Question about mankind.

[hbarcat]

Entropy is the tendency of everything in the universe to all reach a uniform temperature. Maximum entropy will be the end of everything, so that's probably what you're thinking of. From big bang to heat death is like asymmetry to perfect symmetry.

I think entropy is defined as the tendency for the universe to create life out of nothing by making gas mains explode.

 

[will33]

Do the search again and scroll down to the Wikipedia article on Dunbar's Number if you want a less silly explanation. It's actually relevant to this thread.

Please don't tell me you're a scientist citing wikipedia as a reference......my dreams have been shattered....

[ searches for hanging head in shame with jovial reference emoticon.....[ /can't find it ]

Also has bright idea to add "jovial" to Word of the Day thread [ / proving difficult]

 

[Sav'nBass]

Inspired by the climate damage thread.....
Why can't mankind live within nature. Why does he harm the environment unlike any other creature on the planet? I know some will correctly say it's our intelligence but then why has nature spawned a being that can do what we do in the first place?
Was this an accident of nature? Is it just un natural? Is there a larger plan by mother nature? What are your feelings and insights into this topic?

That is assuming that nature "spawned" mankind ... which is just an assumption. I personally do not believe that idea of why we are here or how we got here and frankly the more I look at the vastness of the universe as we discover more and more... for me... Psalm 19:1 becomes even more factual. For me... the answer to the questions that you pose are found in the Hebrew and Greek scriptures that are collectively called "The Bible" ... for others that may not be enough.. To each his own..

The definition of nature is everything minus the things that people do.

All our works, our actions, are artificial - by definition.
This doesn't mean it's bad, it's simply the definitions, people tend to make the terms more ambiguous than they really are.

na·ture
noun \ˈnā-chər\
: the physical world and everything in it (such as plants, animals, mountains, oceans, stars, etc.) that is not made by people
: the natural forces that control what happens in the world
: the way that a person or animal behaves : the character or personality of a person or animal

BTW, I'm sincerely encouraged that there has been no mention of God, His divine plan, etc., etc. so far in this thread.

Why? Do you think that that would somehow make this a more intelligent discussion or that the mention of "God" would make it less so?

This thread could spawn some interesting discussions and eventually metalbasspro will respond, but not if religion is brought up and the thread gets shut down.

Again.. why? Religion needs to be placed in it's context... but just as surely as "religion" needs to pay more attention to science .. science needs to pay attention to religion as well...

There is no plan or grand design. Everything happens based on Newton's law of action and reaction. Forces build up, you have the big bang. The big bang goes off, the Universe starts to grow. The conditions get right, chemical elements start to form life. Life wants to survive so it evolves because its chemical composition pushes it to. It eventually evolves into humans....... This is all my personal opinion, of course.

This opinion takes a greater leap of faith than "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.." We look at some of these shows that want to attribute many ancient works of men to alien technology ... but they all acknowledge a cause ... yet many look at the universe... in all it's glory ... that by the way is revealed more and more as each decade goes by.. and want to think that it all just happened by random chance... and what is the greater leap?

The problem I see with both science and religion is that ironically the latter is hindered by a lack of faith and the former is hindered by a lack of insight.

Money in and of itself isn't inherently evil ........

No it is not.. it is the love of money.. that is at the root of all evil..

Nature hasn't "spawned" us and existence is not an accident. Man is special and the universe was made for us. We're doing (for the most part) what we're supposed to be doing, which is "more good than harm," albeit sometimes making a mess of things.

In your opinion.

It's a good job then that those who decide what science curriculum our children follow explicitly state that 'Intelligent Design' is laughed out of town.

That does not mean that intelligent design is not a viable reasonable explanation of the universe. Ignorance and blind faith are not confined to the halls of religion.

 

[DerHoggz]

That does not mean that intelligent design is not a viable reasonable explanation of the universe. Ignorance and blind faith are not confined to the halls of religion.

It means that based on all the available information evolution is the best understanding of how life came to exist as it does today. There is no controversy within the science that needs to be taught.

 

[Bloodhammer]

I think entropy is defined as the tendency for the universe to create life out of nothing by making gas mains explode.

Alas, I have been wrong all this time.

Will the gas main in the sky ever forgive my ignorance?

 

[Bloodhammer]

Please don't tell me you're a scientist citing wikipedia as a reference......my dreams have been shattered....

[ searches for hanging head in shame with jovial reference emoticon.....[ /can't find it ]

Also has bright idea to add "jovial" to Word of the Day thread [ / proving difficult]

I never claimed to be a scientist.

I am a yeti.

 

[BawanaRik]

Please don't tell me you're a scientist citing wikipedia as a reference......my dreams have been shattered....

[ searches for hanging head in shame with jovial reference emoticon.....[ /can't find it ]

Also has bright idea to add "jovial" to Word of the Day thread [ / proving difficult]

Wikipedia reminds me of John Brunner's Delphi poll.

 

[will33]

I never claimed to be a scientist.

I am a yeti.

Ah ha....mmm hmm....yup.....okay.....[mutters under breath ] something that sounds like scribblescrabble [/ stops muttering under breath ]

 

[Bloodhammer]

You should probably get your colon pee situation checked out before you start diagnosing me with anything, doc. :|

 

[will33]

It means that based on all the available information evolution is the best understanding of how life came to exist as it does today. There is no controversy within the science that needs to be taught.

And this assumes that us and our five basic senses are even capable of knowing all that is.

 

[will33]

You should probably get your colon pee situation checked out before you start diagnosing me with anything. :|

I can't afford colon-pee insurance and obama hates me.

 

[Bloodhammer]

Well urine some trouble, aren't you?

 

[DerHoggz]

And this assumes that us and our five basic senses are even capable of knowing all that is.

No it doesn't.

 

[will33]

Well urine some trouble, aren't you?

Yup. European now.

 

[will33]

No it dosn't.

It's spelled "doesn't". It's a contraction for "does not".

That sort of stuff is importain't.

 

[DerHoggz]

It's spelled "doesn't". It's a contraction for "does not".

That sort of stuff is importain't.

Got me before the edit. My keyboard is half functioning, I have to use caps lock for half of the letters.

 

[will33]

Got me before the edit. My keyboard is half functioning, I have to use caps lock for half of the letters.

Always with the excuses, eh?

Typical of todays "gimme" attitude.

 

[GIBrat51]

To answer the OP's question: what do I think?

I think "intelligent" animals with not much going for them but a large brain and opposable thumbs are simply an evolutionary... experiment (for want of a better word) ..that may or may not have been tried before. I don't know of any evidence that shows that Intelligence, as an evolutionary strategem, was successful in the past. And, considering how long some other species have been around, I have to say that we don't seem to have been a particularly successful experiment this time, either. I seriously doubt that we're going to be around much longer - at least, in the overall scheme of things. And since I'm in my 60's, with no kids, I really don't much care. So, Get Off My Lawn!!!

 

[BawanaRik]

And this assumes that us and our five basic senses are even capable of knowing all that is.

Even when humans are compared to some animals our senses come up short.

I miss my dog for many reasons. One is that when he was around I had extra range on a few things.

I guess I should get a door bell. I never needed one when I had him.

 

[BawanaRik]

To answer the OP's question: what do I think?

I think "intelligent" animals with not much going for them but a large brain and opposable thumbs are simply an evolutionary... experiment (for want of a better word) ..that may or may not have been tried before. I don't know of any evidence that shows that Intelligence, as an evolutionary strategem, was successful in the past. And, considering how long some other species have been around, I have to say that we don't seem to have been a particularly successful experiment this time, either. I seriously doubt that we're going to be around much longer - at least, in the overall scheme of things. And since I'm in my 60's, with no kids, I really don't much care. So, Get Off My Lawn!!!

One of the things I've realized from reading Jared Diamond's books is that some of the earlier versions of humans had larger brains and may well have been smarter than the current version.

In fact it seems some people think IQs are on the decline.

[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]