Young Earth Creationism in the LDS Church

[_lulu]

When Utah Mormons drive up across the Idaho border
to purchase cases of that state's stronger alcohol content
beer,

And lottery tickets.

[_Tobin]

Occam's razor is only reasonable given all claims being equal. .

According to your earlier post you obviously think that the scientific narrative and your "science fiction" scenario are on an equal footing in terms of credibility of the claims being made.

Of course they are not. But if you cannot see that the relevant data support the science narrative, then at least you can apply Occam's razor and realize how many more contingencies (assumptions) are required for the science fiction scenario as compared to the scientific narrative.

I don't think there is much difference between my positions and the views held by many scientists. Many scientists believe there is life outside our biosphere and are spending considerable amounts of public money in search of it. I believe this is correct. However, I don't believe it is only simple lifeforms that exist beyond our biosphere, but higher orders of intelligent being as well. This is entirely consistent with our understanding of evolution and technological (and knowledge) progress that our species has experienced. To assert that it is very likely that our planet is not unique as far as life and intelligent life is concerned is perfectly reasonable and stating that any intelligent life that evolved billions of years ago would be transcendent in comparison to ourselves (given our current rate of technological progress) is also very reasonable.

Now, you assert that such views are not reasonable and science fiction. However, I think you are in the minority with that view. The only step I go beyond that is to state that I believe that what many have experienced in the past (and some experience now) are these higher order beings communicating with us. That has not been definitively proven, but is an area of belief. I do not view this belief as being unreasonable or ultimately futile and believe in the future that this will be shown to be correct as well.

[_Chap]

...
I don't think there is much difference between my positions and the views held by many scientists. Many scientists believe there is life outside our biosphere and are spending considerable amounts of public money in search of it. I believe this is correct.

People don't put life-detecting experiments on a Mars probe because they "believe there is life" on Mars, or even within our solar system. They do it because they see no reason to conclude in advance that there is definitely no life, however elementary, on that planet, and therefore think it is worthwhile to make a check. That judgement is based on much more limited hypotheses than that "there is life outside our biosphere". It is certainly not based on a positive belief in the presence of life elsewhere.

However, I don't believe it is only simple lifeforms that exist beyond our biosphere, but higher orders of intelligent being as well.

This isn't a question of belief, but calculating probabilities.

This is entirely consistent with our understanding of evolution and technological (and knowledge) progress that our species has experienced. To assert that it is very likely that our planet is not unique as far as life and intelligent life is concerned is perfectly reasonable and stating that any intelligent life that evolved billions of years ago would be transcendent in comparison to ourselves (given our current rate of technological progress) is also very reasonable.

Tobin has no reliable way of estimating the likelihood that his views in this matter are in accordance with the facts. They are 'reasonable' only in the sense that they do not contain a formal logical contradiction.

Such real evidence as there is about the duration of the existence of a species as intelligent as humans points to homo sapiens having been around for less than half a million years. It currently seems quite possible that we may shortly succeed in rendering ourselves extinct.

Now, you assert that such views are not reasonable and science fiction. However, I think you are in the minority with that view. The only step I go beyond that is to state that I believe that what many have experienced in the past (and some experience now) are these higher order beings communicating with us. That has not been definitively proven, but is an area of belief. I do not view this belief as being unreasonable or ultimately futile and believe in the future that this will be shown to be correct as well.

There's a lot of belief there. And, per Tobin, it all goes back to the time he was doing something bad with somebody else in a locked apartment, and he had an experience that led him to feel that a deity had appeared before him and told him he was a bad guy.

Me, I believe Tobin may have had a temporal lobe epilepsy episode, since such events are known to give rise to 'religious' experiences of that kind. And that belief of mine is both perfectly reasonable and (unlike Tobin's) backed up by precise parallels found by scientific studies of such events.

[_Uncle Dale]

...
Such real evidence as there is about the duration of the existence of a species as intelligent as humans points to homo sapiens having been around for less than half a million years. It currently seems quite possible that we may shortly succeed in rendering ourselves extinct.
...

One sobering possibility is that advanced societies
of lifeforms tend to concentrate great destructive
power in the hands (claws, tentacles, etc.) of a
few of society's members --- such that a single
terrorist is able to destroy an entire planet.

Short of that, perhaps a small group of selfish
members of the society gain the ability (by plan
or by circumstance) to destroy the lifespace of
entire planetary systems.

Add to that the natural tendency of dying stars,
meteors and comets to obliterate whole biospheres,
and there's compelling reason to believe that advanced
societies rarely survive long enough to develop space
travel and interstellar communications/engineering.

We here on earth may be nearing our statistical
point of no return, at which we are pretty much
doomed to go extinct. Mayan calendar, anyone?

I'd hoped that we'd last long enough to share
Shakespeare with the aliens -- but quite likely
we've over-stayed our time in this cosmos.

UD'

[_Chap]

...
Such real evidence as there is about the duration of the existence of a species as intelligent as humans points to homo sapiens having been around for less than half a million years. It currently seems quite possible that we may shortly succeed in rendering ourselves extinct.
...

One sobering possibility is that advanced societies
of lifeforms tend to concentrate great destructive
power in the hands (claws, tentacles, etc.) of a
few of society's members --- such that a single
terrorist is able to destroy an entire planet.

Short of that, perhaps a small group of selfish
members of the society gain the ability (by plan
or by circumstance) to destroy the lifespace of
entire planetary systems.

Add to that the natural tendency of dying stars,
meteors and comets to obliterate whole biospheres,
and there's compelling reason to believe that advanced
societies rarely survive long enough to develop space
travel and interstellar communications/engineering.

We here on earth may be nearing our statistical
point of no return, at which we are pretty much
doomed to go extinct. Mayan calendar, anyone?

I'd hoped that we'd last long enough to share
Shakespeare with the aliens -- but quite likely
we've over-stayed our time in this cosmos.

UD'

I tend to agree with this, given the total absence of any reliable evidence for communications from aliens elsewhere in the cosmos, apart from the voices in Tobin's head.

[_DrW]

I don't think there is much difference between my positions and the views held by many scientists. Many scientists believe there is life outside our biosphere and are spending considerable amounts of public money in search of it. I believe this is correct. However, I don't believe it is only simple lifeforms that exist beyond our biosphere, but higher orders of intelligent being as well. This is entirely consistent with our understanding of evolution and technological (and knowledge) progress that our species has experienced. To assert that it is very likely that our planet is not unique as far as life and intelligent life is concerned is perfectly reasonable and stating that any intelligent life that evolved billions of years ago would be transcendent in comparison to ourselves (given our current rate of technological progress) is also very reasonable.

Now, you assert that such views are not reasonable and science fiction. However, I think you are in the minority with that view. The only step I go beyond that is to state that I believe that what many have experienced in the past (and some experience now) are these higher order beings communicating with us. That has not been definitively proven, but is an area of belief. I do not view this belief as being unreasonable or ultimately futile and believe in the future that this will be shown to be correct as well.

Tobin,

I certainly agree that there are (much more likely than not) other intelligent lifeforms in the Universe. Some of them may well be much more advanced than us.

However, as I was forced to remind folks over on the MADBoard when they started mixing science and magic: there are Laws.

If these higher life forms are communicating with us, it is a slow process, especially if you are claiming any kind of two-way communication.

The nearest star is just over 4 light years away. The nearest (possibly) habitable planets that we know of are 20 to 40 light years away.

Since there is an absolute speed limit on he transfer of useful information of 3 x 10^10 cm/s (the local speed of light), the fastest possible communication link would require 4 years to the closest star and 20 to 40 years to the closest habitable planet - one way. For two way communication, one can double the time.

This mean if you were a young teenager (say 15 years old) with your brand new interstellar radio transmitter and special antenna, and sent a message to the nearest known habitable planet, you would be at least 55 years old when the answer came back. If the intelligent life happened to live in the outer reaches of this band (say at 40 light years), you had better teach your daughter how to run the equipment because it is unlikely you would be alive when the answer came back.

Since 1985 SETI has been searching at ever increasing sensitivity, selectivity and bandwidths for any kind of signals from space indicating intelligent life, using (for most of that time) best available technology. SETI is coming up to 30 years now, and still nothing.

Every year that passes on this project with no signs of intelligent life detected places more constraints on the best case scenario here.

Is intelligent life out there? The odds say yes. But the chances of us detecting it from Earth diminish each year.

We may be evolutionarily more unique than you imagine.

At some distance, it no longer matters, the intelligent life would be too far away even for reasonable two way communication, let alone a friendly personal visit.

In fact, it is entirely possible that by the time we were to receive a signal from a distant intelligent life, that life may no longer exist.

[_Uncle Dale]

...
In fact, it is entirely possible that by the time we were to receive a signal
from a distant intelligent life, that life may no longer exist.

Had a Mormon friend in Idaho years back -- who agreed that
the speed of light in a vacuum was pretty much what the
scientists say it is -- and that it had always had that speed
and always would have.

But when it came to God (whom he irritatingly called "Elo-himm")
then the speed of light was no problem -- for God can read our
minds from light years away, instantaneously. And God can
communicate "personal revelation" back to us at that same
marvelous and wonderful instantaneous speed.

As can Satan, if he takes a mind to interfere in our lives.

(sigh!)

There's no reasoning with such latter day dogma, so I no longer
even make the attempt.

As for alien civilizations, I suspect that if they have the
ability to send spacecraft across great distances, they'll
be sending them out on one-way trips. For whatever
purposes that sort of outreach might serve.

"Dear beings living on one of the planets orbiting the
medium-sized yellow star, on the edge of this galaxy:
Hope you are doing well -- wish you were here."
...... (signed) "The Supreme Council of Kolob" (via
robotic exploration craft #92467).

UD

[_Tobin]

Tobin,

I certainly agree that there are (much more likely than not) other intelligent lifeforms in the Universe. Some of them may well be much more advanced than us.

However, as I was forced to remind folks over on the MADBoard when they started mixing science and magic: there are Laws.

If these higher life forms are communicating with us, it is a slow process, especially if you are claiming any kind of two-way communication.

The nearest star is just over 4 light years away. The nearest (possibly) habitable planets that we know of are 20 to 40 light years away.

Since there is an absolute speed limit on he transfer of useful information of 3 x 10^10 cm/s (the local speed of light), the fastest possible communication link would require 4 years to the closest star and 20 to 40 years to the closest habitable planet - one way. For two way communication, one can double the time.

This mean if you were a young teenager (say 15 years old) with your brand new interstellar radio transmitter and special antenna, and sent a message to the nearest known habitable planet, you would be at least 55 years old when the answer came back. If the intelligent life happened to live in the outer reaches of this band (say at 40 light years), you had better teach your daughter how to run the equipment because it is unlikely you would be alive when the answer came back.

Since 1985 SETI has been searching at ever increasing sensitivity, selectivity and bandwidths for any kind of signals from space indicating intelligent life, using (for most of that time) best available technology. SETI is coming up to 30 years now, and still nothing.

Every year that passes on this project with no signs of intelligent life detected places more constraints on the best case scenario here.

Is intelligent life out there? The odds say yes. But the chances of us detecting it from Earth diminish each year.

We may be evolutionarily more unique than you imagine.

At some distance, it no longer matters, the intelligent life would be too far away even for reasonable two way communication, let alone a friendly personal visit.

In fact, it is entirely possible that by the time we were to receive a signal from a distant intelligent life, that life may no longer exist.

I think we are finding the universe isn't as limited as that. One proposed means of communication that breaks the spead of light is quantum entanglement which would allow instantaneous communication across an infinite distance. Also, even though the speed of light is limited, space-time has no such contraints. We are just beginning to understand the principles that govern space-time and it may be possible in the future to alter space-time itself. This would allow transit at speeds far in excess of the speed of light.

I would also note that I think the search for intelligent life via radio signals is unlikely to succeed. The spectrum is just too large and the likelihood that an advanced species would use such a slow means of communications over interstellar distances is remote. Even if they did broadcast radio signals at some point in their development, I question whether we could detect these signals at such great distances. And as you stated, even if we do find such a signal, intelligent life may not exist at the location any longer.

I find it much more likely that if there is intelligent life, it is already transcendent and has explored the universe using the means above. If that is the case, such life would already be aware of us and may be molding our development with the visitations and accounts that have been recorded. I believe at a certain point in our development, they will make themselves more generally known to us, provided we don't destroy ourselves as has been said by others.

[_DrW]

Tobin,

I certainly agree that there are (much more likely than not) other intelligent lifeforms in the Universe. Some of them may well be much more advanced than us.

However, as I was forced to remind folks over on the MADBoard when they started mixing science and magic: there are Laws.

If these higher life forms are communicating with us, it is a slow process, especially if you are claiming any kind of two-way communication.

The nearest star is just over 4 light years away. The nearest (possibly) habitable planets that we know of are 20 to 40 light years away.

Since there is an absolute speed limit on he transfer of useful information of 3 x 10^10 cm/s (the local speed of light), the fastest possible communication link would require 4 years to the closest star and 20 to 40 years to the closest habitable planet - one way. For two way communication, one can double the time.

This mean if you were a young teenager (say 15 years old) with your brand new interstellar radio transmitter and special antenna, and sent a message to the nearest known habitable planet, you would be at least 55 years old when the answer came back. If the intelligent life happened to live in the outer reaches of this band (say at 40 light years), you had better teach your daughter how to run the equipment because it is unlikely you would be alive when the answer came back.

Since 1985 SETI has been searching at ever increasing sensitivity, selectivity and bandwidths for any kind of signals from space indicating intelligent life, using (for most of that time) best available technology. SETI is coming up to 30 years now, and still nothing.

Every year that passes on this project with no signs of intelligent life detected places more constraints on the best case scenario here.

Is intelligent life out there? The odds say yes. But the chances of us detecting it from Earth diminish each year.

We may be evolutionarily more unique than you imagine.

At some distance, it no longer matters, the intelligent life would be too far away even for reasonable two way communication, let alone a friendly personal visit.

In fact, it is entirely possible that by the time we were to receive a signal from a distant intelligent life, that life may no longer exist.

I think we are finding the universe isn't as limited as that. One proposed means of communication that breaks the spead of light is quantum entanglement which would allow instantaneous communication across an infinite distance. Also, even though the speed of light is limited, space-time has no such contraints. We are just beginning to understand the principles that govern space-time and it may be possible in the future to alter space-time itself. This would allow transit at speeds far in excess of the speed of light.

I would also note that I think the search for intelligent life via radio signals is unlikely to succeed. The spectrum is just too large and the likelihood that an advanced species would use such a slow means of communications over interstellar distances is remote. Even if they did broadcast radio signals at some point in their development, I question whether we could detect these signals at such great distances. And as you stated, even if we do find such a signal, intelligent life may not exist at the location any longer.

I find it much more likely that if there is intelligent life, it is already transcendent and has explored the universe using the means above. If that is the case, such life would already be aware of us and may be molding our development with the visitations and accounts that have been recorded. I believe at a certain point in our development, they will make themselves more generally known to us, provided we don't destroy ourselves as has been said by others.

Tobin,

You should know that quantum entanglement cannot be used to transfer anything but quantum information. No useful information can be superimposed on the "signal". "Entanglement" can't even be used to transmit Morse code. If you read science instead of science fiction, you would know that. It is not a practical possibility because it is theoretically impossible. It is not allowed, even according to quantum mechanics.

There are Laws.

And even though the speed of light is limited, space-time has no constraints.

What does this even mean?

What is it about "space-time" that you think we do not understand?

Do you think we don't know the appropriate equations?

Do you think the equations we use are wrong?

Do you feel we don't have the right values for the constants involved?

Are you talking about black holes or worm holes?

What?

[_Tobin]

Tobin,

You should know that quantum entanglement cannot be used to transfer anything but quantum information. No useful information can be superimposed on the "signal". "Entanglement" can't even be used to transmit Morse code. If you read science instead of science fiction, you would know that. It is not a practical possibility because it is theoretically impossible. It is not allowed, even according to quantum mechanics.

There are Laws.

Again, the idea is actually rather interesting even if a practical methodology has yet to be developed. Your view is since the state of the photons collapsed immediately, no information could be transfered. But that is just plain silly. If they'd developed a way to actually employ it, we'd all be using quantum entanglement today in our computers and for all communications and I wouldn't be suggesting it may be a means of transmitting information in the future.

And even though the speed of light is limited, space-time has no constraints.

What does this even mean?

That isn't very hard to conceive of if you have even a basic understanding of the data from modern cosmology. For example, there are likely parts of our universe expanding away from us at faster than the speed of light, what that means is the light from those galaxies of stars that will never reach us. I'm actually stunned that someone like you wouldn't be aware that space-time is not constrained by the speed of light. If you knew anything about the big bang, you'd realize that space-time can expand dramatically faster than the speed of light. Your ignorance of this fact is staggering.

What is it about "space-time" that you think we do not understand?

Why does space-time expand? What causes it? Why is this expansion accelerating?

Do you think we don't know the appropriate equations?

What equations and principles dictate and explain the expansion of space-time?

Do you think the equations we use are wrong?

Again, I'd like you to explain the expansion of space-time first and provide equations for it.

Do you feel we don't have the right values for the constants involved?

It isn't a constant. Again, it is accelerating. Why is that?

Are you talking about black holes or worm holes?

No.