Posted on 12/11/2002 6:28:08 AM PST by A2J
You're mistaken. The speed of light is constant, regardless of the frame of reference.
Ewww, gross! At least wash your hair.
Then I only think the way that I do because He wants me to... Whoa. That makes my atheistic actions God's Will and therefore holy! Goodbye free-will, hello true moral relativism! All actions are predetermined by God and therefore we are all acting under His script on His stage. No more faults, no more vices.
Musical scores in movies strike me the same way - sometimes the scene would make no sense without it, sometimes it heightens our anticipation or amplifies our revulsion. And so many times, music can express when words fail. Hugs!!!
Your one sick overblown god you should get rid of - - - POPE // EGO . . . way over rated phony bloated self ! ! ! f.Christian
I see what you mean A-Girl. This here post by f.Christian would make a beautiful song. I'm going to call Celine Dion and see if she'll cover it.
Aw! And you have the most darling little dimples!
I tell you that there are those who use the word "evolution" as part of a "theory" that the universe came into existence by accident and you say that's not true. I provide links. You say the words don't really mean what they say they mean.
To dredge up a spectre from the past, the term evolution often takes on several meanings in today's scientific circles, often in very misleading ways.
This is why it's important to identify which meaning of the word "evolution" before we start debating the term. In that spirit, summarize, if you would, the all-encompassing cosmological theory of evolution to which you are referring.
what does Dawkins really mean when he titles his book: The Blind Watchmaker: Why the Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe Without Design?
Could it mean that evidence of evolution demonstrates spontaneous emergence of order and self-regulation in undirected systems?
That particular post by f.Christian (which evidently is a condemnation of self serving attitudes, making ones self their own God or Pope) - brings to my mind something more despairing and tragic, like the Requiem Mass (Mozart.)
I am reading Emperor's New Mind and do not at all come away with this conclusion. I am tempted almost to ask whether we refer to the same book. There is without doubt something deep and mysterious going on at the level of fundamental perception and it is intangible. There must of course be a material aspect to perception and some understanding of this is imperative but it is not appropriate to simply declare that materiality encompasses all because we can't describle or understand something real in non-material terms.
It is a stretch for ordinary humanity, even brilliant ordinary humanity, to try to understand that space-time is an aspect of physicality or that light speed is constant relative to everything else. Neither of these make any sense at all from an everyday perspective, which is the perspective in which we all live. And this is only classical physics. Things become much stranger at the quantum level. Some physicist wag once said that anyone who thinks they understand quantum mechanics hasn't studied it enough. I agree. Einstein was wrong about it. I would go so far as to say that the conscious, everyday perceptional frame of reference and mode of thinking is inadequate to really understand it and that this is because what we experience is not what's really going on at quantum levels.
My position would be that there is some "thing" that is operative, immaterial and intangible at the heart of reality and that anything less than this acknowledgement is denial.
All material is ultimately quantum mechanical in nature. People think that when one billiard ball hits another, the action is obvious and simple, but it's not. What is actually happening is that a billion billion electron wavefunctions are interacting with each other nonlinearly, diffracting through each other, interfering with each other, amplifying and cancelling each other out by turns.
Yes and No, Physicist, if you will. Billiard balls is a poor analogy. There is no thing at the heart of materiality. We perceive things. Methinks thee doth protesteth too loudly. As I have said before, I have great respect for your intellectual capacity, but I do not think such capacity is alone capable of understanding fundamental reality because it is not equipped to handle, in any way, intangibility. If Einstein couldn't get it, after trying for decades, can anyone? Well, I think so, but it requires something more than intellectual capacity. All, as always, in my humble view, and on a silver platter.
Yes, and a lot of this is going on here, A-G.
My sneaking suspicion is that the philosphers are patiently waiting for the scientists and that those philosphers would include Buddha and Jesus.
We're talking "little kids" here, Doc. Plus I thought the main mission of public education is to transmit the culture to the rising generation. (Silly me, what a "conservative idea." Of course, the Prussian Wilhelm Von Holbach transformed the mission of the public schools into "factories" preparing children to earn a living and become a "productive" member of society.... IMHO, this was a disastrous innovation which has resulted in massive cultural ignorance even among the "credentialled.") The theory of evolution is part of that culture; but it's not the only part.
Good grief, tpaine, your certainly have a "religion phobia." Of course I agree with you that the public schools must remain non-sectarian. But do you realize you can actually speak about God without reference to religion, or any religious sect?
Or is it really God Himself that you are "allergic" to?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.