ICANT'S position in the creation debate

Sasuke writes:However there are some things I can conclude as mythological. Look at history, how many faiths are there? Is it not true that every culture in history has its own faith? So why would anyone in there right mind, knowing that every culture has its own faith that christianity is truth? Come on man be objective don't assume christianity just because you want to. It is not logical to assume a god that you have never SEEN or HEARD or TOUCHED created the universe. Even if there was such a thing, I am sure you could never understand this "being". and speaking of such things, why would this being that has existed for an eternity care about moral character? all Humans live and die for peats sake.. And dont tell me that a biological being could at one time under different circumstances live for an eternity but then because he ate from a tree of good and evil that caused them to live less time or some hog wash.. We are here.. this is our reality.. henceforth, every view must be tested.. There is no absolute truth.. and faith is not science... you should not be looking at scripture to prove your views scientifically because the views of the writers were nothing like the science views of today...

JonF writes:Both, except it's not "appear to run faster". It does indeed run faster.{ABE} These are only true only from the point of view of an observer on Earth.

JonF writes:A postulate is an unproven assumption.

JonF writes:Why is that answer better than mine?

JonF writes:Still waiting for an explanation.

Rrhain writes:So for you to insist that "literal Genesis is the best explanation of the facts" requires that the fact that we do not see any flowering plants in the fossil record until long after the rise of insects to be false. It requires that the fossil record showing the evolution of plants over time after the rise of insects to develop structures that exploit pollinators such as insects to be false.

NoseyNed writes:If you are with the clock it is running perfectly normally.

Coyote writes:This is an assertion, not a documented fact.

Coyote writes:What human parents do now has no relation to the question of origins. What human parents do now doesn't prove anything about origins several billion years ago! You should be ashamed for even suggesting such a thing! Freshmen in science courses have been failed for less than that.

Coyote writes:Sorry, that doesn't cut it as empirical evidence.

Sasuke writes:It is not a fact, it is assumed. There has never been any evidence to suggest life can't come from non life.

Sasuke writes:Prove that life can't come from non life.

"Never will the doctrine of spontaneous generation recover from the mortal blow struck by this simple experiment" (referring to his swan-neck flask experiment wherein he proved that fermenting microorganisms would not form in a flask containing fermentable juice until an entry path was created for them

Sasuke writes:I will agree non life can't produce life but that does not make it proven.

Sasuke writes:Neither can all the evidence in the world prove life can only come from life.

Sasuke writes:In reality there is no reason to think there is a god cept an assumption and as such we know there are natural laws.

KSasuke writes:Being as it is, it seems non life can produce life based on that observation alone.

Coyote writes:I suppose the fact that Edison failed to make a workable filament for his first light bulb--producing thousands of failures--is proof positive that such a filament can't be made, eh? That's the analogy you are making.

Coyote writes:And none are supported by empirical evidence.

Coyote writes:But from this mish-mash of unsupported beliefs you pull an absolute proof that only life begets life?

JonF writes:Nope, you will observe the clock on the ground to be running slower than yours. By the exact amount that the observer on Earth thinks your clock is running faster than his. All observers in all possible states of motion agree.

JonF writes: Oh, come on. Get real. Go read a book.

Special & General Relativity Questions and AnswersIf I could put myself in the same point in spacetime where I was yesterday at noon, would it still be yesterday at noon?Yes...but it would involve time travel and Nature doesn't seem to want to play that game with us.All answers are provided by Dr. Sten Odenwald (Raytheon STX) for the NASA Astronomy Cafe, part of the NASA Education and Public Outreach program.

JonF writes:Who says, and why are they right?

Perhaps readers who are not familiar with the current impossibility of reconciling relativity and quantum theory, may be visiting this site expecting to find an answer to the question "what is space-time?". Alas, there is no answer, at least not for now, and maybe never. At the University of Michigan's Strings 2000 seminar the participants proposed a list of the ten most important unsolved problems in fundamental physics. Number 5 was - "Why does the universe appear to have one time and three space dimensions?" In other words, what are space and time, and what is the strange combination of Space and Time that is the Spacetime Continuum?

Perdition writes:We're also operating in conditions very different from those in which life originated and have the added difficulty of making sure current life doesn't contaminate our experiment.

Sasuke writes:Bravo! Still don't prove it.

Sasuke writes:Impossible to prove either way.

Sasuke writes:Why wouldn't it exist? It just does and the fact that it does is evidence that life came from non life.

Sasuke writes:I think either is plausible.

cavediver writes:I can't begin to imagine how anyone who thinks that they are sufficiently informed to report on the annual Strings conference, can draw such an inept conclusion.

Here are the problems:1. Are all the (measurable) dimensionless parameters that characterize the physical universe calculable in principle or are some merely determined by historical or quantum mechanical accident and uncalculable?
David Gross, Institute for Theoretical Physics, University of California, Santa Barbara2. How can quantum gravity help explain the origin of the universe?
Edward Witten, California Institute of Technology and Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton3. What is the lifetime of the proton and how do we understand it?
Steve Gubser, Princeton University and California Institute of Technology4. Is Nature supersymmetric, and if so, how is supersymmetry broken?
Sergio Ferrara, CERN (European Laboratory of Particle Physics)
Gordon Kane, University of Michigan5. Why does the universe appear to have one time and three space dimensions?
Shamit Kachru, University of California, Berkeley
Sunil Mukhi, Tata Institute of Fundamental Research
Hiroshi Ooguri, California Institute of Technology6. Why does the cosmological constant have the value that it has, is it zero and is it really constant?
Andrew Chamblin, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Renata Kallosh, Stanford University7. What are the fundamental degrees of freedom of M-theory (the theory whose low-energy limit is eleven-dimensional supergravity and which subsumes the five consistent superstring theories) and does the theory describe Nature?
Louise Dolan, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
Annamaria Sinkovics, Spinoza Institute
Billy & Linda Rose, San Antonio College8. What is the resolution of the black hole information paradox?
Tibra Ali, Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics, Cambridge
Samir Mathur, Ohio State University9. What physics explains the enormous disparity between the gravitational scale and the typical mass scale of the elementary particles?
Matt Strassler, Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton10 Can we quantitatively understand quark and gluon confinement in Quantum Chromodynamics and the existence of a mass gap?
Igor Klebanov, Princeton University
Oyvind Tafjord, McGill University

Minnemooseus writes:Besides, others have pointed out Biblical scripture that God created man "from the dust of the Earth". There you have it - life from nonlife.

Gen 2:7 And the LORD God formed man [of] the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

Moose writes:Are you to say you're certain of God's methodology?

JonF writes:You think wrong. It's been experimentally demonstrated over and over again in lot of varied, clever, and independent ways. For example, if you were right GPS would not work. But GPS works. Therefore&hellips;

JonF writes:You asked what happens to time when you travel faster than light. I tried to hint that you may have heard "you can't go faster than light" at some time in your life. Your response is irrelevant.

JonF writes:I don't know. Certainly not Paul Stewart Snyder, the author of that page. Who did?