Jump to content
Science Forums

Does God exist?


Jim Colyer

Recommended Posts

Moon

 

First, I will drink to that. In fact I have a glass of beer with me at this very moment. Ben Frankin wrote that beer is strong evidence God wants us to be happy! I believe in beer! Further, if we are the only intelligent beings [unprovable in my estimation] then that DOES present a quandary, given the statistical probablilities.

 

Further, even on this improbably perfect planet, we have not seen much in the way of intermediary forms of intelligence, unless we stipiulate Niendertals were one such species. Correct me if I am mistaken, but hominids of one sort or another made stone tools and used fire for a very long time, but never seem to have mastered plane geometry or quadratic equations. Or, for that matter, survival.

 

That some members our species only a couple of hundred thousand years old mastered calculus is very very weird indeed. Certainly EYE never did. The dinosaurs had hundreds (?) of millions of years and not one of them seems to have been interested in slap stick commedy.

 

Four or five BILLION years of life, and natural selection only once selected for intelligence? Barely. Clearly intelligence is WAY outside the box of evolutionary history.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Moon

 

First, I will drink to that. In fact I have a glass of beer with me at this very moment. Ben Frankin wrote that beer is strong evidence God wants us to be happy! I believe in beer! Further, if we are the only intelligent beings [unprovable in my estimation] then that DOES present a quandary, given the statistical probablilities.

 

Oh for sure from what we know so far we are a statistical improbability, too bad all we have is a curve with one data point.

 

Further, even on this improbably perfect planet, we have not seen much in the way of intermediary forms of intelligence, unless we stipiulate Niendertals were one such species. Correct me if I am mistaken, but hominids of one sort or another made stone tools and used fire for a very long time, but never seem to have mastered plane geometry or quadratic equations. Or, for that matter, survival.

 

I think we can assume that Neanderthals were indeed our equals in many ways, possibly even our superiors in some ways as well, the fact we are here they are not proves nothing but they were unlucky. There is some reason to think they were just beginning their own "leap" froward when the climate changed and we arrived, kind of a double whammy. We cannot say what might have happened if the climate had continued to favor them over us. Anything we might say is pure speculation but it is interesting speculation.

 

That some members our species only a couple of hundred thousand years old mastered calculus is very very weird indeed. Certainly EYE never did. The dinosaurs had hundreds (?) of millions of years and not one of them seems to have been interested in slap stick commedy.

 

Again to speculate what the dinosaurs might have become is interesting, they were progressing toward larger brains and better body forms when the asteroid hit, if not for that he beings discussing this might be Dinosauroids instead of humanoids.

 

intelligent dinosaurs

 

To say dinosaurs had time to develop but didn't ignores the fact the mammals are actually older than dinosaurs in terms of when they first came on the scene so we have had hundreds of millions of year to evolve intelligence as well. Maybe we just had more time?

 

Four or five BILLION years of life, and natural selection only once selected for intelligence? Barely. Clearly intelligence is WAY outside the box of evolutionary history.

 

 

Possibly, but if intelligence hadn't developed we wouldn't be here to discuss why now would we? Until we get some more data points on our curve it will really be nonsensical to say we are or are not a statistical improbability, possibly the only thing our presence says is it took a long time for advanced nervous systems and large brains to become an evolutionary positive.....:shrug:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I Want To Hear From ET

 

However, two things seem to conspire against this happening, both of which seem evidence against his existence.

 

First, but least, is we have been searching for decades without success.

 

Second, and far more troubling, is the following. Specifically, if intellegence is common, or even rare in the universe, that means many many many such civilizations would have arrisen in the distant past, but seem not to have erected any beacons for the rest of us.

 

For arguements sake, let us assume our searches continue to be unrequited. Further, lets assume our technological society continues hundreds of years into the future without ET, and that our civilization seems secure for the long run. [if intelligent civilizations are as numerous as some believe, this assumption of long lasting technological civilizations seems reasonable for some of them].

 

At some point, realizing our own civilization is secure for the indefinite future, I propose we [and the others] would erect beacons that would assume a long standing future. These becons are for the dedicated purpose of both anouncing our own existence, and enticing others to respond.

 

WE are way early in this, and our beacons might need tens of thousand of years, or much more, to reach the others. However, theirs would have been on the way millions, or even billions of years before our own. And assuming the lowest common denomenator, theirs would be entirely accessible to our own early technology.

 

Yet still, we have squat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I Want To Hear From ET

 

However, two things seem to conspire against this happening, both of which seem evidence against his existence.

 

First, but least, is we have been searching for decades without success.

 

We would all like to hear from ET, we have been searching for what we think ET would do using technology we think ET would use. This I think is a very problematic attitude. What if ET is significantly different from us and what we think should be done?

 

 

Second, and far more troubling, is the following. Specifically, if intellegence is common, or even rare in the universe, that means many many many such civilizations would have arrisen in the distant past, but seem not to have erected any beacons for the rest of us.

 

Why would they?

 

For arguements sake, let us assume our searches continue to be unrequited. Further, lets assume our technological society continues hundreds of years into the future without ET, and that our civilization seems secure for the long run. [if intelligent civilizations are as numerous as some believe, this assumption of long lasting technological civilizations seems reasonable for some of them].

 

At some point, realizing our own civilization is secure for the indefinite future, I propose we [and the others] would erect beacons that would assume a long standing future. These becons are for the dedicated purpose of both anouncing our own existence, and enticing others to respond.

 

I am sorry dude but again I have to ask "Why?" I am not even sure we would do this much less be willing to predict what some non human intelligence would do.

 

WE are way early in this, and our beacons might need tens of thousand of years, or much more, to reach the others. However, theirs would have been on the way millions, or even billions of years before our own. And assuming the lowest common denomenator, theirs would be entirely accessible to our own early technology.

 

You do realize our own efforts are not as all encompassing as many think, so far we really cannot expect to find a passive signal from very far away, any signal would indeed have to be intentional to get our attention with the way were are currently able to look. This assumes that the aliens want to be found, they want to contact us, and that they are using technology we can detect. That is a big assumption. I honestly don't think we can assume any of these things. So silence is not evidence of absence of alien civilizations.

 

Yet still, we have squat.

 

I would like to ask, "How many civilizations would it take to be evidence that we are not so special that only god could have intervened and brought us into being?" To me the more there are the more likely that "God" or a god like being is responsible. The fewer there are the more likely it is it's all just a random fluctuation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In General,

 

If technological civilizations are common, then some of them are likely billions of years old. Yet we see no archaological evidence of them at all. Our pitiful 200 years of technology has already left all sorts of electromagnetic archaololgical evidence, even if accidental. Further, we are already looking for others with which to communicate. Almost by default that will mean we will either build beacons to acknowledge our reception of their communication, or build beacons to attract attention to ourseflves.

 

This seems a simple deduction either way. It DOES imply a certain willingness to wait centuries or millenia for replies. But for civilizations that may already be billions of years old it hardly seems a burdon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Moon,

 

You state you would be more likely to attribute intelligent design to the universe if there are more, not fewer technological civilizations. I don't see that as an unrealistic interpretation. I see it the other way. If we are the only ones then I would be inclined to suspect only an intelligent design would have set in motion such a near mathematical impossibility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In General,

 

If technological civilizations are common, then some of them are likely billions of years old.

 

Please define common.

 

 

Yet we see no archaological evidence of them at all.

 

How do you know that? maybe we are just not advanced enough to know it when we see it. maybe flare stars are advanced civilizations communicating with each other, we really do not have enough information to know anything, we know squat (to use your words) about what an advanced civilization would do. Possibly they like to remain hidden for some reason we are simply not aware of yet.

 

Our pitiful 200 years of technology has already left all sorts of electromagnetic archaololgical evidence, even if accidental.

 

Not as much as you would think, beyond about 100 light years we are impossible to detect.

 

Further, we are already looking for others with which to communicate. Almost by default that will mean we will either build beacons to acknowledge our reception of their communication, or build beacons to attract attention to ourseflves.

 

I still don't see how you can assume others would put up beacons or even that we would.

 

This seems a simple deduction either way. It DOES imply a certain willingness to wait centuries or millenia for replies. But for civilizations that may already be billions of years old it hardly seems a burdon.

 

A burden? No, but why is the really big question here, why would they want to? maybe their curiosity about primitive cultures ended a million years ago so they cut off the beacons.

 

 

Again please define common, two civilizations? Ten? 1000? 10,000? How do you define common? I will say again that I think a argument could be made that if there are tens of thousands of civilizations it makes a stronger argument for a god like intervention than one at random does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Moon,

 

You state you would be more likely to attribute intelligent design to the universe if there are more, not fewer technological civilizations. I don't see that as an unrealistic interpretation. I see it the other way. If we are the only ones then I would be inclined to suspect only an intelligent design would have set in motion such a near mathematical impossibility.

 

So if one person wins the lotto it's intervention from god but if a million people choose the correct number it's luck?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree with both Moontanman and litespeed.

 

I fail to see the relevance of lack or abundance of sentient beings when considering proof of God.

 

You miss my point, I was trying to get across that either or neither premise was better or worse than the other. You can argue from both directions with equal authority. It's quite meaningless to assert that our presence is proof of god or disproof of god, it's a null point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You miss my point, I was trying to get across that either or neither premise was better or worse than the other. You can argue from both directions with equal authority. It's quite meaningless to assert that our presence is proof of god or disproof of god, it's a null point.

 

Ok, so we're in complete agreement here. :shrug:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey guys,

 

When I was in Vietnam, I did not attribute my survival of a few hundred rockets to God. Had that number been ten thousand, I might have had second thoughts. Thats all. Conversely, if the universe includes ten thousand civilizations capable of advanced mathematics, thats no big deal. But if we are the only ones, that is one hell of a big deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I honestly don't see your premise litespeed, people have fallen out of airplanes at 30,000 feet and survived with out chutes. But if you shoved a hundred people out of one airplane and they all survived that would be a miracle. Random things happen, even unusual random things. I see no connection to a deity, just blind luck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Postulate 1: Life can only begin in water.

Postulate 2: Technology can only develop on land.

 

There has to be evolutionary pressure for life to come out of the water. An oversized moon, raising massive tides, seems to be a minimum requirement. How many otherwise earthlike planets would have a moon so large that we're almost a double-planet?

 

Even with that evolutionary push, it has taken half the life of the sun to reach a technological civilisation. Without it, I venture to suggest that there simply wouldn't be time for it all to happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...