science and religion

[ShadowSot]

My point was that animals do not enjoy a utopian existence that you seem to think they do.

I did overstate my case however.

We have decent night vision, but it isn't really comoarable to nocturnal soecues.

[+Liquid Gardens]

(And on a point arising: our night vision is exquisite when dark adapted, but we seem to prefer to remain un dark adpated whenever possible. We are the only species that deploys artifical illumination, so it's a tangle to look at from a natural selection point of view without lapsing into "just so" stories.)

I missed what point was being made earlier about night vision, but I was wondering if something like the advent of artificial illumination has been too recent historically to have much impact on evolutionary forces. I'm assuming the point was something along the lines of, 'our night vision is not as good as animals possibly because of evolution and our lessened need for that ability', but not sure. Our vision is sharper than a lot of other mammals I believe (while being pitiful compared to a lot of birds), but there are quite a few mammals with the extra eye structure that causes 'eye shine' in the dark and allows them to better capture available light in the 'dark', which does give many mammals improved night vision compared to humans.

[ellapenella]

I see the earth as a living thing well at least as a much larger version, with everything inside helping it maintain balance . we as humans are just not up to speed on the truth and are blinded by our need to explain everything even if it's wrong.

According to the bible man's greatest sin is when Adam took from the fruit of knowledge.

No but even the bible it basically says ignorance is bliss refering to the garden of Eden scenario. I fear intelligence is actually the decline in evolution for it takes from everything until there is no more. Say evolution is a cycle that starts with single celled organism and ends up with intelligence . yes science has advanced the human race but it has also takin a toll on this planet. Which I fear is irreversible. So maybe itelligence is another form of reset button for the planetary system. Maybe evolution is just a planetary function to process gases in the atmosphere and life is basically the operating system for a planet well at least habitable planets making it into some form of mutualism . But with any cycle there must be a decline and intelligence is my best guess. The facts are this world is on the breaking point, with only the combustible engine to blame. Means intelligence caused it. Now the earth sees it has an infection and will try it's best to kill it through bad weather and longer droughts

interesting...

[eight bits]

LG

I was answering Shadowsot's

So you would say then that humans have the same fight or flight response animals have, just no longer have as many reasonable fears then.

Instincts are an evolved response, not something you consider.

Being afraid of the dark when you are young and mistly defenseless, and your species does not have particularly good night vision isn't unreasonable.

Which in turn, was said in the context of his exchange with FTWind. The gap has since narrowed to the point where what I call exquisite, SS calls pretty decent. Meh, close neough.

I didn't weigh in on whether "fear of the dark" as such is a product of natural selection. Fearful or not, we are typically day critters, though, presumably because regardless of how good our night vision is, our daylight vision is much better.

but there are quite a few mammals with the extra eye structure that causes 'eye shine' in the dark and allows them to better capture available light in the 'dark', which does give many mammals improved night vision compared to humans.

There is, however, a quantum limit of detection, which we can achieve. So, at low enough levels of illumination, we can meet or beat our "eye shining" competitors. Also, in environmentally typical dim light, processing matters, and we have huge architectural investment in visual processing.

Sorry, wolves, but we're very well matched at night - and my eyes don't give away my position. (The wolf responds that she can navigate by sound alone, which humans can do only with considerable training, and incorrigible bad resolution. You just can't argue with wolves.)

Edited August 13, 2015 by eight bits

[+Liquid Gardens]

There is, however, a quantum limit of detection, which we can achieve. So, at low enough levels of illumination, we can meet or beat our "eye shining" competitors. Also, in environmentally typical dim light, processing matters, and we have huge architectural investment in visual processing.

Sorry, wolves, but we're very well matched at night - and my eyes don't give away my position. (The wolf responds that she can navigate by sound alone, which humans can do only with considerable training, and incorrigible bad resolution. You just can't argue with wolves.)

Thanks for pointing out the tie-in to night vision, I missed that statement. I couldn't find a ranking of the low light vision capabilities of mammals, but I thought there were quite a few that definitely beat us, including dogs, and I'd be surprised if they were much different than wolves. I may not be understanding what you mean by 'quantum level of detection' though.

I'd guess it depends on the specific environment we are talking about. It seems like when we are talking about wolves at night there seems some justification for then thinking we are out in the wild somewhere, away from artificial lighting. Eye-shine only works when there is enough light shining into their eyes to reflect back into yours so in the wild that advantage would seem to be neutralized. I couldn't find anything definitive, but what I had read implied that a dog has better motion sensitivity also. The sense that came to my mind when you mentioned wolves was smell, I wouldn't be surprised if they could pluck out humans in pitch-dark based on that alone; our eye-shine may not give us away our position but our deodorant probably will.

(Oh, and 'dog' spelled backwards is 'god' and I'll bet Jesus had excellent-to-perfect night vision; I'm on topic!)

[IdPnSD]

There was a time when Vedas were known all over the world. Its influences are there in Bible and Judaism. Vedas describe the laws of nature like - reincarnation, destiny, soul theory, yogic power, eternal recurrence etc. You all know that reincarnation was removed from Bible. But there are still some verses in Bible that indicate reincarnation. Destiny and eternal recurrence are there in Bible. Yogis are still there all over the world.

However, science do not and cannot have any truth. This includes Newton (Classical physics), Einstein (Relativity theory), Heisenberg (Quantum mechanics) etc. The reason is of course very obvious. Creations cannot know anything about creators. Just like computers cannot know any thing about humans, similarly humans also cannot know anything about nature. Can you imagine some computers doing some experiments and telling truth about humans? In the same way doing some experiments in some isolated and controlled environment or writing some mathematical equations humans cannot also find any truth about nature.

Humans must observe the nature to find the truth, just like Galileo did. In the same way you can acquire divine vision by performing yogic meditation and then you will also be able to see the truth about nature. This is how yogis of Vedic period could see the entire universe, all its events, all objects, and their laws. Thus Vedas represent eternal truths. It was valid billion years back, are valid now, and will remain valid billion years from now and for the entire universe. If you read Vedas, you will see there are many truths in Bible but none in Science. For details take a look at https://theoryofsouls.wordpress.com/

[Podo]

There was a time when Vedas were known all over the world. Its influences are there in Bible and Judaism. Vedas describe the laws of nature like - reincarnation, destiny, soul theory, yogic power, eternal recurrence etc. You all know that reincarnation was removed from Bible. But there are still some verses in Bible that indicate reincarnation. Destiny and eternal recurrence are there in Bible. Yogis are still there all over the world.

However, science do not and cannot have any truth. This includes Newton (Classical physics), Einstein (Relativity theory), Heisenberg (Quantum mechanics) etc. The reason is of course very obvious. Creations cannot know anything about creators. Just like computers cannot know any thing about humans, similarly humans also cannot know anything about nature. Can you imagine some computers doing some experiments and telling truth about humans? In the same way doing some experiments in some isolated and controlled environment or writing some mathematical equations humans cannot also find any truth about nature.

Humans must observe the nature to find the truth, just like Galileo did. In the same way you can acquire divine vision by performing yogic meditation and then you will also be able to see the truth about nature. This is how yogis of Vedic period could see the entire universe, all its events, all objects, and their laws. Thus Vedas represent eternal truths. It was valid billion years back, are valid now, and will remain valid billion years from now and for the entire universe. If you read Vedas, you will see there are many truths in Bible but none in Science. For details take a look at https://theoryofsouls.wordpress.com/

Re: the bolded segment, I don't think you know how science works. Science is nothing but the quest for and acquisition of truth. Before the scientific method and technology, we didn't know...anything, really. Through experimentation and observation, we learn about our world. We KNOW that gravity works. We KNOW how lightning is made, and how the sun works, and how nuclear reactions take place. We know a wealth of medical truths that we certainly did not know before the scientific method began being employed. Take whatever view of religion you wish, but to state that science can reveal no truths is false at best and willfully ignorant at worst.

[FTWind]

I sympathize with your view of things, idpnsd. You are wrong about science though. Science best explains the world around us, it is the culmination of 100's of years of recording the observations humans have made.

Yes,science might get it wrong , but it won't stay like that for long

with that said , I believe in the power of the human mind. Just like the placebo effect, basically saying if the brain believes strongly enough in something it will manifest it. I believe this also goes into effect when applied to beliefs as Well.

Basically you can be your own God if you believe enough in yourself. Christian's on the other hand believe in God . Giving praise to him whenever something good happens. They build him up in their minds. To where more positive things will happen because they believe strongly enough that someone is actually there helping them.

Edited August 18, 2015 by FTWind