Life, The Universe and Everything (and Other Stuff).

I've been an atheist for most of my life. I quickly realised that religion is a complete nonsense. I also realised that the answers to the questions of life, the universe and everything could be found in science, not in a church or a dusty old book full of fairy tales.

Science tells us that the universe came into existence 13.77 billion years ago. The Big Bang Theory makes a lot of sense scientifically. How or why it came into existence is, however, not known and is open for debate.

Some theoretical physicists believe that there was nothing before The Big Bang, not even any space. Some think that there must have been empty space for everything to expand into. Some think the the universe is in a constant state of expansion and contraction, an eternal universe. Some think that there are parallel universes alongside our own, perhaps an infinite number, and also many more dimensions that we cannot detect. Ok, so you get the general idea, it's still a bit of a mystery.

Whilst many disagree on what existed before The Big Bang, what is not in question is the fact that the universe all came from a single point, the singularity, 13.77 billion years ago.

Now, with that in mind, it is impossible for us to know whether or not our universe just appeared, by itself, out of nothing (which makes no sense whatsoever), or whether it was created by a higher intelligence (bear with me) as some sort of conscious effort to produce, or reproduce life.

Our sense of time and space is just that, "our own" as we interpret it. This may be completely different in parallel universes and other dimensions. In an eternal universe (expanding and contracting) life will also be eternal. Life will have evolved before our universe (as we know it) and may be capable of incredible things. It will have had almost an eternity to evolve and discover. If you think that creating universes in other dimensions is an utterly ridiculous concept (I admit, it does sound it) then you need to consider what we are achieving and attempting to achieve at CERN and other such places. We are at the cusp of some potentially huge scientific discoveries. This sort of thing may be achievable by ourselves in the not too distant future. Consider intelligent life almost infinitely more advanced than our own and what they could achieve.

So, the bottom line is, do you believe that the universe was 'created' or do you believe that it just came into existence? Isn't that the fundamental question when it comes to the belief, or not, of a 'Creator' ?

The answer is that it is impossible for us to know whether or not the universe was created by a higher intelligence and that both options are theoretically possible. Once I realised this it became apparent to me that I was no longer a true atheist and that I had become an agnostic. It's the only logical conclusion when presented with all the available evidence.

Don't you think?

Electric universe theory, which suggests that electrical energy rather than gravity as the main force in the universe and that the universe maybe has always existed and therefore the big bang theory is false.

Maybe this is pseudo science nonsence but currently physics relies on a lot of unobserved phenomena like dark matter and dark energy to make the current models work at the quantum level.

I honestly think we are on the cusp of amazing new discoveries about our universe -through IBEX, mars rover, voyager, CERN etc. - that will lead to huge paradigm shifts in modern physics and astronomy, as significant as when we discovered the earth revolved around the sun and not vice versa..... science needs to shake of the dogma though and free itself from the shackles of Newton and Einstein.

I believe over the next few decades we will discover at a minumum:

- Life once existed on Mars (and possibly on Saturns moons) and that there are countless planets throughout the observable universe which can possibly host life.

- Our solar system is part of a binary star system with a black hole or brown dwarf as the twin star of our sun.

- the speed of light can be broken.

Not sure that answers the op but thats what I think anyways....

rodders wrote:Electric universe theory, which suggests that electrical energy rather than gravity as the main force in the universe and that the universe maybe has always existed and therefore the big bang theory is false.

Maybe this is pseudo science nonsence but currently physics relies on a lot of unobserved phenomena like dark matter and dark energy to make the current models work at the quantum level.

I honestly think we are on the cusp of amazing new discoveries about our universe -through IBEX, mars rover, voyager, CERN etc. - that will lead to huge paradigm shifts in modern physics and astronomy, as significant as when we discovered the earth revolved around the sun and not vice versa.....  science needs to shake of the dogma though and free itself from the shackles of Newton and Einstein.

I believe over the next few decades we will discover at a minumum:

- Life once existed on Mars (and possibly on Saturns moons) and that there are countless planets throughout the observable universe which can possibly host life.

- Our solar system is part of a binary star system with a black hole or brown dwarf as the twin star of our sun.

- the speed of light can be broken.

Not sure that answers the op but thats what I think anyways....

Thanks for the response, rodders. I wasn't sure if I'd get any responses to this, it is just me rambling on about the stuff that goes round in my head when I'm bored. A lot of it must sound quite mad to some people. But I posted it anyway  

"I honestly think we are on the cusp of amazing new discoveries about our universe -through IBEX, mars rover, voyager, CERN etc. - that will lead to huge paradigm shifts in modern physics and astronomy, as significant as when we discovered the earth revolved around the sun and not vice versa.....  science needs to shake of the dogma though and free itself from the shackles of Newton and Einstein."

I couldn't agree more. I'd also add Kepler and future space telescopes to your list.

What we have discovered over the last couple of hundred years is amazing. I think what we will discover in the next couple of hundred years, with our current advancing technology, will be even more so.

Rodders/Cobra

What do you guys do for a living?

You post some absolutely fascinating stuff on this subject matter, and broader, just wish I could understand it all fully!!

TopHat24/7 wrote:Rodders/Cobra

What do you guys do for a living?

You post some absolutely fascinating stuff on this subject matter, and broader, just wish I could understand it all fully!!

Hi, TopHat24/7,

I'm work in civil/structural engineering   which has nothing to do with any of this stuff.

I'm no academic either. I squandered my chances in that area with too many drugs and lose women and not being arsed about anything.

My interest in this stuff is only recent. It probably started with watching too many UFO documentaries and Brian Cox's Wonders of the Solar System and it's gone on from there really. I find it all infinitely fascinating, the big questions that we don't have the answers to yet.

Oh, and if it's any consolation, I don't really understand any of it either.

Engineering still tells a story though. All interesting stuff.

TopHat24/7 wrote:Engineering still tells a story though.  All interesting stuff.

BBC Horizon have done loads of interesting documentaries on this kind of thing. Also, Brian Cox's "Wonders of the Solar Sytem" and "Wonders of the Universe" are a great place to start if you're interested. They're not too difficult to follow, honest.

But there was this one BBC Horizon documentary that really opened my eyes to what else could possibly be out there and what more there is that we just do not know....

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00vdkmj

Unfortunately, I can't find a link to the actual video. It's mind-boggling stuff.

Edit: found a preview....

http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/what-happened-before-the-big-bang/

TopHat24/7 wrote:Rodders/Cobra

What do you guys do for a living?

You post some absolutely fascinating stuff on this subject matter, and broader, just wish I could understand it all fully!!

 
Cheers TopHat, I'm a software engineer so feel free to treat my posts on this as nonsense ....  
 
There's lots of information out there on the web - a lot of it garbage and there are a lot of quacks for sure- but you just have to read around and form your own opinions about what has merit and what is BS.

I think everyone should have some interest in the universe and life I suppose.... dum dum dum ....

rodders wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:Rodders/Cobra

What do you guys do for a living?

You post some absolutely fascinating stuff on this subject matter, and broader, just wish I could understand it all fully!!

 
Cheers TopHat, I'm a software engineer so feel free to treat my posts on this as nonsense ....  
 
There's lots of information out there on the web - a lot of it garbage and there are a lot of quacks for sure- but you just have to read around and form your own opinions about what has merit and what is BS.

I think everyone should have some interest in the universe and life I suppose.... dum dum dum ....

Most people live their lives in a little bubble. Some aren't even interested in what's going on in the next street, let alone the solar system, galaxy or universe.

But there's nothing wrong with that. Why should they care, it doesn't affect their day to day lives. All people are different and have different lives and interests.

But the fact is that our lives, in the grand scale of things, are almost meaningless and we pass in and out of this world in the blink of an eye and contribute an almost infinitesimal amount of nothing to the cosmos.

Comedian Frankie Boyle tweeted something that I found rather touching...

"Here we all are, living our lives, having our dramas. It's actually kind of beautiful, dying on this rock together, for no apparent reason"

See I'd change that to living on this rock together, for no apparent reason, STC.

Regardless of what else is out there, or what the meaning of life is (clearly there is no meaning, it is just a natural happening), we find ourselves on an incredibly beautiful planet. Granted humans are doing their level best to ruin that, but plenty of areas remain untouched. My own priority is to visit and experience them and make the most of my own opportunity. Whatever happens a hundred years from now will be of little consequence to me, either bad or good, but it'd be nice to know that my own would have the opportunity to do the same thing.

Using last year as an example, I saw a wild tiger in India. Probably the most humbling moment of my life. I was blown away by the sheer size and majesty of the animal, but it was also tinged with sadness in that I was looking at one of approximately 3,000 left in the world. When you think that they numbered in their hundreds of thousands a mere hundred years ago that is a worrying statistic and one entirely derived by human influence. Sadly, with India's population booming at ridiculously unsustainable rates, the future doesn't look great for probably the most impressive animal in the world.

I often think that, whilst space is an enormously intriguing frontier that is well worthwhile investigating, if only a shred of that ambition was used in preserving the planet we live on then it might be a slightly better place.

Fists of Fury wrote:See I'd change that to living on this rock together, for no apparent reason, STC.

Glass half full? My glass used to be half full too. Now it's not even half empty. It's more like condensation on the inside of an empty glass.

Fists of Fury wrote:Regardless of what else is out there, or what the meaning of life is (clearly there is no meaning, it is just a natural happening), we find ourselves on an incredibly beautiful planet. Granted humans are doing their level best to ruin that, but plenty of areas remain untouched. My own priority is to visit and experience them and make the most of my own opportunity. Whatever happens a hundred years from now will be of little consequence to me, either bad or good, but it'd be nice to know that my own would have the opportunity to do the same thing.

Using last year as an example, I saw a wild tiger in India. Probably the most humbling moment of my life. I was blown away by the sheer size and majesty of the animal, but it was also tinged with sadness in that I was looking at one of approximately 3,000 left in the world. When you think that they numbered in their hundreds of thousands a mere hundred years ago that is a worrying statistic and one entirely derived by human influence. Sadly, with India's population booming at ridiculously unsustainable rates, the future doesn't look great for probably the most impressive animal in the world.

I'm still astounded by places of natural beauty, and nature itself. We are, as a species, responsible for destroying a lot of it.

I saw a documentary recently about dolphins and whales. It totally blew me away. We think we are the most important species on the planet but we are not. We share it with some truly amazing animals..

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b013wpxz

Fists of Fury wrote:I often think that, whilst space is an enormously intriguing frontier that is well worthwhile investigating, if only a shred of that ambition was used in preserving the planet we live on then it might be a slightly better place.

Couldn't agree more with that. But space is future. It may be our future home should we continue the way we are going here on Earth. And as much beauty as there is in the natural world here on Earth, there is bound to be an even greater variety of nature out there in the cosmos. Hopefully one day we will discover it.

Well, quite, but simple timescales (based on physics as we know it) suggest that, even if there is, it'll be much too far for us to ever get near to.

I know someone mentioned about exceeding light speed above, but I very much doubt that can ever happen. We may not have fully investigated the laws of physics, but we'd probably know by now if there was even a chance.

Oh for warp speed..

Fists of Fury wrote:Well, quite, but simple timescales (based on physics as we know it) suggest that, even if there is, it'll be much too far for us to ever get near to.

I know someone mentioned about exceeding light speed above, but I very much doubt that can ever happen. We may not have fully investigated the laws of physics, but we'd probably know by now if there was even a chance.

Oh for warp speed..

That's a view based on what we understand today, so from a scientific perspective it is a solid view.

But there are many mysteries in the universe that science does not yet understand: dark matter, dark energy, black holes, the early inflation of the universe, etc. These are huge mysteries and they are an integral part of the cosmos and it's evolution. We understand much, but we don't understand much more.

To think that we will never venture to other solar systems in the galaxy at some point in our future seems to me to be a little narrow-minded.

STC wrote:
Most people live their lives in a little bubble. Some aren't even interested in what's going on in the next street, let alone the solar system, galaxy or universe.
 
But there's nothing wrong with that. Why should they care, it doesn't affect their day to day lives. All people are different and have different lives and interests.

But does it effect their day today life? I'd say it does more than people know.
 
To understand a little about genetics, evolution, some basic psychology helps explain why people behave the way they do and helps us function in society.
 
Enviromental change -weather patterns, tectonics, solar cycles - they shape our lives, our economies, drive goverment policy, insurance costs, inflation, food production.
 
There's nothing wrong at all with not caring about these things but by understanding a bit about what is understood and not understood about the universe we find ourselves in, to realise what we can control and what we can't, puts us in the best place to make decisions in our day to day lives - what we eat, where we live, how we vote, travel and interact with others...how we percieve ourselves.

Science is on the cusp of some amazing new discoveries I believe about our universe that will impact us or certainly future generations- some exciting, some terrifying maybe -..... this could be both a great century to live through or a very bad one...or paradoxically it could be both....

rodders wrote:

STC wrote:
Most people live their lives in a little bubble. Some aren't even interested in what's going on in the next street, let alone the solar system, galaxy or universe.
 
But there's nothing wrong with that. Why should they care, it doesn't affect their day to day lives. All people are different and have different lives and interests.

But does it effect their day today life? I'd say it does more than people know.
 
To understand a little about genetics, evolution, some basic psychology helps explain why people behave the way they do and helps us function in society.
 
Enviromental change -weather patterns, tectonics, solar cycles - they shape our lives, our economies, drive goverment policy, insurance costs, inflation, food production.  
 
There's nothing wrong at all with not caring about these things but by understanding a bit about what is understood and not understood about the universe we find ourselves in, to realise what we can control and what we can't, puts us in the best place to make decisions in our day to day lives - what we eat, where we live, how we vote, travel and interact with others...how we percieve ourselves.

Science is on the cusp of some amazing new discoveries I believe about our universe that will impact us or certainly future generations- some exciting, some terrifying maybe -..... this could be both a great century to live through or a very bad one...or paradoxically it could be both....  

I'm with you 100% there, rodders, but the fact remains that the majority of the population either don't know about these things or just don't care.

Take television. We have hundreds of TV channels at our disposal. A huge choice available to us. There are some fantastic nature programmes, science programmes, history programmes on TV that anybody can watch to broaden their knowledge about the reality of the world around them. But hardly anybody watches them. Instead they chose to watch an endless cycle of trash TV soaps, investing their emotions on the day to day dramas of fictional characters.

What does that say about the society that we live in?

I'm along the same lines as you, STC. I think it's called theistic evolution, combining science and religion to try to explain the universe etc. It doesn't really sit well with me, though. Part of me sees it as religion just trying to stay relevant and will cling onto anything to do so. But the other part of me sees aCreator as the only logical (and I say that very loosely) reason to explain the existence of all this mass prior to the Big Bang.

I used to know a girl in Uni who was a mad creationist. She subscribed to this magazine which tried to use science to prove the earth was created 8,000 years ago and that significant events in the Bible took place. I have to admit that some of their articles were very persuasive. One such article that sticks with me was about a great global flood actually happening, a la Noah's Ark. I can't remember the details all that well as it was a few years ago, but the basic premise was that certain compounds found within the rocks in the Grand Canyon can only be formed under sudden high pressure. They argued that there was no other way to explain the presence of these compounds than a great flood as the weight of the rock above was not sufficient to cause the formation. I'm sure there is another way of explaining the occurrences of these compounds, but the reasoning this magazine used seemed pretty flawless. I asked an earth science student about it and he hadn't the foggiest.

I also took a filler module called "exploring the Cosmos" in first year and found certain aspects to be fascinating. But I still struggle to get my head round things like dark matter and why the universe is expanding at greater and greater velocities when what I think is rational thinking tells me what should and shouldn't be happening/exist. Obviously I'm no expert on such matters and don't disagree with the accepted theories as I know so little, but the thought behind them seems at odds with conventional logic at times, for me.

6oldenbhoy wrote:I'm along the same lines as you, STC. I think it's called theistic evolution, combining science and religion to try to explain the universe etc. It doesn't really sit well with me, though. Part of me sees it as religion just trying to stay relevant and will cling onto anything to do so. But the other part of me sees aCreator as the only logical (and I say that very loosely) reason to explain the existence of all this mass prior to the Big Bang.

I used to know a girl in Uni who was a mad creationist. She subscribed to this magazine which tried to use science to prove the earth was created 8,000 years ago and that significant events in the Bible took place. I have to admit that some of their articles were very persuasive. One such article that sticks with me was about a great global flood actually happening, a la Noah's Ark. I can't remember the details all that well as it was a few years ago, but the basic premise was that certain compounds found within the rocks in the Grand Canyon can only be formed under sudden high pressure. They argued that there was no other way to explain the presence of these compounds than a great flood as the weight of the rock above was not sufficient to cause the formation. I'm sure there is another way of explaining the occurrences of these compounds, but the reasoning this magazine used seemed pretty flawless. I asked an earth science student about it and he hadn't the foggiest.

I also took a filler module called "exploring the Cosmos" in first year and found certain aspects to be fascinating. But I still struggle to get my head round things like dark matter and why the universe is expanding at greater and greater velocities when what I think is rational thinking tells me what should and shouldn't be happening/exist. Obviously I'm no expert on such matters and don't disagree with the accepted theories as I know so little, but the thought behind them seems at odds with conventional logic at times, for me.

Hi, 6oldenbhoy.

Thanks for taking the time to post. This thread is going better than I thought. Lots of interesting posts and ideas. Including your own.

Can I just point out though that I'm not subscribing to theistic evolution, combining science and religion, at all. I think you misunderstood what I was saying slightly. But that's fine if you have that view. I'd also like to state that I believe that everybody has a right to believe whatever they want. Organised religion though I think can be quite a dangerous thing. Some people are born into it and have no other options presented to them. I think this is deeply unfair on an individual.

Anyhow, what I was implying in my original post is that our universe may or may not have been 'created'. If the universe is eternal, which theoretically it may be, then time and space would also be eternal. If that is the case, then life itself may also be eternal.

By this I mean that, in a infinite universe, life will have evolved before our own universe was created (or our undestanding of it from Big Bang Theory). Therefore, it is theoretically possible that our universe came into being as the direct result of actions of highly evolved intelligent life, meaning it was 'created' by a 'creator'. Not a God. Just a more advanced version of ourselves. No reason to pray or worship. No need to follow antiquated rules devised by men hundreds of years ago.

Now I'm not saying I believe that this was the case. I'm saying that I accept is a possibility. The possibilty that our entire universe just popped into existence, out of nothing, in the form of The Singularity at the start of The Big Bang, is also a possibility.

That's why I am agnostic, although possibly atheist agnostic comes close to describing what I'm saying.

It's not a religious view, more a cosmological one. I think.


Oh and I thought that the Grand Canyon used to be, at one time, a sea bed?

There are fossils and shells of sea creatures on the top of Mount Everest, as it was also a sea bed millions of years ago. Nothing to do with Noah's Ark or great floods.

Sorry for the misunderstanding, came from the bit where you realised you were an agnostic rather than an atheist.

Regarding the Grand Canyon bit, the compounds, I can't remember the name and a quick google search didn't help, can only be formed by a sudden and massive increase in pressure. The magazine implied that the great flood created a great enough change in the pressure to lead to the formation and that the rock would not have been ordinarily placed under such extreme changes. I think there was something in it about Carbon dating but again it's been about five years since I read it so my memory is a bit hazy. I will endeavour to find out though.

6oldenbhoy wrote:Sorry for the misunderstanding, came from the bit where you realised you were an agnostic rather than an atheist.

No apology necessary. It's not easy to explain what I mean. I confuse myself sometimes  

6oldenbhoy wrote:Regarding the Grand Canyon bit, the compounds, I can't remember the name and a quick google search didn't help, can only be formed by a sudden and massive increase in pressure. The magazine implied that the great flood created a great enough change in the pressure to lead to the formation and that the rock would not have been ordinarily placed under such extreme changes. I think there was something in it about Carbon dating but again it's been about five years since I read it so my memory is a bit hazy. I will endeavour to find out though.

Thanks. I'd be interested in reading anything you could find.

You guys who say religion is false and science hold the answers are wrong.

Research science all you like it will lead you directly back to GOD.

How perfect is his divine plan. Science can only explain things from a terrestrial stand point so when there are things that are either exrta terrestrial or interventionist then science paints itself into a corner and contradicts itself.

The truth is being hidden. There are things in our ancient past that confront science head on and science cannot except it or explain it. For example how did the ancients know about complex planetary formations? How did the ancient Sumerians the first known civilisation on earth, know that the earth rotated around the sun including the other planets??? centuries before stupid Europeans believed the world was flat.

What about the monolithic stone structures of Peru and Mexico that had to be carved using machine tools rather then hand and chisal which scientists believe the ancients used to build such structures including the pyramids???

So many questions. Science claims we evolved from apes yet real scientific research suggests we are a another spiches all together. Face it we humans were created. Weare not natural to this planet if we was we would be covered in fur and hanging from trees. We as humans were introduced to this planet by some OUTSIDE source. Who or what the source is, is up for question and debate but science needs to tell the truth and inform the world what history has been telling us for centuries through religion, myths, legends and folklore, that we were created and put on this planet by a higher force.

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:You guys who say religion is false and science hold the answers are wrong.

Research science all you like it will lead you directly back to GOD.

How perfect is his divine plan. Science can only explain things from a terrestrial stand point so when there are things that are either exrta terrestrial or interventionist then science paints itself into a corner and contradicts itself.

The truth is being hidden. There are things in our ancient past that confront science head on and science cannot except it or explain it. For example how did the ancients know about complex planetary formations? How did the ancient Sumerians the first known civilisation on earth, know that the earth rotated around the sun including the other planets??? centuries before stupid Europeans believed the world was flat.

What about the monolithic stone structures of Peru and Mexico that had to be carved using machine tools rather then hand and chisal which scientists believe the ancients used to build such structures including the pyramids???

So many questions. Science claims we evolved from apes yet real scientific research suggests we are a another spiches all together. Face it we humans were created. Weare not natural to this planet if we was we would be covered in fur and hanging from trees. We as humans were introduced to this planet by some OUTSIDE source. Who or what the source is, is up for question and debate but science needs to tell the truth and inform the world what history has been telling us for centuries through religion, myths, legends and folklore, that we were created and put on this planet by a higher force.

Er, ok. Not sure if you're being serious.

Ancient Aliens?

Chariots of the Gods, maybe?

I must admit, I did like this part....

ONETWOFOREVER wrote: Science claims we evolved from apes yet real scientific research suggests we are a another spiches all together....

Very good.

Actually we did not evolve from (modern) apes rather both us and apes had a common ancestor and all real scientific evidence supports evolutionary theory.

Interesting comments on the sumerians. Personally I think some of these ancient civilizations were much more advanced than we realize, particularly the sun worshipers. They had advanced scientific knowledge but then their societies were around for hundreds of years.

My belief is that there has been periodic huge natural disasters that have wiped out fairly advanced civilizations and knowledge more than once in the time of humans and that maybe in some ways we are not as far advanced from some ancient societies as we would like to think.

The Mayans, Sumarians etc. do seem to have had a better understanding of solar cycles - the Mayan calendar closely aligning to the precesion of the equinoxes is remarkable.

Once people started worshiping Abrahamic religons rather than the sun things seem to have took a bit of a nose dive.....

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:How did the ancient Sumerians the first known civilisation on earth, know that the earth rotated around the sun including the other planets??? centuries before stupid Europeans believed the world was flat.

Ooh, I don't know, maybe the same way that Aristarchus of Samos figured it out?

That or Aliens told them.

STC wrote:

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:How did the ancient Sumerians the first known civilisation on earth, know that the earth rotated around the sun including the other planets??? centuries before stupid Europeans believed the world was flat.

Ooh, I don't know, maybe the same way that Aristarchus of Samos figured it out?

That or Aliens told them.

Sumerians were thousands of years before Aristarchus.

So this knowledge was around in ancient times. We was taught this knowledge because no ape becoming man would have known this knowledge it would have taken thousands of years. At some point in out history this knowledge was handed down to us from an outside force. And like it or not both religion and science point to this.

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:

STC wrote:

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:How did the ancient Sumerians the first known civilisation on earth, know that the earth rotated around the sun including the other planets??? centuries before stupid Europeans believed the world was flat.

Ooh, I don't know, maybe the same way that Aristarchus of Samos figured it out?

That or Aliens told them.

Sumerians were thousands of years before Aristarchus.

So this knowledge was around in ancient times. We was taught this knowledge because no ape becoming man would have known this knowledge it would have taken thousands of years. At some point in out history this knowledge was handed down to us from an outside force. And like it or not both religion and science point to this.

It's an interesting theory.

I'm not against the idea that intelligent life has been monitoring our planet and others like it for thousands, if not millions of years. It's theoretically possible as far as I'm concerned.

There is, however, as far as I'm aware, no evidence to support this theory. You say science points to this. Can you give some examples? Or links to any scientific papers or something similar? I'd be very interested to read them.

rodders wrote:Actually we did not evolve from (modern) apes rather both us and apes had a common ancestor and all real scientific evidence supports evolutionary theory.  

Interesting comments on the sumerians. Personally I think some of these ancient civilizations were much more advanced than we realize, particularly the sun worshipers. They had advanced scientific knowledge but then their societies were around for hundreds of years.

My belief is that there has been periodic huge natural disasters that have wiped out fairly advanced civilizations and knowledge more than once in the time of humans and that maybe in some ways we are not as far advanced from some ancient societies as we would like to think.  

The Mayans, Sumarians etc. do seem to have had a better understanding of solar cycles - the Mayan calendar closely aligning to the precesion of the equinoxes is remarkable.

Once people started worshiping Abrahamic religons rather than the sun things seem to have took a bit of a nose dive.....

Good post.

If you study the Abrahamic religions you will see they are full of descriptions on outside forces guiding man. From giant pillars of fire in the sky, to shinning stars guiding ''3 wise men'' to angels sent down to Babylon ''teaching mankind'' to fallen angels to chariots of fire and Izekiels vision of wheels within wheels. People in those times would have struggled to explain these things because they had no refference for it. So flying machines became chariots of fire and visitors from other worlds became angels.

something to think about.

STC wrote:

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:

STC wrote:

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:How did the ancient Sumerians the first known civilisation on earth, know that the earth rotated around the sun including the other planets??? centuries before stupid Europeans believed the world was flat.

Ooh, I don't know, maybe the same way that Aristarchus of Samos figured it out?

That or Aliens told them.

Sumerians were thousands of years before Aristarchus.

So this knowledge was around in ancient times. We was taught this knowledge because no ape becoming man would have known this knowledge it would have taken thousands of years. At some point in out history this knowledge was handed down to us from an outside force. And like it or not both religion and science point to this.

It's an interesting theory.

I'm not against the idea that intelligent life has been monitoring our planet and others like it for thousands, if not millions of years. It's theoretically possible as far as I'm concerned.

There is, however, as far as I'm aware, no evidence to support this theory. You say science points to this. Can you give some examples? Or links to any scientific papers or something similar? I'd be very interested to read them.

You won't find any proof in the mainstream scientific community you have to look at alternative sources that are completely denied by mainstream science. As I have said science tends to stay within the terrestrial viewpoint disregarding anything that contradicts it as madness, To say there is no evidence implies your lack of knowledge on human history. First you must research history from all over the world and then ask yourself if it matches science's answer to it.

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:

STC wrote:

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:

STC wrote:

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:How did the ancient Sumerians the first known civilisation on earth, know that the earth rotated around the sun including the other planets??? centuries before stupid Europeans believed the world was flat.

Ooh, I don't know, maybe the same way that Aristarchus of Samos figured it out?

That or Aliens told them.

Sumerians were thousands of years before Aristarchus.

So this knowledge was around in ancient times. We was taught this knowledge because no ape becoming man would have known this knowledge it would have taken thousands of years. At some point in out history this knowledge was handed down to us from an outside force. And like it or not both religion and science point to this.

It's an interesting theory.

I'm not against the idea that intelligent life has been monitoring our planet and others like it for thousands, if not millions of years. It's theoretically possible as far as I'm concerned.

There is, however, as far as I'm aware, no evidence to support this theory. You say science points to this. Can you give some examples? Or links to any scientific papers or something similar? I'd be very interested to read them.

You won't find any proof in the mainstream scientific community you have to look at alternative sources that are completely denied by mainstream science. As I have said science tends to stay within the terrestrial viewpoint disregarding anything that contradicts it as madness, To say there is no evidence implies your lack of knowledge on human history. First you must research history from all over the world and then ask yourself if it matches science's answer to it.

Ah, ok, so I should study the entire history of the human race?

Right, sorry. I'll get right on that. I'll "do some research" like you obviously have.

And there's no scientific evidence because mainstream science stays away from it?

Yeah that makes sense.


Look, if you don't know the answers to a question just say so. It's ok.

And as for alternative sources that are completely denied by mainstream science, that's called "pseudoscience" for future reference.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudoscience

STC wrote:

6oldenbhoy wrote:Sorry for the misunderstanding, came from the bit where you realised you were an agnostic rather than an atheist.

No apology necessary. It's not easy to explain what I mean. I confuse myself sometimes  

6oldenbhoy wrote:Regarding the Grand Canyon bit, the compounds, I can't remember the name and a quick google search didn't help, can only be formed by a sudden and massive increase in pressure. The magazine implied that the great flood created a great enough change in the pressure to lead to the formation and that the rock would not have been ordinarily placed under such extreme changes. I think there was something in it about Carbon dating but again it's been about five years since I read it so my memory is a bit hazy. I will endeavour to find out though.

Thanks. I'd be interested in reading anything you could find.

There may be a reference to it in this link. I haven't read it, as I haven't the time, but it's about 30 pages of why there was a great flood and how it formed the Grand Canyon.

http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/GrandCanyon2.html

6oldenbhoy wrote:

STC wrote:

6oldenbhoy wrote:Sorry for the misunderstanding, came from the bit where you realised you were an agnostic rather than an atheist.

No apology necessary. It's not easy to explain what I mean. I confuse myself sometimes  

6oldenbhoy wrote:Regarding the Grand Canyon bit, the compounds, I can't remember the name and a quick google search didn't help, can only be formed by a sudden and massive increase in pressure. The magazine implied that the great flood created a great enough change in the pressure to lead to the formation and that the rock would not have been ordinarily placed under such extreme changes. I think there was something in it about Carbon dating but again it's been about five years since I read it so my memory is a bit hazy. I will endeavour to find out though.

Thanks. I'd be interested in reading anything you could find.

There may be a reference to it in this link. I haven't read it, as I haven't the time, but it's about 30 pages of why there was a great flood and how it formed the Grand Canyon.

http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/GrandCanyon2.html

30 pages!?  

Besides, no offence, but this isn't the type of 'creation' I'm on about.

The Earth evolved 4.5 billion years ago, as science tells us.

I was referring to the possible 'creation' of the universe at The Big Bang 13.77 billion years ago. I'm not really into any of this great floods and Noah's Ark stuff.

Thanks though.

Great. The tin-foil hat brigade have found this thread, oh well....

Someone get a mod in here before this goes the wayof N&CA!!

STC wrote:

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:

STC wrote:

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:

STC wrote:

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:How did the ancient Sumerians the first known civilisation on earth, know that the earth rotated around the sun including the other planets??? centuries before stupid Europeans believed the world was flat.

Ooh, I don't know, maybe the same way that Aristarchus of Samos figured it out?

That or Aliens told them.

Sumerians were thousands of years before Aristarchus.

So this knowledge was around in ancient times. We was taught this knowledge because no ape becoming man would have known this knowledge it would have taken thousands of years. At some point in out history this knowledge was handed down to us from an outside force. And like it or not both religion and science point to this.

It's an interesting theory.

I'm not against the idea that intelligent life has been monitoring our planet and others like it for thousands, if not millions of years. It's theoretically possible as far as I'm concerned.

There is, however, as far as I'm aware, no evidence to support this theory. You say science points to this. Can you give some examples? Or links to any scientific papers or something similar? I'd be very interested to read them.

You won't find any proof in the mainstream scientific community you have to look at alternative sources that are completely denied by mainstream science. As I have said science tends to stay within the terrestrial viewpoint disregarding anything that contradicts it as madness, To say there is no evidence implies your lack of knowledge on human history. First you must research history from all over the world and then ask yourself if it matches science's answer to it.

Ah, ok, so I should study the entire history of the human race?

Right, sorry. I'll get right on that. I'll "do some research" like you obviously have.

And there's no scientific evidence because mainstream science stays away from it?

Yeah that makes sense.


Look, if you don't know the answers to a question just say so. It's ok.

Some people like me are at work so can't help you as you would like. Can't access all the web from here and i am busy

No need to be a complete tool

PS: Not a reference to your good self 6oldenbhoy!

It looks like that is the tip of the Iceberg. The website has hundreds of articles that back up their theory of evolution.

I've read a few things on the Mitochondrial Eve theory before which is quite interesting, so give that a read if its on there.

TopHat24/7 wrote:PS: Not a reference to your good self 6oldenbhoy!

I know who you are referring to, Tophat. For the record, I'm not a Creationist, just find the way they can manipulate science to fit their doctrine intriguing.

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:

STC wrote:

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:

STC wrote:

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:

STC wrote:

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:How did the ancient Sumerians the first known civilisation on earth, know that the earth rotated around the sun including the other planets??? centuries before stupid Europeans believed the world was flat.

Ooh, I don't know, maybe the same way that Aristarchus of Samos figured it out?

That or Aliens told them.

Sumerians were thousands of years before Aristarchus.

So this knowledge was around in ancient times. We was taught this knowledge because no ape becoming man would have known this knowledge it would have taken thousands of years. At some point in out history this knowledge was handed down to us from an outside force. And like it or not both religion and science point to this.

It's an interesting theory.

I'm not against the idea that intelligent life has been monitoring our planet and others like it for thousands, if not millions of years. It's theoretically possible as far as I'm concerned.

There is, however, as far as I'm aware, no evidence to support this theory. You say science points to this. Can you give some examples? Or links to any scientific papers or something similar? I'd be very interested to read them.

You won't find any proof in the mainstream scientific community you have to look at alternative sources that are completely denied by mainstream science. As I have said science tends to stay within the terrestrial viewpoint disregarding anything that contradicts it as madness, To say there is no evidence implies your lack of knowledge on human history. First you must research history from all over the world and then ask yourself if it matches science's answer to it.

Ah, ok, so I should study the entire history of the human race?

Right, sorry. I'll get right on that. I'll "do some research" like you obviously have.

And there's no scientific evidence because mainstream science stays away from it?

Yeah that makes sense.


Look, if you don't know the answers to a question just say so. It's ok.

Some people like me are at work so can't help you as you would like. Can't access all the web from here and i am busy

No need to be a complete tool

Apologies.

But telling me to go research this stuff is a bit vague. I asked you for links to it.

I have done quite a lot of research into the UFO phenomenon, but mainly post World War II. The reason for that is because there is loads of evidence available on UFOs post WWII. Evidence is important when making an argument.

It is impossible to research anything in the eras that you are proposing because the evidence doesn't exist. It's a waste of time. It's all purely hypothetical. It's impossible to make a case that anyone will look at seriously.

Real science gave us gravity and the laws of motion.

Tin-foil hat science gave us chemtrails.

Says it all really......

TopHat24/7 wrote:Great. The tin-foil hat brigade have found this thread, oh well....

Someone get a mod in here before this goes the wayof N&CA!!

Tin-foil hats are welcome.

But I draw the line at abducting people and anally probing them.

STC wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:Great. The tin-foil hat brigade have found this thread, oh well....

Someone get a mod in here before this goes the wayof N&CA!!

Tin-foil hats are welcome.

But I draw the line at abducting people and anally probing them.

Are on the spot anal probes more fun?

Otherwise interesting posts and topics, cheers

ShahenshahG wrote:

STC wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:Great. The tin-foil hat brigade have found this thread, oh well....

Someone get a mod in here before this goes the wayof N&CA!!

Tin-foil hats are welcome.

But I draw the line at abducting people and anally probing them.

Are on the spot anal probes more fun?

Otherwise interesting posts and topics, cheers

I can't imagine that any type of anal probing is fun (although some people may beg to differ).

rodders wrote:Once people started worshiping Abrahamic religons rather than the sun things seem to have took a bit of a nose dive.....

It actually makes perfect sense to worship the sun. We wouldn't exist without it. And like any omnipotent god, it also has the power to destroy us.

At least the Sun is real.

Very true!

STC wrote:At least the Sun is real.

Murdoch loves people like you

STC wrote:At least the Sun is real.

Who created the Sun?

See above.

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:

STC wrote:At least the Sun is real.

Who created the Sun?

'Who' created it?

It formed in the same way that all other stars form. I don't think there's any real mystery to it.

STC wrote:

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:

STC wrote:At least the Sun is real.

Who created the Sun?

'Who' created it?

It formed in the same way that all other stars form. I don't think there's any real mystery to it.