Site Search:
 
Speak Korean Now!
Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!
Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Multiple Intelligences Creationism
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Off-Topic Forum
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Underwaterbob



Joined: 08 Jan 2005
Location: In Cognito

PostPosted: Mon Jan 19, 2009 11:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

PRagic wrote:
I have no 'doctoral wisdom' per say with regards to this topic.


You can't spell "per se" either.

I understand you're a bit upset with being left out of the lunchroom chats at university, but attacking us won't make you feel better.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
Omkara



Joined: 18 Feb 2006
Location: USA

PostPosted: Tue Jan 20, 2009 1:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Okay, we've gotten off track, here.

The idea is that many gods is a better explanation for the variety of objects than a single god.

It would take at least five gods to elongate the giraffe's neck. Four to grab the legs, and one to pull on the head.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
greedy_bones



Joined: 01 Jul 2007
Location: not quite sure anymore

PostPosted: Tue Jan 20, 2009 1:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

itaewonguy wrote:
greedy_bones wrote:
itaewonguy wrote:
Where is the evidence that cells just appeared from nothing?


It's in the same place the evidence for Giraffes elongating their necks by stretching to reach higher leaves and then passing on this newly acquired trait to their offspring is.


no.. that's not evidence!


I think you've missed the point. My point is that the idea that cells appeared out of thin air is as close to the current theory of abiogenesis as the lamarckian example I gave you is to the current theory of evolution.

You've created another strawman.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Omkara



Joined: 18 Feb 2006
Location: USA

PostPosted: Tue Jan 20, 2009 2:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Many gods are better than one!

There is no reason to prefer one god to many gods.

Evolution is an incomplete theory, so I am justified in positing many gods.

To teach this in our schools would be at once to teach tolerance for other religions.

Only this is acceptable in a democracy. I vote for many gods.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
greedy_bones



Joined: 01 Jul 2007
Location: not quite sure anymore

PostPosted: Tue Jan 20, 2009 2:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Omkara wrote:
Many gods are better than one!

There is no reason to prefer one god to many gods.

Evolution is an incomplete theory, so I am justified in positing many gods.

To teach this in our schools would be at once to teach tolerance for other religions.

Only this is acceptable in a democracy. I vote for many gods.


I'm pretty happy with God/s being left out of public schools.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Rteacher



Joined: 23 May 2005
Location: Western MA, USA

PostPosted: Tue Jan 20, 2009 3:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Producing things out of thin air is also called "inconceivable mystical power" (and Krishna is the Supreme Mystic...)

Although most everyone here is loathe to seriously consider the Vedic model, it does use the analogy of there being one original candle from which innumerable candles - each with the same "candlepower" - have been lit..

The original "candle" - Krishna - always remains the original source and is further distinguished from the Vishnu expansions and incarnations by several personal qualities - including "wonderful excellence of beauty which cannot be rivaled anywhere in the creation".
http://nectarofdevotion.com/21/en

Here's a decent Wikipedia article summarizing Krishna's position in relation to all the other Gods ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Svayam_bhagavan[/url]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
mindmetoo



Joined: 02 Feb 2004

PostPosted: Tue Jan 20, 2009 4:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Rteacher wrote:
As far as I can see, there is no conclusive evidence that particles are created from nothing and it's largely a matter of interpretation and definition. I doubt that there's a consensus.


We're talking what is the creation contingent upon. In QM, which you have cited to support some aspect of your religious believe, there is no such thing as contingency. This aspect of QM has been thoroughly verified experimentally. I'm afraid there is a consensus on that matter.

Your giraffe comment I will properly address on the evolution thread.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Underwaterbob



Joined: 08 Jan 2005
Location: In Cognito

PostPosted: Tue Jan 20, 2009 4:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Rteacher wrote:
Producing things out of thin air is also called "inconceivable mystical power"


So that's what that was when my uncle pulled that coin out from behind my ear...

Seriously though, how does this arbitrary definition prove, or show us anything?

I think the multiple god discussion has fallen behind because, while being an interesting premise, there's about as much empirical evidence of multiple gods as there is of one god. (ie none) Discussing the implications of a highly unlikely scenario grows old pretty fast. Unless Omkara can more effectively demonstrate (perhaps with a bit less jargon) how it's just as likely, or more likely, than a monotheistic case.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
itaewonguy



Joined: 25 Mar 2003

PostPosted: Tue Jan 20, 2009 5:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

greedy_bones wrote:
itaewonguy wrote:
greedy_bones wrote:
itaewonguy wrote:
Where is the evidence that cells just appeared from nothing?


It's in the same place the evidence for Giraffes elongating their necks by stretching to reach higher leaves and then passing on this newly acquired trait to their offspring is.


no.. that's not evidence!


I think you've missed the point. My point is that the idea that cells appeared out of thin air is as close to the current theory of abiogenesis as the lamarckian example I gave you is to the current theory of evolution.

You've created another strawman.


no strawman arguement here.. just you being a good athiest/evolution and dodging questions you can't answer!
I am asking you to prove something..
so either put up or shut up!!

you got anything?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
greedy_bones



Joined: 01 Jul 2007
Location: not quite sure anymore

PostPosted: Tue Jan 20, 2009 8:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

itaewonguy wrote:
greedy_bones wrote:
itaewonguy wrote:
greedy_bones wrote:
itaewonguy wrote:
Where is the evidence that cells just appeared from nothing?


It's in the same place the evidence for Giraffes elongating their necks by stretching to reach higher leaves and then passing on this newly acquired trait to their offspring is.


no.. that's not evidence!


I think you've missed the point. My point is that the idea that cells appeared out of thin air is as close to the current theory of abiogenesis as the lamarckian example I gave you is to the current theory of evolution.

You've created another strawman.




no strawman arguement here.. just you being a good athiest/evolution and dodging questions you can't answer!
I am asking you to prove something..
so either put up or shut up!!

you got anything?


Your question is "where is the evidence that cells just appeared from nothing". There is no evidence for this, but this is not what the current hypotheses suggest. The current hypothesis being tested is that a series of chemical reactions first resulted in organic molecules which continued to react in a process similar to metabolism and the end result was a self replicating cell.

The reason why this is science and not religion is because at least a portion of this hypothesis is testable. Scientists have not yet created a living cell from inorganic matter, but one day they might.

Yes, under our current understanding of the universe, we cannot test whether this happened for the first cell, but we can accept it as the most likely scenario because it is possible within our understanding of the natural world, whereas an entity or entities with unlimited power, knowledge and time magically created the entire universe is not.

300 years ago, science couldn't produce electricity, but Thor and/or Zeus weren't considered the creators of the phenomenon. Why should life be any different?

edit: Sorry to continue derailing the thread, but IG's misunderstandings about biology tend to catch my attention more than the current topic does.

And if there is a God or a collection of gods, my money is on Asgard, mostly because I got into Norse mythology as a kid, and trolls, elves, dwarves and giants are much cooler than Krishna and Jesus.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mindmetoo



Joined: 02 Feb 2004

PostPosted: Tue Jan 20, 2009 2:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

greedy_bones wrote:
And if there is a God or a collection of gods, my money is on Asgard, mostly because I got into Norse mythology as a kid, and trolls, elves, dwarves and giants are much cooler than Krishna and Jesus.


Indeed. We pay a lot of credit to greek mythology's influence in our culture but don't give the Norse myths as much credit, even though we get a few days of the week from them, Lord of the Rings and fantasy is based largely on Norse myth, and I'd plug a Norse goddess long before I'd plug a greek godddess (not much into treasure trails).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
itaewonguy



Joined: 25 Mar 2003

PostPosted: Wed Jan 21, 2009 1:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

greedy_bones wrote:





Your question is "where is the evidence that cells just appeared from nothing". There is no evidence for this, but this is not what the current hypotheses suggest. The current hypothesis being tested is that a series of chemical reactions first resulted in organic molecules which continued to react in a process similar to metabolism and the end result was a self replicating cell.


well when those tests have a result, then lets talk again about that!
Im getting tired of the word hypotheses
thats a scientific meaning for the word GUESS!!


Quote:
The reason why this is science and not religion is because at least a portion of this hypothesis is testable. Scientists have not yet created a living cell from inorganic matter, but one day they might.


Religion? well, I never said it was...
great, test it... and until then scientists should be saying " WE DONT KNOW"
just because creationists say GOD DID IT! doesnt mean science has to make up assumptions..


Quote:
Yes, under our current understanding of the universe, we cannot test whether this happened for the first cell, but we can accept it as the most likely scenario because it is possible within our understanding of the natural world, whereas an entity or entities with unlimited power, knowledge and time magically created the entire universe is not.


you are probably right ... but that doesn't mean your theory can't be wrong and theirs can be right.. the case is open.. thats just how it is.. like it or not..
you have a scenario from educated humans who have studied what it is they can test, read and research! they have made their best guess!
creationists are sticking with well, GODS hand is in it..
I don't see much of a difference except scientists are working at it and doing their jobs! creationists are sticking with their gut feeling...
both standing side by side at this point...



Quote:
300 years ago, science couldn't produce electricity, but Thor and/or Zeus weren't considered the creators of the phenomenon. Why should life be any different?


OHHHH right.. you think every religious man is stupid!! you guys still beating than drum huh... hahahahaha THOR and ZEUS hahahha thats funny....

Quote:
Sorry to continue derailing the thread, but IG's misunderstandings about biology tend to catch my attention more than the current topic does.


biology! emmmmm biology 101 tells us that every living thing needs a parent! explain that!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Rteacher



Joined: 23 May 2005
Location: Western MA, USA

PostPosted: Wed Jan 21, 2009 1:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dr. Frankenstein is their guru!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
greedy_bones



Joined: 01 Jul 2007
Location: not quite sure anymore

PostPosted: Wed Jan 21, 2009 1:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

itaewonguy wrote:
greedy_bones wrote:





Your question is "where is the evidence that cells just appeared from nothing". There is no evidence for this, but this is not what the current hypotheses suggest. The current hypothesis being tested is that a series of chemical reactions first resulted in organic molecules which continued to react in a process similar to metabolism and the end result was a self replicating cell.


well when those tests have a result, then lets talk again about that!
Im getting tired of the word hypotheses
thats a scientific meaning for the word GUESS!!
No, it means an educated guess that is being tested. The reason I say hypothesis is because it is not at the level of a theory.

itaewonguy wrote:

Quote:
The reason why this is science and not religion is because at least a portion of this hypothesis is testable. Scientists have not yet created a living cell from inorganic matter, but one day they might.


Religion? well, I never said it was...
great, test it... and until then scientists should be saying " WE DONT KNOW"
That is exactly what scientists say. But instead of saying we don't know and walking away, they say "I'd like to know" and then they do research. No one says we know how life began.


itaewonguy wrote:


Quote:
300 years ago, science couldn't produce electricity, but Thor and/or Zeus weren't considered the creators of the phenomenon. Why should life be any different?


OHHHH right.. you think every religious man is stupid!! you guys still beating than drum huh... hahahahaha THOR and ZEUS hahahha thats funny....
I'm saying that if we don't know the answer to something, this doesn't mean a magical entity is as plausible of an explanation.

itaewonguy wrote:

Quote:
Sorry to continue derailing the thread, but IG's misunderstandings about biology tend to catch my attention more than the current topic does.


biology! emmmmm biology 101 tells us that every living thing needs a parent! explain that!
I know of no textbook that says all living things have a parent. Kindly explain how this idea works for mitosis.

I said you have a misunderstanding of biology because you claim that scientists think a cell materialized out of thin air. This is clearly not the case, and I think you know that.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Rteacher



Joined: 23 May 2005
Location: Western MA, USA

PostPosted: Wed Jan 21, 2009 1:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

More evidence that Krishna was known by many ancient Greeks - and worshipped as God ...

[color=darkblue]"These square coins, dating back to 180- BC, with Krishna on one side and Balram on the other, were unearthed recently in Al Khanoun in Afghanistan and are the earliest proof that Krishna was venerated as a god, and that the worship had spread beyond the Mathura region," says T K V Rajan, archaeologist and founder-director, Indian Science Monitor, who is holding a five-day exhibition, In search of Lord Krishna,' in the city from Saturday.

Having done extensive research in Brindavan, Rajan is convinced that a lot of the spiritual history of ancient India lies buried. "Close to 10,000 Greeks, who came in the wake of Alexander the Great, were Krishna's devotees. There is an inscription by Heliodorus, the Greek ambassador at Takshila , which reads Deva, deva, Vasudeva. Krishna is my god and I have installed this Garuda Pillar at Bes Nagar (now in Bihar),'" says Rajan.

According to him the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) has unearthed many sites that throw fresh light on the era of Krishna. "ASI is expected to release the full findings next year. Many of the unearthed artifact have a close resemblance to materials of what is believed to be the Harappan civilisation. The findings may show that Krishna's life was the dividing line between India's spiritual history and the society's gradual shift towards a materialistic one," says Rajan.

Interestingly, a lot of what has been uncovered closely resemble the narration in the texts of Mahabharatha and the Bhagavatham," he adds. Both the spiritual works are revered by the Hindus as their holy books.

It has been over five years since the discoveries were made at Tholavira near Dwaraka, close to Kutch. Much progress has been made due to the application of thermoluminous study (TL) in ascertaining the age of artifact. "It is possible to get the diffusion of atomic particles in the clay pottery unearthed and arrive at an accurate date," points out Rajan. Tholavira itself is believed to be the capital city as detailed in the opening chapters of Bhagavatham. Rajan points to an image of a plough, made of wood, which is mentioned in the Bhagavatham.

The findings could lay a trail to understanding Krishna's life (said to be 5,000 years ago) and times, as a historical fact, says Rajan. The exhibition will be open till December 31 at Sri Parvathy Gall
ery, Eldams Road[/color]


Of course (as you should expect by now) there is also evidence that Norse mythology was influenced by Vedic culture...

The Norse Ragnarok involves the destruction of the earth and the abodes
of the Norse demigods (called Asgard), and thus it corresponds in Vedic
chronology to the annihilation of the three worlds that follows 1,000
yuga cycles, or one day of Brahma. It is said that during Ragnarok the
world is destroyed with flames by a being called Surt, who lives beneath
the lower world (appropriately called Hel) and was involved in the
world's creation. By comparison, the Srimad Bhagavatam (3.11.30) states
that at the end of Brahma's day, "the devastation takes place due to the
fire emanating from the mouth of Sankarsana." Sankarsana is a plenary
expansion of Krsna who is "seated at the bottom of the universe" (Srimad
Bhagavatam 3.8.3), beneath the lower planetary systems.

There are many similarities between the Norse and Vedic cosmologies, but
there are also great differences. One key difference is that in the
Srimad Bhagavatam, all beings and phenomena within the universe are
clearly understood as part of the divine plan of Krsna, the Supreme
Personality of Godhead. In contrast, in the Norse mythology God is
conspicuously absent, and the origin and purpose of the major players in
the cosmic drama are very obscure. Surt, in particular, is a "fire
giant" whose origins and motives are unclear even to experts in the
Norse literature.[9]

One might ask, If Vedic themes appear in many different societies, how
can one conclude that they derive from an ancient Vedic civilization?
Perhaps they were created in many places independently, or perhaps they
descend from an unknown culture that is also ancestral to what we call
Vedic culture. Thus parallels between the accounts of Surt and
Sankarsana may be coincidental, or perhaps the Vedic account derives
from a story similar to that of Surt.

Our answer to this question is that available empirical evidence will
not be sufficient to prove the hypothesis of descent from an ancient
Vedic culture, for all empirical evidence is imperfect and subject to
various interpretations. But we can decide whether or not the evidence
is consistent this hypothesis.

If there was an ancient Vedic world civilization, we would expect to
find traces of it in many cultures around the world. We do seem to find
such traces, and many agree with Vedic accounts in specific details
(such as the location of Surt's abode or the sacred buffalo's loss of
one leg per world age). Since this civilization began to lose its
influence thousands of years ago, at the beginning of Kali-yuga, we
would expect many of these traces to be fragmentary and overlain by many
later additions, and this we also see. Thus the available evidence seems
to be consistent with the hypothesis of
a Vedic origin.[/color]

http://wiretap.area.com/Gopher/Library/Article/Religion/vedic.txt
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Off-Topic Forum All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 4 of 5

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


This page is maintained by the one and only Dave Sperling.
Contact Dave's ESL Cafe
Copyright © 2018 Dave Sperling. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe
TEFL Courses, TESOL Course, English Teaching Jobs - TEFL International