The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 2 Votes - 3 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
27-07-2016, 05:41 PM
RE: The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
At work.

Sorry for lack of direct reply U196533.

It would seem that there is a conflation of terms.

Universe formation or beginning =/= Abiogenisis.

As one example of mixing up terms/ideas.

Thumbsup
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-07-2016, 06:01 PM
RE: The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
(27-07-2016 05:14 PM)Full Circle Wrote:  
(27-07-2016 04:35 PM)u196533 Wrote:  I admit is is kinda the chicken or the egg. If you could prove abiogenesis, then I could prove it could not have happened naturally. Since you can't prove abiogenesis, I only have logic and reasoning, but no evidence. That's the rub.

This is where you and I differ. I say we don’t know yet and you say gawd.
To most of us here logic and reasoning leaves us with questions yet to be answered. You on the other hand are like our ancestors when the ground shook and lightning bolts came down from the sky, ignorant of why but willing to inteject a SUPER-natural explanation based not on evidence but human imagination.

You would think that in this day and age where we have a method of parsing out fact from fancy by way of the scientific method people would stop holding on to fairy tales. There are scientific studies showing why this is still so. Dr. Glick at Columbia Center for Psychoanalytic Training and Research, calls belief systems “societal pain relievers.”

http://www.columbia.edu/cu/21stC/issue-3...houli.html

A good read to dissuade you from the god of the gaps argument you are holding on to is Carl Sagan’s book A Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark, you would do well to read it.

“All our science, measured against reality, is primitive and childlike - an yet it is the most precious thing we have.” ~ Albert Einstein

As a man of science I understand it's limitations. It is reductionistic by nature. It cannot explain emergent properties such as self preservation, consciousness or life. Not now. Not ever.
Science is awesome, but it cannot explain everything..
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-07-2016, 06:11 PM
RE: The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
(27-07-2016 05:27 PM)Full Circle Wrote:  
(27-07-2016 04:52 PM)u196533 Wrote:  However, the 1st Law of Thermo states that energy cannot be created or destroyed. Therefore it is not unreasonable to think that something created the energy in our universe.

For the umpteenth time, this isn’t an isolated system. In practice, perfectly isolated systems cannot exist. All systems transfer energy to their environment through radiation no matter how well insulated they are.

"The first law of thermodynamics allows for many possible states of a system to exist, but only certain states are found to exist in nature. The second law of thermodynamics (entropy) helps to explain this observation.” ~ NASA

https://www.grc.nasa.gov/www/k-12/airplane/thermo1.html

If you have issue with any of this please call NASA.

As soon as someone tells me that the laws of thermodynamics only apply to isolated systems, I know they got their "science" from the internet.

Yes As I have said umpeen times, entropy can be lowered locally provided that the entropy of the overall universe increases.
You overlook my primary point that chemical reactions in which energy is increased and entropy is lowered will not happen spontaneously. You can put those chemical together, but they won't react. That is Chem 101.
You can force those reactions to occur, but that places them in an unstable state. When they reach their activation energy, they break apart. ( Sometimes violently. That's how bomb's are made.)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-07-2016, 06:23 PM (This post was last modified: 27-07-2016 06:33 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
(27-07-2016 04:56 PM)u196533 Wrote:  
(27-07-2016 12:23 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Atoms don't "decompose". OMG are you stupid, (or uneducated). Atoms in living systems work EXACTLY as they do outside living systems. It's why your body works at all. http://www.chem1.com/acad/webtext/solut/solut-4.html It's how your blood transports chemicals and energy and sugar.
It's why your heart beats, it's why your kidneys work.
http://health.howstuffworks.com/human-bo...t-beat.htm
https://www.niddk.nih.gov/health-informa...atomy.aspx

Can't your god(s) send someone here with a brain, and some basic education ?
Your problem, is you have NO education AT ALL in biological systems.
Chemicals "defy" nothing.
What does "defy", is your brain. Stupidity at your level is incompatible with life. How is it you are alive, and get your socks on in the morning, "u" ?

Actually radioactive atoms decompose. I am not stating that individual atoms decompose. Complex molecules and systems decompose into their constituent simpler molecules and atoms.

My argument is not based on biology. It appears that is what you know. (All u have is a hammer so everything looks like a nail.)

It is based on pre-biology/abiogenesis.

They do not "decompose". They emit particles, and remain basically the same atom.
BIOLOGICAL systems decompose. You know nothing about Biology.
You have no argument. It appears that all you know (are obsessed with) is one law that doesn't apply. You've basically wasted your life on a fallacy.

You CLAIM your argument is based on biological systems doing something different, then deny it. Are you retarded, or senile ?

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
27-07-2016, 06:25 PM
RE: The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
At work.

Just a point on the 'non reactivity' of chemicals. I think Sodium and water and most acids (As the High school ryme goes) would beg to differ.

Thumbsup
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Peebothuhul's post
27-07-2016, 06:39 PM
RE: The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
(27-07-2016 06:01 PM)u196533 Wrote:  As a man of science I understand it's limitations. It is reductionistic by nature. It cannot explain emergent properties such as self preservation, consciousness or life. Not now. Not ever.
Science is awesome, but it cannot explain everything..

Never is a long time.

So your answer to as yet explained processes is fairy dust? You certainly don’t sound like any man of science I’ve ever met. No, you are quite happy in your ignorance and wish to remain so.

"[In response to the view beholden by some religious people that God is the cause of various inexplicable events...] If that's how you want to invoke your evidence for God, then God is an ever-receding pocket of scientific ignorance that's getting smaller and smaller and smaller as time moves on. So, just be ready for that to happen, if that's how you want to come at the problem. So that’s just simply the God of the gaps argument.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson

As to your pot shot of accusing me of getting my information from the internet, well I suppose I could have also been accused of getting my information from books a few short decades ago. Gasp

Facepalm

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Full Circle's post
27-07-2016, 06:40 PM
RE: The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
(27-07-2016 06:23 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(27-07-2016 04:56 PM)u196533 Wrote:  Actually radioactive atoms decompose. I am not stating that individual atoms decompose. Complex molecules and systems decompose into their constituent simpler molecules and atoms.

My argument is not based on biology. It appears that is what you know. (All u have is a hammer so everything looks like a nail.)

It is based on pre-biology/abiogenesis.

They do not "decompose". They emit particles, and remain basically the same atom.
BIOLOGICAL systems decompose. You know nothing about Biology.
You have no argument. It appears that all you know (are obsessed with) is one law that doesn't apply. You've basically wasted your life on a fallacy.

You CLAIM your argument is based on biological systems doing something different, then deny it. Are you retarded, or senile ?

Why not both?

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Full Circle's post
27-07-2016, 06:53 PM
RE: The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
(27-07-2016 06:23 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(27-07-2016 04:56 PM)u196533 Wrote:  Actually radioactive atoms decompose. I am not stating that individual atoms decompose. Complex molecules and systems decompose into their constituent simpler molecules and atoms.

My argument is not based on biology. It appears that is what you know. (All u have is a hammer so everything looks like a nail.)

It is based on pre-biology/abiogenesis.

They do not "decompose". They emit particles, and remain basically the same atom.
BIOLOGICAL systems decompose. You know nothing about Biology.
You have no argument. It appears that all you know (are obsessed with) is one law that doesn't apply. You've basically wasted your life on a fallacy.

You CLAIM your argument is based on biological systems doing something different, then deny it. Are you retarded, or senile ?

Biological systems DO take on energy in order to reduce entropy. Non-biological systems do not.
That can be explained by self preservation.

Self preservation cannot be invoked during abiogenesis.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-07-2016, 06:54 PM
RE: The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
(27-07-2016 06:39 PM)Full Circle Wrote:  
(27-07-2016 06:01 PM)u196533 Wrote:  As a man of science I understand it's limitations. It is reductionistic by nature. It cannot explain emergent properties such as self preservation, consciousness or life. Not now. Not ever.
Science is awesome, but it cannot explain everything..

Never is a long time.

So your answer to as yet explained processes is fairy dust? You certainly don’t sound like any man of science I’ve ever met. No, you are quite happy in your ignorance and wish to remain so.

"[In response to the view beholden by some religious people that God is the cause of various inexplicable events...] If that's how you want to invoke your evidence for God, then God is an ever-receding pocket of scientific ignorance that's getting smaller and smaller and smaller as time moves on. So, just be ready for that to happen, if that's how you want to come at the problem. So that’s just simply the God of the gaps argument.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson

As to your pot shot of accusing me of getting my information from the internet, well I suppose I could have also been accused of getting my information from books a few short decades ago. Gasp

Facepalm
Science cannot explain emergent properties. Never has. Never will.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-07-2016, 06:59 PM
RE: The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
(27-07-2016 06:11 PM)u196533 Wrote:  
(27-07-2016 05:27 PM)Full Circle Wrote:  "The first law of thermodynamics allows for many possible states of a system to exist, but only certain states are found to exist in nature. The second law of thermodynamics (entropy) helps to explain this observation.” ~ NASA

https://www.grc.nasa.gov/www/k-12/airplane/thermo1.html

If you have issue with any of this please call NASA.

As soon as someone tells me that the laws of thermodynamics only apply to isolated systems, I know they got their "science" from the internet.

So. You are smarter and/or more knowledgeable than the folks at NASA?

Then, in the same breath, you criticize us for getting science "from the internet" while you lecture us about SCIENCE on the INTERNET.

Exactly how fucking stupid are you???

Help for the living. Hope for the dead. ~ R.G. Ingersoll

Freedom offers opportunity. Opportunity confers responsibility. Responsibility to use the freedom we enjoy wisely, honestly and humanely. ~ Noam Chomsky
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Fatbaldhobbit's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: