[Silverseeker]

Oo
* Likes P4091's idea.
I have never met anybody outside of my small circle of friends who has thought that way. Awesome!

[Wolf]

Well the Bible does make mention that God brought all the animals to Adam for him to name. People usually take this as intrinsicly meaning they haven't changed since that event. The counter argument is one like P's where time is being told as relative to the creator and cannot be taken literally because of the human condition. There is also no mention of a mechinism for change or stagnation which is why we are having this debate to begin with. Religion is flawed because we are flawed. Science is flawed because we are flawed. We cannot see the truth because we lack the vision to do so but, quite frankly, learning something new is much more exciting than knowing everything. So keep an open mind but do not forget to question everything.

[okami]

Wow. Thats an awesome way to think of things. I agree that we are flawed. and that Humans in general strive for perfection. Due to that fact we are in a constant war to be perfect. If we all had stopped trying to be better then the other sometimes. Maybe there would be less damage to the world then there already is. Thank you, I liked the comment you made on this subject. Also not to get off topic but we have the same name.

Okami = wolf in japanese I believe.

[lokitakeuchi10]

Sorry to break it to you burnedalive but the universe having zero spin (as far as we calculated) is a sign that there was 'creatio ex nihilo' of course if you prefer another theory, there is always the eternal inflation where universes are born from other universes, but that still leaves the question of where the first universe came from. Or perhaps the other theory by James N. Gardner or Andrei Linde that humans are cosmic replicators meant to evolve so as to create a baby universe for our universe. With the death of the universe being our 'driving mechanism'. In which case the universes are created by previous precursor civilisations to escape the heat death of the universe. Since the big crunch/ osciliating universe isn't possible with our current calculations of omega being bigger than 1.

Also, I think evolution/ natural selection has been proven correct. But that doesn't really denounce most religions, buddhism doesn't say where life came from, and Hinduism seems to have a metaphoric interpretation of evolution from fish to man. The only problem is when religion tries to make scientific theories without proof, but if religion lets science do its job and religion just continues as a culture, than there is no conflict. Also I think a higher being would have foresight to build his creations with adaptive abilities so they don't die out after one small ice age. After all its one of the most important rules in inventing, "The product should be adaptable".

[Forty-Two]

I'll go with religion. God hates all of you guys. :x

[warpig]

i love that idea that wolf has