A higher power/being

[We Never Know]

The point is that abiogenesis does not describe a process, it is just a term for the transition from no life to life, however it took place. It's not a matter of it being "proven". If one accepts that once there was no life on the Earth, then abiogenesis occurred, because now there is life. How abiogenesis occurred is the interesting subject.

It's not the Big Bang that breaks down at a certain point. The Big Bang is a model for the very early stages of expansion of the universe, based on extrapolating from observations of the cosmos. The extrapolation can't be extended right back to what looks like the start because the laws of physics break down at a certain point. So the Big Bang does not attempt to describe the start, if there was a start. The Big Bang describes what seems to have happened from a point shortly after that.

None of this has any relation to whether or not there may be a higher power or being. This is just science. "God of the Gaps" (a phrase coined by one of the professors whose lectures I attended at university, and who was a Methodist lay preacher) is a lousy basis for faith in a supernatural power.

God of the gaps - Wikipedia

I disagree. Abiogenesis is the natural process for the origin of life. No god needed.

Of course the BB itself doesn't break down, the study of the BB breaks down.

 

[exchemist]

I disagree. Abiogenesis is the natural process for the origin of life. No god needed.

Of course the BB itself doesn't break down, the study of the BB breaks down.

The issue is that physics does not allow the Big Bang model to be extrapolated back in time beyond a certain point.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

They are "relevant" because many don't accept the big bang or abiogenisis..... a god created the universe and life.

And many do. So obviously it is not an either / or situation.

Sure, they might be incompatible with certain very specific god ideas.
But the OP doesn't specify such at all. It just refers to a vague non-determined, non-specified "higher power / being".

All those theistic people who DO accept science, obviously they have no issues in accepting science while still believing in their "higher power".

So yeah....


Perhaps then you should be more specific as to what you mean exactly by "higher power", because clearly you have something in mind that is waaaaay more specific then what you wrote down.

 

[Sand Dancer]

If you cook a meal, are you responsible for someone taking home the leftovers, leaving them on their counter, eating them 2 days later, and getting food poisoning?

Your reply assumes omnipotence, omnipresence, and ability/desire to intervene in worldly affairs. Why do you assign such qualities to a god that you apparently do not even know exists?

US culture assumes certain attributes of a deity because of Christianity. Sometimes it's hard to get out of that mindset.

 

[We Never Know]

And many do. So obviously it is not an either / or situation.

Sure, they might be incompatible with certain very specific god ideas.
But the OP doesn't specify such at all. It just refers to a vague non-determined, non-specified "higher power / being".

All those theistic people who DO accept science, obviously they have no issues in accepting science while still believing in their "higher power".

So yeah....


Perhaps then you should be more specific as to what you mean exactly by "higher power", because clearly you have something in mind that is waaaaay more specific then what you wrote down.

When I say "do you believe in a higher power" and its in religious debates, what else do you think I could be talking about other than a god?

 

[We Never Know]

The issue is that physics does not allow the Big Bang model to be extrapolated back in time beyond a certain point.

Yes.... the study of the BB breaks down.

 

[exchemist]

Yes.... the study of the BB breaks down.

No, the physics limits the scope of application of the theory, that's all. It's meaningless to claim the "study" of a model "breaks down". People do not study it beyond its scope of applicability, obviously. Only a fool would do that.

 

[We Never Know]

No, the physics limits the scope of application of the theory, that's all. It's meaningless to claim the "study" of a model "breaks down". People do not study it beyond its scope of applicability, obviously. Only a fool would do that.

Ok

When someone in a religious thread says...
1"do you believe in a higher power"
or
2. "the study of the BB breaks down

I don't need it drawn out in crayon for me to realize they are more than likeky talking about...
1. a god
2. physics.. being physics is what is used to study the BB.

 

[exchemist]

Ok

When someone in a religious thread says...
1"do you believe in a higher power"
or
2. "the study of the BB breaks down

I don't need it drawn out in crayon for me to realize they are more than likeky talking about...
1. a god
2. physics.. being physics is what is used to study the BB.

Sure. You are trying to rehash the old God of the Gaps gambit.

Prof. Coulson, an eminent Methodist, mathematician and theoretical chemist, thought it was silly in the 1950s and it is still just as silly today.

 

[Revoltingest]

I believe in lower powers.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

Do you think/believe there is a higher power/being?

Abiogenisis hasn't been shown. The big bang breaks down at a certain point.....

Now some say "abiogenisis is proven" because there was once no life then there was life...created or not.. Its abiogenisis.

Does that mean since the big bang breaks down at a point that it was created? Its the same concept and logic isn't it.

I am not convinced by the evidence that a higher being exists. I am open to t he possibility if the evidence is convincing. We have no idea how life began, how the ultimate beginning of the universe began or why there is something rather than nothing. These unanswered questions do not mean we get to fill them in with whatever we want.

 

[viole]

In a realm of pure information, which is very different from a realm of matter

Not sure what you mean here. Information is physical. You can actually measure one bit of information in calories at room temperature.

Ciao

- viole

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

When I say "do you believe in a higher power" and its in religious debates, what else do you think I could be talking about other than a god?

Are you again going to ignore the many many many theists who have no problem accepting science AND believe in their god?

This includes many christians. Including christians that are scientists.

Many such christians post on these boards also, btw.

 

[rational experiences]

No.

As it's coldest is its zenith.

As change means higher to lower we realise heat changed and cold was it's end.

So it can't be a beginning term.

 

[rational experiences]

When lying men talk about their human brain thought beliefs. Do they subject their life to machine transmitted experiments? As brains frontal lobes?

Based on man's pre built used by his mind body controls designed machines. Claiming brain remote viewing ....Knowing he caused it by owning a brain?

No.

Yet they thought the theory.

So why not?

Real answer is I'd be hurt attacked.

So straight away are told they are lying.

Basic human advice they don't want.

So dimwitted humans who leave earth in man built metal machines burning up huge gas fuels alight. Go outside earths space and bio termed time.

As humans.

Claim I left earths space time yet I moved by light forces and mass.

As the whole technical man's human science community think using the same lying human only concepts.