• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Can anyone say for certain that they know the origins of the universe?

Masterhawk

DP Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2016
Messages
1,792
Reaction score
411
Location
Colorado
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Most people point out the problems in other people's beliefs while accepting theirs as the truth. However, there are many unsolved questions which poke holes in many beliefs:

Creationists:

How did life get to Australia if there was a worldwide flood?

If the universe is only thousands of years old, how come we can see billions of light years away?

(Christianity) Why weren't Jesus's miracles recorded by the romans?

(Islam) if Jesus was just a prophet, why is there a religion centered around him?

Evolutionists:

What caused the big bang?

I understand how bacteria evolved into complex life but how did life really begin?

If aliens are out there, why haven't we found them yet (fermi paradox)?

How did complex life survive before they evolved an immune system?

How does a mars like planet (the one which crashed into earth to form the moon) form in earth's orbit without crashing into the earth?

This is not an attack on any belief, this is just something to think about.
 

Quag

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 8, 2012
Messages
29,426
Reaction score
12,866
Location
Earth
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Most people point out the problems in other people's beliefs while accepting theirs as the truth. However, there are many unsolved questions which poke holes in many beliefs:

Creationists:

How did life get to Australia if there was a worldwide flood?

If the universe is only thousands of years old, how come we can see billions of light years away?

(Christianity) Why weren't Jesus's miracles recorded by the romans?

(Islam) if Jesus was just a prophet, why is there a religion centered around him?

Evolutionists:

What caused the big bang?

I understand how bacteria evolved into complex life but how did life really begin?

If aliens are out there, why haven't we found them yet (fermi paradox)?

How did complex life survive before they evolved an immune system?

How does a mars like planet (the one which crashed into earth to form the moon) form in earth's orbit without crashing into the earth?

This is not an attack on any belief, this is just something to think about.

The answer to your question is no
 

Quag

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 8, 2012
Messages
29,426
Reaction score
12,866
Location
Earth
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I coulda swore it was 42.

No thats the answer ot the ultimate question of life the universe and everything, or what is 6X9
 

azgreg

Chicks dig the long ball
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2012
Messages
23,719
Reaction score
20,731
Location
Phoenix, AZ
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
No and I'd bet an order of Chicken McNuggets we never will.
 

Paleocon

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 21, 2013
Messages
13,309
Reaction score
1,307
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Most people point out the problems in other people's beliefs while accepting theirs as the truth. However, there are many unsolved questions which poke holes in many beliefs:

Creationists:

How did life get to Australia if there was a worldwide flood?

If the universe is only thousands of years old, how come we can see billions of light years away?

(Christianity) Why weren't Jesus's miracles recorded by the romans?

(Islam) if Jesus was just a prophet, why is there a religion centered around him?

Evolutionists:

What caused the big bang?

I understand how bacteria evolved into complex life but how did life really begin?

If aliens are out there, why haven't we found them yet (fermi paradox)?

How did complex life survive before they evolved an immune system?

How does a mars like planet (the one which crashed into earth to form the moon) form in earth's orbit without crashing into the earth?

This is not an attack on any belief, this is just something to think about.

I know that my niece was born on (redacted). I don't know all the details. I don't know what time of day it was or how long it took. Or a bunch of other details about it.

Yet I'm still certain she was born on (redacted).
 

Nilly

stb
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 12, 2014
Messages
6,871
Reaction score
3,807
Location
DC
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Progressive

Howtohelp

New member
Joined
Jun 2, 2016
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
My take on this question is a mix of both creationist and evolutionist. I believe that creationists are right about a higher power creating the universe, the reason being because we still don't have a 100% flawless theory on the reasons for the cause of the big bang, this leads me to believe that the higher power caused the Big Bang. However, after that evolutionists have the right idea. I believe the higher power didn't want to directly influence so early on its creation, so he let evolution take its course, thus leading in the creation of man through evolution. When man comes to be, that is when the higher power comes back to influence the world and gives the first human to evolve a name, Adam and he makes it so that the next human to evolve is a female and names her Eve. Adam is given the task by the higher power to name the creatures. and the rest is self explanatory. This is my take on your question.
 

Skeptic Bob

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 6, 2014
Messages
16,626
Reaction score
19,488
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
No, there is no way to be certain. And the vast majority of scientists don't claim to be certain. They posit various hypotheses and some are more supported than others but none of them can be proven. And quite possibly we will never be certain. Most Creationists, on the other hand, DO claim to be certain.

Personally, while I think our particular universe had a beginning, I think "something" has always existed. Perhaps a multiverse in which an infinite number of universes are "popping" into and out of existence all the time. There are various models that explain how this could occur, though the math is WAY above my head. Or the answer may be something that nobody has even considered.

It is fun to think about but don't take anyone seriously who claims to KNOW the answer.
 

zyzygy

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 6, 2014
Messages
43,901
Reaction score
8,673
Location
Flanders.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
My take on this question is a mix of both creationist and evolutionist. I believe that creationists are right about a higher power creating the universe, the reason being because we still don't have a 100% flawless theory on the reasons for the cause of the big bang, this leads me to believe that the higher power caused the Big Bang. However, after that evolutionists have the right idea. I believe the higher power didn't want to directly influence so early on its creation, so he let evolution take its course, thus leading in the creation of man through evolution. When man comes to be, that is when the higher power comes back to influence the world and gives the first human to evolve a name, Adam and he makes it so that the next human to evolve is a female and names her Eve. Adam is given the task by the higher power to name the creatures. and the rest is self explanatory. This is my take on your question.

Adam and Eve? Seriously?
 

sookster

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 12, 2011
Messages
1,838
Reaction score
452
Location
In my own world.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Most people point out the problems in other people's beliefs while accepting theirs as the truth. However, there are many unsolved questions which poke holes in many beliefs:

Creationists:

How did life get to Australia if there was a worldwide flood?

If the universe is only thousands of years old, how come we can see billions of light years away?

(Christianity) Why weren't Jesus's miracles recorded by the romans?

(Islam) if Jesus was just a prophet, why is there a religion centered around him?

Evolutionists:

What caused the big bang?

I understand how bacteria evolved into complex life but how did life really begin?

If aliens are out there, why haven't we found them yet (fermi paradox)?

How did complex life survive before they evolved an immune system?

How does a mars like planet (the one which crashed into earth to form the moon) form in earth's orbit without crashing into the earth?

This is not an attack on any belief, this is just something to think about.

1.) What caused the Big Bang? Well I read an article that it is possible the big bang happened on the event horizon of a fourth dimensional black hole. There is the argument that God did it (doesn't have to be a Christian God). There's the argument that it just imploded. When the universe is a singularity, there is no reality, there is no time. So, it could of imploded, and it could of imploded in an infinite amount of ways, and it turns out it can support life. Bottom line. No one knows.

2.) This life question actually has more to it in recent science. Before they would but hydrocarbons in a solution and zap electricity to see if they could create life, but they couldn't. The Constructal Law states that the universe consists of various flow systems. These flow systems change their structure to further facilitate their flow. Meaning, transport what it is flowing with the least amount of energy. This is huge, because this law was the foundation of a mathematical theorum that shows how life could of been created. He should get a Nobel Prize in my book. In any case, the flow system of energy itself manifests into life. Energy wants to flow with the least amount of energy, so look at the food pyramid. As you travel up, higher organisms can travel further. And guess who can travel the furthest, albeit without a lot of fast food? You guessed it, humans. Which means, when you look at Darwinism, the successful mutations were successful because more energy could be transported per unit of energy. This has to do with the guy with the Nobel prize because he showed the mathematics of it. In his thought experiment, he put a carbon structure (rock) in a pool of various hyrocarbons (compounds found by volcanoes). He showed that over millions of years, the rocks would tend to transfer temperature more efficiently, to the point that the atomic structure would change. Walla. As energy gets pumped through the system, it becomes faster and faster and eventually creates life. The fact that there is life is because of the energy created from The Big Bang.

3.) Aliens is a tough one. Because there's the whole conspiracy thing. I will say numerous high ranking government officials have stated that the government change their policy of extraterrestrial life. That's pretty suggestive to me. There are numerous crazy UFO siting from NASA in space. I mean, traveling really really fast. In my opinion, the sightings are enough to say there are aliens out there. Plus, look at the math. Look at the vastness of space that we cannot comprehend, and we have already found numerous Earthlike planets. So I think it is highly probable that we have found them, but maybe not communicated with them. And it's possible that these aliens are on the same evolutional clock that we are in, or we are faster. Who knows. But I think they are out there.

4.) I think a lot died and that is what developed the immune system. The thing is with this planet is it can't totally eliminate life, otherwise the Earth would die. So natural processes would be put in place, naturally, to provide conditions for life to survive long enough to create an immune system (Gaia Theory).

5.) So I tend to believe in a God, for theories like these. There are others of course. But in order for the Moon to collide with The Earth, then split off and have the exact mass to stay in orbit where it is, is extremely extremely unlikely. I forget the number. The "moon" rammed at such an angle and velocity to create the masses that were created and have it rest at that distance. Chance right? I mean, the universe is vastly huge, of course something like this was bound to happen. However, it could be argued that life could of existed without the moon, but not like life here on Earth. Gaia adapted to the Moon, and the processes were changed accordingly.

This is what I understand with the current readings that I have done.
 

Howtohelp

New member
Joined
Jun 2, 2016
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I did get rather specific religion wise with that part to be honest
 

roughdraft274

ThunderCougarFalconBird
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 3, 2010
Messages
15,912
Reaction score
9,733
Location
Louisiana
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
I believe that creationists are right about a higher power creating the universe, the reason being because we still don't have a 100% flawless theory on the reasons for the cause of the big bang,

That is the very definition of "argument from ignorance" fallacy.

It's the same as saying "well we know that Zeus throws the lightening bolts because we don't have a flawless theory that explains them yet."

Even if someone proved 100% that evolution were false, that wouldn't then mean that creationism is true in any form. It would mean that we simply don't know and we need to look into it.
 

William Rea

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 23, 2010
Messages
8,949
Reaction score
2,231
Location
UK
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Socialist
Most people point out the problems in other people's beliefs while accepting theirs as the truth. However, there are many unsolved questions which poke holes in many beliefs:

Creationists:

How did life get to Australia if there was a worldwide flood?

If the universe is only thousands of years old, how come we can see billions of light years away?

(Christianity) Why weren't Jesus's miracles recorded by the romans?

(Islam) if Jesus was just a prophet, why is there a religion centered around him?

Evolutionists:

What caused the big bang?

I understand how bacteria evolved into complex life but how did life really begin?

If aliens are out there, why haven't we found them yet (fermi paradox)?

How did complex life survive before they evolved an immune system?

How does a mars like planet (the one which crashed into earth to form the moon) form in earth's orbit without crashing into the earth?

This is not an attack on any belief, this is just something to think about.

Your posts is flawed. Evolution and the ToE says nothing about the Big Bang or any other branches of science not directly related to the origins of the diversity of species on planet Earth that we observe as a fact.
 

Howtohelp

New member
Joined
Jun 2, 2016
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
i think what you think is ignorance is actually quite logical, because by "100% flawless theory" i mean that we have a good theory, it just hasn't been proven to what science would call it a scientific law
 

Iron Cross

New member
Joined
May 26, 2016
Messages
34
Reaction score
7
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
4.) I think a lot died and that is what developed the immune system. The thing is with this planet is it can't totally eliminate life, otherwise the Earth would die. So natural processes would be put in place, naturally, to provide conditions for life to survive long enough to create an immune system (Gaia Theory).

Actually, that's not what happened; immunity was not an evolutionary adaptation to combat dying numbers of organisms. And the Gaia hypothesis is unverifiable pseudoscience; it aims to explain processes, which have already been explained by scientific means, through an arbitrary intuitively-derived mechanism. Also, the Earth would not 'die'(to the extent that a planet can 'die') if all life on it was eliminated.

External immunity in protista is achieved through phagocytosis, arbitrated through opsonization, the same mechanism that facilitates predation. This serves two purposes; keeping external pathogens from penetrating the protistic colony, and providing energy for the predator cell. Metazoan immunity works in a manner similar to this; with macrophages initiating phagocytosis on pathogens on which immunoglobulins have attached to resident antigens. Internal immunity in protocista, commonly aimed at bacteriophagal and extrachromosomal plasmid infection, incorporates CRISPR/CAS functions to inhibit extravenous reproduction. Mechanisms like these have existed long before life accreted in complexity, therefore, the premise the question assumes (that there were no immune systems before complex life), is simply wrong.

5.) So I tend to believe in a God, for theories like these. There are others of course. But in order for the Moon to collide with The Earth, then split off and have the exact mass to stay in orbit where it is, is extremely extremely unlikely. I forget the number. The "moon" rammed at such an angle and velocity to create the masses that were created and have it rest at that distance. Chance right? I mean, the universe is vastly huge, of course something like this was bound to happen. However, it could be argued that life could of existed without the moon, but not like life here on Earth. Gaia adapted to the Moon, and the processes were changed accordingly.

That is not what happened. When Theia and earth collided, sediment from the collision was cast off from the collision, forming a ring similar to the protoplanetary disks of the earlier universe. This sediment, which was within the gravitational influence of the earth, then accreted, forming the moon as we now know it. Insinuating that the moon collided with the earth, then spun off at the perfect velocity to maintain a stable orbit, is a strawman of scientific positions based on long-discarded reasoning.
 

Iron Cross

New member
Joined
May 26, 2016
Messages
34
Reaction score
7
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
i think what you think is ignorance is actually quite logical, because by "100% flawless theory" i mean that we have a good theory, it just hasn't been proven to what science would call it a scientific law

There are no 'scientific laws' which cannot be broken. A scientific law being a statement that cannot be broken, this means that there exist no scientific laws. If you seek total and unquestionable truth, and attempt to placate the lack of the aforementioned with a 'god of the gaps', then you fail to grasp simple logical and scientific concepts
 

Frank Apisa

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 4, 2008
Messages
11,492
Reaction score
2,718
Location
New Jersey
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
My answer:

I can't.

I doubt that anyone else can...but of that, I am not certain.
 

Grand Mal

bas air son Eachin
DP Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2013
Messages
38,507
Reaction score
20,448
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Liberal
My take on this question is a mix of both creationist and evolutionist. I believe that creationists are right about a higher power creating the universe, the reason being because we still don't have a 100% flawless theory on the reasons for the cause of the big bang, this leads me to believe that the higher power caused the Big Bang. However, after that evolutionists have the right idea. I believe the higher power didn't want to directly influence so early on its creation, so he let evolution take its course, thus leading in the creation of man through evolution. When man comes to be, that is when the higher power comes back to influence the world and gives the first human to evolve a name, Adam and he makes it so that the next human to evolve is a female and names her Eve. Adam is given the task by the higher power to name the creatures. and the rest is self explanatory. This is my take on your question.

I guess that explains where Cain found his wife. She was the third person to evolve.
 

Grand Mal

bas air son Eachin
DP Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2013
Messages
38,507
Reaction score
20,448
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Liberal
There are no 'scientific laws' which cannot be broken. A scientific law being a statement that cannot be broken, this means that there exist no scientific laws. If you seek total and unquestionable truth, and attempt to placate the lack of the aforementioned with a 'god of the gaps', then you fail to grasp simple logical and scientific concepts

There are four scientific laws that can't be broken.

edit; http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/forces/funfor.html

Actually, in looking for that link I found there's lots more than four.
 
Last edited:

Grand Mal

bas air son Eachin
DP Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2013
Messages
38,507
Reaction score
20,448
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Liberal
And what are they? Thermodynamics? Newtonian mechanics? Please enlighten me.

I edited my post with a link. Basically, gravitation, electromagnetism, and the strong and weak interaction which happen at an atomic level.
And there's others. The laws of thermodynamics, yes.
 

Iron Cross

New member
Joined
May 26, 2016
Messages
34
Reaction score
7
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
I edited my post with a link. Basically, gravitation, electromagnetism, and the strong and weak interaction which happen at an atomic level.
And there's others. The laws of thermodynamics, yes.

Wrong. At a singularity, all 'laws' of physics break down. Also, the four fundamental forces were not always separate. For example, the electromagnetic and weak interactions formed the electroweak interaction. A law has to be consistent across all spatial and time boundaries. Therefore, there are no 'scientific laws', only theories and hypotheses.
 

Grand Mal

bas air son Eachin
DP Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2013
Messages
38,507
Reaction score
20,448
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Liberal
Wrong. At a singularity, all 'laws' of physics break down. Also, the four fundamental forces were not always separate. For example, the electromagnetic and weak interactions formed the electroweak interaction. A law has to be consistent across all spatial and time boundaries. Therefore, there are no 'scientific laws', only theories and hypotheses.

Okay. I'll pass that on.
 

RAMOSS

Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 19, 2014
Messages
53,011
Reaction score
19,642
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
And what are they? Thermodynamics? Newtonian mechanics? Please enlighten me.

No scientific law can be 'broken', merely inaccurately described. A 'scientific law' is descriptive, no prohibitive.
 
Top Bottom