Does God Love Us?
- Thread starter Closet Philosopher
- Start date
Or maybe God does exist and He didn't create evil.
End of inner struggle.
Love
Jan Ardena.
Immortality is at our fingertips right now. The length of the telomere on the gene determines how long we will live. It involves an enzyme called telomerase. This longer telomere determines factors such as heart disease, diabetes, atherosclerosis, etc. It is the key to immortality and it is being researched right now.
"All the king's men" couldn't put Humpty Dumpty together again because this was referring to a king, possibly Henry the Eighth, the House of Tudor, when it fell.
Re: I was hoping for some imagination.
Of course not! Why do you want to make fun of everything I have to say? It's GENETIC. It has nothing to do with fate. Why don't you just look up the science of the telomere. Under a microscope, the telomeres can be observed for their length. Some people may be genetically predisposed to short telomeres and others more lucky may have longer telomeres. It foretells the potentiality of onset of disease. The longer the telomere, the healthier the individual. It's genetic, not occult as you would try to imply. I gave you credit for being more intelligent than you appear.
Of course not! Why do you want to make fun of everything I have to say? It's GENETIC. It has nothing to do with fate. Why don't you just look up the science of the telomere. Under a microscope, the telomeres can be observed for their length. Some people may be genetically predisposed to short telomeres and others more lucky may have longer telomeres. It foretells the potentiality of onset of disease. The longer the telomere, the healthier the individual. It's genetic, not occult as you would try to imply. I gave you credit for being more intelligent than you appear.
The human being was created divine to evolve toward perfection. (This has nothing to do with "original sin). As we evolved, our lives became longer, our lifestyles became healthier (more conducive to better survival). We lived longer. Now here we are. "Genetic decay" has been significantly delayed from that of our forebears. We are on the scientific forefront of conquering physical death (genetic decay). There has not been, is not now, and never will be "death" to the spirit--the alpha-omega. In time (maybe millenia, we don't know), the human being will not experience physical demise.
May you please list ONE area where we have placed a new direction and order on nature. In specific, please enlighten us in the areas of seizemic, meteorology, cosmotology, water resources, ect. Aside from the limited knowledge that we have gained in these areas, what have we done so far to ACTUALLY disperse a tornado, move a planet out of it's course to another orbit, cause more rainfall, improve our deteriorated air quality, stop an earthquake from happening, stop a tidal wave, ect... What have we done to nature apart from merely reacting to it a bit better and randomly destroying our local environment. What have we done to the water resource in our planet aside from building dams to hold some of it back until we are ready for the rest.
Cris, you don't seem to get the fundemental idea that we are limited to finite resources on this earth. No other tiny earth have oil, iron, water, ect....Our source of iron and metals is limited, Our energy sources are limited, ect.... We WILL NEVER be able to change NATURE in any significant manner, because our resources are insignificant to the power of the universe.
Too bad, you won't personally defeat it. You also won't be around to celebrate the fact when gazillionth of years later someone have defeated it. What type of other useless and pointless points of view do you uphold so dear to you?
I'm afraid MW that you are a bit off in your analysis of our evolution. Humans have not evolved physically to be better than our forefather. We have only grown to understand our surroundings better and we have learned how to deal more effectively with them. Humans have learned how to cohabitat effectively and that have nothing to do with a physical evolution.
A small test to the problems in your theory is the following. If we took a new born child today and placed it out of it's environment where it had no contact with civilization and others. Would you expect that person to be different than our fathers...Would you expect that person to know already all the state of the art technologies? Not really, that person IF SURVIVED, would more like represent the cave man than us. We have no evolved to be stronger or better, we merely learned more about our environment and are using our collective experience to protect ourselves from the unknown powers of nature.
Fifty years is by no means a significant delay. In addition, these years that have been delayed are non functional years of the human life. Our elderly are not living...They are merely preserved like fragile spider webs that will one day collapse.
That will be a disaster. Death is extremely beneficial in cleansing the population and allowing for new generation that are equipped to deal better to take over. If death ceased to exist in our little tiny planet, you can be rest assured that people would start killing each other to establish some sort of balance. Death is mercy and order of nature from god...but the unwise selfish souls will always cling to the material things, because that's all they know. God or universal power have the insight and mercy to observe the humans point of incompetence againest their environment and place an end to humans physical life before the deadly point is reached.
I agree, and many animals do enjoy such "optimum environmental conditions" that have improved the quality of life of these animals. For example, rats and cocoroaches stand a way better chance of survival in much bigger numbers with lengthened life spans than tigers and bears for instance, but these advancements could easily be reversed if the environmental conditions change. For example, another ice age, which is not totally improssible, could erradicate the human species, and thus make you and Cris talk completely irrelevant. Yo
So is the human species in general. We are vulnerable to a great extent and if it wasn't for our optimum environmental conditions we wouldn't be here. Think ice ages, Global warming, ect... that could eradicate life as we know it.
Yet, a tiny pinch to our nervous system can immediately kill us. A reverse in blood flow can kill us. Heat kills us, cold kills us, lack of oxygen kills us, too much oxygen kills us, lack of sleep kills us, a two spoonfull of waters in our lungs can kill us. We may have defied tiny little viruses that are ever accomodating to the environment, and we remain as vulnerable as we have ever been.
Now you are sounding just like Cris. What technologies are you talking about and how do you measure the benefits of these technologies relative to this universe.? Having more cars and pollution is a plight not an advancement. Having cell phones doesn't make it in my book of advancement, specially when we all tremble at the thought of a natural disaster or a nuclear bomb. What good are these technologies if they are not allocated properly. How can you equate 100 years to 22,000 years? Perhpas it was the conservation techniques of our land that have been observed in the last 22,000 years that have allowed for our leap. Perhpas we are ruining things so bad in our consumerist life styles that we are eradicating our futures with every breath we take.
Nature have already discovered the fountain of youth...It's called reproduction, unless Cris would like to tell us in detail his proposal of reinventing the wheel.
Originally posted by Flores
I agree, and many animals do enjoy such "optimum environmental conditions" that have improved the quality of life of these animals. For example, rats and cocoroaches stand a way better chance of survival in much bigger numbers with lengthened life spans than tigers and bears for instance, but these advancements could easily be reversed if the environmental conditions change. For example, another ice age, which is not totally improssible, could erradicate the human species, and thus make you and Cris talk completely irrelevant. Yo
----------
M*W: Yes, we are vulnerable to environmental conditions--those we created and those we have no control over--like global warming, the melting icecaps, el nino, etc.
----------
So is the human species in general. We are vulnerable to a great extent and if it wasn't for our optimum environmental conditions we wouldn't be here. Think ice ages, Global warming, ect... that could eradicate life as we know it.
Yet, a tiny pinch to our nervous system can immediately kill us. A reverse in blood flow can kill us. Heat kills us, cold kills us, lack of oxygen kills us, too much oxygen kills us, lack of sleep kills us, a two spoonfull of waters in our lungs can kill us. We may have defied tiny little viruses that are ever accomodating to the environment, and we remain as vulnerable as we have ever been.
Now you are sounding just like Cris. What technologies are you talking about and how do you measure the benefits of these technologies relative to this universe.? Having more cars and pollution is a plight not an advancement. Having cell phones doesn't make it in my book of advancement, specially when we all tremble at the thought of a natural disaster or a nuclear bomb. What good are these technologies if they are not allocated properly. How can you equate 100 years to 22,000 years? Perhpas it was the conservation techniques of our land that have been observed in the last 22,000 years that have allowed for our leap. Perhpas we are ruining things so bad in our consumerist life styles that we are eradicating our futures with every breath we take.
----------
M*W: I heard the statistic on the radio. I can't explain it, but I think it means that in the past 100 years, we have the automobile, airplane flight, telephone, electricity, TV, Internet, etc., oh and lets not forget the Bomb.
----------
Nature have already discovered the fountain of youth...It's called reproduction, unless Cris would like to tell us in detail his proposal of reinventing the wheel.
----------
M*W: The latest research on the telomere is thought to prolong life. It's been written about in Time and Discover including scientific journals. I fear that reproduction may become a thing of the past when we start extending the lifespan. I'm all for reproduction. It keeps me in business.