18 Feb 12
1 edit
-Removed-Interesting question. The nuclear problem has been particularly unifying in terms of people realizing that they finally invented a bomb that could make a war a no-win situation for everyone.
Anyway, I thought God was everywhere, including inside scientists, so I would need you to briefly define these terms before I could answer you here, not to mention that it seems like an extremely loaded OP. What is your agenda here?
19 Feb 12
Originally posted by rwingettI thought that the very Universe itself incorporating a meaninglessly vast no. of massive explosions involving the the birth and death of numerous stars, no less, was the creation of God. Surely the term God includes the Universe as we see it. I say God is an old hand at these explosions.
God without science would never lead to an atom bomb. Science, with or without god, eventually would.
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
19 Feb 12
Originally posted by stellspalfieFor that matter, there is no being called "man" to be at blame.
i blame man. man made the bomb not science. there is no such thing as god so i cant blame him.
According to Wikipedia, in 1942, researchers at Harvard came up with Napalm. Are they the blameworthy, or is the net cast wider. Were their efforts funded specifically to find what they found? Were they aware of the uses to which it would be put or were they studying how to make a jellied fuel for other reasons? Who funded it? Who first used it? Etc. etc.
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
19 Feb 12
Originally posted by rwingettSometimes I think that the reason we have not heard from beings on other planets is that the same level of technological evolution that would permit communication, permits self-annihilation. Whether via weapons, environmental destruction, whatever.
God without science would never lead to an atom bomb. Science, with or without god, eventually would.
(After all, if there are civilizations out there, some of them would have to be 100's of thousands of years more advanced than we are -- unless they self-annihilated.)
19 Feb 12
Originally posted by JS357I think you are correct. Any civilization which sustainably harnesses its technological development will have no need to venture forth. Civilizations which have become slaves to their technology will always annihilate themselves one way or another before they're capable of venturing forth.
Sometimes I think that the reason we have not heard from beings on other planets is that the same level of technological evolution that would permit communication, permits self-annihilation. Whether via weapons, environmental destruction, whatever.
(After all, if there are civilizations out there, some of them would have to be 100's of thousands of years more advanced than we are -- unless they self-annihilated.)
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
19 Feb 12
Originally posted by rwingettThere is speculation on the early TV broadcasts of I Love Lucy being received and decrypted on some distant planet. I wonder if it is a realistic possibility that, before a planet's civilization either self-annihilates or turns away from their own version of SETI, it could receive and decrypt Lucy and Ricky, and conversely, while we have SETI, we could receive some unintended signals and properly decrypt them. I think this is a likely scenario for detecting another civilization but I might be overoptimistic about signal strength and decryption capabilities.
I think you are correct. Any civilization which sustainably harnesses its technological development will have no need to venture forth. Civilizations which have become slaves to their technology will always annihilate themselves one way or another before they're capable of venturing forth.
20 Feb 12
Originally posted by JS357Free reruns of 'I Love Lucy'. I wonder if that's motivation enough to venture forth into space.
There is speculation on the early TV broadcasts of I Love Lucy being received and decrypted on some distant planet. I wonder if it is a realistic possibility that, before a planet's civilization either self-annihilates or turns away from their own version of SETI, it could receive and decrypt Lucy and Ricky, and conversely, while we have SETI, we could receive ...[text shortened]... r civilization but I might be overoptimistic about signal strength and decryption capabilities.
20 Feb 12
1 edit
Originally posted by JS357To be sure, other civilizations have reached the same point and destroyed themselves.
Sometimes I think that the reason we have not heard from beings on other planets is that the same level of technological evolution that would permit communication, permits self-annihilation. Whether via weapons, environmental destruction, whatever.
(After all, if there are civilizations out there, some of them would have to be 100's of thousands of years more advanced than we are -- unless they self-annihilated.)
We must learn about the atom to understand the nature of the universe better, it is a neccesary lesson for evolution. But at the same time we learn of its potential destructive powers which in makes us turn back to ourselves and our world and the potential application of these discoveries.
We can learn from other situations just as we can learn from Jesus. Even if he was purely myth , the myth still changed the world a great deal and sometimes even for the better.
As has been pointed out before, your belief is not required for ghosts, Jesus, aliens, etc,etc. to exist.
I really do think a lot of people are more egotistical than they are willing to admit.
We can dismiss others stories simply because they do not fit current scientific models is silly. After all, has science not needed to correct itself several times in the past to adhere to what they think is REALLY going on?