Is Earth a prison planet?

[Burner]

There's no evolution but rather an intelligent design. We should be seeing creatures on the verge of evolution but am sure you can't point at least one.

Do you think evolution happens when a creature just emerges with some new feature?
And to propose intelligent design you must first demonstrate:
1. Design. That life on earth is designed
2. A designer. An agent that did the design

 

[Nabongo Mumia VII]

Were the animals and plants equally sinful to be imprisoned with Mankind on earth?

No, they were either found as they were when we were allegedly placed here or engineered to serve our needs.

 

[Nabongo Mumia VII]

what of the new born babies who dies, what of their fate? this theory has too many loopholes

They're either gone for good or reincarnated into a new embryo here on Earth.

Kabisaa.
you don't find it suspicious that we have never gone back to the moon despite our very superior technology from the last time it was achieved?

David Icke also claims that the moon is hollow and that's where the simulation that we live in is generated from.

 

[Burner]

David Icke also claims that the moon is hollow and that's where the simulation that we live in is generated from.

Well, he can claim it but if he has no evidence to back it up or his data is faulty, why take him seriously?
All evidence we have shows that the moon is not and cannot be hollow and there is no projection coming from it. Why would you even consider this a candidate for reality?

 

[Mishale]

Go back to do what?

to explore and mine the said minerals.
arent we on a mision to go to the moon and mars?

 

[Doc oga]

Do you think evolution happens when a creature just emerges with some new feature?
And to propose intelligent design you must first demonstrate:
1. Design. That life on earth is designed
2. A designer. An agent that did the design

How then does evolution occur?

Life on earth is designed by something take for example why do we humans suffer from back problems unlike other animals and does that mean we are originally from a lower gravity planet? Why can't women give birth by themselves or without assistance? Why is man vengeful?

The above could point out to some genetic manipulation in the past and probably it is still ongoing.

Well, he can claim it but if he has no evidence to back it up or his data is faulty, why take him seriously?
All evidence we have shows that the moon is not and cannot be hollow and there is no projection coming from it. Why would you even consider this a candidate for reality?

Without the Moon life would be difficult for all creatures as the days would be shorter and also think of the tides and it's effects. The moon could be an artificial satellite as Strabo once said "long before the sky had no moon".

 

[Burner]

to explore and mine the said minerals.
arent we on a mision to go to the moon and mars?

Mining in near zero gravity is very different from mining on earth. The tools we use here on earth wouldnt work the same way on the moon. Explosives work different in space/the moon. How will this be sorted?

You would need a massive supply of oxygen/air for people to live and work on the moon. How do we get this? What will they eat and drink there?

The amount of fuel needed to haul everything to the moon and then haul back mined material would be insane.

Finally, what minerals? I havent read up on the makeup of the moon but i do not recall there being any minerals in quatlntities vast enough to warrant mining it?

Any missions to Mars in the near future are still unmanned due to the time it takes to get there. You still have the problem of food and fuel on the journey there let alone living on the planet and coming back.

 

[Burner]

How then does evolution occur?

Life on earth is designed by something take for example why do we humans suffer from back problems unlike other animals and does that mean we are originally from a lower gravity planet? Why can't women give birth by themselves or without assistance? Why is man vengeful?.

I think you expect evolution to happen on a massive scale that one day an animal looks this way and the next day it looks totally different. It does not work that way.
Changes occur generation by generation in a population. I suggest you read up on the subject. I am not an evolutionary biologist but there is clearly a big misunderstanding in what you think it evolution is.

You cannot say life is "designed by something" because design infers there is an intention for the thing designed. So you would have to show the intention, and you still have to demonstrate a designer.
Furthermore you can only claim something is designed by contrasting it with something that is not designed i.e something natural. So show me something that is designed and something natural and tell me how you can tell the differrence?
(And im excluding anything and ecerything man-made since we have clear examples of people designing and making those things. So dont give me an example of a watch and a com).

We suffer from back problems because we walk erect (vertically) and have a hip that isnt ideal for the way you weight shifts from side to side. If you claim that we are from a low gravity planet, go ahead and prove it. All evidence we have points to us having evolved on this planet.
Your other questions do not counter the evolution theory. They are part philosophical (the vengeful question) and partially wrong(the giving birth question) because there are millions of example of women who give birtth by themselves in fields and home all over the planet.

As for the moon being an artificial satellite, im beginning to see a pattern here. Someone throws out a hypothetical and you seem to give it some level of credence. If this is how you operate then what is the use of asking questions? If you are going to give any nutty hypothetical the same degree of confidence then skepticism or evidence will do you no good.

 

[Doc oga]

I think you expect evolution to happen on a massive scale that one day an animal looks this way and the next day it looks totally different. It does not work that way.
Changes occur generation by generation in a population. I suggest you read up on the subject. I am not an evolutionary biologist but there is clearly a big misunderstanding in what you think it evolution is.

You cannot say life is "designed by something" because design infers there is an intention for the thing designed. So you would have to show the intention, and you still have to demonstrate a designer.
Furthermore you can only claim something is designed by contrasting it with something that is not designed i.e something natural. So show me something that is designed and something natural and tell me how you can tell the differrence?
(And im excluding anything and ecerything man-made since we have clear examples of people designing and making those things. So dont give me an example of a watch and a com).

We suffer from back problems because we walk erect (vertically) and have a hip that isnt ideal for the way you weight shifts from side to side. If you claim that we are from a low gravity planet, go ahead and prove it. All evidence we have points to us having evolved on this planet.
Your other questions do not counter the evolution theory. They are part philosophical (the vengeful question) and partially wrong(the giving birth question) because there are millions of example of women who give birtth by themselves in fields and home all over the planet.

As for the moon being an artificial satellite, im beginning to see a pattern here. Someone throws out a hypothetical and you seem to give it some level of credence. If this is how you operate then what is the use of asking questions? If you are going to give any nutty hypothetical the same degree of confidence then skepticism or evidence will do you no good.

I once had your thoughts but eventually I graduated to higher ones

 

[Burner]

I once had your thoughts but eventually I graduated to higher ones

If you can supportany of your views here with evidence then lets hear it.

 

[Doc oga]

If you can supportany of your views here with evidence then lets hear it.

I don't know the origins of man that's the reason why I am willing to include such hypothesis in the course of searching for the truth. I know we came from somewhere and our origins are definitely not this planet, check out the folklores among different cultures and all point to the sky.

 

[Burner]

I don't know the origins of man that's the reason why I am willing to include such hypothesis in the course of searching for the truth. I know we came from somewhere and our origins are definitely not this planet, check out the folklores among different cultures and all point to the sky.

Again. You claim you know that we came from somewhere else but offer no evidence but a story. Stories can be made up and usually when human cannot find a suitable explanation. And the popularity of a story does not make it more credible.

 

[Doc oga]

Again. You claim you know that we came from somewhere else but offer no evidence but a story. Stories can be made up and usually when human cannot find a suitable explanation. And the popularity of a story does not make it more credible.

Folklore ain't enough evidence for you? Give me alternative solid evidence to support your evolution isht theory.

 

[Mishale]

Again. You claim you know that we came from somewhere else but offer no evidence but a story. Stories can be made up and usually when human cannot find a suitable explanation. And the popularity of a story does not make it more credible.

can one also argue, Popularity of a theory (also backed by facts), doesn't make it true?
all theories we know are from those who were able to record or patent them. everything else is based on those singular theories/experiments..... and Humans don't have a way of disapproving them.

we decide on the 8/9-5 work hours, decided Mon-Fri as workdays.......
imagine of someone tomorrow came with a theory that the working days will be Wed-Sun. (what if they also changed the names), would you believe that person or view them as insane.

if the Ethiopians conquered the world, we would be in 2012/2013 and not 2020.

 

[Mishale]

Mining in near zero gravity is very different from mining on earth. The tools we use here on earth wouldnt work the same way on the moon. Explosives work different in space/the moon. How will this be sorted?

You would need a massive supply of oxygen/air for people to live and work on the moon. How do we get this? What will they eat and drink there?

The amount of fuel needed to haul everything to the moon and then haul back mined material would be insane.

Finally, what minerals? I havent read up on the makeup of the moon but i do not recall there being any minerals in quatlntities vast enough to warrant mining it?

Any missions to Mars in the near future are still unmanned due to the time it takes to get there. You still have the problem of food and fuel on the journey there let alone living on the planet and coming back.

Want to Mine the Moon? Here’s a Detailed Map of all its Minerals

The prospect of mining asteroids and the Moon is on a lot of peoples’ minds lately. Maybe it’s all the growth that’s happened in the commercial aerospace industry in the past few decades.

Or perhaps it’s because of Trump’s recent executive order to allow for asteroid and lunar mining. Either way, there is no shortage of entrepreneurs and futurists who can’t wait to start prospecting and harvest the natural bounty of space!

Coincidentally enough, future lunar miners now have a complete map of the lunar surface, which was created by the US Geological Society’s (USGS) Astrogeology Science Center, in collaboration with NASA and the Lunar Planetary Institute (LPI). This map shows the distribution and classification of the mineral deposits on the Moon’s surface, effectively letting us know what its familiar patchwork of light and dark patches the really are.

Known as the “Unified Geologic Map of the Moon,” this immensely-detailed 1:5,000,000 scale map is available online and is intended for use by the scientific community, educators, and the general public. In addition, the USGS states that it will serve as a “definitive blueprint of the moon’s surface geology for future human missions.”

The full map and descriptions of mineral deposits. Credit: USGS/USRA

Want to Mine the Moon? Here's a Detailed Map of all its Minerals

The USGS' Astrogeology Science Center has released a complete mineral map of the Moon, which the lunar mining crowd is sure to appreciate!

www.universetoday.com

Many countries have expressed a renewed desire to go back to the moon. NASA has a multitude of plans to do so, China landed a rover on the lunar farside in January and has an active rover there right now, and numerous other countries have their sights set on lunar missions. The necessity of using materials already present on the Moon becomes more pressing.

Artist’s concept of what lunar in-situ resource utilization might look like. Image via NASA.

Anticipation of lunar living is driving engineering and experimental work to determine how to efficiently use lunar materials to support human exploration. For example, the European Space Agency (ESA) is planning to land a spacecraft at the lunar South Pole in 2022 to drill beneath the surface in search of water ice and other chemicals. This craft will feature a research instrument designed to obtain water from the lunar soil or regolith.


There have even been discussions of eventually mining and shipping back to Earth the helium-3 locked in the lunar regolith. Helium-3 (a non-radioactive isotope of helium) could be used as fuel for fusion reactors to produce vast amounts of energy at very low environmental cost – although fusion as a power source has not yet been demonstrated, and the volume of extractable helium-3 is unknown.

Nonetheless, even as the true costs and benefits of lunar ISRU remain to be seen, there is little reason to think that the considerable current interest in mining the Moon won’t continue.

| EarthSky

How can the cost of space travel – to and from the moon and possibly to Mars - be reduced? One approach is to mine the moon for necessary resources.

earthsky.org

 

[Burner]

can one also argue, Popularity of a theory (also backed by facts), doesn't make it true?

If there is data to back the theory and it is testable, repeatable and gives consistent results then it is considered true. How popular it is, is irrelevant.

all theories we know are from those who were able to record or patent them. everything else is based on those singular theories/experiments..... and Humans don't have a way of disapproving them.

we decide on the 8/9-5 work hours, decided Mon-Fri as workdays.......
imagine of someone tomorrow came with a theory that the working days will be Wed-Sun. (what if they also changed the names), would you believe that person or view them as insane.

if the Ethiopians conquered the world, we would be in 2012/2013 and not 2020.

I dont know what you have said here.

 

[Mishale]

If there is data to back the theory and it is testable, repeatable and gives consistent results then it is considered true. How popular it is, is irrelevant.



I dont know what you have said here.

am just saying, if the world was conqured by different parties than the ones we have, most theories would be different.

 

[Burner]

am just saying, if the world was conqured by different parties than the ones we have, most theories would be different.

Give an example please.

 

[Mishale]

Give an example please.

In 2014, Hawking proposed that instead of having a boundary through which nothing can escape (known as the “event horizon”), black holes have an “apparent horizon,” which temporarily holds energy and matter before eventually releasing them in a different form. In other words, black holes transform all of the information they collect. Paradox solved.

However, an Indian scientist has been saying for years that he solved this paradox long before Hawking did. In a paper published in the journal, Foundations of Physics Letters, in 2000, Abhas Mitra, then a senior scientist at Mumbai’s Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC), suggested that “exact” black holes as we thought of them could not exist as they would not follow the rules of Albert Einstein’s general theory of relativity. Instead, Mitra argued that all black holes would only be approximate or quasi black holes.

The Indian physicist who contested Stephen Hawking’s theory about black holes

Abhas Mitra, the former head of Mumbai's Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, says he established that black holes don't exist long before Hawking did.

qz.com

G Nageshwar Rao, vice chancellor of Andhra University, also said a demon king from the Hindu religious epic, Ramayana, had 24 types of aircraft and a network of landing strips in modern day Sri Lanka.
Another scientist from a university in the southern state of Tamil Nadu told conference attendees that Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein were both wrong and that gravitational waves should be renamed "Narendra Modi Waves".
Dr KJ Krishnan reportedly said Newton failed to "understand gravitational repulsive forces" and Einstein's theories were "misleading".

Critics said that while ancient texts should be read and enjoyed - it was nonsense to suggest they represented science.
The Indian Scientific Congress Association expressed "serious concern" at the remarks.
"We don't subscribe to their views and distance ourselves from their comments. This is unfortunate," Premendu P Mathur, general secretary of Indian Scientific Congress Association, told the AFP news agency.
"There is a serious concern about such kind of utterances by responsible people."

India scientists dismiss Einstein theories

Speakers at a major conference have been criticised for making irrational claims based on Hindu mythology.

www.bbc.com

Why physicists are determined to prove Galileo and Einstein wrong

Physicists dropped objects on a satellite for two years to test Galileo's theory of falling objects.

www.livescience.com

 

[Burner]

In 2014, Hawking proposed that instead of having a boundary through which nothing can escape (known as the “event horizon”), black holes have an “apparent horizon,” which temporarily holds energy and matter before eventually releasing them in a different form. In other words, black holes transform all of the information they collect. Paradox solved.

I dont understand how this is any different from what i have been saying. You collect data and if it is repeatable, testable and gives consistent results it is true.
Theories are refined as long as the evidence that supports or challenges them holds up to scrutiny. It is not a matter of popularity.

If there was evidence that was to emerge that completely rewrites the theory of gravity and how it is understood, then great. The theory of gravity isnt what it is because it is popular. There were competing theories that tried to explain the force between bodies whose evidence didnt meet the standards set.