The Universe: Eternal or no?

[B94]

Come on people lets get some of this straight.
Dreams are not reality but reality might be a dream. The universe and all that is known to man fits in one grain of sand on the beach full of sand. The answer to most of the questions in this thread is that man knows very little and then tries to explain the unknown. I particularly like the people that have determined what happens to people after they die.

 

[XVZ]

There are records of some dynasty rulers talking to God.

This is the science and technology forum. Magic man belongs on the fantasy board.

You know, Science has proven or taken as truth, that the Universe is expanding....i don't know where that fits in to eternal?

Science has only evidence to suggest that the galaxies are all moving away from each other. That is what is meant by 'the universe is expanding' and from there different theories will have different elements but none of them are 'proven'.

And then the theory of parallel universes/M/string theory.

This can go on the fantasy board as well. There is no evidence and I am not aware of a string theory that actually makes a prediction that could in theory be tested (the essence of science).

I am with Ret gny sarg on this, when it comes to the Bible....it states that God [snip...]

Now you are getting off topic with psychobabble.

I'm good with the biblical explanation.

Now there is the mark of wasted mind. You are 'good' with an explanation that has no evidence in support of and was dreamed up by mere men with the knowledge of caveman

The elements of the universe are eternal. They cannot be created or destroyed, only moved and rearranged. it is hard for our finite minds to comprehend that such things have always been. When we think of something being created we think of something being made out of thin air when in reality it is an arrangement of physical and spiritual matter.

What the hell is spiritual matter?

Of course, this kind of story rankles fundamentalist Christians, who consider it blasphemy.

You and Christians alike are blasphemous! Blasphemous to rational and sane thinking.

Waking reality and dream reality are essentially the same.

I've been consciously aware many times while asleep that I am dreaming.

Science theorizes the universe is expanding. In order to come to this conclusion one would need at least a center; which, science does not have. All science can say with certainty is that it appears the universe is expanding based on observation from Earth.

If it is expanding, WHAT is it expanding into?

If you draw points on a balloon and blow it up, it would appear from each point's perspective that it is the center and everything is traveling away from it. So no, a center need not be defined. Also, the big bang theory from which the accelerating universe is derived from says nothing about the creation of the universe or that everything was located at a specific point. All it says is that sometime in the past, the universe was very dense and had an explosion of expansion called inflation that eventually dissipated and then began accelerating again.

 

[Amanda]

Now there is the mark of wasted mind. You are 'good' with an explanation that has no evidence in support of and was dreamed up by mere men with the knowledge of caveman

Unlike a lot of people on the interweb I've never claimed to be smart. What's so wasted about what I believe? I'm not doing anything where it would matter one way or the other what I believed.

 

[Care4all]

Unlike a lot of people on the interweb I've never claimed to be smart. What's so wasted about what I believe? I'm not doing anything where it would matter one way or the other what I believed.

nothing's wrong with it....

he/she just wants to appear as though THEY are smart....it seems....

this is where runoff, is a good thing....let his/her opinion wash away....

 

[XVZ]

Unlike a lot of people on the interweb I've never claimed to be smart. What's so wasted about what I believe? I'm not doing anything where it would matter one way or the other what I believed.

Certainly you do not have to devote your mind to science, but if you are going discuss such topics, I'd hope you respect rudimentary concepts and know that unsupported conjectures such as religion have no place. One stands out like a peasant at a feast for kings when they prattle on with psychobabble about supernatural dogma beliefs when the order of the day is scientific inquiry.

 

[Amanda]

Certainly you do not have to devote your mind to science, but if you are going discuss such topics, I'd hope you respect rudimentary concepts and know that unsupported conjectures such as religion have no place. One stands out like a peasant at a feast for kings when they prattle on with psychobabble about supernatural dogma beliefs when the order of the day is scientific inquiry.

So even though there are plenty of scientists that believe in God you would like to exclude God from the discussion. I guess it does make it easier to be right if you keep dissenting opinions out.

I'm not saying I'm right or you're wrong, all I said was that the Bible is good enough for me. I don't know why that is such a threatening concept. Don't believe it if you don't want to.

 

[XVZ]

So even though there are plenty of scientists that believe in God you would like to exclude God from the discussion. I guess it does make it easier to be right if you keep dissenting opinions out.

No respectable scientist will bring up a god in a scientific discussion. Humans are by nature irrational and most scientist who claim to subscribe to faith readily admit their knowledge that it is an irrational belief, one that has no basis in science and therefore completely divorced from scientific inquiry. Then you have so-called Christian scientists who are anything but scientists, so do not attempt to use them. You will also note a trend that the more distinguished and accomplished a scientist is, the more likely that person is to be an atheist. The percentage of the the top scientists in the world that are atheist are inverse that you will find for the general population. Around 90% are atheist, whereas about 90% of the general population believes in magical mythologies affectionately called religion.

I'm not saying I'm right or you're wrong, all I said was that the Bible is good enough for me. I don't know why that is such a threatening concept. Don't believe it if you don't want to.

Well if you had your facts straight, I don't think you'd bother to bring up such a stupid straw man!

 

[Truthspeaker]

No respectable scientist will bring up a god in a scientific discussion. Humans are by nature irrational and most scientist who claim to subscribe to faith readily admit their knowledge that it is an irrational belief, one that has no basis in science and therefore completely divorced from scientific inquiry. Then you have so-called Christian scientists who are anything but scientists, so do not attempt to use them. You will also note a trend that the more distinguished and accomplished a scientist is, the more likely that person is to be an atheist. The percentage of the the top scientists in the world that are atheist are inverse that you will find for the general population. Around 90% are atheist, whereas about 90% of the general population believes in magical mythologies affectionately called religion.


Well if you had your facts straight, I don't think you'd bother to bring up such a stupid straw man!

Dude you are way out of line. No respectable scientist? Although Albert Einstein's concept of god was different from a lot of peoples he still believed there was one. I guess because he isn't in this new and enlightened age we live in he is now no longer respectable. Probably because he believes in God.
"I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with the fates and actions of human beings." (Albert Einstein)
"I want to know how God created this world, I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know His thoughts, the rest are details."
"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."
How about Dr. Francis Collins living today. Religious wackos like us are hard to shut up when we back it up with logic.
javascript:cnnVideo('play','/video/bestoftv/2007/04/03/foreman.francis.collins.intv.cnn','2009/04/02');

 

[Amanda]

No respectable scientist will bring up a god in a scientific discussion. Humans are by nature irrational and most scientist who claim to subscribe to faith readily admit their knowledge that it is an irrational belief, one that has no basis in science and therefore completely divorced from scientific inquiry. Then you have so-called Christian scientists who are anything but scientists, so do not attempt to use them. You will also note a trend that the more distinguished and accomplished a scientist is, the more likely that person is to be an atheist. The percentage of the the top scientists in the world that are atheist are inverse that you will find for the general population. Around 90% are atheist, whereas about 90% of the general population believes in magical mythologies affectionately called religion.

You make a lot of sweeping generalizations for someone trying to prove the kind of point you're pursuing. So if a scientist is Christian they are anything but scientists, huh? Ok, you win.

Well if you had your facts straight, I don't think you'd bother to bring up such a stupid straw man!

LOL, I get called stupid as a profession, do you think it bothers me when someone does it on the interweb? You're going to have to try harder if you're going to hurt my feelings.

I wonder sometimes if all the "smart people are usually atheists" stuff also holds true about angry people. I sure meet a lot of angry people that claim to be smart. Here's one you'll like: I'd rather be happy than smart. Srsly. Have fun with it.

 

[XVZ]

You make a lot of sweeping generalizations for someone trying to prove the kind of point you're pursuing. So if a scientist is Christian they are anything but scientists, huh? Ok, you win.

Wrong, you misunderstand completely. Someone is perfectly capable of being a scientist and a christian, a so-called "Christian scientist" (that is their self proclaimed title most of the time) are people who attempt to use science to prove their preconceived religious beliefs.

Anyone who takes that approaching of attempting to prove something they want to believe is not practicing science. That was my point, it is not my fault that you aren't capable of understanding something so basic.

LOL, I get called stupid as a profession, do you think it bothers me when someone does it on the interweb? You're going to have to try harder if you're going to hurt my feelings.

If you understood what I said, you'd know I was not calling you stupid. Do you know what a straw man is? Here is a hint, it is not a reference to your lack of womanhood.

I wonder sometimes if all the "smart people are usually atheists" stuff also holds true about angry people. I sure meet a lot of angry people that claim to be smart. Here's one you'll like: I'd rather be happy than smart. Srsly. Have fun with it.

I assure you that any perception of anger is all in your head, just like your god fellow.

Dude you are way out of line. No respectable scientist? Although Albert Einstein's concept of god was different from a lot of peoples he still believed there was one. I guess because he isn't in this new and enlightened age we live in he is now no longer respectable. Probably because he believes in God.

Where did I say no respectable scientist will believe in a god? Did I say that? No. You'd like for me to say that so you could prattle on with your diatribe. But that is not what I said, try again.

 

[Amanda]

I assure you that any perception of anger is all in your head, just like your god fellow.

When I was talking about smart people why did you think I was including you?

I'm sorry, that wasn't nice, but I thought it fitting sense you implied that I wasn't capable following your post. Maybe some tit for tat will make you see how condescending you're being. Or maybe not. Whatever.

I'm going to go back to being happy now. Have fun being smart.

 

[XVZ]

When I was talking about smart people why did you think I was including you?

I'm sorry, that wasn't nice, but I thought it fitting sense you implied that I wasn't capable following your post. Maybe some tit for tat will make you see how condescending you're being. Or maybe not. Whatever.

I'm going to go back to being happy now. Have fun being smart.

As soon as you show any evidence of being able to comprehend what I have written, I will make note to offer you a congratulation.

 

[Truthspeaker]

"No respectable scientist will bring up a god in a scientific discussion." Are the exact words if you just scroll up Einstein. PUn intended

 

[Truthspeaker]

It doesn't take a scientist to be able to see through your thinly veiled disbelief in God.

 

[XVZ]

It doesn't take a scientist to be able to see through your thinly veiled disbelief in God.

I stand by that statement. Perhaps you are confused as to what a scientific discussion is.

 

[sky dancer]

XVZ

Are you an eternalist? If so, you have much in common with people who believe in God.

 

[XVZ]

XVZ

Are you an eternalist? If so, you have much in common with people who believe in God.

Commonality with those who believe in a god is not news to me, everyone in my family are religious loons. Fortunately the indoctrination started late with me and the BS never took root

 

[sky dancer]

Commonality with those who believe in a god is not news to me, everyone in my family are religious loons. Fortunately the indoctrination started late with me and the BS never took root

Are you saying that you feel as though the universe is eternal? That's a religious POV, not a scientific one.

 

[Truthspeaker]

I stand by that statement. Perhaps you are confused as to what a scientific discussion is.

Well at least I showed you where you stated that no respectable scientist would consider the existence of a God when you said you didn't make that statement. Now you are standing by that statement. Good for you.

 

[edthecynic]

Everything in the universe is impermanent. Some of the stars we see in the heavens have already passed out of existence.

The universe is impermanent. It is not logical to say the universe is eternal and God, as a personified Creator, is eternal.

If the universe had a beginning, it can not have been, or be, eternal.

In science, it is time that has a beginning. Energy cannot be created or destroyed. If energy cannot be created, it can't increase and if it can't be destroyed, it can't decrease therefore, if energy can't increase or decrease it is a constant. Energy can only change form.