A Question for the Theists who Believe in Evolution

I am sorry I got you started, that is for sure. If your idea of fun is to carry on so, tho, and present that you are smarter than everyone else despite your LEP status with your native language, dont let me discourage you.

Did you get get around to figuring out how to measure the irregularities in a representative area of a billiard ball?

You've been talking a lot of formulas, but I said you had not done the actual calculations-which you do not seem to have done-and so when you said the earth is smoother, you either read that somewhere, or guessed. Did you do calculations, based on the irregularities of a billiard ball?

 

Hmmm,...

1) Since the 17th century the Scientific Method has given us a way to unanimously certify Facts as universally agreed to by everyone willing to perform the same exact experiments in order to observe those same facts.
This has empirically founded what we call the real world, the factual reality as all must agree to understand it.

2) People need to research the definition of "soul."
They will discover this was the word the King James interpreted chose for what the Hebrew meant "mind," (i.e.; nesphesh in the Hebrew and psyke' in the Greek Bible).

 

Since a Billiard Ball could be made of anything from ceramic to some plastic composite or polymer or perhaps acrylic, polyester or phenolic resin....I am choosing Phenolic Resin as this is used more so now days than any other material to make Billiard Balls.

The problem is I might have to choose polyester or acrylic instead as there are issues as far as phenolic resin being used for an object of this size as it won't work with the Fractal assignment....well the best analogy I can use...although it is not an accurate representation...is attempting to use the same Fractal assignment for all states of H2O....you can't.

Although this issue has nothing to do with it being a solid, liquid or vapor....it does have an issue about using an already determined Fractal based algorithm for phenolic resin that was never designed to work within such a Macro use.

If you have a algorithm predetermined to calculate the average or Mean Topology of Arctic Sea Ice.....for Earths Arctic Ice Paced Oceans.....then you have to calculate the Topology of the Jovian Moon Europa's Surface Ice....which not only is effected by Jupiter's Gravity but also exists much thicker on a much smaller celestial body with less Solar effect but with much more Jovian Gravity effect......well.....hopefully I am not just talking to myself and you might understand and get the idea.

There is no reason for you to continue with the verbal sniping.

Either post something to me and the membership that will let me and everyone else know you can grasp what I am doing here and what the difficulties are doing this calculation.....or just say....Sorry.

I am a forgiving person.

AboveAlpha

 

Anyone who wades here can see that you are making a very simple thing ridiculously complicated, and that you have not addressed my question as to whether you actually did any calculation.

The simple obvious way to to this is to take the ratio between the maximum
height of the highest mountain plus depth of ocean trench, and compare that to the diameter of the earth.

There turns out to be such a things as The World Pool-Billiard Association Tournament Table and Equipment Specifications

Their tolerances allow for greater irregularity than what one gets for the surface of the earth from the above measurements.

The difficulties you have making this simple calculation are entirely self- imposed

 

After reading your post here I can now understand why we are having difficulties.

We do not either think in anywhere near the same manner nor do we place the same values upon accuracy.

I am certain after reading your post that if I were to just look up Radar Scans of Planet Earth that allow us to then place this data through a Super Computer it would break down the entire planet into micro grids and then calculate the average mean height or depth above or below sea level for each Hectare as well as take the average height or depth of all the grids upon the ocean's varying waved surfaces as well as the same over polar ice.....then average all these out and get a Representative Number associated to a scale for Topological Elevation.

And then simply take a Laser Scan of a Phenolic Resin Billiard Ball.....expand these numbers on a Celestial Object scale.....then also get a number of a scale....and compare numbers.

Oh...how so simple.

IT WON'T WORK!!!

There are so many reasons it won't work that this number is larger than the number of variable I am already dealing with not to mention the Earth's Topology changes day to day...season to season.....and changes on a cyclical basis as well as long term.....not to mention average depth or elevation does not determine smoothness.

Taikoo....just save us all a lot of trouble and say sorry.

AboveAlpha

- - - Updated - - -

Taikoo....if you disagree with my above post then instead of insulting me....how about offering both me and the membership a method YOU would use to determine smoothness?

AboveAlpha

 

Yes, and we have discovered there are forces that were formerly beyond our perception. Why should we close our minds to the existence of a soul?

Mind, psyke, id etc. are all terms describing in intangible things yet we have PHD's and MD's that scientifically study and treat them.

 

All those PHD's are in fields that have tangible evidence of existence.

I mean....we can use a CT scan to actually see the electrical impulses in the brain and specific areas firing up.

We cannot as yet quantify a SOUL....no matter how much any one of us want's to have one.

AboveAlpha

 

We couldn't see exact brain activity either before we had the right kind of a detection device.

 

And that is why I posted....We cannot as yet quantify a SOUL

AboveAlpha...p.s...as any Agnostic would.

 

I have heard many times over many years that the Earth if shrunk down to the size of a Pool Ball or Ping Pong Ball...that the Earth would be smoother so there was no need for me to do calculations that this was so....and since you are making such a big issue of this did you do calculations to check before you posted this?

I think not....and I KNOW you would not even know where to begin to calculate this.

You have no method.

You are talking gibberish.

AboveAlpha

 

Something that cannot be currently quantified may not be recognized in the scientific realm but that is a limited reality. Science itself has proven over and over again that our beliefs, hunches, desires, etc. can lead us to great new discoveries. The 'soul' may have already been discovered in various scientific fields but just not identified. I prefer to keep an open mind.

 

Why was it like pulling teeth to just get you to say that you did not do any calculations before stating as a fact that the earth is smoother? I got it the same way you did, by reading it somewhere. I didn't do the calculations, and you didn't either.

Of course, one does well to check, as a lot of what sees written as fact is not. As is betimes the case with what you write.

I sure thought of a quicker, easier and more sensible way than you did, and I described it twice before you made this statement of what you "know" but which is not true. The part I didnt know what how smooth a billiard ball is, which turns out to be easy to look up.

You are much like our creationists, who like to just make things up and state them as fact.

Coming from the LEP "professor" who can scarcely complete a single sentence in standard English, that has an element of dry humour to it. So does the insanely Rube Goldberg method you came up with.

Here is an example of calculating it in the same non existent way that I proposed:

Proof that the Earth is smoother than a billiard ball

The World Pool-Billiard Association Tournament Table and Equipment Specifications (November 2001) state: "All balls must be composed of cast phenolic resin plastic and measure 2 ¼ (+.005) inches [5.715 cm (+ .127 mm)] in diameter and weigh 5 ½ to 6 oz [156 to 170 gms]." (Specification 16.)

This means that balls with a diamenter of 2.25 inches cannot have any imperfections (bumps or dents) greater than 0.005 inches. In other words, the bump or dent to diameter ratio cannot exceed 0.005/2.25 = 0.0022222

The Earth's diameter is approximately 12,756.2 kilometres or 12,756,200 metres.

12,756,200 x 0.0022222 = 28,347.111

So, if a billiard ball were enlarged to the size of Earth, the maximum allowable bump (mountain) or dent (trench) would be 28,347 metres.

Earth's highest mountain, Mount Everest, is only 8,848 metres above sea level. Earth's deepest trench, the Mariana Trench, is only about 11 kilometres below sea level.

So if the Earth were scaled down to the size of a billiard ball, all its mountains and trenches would fall well within the WPA's specifications for smoothness.

 

And I never asked for scientific proof. The point of this thread is that when dealing with the metaphysical all we have is our phaneron. If you think about it logically based on the origin of the concept do you have to make exceptions and create new reasoning’s to maintain your idea of its existence? If so does it a) reduce the chances of it being an actuality and b) shine an unpleasant light on metaphysical claims in general?

Before the concept of evolution the idea of having a soul or being granted a soul by a higher power didn’t have a lot of mental road blocks to deal with. If we simply came into being, the idea of having a soul is easy to perceive. And of course it’s easy to change ones perspective to maintain a belief in the face of new knowledge we see it all the time but seeing life on this planet as continuous lines stretching back billions of years the concept of being gifted something metaphysical at a particular place and point in time creates a lot of questions.

Is life sacred? If so what life? Our lives? Dogs? Dolphins? How about bacteria?
How about Homo habilis or Homo erectus and Homo ergaster? They were sentient beings did they have souls?

Another question that arises here is does one think about having a soul in terms of it being necessary to our existence or in terms of it being necessary to their beliefs?

 

And I didn't ask for scientific proof either. All we ever have is our own phaneron and we have no way of knowing if the next individual really perceives the SAME 'reality' in their phaneron. For instance, two individuals may call the same wavelength of light 'blue' but how each individual actually EXPERIENCES it can never be known.

A belief needs no proof and can endure from generation to generation across the ages intact UNTIL exploration, research, experimentation prove the belief to be false by way of some quantifiable, scientific discovery in that field or a related field. So far, that is not the case for a soul. We have neither discovered proof-positive for its existence or for it's non-existence. Yet, the idea (or something like it) has persisted for thousands of years.

Evolution should not preclude the existence of a soul. For all we know, having a soul may not be species specific and is part of the overall life-force which still has not been scientifically quantified. Evolution has to do with biological machinations which could easily exist along with a 'soul.'

All life. 'Sacred' does not mean we can't kill a deer for food. After all, we are not killing it to eat its soul. What we kill and what we preserve has to do with what we agree is corporal not ethereal.

It easily could be an integral part of life on Earth.

 

I believe that we ought assume the soul is what we distinguish as our Mind, today, pretty much recognizing the mind as the Software output from the brain which is the hardware. Our mind is divided into a triade of Conscious mind, Subconscious mind, and Unconscious mind.

We are functioning in the Conscious State and only in the last century have become aware of ancient entities in the Subconscious mind which long genetically established thinking source that input ideas and also serve us as we consciously call on them to perform in certain areas of our life.
Those seven archetypes take there place at various times in our life where they actually are favored and welcomed by our Conscious mind in more or less, taking over.
In our sex life or at the dinner table, our Libido turns on much to our pleasure and enjoyment.
During written Tests in school, we get "our thinking capon." allowing the Superego to apply the Logical/mathematic intelligence it is so accomplished in.

These are all part of our soul.

The seven archetypes are characteristic of modern man and they reappear at birth in us all, entering back into the world of the living which they know so well, because they have been here before, the lil' devils that they can be.
But they are joined by our Unconscious mind, which we are just beginning to recognize as the good shepherd who watches over our species by joining with the other Unconscious mind of those in our generation.

The Collective Unconscious mind is the Christ who is and has been saving us as species for a very long time now.


Read:
Subliminal: How Your Unconscious Mind Rules Your Behavior

 

So do I.

I certainly would be happy to know a soul exists.

But one thing I am fairly certain of as I have a deep gut feeling about it and when I get such a feeling I am never wrong...yet at least.

If we have a soul.....and if there is some connective afterlife that one might call a...GOD....it will certainly be different than any religion on Earth has so decreed.

AboveAlpha

 

I don't fully follow the thought process here. I am an Atheist myself but I happen to have many friends and even family members who are Theists but don't doubt evolution. Being Christian merely means believing in Jesus's teachings and God to them. Evolution is science and doesn't contradict that in any way. But I would go so far and highly doubt that merely human beings have souls in their belief system. But I shell ask them when I get the chance next time. I don't think it ever was debated or thought of. Having a soul is just a given fact I think, it's not limited to a specific year in history or something.

But people who are Theists around me are quite moderate. They do visit the church but they usually disagree with most of what comes out of Rome. Their faith is based on "there must be something out there"-premise and following the teachings of the bible. I know most of them believe in heaven and hell but I don't happen to know anyone who takes the bible serious word for word - not even the priest.

 

Actually the Roman Catholic Church under Pope John Paul II came right out and announced that Evolution was a fact as well as the possibility that Earth might very well be only one planet our of untold billions that have intelligent life.

It is mostly the Bible Belt Baptists that refuse to accept the fact of evolution.

AboveAlpha

 

I cant believe you're still arguing over this smooth poolball crap. Smoothness only applies to touch? I want some of whatever you're smoking.

 

If there is a point to be made, it must be affirming to himself that he is the genius he has proclaimed he is, by concocting some fantastic baroque way to demonstrate something simple.

Apparently the tack now is playing equivocation with the word "smooth"?

If our LEP ex professor genius is still arguing, he is arguing with himself, to no point.
He is already convinced of whatever he makes up, and Im not going to read it.

 

Again....you seem to have no problem posting insults to me but have yet to acknowledge even one of the multiple points of issue specific to calculating the difference of smoothness when a Pool Ball is increased to Earth's Equatorial Circumference.

Now....IF THERE IS EVEN ONE POINT I HAVE POSTED THAT YOU CAN DEBUNK OR PROVE TO BE FALSE.....then by all means...DO IT!!!

You stated this..."If there is a point to be made, it must be affirming to himself that he is the genius he has proclaimed he is, by concocting some fantastic baroque way to demonstrate something simple."...end quote.

As I have been pointing out to you....to get a proper and accurate comparison on a Macro level...IT IS NOT SIMPLE!!!!

The SAD thing about this is you are more interested in posting insults than you are interested in perhaps LEARNING SOMETHING or even a HEALTHY DEBATE between you and I would certainly be more preferable to your character assassination attempts.

There is a DIFFERENCE between assessing and calculating whether one object or another increased or decreased will either be smoother to touch.....have greater or lessor average ratio of topology.....as well determining BOTH OR EITHER of these two things is EFFECTED BY WHETHER AN OBJECT IS A SPHERE OR SPHEROID!

Now...I have just laid it out for you...why this is not SIMPLE as I have so quoted you posting.

Now...let's me and the membership see if it is possible for you to actually discuss or debate what I have just posted rather than you usual Insult or Dumb remark.

AboveAlpha

 

Who outside of religion needs to believe in a soul? What purpose does it serve? As I have said in other posts in this thread the idea of being created at a certain point in time makes the posession of a soul easier to grasp and reconcile with ones belief in an afterlife. However with the TOE it becomes a more interesting question to me. How exactly does it work? Which of our ancestors were without a soul? What happened to them when they died? Did souls evolve with us or were they implanted at some point? Did those worthy get theirs from their direct decendants or did they all get one at the same time? The whole point of any religious debate is to question is it not?

Thanks to secularism, science and philosophy asking questions like the one in the OP. The more you question the harder it is to simply accept an answer.

 

The length of time an idea persists is not equal to it's validity. The farther down that path you go the closer you get to everything being valid and nothing being valid. I'm simply asking a question that I find interesting in the hopes it will lead to other questions.

Sure it could but is that what theology tells us? If it does at least from the Christian perspective it's news to me.

Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground." (Genesis 1:26, NIV)

Theologians point out that man was created superior to animals and that animals can’t be equal with him. As in they have the breath of life but no soul.

And it could easily be a figment of our imagination and desire.