Bill Nye The Science Guy Debate.......

Considering those are points of historical doctrine and reliant upon "faith", they do not lend themselves to scientific scrutiny in the same way the other points I mentioned do.

The spontaneous genesis of life without some outside, intentioned influence is a point of assumption for most people and is rarely considered, yet is one of those things that defies scientific explanation, or at least explanations that can actually be reproduced, an important hallmark of any scientific "fact".

Second there is as of yet no solid fossil record indicating the type of crossover from one species to the next evolution calls for, another point often just assumed to be "fact".
Another point that has always befuddled me is the fact that evolutionary theory holds that life evolved into ever more complex forms through the process of natural selection, yet everything else in the universe does the opposite, goes from states of higher complexity to states of lower complexity, at least not without some form of external influence.

Black holes are still 100% theory, one has never actually been found. We see stuff that sort of might be maybe be the result of a black hole, but still no actual discovery. Yet the majority of people believe them to be bonafide scientific fact.

So while I "get" your point, it also typifies one of the hurdles to overcome in this "debate";
distinguishing between what ideas are subject to "scientific scrutiny" and what are not, and not just dismissing one concept based on it's juxtaposition to another.

Then when we begin to consider the advances in knowledge we are gaining from quantum physics and shit, is a virgin birth and resurrection really all that far out

 

Well let me say this about that...:scholar:

Ahh... actually, who gives a fuck.:ssmokeit:

 

Toke, cough, yeah I see what you mean brother! It's raining outside.

Knowledge is material and takes up space in the mind. Some care for it some not which is why it seems to exist in clumps but no one is without it.

I prefer a synchronistic argument. First man adam to last man adam is an evolutionary progression and all that both face are the creative effects of their own thinking.

 

I'm not sure how you view planets and stars as less complex then what they are borne from.

 

What he's referring to is entropy, which always increases. Any local decrease in entropy must increase entropy elsewhere and the total entropy in the universe will increase. Complexity has nothing to do with it really, what does complexity mean anyways? It is what it is, there are causes and effects...everything is complex.

 

I saw tiny lights in the sky last night...
They say they are stars! :conehead:

If the brain is like a hard-drive, I sometimes feel like mine needs de-fragging. :dizzy2:

I can dig it...:beatnik:

 

I don't get why intelligent design gives people hope, but evolution doesn't. Evolution is wild, man. That something so beautiful exists is a miracle, in my eyes.

 

Wild, beautiful, yet unpredictable. People don't like that. People like straight forward, easy answers.

 

Sometimes I've wondered what they are and why they twinkle.

This is familiar. Took me a while to figure out you are not required to supply the answer for things you don't know. However I have been satisfied in asking a sincere question of no one in particular alone in secret and simply being alert for the answer. It appears most definitely in a form I recognize as unmistakable. The more intense or consistent my patience in waiting for the answer, the sooner it comes.

 

People take it as an insult to say we came from monkeys, as though there is something wrong with being a monkey, or that there's nothing fantastic about the fact that monkeys transformed into human beings. Science is opening up this fantastic world to people and they're being picky babies about it. Unbelievable.

 

Some of those are galaxies, no?

 

Bird:

Start counting and see if you can reach the end.. and besides, infinite doesn't necessarily mean that it has to continue in a linear fashion.


See.. the thing with science is that it's a product of the human mind, our minds base themselves on perception, and perception is relative.
For the sake of the argument, I'll say that the universe isn't actually infinite.. but let's at least agree that it is FAR too much for our fragile little minds to comprehend.

For the survival of our species, we have to polarize the universe.. we just can't consciously take in all the stimuli that the world is continually throwing at us.. and we, as individuals, are only exposed to a pathetically miniscule amount of the vast cosmic forces that are at work as you're reading this..(keeping in the spirit of science, we will disregard the butterfly effect for the sake of the explanation).

For science to be science, it has to isolate something from its environment. Logical parameters need to be set upon an illogical universe to make things easier for our logical minds to comprehend. We set the parameters, which are a result of our thoughts, which are manifested as a result of a cultural paradigm, which has manifested as a result of a sensorial paradigm, etc etc...

As time goes on, these paradigms will change. We will learn new things and forget the rest, each moment will go by and we'll think we're oh-so-clever.. forgetting that we've just forgotten, and therefore not knowing everything.

We don't know what we don't know. That is infinite.




Science is designed to only look at the "footprints" of the universe.. but what's leaving those footprints? Science can't answer that because there is no proof of anything besides the assumption that there's something here to experience.

I want hard evidence that all this evidence is real please, not just your opinions on the matter.

 

Planets too and sometimes the animals we find in zoos.

like the big bear

 

^wow...nicely said. I've always known that some things must be beyond the ability of our mind to comprehend. So we have to make theories that we can relate to, I think they call this perturbation or something like that......when the math breaks down and things are only approximations?

 

The mind is naturally abstract, cement not so much.

 

Interesting...in my shamanistic studys (blink) I've become aware that everyone of us possess something like a dark pool of silent knowledge where if the question is sincere and the answer is in the realm of the knowable, we all have access...If we can only quiet the mind enough to receive. The problem is part of our mind is not our own, it's foreign installation.

 

Is the mind product of the brain? Seems logical. What about other systems, could they give rise to consciousness also? What is consciousness? I have many questions....

 

I don't see why it has to be a one way street... the mind can be a product of the brain, as much as the brain can be a product of the mind.

The rest... well, fuck.. I'm out

 

The mind may be a product of the brain, but the past, present, and future all supposedly exist simultaneously.

 

Where are the past and future but as artifacts of current concerns?