What did God do before creation?

Message boards : Politics : What did God do before creation?
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

Previous · 1 . . . 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 . . . 24 · Next

AuthorMessage
Profile Intelligent Design
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 12
Posts: 3626
Credit: 37,520
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1284683 - Posted: 17 Sep 2012, 3:43:34 UTC - in response to Message 1284655.  

What if God IS the dice--and--order, at the same time. What looks like chaos is order and what looks like order is chaos. Apparently it takes both.

Does it make a difference?

We can't even define what time IS, we mark it, that's all. So, indeed, what IS a day for God? Could be 7 divided by 13.7 billion years.

I'm going to have to quote msattler ..."LOL, I should think the accomplishment would speak for itself."

Here, let me twist your minds a little more---The God Particle would be a lot like pixels on your TV set. We live inside of a 3D TV. And in effect we own nothing but our mass-less souls.

Point is, it makes no sense to deny what you see with your own eyes. Design. And there is so much of it that it cannot be chance. And since it cannot be chance, there must be a DESIGNER. It also makes no sense to deny any possibly up to and including the one have just given you. It is NOT science when you come to the table with preconceived notions. Bottom line...


ID, your hypotheses is just that, no evidence to turn it into a theory and as a counter point random events are observed commonly which elevates the random thing to theory.



hypotheses of many types and many in number is being taught in school right now. Math that has not been proven is hypotheses

Nice try but no cookie....
ID: 1284683 · Report as offensive
Profile betreger
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 29 Jun 99
Posts: 9437
Credit: 25,371,650
RAC: 21,400
United States
Message 1284691 - Posted: 17 Sep 2012, 4:15:36 UTC - in response to Message 1284683.  
Last modified: 17 Sep 2012, 4:33:45 UTC

ID, so you agree that intelligent design is a hypothesis and should not be presented as a theory?
ID: 1284691 · Report as offensive
Nick: ID 666
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 12994
Credit: 35,997,836
RAC: 19,747
United Kingdom
Message 1284723 - Posted: 17 Sep 2012, 6:56:10 UTC - in response to Message 1284691.  

ID, so you agree that intelligent design is a hypothesis and should not be presented as a theory?

Can intelligent design be even regarded as a hypothesis as it has failed every peer revue.
ID: 1284723 · Report as offensive
Profile The Simonator
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 18 Nov 04
Posts: 5698
Credit: 3,471,084
RAC: 0
United Kingdom
Message 1284732 - Posted: 17 Sep 2012, 9:12:06 UTC - in response to Message 1284723.  

ID, so you agree that intelligent design is a hypothesis and should not be presented as a theory?

Can intelligent design be even regarded as a hypothesis as it has failed every peer revue.

Only really in America, in the civilised world it's long since been thrown out on its ear.
Life on earth is the global equivalent of not storing things in the fridge.
ID: 1284732 · Report as offensive
Profile William Rothamel
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Oct 06
Posts: 3564
Credit: 1,780,188
RAC: 817
United States
Message 1284743 - Posted: 17 Sep 2012, 9:56:13 UTC - in response to Message 1284732.  

"Intelligent design" can be credited to Nature and the way that evolution works. The problem is when an anthropomorphic uber-being is given the credit. So you could then see nature as 'Intelligent" of even god-like.

So it's really a non-issue. one man's Nature is another man's god.
ID: 1284743 · Report as offensive
Profile Intelligent Design
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 12
Posts: 3626
Credit: 37,520
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1284897 - Posted: 17 Sep 2012, 18:24:11 UTC - in response to Message 1284691.  

ID, so you agree that intelligent design is a hypothesis and should not be presented as a theory?


LOL, no, it should be taught right along all the rest of the hypothesis being taught in school.
ID: 1284897 · Report as offensive
Profile Intelligent Design
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 12
Posts: 3626
Credit: 37,520
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1284901 - Posted: 17 Sep 2012, 18:25:21 UTC - in response to Message 1284723.  

ID, so you agree that intelligent design is a hypothesis and should not be presented as a theory?

Can intelligent design be even regarded as a hypothesis as it has failed every peer revue.


No so. Added peer review long ago.
ID: 1284901 · Report as offensive
Profile Intelligent Design
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 12
Posts: 3626
Credit: 37,520
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1284906 - Posted: 17 Sep 2012, 18:26:54 UTC - in response to Message 1284743.  

"Intelligent design" can be credited to Nature and the way that evolution works. The problem is when an anthropomorphic uber-being is given the credit. So you could then see nature as 'Intelligent" of even god-like.

So it's really a non-issue. one man's Nature is another man's god.


You said it was intelligent. That tells us that there must be some intelligence behind it. I believe in a God.
ID: 1284906 · Report as offensive
Profile betreger
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 29 Jun 99
Posts: 9437
Credit: 25,371,650
RAC: 21,400
United States
Message 1284908 - Posted: 17 Sep 2012, 18:28:11 UTC - in response to Message 1284723.  

ID, so you agree that intelligent design is a hypothesis and should not be presented as a theory?

Can intelligent design be even regarded as a hypothesis as it has failed every peer revue.

Since a Merriam-Webster defines a hypothesis as conjecture it does not need peer review which reflects why it is not a theory.
ID: 1284908 · Report as offensive
Profile betreger
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 29 Jun 99
Posts: 9437
Credit: 25,371,650
RAC: 21,400
United States
Message 1284916 - Posted: 17 Sep 2012, 18:41:35 UTC - in response to Message 1284897.  

ID, so you agree that intelligent design is a hypothesis and should not be presented as a theory?


LOL, no, it should be taught right along all the rest of the hypothesis being taught in school.

ID, conjecture is not being taught, theory is taught and a hypothesis IS conjecture.
ID: 1284916 · Report as offensive
Sirius B Project Donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 26 Dec 00
Posts: 20964
Credit: 2,908,245
RAC: 627
Ireland
Message 1284939 - Posted: 17 Sep 2012, 19:53:22 UTC

A Philistine's view of what God did before the creation: -

Picture the scene: A large heavenly card table fit for Gods, more extravagant than Zeus & Mount Olympia......

The blare of trumpets ring out....

...2 long queues stride towards that magnificient table....

One queue led by God with all his angels, the other Lucifer & his minions.....

All previously bored out of their skulls until Gabriel thought up the idea of some card games & turn it into a tournament....

After sutiably wetting their whistles with some Golden Nectar, the games commenced....

.....god & the angels won the 1st game of poker which went fairly peaceably....

...Lucifer called for Bridge to be the 2nd set of games..... Getting close to the end, Lucifer did not wish to lose so slammed his cards on that heavenly table with such a force that a continuous stream of dust could be seen floating away into the nothingness.

Lucifer won that game, so God called for the final game to be "Snap".

Now God did not wish to lose either so kept his eyes on Lucifer - Lucifer did not like this & began to make mistakes, which god capitalised on & slammed his hand on the winning card with such a force that the dust was seen floating away for days!

Some time later, that Godly Dust intermingled with the Devilish Dust....

....which today, we now call the "BIG BANG"
ID: 1284939 · Report as offensive
Profile Intelligent Design
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 12
Posts: 3626
Credit: 37,520
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1285070 - Posted: 18 Sep 2012, 5:09:15 UTC - in response to Message 1284916.  

ID, so you agree that intelligent design is a hypothesis and should not be presented as a theory?


LOL, no, it should be taught right along all the rest of the hypothesis being taught in school.

ID, conjecture is not being taught, theory is taught and a hypothesis IS conjecture.



So, string theory is NOT being taught in University? There is not even a honorable mention of M Theory in say any of the top ten University?

Come now betreger...

...you really don't believe that do you?
ID: 1285070 · Report as offensive
Nick: ID 666
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 12994
Credit: 35,997,836
RAC: 19,747
United Kingdom
Message 1285086 - Posted: 18 Sep 2012, 7:30:57 UTC - in response to Message 1285070.  
Last modified: 18 Sep 2012, 7:31:18 UTC

ID, so you agree that intelligent design is a hypothesis and should not be presented as a theory?


LOL, no, it should be taught right along all the rest of the hypothesis being taught in school.

ID, conjecture is not being taught, theory is taught and a hypothesis IS conjecture.



So, string theory is NOT being taught in University? There is not even a honorable mention of M Theory in say any of the top ten University?

Come now betreger...

...you really don't believe that do you?

It is only taught in a few places, and all of these students would probably have a fit of giggles if you even mentioned I.D.

MIT’s 8.251, based on Barton Zwiebach's String Theory for Undergraduates,
Caltech has Physics 134
Carnegie-Mellon has Physics 33-652
and Stanford has Physics 153A and Physics 153B
ID: 1285086 · Report as offensive
Profile Intelligent Design
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 12
Posts: 3626
Credit: 37,520
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1285163 - Posted: 18 Sep 2012, 15:00:41 UTC - in response to Message 1285086.  
Last modified: 18 Sep 2012, 15:01:11 UTC

ID, so you agree that intelligent design is a hypothesis and should not be presented as a theory?


LOL, no, it should be taught right along all the rest of the hypothesis being taught in school.

ID, conjecture is not being taught, theory is taught and a hypothesis IS conjecture.



So, string theory is NOT being taught in University? There is not even a honorable mention of M Theory in say any of the top ten University?

Come now betreger...

...you really don't believe that do you?

It is only taught in a few places, and all of these students would probably have a fit of giggles if you even mentioned I.D.

MIT’s 8.251, based on Barton Zwiebach's String Theory for Undergraduates,
Caltech has Physics 134
Carnegie-Mellon has Physics 33-652
and Stanford has Physics 153A and Physics 153B


And it is hypothesis, NOT proven fact.

Just like Intelligent Design is best explained by intelligent cause, not undirected process.
ID: 1285163 · Report as offensive
Profile ML1
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 01
Posts: 9891
Credit: 7,396,238
RAC: 94
United Kingdom
Message 1285219 - Posted: 18 Sep 2012, 21:15:31 UTC - in response to Message 1285163.  
Last modified: 18 Sep 2012, 21:16:01 UTC

And it is hypothesis, NOT proven fact.

I suspect that you do not understand the descriptions "hypothesis" and "theory", nor appreciate the scientific method.


Just like Intelligent Design is best explained by intelligent cause, not undirected process.

Just as "Creationism" and "Intelligent Design" are blind suppositions, and just as religion is blind faith.


Also note that evolution is hardly 'undirected'... (Even if it is not 'directed' in the way that you might wish or believe.)

Keep searchin',
Martin
See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)
ID: 1285219 · Report as offensive
Profile Sarge
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 25 Aug 99
Posts: 11491
Credit: 7,460,103
RAC: 3,888
United States
Message 1285314 - Posted: 19 Sep 2012, 2:43:54 UTC - in response to Message 1285163.  

ID, so you agree that intelligent design is a hypothesis and should not be presented as a theory?


LOL, no, it should be taught right along all the rest of the hypothesis being taught in school.

ID, conjecture is not being taught, theory is taught and a hypothesis IS conjecture.



So, string theory is NOT being taught in University? There is not even a honorable mention of M Theory in say any of the top ten University?

Come now betreger...

...you really don't believe that do you?

It is only taught in a few places, and all of these students would probably have a fit of giggles if you even mentioned I.D.

MIT’s 8.251, based on Barton Zwiebach's String Theory for Undergraduates,
Caltech has Physics 134
Carnegie-Mellon has Physics 33-652
and Stanford has Physics 153A and Physics 153B


And it is hypothesis, NOT proven fact.

Just like Intelligent Design is best explained by intelligent cause, not undirected process.


I'd like to know why one thinks it is only being "taught" in a *few* places.
Nonetheless, I suspect in lower level classes, it may receive brief mention. When brought up in upper lever classes, it would have to be in discussions of what could be done to further the theory or experiments that could be done to test it.
I could ask some colleagues in the near future.
ID: 1285314 · Report as offensive
Profile Intelligent Design
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 12
Posts: 3626
Credit: 37,520
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1285507 - Posted: 19 Sep 2012, 15:08:49 UTC - in response to Message 1285219.  

And it is hypothesis, NOT proven fact.

I suspect that you do not understand the descriptions "hypothesis" and "theory", nor appreciate the scientific method.


Just like Intelligent Design is best explained by intelligent cause, not undirected process.

Just as "Creationism" and "Intelligent Design" are blind suppositions, and just as religion is blind faith.


Also note that evolution is hardly 'undirected'... (Even if it is not 'directed' in the way that you might wish or believe.)

Keep searchin',
Martin



A hypothesis is a proposed explanation for a phenomenon.

A theory is an unproven idea or speculation.

When some "proof" is added, like gravity bends light theory becomes more tangible. At some point theory moves into science fact.

String "theory/hypothesis" has no tangible proof and is more hypothesis then anything else and is being taught in University.
ID: 1285507 · Report as offensive
OzzFan Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 02
Posts: 15681
Credit: 81,638,681
RAC: 22,409
United States
Message 1285518 - Posted: 19 Sep 2012, 15:43:33 UTC - in response to Message 1285507.  

A hypothesis is a proposed explanation for a phenomenon.

A theory is an unproven idea or speculation.

When some "proof" is added, like gravity bends light theory becomes more tangible. At some point theory moves into science fact.


No, that's not correct. Strictly speaking, you have hypothesis correct, but theory, in the scientific sense of the word, is something that has been confirmed to be proven through observation and experiment. Once it has been agreed upon by peer-review, it generally becomes accepted as science fact, but there is no third stage of scientific ideology that goes Hypothesis -> Theory -> Science Fact. It is simply Hypothesis -> Theory. Any theory can gain new information as we constantly discover the world around us, and that theory can be changed, even if it was previously accepted as fact.

Gravity is a scientific theory, though not fully understood, but certainly it is not an "unproven idea or speculation".

Unfortunately, so many people use the word 'theory' when they mean 'hypothesis' that the meaning has been obscured.
ID: 1285518 · Report as offensive
Profile Sarge
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 25 Aug 99
Posts: 11491
Credit: 7,460,103
RAC: 3,888
United States
Message 1285534 - Posted: 19 Sep 2012, 16:39:03 UTC - in response to Message 1285518.  

Unfortunately, so many people use the word 'theory' when they mean 'hypothesis' that the meaning has been obscured.

Hence my (unstated) discomfort in my posting last night. Typing out "string theory", when it should be "The Stringy Hypothesis" was gnawing at me at some subconscious level.
ID: 1285534 · Report as offensive
Previous · 1 . . . 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 . . . 24 · Next

Message boards : Politics : What did God do before creation?


 
©2019 University of California
 
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.