IMPORTANT NOTE:
You do NOT have to register to read, post, listen or contribute. If you simply wish to remain fully anonymous, you can still contribute.
|
Home  Forums |
|
|
|
|
Topic History of: Benazir Bhutto killed
Max. showing the last 5 posts - (Last post first)
|
The Cat |
Not really wanting to labour this point, but again I disagree. If the Christian God is all powerful, then it's certainly possible that he could have created the universe in 6 days. It's beyond our comprehension, but so is infinity. Someone once said that if we could understand God, we'd be equal to him and therefore he would not be God. Man's theories of the creation of the universe continue to change as more discoveries are made. What we think is fact today may be disproven tomorrow. We are still a tiny speck in eternity, still trying to explain what happens on our one small planet in just one of numerous galaxies.
On the issue of human brains. If they become less developed through lack of use, that's just evolution, not devolution. There is a snake with small useless limbs attached to it's side. The scientific theory is that it "evolved" from being a kind of lizard due to using it's limbs less and less. Not all evolution is progress. |
|
Anthony |
The Cat wrote:
I disagree that Darwin blew Christianity out of the water. He was a Christian himself, of sorts. He explained evolution, but for something to evolve it must first come into existence (be created somehow). I believe that evolution and creation can easily co-exist.
Darwinism doesn't disprove every kind of creation theory, but it certainly rules out Christianity's version. Smarter Christians have of course moved the goalposts and decided that all that creation in 6 days poppycock was meant to be symbolic all along, but surely either you believe in the teachings of a religious book or not. If you start picking and choosing the bits you like best, you have invented a new religion.
I agree that the masses are using their brains less than in previous eras, but that is not indicative of a less developed brain. I'm not certain, but I'm unaware of any precedent for a species devolving. We could be the first, I suppose, but I doubt it. |
|
The Cat |
I disagree that Darwin blew Christianity out of the water. He was a Christian himself, of sorts. He explained evolution, but for something to evolve it must first come into existence (be created somehow). I believe that evolution and creation can easily co-exist.
I think our brains are possibly less developed than in previous centuries. We have more technology and devices to make life easier so that many of us need to think less. You just have to take a group of teens on a camping trip and see how clueless they are without their gadgets. I'm continuously reminded of the Zager and Evans song 'In the year 2525'.
H G Well's vision of the human race being split into the practical, sinister Morlocks and the hopeless Eloi becomes less far fetched. |
|
Anthony |
Anyone who knows me well would be amused to see me as the optimist in any discussion! I'm on unfamiliar territory. JK, I really don't see you plodding the streets of London proclaiming that the end of the world is nigh! Mother Nature has a mighty armoury but she has never been able to take out more than a few thousand humans in one fell swoop. Just what sort of event would it take to eliminate all 7 billion of us? Even the worst global warming case scenario would see the likes of Bangladesh, the Netherlands and South East England disappearing under the sea. Devastating, catastrophic, yes, but not the end.
The worst type of nuclear holocaust would kill millions and put human evolution back by centuries, but there would still be survivors who would regroup and rebuild.
Cat, just because our brains are not yet developed enough to grasp the notion of infinity doesn't mean there must be a magical force behind it. Darwin blew the tenets of Judaism, Islam and Christianity out of the water, and many still haven't caught up with him, but they will eventually. I agree with you fully that humanity has a badly misguided view of what civilization should mean but as I said before, we have only just set out on our journey.
I'm not really optimistic as none of us will be around to witness the enlightenment. We'll just have more of the same miseries inflicted on us, but the end of the human species will not be one of them. |
|
The Cat |
That's what I thought when I read your post, JK. Prophet of Doom! The end is nigh! 
I'm sure people would have had your view during the black death, the 100 year war, the two world wars, the 17th century witch hunts, etc. etc. Man's history is crammed with appalling violence and injustice, and each generation abuses the planet worse than the last. Despite this we continue to exist and multiply.
Anthony, I think there will always be things beyond man's understanding. Until we can answer two basic questions - where does space end? - If it ends, what's beyond it? - we can never say that there is no greater power or intelligence. It's taken us thousands of years to just travel to the moon.
Unfortunately, man's idea of being fully civilized is being able to do things as fast as possible with the least effort regardless of the cost to others. We've increased our knowledge, but not our intelligence. Our top modern engineers are still baffled by Stone Henge and the pyramids.
Mankind will be around for a while yet, but that will not necessarily be a good thing for planet earth. |
|
|
|
|
