I heard something very interesting on a "Discovery Science" TV show.
Apparently, some years ago cosmologists were somewhat disturbed by what they could see of the observable universe. Basically, they came to the conclusion/calculated that there is insufficient visible matter to hold the universe together, i.e. lack of mass. As the universe IS clearly stable, this fuelled a great debate where Creationists considered it as proof that there was a God.
The scientests had to come up with a theory to explain why the universe was being held together, even though there was insufficient visible matter. Basically, they theorised that there was "dark matter" too and that this made up for the lack of visible matter.
Now, I'm not saying that the scientists are wrong, but so far no-one has actually found a chunk of dark matter. They suspect it exists, but unless they can climb into a spaceship and travel thousands of light years to see if there is dark matter where they think it is, then the scientists' theory is still a theory without any hard evidence.
So, until that happens, the scales are tipped in favour of Creationism because there may not be any dark matter out there!
Hooray... another "Evolution vs. Creation" thread...
Gandelf wrote: So, until that happens, the scales are tipped in favour of Creationism because there may not be any dark matter out there!
People have been trying to prove the existence of god for much longer than Dark matter, and failed. That would suggest it's less likely God exists than Dark Matter, especially since god is supposed to be everywhere...
irrespective of space ships and theories about dark matter if you truly believe, as you say you do, then you would not put your God into the gaps of a scientific theory which is what you would do with this argument.....
Na Fianna Dragun
Karak-Eight Peaks, Kiera ze Witch Hunter
Eve online - Kaminjosvig.
Karak-Eight Peaks, Kiera ze Witch Hunter
Eve online - Kaminjosvig.
That doesn't make any sense because just the same there may not be a creator out there either so at very least taking that point of view the scales are balanced.Gandelf wrote:So, until that happens, the scales are tipped in favour of Creationism because there may not be any dark matter out there!
More to the point however, the existence or non-existence of dark matter doesn't threaten the possibility of the existence of a creator regardless, because there's nothing to say the creator didn't create the dark matter, so quite why you feel the need to suggest the two are mutually exclusive I don't know.
The idea of dark matter arises because we can observe effects on objects far off in space such that they appear to be being pulled, or acted on by some other force in some way yet there is no other object there to pull them (i.e. via gravity). The argument is then that there is some other form of matter out there that is simply not visible or detectable to us but is still capable of enacting forces such as gravity upon other objects that are visible. Ironically, someone with a religious mind might even argue that dark matter is their deity at work, moving things around the universe with his hands invisibly.
This is simply what I don't understand about you Gandelf, you're so insecure and closed off in your beliefs that even your own beliefs don't make any sense, you believe in a god that contradicts his very own existence. Science has proven that something exists out there in the universe that we can't explain, so rather than apply your belief of the way the universe was created you instead seek to suggest it doesn't exist, which is contrary to reality as we know it, it's like the person that sits curled up in a ball, with their hands over their ears screaming "LALALALA I'M NOT LISTENING".
Gandelf, I'm not sure what sort of Christian you are, but I do wonder if you realise that even the Vatican not only accept the existence of dark matter, but also have their very own observatory to further research in such areas? If any set of religious beliefs are correct then surely it's those that fit in with the universe as we know it, than a belief like yours that simply runs contradictory to reality?
Sorry for starting off another controversial thread. The reason I started it off was just to gauge roughly how many forum users there are around these days. I figured that an "evolution vs. creation" would probably be the best topic for getting the maximum number of different forum users to respond. But only 5 replies... which only confirms to me that Prydwen Net should be decommissioned. Without sounding disrespectful... why is still going?
Gandelf wrote:Sorry for starting off another controversial thread. The reason I started it off was just to gauge roughly how many forum users there are around these days. I figured that an "evolution vs. creation" would probably be the best topic for getting the maximum number of different forum users to respond. But only 5 replies... which only confirms to me that Prydwen Net should be decommissioned. Without sounding disrespectful... why is still going?
Because YOU post Gandelf, and because we care :¬)
It confirms that you should be decomissioned imo. Why are you still going?Gandelf wrote:Sorry for starting off another controversial thread. The reason I started it off was just to gauge roughly how many forum users there are around these days. I figured that an "evolution vs. creation" would probably be the best topic for getting the maximum number of different forum users to respond. But only 5 replies... which only confirms to me that Prydwen Net should be decommissioned. Without sounding disrespectful... why is still going?
Does it really matter if it's still here? If it offends you that it is you don't have to visit it if you don't want to
Gandelf wrote:Sorry for starting off another controversial thread. The reason I started it off was just to gauge roughly how many forum users there are around these days. I figured that an "evolution vs. creation" would probably be the best topic for getting the maximum number of different forum users to respond. But only 5 replies... which only confirms to me that Prydwen Net should be decommissioned. Without sounding disrespectful... why is still going?
Because people are still prepared to pay for the resources to keep it going, it is their choice ... not yours! If you don't want to post here don't, simple.