Current Events > I honestly don't know how people can look at the world and think...

(+) Yeah! (+)

...this was all the result of randomness and that there's nothing after death. I pity those people, tbh.

I refuse to believe there isn't something way deeper that is behind this Kitchen Nightmares episode Im currently watching. Gordon Ramsay is the protag of the world

I refuse to believe there won't be a Dark Seed III.

There is some randomness, but that's all I'll say

this is coming from someone who can look around at the world and be like, "wow, it's all flat"

If youd put down your holy books and pick up a science book maybe you could begin to get an idea of how large the universe is

And maybe from there youll understand that statistically speaking places like Earth eventually coming into existence isnt that hard to believe

That's a common logical fallacy, tc. You'll get over it, if you want to.

Believe in science all you want, but we all have to go through and experience death some day.

Clarence_Royce posted...

Believe in science all you want, but we all have to go through and experience death some day.

Yes, and?

flips a coin; gets heads
*Audible gasp* Was this the doing of a God!?

Thompson posted...

flips a coin; gets heads
*Audible gasp* Was this the doing of a God!?

It's even worse than that. At least you have a rough frame of reference for coin odds.

Guide posted...

Yes, and?

And what does science tell you about what happens to our consciousness after death?

Clarence_Royce posted...

And what does science tell you about what happens to our consciousness after death?

Biology says our consciousness is a product of our brains, and so when the brain dies, the consciousness dies with it. We cease. What about it?

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

FINISH HIM

Lost_All_Senses posted...

I refuse to believe there isn't something way deeper that is behind this Kitchen Nightmares episode Im currently watching. Gordon Ramsay is the protag of the world

Fueeen donkee

It really all depends on the authenticity of reports from our astronomy scientists. If the universe is truly as big as they say, then chances are, there has to be millions of other planets out there like ours. So we are nothing special, we are not at the center of the universe. Though we are conveniently separated by space/distance.

But our scientists also say that the universe is expanding rapidly. In time, maybe million of years? And if the human race survives long enough, there will be a day where we wont see any stars in the skies anymore. And when you dont see anything in the sky, you cant learn anything about the universe.

Say if our species went extinct and then, another animal species evolve with intelligence like us millions of years later. All our books and buildings and remains buried deep within the earth. These newly evolved lizardmen would not be able to learn about the universe, big bang or even galaxies. They would assume that beyond the sky is just the void. And that our planet is the only thing in existence.

Pretty interesting like.

Clarence_Royce posted...

...this was all the result of randomness

This is you grossly misunderstanding the nature of the universe.

Rathinor posted...

FINISH HIM

@The_Korey

Clarence_Royce posted...

...this was all the result of randomness and that there's nothing after death. I pity those people, tbh.

Even if you think there's some sort of intelligent design to the world, which I'd disagree with, it doesn't imply an afterlife.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GS3BZs5fx3Q

I could not care less if this was made randomly, or if there's an afterlife.

It's not like everything that exists today came to be like that in one go. Since the formation of Earth alone, millions of species have died out or evolved into something else, and entire continents have formed, shifted and or sunk before we got to how things are today. Evolutional mutations can and do occur randomly. It's just a matter of whether a species is better at surviving with or without that mutation, or whether they manage to adapt to whatever their circumstances may be, which eventually change inevitably.

If that doesn't at least make one consider the possibility of randomness, I don't know what will.

I pity them too, TC. I pity their rancor, close mindedness and bitterness.

Where did your consiousness come from? Like, before you were born, where were you?
Death is exactly like that. No heaven, no hell, just nothing.

Imit8m3 posted...

Where did your consiousness come from? Like, before you were born, where were you?
Death is exactly like that. No heaven, no hell, just nothing.

That's quite the leap of faith to believe that.

Clarence_Royce posted...

That's quite the leap of faith to believe that.

Not nearly as big a leap as believing in a all powerful entity that you must appease or be sent to a lake of fire controlled by one of his bad kids.

The beautiful chemistry of plants and animals having their symbiotic relation is something that gives on pause.
Animals eat plants, but they also spread their seeds and convert the oxygen to cabron dioxide.

A world where only plants had existed would be one where all plants died. Same for animals.
This is important because it is supposed to be a random chance that either would exist.

WingsOfGood posted...

The beautiful chemistry of plants and animals having their symbiotic relation is something that gives on pause.
Animals eat plants, but they also spread their seeds and convert the oxygen to cabron dioxide.

A world where only plants had existed would be one where all plants died. Same for animals.
This is important because it is supposed to be a random chance that either would exist.

the universe is infinitely huge. there's a potentially infinite number of planets capable of supporting life. even if there's only a 0.000 000 000 000 001 percent chance of a planet developing that way, it's inevitable that one eventually would. if you have an infinite number of monkeys with typewriters, eventually one of them will bash out Hamlet

averagejoel posted...

it's inevitable that one eventually would.

So you saying we the only planet with life?

if you have an infinite number of monkeys with typewriters, eventually one of them will bash out Hamlet

This also implies once. Even with that scenario the times they bash out hamlet is barely once?

Why do you guys always fall for such obvious bait?

WingsOfGood posted...

So you saying we the only planet with life?

no. it's literally impossible that we're the only planet with life. it probably evolved very differently on other planets though

WingsOfGood posted...

This also implies once. Even with that scenario the times they bash out hamlet is barely once?

one monkey will eventually bash out every work of literature ever conceived given enough time. Hamlet was just one example

It's weird, isn't it? That planet Earth's smartest creatures could have been basic monkeys instead of humans. And they never would have invented space travel. It really makes you think.

also, is the universe infinite? is a question still left unanswered

https://www.swinburne.edu.au/news/2021/08/Is-space-infinite-we-asked-5-experts/

https://astronomy.com/news/2020/03/is-the-universe-infinite

Monkey with typewriter is used to explain things happening on Earth since we know life was on Earth. Never seen someone use it to try and say that means other Earths 100% out there. Not mention it is not like every star system is like ours.
For your monkey typewriter comparison to work, you are assuming the same environment each time. That is, every typewriter has a monkey. But that is not true for the universe. It would be giving many of them broken typewriters or objects that cannot be used to write and some typewriters no monkeys.

That is to say, every monkey with typewriter is assumed to have the chance to create hamlet.
Not every planet actually has the chance to even attempt life. Or at least in terms of how we understand life coming into existence.

Dont feed SMAL

Or those who think

...yea it's totally fine to have a kid or two.

WingsOfGood posted...

Monkey with typewriter is used to explain things happening on Earth since we know life was on Earth. Never seen someone use it to try and say that means other Earths 100% out there. Not mention it is not like every star system is like ours.

I didn't say that other Earths are 100% out there, or that every system is like ours. those are not necessary prerequisites for a planet's capabilities to sustain life

For your monkey typewriter comparison to work, you are assuming the same environment each time. That is, every typewriter has a monkey. But that is not true for the universe. It would be giving many of them broken typewriters or objects that cannot be used to write and some typewriters no monkeys.

sure. but to go back to the actual point: even if only one star in a million has one planet orbiting it that can sustain life, there are still an estimated 200 sextillion stars in the universe, and it's inevitable that some of those planets would develop life

What I don't really understand is how life even started. My understanding is that lightning hit a rock and it formed proteins or some shit. And then these proteins somehow formed into cells which could self produce.

I sooner believe we are in a simulation or God than this is how life started. But that's just my opinion.

WingsOfGood posted...

Monkey with typewriter is used to explain things happening on Earth since we know life was on Earth. Never seen someone use it to try and say that means other Earths 100% out there. Not mention it is not like every star system is like ours.
For your monkey typewriter comparison to work, you are assuming the same environment each time. That is, every typewriter has a monkey. But that is not true for the universe. It would be giving many of them broken typewriters or objects that cannot be used to write and some typewriters no monkeys.

That is to say, every monkey with typewriter is assumed to have the chance to create hamlet.
Not every planet actually has the chance to even attempt life. Or at least in terms of how we understand life coming into existence.

The point of the monkey writing hamlet analogy has gone entirely and completely over your head. The monkeys being monkeys, or having typewriters, is not at all the point. They're just the happenstance example that got famous.

Think about everything that happened to you yesterday and the specific order of every single event through out your entire day.

If on the day prior someone came up to you and asked you " what are the odds that all of these events are going to happen to you tomorrow in this exact order etc." you'd probably think that's pretty much impossible, or at the least the odds are incredibly low.

Yet, yesterday happened.

No matter how unlikely you think it is that all of the events that have happened by random chance in the universe over billions of years have led to where we are today, the fact is that they happened.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

Oh dayum

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/7/7/3/AAT2moAAA41F.jpg

Clarence_Royce posted...

Believe in science all you want, but we all have to go through and experience death some day.

how does this contradict science? Everyone dies. That's a fact.

Arcanine2009 posted...

how does this contradict science? Everyone dies. That's a fact.

Science can't answer the most important question: what happens to our consciousness after we die?

In return, I don't know how people can blindly put faith into an invisible entity. The concept seems absurd.

Not attempting to be insulting, but I feel the way you do on the other side of the fence. Unless something even hints toward the existence of some kind of God in my lifetime, i'll never change my stance.

I'm not an atheist, but saying something like, "we don't know what happens to someone's consciousness after they die" isn't some meaningful argument, nor is it a slam dunk against "science" (some abstract umbrella term detectors use to insult something they don't understand).

we have an idea of what happens to the physical component of consciousness, the part that can be studied to some extent, when we die, and we currently have no reason, as far as I know, to believe that there's anything beyond that physical part.