Marblehead Posted March 14, 2016 Stephen Hawking has already clarified that. The universe was created out of nothing. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Karl Posted March 14, 2016 Re: ----- "Outer space and infinity LOL You need to stop getting your science from Pixar ;-)" ----- It's actually much simpler than that. Everything on earth comes from outside of earth. Which is "outer space". The earth did not just suddenly appear from inside itself. The rest of what I wrote is also just as simple. -VonKrankenhaus Its the words you are using. The Earth is part of a finite universe, of which there is no inner, outer, or even a specific entity called space. I don't take issue with the rest of what you wrote, I just picked up on the infinity/space and thought of buzz light year which made me laugh. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Karl Posted March 14, 2016 Stephen Hawking has already clarified that. The universe was created out of nothing. Which is to say it wasn't created at all. Nothing is nothing, something is something. Are we back in the Dao/PI thread ? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
leth Posted March 14, 2016 (edited) Cosmogeny, that is the the origin or creation of existance is to be regarded as a mystery. We know very little of the beginning of existance itself, and the big bang is inevetably unexplainable in terms of what triggered it or how it came to be, we simply do not know. with any certainty. Furthermore from a purely logical standpoint, all forms of ontological emergency are paradoxial in nature, and it seems as if our current logic is inherently incapable of asserting the truth of cosmological emergency. (EDIT:) Or we have yet to come up with a theory that is logically consistent. Edited March 14, 2016 by leth Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Marblehead Posted March 14, 2016 Which is to say it wasn't created at all. Nothing is nothing, something is something. Are we back in the Dao/PI thread ? Yes, I think that was an interesting documentary the way and the when it was produced and presented. Stephen's primary theme was that no God is needed for the universe to exist. And I feel the documentary was a rebuttal against those who criticized Neil Tyson and the "Cosmos" series for saying that there was no God involved in the creation of the universe. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Marblehead Posted March 14, 2016 Cosmogeny, that is the the origin or creation of existance is to be regarded as a mystery. We know very little of the beginning of existance itself, and the big bang is inevetably unexplainable in terms of what triggered it or how it came to be, we simply do not know. with any certainty. Furthermore from a purely logical standpoint, all forms of ontological emergency are paradoxial in nature, and it seems as if our current logic is inherently incapable of asserting the truth of cosmological emergency. (EDIT:) Or we have yet to come up with a theory that is logically consistent. Yeah. I like the Big Bang theory. But always try to remember that it is a theory. There is enough data to make the assumption but we need remember that it is only an assumption. Theories and assumptions are pretty ease to come up with. Facts are a bit more difficult. But given that this is not a dream and we really are manifestations of Dao we should live and question. We won't always get the answers we want or even get an answer at all. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Karl Posted March 14, 2016 Yes, I think that was an interesting documentary the way and the when it was produced and presented. Stephen's primary theme was that no God is needed for the universe to exist. And I feel the documentary was a rebuttal against those who criticized Neil Tyson and the "Cosmos" series for saying that there was no God involved in the creation of the universe. That seems right. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Karl Posted March 14, 2016 Cosmogeny, that is the the origin or creation of existance is to be regarded as a mystery. We know very little of the beginning of existance itself, and the big bang is inevetably unexplainable in terms of what triggered it or how it came to be, we simply do not know. with any certainty. Furthermore from a purely logical standpoint, all forms of ontological emergency are paradoxial in nature, and it seems as if our current logic is inherently incapable of asserting the truth of cosmological emergency. (EDIT:) Or we have yet to come up with a theory that is logically consistent. Existence is an axiom and therefore irreducible. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Junko Posted March 14, 2016 God is love.So according to this 'love'contribute a lot to find out about it.I am sure. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Marblehead Posted March 14, 2016 God is love.So according to this 'love'contribute a lot to find out about it.I am sure. That is a concept I have heard many times before. I try to never argue against it. It is a good concept. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Junko Posted March 14, 2016 Well to me love is crazy. So I have to find out about this in a crazy way. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nungali Posted March 14, 2016 You already talked of genetics and environmental influences. But there is more in my book. And your mention of Man's "imaginative soul" leads me to the question: What was the "soul" that "imagined" humanity as a whole? My concept of 'soul' is seen as a development brought about by the circulation of those two forces I mentioned ... circulated in cycles ( think alchemical 'circulation' ) over hundreds of thousands of years. Can we agree on the World Soul? We can , as a term, but what is understood by that term ? We may differ there. Did it express an "Uridee" in the Platonic sense? Sorry, I am unfamiliar with the term I hope now you start seeing what I meant by different influences coming together. I was not talking about different DNA strands - at least not primarily. Yep. But now that you brought this up: Where do, for instance, the "swimming skins" between our fingers come from? No other primates have them. Good question . Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Marblehead Posted March 14, 2016 But now that you brought this up: Where do, for instance, the "swimming skins" between our fingers come from? No other primates have them. Good question . Carry-overs of evolution from when we were fishes. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nungali Posted March 14, 2016 Adam came from Mars. Eve came from Venus. They mated. The rest is history. ..... and then ... there were these two brothers - the 'Gemini twins' ('Lovers' - one from heaven, one from hell ) ... everything was sweet .... then they started to fight about stuff. That brother's story , I have seen it in so many different cultures. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nungali Posted March 14, 2016 Energy/matter wise this is a given. I have noticed that the theory that biological life originating from outer space is gaining more fans. Well, its a handy shift of the problem to 'another place ' . How did God come into existence ? Some other God made him, of course . 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nungali Posted March 14, 2016 Humans have a side of to taking risks and exploring. Yes Junko ... this is part of what developed and what is expressed in Mankind's ' imaginative soul' . Still, it is not a quality that some animals lack . You must realise that dogs like exploring and taking risks too ... and sometimes, just doing things for the pure fun of it ! ever been on a 'dog sled' ? but the human 'imaginative soul' leads Man to far more than this. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nungali Posted March 14, 2016 In terms of the origin of mankind, what are things we can observe, how can we test our belives around the origin of mankind and what sort of personal experiences can help us understand the truth about the origin of mankind? Through empirical evidence and clear analysis of that evidence removed from our own contextual beliefs ... which can include our personal experiences . Otherwise we tend to interpret our findings with prejudice. In the forward to ' Ancient Egypt - from the First Farmers to the Great Pyramid' John Romer has a great section on this. How our interpretations beyond the empirical findings caused us to have a slanted view, and how to actually make accurate conclusions from the evidence at hand. For example, in much of the old post Victorian archeology, it was interpreted that great rises in culture were bought about by some superior civilised 'race' colonising and teaching . ...... Ummmmmm ... just like the British Empire thought about itself . 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nungali Posted March 14, 2016 Stephen Hawking has already clarified that. The universe was created out of nothing. gotta start somewhere Its either that or blame some trash from another universe , a previous universe, God made God Its either turtles all the way down .... or somewhere a turtle 'just appeared outta nuthin ! ' 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nungali Posted March 14, 2016 But now that you brought this up: Where do, for instance, the "swimming skins" between our fingers come from? No other primates have them. Carry-overs of evolution from when we were fishes. Huh ? We were the only primates that were fishes ? 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
thelerner Posted March 14, 2016 But now that you brought this up: Where do, for instance, the "swimming skins" between our fingers come from? No other primates have them. Carry-overs of evolution from when we were fishes. I like the theory that a close ancestor of ours spent time in the swamps. A few thousand maybe 10's of 1,000's of years which made us naked apes (fur being impractical due to dry cleaning costs), with bigger brains that ate fish and were good for cooling. Some mammals like whales and dolphins headed out to sea, we spent time in the swamp, then came back to land. Can't say its a well received theory, but its out there and I'd put $2 bucks on it. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Karl Posted March 15, 2016 (edited) Well I know precisely nothing about the origin of man, but it would seem logical to me that we are made up of all the other kinds of things on the planet. So we are part, virus, bacteria, insect, fungus, plant, tree, flower, worm, jellyfish, snake, fish, animal, bird, as indeed everything else is and which we live symbiotically to the extent that many are now integral to our systems It's all cellular growth multiplying in response to the environment. Something converts something to something else. We have organic acid and bacteria in our guts and even a rudimentary kind of brain controlling it seperately to the one inside our skulls. The most miraculous thing-beyond our consciousness-is our unique ability to reason, perhaps as result of the need to communicate hunting perceptions which then became conceptions. That change is such a radical development it really does make it totally impossible to predict the next evolutionary twists. We can now do literally anything within the bounds of physical laws. It's only a matter of time before we harness a virtually limitless energy source and a method to cross enormous distances between galaxies, colonise and terraform planets. Who knows what is next for us. Maybe we make our own worlds and rapid transport system between them like an advanced metro. That life crawls forward is the universe continually evolving itself. Incredible stuff. Edited March 15, 2016 by Karl 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Marblehead Posted March 15, 2016 That brother's story , I have seen it in so many different cultures. Just as strangely, that stuff happens with nearly all species of life. I guess it has to be attributed to the instinct for survival - survival of the fittest. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Marblehead Posted March 15, 2016 gotta start somewhere Its either that or blame some trash from another universe , a previous universe, God made God Its either turtles all the way down .... or somewhere a turtle 'just appeared outta nuthin ! ' He did stick with evolution though. I still haven't figured out where he got the initial pure energy though. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Marblehead Posted March 15, 2016 Huh ? We were the only primates that were fishes ? I know. I had to make some kind of response. I didn't do the research. A comparison between humans and other primates would be necessary, especially us and the other apes. (Not monkeys.) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vonkrankenhaus Posted March 15, 2016 Re: ----- "You already talked of genetics and environmental influences. But there is more in my book. And your mention of Man's "imaginative soul" leads me to the question: What was the "soul" that "imagined" humanity as a whole?" ----- Animal was created by vegetal. The thing that shaped human being from ape was that the climate cooled (due to position of solar system around galaxy) and large fruits and nuts contracted into seeds like those of wild grasses and small pulses (beans). Wild grases are the most recently evolved plants. Human being are the most recently evolved animal. Throughout evolution this has happened. Changes in vegetal realm become changes in animal realm. We are the dreams of plants. -VonKrankenhaus 5 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
