How's this coming along in the USA these days? We haven't heard anything in the foreign media in a while...

bwahahaha yeah what a concept.

I dunno, it actually makes more sense than most of the religious crap. I've long thought that people sell their god short. If "he" is so damned all-knowing, all-seeing, etc, why do people think they can understand what "he" is up to, or what "his" plan is?

Maybe cuz we invented "him"?

ID is religious crap. I'm not getting involved in this thread for fear of tiring those of weak constitution, but I'll just leave this: Recent Gallup Poll shows 39% of Americans believe in Evolution
USA! USA! USA!
Fuck yeah.

OK, agreed, it's religious crap, but isn't it at least basically saying that we've evolved cuz that's god's plan for us?

Beats the shit out of the Adam and Eve bullshit, doesn't it?

You know, when you sit down and really start thinking about reality, matter, energy, the Universe... How big is the universe? Where does it end? Does it end? What's on the other side of it? What if there is no end? Matter is energy, but why has it formed into matter, and how come out of all of this shit that just happened that I have consciousness and in an extremely short amount of time why is the human race already learning how to rip it all apart at the seams?

I mean, just the fact that all of this crazy shit existsmakes intelligent design as likely as anything else (in my mind).

What I mean is that I find existence itself just as unlikely as anything else. Why should there be a universe? It wouldn't make any difference in the grand scheme of things if there wasn't. Right?

For me, ID is not so much about the rational sounding point of view that it projects, its the selling of obvious religious concepts in Orwellian newspeak that makes me disregard it.

Physics theory is just as batshit. And just as impossible to prove.

You know, when you sit down and really start thinking about reality, matter, energy, the Universe... How big is the universe? Where does it end? Does it end? What's on the other side of it? What if there is no end? Matter is energy, but why has it formed into matter, and how come out of all of this shit that just happened that I have consciousness and in an extremely short amount of time why is the human race already learning how to rip it all apart at the seams?

There are actually some really good answers to those questions.  The universe's size is measured in light years, and is based on our measurements of the CMB.  Where the universe ends is actually a meaningless question, since the spacetime occupied by the universe defines the borders of where something CAN exist.  The matter-to-energy question is a pretty interesting one too, and people have spent the last 60 years trying to work that out.  It's interesting.

And you're giving the human race too much credit.  The closest we've come to ripping apart the universe is POTENTIALLY being able to make a MICRO black hole, and all that would do is destroy Earth.  And we'll only be able to do that if we can fire up the new accelerator in Europe (which we use to smash very small particles against one another, to see what happens - yes, this is our science at work!).

Physics theory is just as batshit. And just as impossible to prove.

Untrue!  Proving quantum physics theories is the reason we have particle accelerators and such.

PS - Intelligent Design is bullshit.

There are actually some really good answers to those questions.  The universe's size is measured in light years, and is based on our measurements of the CMB.  Where the universe ends is actually a meaningless question, since the spacetime occupied by the universe defines the borders of where something CAN exist.  The matter-to-energy question is a pretty interesting one too, and people have spent the last 60 years trying to work that out.  It's interesting.

What we have is an idea of how large the OBSERVABLE universe might be, but really, what does it look like to someone on the edge of that universe? Do you see galaxies on one side of you and nothingness on the other? Or does the Universe's own gravity bend light around itself so that you see shit all around you and have no idea that you're on the "edge"?

Additionally you can't simply discount the question of where the universe ends as a meaningless question based on the rationale that spacetime occupied by the universe defines the borders of where something CAN exist, because if the Universe exists and can expand to occupy more space then there must already be space for it to occupy, right?

And you're giving the human race too much credit.  The closest we've come to ripping apart the universe is POTENTIALLY being able to make a MICRO black hole, and all that would do is destroy Earth.  And we'll only be able to do that if we can fire up the new accelerator in Europe (which we use to smash very small particles against one another, to see what happens - yes, this is our science at work!).

Too much credit? Here's the story so far... Universe springs up out of nowhere, life gets created. Life evolves, monkeys lose their fur and start using stone tools. Intelligence of furless monkies increases, sharing of knowledge advances technology faster and faster. Then you get the atomic bomb. Next thing you know we're ripping apart particles to see what makes matter, space and time itself tick. With our meager intelligence we're actually trying to reverse engineer the Universe with a small measure of success. How is that too much credit?

The egg came first.

Here's the main problem:  "Advocates of intelligent design argue that it is a scientific theory, and seek to fundamentally redefine science to accept supernatural explanations. The consensus in the scientific community is that intelligent design is not science." (wiki'd).  The proponents of intelligent design in its current state are not themselves very intelligent.  It is complete antithesis to modern scientific method, and trying to get it condoned as science is both wrong and completely misguided.  The argument itself is a philosophical, theological, maybe even observational one, but it is certainly not a scientific one because it cannot be measure in any real quantifiable way by man.  And to try to advocate that it be taught in primary schools as FACT is completely misguided and dangerous -- there is inherently no way to prove it as fact short of god himself gracing our presence and saying to the people of earth "yes, this is what i did, pretty sweet huh?" so there is no point in teaching it to people as fact.

That's what really shapes my opinion of ID.  If you want to argue that evolution is a wrench and God's running around tightening the bolts on all of creation, that's fine with me.

If you want to have a religion & philosophy class and discuss that, it's fine with me too.

Just keep it out of science classes.  Science is concerned with the wrench, not who conceivably might be turning it.

On the other hand, a part of me thinks there is a big stake of things that science cannot explain but may gradually attain the ability to do so.  Supernatural phenomenon if you will.  Theoretical physics is one of the only fields that attempts a lot of these things, but throughout history science has gradually whittled these types of things away and they have been "explained by man" to rational processes.  There are also probably some things that man will never be able to solve rationally and the perpetual existence of these unexplained mysteries of the universe will continue to allow those who purport a "God theory" room to debate until absolutely 100% of all phenomenon can be attributed somehow which is a virtual impossibility.

I think there are a vast number of questions that humans will never be able to adequately answer with science.  I doubt we'll hit the technological levels necessary to make such investigations (of course that's my own bias, because I'm firmly convinced we're headed to a technological peak and subsequent decline).

Plus, there's always philosophical skepticism to fall back on!

@Libertine: Well said.

Physics theory is just as batshit. And just as impossible to prove.

Untrue!  Proving quantum physics theories is the reason we have particle accelerators and such.

You may as well spend that money trying to prove God exists. So you smash a few particals together, you observe the results, and you then try to fit it to the theory.
Remember, theories are not always able to be proven. That's why they're called theories.

Tell me that the concept of a piece of matter existing in two places at the same time isnt as wacky a concept as a God who oversees everything.

Physics theory is just as batshit. And just as impossible to prove.

Untrue!  Proving quantum physics theories is the reason we have particle accelerators and such.

You may as well spend that money trying to prove God exists. So you smash a few particals together, you observe the results, and you then try to fit it to the theory.
Remember, theories are not always able to be proven. That's why they're called theories.

Tell me that the concept of a piece of matter existing in two places at the same time isnt as wacky a concept as a God who oversees everything.

Arguably, this is the same thing I was saying to Doormouse in another thread.  I figured I'd give his side of the argument a shot here. 

What we have is an idea of how large the OBSERVABLE universe might be, but really, what does it look like to someone on the edge of that universe? Do you see galaxies on one side of you and nothingness on the other? Or does the Universe's own gravity bend light around itself so that you see shit all around you and have no idea that you're on the "edge"?

it would be extremely dark, since the edge of the universe would have very little visible light (most of its edge being high-energy particles released during the big bang).  stay in one place long enough, and you'd eventually see something, but then you wouldn't be at the edge of the universe anymore!

Additionally you can't simply discount the question of where the universe ends as a meaningless question based on the rationale that spacetime occupied by the universe defines the borders of where something CAN exist, because if the Universe exists and can expand to occupy more space then there must already be space for it to occupy, right?

No, you really can discount it!

The problem is, we're too hung up on thinking about things, so even nothing ends up having some physical parameters; a box full of nothing is bounded within a certain space.  Even a vacuum in space has a boundary that can be measured by travelling through it.

but the universe's shape is defined by the contents of the universe.  whatever the furthest point of the universe is, that point will be occupied by matter and/or energy.  and if you ask "what's beyond that point?", it's really nothing...  because there's actually nothing there to define the spacetime.

so, to prove me wrong, you travel to the edge of the universe, and then go BEYOND the point.  You say "see?  there WAS something beyond the edge of the universe!"  but now, YOU are the thing defining the edge of the universe.

What's beyond you?  Throw a baseball - now it defines the edge.

And so on, and so on, and so on.  Turtles, all the way down.

No, you really can discount it!

It's nice to see that the ideas you've decided on are the right ones.  I think you should start writing letters to the physicists, astrophysicists, and astronomers who wonder what, if anything, lies beyond the edge of the universe. Do it in your own blood and use postage stamps that you made yourself with crayons so they know to take you seriously.

it would be extremely dark, since the edge of the universe would have very little visible light (most of its edge being high-energy particles released during the big bang).  stay in one place long enough, and you'd eventually see something, but then you wouldn't be at the edge of the universe anymore!

I guess I'm thinking more being just a bit inside the edge rather than right on it. Some physicists think it's that it may be impossible for even light to leave the universe because of the universe's own gravity. The universe becomes it's own gravitational lens, bending light back upon itself. If that's the case then it could be really difficult to ever find an actual "edge" if one does indeed exist.

you homoes are arguing about stuff that nobody will ever know way to waiste your time nerds.

Thanks to modern technology, and a small fee, pious christians don't even have to pray for themselves anymore.
Now they can reserve their place in heaven ... on autopilot.

Information Age Prayer

"Information Age Prayer is a subscription service utilizing a computer with text-to-speech capability to incant your prayers each day. It gives you the satisfaction of knowing that your prayers will always be said even if you wake up late, or forget."

God ignored stephen hawking, I doubt the christains will have better luck.

Physics theory is just as batshit. And just as impossible to prove.

Untrue!  Proving quantum physics theories is the reason we have particle accelerators and such.

You may as well spend that money trying to prove God exists. So you smash a few particals together, you observe the results, and you then try to fit it to the theory.
Remember, theories are not always able to be proven. That's why they're called theories.

Tell me that the concept of a piece of matter existing in two places at the same time isnt as wacky a concept as a God who oversees everything.

I'm with Mosh.

yup. Silly Christians and their "one true God".

Allah Akbar!

Religion might seem like hokum, some of its concepts are crazy and all, but it does do an awful lot of good for a lot of people.

Science might be rational and all, but there is a lot of it that is plainly insane. Some of the outputs from scientific discoveries are straight up frightening.

I think a society where technocrats rule would be just as awful to live in as one where the leading religion is in charge.

you and I should be running this show. Put another leg of lamb on the barbie

you and I should be running this show. Put another leg of lamb on the barbie

We'll fuckin' lead as two kings...

you and I should be running this show. Put another leg of lamb on the barbie

Too much like hard work.

I'm an agnostic and a hater of organized religion, but I think that the possibility that there might be some intelligent design makes a lot of sense.  Like, how in the shit does a plant know that it is easy prey, so it somehow sends genetic signals to it's offspring to grow spines as a defense?  Or how in the blazing fuck does the Rafflesia arnoldii realize that by creating the smell of rotting flesh, that it can attract flies to pollinate it?  I mean, this shit boggles my mind.

A while ago I found out that Ben Stein, who is an extremely intelligent and educated man, made a documentary called "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed" exploring the concept of intelligent design that received almost universally negative reviews from people calling it religious propaganda and full of lies and falsehoods.  This surprised me because I didn't think that Ben Stein could make such an alleged ignorant film....

Well the amazing part was that after I watched it, and read so many of the countless negative reviews and the few positive reviews just from stupid Christians, I realized that those people JUST DIDN'T GET THE FILM.  I was like, wow, am I the only one who understands what Mr. Stein was driving at and that he made quite a remarkable and interesting film that made actual intelligent points?  I think the simple fact is that it went over the heads of the majority of people who watched it because they lacked the intellect and the minimum agnostic open-minded view to comprehend it.

That's a movie I've been meaning to watch for a while now.

I'm a documentary junkie.