>Hi Silk here: If we are to assume that the uncreated creator (god to
>many) made all the way they {it} are {is} where they {it} are {is}
>doing what they are then our only question can be "WHY" & if thats
>it then it's not even worth 5 minutes of contemplation, but if god
>did do it all then this god did or did not endow you with the
>curiosity to contemplate what it had done or is doing & why! Period!
>cogito ergo sum! You do what you do because it's what you're
>supposed to do otherwise you'd be doing something else!
>
so *that's* why I've been doing something else!
>Other side of the same coin: What if we go along with Hubble & say
>the universe is expanding & then go backwards? If we do we should
>arrive at the original point of expansion? N'est-ce pas? Forget for
>the sake of discussion what came before that! Ok if we do this I
>guess that more or less brings us to the big bang? So here we are
>with this "primordial soup" made up of some stuff; cosmic background
>radiation, free electrons, photons & helium & all that type thing!
>Ok, from all this mysterious stuff mixing itself up with outstanding
>temperatures & lightening & all other same such activities bingo we
>get a thing called life! We can, again for the sake of the
>conversation, assume the physical & chemical laws then (12 - 15
>billion yr's ago) were obeying different masters (rules). Abiogensis
>or some same such thing long since departed & therefore not so much
>as a trace left behind & thus available for our scrutiny? [I could
>see it, whether god "designed" or not ] So this "life" was very
>fresh & vulnerable & impressionable [ I can see that can you?] (for
>the sake of a thread for if we wait for concrete proof we shall
>never have a handle from which to contemplate anything?) Why then
>did this ever so impressionable life evolve into so many different
>forms, say without design to guide it, & add to this that this life
>did so evolve into a myriad of things under the very same
>environmental conditions & the same time (starting point)? Of course
>if every species that ever was was somehow isolated from one another
>at this time of "genesis" (each evolved from unique conditions) only
>later to migrate & mingle with one another that could explain the
>variety & spice of life? Any conjectures? I for one ( in the
>abscence of a supernatural intelligent designer) simply do not know!
>Say this "new life" was all the "same" when it came into being -
>common ancestory?? Take 10 pint bottles of paint (all the same
>paint) & throw each one against a wall & you may very well get 10
>very different "splotches" not at all unlike Rorschachs blots? The
>lottery of life, simply & only that! A form of chance? Or is that
>too "unsophisticated" for ya all? I must admit that all that "is"
>seems to be conducting "Its" affairs with a great degree of
>symbiosis? Perhaps this "coincidence" simply developed later on for
>"convenience"? Seems to be a hell of alot of convenience in the
>works for "chances" sake?
If you hit the return key a couple of times every so often in the
middle of your rants you would look smarter. Trust me! take a look at
some of the other posts. It works.
Susan
-- ----------I am aware that the conclusions arrived at in this work will be denounced by some as highly irreligious; but he who denounces them is bound to shew why it is more irreligious to explain the origin of man as a distinct species by descent from some lower form, through the laws of variation and natural selection, than to explain the birth of the individual through the laws of ordinary reproduction.
---Charles Darwin
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Dec 07 2000 - 15:11:31 EST