Baraka_Guru

From "Tidal Acceleration," Wikipedia:
Tidal acceleration - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If the universe has an intelligent creator, then why does Earth seem so impermanent in its design?

As a summary to the above, Earth:

1. Is slowly slowing its rotation
2. Will possibly have its oceans vaporized by the sun
3. Will possibly be destroyed by the sun's possible future red giant status

It will take over 2 billion years for this to play out, but if the universe were created by an intelligent designer, why would he or she do this to us?

• Do we assume that space travel and other habitable planets were an inevitability, a part of the intelligent creator's plan?
• Do we assume that the intelligent creator will still shape the universe even after it's been created?
• Is life destined for a non-material paradise instead?

Ultimately, is this information simply a major strike against intelligent design?

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

Hektore

You cannot assume motives.

And...you still can't prove there isn't a designer, therefore there could be one.

Which is why this argument will never go away, and there is no such thing as a blow against ID/Creationism.

Until you can prove a negative, the evidence in favour of the alternatives is irrelevant to the discussion. The conclusion is assumed beforehand, and the argument itself is a waste of time.

Kind of depressing really. That people buy into the crap notion that you have to declare any idea that you can't prove, beyond a shadow of a doubt, is false as being credible

__________________
The advantage law is the best law in rugby, because it lets you ignore all the others for the good of the game.

SecretMethod70

One thing that is generally true among faithful is that reality serves faith, and not the other way around. (It should be noted that this was not always true.)

Most believers in "intelligent design" would simply discount the facts you state by saying they haven't personally seen proof of this, it's just a scientific conspiracy, or some other such nonsense.

Then you have people who believe in a creator who takes special interest in humanity but who do not ignore what has been discovered by science. The only reasonable response for such a person is to assume your final point, that life is destined for a non-material paradise. Of course, this is still an assumption, and one which was not always present in the histories of modern religions. One's understanding of the creator's plan is always relative to what one assumes and/or does not understand about the world in which we live. It's a necessity of belief, and it's why the most astute people rarely remain in this phase for very long.

It is because of this that the only reasonable conclusion - if one is to believe in a creator of some sort - is to recognize that humans are likely nothing special in the creator's mind. We are a blip in creation, and probably one of thousands of species like us across the universe. As an intelligent species, maybe we are more beloved than the plants and animals, but it's certainly unlikely that we are most beloved across the universe.

Personally, I think our impermanence and insignificance are part of what makes life so special and wondrous. When you understand all the things that fell into place to put us here, it's really amazing, and far more poetic than a creator snapping its fingers. That doesn't mean there's not some force behind creation, but creation - which we discover through science - cannot contradict the creator. And considering the revelations we've learned about our relationship to the potential creator, given the discoveries we've made through science, I don't see how the question of a creator really matters.

__________________
Le temps détruit tout

"Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling

seamaiden

Everything in the universe is impermanent. Earth is just a small piece of the big picture, a picture that has no conceivable boundaries. I can't help but assume there are many habitable planets in existence that do support intelligent life forms and they are just as temporary as we are.

Maybe the intention was for constant change, or perhaps there's a flaw in the design. Whichever, it's obvious we aren't meant to know the answers at this point in our existence. I truly hope our awareness continues in some form after death, but just in case it doesn't, I'm trying to live in my own personal paradise, right here and now (not a whole lot of material things are necessary for that).

Jetée

God helps those who help themselves.


Don't be blind, work towards your aim, (rockets and space bubbles and whatnot) and you shall be rewarded.

__________________
As human beings, our greatness lies not so much in being able to remake the world (that is the myth of the Atomic Age) as in being able to remake ourselves.

—Mohandas K. Gandhi

ring

Why split hairs?

The wise hare above me inhabits many languages and speaks many forms.

I bestill my own noise,
and then I can hear.

Ourcrazymodern?

Periodic recycling? Given that I'll long be part of the compost, I can't imagine why to worry about a future so very far forward. The infinite itself might not have motives.

__________________
BE JUST AND FEAR NOT

ObieX

I would say that these things are not an argument for OR against intelligent design.

If you're against intelligent design: it is what it is. If you're for intelligent design: it still is what it is, except you get to ponder the motivations.

Pondering the motivations of God would seem to be pointless. If God put something someplace that's where it always needed to be. To go any farther than that would require knowing God's "ultimate plan", and that "plan" would be on a scale of complexity far beyond anything a human could ever understand, I'd reckon.

Humanity won't survive to see the sun swallow the earth. We'll either all be dead, or evolved into something else by then. Remember, we're talking billions of years here. By the time the sun expands to a point where the oceans boil off or the earth is swallowed by the sun an exodus would have happened long before. We'll have no use for the cradle that was Earth at that point.

__________________
We Must Dissent.

Mantus

Some years ago I came to conclusion that some people MUST have an answer to life's questions while other are perfectly content living life knowing they will never fully comprehend the universe they live in. I'm the later.

Ironically in order to have The Answer all one has to do is stop asking questions. But there is always another question and someone will always find another answer.

The watchmaker analogy is probably the weakest answer out there. Intelligent design offers zero insight about our universe – once dissected it’s completely moot. I have no idea how some people are willing to accept such an empty answer to some of life’s biggest questions...

Hehe I though ID was rebutted in 1886 with the appendix.

Baraka_Guru

Yeah, I thought of that afterward as well. It's an excellent point.

I'm the latter too. Well, actually, I'm a combination of both positions. I know we'll never fully comprehend the universe. I don't think we'll ever fully comprehend our own brains and bodies, let alone everything outside of them. Everything is changing. (The whole idea of constant flux.) How can we gain and hang onto ultimate omniscient knowledge? I think it's impossible.

At the same time, I strongly believe in the pursuit of knowledge and finding as many answers as humanly possible. Through knowledge and understanding, we can make (and have made) our lives better. The 20th century alone has brought us many things. Improvements of many kinds that have had a positive impact on all walks of life---from the multi-kajillionaire right down to the destitute in Third World countries.

I think it comes down to achieving a fine balance between the two positions. The long view might not serve much to us personally, but I think generation to generation we might find solutions to the seeming inevitability that the Earth isn't going to be around forever. We might not be either, but we'll certainly do what we can to keep on keepin' on.

Oh, snap!

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

Mantus

For my own sake I’m making an attempt to break down the “Intelligent Design” argument and sharing my thoughts with everyone here. Like I mentioned earlier claiming that our universe was created by an intelligent being is absolutely useless, and here is why:

There are the three fallacies within The Watchmaker Argument: the fallacy of circular logic, false analogy and special pleading. Logic aside it’s important to understand that this answer to one of life’s deepest questions is hollow because it offers us no real insight of our universe.

Having a Watchmaker doesn’t make our search for knowledge any easier; if a being that created the universe is as complex as the universe then the existence of such a being in no way simplifies our understanding of the universe. In fact, it increases the complexity of our universe twofold: we must now understand a being and its creation. If a creator is less complex than his creation then knowing this being is not enough to understand our universe.

To claim that God created the universe is a copout in the pursuit of understanding. It is a choice to end pursuit of knowledge. If people who believe the Intelligent Design argument were truly interested in expanding their understanding of the universe then they would take steps to understand the creator and creation. “God made it happen” is not much of an answer – it certainly doesn’t satisfy my curiosity.

Cernunnos

Can one know the infinite mind of God? By definition, it is beyond human understanding. To speculate as to its motives is a vain effort in futility.

I don't believe any immaterial being exists, and certainly not a creator of the universe. However, if the creator did exist, had some unique interest in the survival of our species, and possessed the means of precisely determining all future events (three uncertain, unverifiable premises), it could have predicted the eventual rise of space technology and known that humanity would ascend into the stars. As such, the demise of our original planet would be irrelevant to the continuation of the species.

Another possibility is that the creator intended us to die in a cataclysmic event and reach a higher plane of existence, which is laughably preposterous, though no more so than the scenario described in the former paragraph.

Epiphelion

Personally I think the application of Occam's Razor pretty much settles the issue for all practical intents and purposes. This does not mean that I would say no god exists, I have not been everywhere/when. Like has been said already, knowing whether a god exists, or ever existed, does not really contribute to our understanding of existence and is therefore a moot point.
The real pressing issue of our times, in my opinion, is not really whether a designer, or god, exists, but what influence the belief in such an entity should be playing in the ongoing, evolutionary changes that occur in the structure of society. It is my firm conviction that the present state of affairs will lead to our doom, but that is a different topic.

__________________

remy1492

The idea of the sun swallowing up the 3 nearest planets is not good for real estate sales.

The idea and chance of ANY life appearing is so remote, yet we have it. Then the idea that mammals had a chance to evolve after the Dinosaurs got evicted, also was a slim chance, yet it happened.
Then to be us, and not a Neandertal, another CHANCE.

We take our jackpot for granted. Or was it all by design?
Jared Diamond writes some good stuff and I like his ideas on most. Its chance and destiny, not design.

Then I think what is PAST all the solar systems moving outward toward empty space, on the limits of the big bang where we can barely detect red shift light. Is there complete void? are there other big bangs even further out? Or are we a small microcosm, like our whole SPACE being just something under a larger electron microscope in a much larger space, is our great intelligence simply going to vanish with the planet? Where will it all end, we want all the answers like the end of a book or movie to these questions.................................whoa.................ok, brain overload. Too much to consider.

back to watching cartoons 4me.

SecretMethod70

Everything comes down to coincidence if you break it down enough. It's not destiny that mine and onodrim's ancestry made decisions that ultimately led to the two of us going to the same high school and meeting each other. It's just how life happened. It's equally ridiculous to call it destiny that the extinction of the dinosaurs created the opening for mammals that eventually led to humans. Or, I could say it was destiny that I was forced to buy a cell phone when the Palm Centro came out. I guess we were made for each other! These are all examples of us attempting to attribute purpose to events that lack it.

__________________
Le temps détruit tout

"Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling

remy1492

well I suppose destiny is a way of saying, Chance, and that chance happens in a way that I cannot change, therefore destiny. To look at it otherwise would be cynical and akin to the guys at the bar down the street singing a country song about how their life sucks.

When I get something good or get something bad, I call it destiny, instead of chance. Makes me feel better

Willravel

That's a bit of a sideways attack on intelligent design (though it's truly fascinating information).

Cancer. Birth defects. Nondisjunction. The myriad evidence for mutation and natural selection taking place even within our lifetimes, let alone spanning all of geological time since abiogenesis (over 4 billion years).

It's not about religion, never has been never will be. Most of people believe in god or gods while believing in science and evidence (thank you, to all those people). It's about hubris and willful ignorance. It's about coming to a conclusion and then ignoring all the evidence that contradicts that conclusion even when that evidence is beyond question.

Trevrawr

I want to chip in on this just to say this is an excellent conversation.

I just want to add by saying whatever the final answer is to the "Big Question" we constantly ask ourselves and argue about. It has to be the greatest miracle ever. I mean think about yourself sitting in front of your computer as a human being. The human mind and body thinking and interacting it is all just so complex there has to be something. This cannot be all that there is.

And even if there isn't why do people try to knock another person's or disprove their faith. In the end, if there was nothing but the 6 foot hole that you were laying in. Would it actually have been so bad to believe and have hope that there was something out there for you when it was all said and done. I mean, live your life but there is no reason to not believe in an Intelligent Designer. And if we are all wrong or right, lets just hope the "ID" is forgiving.

I didn't mean to rant and didn't really add to the original subject just putting my 2cents in there and hoping you guys don't tear me apart but understand where im headed with that.

__________________
I get by with alittle help from my friends.
I get high with alittle help from my friends.

SecretMethod70

First, Trevrawr, welcome to TFP

No question about it, the universe is filled with many incredible things. I don't think that, in itself, makes it any more likely that there is an intelligent designer though. As humans, we're genetically predisposed to see patterns and attribute meaning to things. What we fail to notice, or give appropriate attention to, is that for all its wondrous complexity, life and Earth are terribly inefficient. If you learn enough about the science behind creation, it becomes clear that if there is a "creator," it's questionable whether or not that creator is actually intelligent.

But why not believe in one anyway? There are two main reasons. First, belief often comes with other requirements, so it is not true to say there's no harm in believing even if it's not true. Just going to church for an hour a week would waste about 4 months over the course of your life, not to mention potentially unnecessary moral hangups that are often associated with belief. Second, we have a fairly robust history as humans of seeking truth for its own sake. I see no reason to stop when it comes to matters of spirituality.

There are valid arguments on both sides when it comes to disproving another person's faith. In a discussion like this one, I see no reason why anyone should hold back. It's on-topic, and it makes no sense to say the believer can make arguments for belief but the atheist cannot make arguments for skepticism. I don't think you mean conversations like this one though, I think you're talking about the world at large. In that case, I cautiously agree. Atheist evangelism is just as annoying and inappropriate as any other sort of evangelism. That doesn't mean atheists should pretend they don't exist though. Demands for equal respect are often framed by believers as an attack on faith, but it really comes down to religious freedom. To an atheist, having "god" in the pledge, for example, is just as appalling as it would be for a Christian if the pledge said "under Krishna." A Christian would not be persecuting Hindu's by demanding Krishna be removed from the pledge, that Christian would simply be demanding that the country live up to the secular ideals it was founded under. (Indeed, "under God" was not added to the pledge until the 1950's).

This brings us back to intelligent design. One could read what I wrote above and think that is an argument for teaching intelligent design in schools. It is not. There is a significant difference between recognizing the rights of people to believe what they wish, and promoting particular beliefs. Where science differs from intelligent design and other theories on creation is that science is verifiable. We have a responsibility in our schools to only teach things that are generally known to be factual. There is ample evidence for evolution and an Earth that is about 4.5 billion years old. There is, literally, no evidence at all that there is an intelligent designer. People have a right to believe in one, but we should not specifically teach things that have no basis in verifiable fact.

Finally, I feel I should address the idea that whoever is right we should hope the theoretical intelligent designer is forgiving. This is, of course, another problem with intelligent design: it's just a veiled term for creationism and conservative Christian values. Plenty of other religions have no concept of a creator that judges, and apparently these religions do not fit into the intelligent design paradigm. Even if there is an intelligent designer, why would this being be particularly concerned with what we think of him? There are an estimated 6.25 billion life-supporting solar systems in the universe, and absent evidence that we are alone in the universe it is safe to assume that there is plenty of intelligent life out there beyond our communication capabilities. I see no reason to believe that if there were an intelligent designer, it would be so narcissistic as to demand all these species believe despite no evidence or face punishment. In fact, the whole concept of a deity that punishes people for lack of belief is appalling, particularly when you consider that lack of belief often comes from people using the very cognitive abilities the supposed creator gave us. Kind of sadistic, don't you think?

Anyway, despite the rant I do mean it: welcome to TFP If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to PM me or any of the other moderators!

__________________
Le temps détruit tout

"Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling

Trevrawr

Why thank you!


Geez though, this is what I didn't want to happen to me. I apologize for subtly putting my view of the world in my post. I should have thought my post over with more of a "neutral" thought process and response.

But if there is anything I believe in more, it would be religious freedom for anyone. As for Religion in schools I would hate to get caught up in that debate it would take another thread of its own. And possibly make myself look more stupid.(For lack of a better word)

Maybe, the idea should be switched then to whether we should be worried about our advancement to get off this planet to communicate and explore. Or was that the question all along? Or maybe we are right on track or maybe we will all blow each other off the face of the Earth tomorrow and melt away into the Abyss. No matter what happens I'm gonna leave this thread with the same beliefs I have and live the way I do. And I would hope that you do too. One thing is for sure, spoken by Ambrose Bierce, "Death is a dignitary who when he comes announced is to be received with formal manifestations of respect, even by those most familiar with him."

*Backs away slowly* I might return though

__________________
I get by with alittle help from my friends.
I get high with alittle help from my friends.

SecretMethod70

No worries, you didn't make yourself look stupid at all, and what other point of view could you put in your post other than your own? I may disagree, but that doesn't mean it's not a worthy discussion.

__________________
Le temps détruit tout

"Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling

kelly7898

Thank you for the post.
Hi guys, Im a newbie. Nice to join this forum.

__________________
Watch Remember Me Online Free