Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Vault
Time Travel Schematics
T.E.C. Time Archive
The Why Files
Have You Seen...?
Chronovisor
TimeTravelForum.tk
TimeTravelForum.net
ParanormalNetwork.net
Paranormalis.com
ConspiracyCafe.net
Streams
Live streams
Featured streams
Multi-Viewer
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Time Travel Forum
Time Travel Discussion
The Creation of Man
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Dmitri" data-source="post: 16975" data-attributes="member: 397"><p><strong>Re: The Creation of Man</strong></p><p></p><p>My point of view is that life and intelligence exist, without a need for a gradual evolutionary development or a need for an origination factor, other than origination of everything, which is a metaphysical issue. When a computer program runs in loops performing operation a then b then c then d and then back again to a and so on, there are no paradoxes, it just runs this way, so our world may behave similarly. A thing does not create itself de novo. However some advanced civilizations can create life in labs trying to reproduce and enhance themselves, and other living forms for aesthetical reasons. And they spread it all over different time space possibilities. What is wrong with this hypothesis? It does not support mechanistic causality of ?before? and ?after?? Cause comes first anyway, maybe not necessarily first in a linear time line manner; but this is not Newtonian world any more, right? I suggest physics here, not metaphysics. We can prove ID by comparing genomes and finding ?living fossils? of pertinent events. ET bacteria can be found, if not are being found already. If ID and directed development of life are to be proved soon, we face more common sense in biology and elsewhere. We could speculate more on reasons, intentions and foresee consequences. We could talk about it more; there would be a lot more interesting questions to talk about; and the century of the evolutionary nightmare would end. If we then speculate about ancestral roots vs horizontal gene transfer, we will see that recent genetic ?upgrades? may well overweigh our direct ancient ancestry. In which case Hawking?s chronology protection conjecture is not so important a defense. Our ancient chronology should not matter much compared to what our most recent ancestors and we have got while out here. I would call it something like merged ancestry, or cosmic ancestry for that matter. Harte, I think nobody will find the beginning of life scenarios since life is already here without more primitive pre cellular intermediates; they better quit looking for it as Orgel and Crick did. No RNA or protein soup. This is my beef with evolution.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Dmitri, post: 16975, member: 397"] [b]Re: The Creation of Man[/b] My point of view is that life and intelligence exist, without a need for a gradual evolutionary development or a need for an origination factor, other than origination of everything, which is a metaphysical issue. When a computer program runs in loops performing operation a then b then c then d and then back again to a and so on, there are no paradoxes, it just runs this way, so our world may behave similarly. A thing does not create itself de novo. However some advanced civilizations can create life in labs trying to reproduce and enhance themselves, and other living forms for aesthetical reasons. And they spread it all over different time space possibilities. What is wrong with this hypothesis? It does not support mechanistic causality of ?before? and ?after?? Cause comes first anyway, maybe not necessarily first in a linear time line manner; but this is not Newtonian world any more, right? I suggest physics here, not metaphysics. We can prove ID by comparing genomes and finding ?living fossils? of pertinent events. ET bacteria can be found, if not are being found already. If ID and directed development of life are to be proved soon, we face more common sense in biology and elsewhere. We could speculate more on reasons, intentions and foresee consequences. We could talk about it more; there would be a lot more interesting questions to talk about; and the century of the evolutionary nightmare would end. If we then speculate about ancestral roots vs horizontal gene transfer, we will see that recent genetic ?upgrades? may well overweigh our direct ancient ancestry. In which case Hawking?s chronology protection conjecture is not so important a defense. Our ancient chronology should not matter much compared to what our most recent ancestors and we have got while out here. I would call it something like merged ancestry, or cosmic ancestry for that matter. Harte, I think nobody will find the beginning of life scenarios since life is already here without more primitive pre cellular intermediates; they better quit looking for it as Orgel and Crick did. No RNA or protein soup. This is my beef with evolution. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Time Travel Forum
Time Travel Discussion
The Creation of Man
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top