Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,819 Year: 3,076/9,624 Month: 921/1,588 Week: 104/223 Day: 2/13 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Evolution of "light"
Wise
Inactive Member


Message 106 of 126 (53624)
09-03-2003 1:09 AM


CRASHFROG---After the universe. See, God moves over the waters at the beginning, right? Before he creates light? How can there be water if there's no universe? There can't, so we know that the Biblical accounts says that first comes the universe, then water, then light.
But the cosmological model says that the universe comes first, light at the same time (since it's a fundamental force in the universe), and water after millions of years.
Clearly the accounts don't agree. The order is wrong. What's hard to understand about that?
Wise---Yes, but light was "instantaneous" in both cases. It "just happened". One by the supposed "bang" and the other by the spoken word, then "bang".
Both identical and reconciliable.
Light was Gods first "spoken" creation and it was the Bangs first creation.
Wise

Replies to this message:
 Message 108 by Dr Jack, posted 09-03-2003 6:01 AM Wise has not replied
 Message 114 by crashfrog, posted 09-03-2003 10:14 AM Wise has not replied

  
Yaro
Member (Idle past 6496 days)
Posts: 1797
Joined: 07-12-2003


Message 107 of 126 (53625)
09-03-2003 1:22 AM
Reply to: Message 105 by Wise
09-03-2003 12:55 AM


Wise,
You ignored my post.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 105 by Wise, posted 09-03-2003 12:55 AM Wise has not replied

  
Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003
Member Rating: 8.7


Message 108 of 126 (53644)
09-03-2003 6:01 AM
Reply to: Message 106 by Wise
09-03-2003 1:09 AM


Wise,
Why do you assume that because light didn't come about through evolution it had to 'just happen'? I don't think you'll find many Physicists to agree with you on that. They will probably tell you we don't know why the fundemental properties are as they are, but that is long way from saying they 'just happened'. Already there are tantalising hints of a deeper structure, explaining the values found in the Standard Model.
You're quite right we will never know everything about the universe. Now explain how that means we can't explain it's origin and properties? You understand don't you that that's a very small part of everything about the universe?
"Faith requires NO evidence", huh? Sounds to me like you've just chosen ignorance; don't expect us to rush to join you.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 106 by Wise, posted 09-03-2003 1:09 AM Wise has not replied

  
Parasomnium
Member
Posts: 2224
Joined: 07-15-2003


Message 109 of 126 (53645)
09-03-2003 7:00 AM
Reply to: Message 95 by Wise
09-02-2003 11:20 PM


Wise writes:
Wise----What answers?
I haven't seen any. Look...it is up to the evolutionists to explain the evolution of light. My belief in its creation is based upon "faith" which requires NO explanation.
You haven't seen any answers. Would that be because you do not read our responses? It has been explained to you that light does not evolve, and that 'evolvement' is not a word. Yet, you stubbornly persist in your soliloquy, giving me the impression that I'm dealing with a tape recorder. A fruitful discussion with you is not possible, it seems. Especially so since you've just disqualified yourself with your 'faith which requires NO explanation.' I'll just leave you here and go and talk to people who do not behave like zombies.
Goodbye.
[This message has been edited by Parasomnium, 09-03-2003]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 95 by Wise, posted 09-02-2003 11:20 PM Wise has not replied

  
Wise
Inactive Member


Message 110 of 126 (53659)
09-03-2003 8:54 AM


YARO-----Wise
Why the heck do you think Light must have evolved? Evolution only applies to living things. Don't you see how stupid your question is?
It's like asking "how do rocks run?" or "how do trees speak?", it's a nonsensical question. Now, you can easely ask were did light come from, or the universe for that matter, and guess what, you may actually be on to something!
Because, we simply don't know. Sure we have theories that explain the universes inseption like the Big Bang, but it has yet to account for what is beyond the universe, or it's purpose for being (if indeed it has one). And the theory is largly speculative. So sure, maybe God is at the end of it after all! But we don't know... YET.
In any case, we do know things evolve, and from that knowledge we can estimate the earths age, and the timespan of biology uppon it's surface.
So, now do you see why your question dosn't make sense?
Now... before you go restating it, can I ask you to bring me a sourcee, a webpage, a quote from a book, etc. that states that evolution must acount for phisical principals such as light, gravity, etc. Because evolution has never proported to be involved in these phenomena, it is strictly a principle of living matter.
Now... I know you think somehow light must be present for life to exist, so pelase don't restate this. It is an irelivant point, and a dubius one at that since there is life that dosn't depend on light. Please answer why you think, life must have evolved for evolution to be true. Sources please!
So please, bring us the evolutionist why stated light eveolved
Wise---ALAS!! Someone with an open cranial cavity. BTW, you are not ignored. You , at least, believe there MAY be a god behind it all though you believe it is not proven.
good, very good.
Light is a form f energy, though not totally understood. It is admitted that for life to survive (as WE know it) on another planet, for example, that the sun, or suns would play a vital role.
IF that be the case, then what we may not KNOW about light is that it is "living". And anything that "lives" requires a beginning. To an evolutionists this would require "evolution".
Life requires 3 things, one of them is light:
CUT AND PASTE:::
jan.ucc.nau.edu/~bah/BIO471/SulfurMethane.pdf
Wise
[This message has been edited by Wise, 09-03-2003]

Replies to this message:
 Message 116 by crashfrog, posted 09-03-2003 10:18 AM Wise has not replied

  
Wise
Inactive Member


Message 111 of 126 (53661)
09-03-2003 9:04 AM


Parasomnium---You haven't seen any answers. Would that be because you do not read our responses? It has been explained to you that light does not evolve, and that 'evolvement' is not a word. Yet, you stubbornly persist in your soliloquy, giving me the impression that I'm dealing with a tape recorder. A fruitful discussion with you is not possible, it seems. Especially so since you've just disqualified yourself with your 'faith which requires NO explanation.' I'll just leave you here and go and talk to people who do not behave like zombies.
Goodbye
Wise---Faith requires NO explanation. Why? Because it is just that..F-A-I-T-H. It is a belief in something that may or may not be true.
Science, on the other hand, REQUIRES that ALL THINGS be explained scientifically. Thus it is up to you, the Scientist and evolutionists to do the explaining.
But if you cannot take the heat, then...
Ta Ta Pee Wee !
Wise

  
Wise
Inactive Member


Message 112 of 126 (53662)
09-03-2003 9:13 AM


Mr. JACK---Wise,
Why do you assume that because light didn't come about through evolution it had to 'just happen'? I don't think you'll find many Physicists to agree with you on that. They will probably tell you we don't know why the fundemental properties are as they are, but that is long way from saying they 'just happened'. Already there are tantalising hints of a deeper structure, explaining the values found in the Standard Model.
You're quite right we will never know everything about the universe. Now explain how that means we can't explain it's origin and properties? You understand don't you that that's a very small part of everything about the universe?
"Faith requires NO evidence", huh? Sounds to me like you've just chosen ignorance; don't expect us to rush to join you
Wise---"Tantalizing hints"? You mean like...GOOD GOD....Light COULD actually be "living"?! Thereby it needs a BEGINNING?! GASP...Choke...choke...
Fine...Then if Physicists do not think that light "just happened" then it will be up to them to explain its evolution.
If one cannot know everything about the universe then how can one EVER undertsand its creator?
To an atheist it is put this way:
God is simply to "deep" for you.
Wise

Replies to this message:
 Message 113 by Dr Jack, posted 09-03-2003 9:25 AM Wise has not replied

  
Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003
Member Rating: 8.7


Message 113 of 126 (53664)
09-03-2003 9:25 AM
Reply to: Message 112 by Wise
09-03-2003 9:13 AM


Wise,
Please use the reply button at the bottom of the post you are replying to, also please use the quote or qs tags to identify quoted material in your posts.
"Tantalizing hints"? You mean like...GOOD GOD....Light COULD actually be "living"?! Thereby it needs a BEGINNING?! GASP...Choke...choke..
Don't be stupid. Light is not living, nor is there any possibility it could be so. Light is simply a form of electromagnetic radiation, which is an extremely well understood phenemona, with very well defined and understood properties. We do not yet know why it has the particular properties it has, but ignorance is not evidence.
Then if Physicists do not think that light "just happened" then it will be up to them to explain its evolution.
As has been pointed out to you many a time, light is not alive therfore it has not evolved. Its properties are in need of explanation and work is being done to provide this explanation. I am confident that Physicists will be able to provide deeper explanations in the coming years.
But even if they do not, that will still not be any kind of evidence for a god, or gods. Specifically it will not be evidence for your particular brand of god, rather than Odin, Krishna or the Cosmic Goat. No part of Atheism requires that the universe be comprehensible to us.
If one cannot know everything about the universe then how can one EVER undertsand its creator?
What does that have to do with anything? There is no evidence of there being any creator to understand.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 112 by Wise, posted 09-03-2003 9:13 AM Wise has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 114 of 126 (53666)
09-03-2003 10:14 AM
Reply to: Message 106 by Wise
09-03-2003 1:09 AM


One by the supposed "bang" and the other by the spoken word, then "bang".
Both identical and reconciliable.
How does that make any sense? You've accurately presented the difference between the two models at hand, but then in your very next sentence you assert that there's no difference.
Now you're just not making any sense.
Anyway, so what? If the Genesis account can be liberally stretched to agree with the cosmological evidence, so what? You've hit the one thing that the Genesis account can be made to look accurate on. It's wrong on every other point. Or at the very least, no more right than any other mythological account.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 106 by Wise, posted 09-03-2003 1:09 AM Wise has not replied

  
Dan Carroll
Inactive Member


Message 115 of 126 (53667)
09-03-2003 10:18 AM
Reply to: Message 94 by Wise
09-02-2003 11:11 PM


quote:
DAN CAROLL
After a while, you'd think the number of people online who are able to misspell my name when it's on the screen in front of them would stop amazing me.
quote:
Then perhaps you can en"light"en us and explain the evolvement of colors, spectrum by spectrum.
I have no idea what "evolvement" means. If you clue me in maybe I can explanamate to you, but until then I'm just confuzesased.
Since you chose not to answer my question, can we assume you are unable to answer a simple question about color?
Obviously, your lack of knowledge on one matter means that everything you've ever said has no relevance.
------------------
Ms. Krabappal:Are there any more questions?
Bart:Yes, how would I go about making a half man half monkey creature?
Krabapal:I'm sorry Bart, that would be playing God.
Bart:God schmod! I want my monkey man!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 94 by Wise, posted 09-02-2003 11:11 PM Wise has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 116 of 126 (53668)
09-03-2003 10:18 AM
Reply to: Message 110 by Wise
09-03-2003 8:54 AM


It is admitted that for life to survive (as WE know it) on another planet, for example, that the sun, or suns would play a vital role.
IF that be the case, then what we may not KNOW about light is that it is "living". And anything that "lives" requires a beginning.
Dude, take a biology class. There's nothing magic about an ecology's dependance on sunlight. Light is simply a ready source of energy that helps catalyze certain chemical reactions. It's called "photosynthesis".
Light isn't alive. It's not some kind of magic "life force" or essence or something. Maybe you need to read a little less science fiction and open a textbook.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 110 by Wise, posted 09-03-2003 8:54 AM Wise has not replied

  
awinkisas
Inactive Member


Message 117 of 126 (53675)
09-03-2003 10:44 AM
Reply to: Message 103 by Wise
09-03-2003 12:44 AM


I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that either English is not your first language or you are really young because you are having a lot of trouble grasping the simplest ideas and your reasoning is all over the map.
unwise writes:
Haven't you ever heard the TRUE story about George Washington Carver?
Let me enlighten you:
It has been said that george Washington carver, as a young Scientist, one day, asked God..."show me the secrets of the universe"...
You start by saying that this is a TRUE story (capitals don't imply truth) but then you go on to say "It has been said ..." No one will dispute George Washington Carver's accomplishments with the peanut however, did the aforementioned conversation with God actually happen? No one can say for sure. It is folly to state it as fact.
unwise writes:
Again, what makes you think man will learn everything in the universe? Will you one day stand upon distant planets and study its soil and atmosphere? Will you study distant stars at close range? Will you enter a blackhole? HAW !!
When one refers to mankind one is not referring to an individual person i.e. me, instead it refers to the complete set of all men and women, past, present and future.
Will I one day stand upon distant planets and study its soil and atmosphere? Probably not. Will mankind? Most likely. We have already stood on the moon and we have the technological ability to go to Mars. The expense however outweights the desire at this time.
Will I study distant stars at close range? Probably not. Will mankind? Almost assuredly. We have sent probes beyond the edges of our solar system, it is not a huge leap to assume that someday we will send ourselves.
Will I enter a blackhole? Probably not. Will mankind? Maybe, who knows what technology may allow us to do in the future.
unwise writes:
Facts !? FACTS, you say !!?? I just gave you several above.
Actually, you haven't sited one fact. You have made a lot of bald faced claims but you haven't offered even a sliver of evidence.
unwise writes:
Does knowledge come from intelligence?
Yes. But they are not the same.
Knowledge is the collection of what has been discovered or learned. Intelligence is the capacity to aquire and apply knowledge. Mankind's collective knowledge only increases on a daily basis. Once something is discovered it is added to our knowledge and is available to all those who were not intelligent enough to discover it themselves.
In closing please try to understand that knowledge is increasing. We may not know the answers right now but someday we will. This has been going on for hundreds of years, ever since humanity threw off the yolk of religious oppression. This allowed our minds to examine and explore with out having to filter everything through some obsolete tome. We know more now than we did 100 years ago and 100 years from now we will know several magnitudes more. This progression will logically lead us to become intimate with the innermost workings of all that exists.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 103 by Wise, posted 09-03-2003 12:44 AM Wise has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 118 by Wounded King, posted 09-03-2003 10:54 AM awinkisas has replied

  
Wounded King
Member
Posts: 4149
From: Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Joined: 04-09-2003


Message 118 of 126 (53676)
09-03-2003 10:54 AM
Reply to: Message 117 by awinkisas
09-03-2003 10:44 AM


Humanity threw off the yoke of religious oppression? You could have fooled me.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 117 by awinkisas, posted 09-03-2003 10:44 AM awinkisas has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 126 by awinkisas, posted 09-03-2003 11:05 PM Wounded King has not replied

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 12998
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 119 of 126 (53685)
09-03-2003 11:30 AM


Temporarily Closing This Thread
My position about this thread is that the originator is not interested in discussion, but the activity level indicates a lot of interest in the topic, or perhaps it is the originator's style that is attracting attention. Anyway, productive discussion doesn't seem to be taking place, and so I am going to close this thread for a few hours. I'll open it again around 4 PM eastern US time.
When it reopens I would like to request that the originator demonstrate an interest in discussion, and that the respondents work very hard to help him with this by staying focused on the thread's topic and by refraining from engaging in extracurricular activities.
Instant suspension of posting privileges will be imposed for anyone thought to be ignoring this request. If this should happen to you, please do not take it personally. It happens to the best of us, including me. All it takes to have your posting privileges restored is an email request to Admin.
------------------
--Percy
EvC Forum Administrator

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 12998
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 120 of 126 (53734)
09-03-2003 5:13 PM


Thread Reopened
Enjoy!
------------------
--Percy
EvC Forum Administrator

Replies to this message:
 Message 121 by Wise, posted 09-03-2003 5:39 PM Admin has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024