Barf> I tried ALL the links on that long list. And I do mean ALL of them. Not a single one worked.
MegaDeuce won't come back. He's like The Force, who promised me several weeks ago, to prove Creation to me "when he got home". Not a word. Why? Because neither of this two gentlemen CAN prove it. It is Bellatrax all over They THINK somethng exists, but when they try and find it, they realise it doesn't.
Oops! Sorry about the links on that article. I guess it wasn't so great. 🙁
I found this quote from Thomas Paine. He was a Deist - not a Christian. I don't think he was a scientist or anything, so, again, not offering any proof. I just thought it was interesting, and wanted to see what you guys thought of it. He was speaking in regard to athiests, but it's in the "creation" context...
"In the first place, admitting matter to have properties, as we see it has, the question still remains, how came matter by those properties? To this they will answer, that matter possessed those properties eternally. This is not solution, but assertion; and to deny it is as impossible of proof as to assert it."It is then necessary to go further; and therefore I say - if there exist a circumstance that is not a property of matter, and without which the universe, or to speak in a limited degree, the solar system composed of planets and a sun, could not exist a moment, all the arguments of atheism, drawn from properties of matter, and applied to account for the universe, will be overthrown, and the existence of a superior cause, or that which man calls God, becomes discoverable, as is before said, by natural philosophy.
"I go now to show that such a circumstance exists, and what it is.
"The universe is composed of matter, and, as a system, is sustained by motion. Motion is not a property of matter, and without this motion, the solar system could not exist. Were motion a property of matter, that undiscovered and undiscoverable thing called perpetual motion would establish itself.
"It is because motion is not a property of matter, that perpetual motion is an impossibility in the hand of every being but that of the Creator of motion. When the pretenders to atheism can produce perpetual motion, and not till then, they may expect to be credited.
"The natural state of matter, as to place, is a state of rest. Motion, or change of place, is the effect of an external cause acting upon matter. As to that faculty of matter that is called gravitation, it is the influence which two or more bodies have reciprocally on each other to unite and be at rest. Everything which has hitherto been discovered, with respect to the motion of the planets in the system, relates only to the laws by which motion acts, and not to the cause of motion.
"Gravitation, so far from being the cause of motion to the planets that compose the solar system, would be the destruction of the solar system, were revolutionary motion to cease; for as the action of spinning upholds a top, the revolutionary motion upholds the planets in their orbits, and prevents them from gravitating and forming one mass with the sun. In one sense of the word, philosophy knows, and atheism says, that matter is in perpetual motion.
"But the motion here meant refers to the state of matter, and that only on the surface of the Earth. It is either decomposition, which is continually destroying the form of bodies of matter, or recomposition, which renews that matter in the same or another form, as the decomposition of animal or vegetable substances enters into the composition of other bodies.
"But the motion that upholds the solar system, is of an entirely different kind, and is not a property of matter. It operates also to an entirely different effect. It operates to perpetual preservation, and to prevent any change in the state of the system.
"Giving then to matter all the properties which philosophy knows it has, or all that atheism ascribes to it, and can prove, and even supposing matter to be eternal, it will not account for the system of the universe, or of the solar system, because it will not account for motion, and it is motion that preserves it.
"When, therefore, we discover a circumstance of such immense importance, that without it the universe could not exist, and for which neither matter, nor any nor all the properties can account, we are by necessity forced into the rational conformable belief of the existence of a cause superior to matter, and that cause man calls GOD.
"As to that which is called nature, it is no other than the laws by which motion and action of every kind, with respect to unintelligible matter, are regulated. And when we speak of looking through nature up to nature's God, we speak philosophically the same rational language as when we speak of looking through human laws up to the power that ordained them.
"God is the power of first cause, nature is the law, and matter is the subject acted upon."
Julibug> Ah, don’t worry about it 🙂 I guess you didn’t follow any of the links.
Thomas Paine: I guess he wrote his stuff prior to the theories and subsequent proof of the Big Bang? No one has claimed that matter eternally had the properties it has. You may want to look up Higgs Boson and Higgs Fields for how matter is defined and gets its properties in modern physics. If you can’t find any laymens pages, I’d be happy to tell you 😄
There does exist circumstances which are not properties of matter as such. Namely how matter arose after the Big Bang. But I can’t see how the good Mr. Paine can then conclude there exists a superior cause (God).
Just because we cannot explain this or that, it doesn’t PROVE any deity. As you’re already aware. And simply leaving the answer to mysteries “in Gods hands” prevents us from discovering the real cause or effect of that, which we cannot explain.
Yes, the Universe is composed of matter. AND of radiation. It’s not sustained by motion, but by energy, which is intimately linked to time. Motion is a property of matter, as matter can move. It is not an intrinsic property of matter (such as charge), it is an extrinsic property, just as position.
It’s nonsense to say, that because motion is not an intrinsic property of matter, then that is why we won’t have perpetual motion. That has to do with the different types of energy.
“Natural state”? How can he speak of “natural” when motion is an extrinsic property of matter? There is no such thing as unnatural states of matter.
“Everything which has hitherto been discovered, with respect to the motion of the planets in the system, relates only to the laws by which motion acts, and not to the cause of motion.”
HUH? Formulating laws of gravity is formulating the cause of the motion of the planets. What creates gravity is the mass and energy OF matter. Massive bodies creates “dents” in spacetime, and other objects can then move on the sides of these “wells”. Since mass is an intrinsic property of matter, it is an intrinsic property of matter which causes motion. The planets are slowing down. It’s a good thing, that it’s just not happening very fast 😄
I don’t know who Thomas Paine is, but I’m assuming he wrote that prior to 1915.
Well, like I said, he wasn't a scientist. 😉 He was, however, one of the important individuals involved in the beginnings of the U.S. He had quite a bit of influence on the Declaration of Independence. He wrote some well-known papers including "Common Sense", "Rights of Man" & "Age of Reason". Thomas Jefferson was an admirer of his. Needless to say, yes, he wrote what I posted previously before 1915. ✅
http://odur.let.rug.nl/~usa/B/tpaine/paine.htm
Thank you for the reply, though. It was helpful. 😄
I'm afraid I don't understand how the existance of motion proves the existance of a god...
Plus, (and forgive me if I'm wrong because like I said earlier I'm not a physicist) if I'm not mistaken, in a world without motion there could be no gravity, since the two are directly related--if all motion in the universe were to suddenly cease, the planets wouldn't merge with the sun, they'd stay exactly where they were, since if they couldn't move they wouldn't be able to move to the sun. Like I say, I really, really suck at physical science, so forgive me if every word of what I just wrote was wrong.
Julibug> Well then, if the good Mr. Paine wasn't even a scientist, who's HE to judge physics and science? The world is littered with un-scientific and pseudo-scinetific stuff, created by people without any education to back up their claims. Mr. Paine may've been one of the rulers in early U.S. and influenced your Declaration of Independence. But he's "essay" is quite unscientific
Well, like I said, he wasn't a scientist. He was, however, one of the important individuals involved in the beginnings of the U.S. He had quite a bit of influence on the Declaration of Independence. He wrote some well-known papers including "Common Sense", "Rights of Man" & "Age of Reason". Thomas Jefferson was an admirer of his. Needless to say, yes, he wrote what I posted previously before 1915.
Barf> It's not really a matter of motion or not. Talking about a world without motion, is essentially taking a "picture" of our spacetime, if you understand what I mean. That has absolutely nothing to do with any deity. The reasoning is completely hay-wire: Motion is not an intrinsic property of matter, therefore God exists.
This reasoning is odd, to say the least.
It's actually so, that in a world without matter/energy there would be no gravity and hence no motion. And as you correctly points out - if all motion ceased, then it would be ALL motion. And you'd get a "picture" of the Solar System. If motion ceases but gravity still works, you WILL get motion. You cannot have one without the other.
Barf> Good picturing then 😄
You know, when we take pictures with cameras we get a 2D representation of our four dimensions (3 spatial and one time). Remove time/motion and you’d get a 3D representation of our 4D space-time.
Btw: Noticed how neither MegaDeuce nor The Force has returned?
Julibug> Oh, you started out by saying you weren’t trying to prove anything 🙂 I just commented on the essay. So how are you on evolution vs. creation these days? An “old-Earth Creationist”? Or something else? Please understand that I’m not out to “take away” your religion, which I can’t. I’m simply curious.
I haven't read any previous posts. I'm just here to state my opinion: I believe in evolution. I'm not theorizing that there is no god, because I'm not sure what to believe. But I do believe that we have evolved as a species over time. I don't think that we, as humans, looked like this when we were first created, be it by a god or whatever.
Did you read The Force's comments here, Omega?
Originally posted by The Omega
Julibug> Why do you think a God was involved in creating the Universe?
I'm afraid that if I answer that question completely and honestly, it will be considered a religious comment which we are to avoid on here. However, if you really want my full reply, I would be happy to pm or e-mail you. I can tell you, though, that it involves faith-based experience that probably would sound more like superstition than science to you. 😉 So, let me know if you want me to go into all the details. Otherwise I won't waste your time. 😄
Originally posted by Jeff_Atello
no religious discussions are allowed.
I'm aware that religious discussions are not allowed - thus I offered to pm or e-mail my response if Omega is interested.
Originally posted by Jeff_Atello
This thread itself is religious, as is the Witchcraft one.
This thread isn't religious?!? 😕 While I can possibly understand your comment on the Witchcraft thread, because of witchcraft's association with the supernatural by some, this one is really not religious. The subject matter of this thread does cause some people to make religious comments, though, but we've tried to be careful about it.
Originally posted by Jeff_Atello
There is nothing wrong with religious comments, just overly religious threads.
Well, we still try to avoid the comments, because they lead to discussions. 😉
This thread is really more scientific than religious... If this has been reported, I am aware of the non-religion policy, and I think it is quite fair. However, this wasn't originally meant to be an "Evolution vs Creation" thread. If you page through it, you will see that everyone is being very civil. Nobody has openly flamed or bashed another member. Also, since at least two of the people posting in here are mods, and I believe julibug as well, I'd think that this is ok to have around since it hasn't been closed yet...