Where did God come from?

Originally posted by DigiMark007
Yeah, the differing uses of the word 'theory' in common usage and the scientific community is one of the biggest stumbling blocks to getting people to understand scientific theories and take them seriously. The way it's used colloquially is closer to the scientific definition for 'hypothesis.' I've thought for a long time that scientists should band together and start using a new word to make it clearer to the public.

It's the natural progression of new phenomena to be introduced such that Theories must be changed to accommodate said observations, or new theories be introduced that can reinforce an older theory.

😛

Originally posted by Kapton JAC
This is a question that I have been asked more times than I can count... Where did God come from? He couldn't have always been here, so where did he come from? Well lets think about this:

We are constrained by time, everything has a beginning, every thing has an end. But why does God have to be? Remove time from the equation. This is eternity, no beginning and no end, and this is, I believe, where God resides.

Debate please.

Originally posted by Da Pittman
Well if you go with the idea that God is everything from the atom to the stars then God was created when the universe was created.

So when exactly was that?

^sumtime in the finite past. that is ofcourse , assuming that THIS universe is all that exists

You assume this universe exists.

lol @ post-modern christianity 🙂

Cogito ergo Jesus est?

"They say we need a creator, and they call it God. That suggests God needs a creator, but they say, we can't know God's creator. So, if that's an accepted answer, why not just go back a step and say we can't know our creator. If the answer is "God's always existed", why not go back and say the universe has always existed?" -- Carl Sagan

Originally posted by lord xyz
"They say we need a creator, and they call it God. That suggests God needs a creator, but they say, we can't know God's creator. So, if that's an accepted answer, why not just go back a step and say we can't know our creator. If the answer is "God's always existed", why not go back and say the universe has always existed?" -- Carl Sagan

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
So when exactly was that?

Originally posted by Da Pittman
I like him 😄

Originally posted by lord xyz
Check out my sig.

Holy Shit Carl Sagan was a woman!!?!!

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Holy Shit Carl Sagan was a woman!!?!!

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Holy Shit Carl Sagan was a woman!!?!!

Originally posted by Newjak
For the other side of fence people tend to forget that theories may not be a Hypothesis that is dictated by so many whims, does not mean that Theories are not open to change and enhancement from what they once were.

It's the natural progression of new phenomena to be introduced such that Theories must be changed to accommodate said observations, or new theories be introduced that can reinforce an older theory.

That's the beauty of science. Provisional scientific truths allow for improvement and change, not dogmatic stubbornness. So yes, I'm in complete agreement. Your words are correct, but don't address my original point, which was that the word theory still implies an accepted position that is corroborated with ample evidence. It is not used as such in most of society.

Originally posted by DigiMark007
That's the beauty of science. Provisional scientific truths allow for improvement and change, not dogmatic stubbornness. So yes, I'm in complete agreement. Your words are correct, but don't address my original point, which was that the word theory still implies an accepted position that is corroborated with ample evidence. It is not used as such in most of society.

But in doing so they always fail to address the prime fear or stance of the mass of people, in that theories can change and what was once the approved norm for a theory can change in the future with any new observation that is introduced.

What people in the scientific community get hung on is the idea of observations that may never come or probabilities of said observation changing things are slim.

On the same note they also fail to grasp the idea that any new data being introduced into a system can yield unpredictable results. No matter the pre-designed probabilities because you can not account for the unknown only prep for it.

So while scientist maybe right the fears of the public or the stances of the public are not unfounded even if they do happen to not know the why of it.

😛

That's all I'm saying, just trying to give both sides a decent reasonable understandable summary. 😄

Originally posted by DigiMark007
That's the beauty of science. Provisional scientific truths allow for improvement and change, not dogmatic stubbornness. So yes, I'm in complete agreement. Your words are correct, but don't address my original point, which was that the word theory still implies an accepted position that is corroborated with ample evidence. It is not used as such in most of society.

Interesting spin on the situation...

We all know scientists are bastards and hate people coming up with new ideas which displace their own.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Interesting spin on the situation...

We all know scientists are bastards and hate people coming up with new ideas which displace their own.

Mostly true, since most scientists happen to be human, but there's also those which are interested in knowledge more than their latest take in a situation.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Interesting spin on the situation...

We all know scientists are bastards and hate people coming up with new ideas which displace their own.

*Shudder*

I sincerely hope that was sarcasm (which I am physically unable to detect) or at least an attempt at humor.

LOL?

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Interesting spin on the situation...

We all know scientists are bastards and hate people coming up with new ideas which displace their own.

Wait I'm not a scientist, but maybe I'm a bastard??? 😖

Originally posted by Da Pittman
I'm not a bastard!!!

Wait I'm not a scientist, but maybe I'm a bastard??? 😖

So, you are not sure? 😱