A Scientists Approach to Creation (Origins)

by David Turell , Friday, January 18, 2013, 19:00 (4114 days ago) @ dhw

dhw: (I myself can't prove that the Earth goes round the sun. I simply accept it as a fact.) This makes us vulnerable, and if there is controversy, I think one has to keep an open mind. -Sure you can. Why do we have seasons? We know the Earth is tilted because the sun arises ad sets differently in diferent seasons.-
> 
> dhw: But the moment you bring in a designer, you are clobbered with a vast number of unresolved issues: 1) Where did the designer come from? 2) What reason(s) did it have for creating life? 3) What is its nature? 4) What does it want from us? 5) What are its future plans for us? -Your trouble is that you are trying to anthropomorphize the First Cause. It can't be done with any sense of logic, because of our ignorance about it. Accept it as is. There is a first cause and we are here. Nuff said.
> 
> dhw:Chance ends the debate. The universe is then a vast impersonal combination of mindless matter and energy, there is no purpose, and we are on our own.
> You do not need to repeat the case against chance. In my view it is unanswerable. -Agreed. Just as with first cause. Unanswerable.- 
> dhw:It would be best to leave it at that, except to thank you and Casey, and to reciprocate all the good wishes.-I'm delighted to have Tony and Casey here with active viewpoints.