Bobtoad777
Virgin
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2000
- Posts
- 3,067
Please discuss your origins theory in detail please?
this ones for you DCL
- Thread starter Bobtoad777
- Start date
Bobtoad777
Virgin
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2000
- Posts
- 3,067
i saw that i would just like an expansion on it
Ezzy
Insignificantly Important
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2000
- Posts
- 2,252
DCL I think he hopes you experience a Big Bang (JOKE if you dont get it reread this thread,Dont blame me)
EZ http://smilecwm.tripod.com/cwm2/sleep.gif
EZ http://smilecwm.tripod.com/cwm2/sleep.gif
Dixon Carter Lee
Headliner
- Joined
- Nov 22, 1999
- Posts
- 48,682
No.
I've already said that I won't go into detail concerning my reasoning behind my belief in a Godless Universe, which is what I think you're looking for here, Bob. And it's not for any deep personal reason. It's for two reasons:
1) Who the hell cares? I don't mean that facetiously. Science is based on critical thinking. Belief in God is based on faith. No matter how much people tell you that science and faith have "much in common", they don't. There is no meeting point for the two, no common ground, no shared platform.
In other words, most people already know that a debate over which is more correct, atheism or theism, will always be a draw, not because both sides are equally well argued, but because they do not share a comon vocabulary. It's like asking two people who grew up on a desert island, one who can only see red and one who can only see yellow, "What color is the sky?" How on earth are they to debate?
My vocabulary is skepticism, which is question/hypothesis/theory/experiment/repetition of experiment/conclusion/revision upon new evidence. "Their" vocabulary is "Have faith and faith will be given unto you." There is no mixing of those two ideologies, no chance for debate.
People will continue to believe what they believe, and I respect that. So, I repeat, who the hell (on a sex web site) cares what I think about creationism "in detail"?
2) I pause to write this, hoping I won't do what, in a pique of over-reaction, recently accused Never, who is very bright and thoughtful, of doing: Not taking someone's deeply held beliefs seriously and not treating them with respect. So, please everyone, I'm just responding to a series of questions, and I won't harp on any of this, I promise.
I don't wish to go into "detail" here regarding why I don't think God had a hand in the Universe's construction because I don't feel that there is any controversy to discuss. (To my mind) "God", as an actual being, is on par with Beowulf, Poseiden, and Mother Goose. That may sound flip, and it is somewhat, but I want to make this part of my mind clear -- it's not that I disbelieve in God or reject God or think that God is someone dead or not all a nice person -- it's that I don't believe that God exists in the same way you don't believe Bigfoot lives in your attic. Why on earth would you want to spend a lot of time trying to prove or explain "in detail" why Bigfoot wasn't living in your attic?
Now, before I lose all credibility, I understand that God's place in the world of letters, religious movements, civilization building and philosphy far outweighs Bigfoot's, and I respect that deeply. But when it comes down to it I would more easily believe in a hairy giant ape-man wandering the Pacific Northwest than the myrriad descriptions of an omnipresent Creator of the Universe.
------------------
So, you see, as I've said before, I never feel that the burden of proof is with me, and since I can't prove a negative, I don't even try. I can state my reasons for this and that, but, honestly, if you want to know what I truly think about Creation you're better off reading Einstein, Betrand Russell and Steven Hawking, because it would take those writings to explain everything I feel, and I'm pretty sure that everyone, even the brilliant Felix, would lose all patience with me after the 800th page of my post.
I'd rather ask you, Bob, seriously, "Why do you want to know?" You seem to be trying to get at something here. Maybe we can narrow this discussion down and save everyone these looooooong posts. What exactly is your question?
But I know that I'm the one who asked you to start this thread, so I'm going to answer you in as little "detail" as I can regarding my feelings about Creation: they're pretty humdrum, and fall along the line of current thinking. I discussed them on the other thread when I over-reacted to Never's "innocuous" comment (sorry again, Never, I was in a foul mood last night).
(Stop reading now, all, if this bores you to tears):
Basically, I believe the Universe was created from a singularity in space-time when the universe was so dense it occupied a space smaller than a single atom. I believe that a fraction of a second after the Big Bang all physical laws were created, not allowing for any ammendments or changes. I believe the universe began expanding like a balloon being blown up, with the galaxies and stars forming on the skin of the balloon, made out of cooling elementary particles. I believe the earth was formed out of our sun's elementary particles, which cooled and hardened.
I believe life began some 5 billion years ago on earth in a soup of chemicals shortly after the land cooled enough to permit water in a liquid form to exist. I believe that the first life-form was a single celled creature which evolved over the next 5 billion years into an astonishing variety of mutations to create fish, mollusks and other more complicated creatures. I believe the first microscopic creatures determined the future of all animal life on earth because they expelled oxygen, a poisonous substance at the time, filling our atmosphere and forcing all new life forms to adapt to the gas. I believe life came out of the oceans sometime after the waters receeded to create dry land once again, and evolution continued, married with many periods of mass extinctions.
I believe that several million years ago several primates that looked somewhat human shared the earth, but only one group survived, homo sapiens, who did not evolve from apes, but who did share a common ancestor. I believe that our minds developed to the point where we had to be born early before the head got too big. I believe that once children were born "under-developed" it became neccessary for homo sapiens to cooperate in groups to care for the highly vulnerable offspring, and which in turn produced villages and the need for agriculture, which led to civilization. I believe that this forced attention to children developed our awareness of self. I believe that as our cognizant abilities grew so did our realization of how little we knew, and we immediately began to seek in adulthood the assurances of youth, and since as children our parents seemed God-like (bringing food and building shelter and making rules for our protection) we modeled the spirits of nature after our parents, and this led to the many incarnations of "God."
I believe that as creatures of the earth living in three dimensions we were never designed to "see" the fourth dimension (time) just as we cannot "see" sound as dolphins can, and for this reason the true nature of the universe, space-time, eluded us to this very century when it was discovered after a series of light experiments based upon the work of James Maxwell. I believe that to this day people have no idea what you're talking about when you say "space-time" or "quantum physics" or "relativity" or "e=mc2", and cannot fathom why Albert Einstein is so high on the list of the most influential people of the Millennium despite the fact that he (along with Newton) changed in one life-time the four million year old view that the cosmos works in an observable, geometrical, three dimensional fashion, whether by breath of God, Spheres of Influence, or orbits described with calculus.
And let me just say this: There are plenty of scientists who find plenty of room for God in this model, particularly in the time (if there was "time") before the Big Bang. Though many men of science (including, after a fashion, Einstein) believe in God, they don't even try to work Him into the formulas, well understanding that He occupies a very different realm very much exempt from the laws of physics and critical thought.
To go into "detail" would require debating and arguing a host of "ologies" and quoting from a hundred sources (which I'm not going to do), and I'm pretty sure almost everyone has stopped reading even this "short" post already.
So, there you go.
*whew*
Where the hell is Flagg when you need him? Please start a thread on poultry again...
[Edited by Dixon Carter Lee on 09-01-2000 at 02:26 PM]
I've already said that I won't go into detail concerning my reasoning behind my belief in a Godless Universe, which is what I think you're looking for here, Bob. And it's not for any deep personal reason. It's for two reasons:
1) Who the hell cares? I don't mean that facetiously. Science is based on critical thinking. Belief in God is based on faith. No matter how much people tell you that science and faith have "much in common", they don't. There is no meeting point for the two, no common ground, no shared platform.
In other words, most people already know that a debate over which is more correct, atheism or theism, will always be a draw, not because both sides are equally well argued, but because they do not share a comon vocabulary. It's like asking two people who grew up on a desert island, one who can only see red and one who can only see yellow, "What color is the sky?" How on earth are they to debate?
My vocabulary is skepticism, which is question/hypothesis/theory/experiment/repetition of experiment/conclusion/revision upon new evidence. "Their" vocabulary is "Have faith and faith will be given unto you." There is no mixing of those two ideologies, no chance for debate.
People will continue to believe what they believe, and I respect that. So, I repeat, who the hell (on a sex web site) cares what I think about creationism "in detail"?
2) I pause to write this, hoping I won't do what, in a pique of over-reaction, recently accused Never, who is very bright and thoughtful, of doing: Not taking someone's deeply held beliefs seriously and not treating them with respect. So, please everyone, I'm just responding to a series of questions, and I won't harp on any of this, I promise.
I don't wish to go into "detail" here regarding why I don't think God had a hand in the Universe's construction because I don't feel that there is any controversy to discuss. (To my mind) "God", as an actual being, is on par with Beowulf, Poseiden, and Mother Goose. That may sound flip, and it is somewhat, but I want to make this part of my mind clear -- it's not that I disbelieve in God or reject God or think that God is someone dead or not all a nice person -- it's that I don't believe that God exists in the same way you don't believe Bigfoot lives in your attic. Why on earth would you want to spend a lot of time trying to prove or explain "in detail" why Bigfoot wasn't living in your attic?
Now, before I lose all credibility, I understand that God's place in the world of letters, religious movements, civilization building and philosphy far outweighs Bigfoot's, and I respect that deeply. But when it comes down to it I would more easily believe in a hairy giant ape-man wandering the Pacific Northwest than the myrriad descriptions of an omnipresent Creator of the Universe.
------------------
So, you see, as I've said before, I never feel that the burden of proof is with me, and since I can't prove a negative, I don't even try. I can state my reasons for this and that, but, honestly, if you want to know what I truly think about Creation you're better off reading Einstein, Betrand Russell and Steven Hawking, because it would take those writings to explain everything I feel, and I'm pretty sure that everyone, even the brilliant Felix, would lose all patience with me after the 800th page of my post.
I'd rather ask you, Bob, seriously, "Why do you want to know?" You seem to be trying to get at something here. Maybe we can narrow this discussion down and save everyone these looooooong posts. What exactly is your question?
But I know that I'm the one who asked you to start this thread, so I'm going to answer you in as little "detail" as I can regarding my feelings about Creation: they're pretty humdrum, and fall along the line of current thinking. I discussed them on the other thread when I over-reacted to Never's "innocuous" comment (sorry again, Never, I was in a foul mood last night).
(Stop reading now, all, if this bores you to tears):
Basically, I believe the Universe was created from a singularity in space-time when the universe was so dense it occupied a space smaller than a single atom. I believe that a fraction of a second after the Big Bang all physical laws were created, not allowing for any ammendments or changes. I believe the universe began expanding like a balloon being blown up, with the galaxies and stars forming on the skin of the balloon, made out of cooling elementary particles. I believe the earth was formed out of our sun's elementary particles, which cooled and hardened.
I believe life began some 5 billion years ago on earth in a soup of chemicals shortly after the land cooled enough to permit water in a liquid form to exist. I believe that the first life-form was a single celled creature which evolved over the next 5 billion years into an astonishing variety of mutations to create fish, mollusks and other more complicated creatures. I believe the first microscopic creatures determined the future of all animal life on earth because they expelled oxygen, a poisonous substance at the time, filling our atmosphere and forcing all new life forms to adapt to the gas. I believe life came out of the oceans sometime after the waters receeded to create dry land once again, and evolution continued, married with many periods of mass extinctions.
I believe that several million years ago several primates that looked somewhat human shared the earth, but only one group survived, homo sapiens, who did not evolve from apes, but who did share a common ancestor. I believe that our minds developed to the point where we had to be born early before the head got too big. I believe that once children were born "under-developed" it became neccessary for homo sapiens to cooperate in groups to care for the highly vulnerable offspring, and which in turn produced villages and the need for agriculture, which led to civilization. I believe that this forced attention to children developed our awareness of self. I believe that as our cognizant abilities grew so did our realization of how little we knew, and we immediately began to seek in adulthood the assurances of youth, and since as children our parents seemed God-like (bringing food and building shelter and making rules for our protection) we modeled the spirits of nature after our parents, and this led to the many incarnations of "God."
I believe that as creatures of the earth living in three dimensions we were never designed to "see" the fourth dimension (time) just as we cannot "see" sound as dolphins can, and for this reason the true nature of the universe, space-time, eluded us to this very century when it was discovered after a series of light experiments based upon the work of James Maxwell. I believe that to this day people have no idea what you're talking about when you say "space-time" or "quantum physics" or "relativity" or "e=mc2", and cannot fathom why Albert Einstein is so high on the list of the most influential people of the Millennium despite the fact that he (along with Newton) changed in one life-time the four million year old view that the cosmos works in an observable, geometrical, three dimensional fashion, whether by breath of God, Spheres of Influence, or orbits described with calculus.
And let me just say this: There are plenty of scientists who find plenty of room for God in this model, particularly in the time (if there was "time") before the Big Bang. Though many men of science (including, after a fashion, Einstein) believe in God, they don't even try to work Him into the formulas, well understanding that He occupies a very different realm very much exempt from the laws of physics and critical thought.
To go into "detail" would require debating and arguing a host of "ologies" and quoting from a hundred sources (which I'm not going to do), and I'm pretty sure almost everyone has stopped reading even this "short" post already.
So, there you go.
*whew*
Where the hell is Flagg when you need him? Please start a thread on poultry again...
[Edited by Dixon Carter Lee on 09-01-2000 at 02:26 PM]
Bobtoad777
Virgin
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2000
- Posts
- 3,067
thank you, i just wanted a living persons view of the "godless universe" cause obviously it changed in the years though they mnay be short since i believed in a "godless universe". I just wanted to be kept up to date on what common belief and interpretation. I appreciate your time and thought. I don't find you have smitted or made derogatory any of my beliefs.
yes, i could read books, but you know how it is even with my current views i can read the books and i see it one way but once in practice and formed into personal theory things look and behave differently from the book. that is why i wanted a living, breathing, person to express there view.
again thank you DCL
yes, i could read books, but you know how it is even with my current views i can read the books and i see it one way but once in practice and formed into personal theory things look and behave differently from the book. that is why i wanted a living, breathing, person to express there view.
again thank you DCL
KillerMuffin
Seraphically Disinclined
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2000
- Posts
- 25,603
Hero worship or has he transferred his affections from Nekkie to DCL?
Snoopish, nosey, gossipy old biddies like me wanna know. And no matter what the answer is, it will most definately be perverted to the most astonishingly shocking gossip possible. So fess up Bobbie, are you in lust with DCL? not that I blame ya boy, whew, whatta man.
Snoopish, nosey, gossipy old biddies like me wanna know. And no matter what the answer is, it will most definately be perverted to the most astonishingly shocking gossip possible. So fess up Bobbie, are you in lust with DCL? not that I blame ya boy, whew, whatta man.
Bobtoad777
Virgin
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2000
- Posts
- 3,067
Dont you forget muffie your my latest trist on the lit boards, naked was no good for me she would never admit her true love for me so sad really
plus i dont swing thatta way
plus i dont swing thatta way
KillerMuffin
Seraphically Disinclined
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2000
- Posts
- 25,603
Thats tryst, child. I'm not into molesting babies. However, if you are brave enough, and think you might possibly be man enough, you are more than welcome to attempt to try to begin your latest tryst with me. I cannot promise as to the success of your venture, but I can promise I will have fun.
Bobtoad777
Virgin
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2000
- Posts
- 3,067
now see this is why i love all the women on this board, one builds me up the other tears me down .
I gioan no ground yet i lose none either
I gioan no ground yet i lose none either
Bonnie Wee Lassie
Sweet Beaver
- Joined
- Dec 13, 1999
- Posts
- 1,442
Wow DCL I though you weren't going to go in detail. LOL
Dixon Carter Lee
Headliner
- Joined
- Nov 22, 1999
- Posts
- 48,682
That wasn't detail. Those were just the headlines.
Ezzy
Insignificantly Important
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2000
- Posts
- 2,252
DCL a question if I may
RE not evolving from apes but shareing a common ancestor.
Just wondering how far back you see the split?
EZ http://smilecwm.tripod.com/cwm2/sleep.gif
RE not evolving from apes but shareing a common ancestor.
Just wondering how far back you see the split?
EZ http://smilecwm.tripod.com/cwm2/sleep.gif
Bonnie Wee Lassie
Sweet Beaver
- Joined
- Dec 13, 1999
- Posts
- 1,442
Holy shit then I wouldn't want to see how long detail would be!!!! LMAO
Dixon Carter Lee
Headliner
- Joined
- Nov 22, 1999
- Posts
- 48,682
Re: DCL a question if I may
To the day the day they told Ronald Reagan that Bonzo couldn't really talk.
Ezzy said:
To the day the day they told Ronald Reagan that Bonzo couldn't really talk.
Katerina Val-Kyrie
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Nov 16, 1999
- Posts
- 707
DLC, your written word and intellect never cease to amaze me.
Hugs Katerina
Hugs Katerina
CelestialBody
Starlet of India
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2000
- Posts
- 7,904
CelestialBody
Starlet of India
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2000
- Posts
- 7,904
Bobtoad777
Virgin
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2000
- Posts
- 3,067
wow this amazes me , I never thought that anybody, ever would go through old threads see the name bobtoad and actually open it up, its hard enough just geting people open up a new thread by me, hehehe
Bobtoad777
Virgin
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2000
- Posts
- 3,067
yeah i should have known better than it be my name that got this thread opened,it was that Celebraty of the stars Dixon Carter Lee that did it.
