothing compared with the fine-tuning required for the universe to exist at all. For example, astrophysicists now know that the values of the four fundamental forces—gravity, the electromagnetic force, and the “strong” and “weak” nuclear forces—were determined less than one millionth of a second after the big bang. Alter any one value and the universe could not exist. For instance, if the ratio between the nuclear strong force and the electromagnetic force had been off by the tiniest fraction of the tiniest fraction—by even one part in 100,000,000,000,000,000—then no stars could have ever formed at all. Feel free to gulp.

Multiply that single parameter by all the other necessary conditions, and the odds against the universe existing are so heart-stoppingly astronomical that the notion that it all “just happened” defies common sense. It would be like tossing a coin and having it come up heads 10 quintillion times in a row. Really?

Fred Hoyle, the astronomer who coined the term “big bang,” said that his atheism was “greatly shaken” at these developments. He later wrote that “a common-sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a super-intellect has monkeyed with the physics, as well as with chemistry and biology . . . . The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question.”

Theoretical physicist Paul Davies has said that “the appearance of design is overwhelming” and Oxford professor Dr. John Lennox has said “the more we get to know about our universe, the more the hypothesis that there is a Creator . . . gains in credibility as the best explanation of why we are here.”

The greatest miracle of all time, without any close seconds, is the universe. It is the miracle of all miracles, one that ineluctably points with the combined brightness of every star to something—or Someone—beyond itself."

comment by Golem [CLEGANEBOWL 2K16 CONFIRMED!] #HYPEISREAL (U17162)
posted 29 minutes ago
comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 50 seconds ago
comment by The Kaiser's Trainers (U5676)
posted 47 seconds ago
what if the big bang is really a very small bang and has happened billions of times and is nothing more than the 'engine' that powers a single cell in a being existing in a macro universe 10 to the ?nth times bigger than ours.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

These are the sort of thoughts swirling through my head

------------

Also a moron then
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Some of the greatest advances in science have come from completely out of the box thinking.

The big bang was one of the events that took place during the origin of our universe. It was not the origin as there are galaxies older than it and the margin of error is too large as well.

comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 48 minutes ago
You did not post my comment about asking people what God sounded like or asking then why they attributed their agendas to him though.

Can you post again? I only saw the atheist one. Or perhaps you could direct me to the page?

I stand by everything I said. Every single word
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Misty this comment is for you.

Please read.

comment by Kung Fu Cantona *JeSuisPalestinian* (U18082)
posted 5 minutes ago
"In 1966 Time magazine ran a cover story asking: Is God Dead? Many have accepted the cultural narrative that he’s obsolete—that as science progresses, there is less need for a “God” to explain the universe. Yet it turns out that the rumors of God’s death were premature. More amazing is that the relatively recent case for his existence comes from a surprising place—science itself.

Here’s the story: The same year Time featured the now-famous headline, the astronomer Carl Sagan announced that there were two important criteria for a planet to support life: The right kind of star, and a planet the right distance from that star. Given the roughly octillion—1 followed by 24 zeros—planets in the universe, there should have been about septillion—1 followed by 21 zeros—planets capable of supporting life.

What happened? As our knowledge of the universe increased, it became clear that there were far more factors necessary for life than Sagan supposed. His two parameters grew to 10 and then 20 and then 50, and so the number of potentially life-supporting planets decreased accordingly. The number dropped to a few thousand planets and kept on plummeting.

Even SETI proponents acknowledged the problem. Peter Schenkel wrote in a 2006 piece for Skeptical Inquirer magazine: “In light of new findings and insights, it seems appropriate to put excessive euphoria to rest . . . . We should quietly admit that the early estimates . . . may no longer be tenable.”

As factors continued to be discovered, the number of possible planets hit zero, and kept going. In other words, the odds turned against any planet in the universe supporting life, including this one. Probability said that even we shouldn’t be here.

Today there are more than 200 known parameters necessary for a planet to support life—every single one of which must be perfectly met, or the whole thing falls apart. Without a massive planet like Jupiter nearby, whose gravity will draw away asteroids, a thousand times as many would hit Earth’s surface. The odds against life in the universe are simply astonishing.

Yet here we are, not only existing, but talking about existing. What can account for it? Can every one of those many parameters have been perfect by accident? At what point is it fair to admit that science suggests that we cannot be the result of random forces? Doesn’t assuming that an intelligence created these perfect conditions require far less faith than believing that a life-sustaining Earth just happened to beat the inconceivable odds to come into being?

There’s more. The fine-tuning necessary for life to exist on a planet is nothing compared with the fine-tuning required for the universe to exist at all. For example, astrophysicists now know that the values of the four fundamental forces—gravity, the electromagnetic force, and the “strong” and “weak” nuclear forces—were determined less than one millionth of a second after the big bang. Alter any one value and the universe could not exist. For instance, if the ratio between the nuclear strong force and the electromagnetic force had been off by the tiniest fraction of the tiniest fraction—by even one part in 100,000,000,000,000,000—then no stars could have ever formed at all. Feel free to gulp.

Multiply that single parameter by all the other necessary conditions, and the odds against the universe existing are so heart-stoppingly astronomical that the notion that it all “just happened” defies common sense. It would be like tossing a coin and having it come up heads 10 quintillion times in a row. Really?

Fred Hoyle, the astronomer who coined the term “big bang,” said that his atheism was “greatly shaken” at these developments. He later wrote that “a common-sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a super-intellect has monkeyed with the physics, as well as with chemistry and biology . . . . The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question.”

Theoretical physicist Paul Davies has said that “the appearance of design is overwhelming” and Oxford professor Dr. John Lennox has said “the more we get to know about our universe, the more the hypothesis that there is a Creator . . . gains in credibility as the best explanation of why we are here.”

The greatest miracle of all time, without any close seconds, is the universe. It is the miracle of all miracles, one that ineluctably points with the combined brightness of every star to something—or Someone—beyond itself."


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Superb

Comment deleted by Site Moderator