Re: Astronomy Basics: Challenge to Theism (Episode 1)
About | Information | History | Online | Facts | Discovery
Good Vid and a response to your challenge
Comments
-
Cant say I agree with your philosophy but appreciate your your humility. The truth is, no one really knows. Some like myself have faith in a deity, and some have faith that the prevailing and current excepted scientific theories are absolute. A good scientist never writes anything in stone and say's, we believe the universe to be 15 BY old. A scientist of great faith say's we know the universe is 15 BY old. Who knows what the theory will be one hundred years from now?
-
maybe a face peeling could work?
-
I think the term "anti-human" wasn't meant to be taken literal as. I think the point was there being more anti-life area than there is supporting area for LIFE in general, not just limited to humans.
-
perhaps the the universe isn't suited for us now... but after a little more evolution who knows.
-
About the big bang: Here you are going into meta physics and hypothesis. Physics and Astronomy admits not KNOWING what it was. There are some hypothesis based on observations, but hardly a valid claim. The idea of black holes producing the singularity of the big bang does exist, but has many physical problems still. This is an interesting subject, but it's more Philosophy than it is actual astronomy :)
-
Thank you grimli :) The point actually, was less about the theism challenge (hence my change of topic) and more about some info about Astronomy. The theist challenge was.. an .. uhm.. "add on" ;) thanks for the response. A question to you, though: If the god(s) purpose is humanity (is it?) then what is the universe's vastness for? and why isn't the universe suited for us..? we ARE their purpose, aren't we? statistically, there's more "anti-human" area than there is supporting-area.
3m 50sLenght
8Rating