| Poll: What view of origins is more profound? This poll is closed. |
|||
| Naturalistic | 10 | 76.92% | |
| Assisted | 2 | 15.38% | |
| Literal | 1 | 7.69% | |
| Total | 13 vote(s) | 100% | |
| * You voted for this item. | [Show Results] |
|
What view of Origins is more profound?
|
 What view of Origins is more profound?
October 12, 2009 at 11:23 am
(This post was last modified: October 12, 2009 at 11:24 am by theVOID.)
What view of origins is more profound?
a) The naturalistic view b) Creation through naturalistic process (assisted) c) Literal creation
.
The original universe is cyclic... so even if b and c are true later down the line: A is the 'origin' of it all... though a circle has no beginning.
Please give me a home where cloud buffalo roam
Where the dear and the strangers can play
Where sometimes is heard a discouraging word
But the skies are not stormy all day
RE: What view of Origins is more profound?
October 12, 2009 at 12:41 pm
(This post was last modified: October 12, 2009 at 12:42 pm by theVOID.)
(October 12, 2009 at 12:21 pm)Saerules Wrote: The original universe is cyclic... so even if b and c are true later down the line: A is the 'origin' of it all... though a circle has no beginning. What evidence do you have to support that proposition? Because the evidence i have shows that the universe is expanding exponentially(taken from measuring the red-shift on supernovae; the Doppler effect) due to the universal constant(lambda; the energy density per square meter of the universe) remaining constant(due to the influx of 'Dark Energy') despite the expansion of spacetime and may already have expanded beyond the point where a collapse(big crunch) and re-expansion(big bounce) are possible. There is no evidence to suggest a cyclic universe, in fact the idea seems to be disproved by said expansion. Also, B and C are supernatural and thus are not part of a naturalistic view of origins.
.
  
H0ary H0bbit Religious Views: “Never to suffer would never to have been blessed.” - Edgar Allan Poe
Well B is the best of both surely - if you can totally separate the two.
RE: What view of Origins is more profound?
October 12, 2009 at 6:47 pm
(This post was last modified: October 12, 2009 at 6:48 pm by theVOID.)
(October 12, 2009 at 6:27 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: Well B is the best of both surely - if you can totally separate the two. Well B would be First cause and guided evolution etc. (October 12, 2009 at 6:03 pm)Amphora Wrote:(October 12, 2009 at 11:23 am)theVOID Wrote: What view of origins is more profound? The general naturalistic view of the big bang, abiogenesnis and evolution namely, but any other naturalistic views would qualify.
.
H0ary H0bbit Religious Views: “Never to suffer would never to have been blessed.” - Edgar Allan Poe (October 12, 2009 at 7:06 pm)fr0d0 Wrote:(October 12, 2009 at 6:47 pm)theVOID Wrote:(October 12, 2009 at 6:27 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: Well B is the best of both surely - if you can totally separate the two. Cool, that still fits criteria B.
.
My head hurts.
Looks like everyone (who voted) unanimously agrees on A
The dark side awaits YOU...AngryAtheism
"Only the dead have seen the end of war..." - Plato “Those who wish to base their morality literally on the Bible have either not read it or not understood it...” - Richard Dawkins |
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
