Originally by: Meryl SinGarda

---

And if the Universe or "a" Universe is infinite, then I would begin to wonder just how old it really is, or if it can even be measured with time.

---

Originally by: Meryl SinGarda

---

Also, if you're not asking questions, then you obviously aren't thinking, are you? Sorry, but I guess I'm one of the few that don't just accept things because a bunch of guys in white coats told me to, or because a guy in a black coat stood atop an altar and read from a book.

---

Originally by: Meryl SinGarda

---

Originally by: dexington

---

You are also one of the people who believe the universe is infinite... you need to go to the library and read a book, you got a lot of catching up to do.

---

I believe that you've got some reading comprehension to cover. Please, scroll up.

---

Originally by: Meryl SinGarda

---

And if the Universe or "a" Universe is infinite, then I would begin to wonder just how old it really is, or if it can even be measured with time.

---

Originally by: Melchiades Seti

---

Maybe toes will be more finger-like. Imagine the possibilities.

---

Originally by: Meryl SinGarda

---

"Highly unlikely..." Ugh, give me a freakin' break. I would laugh myself to death if, tomorrow, scientists and astrologists came to the media and exclaimed that we are just 1 Universe along a chain of past Universes that have existed much longer than this imaginary thing we call time. Why would I be laughing? Because then I could come back to this thread, get the last word and watch you type a large string ellipses.

---

Originally by: Meryl SinGarda

---

If it at some point during this painful discussion I mentioned that I hold absolute disbelief in every scientific theory available - either I was typing and stringing different ideas and theories together that I have gathered and partially getting lost amidst the upset I have caused in the very small world of a few people, or you need glasses.

---

Originally by: BellaDonna Nyghtshade

---

Originally by: Meryl SinGarda

---

Also, if this is true, who's image was used in the creation of the eventual extraterrestrials we'll most likely come in contact with?

That is, if, any extraterrestrials we find out there resemble something that the 'human' mind can actually comprehend.

---

This was brought up very recently in an otherwise hilarious movie....and completely ignored, which was sad.

"Paul" said, after hiding in the loo of the caravan, "HOW DO YOU EXPLAIN ME?" and the issue was dropped as if that settled the matter.

In actuality, your second sentence answered the question much more neatly.

Scripture as we know it is silent as to the existence of life on other worlds. Absence of proof is not proof of absence.

"Paul's" folks could have been just as easily created by the very same God and read from a literal parallel of our 'human' scriptures by the simple reasoning that we, in our limited intelligence ( compared to God's ) can only comprehend a narrow range of reality....and as we all know, reality is never the same total sum as actuality.

And before the anti-religious begin foaming at the mouth and hurling epithets, my reasoning is no less valid that your denial.

Grin!

---

Originally by: Ana Vyr

---

With regard to losing our toes, I think the theory went something along the lines that individual toes are vestigial on modern man's foot. Eventually we'd evolve to have a single fleshy pad in place of the 4 little toes, and a big toe. We need toes for balance, but we don't need 5 individual toes for that as we no longer have an opposable "thumb" on our feet. A single, wide toe, kinda like as if you taped your four small toes together wuold serve the same purpose. Most people can't even move their toes truly independantly anymore without significant training/practice. I can move each toe, sure, but I can't just move toe number 3 on its own. I can still move the toe beside my big toe on it's own, but only slightly and it takes concentration.

---

Originally by: Edel Held

---

So, if you trully believe in anything that has no proof, you have to be fair and believe in EVERYTHING that has no proof.

---

Originally by: Dalloway Jones

---

Did the OP go to school in the south or midwest somewhere where they teach intelligent design instead of evolution?


Could someone please explain to him that there really isn't a circumstance which would cause mankind to evolve to not have toes. Humans are able to manipulate their environment and surroundings in such a way that evolution doesn't work for us quite the same way as it does other life forms.

---

Originally by: PotatoOverdose

---

The concept of space-time is rather important here. A wormhole could, hypothetically connect point A in our solar system in the year 2011 with point B in the Andromeda galaxy in the year 35863487. Note that this would be a one-way wormhole from Point A to point B and no information (or anything else) could travel from B to A.

---

Originally by: Nerodon

---

Originally by: dexington

---

Originally by: PotatoOverdose

---

The concept of space-time is rather important here. A wormhole could, hypothetically connect point A in our solar system in the year 2011 with point B in the Andromeda galaxy in the year 35863487. Note that this would be a one-way wormhole from Point A to point B and no information (or anything else) could travel from B to A.

---

I think it's science fiction to assume that wormholes can be used to travel into the future, in theory it may be possible to use relativistic time dilation to travel back in time, but that would not work for traveling into the future.

---

If you consider the limits of information travel (Which is basically the light speed barrier), in theory, faster than light communication is impossible due to causality violations (This can happen in many ways, such as Ship goes into wormhole, and comes back to tell the tale). Maybe the wormhole moves its travelers instantaneously, but must project them at a future time relative to the distance in order to preserve causality.

That would be the effective equivalent of moving at light speed to the destination, which could take a VERY long time depending on where you want to go, as well as compensate for the ever accelerating expansion of the universe.

This may be science fiction, but would make sense, without going into heavy math.

---

Originally by: De'Veldrin

---

After all, our observable universe is only 13-ish billion years old, so star ages in the trillions are most likely based on the mathematical models available at the time the text was published.

---

Originally by: Emiko Luan

---

You should be equally skeptical about any claim you are presented with, else you are a hipocrite, That's why the cat analogy is terrible.
If I searched for evidence for one claim, but accepted another without any evidence, that would make me a hipocrite.

---

Originally by: Nimrod Nemesis

---

Originally by: dexington

---

Edited by: dexington on 26/07/2011 20:45:17

Originally by: Emiko Luan

---

You should be equally skeptical about any claim you are presented with, else you are a hipocrite, That's why the cat analogy is terrible.
If I searched for evidence for one claim, but accepted another without any evidence, that would make me a hipocrite.

---

I can't see why that would make anyone a hypocrite, what seems to imply one would be trying to deceive others. Belief is nothing more the accepting a premise, something everyone does every day. That someone accept one thing to be true, does not mean you have to accept "everything" as being true.

---

What the hell is going on in this argument? I don't even...

I assume bold has something to do with the flying spaghetti... err, Jesus. Am I getting warmer?

---

Originally by: Dalloway Jones

---

Please have a small inkling of how evolution works before you say things like 3.5 billions of years from now our feet are going to change. There needs to be some biological advantage to not having feet. Something that would cause people without feet to have a marked advantage over their footed brethren. Something that would cause those with feet to not survive to breeding age or not to be chosen as a mate because of some perceived flaw. Humans would also have to lose their sentience in order for normal rules of evolution to apply.

---