What do you think about this theory?
Forum rules
Please read and follow this sub-forum's specific rules listed HERE, as well as our sitewide rules listed HERE.
Link to the Secret Ninja Sessions community ustream channel - info in this thread
Please read and follow this sub-forum's specific rules listed HERE, as well as our sitewide rules listed HERE.
Link to the Secret Ninja Sessions community ustream channel - info in this thread
badger wrote:well that's the point of philosophy isn't it really? very little of it can either be proved or disproved. that doesn't stop it being interesting and intellectually stimulating though
that's pretty much my religious/spiritual/whatever beliefs. i definitely think there's some kind of higher ordering force because as parson said before the world is so minutely and intricately balanced that it's unlikely to have come about from chance. unless as some philosophers have said there's an infinite number of universe and ours just happens to be the one in which all the variables are right for life to be able to existTomity wrote:Historically one of the first religions was Taoism, which believed that god was everything, something that if you apply to modern physics we now know to be true. So the idea of god has been corrupted and so has no legitimate standing imo.
point on philosophy taken.
far was you reasoning on god goes, I think the fact that everything works so intricately points the other way, it suggests that it is by chance rather than a higher orde/being/conciousness, the idea that any higher order, no matter how 'powerfull' (for want of a better word) could concieve such in depth complexities is beyond the capacity of my faith and reasoning.
if you came across a sandcastle on the beach and babylon told you it was just there by chance, would you believe iteLBe wrote: far was you reasoning on god goes, I think the fact that everything works so intricately points the other way, it suggests that it is by chance rather than a higher orde/being/conciousness, the idea that any higher order, no matter how 'powerfull' (for want of a better word) could concieve such in depth complexities is beyond the capacity of my faith and reasoning.
no, but equally a sandcastle is not a living world full on concious beings.Parson wrote:if you came across a sandcastle on the beach and babylon told you it was just there by chance, would you believe iteLBe wrote: far was you reasoning on god goes, I think the fact that everything works so intricately points the other way, it suggests that it is by chance rather than a higher orde/being/conciousness, the idea that any higher order, no matter how 'powerfull' (for want of a better word) could concieve such in depth complexities is beyond the capacity of my faith and reasoning.
yeah, so a sandcastle must have been built by intelligent beings, but a complex universe full of intricate systems to support life of all kinds is mere chance. boy do you ever think about the stuff you say?eLBe wrote:no, but equally a sandcastle is not a living world full on concious beings.Parson wrote:if you came across a sandcastle on the beach and babylon told you it was just there by chance, would you believe iteLBe wrote: far was you reasoning on god goes, I think the fact that everything works so intricately points the other way, it suggests that it is by chance rather than a higher orde/being/conciousness, the idea that any higher order, no matter how 'powerfull' (for want of a better word) could concieve such in depth complexities is beyond the capacity of my faith and reasoning.
that higher being could just be like the technologically advanced beings talked about in the simulation example. either they have could have the knowledge of the human mind or computer systems that's advance enough to create a simulation universe; or they could have such an advanced knowledge of physics/chemistry/biology that they can create a real universe like the one we live in. anything's possible, but then nothing's provable eithereLBe wrote:far was you reasoning on god goes, I think the fact that everything works so intricately points the other way, it suggests that it is by chance rather than a higher orde/being/conciousness, the idea that any higher order, no matter how 'powerfull' (for want of a better word) could concieve such in depth complexities is beyond the capacity of my faith and reasoning.
the moon is 1/400th the size of the sun and is 400 times closer to the earth than the sun, so it appears the exact same size in the sky, making solar eclipses possible. it is only significant from a human perspective on earth. like the alignments of stonehenge or pyramids.
this is considered to be the biggest coincidence in the universe. its also responsible for life on this planet.
there is design
this is considered to be the biggest coincidence in the universe. its also responsible for life on this planet.
there is design
of course it has a lot to do with how this planet works (tides etc) but i think to say it is directly responsible for life on this planet is over-stating the case a little bit
i'm sure if it was a few hundred kilometres further away from earth then life on earth would still exist. just not necesarily in the same way it does now
i'm sure if it was a few hundred kilometres further away from earth then life on earth would still exist. just not necesarily in the same way it does now
i mean if it was further away, its going to mean its more massive, meaning its got greater gravitational pull, meaning more drastic tide changes, meaning crazier weather patterns, etc etc.
our shit is balanced nicely the way it is. if the moon was a different size, our planet would look entirely different.
our shit is balanced nicely the way it is. if the moon was a different size, our planet would look entirely different.
i'm not saying it isn't precisely tuned. it's vitally important for life as we know it now obviously, but would life not exist without it? if the moon was either further or closer away then the tides would be different, so possibly the earth would be far more covered in water and thefore there would be more aquatic life (this may be utterly wrong as i'm not really that sure how the tides work)
edit- bah beat me to it
yeah it would look entirely different but life would still exist
edit- bah beat me to it
yeah it would look entirely different but life would still exist
well yes i know that. i'm probably talking out of my arse but you get my pointParson wrote:tides don't add water volume
yeah true. it's all just assumptions though isn't it? even if it's very well informed or logically worked out or whatever, philosophy is basically just the assumption of an intelligent person based on the facts they seeParson wrote:and sure life may exist, but thats a huge assumption.
its pretty easy for a planet to die
anyway i'm going home. laters
No idea, but has anyone come across the expanding earth theory before? Its a ten minute vid but its big on wow and low on wackoParson wrote:so you're assuming that the moon is not precisely tuned. ok so lets say we have no moon. do you know what the earth would look like?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJfBSc6e7QQ
yeah i've seen that. i was pretty convinced subduction didn't exist for like a day. but if you look more into that guy, he seems to be fullashit.ikeaboy wrote:No idea, but has anyone come across the expanding earth theory before? Its a ten minute vid but its big on wow and low on wackoParson wrote:so you're assuming that the moon is not precisely tuned. ok so lets say we have no moon. do you know what the earth would look like?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJfBSc6e7QQ
edit: ha but now i'm watchin it again and its buggin me out all over again
editedit: but here's the debunkers http://scienceblogs.com/goodmath/2006/1 ... ight_1.php
I just read the start, but.Parson wrote:yeah i've seen that. i was pretty convinced subduction didn't exist for like a day. but if you look more into that guy, he seems to be fullashit.ikeaboy wrote:No idea, but has anyone come across the expanding earth theory before? Its a ten minute vid but its big on wow and low on wackoParson wrote:so you're assuming that the moon is not precisely tuned. ok so lets say we have no moon. do you know what the earth would look like?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJfBSc6e7QQ
edit: ha but now i'm watchin it again and its buggin me out all over again
editedit: but here's the debunkers http://scienceblogs.com/goodmath/2006/1 ... ight_1.php
It wasn't enough the earth is expanding eh? they had to assert that gravity doesn't exsist as well and the

The rest looks interesting and i just got lean, thanks Parson.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests