Quote:
|
Originally Posted by evman150
Ok, first, that chirality things sounds really interesting. Unfortunately I know nothing about it. I will have to look into it though.
Second, to deal with a couple of the things posted earlier in the thread. Cheese posted a link to some guy's theory on the world. He seems to base all his postulates on the whole "empty space" problem. Well it's not really a problem. The early universe was not the same size as it is today. The Big Bang has not "filled up" empty space with matter. The big bang has created the universe itself. The matter is space. It's not like I'm at the top of the hill and dump a bucket of balls so they fall in all directions into the surrounding field. What it is is like a balloon with dots on it. Flaccid, the dots on the baloon are all close to each other and the balloon's "universe" is defined by the extent of the rubber, or whatever material it is. Blowing up the balloon is like the big bang. Blowing up the balloon is creating (expanding) the universe itself, while all the dots get further and further away from each other.
But if the parallel universe model is true then our universe having all the right parameters to support stars, galaxies, and life is perfectly reasonable from a natrual point of view.
"Our" universe does not have the "right parameters". There are no "right parameters". You are thinking far too narrow. I suppose the parameters are right for stars to form between 1E32 and 1E35 grams. I suppose the parameters are right for galaxies that form into spirals or blobs with between 1E6 and 1E13 stars. I suppose the parameters are right for life that exists at 290K and a g of 10 N/kg.
But who is to say that with different parameters, everything would be the same, just "phase" shifted? The life argument is particularily narrow because those parameters could be different within our stellar neighbourhood, let alone the whole universe. Who is to say that there is no (intelligent) life out there that exists at 200K with a g value of 80 N/kg? Why do we think we are so special? Why are we so conceited? Because of religion, that is why.
Centre of the solar system, centre of the galaxy, centre of the universe, and the only intelligent life form.
It boggles my mind to think that there are some people who still believe all these myths.
As for the causation problem, it is a problem for both sides of the coin. Bible thumpers argue we couldn't have come out of nothing and that there must have been an original designer. The free thinkers then retort that if somebody designed it all, who designed the designer?
So really, arguing over original causation is an exercise in futility.
|
I posted that link to another persons idea...I never suggested it was an idea I support. It was in response to the ideas of others and suggested that there are many theories out there.
The idea of Chirality is even brought to doubt as I posted below Kybosh's theories....because there is no truth! But science is getting close to an explanation.
Still...none of this proves the main question...Did Jesus exist? There hasnt been one link, idea, quote from anyone that prroves his existence, nothing, yet Cow, troutman and myself have provided many links that suggest its impossible he was a man...or the son of God. God is simply another topic.