Quote:

I agree with what you've said, just another opinion. In my opinion intelligent design makes even less sense than a holy creator



Why? We create with our knowledge and application of the sciences( when we're not trying to make bombs with it, that is).. Why isnt it plausible that.. something with near infinitely more knowledge and probably near proportionate wisdom (something we lack),(therefore having infintely more power) can create something infinitely more complex? Why wouldn't that make sense? We know from studies of our own environment that.. things don't just spring into being.. lifeforms dont spontaneously generate, nor occur as a result of any amount of accidental circumstance. Most of the things in our world that aren't in their natural state.. cities.. monuments.. technology.. were created.. by something with a plan, forsight, and knowledge.

Why can't we have been? Are we too special to be the result of a blueprint and lines of programming code? Isn't that more or less what Deoxyribonucleic Acid sequences are?

Quote:

That reminds me, why in heavens name does a God need to 'rest' anyways? Why one day? Lol, I won't bother asking 'how we know' this...



That's again, indivinating "God". Divinities don't need rest, (that being why the concept of divine beings doesnt make sense in our physical universe, even on the most basic levels). Anything less.. even a being more energy than matter.. probably would (and this is what I'm saying that "God" is, or was.) You're right to say we don't know.. but it just follows that anything that does work expends energy, and therefore needs time to recouperate. There are no exceptions to that in the physical universe.


Quote:


But yeah, it definitely comes down to observability like you've said and at least for now, we just have to accept that our knowledge is (severely?) limited... Perhaps, I tend to jump to conclusions myself, but I'm quite sure real magic in the classical sense does really not exist.




No magic.. only what we do and don't understand. In my research, I'm trying to strike a medium between the existence of an intelligent source for our design and a logical explanation, though for the next... 50-300 thousand years it wil be a theory at best. I'm more or less taking a scientific, and open approach to the inquiry.

Most of earth fails to reach a concensus because one half believes that it's all God, and science is only our invention and is useless after a point.. and the other half believes that everything is the result of natural cycles.. which still negates that there has to have been a catalyst.. like tropical storms and mating cycles in the animal kingdom all have.. a catalyst which is at fault for their onset. That side just doesnt seem to want to accept that an actual intelligence may have been the catalyst for all that we see, hear, and know, no different than our own intelligence is responsible for our various creations and triumphant applications of knowledge and the power that comes with it.

What I think is that.. we all have half of the truth. I mean.. between humans, even our tallest tales and legends have a basis in the truth.. its just truth that has to be broken back down to the realistic version of what took place. And our instruments and detectors can only see so far into space, and so far into our planet. That and science is often obscured and sensored by various government interests.

What I'd like to do is take our two half truths.. and make one whole from it by going where we have not for whatever reasons, investigation wise. First.. we have to embrace that we don't know.. both sides. And.. take what we do know.. and what might make normal, logical sense.. and go with that.

We just have to be willing to start from the beggining, and accept that all our best hypothesis may indeed be totally wrong.. because we've all started the wrong way.. else we'd be alot further along than we are if we really knew so much.

Last edited by ICEman; 09/30/07 17:52.
I'm ICEman, and I approved this message.