Quote:
Originally Posted by m21sniper
(Post 3925912)
Of course i do. The chances of us ever determining if WE have a creator are next to less than zero. But i have never argued that. I have merely argued that a form of creationalism is possible, as there is evidence of it all around us.
I am in 100% agreement with this statement.
What creating a universe does, is prove that it is possible that a form of "intelligent design" is responsible for our origins.
It DOES NOT prove we were created in such a fashion- only that it is possible, and demonstrable. Therefore, it is a valid competing theory wrt our own origins IMO. Nothing more.
A creator may have done it..it's been predicted to be possible by science even when using our own dark ages near-term technology.
Our 'god' may be some guy with a particle accelerator creating universes in a laboratory in some alternate universe. It appears at this time that this is an absolutely viable possibility, and...assuming the predictions about forming universes in particle accelerators holds true, it is a demonstrable means of creation.
That would prove that the concept of creationalism exists, even if it is not the mechanism by which we came to be. That's all i've been trying to say. At no time have i meant to imply this to mean that because intelligent design(a better term would be deliberate formation) of a universe is POSSIBLE that we were created in the same manner. Just that it can't be eliminated as a distinct possibility.
Really, when you think about it, what other means of universe creation can we predict, then verify? Doesn't that make the notion of "deliberate formation" the most likely candidate for our own existance? Maybe we're all in an infinite time loop, and mankind is mankind's creator. No one knows.
The reality is it doesn't matter, but it's fun to debate on the internet.
|
Yes, I agree it’s fun to debate on the internet.
It’s fun to talk about M-theory and creating universes in the lab and the infinity of possible universe and all that, but that’s mostly mental masturbation. Not that I have anything against that… :) :)
You seem to have a different notion of god than most mainstream Christians. If I recall, you seem to think your god (or your creator or whatever you want to call it) initiated the big bang and then stood back and just watched. You’re not alone in these beliefs, but you are in the minority. I’m still curious how/why you arrived at this vision of what god is.
With these views of god, your view of ID is considerably different than what our society generally considers to be ID. You’re familiar with the term irreducible complexity, correct? Proponents of what is generally thought of as ID in our society (as opposed to your view of ID) claim that their intelligent designer guided and directed evolution and that there is evidence of this in the form of irreducibly complex biological systems, such as the eye, the molecular motor of certain flagella, etc. I’m sure you’re also aware that there is no evidence of this view of ID.
This thread was originally about the movie “expelled.” In this movie, Stein is complaining about people who believe in this form of ID being laughed out of the halls of science. Of course, the reason they are laughed out of the halls of science is that this form of ID is not science at all, not by the wildest stretch of imagination.
What are your views of this form of ID?
|
