Why are we here?

that'swhat i said to carlos MM
 
Two things:
1. Where'd you say that
2. Click on the link in the sig, if you have anything more to say (including a reply to this) post it there.
 
Gelion said:
Why not say 100%?

here is the answer:
toh6wy said:
Well... can you really say that the first lifeforms on Earth "evolved" from a few chemical reactions? Not really.


the very first lifeforms developed. They did not evolve in the sense of the ToE.
 
ybbor said:
100% of all species that every existed on this planet were created. None ever evolved.


you are wrong. sorry!

hehe, welcome to the Perfection KO's Creationsim thread.

I am glad you decided to join the debate and give your proof, while I give mine.


edit: oops, sorry, I read in that thread that you said you thought it not worth spending time on as everyone has made up their minds.
 
carlosMM said:
edit: oops, sorry, I read in that thread that you said you thought it not worth spending time on as everyone has made up their minds.

no, if you read my post i said that i'd show some evidence (though most of what i plan to do is more anti-darwinism than pro-intelligent design). i just didn't think it will change anyone's mind
 
ybbor said:
no, if you read my post i said that i'd show some evidence (though most of what i plan to do is more anti-darwinism than pro-intelligent design). i just didn't think it will change anyone's mind

you're welcome, go ahead and show us some proof the synthetic theory of evolution is wrong and there was a creation event.


You'd be the first not to run from that challange.... But please, not cheap stuff like out of context quotes and second-hand source claims that the fossil record is wrong, Ok?
 
The synthetic theory of evolution is obviously right. Discussing with creationists is useless, they just refuse evidences. There's no worse blind than the one who refuses to see.
 
Gothmog said:
Perhaps your ultimate why question refers to a scientific, objective cause, but mine does not. Even if there is no creator, even if science can explain why the universe must be here and take the form it does, my ultimate why will still be "To love and be loved, to try and improve the human condition."

In contrast a conversation with a diety could potentially change my opinion about the ultimate why.

Two thousand "prove god exists" posts speak eloquently of those who refuse to look beyond reason & logic, as well as, those who refuse to accept what reason does prove. I agree, gothmog, that freeing oneself from the straight jacketed, sheeple thinking of the "reason only" and "god only" positions is liberating and allows one to explore the mystery of why we are here. Even after Curt and perfection (et al) unravel the chemical reactions of attraction and mating, they will fail in understanding love.
"For reason, ruling alone, is a force confining; and passion, unatttended, is a flame that burns to its own destruction."
 
Syterion said:
I can't believe it. 70 posts and nobody's said, "Why not?"

Why not what?
 
Your are on earth to have children and thus multiply your genetic code. Just like the bugs, birds and cows you know. Cows are there to provide us with milk and beef, too. :D
 
toh6wy said:
Take a look at the title of this topic. :D
I did: Why are we here? To ask "why not" or any question about our not being here makes no sense when coupled with the fact that we are here. Maybe I'm just being dense and missing something obvious. I will accept enlightenment.;)
 
carlosMM said:
there is no reason. Just random chance.


Great....so we are no better than a fruit fly awesome :goodjob:

Get back to me when u are in your death bed and realize that your existence was the same as the one of a butterfly, to see if u say that so calmly and cool. ;)
 
carlosMM said:
you're welcome, go ahead and show us some proof the synthetic theory of evolution is wrong and there was a creation event.


You'd be the first not to run from that challange.... But please, not cheap stuff like out of context quotes and second-hand source claims that the fossil record is wrong, Ok?


So if I were to quote richard dawkins in an explicit quote not something that can be "interpreted" would that count as non cheap stuff??
 
I can not answer this question, as noone can. Myself I am always moving between evolution and creation. I guess in fact the truth is like always a bit in the middle?!
Just some plain thoughts.
The chance for some fatty acids, proteins, nucleiotides etc. to get mixed and develope a "chemical evolution" towards a living cell like bacteria is as well propable as a tornado crossing a junk yard and putting trash together, forming a working car. Alsmost IMPOSSIBLE to think that. Not that science hasn't tried. This soup created formed early organic compounds like the basis of living cells, but not more. Also during the whole evolution it seems to be a fact that NEVER live was risen again spontaniously without a living source.
So how could it once happen without a plan?

Evolution takes place through mutation. But mutation is considered to be completely random. Although many scientific tests were done, noone could ever witness any mutation that would be a benefit for the organism. Drosophila for example. MANY generations with mutation but not a single benefit. Furthermore, mutations often get "repaired" and the organism returns to the "wild type" of the species.
How does Evolution work than?

Lamarck said once individuals can get directly developed by the environment, but evolution theorists denied. Nowaday the idea of exogenetics reveals that it might be possible thought. If not, think this: the chance of an mutation is very low. On higher individuals it may occur on DNA sequences not expressed anyway (the human genom is 90% crap). Almost no mutation is of any benefit. So how long would it last to change species into other shapes? To develop something like a birds feather. Did you ever have al closter look on a birds feather? With an scanning electron mikroscope? Try to find a foto, it is AMAZING! Such structure without purpose, just by chance? Hard to believe and mathematical quite impossible. With this speed of changes no creature would ever be albe to develope thick fur in time. The iceage would have frozen them all.

So for me there must be something like a plan inside life itself. Some may consider it to be divine or call it god, I don't know. But as dead materia tries to get the highes disorder, may be one difference is that life tries to create more comlicated, ordered organisms. A kind of natural law we just don't know yet? Therefore some call it god wheather others deny because not yet proven?

Why decide some single cell creatures to build up a kind of tissue. Later on some even sacrifice their ability to reproduce themself in order to get more specialized, where else others get dependend on them for nutrition but produce reproductive cells.
There is one theorie called "conspiration". Sounds strange but may be close to the truth?!

There had been made experiments, one I'll shortly describe. Facing Americans with a pool of exsisting Japanese signs and the same amount of fakes one would think statistically it should end up 50-50. But although the tested persons had no idea about Japanese language they hit signifacantly more than 50%. WHY? Could it be possible that there is a kind of common rememberence of mankind? Or organisms in general. Some tests have shown that even bacteria seem to comunicate toward each others in similar terms as cells do inside tissues. WHY?

There are even theories that our whole planet works like an organism. Is this rubbish or may it be possible?

Fact is that the further we get into the science what life means the more we have to admit, it is a wonder and we know almost nothing about it. Evolution or Creationsm, do not forget, are THEORIES. Although there are evidence for either one or another, there is no final prove. Fossile records? Of course they exsist, but the question is still if we interprete them right. Not long ago the Neandertaler was put directly into our own line of ancastors. Today it seems he was another species slowly put aside by our real ancestors, a bit more succsessful during this times. So interpretation of fossile records is an interpretation still, including the possibility of mistakes. As well as the most other theories.

I think in fact we are crumbling on earth like babies trying to figure out where we come from and where we will go to. But for sure we still do NOT know. And I consider science should always ask itself. Not the way Evolution theorie should be taken as a proven fact. But as a theorie what it really is. In fact we do not know exactly. And there are some tiny stones that still don't fit the mosaic completely.

But back to the topic. What's our purpose, if we have any? Countless sleepless nights I've thought about, discussing with friends until sunrise. No real ideas. So in spite of all our science advantages we still have so much room to believe. Einstein, if I remember right, said once something like the more he got to know the more he accepts the presence of god. Whatever he meant with it.

As far as I am personally concerned I do not favoritze one theorie, I guess as so often the truth may be somewhere in the middle, ore elswhere where noone has yet thought about. May be in a few centuries people will laugh about or silly evolution ideas?
Thes sense of live anyway remains somthing every person has to find for himself. May be to get as rich as possble, may be to get involved into charity. Or simply to deny any sense at all.
As it appears to me: just plain speculations...
 
Create your own goal -

*To gain knowledge.
*To create something grand.
*To obey your own law.
*To gratify the mind or senses.
*To oppose injustice.
*To uncover secrets.

I live a life that aims at all these goals.
 
I have no idea why, maybe just to be ourselves and reproduce, but if it really was a big sims game that god created, he should go and learn to create better games :p
 
We are animals with big brains and big imaginations.

Why not explore the world's possibilities?
 
Back
Top Bottom