Liverpool FC Forum

[dawson99]

I was sure I was gonna see this classic here:

Martin Keown, missing link:

[kalos]

andy g said ""and the evidence for intelligent design is...? ""

In broad terms the sheer complexity of life at the biochemical level  and the Universe being so finely tuned in many of its aspects that it simply cannot be put down to chance..

Just a few examples to give you an idea of whats been discovered..

Although most scientists trace the universe back to a very small, dense beginning (a singularity), we cannot avoid this key issue: “If at some point in the past, the Universe was once close to a singular state of infinitely small size and infinite density, we have to ask what was there before and what was outside the Universe. . . . We have to face the problem of a Beginning.”—Sir Bernard Lovell.
This implies more than just a source of vast energy. Foresight and intelligence are also needed because the rate of expansion seems very finely tuned.

“If the Universe had expanded one million millionth part faster,” said Lovell, “then all the material in the Universe would have dispersed by now. . . . And if it had been a million millionth part slower, then gravitational forces would have caused the Universe to collapse within the first thousand million years or so of its existence. Again, there would have been no long-lived stars and no life.”


The earth is also at an ideal distance from the sun, a factor vital for life to thrive. Astronomer John Barrow and mathematician Frank Tipler studied “the ratio of the Earth’s radius and distance from the Sun.” They concluded that human life would not exist “were this ratio slightly different from what it is observed to be.” Professor David L. Block notes: “Calculations show that had the earth been situated only 5 per cent closer to the sun, a runaway greenhouse effect [overheating of the earth] would have occurred about 4 000 million years ago. If, on the other hand, the earth were placed only 1 per cent further from the sun, runaway glaciation [huge sheets of ice covering much of the globe] would have occurred some 2 000 million years ago.”—Our Universe: Accident or Design


""Consider the strong nuclear force, which glues protons and neutrons together in the nucleus of the atom. Because of this bonding, various elements can form—light ones (such as helium and oxygen) and heavy ones (such as gold and lead). It seems that if this binding force were a mere 2-percent weaker, only hydrogen would exist. Conversely, if this force were slightly stronger, only heavier elements, but no hydrogen, could be found. Would our lives be affected? Well, if the universe lacked hydrogen, our sun would not have the fuel it needs to radiate life-giving energy. And, of course, we would have no water or food, since hydrogen is an essential ingredient of both.""

The other force in this discussion, called the weak nuclear force, controls radioactive decay. It also affects thermonuclear activity in our sun. ‘Is this force fine-tuned?’ you might ask. Mathematician and physicist Freeman Dyson explains: “The weak [force] is millions of times weaker than the nuclear force. It is just weak enough so that the hydrogen in the sun burns at a slow and steady rate. If the weak [force] were much stronger or much weaker, any forms of life dependent on sunlike stars would again be in difficulties.” Yes, this precise rate of burning keeps our earth warm—but not incinerated—and keeps us alive.""

Such "coincidences" are just a very few among many that have convinced many scientists that the Universe, in a sense "knew " we were coming into existence. They acknowledge that such conicidences are outside the realms of posssibility and so infer an Intelligent Designer must have brought them into existence.

Personally I reason it out very simply...

All my life I see disorder arising form random action . I've never seen anything useful produced by blind chance - quite the opposite. And for any who think that  Big bang produced the order in the Universe check out pictures of Hiroshima and Nagasaki when they had a particularly big bang land on their doorstep- how much order , logic and precise motion did that produce?

[dawson99]

if space is infinite though, surely the odds of at least one place having the right conditions was always gonna happen...

personally im into the whole faith and god thing, but there is always another explanation

[kalos]

Bit more that i thought might interest folks:

Newsweek magazine of November 9, 1998, reviewed the implications of discoveries regarding the creation of the universe. It said that the facts “suggested that matter and motion originated rather as Genesis [in the Bible] suggests, ex nihilo, out of nothing, in a stupendous explosion of light and energy.” Note the reasons Newsweek gave for comparing the beginning of the universe with the Bible’s description of the event.
“The forces loosed were—are—remarkably (miraculously?) balanced: If the Big Bang had been slightly less violent, the expansion of the universe would have been less rapid, and would soon (in a few million years, or a few minutes—in any case, soon) have collapsed back on itself. If the explosion had been slightly more violent, the universe might have dispersed into a soup too thin to aggregate into stars. The odds against us were—this is just the right word—astronomical. The ratio of matter and energy to the volume of space at the Big Bang must have been within about one quadrillionth of 1 percent of ideal.”
Newsweek suggested that there was, as it were, a “Tuner” of the universe, observing: “Take but degree away (see above, the one quadrillionth of 1 percent margin for error), . . . and what follows is not just discord but eternal entropy and ice. So, what—who?—was the great Tuner?”
Astrophysicist Alan Lightman acknowledged that scientists “find it mysterious that the universe was created in such a highly ordered condition.” He added that “any successful theory of cosmology should ultimately explain this entropy problem”—why the universe has not become chaotic

[kalos]

Space didnt start off infinite though Dawson and that's where the supposition that there was a "chance" becomes fallacious. All the evidencr points to the Universe starting as an inifitesimally small place and expanding at the fanatastically high speed  -

The Universe is apparently still expanding:

""When galactic light was passed through a prism, the light waves were seen to be stretched, indicating motion away from us at great speed. The more distant a galaxy, the faster it appeared to be receding. That points to an expanding universe!""

[dawson99]

Space didnt start off infinite though Dawson and that's where the supposition that there was a "chance" becomes fallacious. All the evidencr points to the Universe starting as an inifitesimally small place and expanding at the fanatastically high speed  -

The Universe is apparently still expanding:

""When galactic light was passed through a prism, the light waves were seen to be stretched, indicating motion away from us at great speed. The more distant a galaxy, the faster it appeared to be receding. That points to an expanding universe!""

What is it expanding into then?


If Space is finite, so whats at the end?

[andy_g]

andy g said ""and the evidence for intelligent design is...? ""

In broad terms the sheer complexity of life at the biochemical level  and the Universe being so finely tuned in many of its aspects that it simply cannot be put down to chance..

Just a few examples to give you an idea of whats been discovered..

Although most scientists trace the universe back to a very small, dense beginning (a singularity), we cannot avoid this key issue: “If at some point in the past, the Universe was once close to a singular state of infinitely small size and infinite density, we have to ask what was there before and what was outside the Universe. . . . We have to face the problem of a Beginning.”—Sir Bernard Lovell.
This implies more than just a source of vast energy. Foresight and intelligence are also needed because the rate of expansion seems very finely tuned.

“If the Universe had expanded one million millionth part faster,” said Lovell, “then all the material in the Universe would have dispersed by now. . . . And if it had been a million millionth part slower, then gravitational forces would have caused the Universe to collapse within the first thousand million years or so of its existence. Again, there would have been no long-lived stars and no life.”


The earth is also at an ideal distance from the sun, a factor vital for life to thrive. Astronomer John Barrow and mathematician Frank Tipler studied “the ratio of the Earth’s radius and distance from the Sun.” They concluded that human life would not exist “were this ratio slightly different from what it is observed to be.” Professor David L. Block notes: “Calculations show that had the earth been situated only 5 per cent closer to the sun, a runaway greenhouse effect [overheating of the earth] would have occurred about 4 000 million years ago. If, on the other hand, the earth were placed only 1 per cent further from the sun, runaway glaciation [huge sheets of ice covering much of the globe] would have occurred some 2 000 million years ago.”—Our Universe: Accident or Design


""Consider the strong nuclear force, which glues protons and neutrons together in the nucleus of the atom. Because of this bonding, various elements can form—light ones (such as helium and oxygen) and heavy ones (such as gold and lead). It seems that if this binding force were a mere 2-percent weaker, only hydrogen would exist. Conversely, if this force were slightly stronger, only heavier elements, but no hydrogen, could be found. Would our lives be affected? Well, if the universe lacked hydrogen, our sun would not have the fuel it needs to radiate life-giving energy. And, of course, we would have no water or food, since hydrogen is an essential ingredient of both.""

The other force in this discussion, called the weak nuclear force, controls radioactive decay. It also affects thermonuclear activity in our sun. ‘Is this force fine-tuned?’ you might ask. Mathematician and physicist Freeman Dyson explains: “The weak [force] is millions of times weaker than the nuclear force. It is just weak enough so that the hydrogen in the sun burns at a slow and steady rate. If the weak [force] were much stronger or much weaker, any forms of life dependent on sunlike stars would again be in difficulties.” Yes, this precise rate of burning keeps our earth warm—but not incinerated—and keeps us alive.""

Such "coincidences" are just a very few among many that have convinced many scientists that the Universe, in a sense "knew " we were coming into existence. They acknowledge that such conicidences are outside the realms of posssibility and so infer an Intelligent Designer must have brought them into existence.

Personally I reason it out very simply...

All my life I see disorder arising form random action . I've never seen anything useful produced by blind chance - quite the opposite. And for any who think that  Big bang produced the order in the Universe check out pictures of Hiroshima and Nagasaki when they had a particularly big bang land on their doorstep- how much order , logic and precise motion did that produce?

i have lots of things i want to say in response to this post but it will have to wait as i'm off to work away in the morning and need to go to bed as i have a taxi coming in 5 hours 

like most people that support intelligent design you are basing all your arguments on a small set of experiments and scientific theories. if there is one thing that intelligent design fans hate its the bigger picture. cutting edge science being what it is - and science relating to the creation of the universe is definitely cutting edge science - there are arguments and counter arguments for just about everything. its all too easy to sieze upon the one that serves your purpose.

the talk about things happening by chance is fairly irrelevent. these things happened - however, we know its unusual for them to happen as we haven't seen it happen anywhere else yet. the habitable zone for planets is bigger than you suggest and we are beginning to spot a few other planets 'in the zone' orbiting distant stars. whether there is anything on those planets or not is another matter.

your last statement about the order of the big bang and the lack of order of the h-bomb explosions is pointless bol,locks, i might add.

[Big Niall]

Darwinists (is that a word?) don't believe that the balance of nature is pure chance. Hence, the creationists argument that intelligent design is required is nonsense.

The scientific argument is about how life evolved and natural evolution does so in a logical balanced way, basically animals are in an arms race so the hunters and the prey get more efficient at their job.

Read Steven Dawkins (as I won't claim my knowledge is perfect) but he 100% rules out that scientists believe in "blind chance" hence, the relgious argument referring to the scientific argument as "blind chance" is uselss.

And no, we don't know exactly what caused the start of the universe of how "infinity" works, what is at the end etc, but just because we don't know something doesn't mean an invisible force with no evidence of existence causes things.

[Big Niall]

Space didnt start off infinite though Dawson and that's where the supposition that there was a "chance" becomes fallacious. All the evidencr points to the Universe starting as an inifitesimally small place and expanding at the fanatastically high speed  -

The Universe is apparently still expanding:

""When galactic light was passed through a prism, the light waves were seen to be stretched, indicating motion away from us at great speed. The more distant a galaxy, the faster it appeared to be receding. That points to an expanding universe!""

What is it expanding into then?


If Space is finite, so whats at the end?

I've never really understood the universe, infinity and all that stuff either.

I am curious though why you believe in god. I realise nobody likes the idea of never seeing their dead loved ones again, or even the idea of their own death can scare some people, or the idea that evil bas*ards who go through this life without facing justice will get their punishment but I don't see any evidence.

While the idea of god is comforting, there is no evidence of a god, I am not even talking about proof just a probability or even a possibility.

[bigmick]

Is my cab here yet?

[tubby]

You guys should read "The Selfish Gene" by Richard Dawkins. Brilliant book.

[Big Niall]

You guys should read "The Selfish Gene" by Richard Dawkins. Brilliant book.

Yeah, I read his other book and he makes it clear that the logic behind it perfectly sensible and not that complicated.

basically, we are all mutants

[Big Niall]

Anyone see the programme on bbc 2 last night about the history of mankind. basically all humans were black, many travelled to europe, being black is a disadvantage in the cold european climate and causes a lack of vitamin d, which damages a woman's pelvis and means she cannot bear children. between that and the ice age (I think) there was about 100 generations during which the black africans ditched their pigment, to become white to solve the above problems. It didn't delve into why people from other parts of the world took their shapes and colours though.

Also interesting to read about the neandarthals and they had to compete with our species but we didn't kill them off (a few theories of what did)

For the more smut interested reader, they also found what may have been a dildo from thousands of years ago, that and porn pictures and sculptures of naked women

[tubby]

The Great Human Adventure was it? Quality show that. But I missed the 1st ep last week, might have to look on iplayer.

How funny was that dildo thing haha. I bet it was probably used for something else but we just haven't figured it out yet.

[kalos]

andyg said :

the talk about things happening by chance is fairly irrelevent. these things happened - however, we know its unusual for them to happen as we haven't seen it happen anywhere else yet


And that sums up the reason why I can't accept evolution as something to take seriously.

An insistence that these things happened with no proof or hard evidence. We haven't seen it happen but it did ! Sound exactly like religion to me - there's very little difference except that when it boils down to brass tacks we all know from our experience in life that nothing comes about by itself- cause and effect if you will.

Whereas EVERYTHING in life that we experience shows the opposite- order and precision reuire an intelligence or a designer. Intelligent Design fits what our own life experience shows us every day.

andyg also said:-

your last statement about the order of the big bang and the lack of order of the h-bomb explosions is pointless bol,locks, i might add.

Really ? It's actually  the biggest bang ever seen by the majority on earth (except maybe Debbie Does Dallas but that's a different thread? )

So that's the one I'll use as a reference point. Simple logic and reason (which fly out the window when it comes to macroevolution) and your own eyes tell you that an explosion that is uncontrolled and has no guiding force produces chaos not order - but you'll try to tell us otherwise when it has NEVER been observed , cannot be fully explianed and then try to tell us evolution is not a faith.