So he believes in aliens and all-creating gravity, but not in God?
-
greg-233 — 15 years ago(October 05, 2010 04:13 PM)
"111c;Greg-233, you don't believe in God yet you do believe in ET, even though there's no evidence for such. What's the difference?"
I haven't stated that aliens definitely exist. Not in the same way theists say God exists. I certainly don't think we've ever been visited by any aliens.
Aliens are a bit easier to believe in than a God. It's not that much of a leap of faith to imagine that there is another form of life elsewhere in the universe that evolved over the aeons, just as we did here on Earth. In fact, there was another Earth-like planet discovered just recently. I think they said it was about 10 light years away, I can't remember exactly, and that it could support life.
Obviously, aliens wouldn't be endowed with supernatural powers, the way a God would be. But if their technology is far in advance of ours, it might be easy to
mistake
them for gods. Arthur C. Clarke stated that any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic - Michael Shermer extended this by saying any sufficiently advanced species is indistinguishable from God.
Maybe if I'd had a religious upbringing, I would want a specific type of God (e.g. Yahweh) to exist, but I didn't. I've never once spent a Sunday morning at church. -
al666940-3 — 15 years ago(October 06, 2010 01:59 PM)
Don't bother with them.
I bet they also believe that GRAVITY created the universe.
A omniponent force that had no beginning nor end (if it created matter out of nothing it doesn't depend on matter to exist), and can create the universe out of nothing.
Wow, that sounds AWFULLY like a deity -
greg-233 — 15 years ago(October 06, 2010 11:07 PM)
"Anyone who reads as much SF as you do can only be a believer. Maybe that's the reason why Isaac Asimov is my favorite SF writer. Hardly any aliens in his fiction."
Well, yes, I do read a lot of SF, but that doesn't mean I believe that aliens REALLY exist. I've also read a lot of fantasy and horror, but that doesn't mean I believe goblins, elves, vampires and zombies really exist either.
"Furthermore, the main body of evolutionists are skeptical of ET life. Yet you won't rule it out. Obviously you must want to believe in ETs.
It takes more than a planet to support life. A lot of other conditions must also occur in order for life to emerge."
I don't think it's a case of
wanting
to believe in aliens. Their existence or non-existence would have no direct impact on my own day to day life, as far as I can tell. Considering the massive size of the universe, it does seem a bit strange that life should only emerge on one little ball of rock, orbiting one little sun in one little galaxy. I imagine the existence of alien life (if any) may raise some disquieting theological issues. Giordano Bruno was burned at the stake in 1600 for suggesting Jesus had visited other planets.
Even if it did turn out that Earth was the only planet in the whole universe to have spawned any life, it wouldn't make the case for a god any more compelling. -
greg-233 — 15 years ago(October 11, 2010 06:13 AM)
"If ET is discovered it would mean the end for religion. Period."
It might simply necessitate a "revision" for Earth-based religions. The discovery of evolution by natural selection didn't stop Christians from believing in Adam and Eve and original sin. They just put a new spin on it. Who's to say the aliens wouldn't have developed religious beliefs of their own?
"The Bible also says that God created the stars in order to guide man on Earth. This means that man is central to His Purpose. What about the inhabitants of all those planets circling the stars? Are they just an after-thought?"
The Bible isn't right about everything. (There's a part of the book that described bats as birds.) I don't see any evidence that humans were made for a "Purpose". We got our chance to emerge as the dominant life-form because the dinosaurs were wiped out after a giant asteroid crashed into the Earth 65 million years ago. Assuming the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics is true, there could be a parallel universe where the asteroid missed the Earth, and dinosaurs never became extinct. Instead, they may have evolved into something intelligent and there would be a race of "reptile people" ruling the Earth instead of us apes. To me, our existence doesn't suggest the outcome of a grand plan. Just pure luck.
"No, if the Bible is correct, then ET doesn't exist. If ET exists, then the Bible is wrong."
Would it really matter that much if the Bible turned out to be wrong? I can't imagine civilization falling apart if that were the case. -
greg-233 — 15 years ago(October 11, 2010 04:38 PM)
I think I remember you mentioning quantum mechanics on the Richard Dawkins board a while back! You said something about
The Legion of Time
by Jack Williamson.
Haven't people been saying civilization is falling apart for centuries?
"Without a belief in biblical inerrancy, the Bible becomes just a bunch of opinions and loses all credibility, with consequences for Christendom and Western civilization that we're seeing today."
At the end of the day, aren't
all
religions just a bunch of opinions?
Carl Sagan's book
The Demon-Haunted World
mentions religion here and there. Basing the structure of society solely on religious texts would have dangerous consequences of their own. For example, "Thou shall not suffer a witch to live." Thankfully, most people no longer take that bit seriously. Sagan talks about the torture and burning of witches in one chapter. Here's an endorsement for the book by James Randi: -
greg-233 — 15 years ago(October 18, 2010 04:10 PM)
In a previous post you wrote:
"This also means that in some parallel universe, a Supreme Being would also exist, since according to the Many Worlds Interpretation of QM, every thing that can happen does happen. And once a God emerges, He would use His omnipotence to muscle in on other universes!"
I'm not sure how the existence of parallel worlds would mean the existence of a "Supreme Being". As you've mentioned, David Deutsch believes in the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics, but he is an atheist. I actually have his book,
The Fabric of Reality
. The book is dedicated to Richard Dawkins, along with Hugh E2000verett, Karl Popper and Alan Turing.
"As for Sagan, he had his own religion called "exo-biology.""
One should be careful when using a word like "religion". The young Earth creationist Kent Hovind described evolution as a religion when it clearly isn't. As Michael Shermer has said in
Why Darwin Matters
, "If a branch of science like evolutionary theory is a tenet of religion, than the definition of religion is so sweeping that virtually everything is a religion, rendering the word meaningless." -
al666940-3 — 15 years ago(October 23, 2010 07:02 PM)
Quick list of stuff you guys have mentioned:
- Multiple parallel universes
- Infinite unbound universe
- Every possible outcome creates a new parallel universe
- Dark matter (not mentioned, but I'll throw that one in anyway
You what those things have in common?
1.- They are wild speculations with no supporting evidence whatsoever.
2.- They are by themselves even more unrealistic/implausible/contradictory than the concept of God will ever be. - What's the evidence of multiple universes again?
- If the universe is curve and you can reach eventually your starting point, then by definition is FINITE!!!!! About as infinite as any sphere. Plus unless matter/energy keeps being created on a daily basis, there's only so much of both to go around, and since the universe is comprised of both, it cannot be infinite.
- That notion is utter B.S., the number of parallel universes would be infinite, plus where would all that matter/energy required to recreate ALL the known universe come from? And add to it the "notion" that each universe would be infinite and/or unbound, how does thta make sense in any way?
- Scientists from Mexico already proposed serious alterations to Newton's second law to account for all that extra gravitational pull people think it must come from "dark matter" (it's definition is quite similar to God's: something that cannot be seen, touched or proved in any way but yet it's all over)
See the point?
At least E.T. are plausible and realistic.
And about that "western civilization was based on Christianity" nonsense (as a Catholic myself): - I don't remember the Greeks and Romans (before Christ) being Christians, or Jews for that matter, hence the 10 commandments didn't factor in any way.
- If anything, western civilization is PAGAN based.
Islam is ONLY gaining strength because:
1.- Western countries are not breeding fast enough (with comfort and/or the increaising costs of raising a family, people simply don't or cannot have more than 2 kids, I myself cannot afford another one, even though I would love to have more, but simply cannot) to keep their populations.
1.- Poor countries, where the kids HELP the family make money (at expense of their future education), do not have those problems and therefore have as many kids as possible, especially Muslim countries where the women are nothing more than breeders (at least that's how they are regarded and raised).
The rest is simple math. And muslims are very good with math (remember who gave us the concept of 0 among many other things)
-
AssetsonFire — 15 years ago(December 19, 2010 05:17 PM)
Chip on your shoulder much? I'm sure you'd be more accomodating if he dismissed aliens and embraced god. If you're so smart, understand that people have opinions and aren't all blessed with your unimpeachable objectivity. Deal with it.
-
pirce — 14 years ago(June 20, 2011 04:07 AM)
There are more than a 100 billion stars in the Milkyway galaxy, most of which have planets orbiting them..
There are several hundred billion galaxies in the universe, each having about the same amount or more stars in them.
To assume that earth is the only planet with life on it seems pretty arrogant to me. The opposite actually seems a more probable answer in light of current knowledge.
The possiblity of a supernatural being controlling everything in the universe requires moving outside current scientific methods and information and therefore is harder to believe in than238 life outside of earth. -
al666940-3 — 13 years ago(May 31, 2012 09:14 AM)
"To assume that earth is the only planet with life on it seems pretty arrogant to me"
Not really if you care to remember that the conditions that make life possible are one of TRILLIONS of possible combinations/succesion of events where the slightest alteration or combination or order in events simply negates the possibility of life.
I advise you to stay away from any casino, with your current assumptions you'll be lucky to leave with your clothes on.
"The opposite actually seems a more probable answer in light of current knowledge"
What current knowledge exactly? Even if primitive life forms (bacteria) were found to exist elsewhere (not proven yet), it's still billions of combinations/succession of events away from INTELLIGENT life forms.
"The possiblity of a supernatural being controlling everything in the universe requires moving outside current scientific methods and information"
Only if you pretend to explain stuff outside the scope of science, like say love, beauty, good/evil, etc. Or are you asserting that anything that can't be explaiend by science is tehrefore invalid and non existent?
And for that matter, stuff like "dark matter/energy" are supposed scientific concepts that are bordeline god-like: stuff we cannot see/hear/perceive/prove in any way yet are supposetly all over affecting everything. -
megArnold — 13 years ago(July 04, 2012 10:38 AM)
Hawking does NOT believe that God doesn't exist, but as a scientist, it's not his job to rule on the existence or non-existence of God.
Additionally, to the agnosticism that is a prerogative for science, Hawking expresses a deistic standpoint:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deism
"The universe is governed by the laws of science. The laws may have been decreed by God, but God does not intervene to break the laws."
(S. W. H.)
This is why we distinguish between belief (as in religion) and knowledge (as in science). People should know the difference. Hawking does.
When people don't understand the difference, we get creationists and atheists.
Grammar:
The difference between knowing your sh**
and knowing you're sh**. -
al666940-3 — 13 years ago(August 09, 2012 08:55 AM)
We already have tons of examples here to draw upon:
- The Spaniards coming to America
- The Moors coming to Europe
- The Buddhist coming anyhwere.
The only religion I'm aware of that's not interested in recruiting is the Jewish one. But that's simply because of their belief they are the Chosen Few, thus no need apply (no judgement on my part).
Why should aliens be different really? You should really see Contact.
-
King-Grim — 13 years ago(August 14, 2012 11:46 AM)
Aliens are a hundred thousand million billion times more likely to exist than God. In the infinite, unbelievable vastness of space it's pretty much a given that it can't be only the one single insignificant has spawned life, and many millions of forms of it at that. While a single, all powerful, conscious creator of thb68is insanely vast universe is, frankly, rather a far fetched premise.
This forum is afraid of me. I have seen its true face.