Discussion: Evolution

[Carcharodon]

this is EXACTLY where i lie wall crawler...you explain so effortlessly..i applaud you

Thank you.

I was reading in an old (2005 or 2006) Scientific American about the Dalai Lama (sp?) speaking at a Neuroscience conference in Washington, DC. He was basically talking about reconciling science with his Buddhist faith. Pretty awesome stuff you probably would like.

 

[Carcharodon]

You want logic, okay a being cannot be Omnipotent and Omniscience at the sametime, yet god is somehow both.. Logicians call this a paradox, and in science when you encounter a paradox that normally means the thing you are trying to prove is wrong.


Also, the universe wasn't designed, we as humans only think it was design because we are here, it happened and we got here, there are countless other Universes that are dead countless others that are teaming with life, we are here because we are, if the earth was closer to the sun there might be a race of Fish people who think there world was designed because it seems so perfect for them, the world wasn't designed we evolved into the world.

If you don't believe "Multiverse" then I suggest you pick up a copy of Hyperspace or A Brief History of time, as we probably live in a bubble universe.

Oh, and isn't it scary to wonder "Who created god?"

An even scarier thought is that the universe is eventually going to disintegrate into total chaos and disorder (laws of Thermodynamics).

Why would a higher power create this universe, essentially setting a timer and letting it dissolve? Crazy stuff.

 

[DarthRekal]

You want logic, okay a being cannot be Omnipotent and Omniscience at the sametime, yet god is somehow both.. Logicians call this a paradox, and in science when you encounter a paradox that normally means the thing you are trying to prove is wrong.


Also, the universe wasn't designed, we as humans only think it was design because we are here, it happened and we got here, there are countless other Universes that are dead countless others that are teaming with life, we are here because we are, if the earth was closer to the sun there might be a race of Fish people who think there world was designed because it seems so perfect for them, the world wasn't designed we evolved into the world.

If you don't believe "Multiverse" then I suggest you pick up a copy of Hyperspace or A Brief History of time, as we probably live in a bubble universe.

Oh, and isn't it scary to wonder "Who created god?"

nice... yes i heard all these theories before..and all of them are sound..

i again ask..where did i ever argue ANY of this???
no it isnt scary to wonder who created god..its actually quite fascinating...


its scary to wonder... if a plane isnt gonna fall on my head.. or am i gonna get an a car accident ..or are my kids gonna make it to adulthood..

THATS SCARY... and for that LOGIC will not provide answers..

 

[DarthRekal]

An even scarier thought is that the universe is eventually going to disintegrate into total chaos and disorder (laws of Thermodynamics).

Why would a higher power create this universe, essentially setting a timer and letting it dissolve? Crazy stuff.

Thank you.

I was reading in an old (2005 or 2006) Scientific American about the Dalai Lama (sp?) speaking at a Neuroscience conference in Washington, DC. He was basically talking about reconciling science with his Buddhist faith. Pretty awesome stuff you probably would like.

good stuff on both counts.. i will check that out.... thanks

 

[Carcharodon]

Scientific American; Feb2006, Vol. 294 Issue 2, p23-24, 2p, 1c

NEUROSCIENTISTS HEAR--AND APPLAUD--THE DALAI LAMA

Many years ago a curious boy looked through a telescope and, on seeing the shadows in the craters of the moon, realized that he had to make a choice. His religion taught him to respect the moon as a generator of light, but science taught him that the moon reflected the sun's rays. The subtle clarification offered by science ultimately trumped the Buddhist interpretation for Tenzin Gyatso, the current Dalai Lama.

Today when this political and religious leader is faced with conflicting explanations of life's mysteries, the Dalai Lama still favors scientific evidence over classical Buddhist concepts. At a time when Americans are battling state by state for religion-free science education, he urges people to take a path of peace between the perspectives. An estimated 14,000 people attended his lecture on November 12, 2005, at a meeting of the Society for Neuroscience in Washington, D.C., with most of them watching from overflow rooms where the talk was broadcast on large screens. Dressed in gold and crimson robes; he suggested a healthy dose of skepticism toward religious pronouncements. Although science can overturn spiritual teachings, people can benefit from scientific understanding without losing faith, he reasoned.

But the Dalai Lama also emphasized that religion can help science, not just hinder it. In particular, he urged neuroscientists not to discount the role of Buddhist traditions on the brain, specifically meditation. "Try to find reality with an open mind," he said, referring both to investigations in science as well as to studies in Buddhist thought. "Without investigation we can't see reality."

The neuroscientists in the auditorium responded with approval, especially those who have examined the effects of meditation. One was Bruce F. O'Hara of the University of Kentucky, who has found that meditation improves the performance of sleep-deprived individuals about as much as drinking a cup of coffee does. O'Hara applauded the religious leader's support of science, "especially given the issues with evolution and the [fundamentalist] Christian reluctance to accept evolution because it threatens their beliefs." Olivia Carter of Harvard University found it fascinating to hear about the Dalai Lama's personal interest in neuroscience and the importance he places on the scientific method of inquiry. "It should not matter that the observations associated with meditation arise through introspection or contemplation, as long as the observations Can be used to generate objective testable predictions," she says. Carter's own work in the field examines meditation's effect on perception.

Sara W. Lazar of Harvard Medical School remarks that not all scientists are equally as open to testing Buddhist meditation practices. "I have encountered mainstream scientists who do not meditate who are very curious and open, and those who are still unwilling to even consider the possibility that meditation might have some positive effects." Lazar has found that meditation may help prevent the rate of cortical thinning with age. Brain scans show that as people get older, the white matter typically degenerates. This material envelops the neurons and helps them work more efficiently. Lazar discovered that older meditators had active cortical regions that were comparable to those of younger nonmeditators.

But such a discovery should not have been too surprising, according to neuroscientist Michael Merzenich of the University of California, San Francisco. The brain typically responds to repetitive use by thickening the cortex in the relevant area -- for example, people who play the piano have more cortex associated with that skill. Moreover, recent studies indicate that "plastic changes driven by mental exercises in many respects parallel those driven by actual exercise," Merzenich says.

Still, he finds the idea of science studying the influence of faith on the brain intriguing. Imaging work has shown that an area in the frontal cortex is activated in response to how strongly someone believes an answer to be correct. Merzenich adds that "this activation affirms the brain's decision that one's conclusion is correct, whether it is or not." Such findings reinforce why the Dalai Lama places so much importance on maintaining an open mind.

MISSING PROTEST
Before the November 2005 meeting of the Society for Neuroscience, hundreds of scientists signed a petition against having the Dalai Lama speak about the neuroscience of meditation in the first of a new lecture series entitled "Dialogues between Neuroscience and Society." The mixing of science and religion was one concern, and politics may have been another-many who opposed it were originally from China. But on the day of the speech, the only visible protest came from a post-doctorate Chinese national with residence status in the U.S., who quietly sat holding a scrawled statement saying that the Dalai Lama was not qualified to speak at the meeting.

Next year architect Frank Gehry will give the 2006 "Dialogues" lecture. His participation is not expected to draw such criticism.

PHOTO (COLOR): DALAI LAMA, at a Society for Neuroscience meeting last November, said that in cases of conflicting explanations, he would favor strong scientific evidence over religion.

 

[Noir]

An even scarier thought is that the universe is eventually going to disintegrate into total chaos and disorder (laws of Thermodynamics).

Why would a higher power create this universe, essentially setting a timer and letting it dissolve? Crazy stuff.

Actually it depends, if there is enough matter in the Unverse then it will contract until it turns into a singularity again, if there isn't enough matter in the unverse then it will expand forever and freeze..
But, by then the earth will have been swallowed up by the sun when it turned into a red giant.

 

[Carcharodon]

Actually it depends, if there is enough matter in the Unverse then it will contract until it turns into a singularity again, if there isn't enough matter in the unverse then it will expand forever and freeze..
But, by then the earth will have been swallowed up by the sun when it turned into a red giant.

Either way I doubt it'll effect either of us very much, eh?

 

[Noir]

Exactly, earth is a tiny dot in the vastness of the Universe, we aren't even at the center of the universe, There is no god concerned with the events of a tiny little dot, we have found over 300 Extrasolar planets, we are going to find alot more, we're not recieve messages from God, we're not getting anything.. Science has proof, Evolution has proof [fosil] people argue that evolution isn't true and god is real, but when faced with the same proof factor they say they don't need proof cause "Faith is different.", Your right, but for now, Evolution is the best way, I'm going to use and argue that was here earlier except against evolution. Get god to send me a fax and then I'll believe him.

 

[imdaly]

It's as I've always said: If God really wants me to believe he exists, then all he has to do is part the water in a river in front of my eyes like it was done in the Bible. I live in a city where two very major rivers combine, so it shouldn't be too hard.

If I witness that, then I'm all believing. I mean, he did it before, what's stopping him from doing it now? Heck. The Bible is FILLED with a bunch of stuff happening that would make me believe it all with just one sight of it: water parting, water turning into wine, etc etc. Why do we NOW have to just have faith? Uh uh. You show me proof, THEN I'll believe.

Sounds an awful lot like an old man coming up to me in an old van saying "Trust me, I have a bike for you at my house. Let me take you to it."

 

[Carcharodon]

It's as I've always said: If God really wants me to believe he exists, then all he has to do is part the water in a river in front of my eyes like it was done in the Bible. I live in a city where two very major rivers combine, so it shouldn't be too hard.

That would negate the concept of faith. Belief and faith are two separate things. Faith is what God (as he's depicted) wants you to have.

 

[Carcharodon]

Exactly, earth is a tiny dot in the vastness of the Universe, we aren't even at the center of the universe, There is no god concerned with the events of a tiny little dot, we have found over 300 Extrasolar planets, we are going to find alot more, we're not recieve messages from God, we're not getting anything.. Science has proof, Evolution has proof [fosil] people argue that evolution isn't true and god is real, but when faced with the same proof factor they say they don't need proof cause "Faith is different.", Your right, but for now, Evolution is the best way, I'm going to use and argue that was here earlier except against evolution. Get god to send me a fax and then I'll believe him.

You lack faith. Thus, you'll never believe him. ...and that's totally fine, as far as I see things. Different strokes for different folks.

 

[imdaly]

however..you just prove my point further.... if you are then to BELIEVE in A GOD... then that must mean you believe in SURREAL activity..hence that is from which he came..... but thats only a THEORY..disprove it..i implore you

I have no idea what you're trying to say there.

What I'm asking is this:

You say that all the stuff that would've caused the Big Bang had to come from somewhere, and that something had to come from something else, and so on and so on. And at the end you place God starting it all.

But as you said, everything has to come from something, meaning God himself would have to have a beginning, had to come from something else...



So where did he come from? What "ingredients" formed God?



And if it's so easy to believe that God was created out of nothing, how's it any less believable that the ingredients that caused the Big Bang was the actual beginning of "existence"?


I agree that even attempting to ponder the beginning of everything is wayyyy too "out there" for me to wrap my head around. But I'm not going to just simplify the answer by shrugging my shoulders and proclaiming "hmm...must've been God"

 

[imdaly]

That would negate the concept of faith. Belief and faith are two separate things. Faith is what God (as he's depicted) wants you to have.

Ahh, the ever popular "you'll never be able to believe until you believe first."

Well how the heck am I supposed to start believing?? Like I said, it wasn't too much to ask back in the Bible times (as it's depicted), so why is it too much to ask for now? If God really wanted me to have faith in him, he'd know that he has to try a little harder. One of the first lessons learned in life is that when someone says to you "Just trust me and do as I say", they probably are trying to mislead you. Forgive me for being cautious.

 

[Matt Murdock]

god isn't real.

 

[DarthRekal]

I have no idea what you're trying to say there.

What I'm asking is this:

You say that all the stuff that would've caused the Big Bang had to come from somewhere, and that something had to come from something else, and so on and so on. And at the end you place God starting it all.

But as you said, everything has to come from something, meaning God himself would have to have a beginning, had to come from something else...



So where did he come from? What "ingredients" formed God?



And if it's so easy to believe that God was created out of nothing, how's it any less believable that the ingredients that caused the Big Bang was the actual beginning of "existence"?


I agree that even attempting to ponder the beginning of everything is wayyyy too "out there" for me to wrap my head around. But I'm not going to just simplify the answer by shrugging my shoulders and proclaiming "hmm...must've been God"

solid points.. and no its not TOO OUT THERE FOR YOU.. you brought up the question...and i GENUINELY thinks its a REAL GOOD one... i agree whos to say that the ingredients that caused the big bang werent "GOD" then that would REALLY me we are one with god and it is all around us(which is along my line of thinking anyway)..

you are correct you shouldnt just shrug your shoulders and write it off.. EITHER WAY..

but you have taken a step.. you cant shrug your shoulders and blame it on dust as much as you can god ...can you???
NOONE can answer this question for you ..BUT YOU.. and that is the bigger ordeal that i have.. i cant STOP at DUST.. i need to go BEYOND that... thats how i have a balance of belief and science...i am not naive to believe that science is the "DEVIL" in fact i would prefer to have an answer...just like noone can PROVE there is a GOD and he cant come and shake your hand..... it STILL hasnt been proven that everything is LOGICAL or SCIENTIFIC...there is a line where i can BELIEVE in what i KNOW and BELIEVE in what I FEEL... i never say the can cant be moved forward nor back.... its a balance

 

[Mike_D202]

I dont think "Noir" was held enough as a child. Hes an agressive poster.

There are different species of monkeys. MANY different species of monkeys. Gorillas, chimps, spider, bamboon, etc.

Why didnt they evolve with the rest of us? What makes us so special that we ditched the rest of our brothers behind? What made us ditch the banana in favor of the wheel?

You'd think that there would be different species of humans just like there are monkeys. But no, I think they're excuse for that would be "natural selection".

*cue AC/DC song "who made who?"*

 

[Hades]

There are different species of monkeys. MANY different species of monkeys. Gorillas, chimps, spider, bamboon, etc.

Why didnt they evolve with the rest of us? What makes us so special that we ditched the rest of our brothers behind?

You'd think that there would be different species of humans just like there are monkeys. But no, I think they're excuse for that would be "natural selection".

Supposedly we ditched the trees and starting eating meat.
And since this was in some hot enviroment, Africa I think, we lost the fur, too.
so we could maintain a more cool temperature.

 

[Joker]

Martin Luthor King Jr,Thomas Jefferson,Alexander the great,Ghandi,JFK,Joan of Ark, and the list goes on of great people who beleived in a higher power. Those people were all great leaders and smarter then ourselves, and yet they believed in a higher power

Thomas Jefferson was an deist, and Joan Of Ark was insane...I dont think any of them were smarter than anyone else either, they just reached power.

 

[sithgoblin]

I dont think "Noir" was held enough as a child. Hes an agressive poster.

There are different species of monkeys. MANY different species of monkeys. Gorillas, chimps, spider, bamboon, etc.

Why didnt they evolve with the rest of us? What makes us so special that we ditched the rest of our brothers behind? What made us ditch the banana in favor of the wheel?

You'd think that there would be different species of humans just like there are monkeys. But no, I think they're excuse for that would be "natural selection".

*cue AC/DC song "who made who?"*

We did not evolve from monkeys. Monkeys, Apes and Humans all evolved from the same ancestor. There's a big difference.

Do you understand evolution? Evolution is small, graduale changes over HUGE periods of time. It happens so that species can better survive in their environments. That's why animals seem designed, so perfectly suited to their environments, because they evolved over a huge amount of time to BE perfectly suited to them. The species that WEREN'T suited to their environments died out. Hence, 'survival of the fittest'.

The common ancestor of Humans, Apes and Monkeys migrated all over the globe, and over millions upon millions of years, the different groups of this species evolved to best survive in their environment. The environments they migrated to differed vastly and this, of course, impacted the evolution of the species who lived in them.

One such group happened to develop a slightly larger than normal brain. This proved beneficial to their survival, and thus, through subsequent generations, the large brain was passed on and continued to grow.

Please remember that I am talking about a massive amount of time here. Millions of years. It's hard to grasp such a large amount of time. The Middle Ages were 1000 years ago. Anceint Rome and Jesus were 2000 years ago. I'm talking millions of years ago. Get your head around it.

The species with the larger than normal brain continued to evolve and branch out into other species but ultimately homo sapiens evolved the best attributes to survive.

The common ancestor of primates can be traced back 60 million years. The genus homo branced off from the other primates that would evolve into monkeys, chimps and gorillas around 1.5 to 2 million years ago.

Homo sapiens first appeared around 250,000 years ago. Again, this didn't happen over night. These are huge, huge huge amounts of time, during which small, tiny gradual changes were made over millions of generations.

Gorillas, Chimpanzees and monkeys did not evolve large brains because they were already seperate species by the time the ancestor of humans developed their large brain.

 

[SLVRSR4]

How about we stop caring so much about where we came from and start caring about where we're going?

that would be too easy?

 

[Matt Murdock]

I think the only reason we can't focus on our future is because humans need to know everything they can. This desire for knowledge is pure instinct. We can't know anything about the future, it hasn't been determined yet, so we focus on the past.

 

[sithgoblin]

We can't decide our future if we don't understand ourselves, our past, and our place in the universe.

 

[Mike_D202]

We did not evolve from monkeys. Monkeys, Apes and Humans all evolved from the same ancestor. There's a big difference.

Do you understand evolution? Evolution is small, graduale changes over HUGE periods of time. It happens so that species can better survive in their environments. That's why animals seem designed, so perfectly suited to their environments, because they evolved over a huge amount of time to BE perfectly suited to them. The species that WEREN'T suited to their environments died out. Hence, 'survival of the fittest'.

The common ancestor of Humans, Apes and Monkeys migrated all over the globe, and over millions upon millions of years, the different groups of this species evolved to best survive in their environment. The environments they migrated to differed vastly and this, of course, impacted the evolution of the species who lived in them.

One such group happened to develop a slightly larger than normal brain. This proved beneficial to their survival, and thus, through subsequent generations, the large brain was passed on and continued to grow.

Please remember that I am talking about a massive amount of time here. Millions of years. It's hard to grasp such a large amount of time. The Middle Ages were 1000 years ago. Anceint Rome and Jesus were 2000 years ago. I'm talking millions of years ago. Get your head around it.

The species with the larger than normal brain continued to evolve and branch out into other species but ultimately homo sapiens evolved the best attributes to survive.

The common ancestor of primates can be traced back 60 million years. The genus homo branced off from the other primates that would evolve into monkeys, chimps and gorillas around 1.5 to 2 million years ago.

Homo sapiens first appeared around 250,000 years ago. Again, this didn't happen over night. These are huge, huge huge amounts of time, during which small, tiny gradual changes were made over millions of generations.

Gorillas, Chimpanzees and monkeys did not evolve large brains because they were already seperate species by the time the ancestor of humans developed their large brain.

Given the time period your talking about (millions of years), in a sense we DID just pop up over night. Nobody can say that we didnt have any help getting to where we are today. What happend? Did the hair fall off our backs and start growing on our heads and above our eyes?? We are a pretty advanced species to evolve from neanderthauls to humans within a few thousand years.

I'm not saying God put adam and eve here and they spawned millions of humans. All I'm saying is that maybe we did have a little help. Personally, I think we hitched a ride on one of the meteors that killed the dinosaurs and we grew from that. I'm also not ruling out that there maybe, in a sense, "souls" in every living thing (some kind of energy source). But thats just my opinion.

 

[Matt Murdock]

We can't decide our future if we don't understand ourselves, our past, and our place in the universe.

exactly. Well put. When you think about, humans are obsessed with time. It is the one asset we can never replace or replenish

 

[sithgoblin]

Given the time period your talking about (millions of years), in a sense we DID just pop up over night. Nobody can say that we didnt have any help getting to where we are today. What happend? Did the hair fall off our backs and start growing on our heads and above our eyes?? We are a pretty advanced species to evolve from neanderthauls to humans within a few thousand years.

I'm not saying God put adam and eve here and they spawned millions of humans. All I'm saying is that maybe we did have a little help. Personally, I think we hitched a ride on one of the meteors that killed the dinosaurs and we grew from that. I'm also not ruling out that there maybe, in a sense, "souls" in every living thing (some kind of energy source). But thats just my opinion.

Did you read what I wrote? We didn't just pop up over night. The hair didn't just fall off our backs. We evolved into what we are today through many SMALL, TINY, GRADUAL steps, over millions of years.

And yes, we did have help achieving our current state: Natural Selection. But natural selection is not a supernatural guiding force. It is a completely natural mechanism, and is very simple to understand: animals with characteristics that suit their environment will survive, while animals that do not suit their environment will die out. Environments are not static, they change over time, and thus animals change over time as well.