Itoero

Past a certain level of income, your income is just not linked to happiness. If you have some emotional turmoil then you go to a psychiatrist or another able person. What help can a priest give? Here in Belgium, Christianity is in a pretty fast decline. Many people are official a catholic (like me), they were baptized and did 2 communes but that's more about tradition then anything else. I consider myself to be an agnostic atheist. Bibles are mostly used to fill up boxes in the attic. In well-faring/peaceful countries, you see a decline of religion. If religion teaches a moral framework then that framework was not invented by religion. Morals evolve through natural processes. Morality definitely does not depend upon religion. The fact that many Christians think you need religion to be moral is the main reason why atheists are so mistrusted in USA.

God likes variation. And god works in mysterious ways. He also created viruses and bloodsucking insects.

They call it 'social science'.

You asked: "Why would he need to say this if the people didn't think he was trying to abolish what came before? And what was he attempting to fulfill?" =>You find many explanations for this on google. Why do you ask that? It's completely irrelevant.

That does not say anything concerning the understanding of the OT...That's about understanding Jesus. In the NT, Jesus referred several times to the OT and agreed with it, it's the word of God. If you throw away the old testament then you are debunking Jesus.

Can you give the verses that show they did not understand the OT? In the NT, Jesus referred several times to the OT and agreed with it...it's the word of God. If you throw away the old testament then you are debunking Jesus. again...Why not? It's translated in English isn't it? It was not voluntary...Jesus did not choose to be sacrificed. Jesus was created by God to be sacrificed. So because Jesus was sacrificed, we can sin?

Why do you think the book wasn't understood 2000 years ago? And what does it matter? So if they didn't understand it, we also can't understand it? Why not? And if you throw away the OT, you throw away all the stories about Moses and Isaac...and the 10 commandments... The NT says you need a human sacrifice to be freed from your sins. Do you think that's moral?

There is morality in the bible. But what about all the immoral and disgusting stuff?

Morality is basically proper behavior, it provides increased evolutionary success, it's an evolutionary trait. It's especially important for social animals.(like humans) It's a property that arises from consciousness. Morality does not depend upon religion, though for some, this is "an almost automatic assumption." This is the main reason why Atheists are so mistrusted in the USA. Many Christians think you need religion to be moral...an a-theist is for them an a-moralist. Morals need to be able to evolve. The morals taught by religion can't evolve , since religion doesn't. The morals you find in the bible were written during the Roman Empire...

after googling it, I saw my mistake

I adore the Queen Charlottes:) But why Haida Gwaii? Haida Gwaii was well North from the southern borders of the icesheet on Canada. Proto-Polynesians had to travel huge distances trough open water to reach America. I don't think that was possible at that time. Proto-Polynesians were definitely asians. If the 10.000 years is true then they just lived in Beringia (like other people lived in Siberia)for that long, they were not waiting for glaciers to clear up. It seems many people lived in Siberia during then last glacial maximum. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/225787072_Siberia_at_the_Last_Glacial_Maximum_Environment_and_Archaeology They did migrate via the coasts, there is the kelp highway hypothesis. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_M._Erlandson#Kelp_Highway_Hypothesis:_The_Peopling_of_the_New_World I believe in the land bridge theory because it all fits. This map explains things I think:

Maybe something like the Azolla event will happen again. Perhaps we can start such an event. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azolla_event

That's probably true. But nature recovers and adapts pretty fast. 30 years after what happened in Tsjernobyl, the area is a refuge for all kinds of animals. Wildlife is thriving despite high radiation levels. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/04/060418-chernobyl-wildlife-thirty-year-anniversary-science/

How can the Earth become largely uninhabitable? Can you give an example?

I found an article which says that Polynesia was a relatively recent discovery. Samoa was probably colonized in 800 BC. http://pvs.kcc.hawaii.edu/ike/moolelo/discovery_and_settlement.html

The absence of local hidden variables means there is nothing physical relating the entangled particles. Then those are separate particles. If entanglement holds DNA together then there must be some force between entangled particles, which is only possible with local hidden variables. Our knowledge and technology imo shoots way to short to explain the nature of the universe. It's like something Bohr said: "It is wrong to think that the task of physics is to find out how Nature is. Physics concerns what we say about Nature. " Those hidden variables are not there because people say they are not there. It's impossible to know if our science is sufficient to explain quantum effects. Evolution is the evidence. In some way evolution is driven by quantum effects. If an even is not caused by anything then it's not adapted to the properties of its environment, which means for example that the spin of a particle is not caused by the properties of the particle. Then we shouldn't be able to define particles, based on their spin. There is also no empirical proof for the absence of such a cause. I don't understand why 'absence of evidence is not evidence for absence' does not count when you study the nature of the universe. If the problem is that our science shoots short to explain hidden variables then no amount of experiments and calculations proof anything. If nothing causes quantum effects then there shouldn't be order in the universe. Order demands that every action is a reaction to something else. Order demands determinism. Ok, but gravity is there because of evidence. Local hidden variables are supposedly not there because the absence of evidence. You can't prove a negative. It seems that entanglement keeps DNA together. https://arxiv.org/abs/1006.4053 https://www.technologyreview.com/s/419590/quantum-entanglement-holds-dna-together-say-physicists/ https://arxiv.org/abs/1403.5342 Quantum teleportation needs a quantum channel and classical channel. If there are no local hidden variables then there is no quantum channel between the particles. A channel demands something physical.

I mean all religions...also the 'good ones'. I rather mean, "What if...". I also mean state religions. That's true, but without religion there would be a lot less strife in the world. Religion is most of the times not the direct cause for bad things but it's a breeding ground.(islam-terrorism) People who do wonderful things, is that because of religion or in spite of religion? Taking a holy book as morel guidance slows down moral evolution.

It seems that the people who colonized America were first stuck on the Bering land bridge for about 10.000 years, during the last glacial maximum. Genetic data shows that founding populations of Native Americans diverged from their Asian ancestors more than 25,000 years ago. This means that Native Americans diverged from their Asian ancestors long before they started to colonize America...some 15.000 years ago. http://www.livescience.com/43726-bering-strait-populations-lived.html What do you think of this hypothesis?

Would the world be a better place without religion? I think it would. Religion creates groups, it forms boundaries between people...that causes many problems.

I am atheist and not spiritual. Where I live (Belgium), atheism is often the norm. I know that many atheists are spiritual. I can imagine that in countries where religion is more important, atheists are generally not spiritual.

I think there is a lot that influences particle decay which gives an indeterministic look. "As an example, a neutron is slightly heavier than a proton, so it has slightly more energy than the latter. It turns out that left alone, a free neutron (one that isn't bound in a nucleus) will spontaneously decay into a proton, and electron and a neutrino (this is called "beta decay"). The characteristic time for the decay to occur is about 15 minutes." Ok, but it was a reaction on somethings Strange said. I just don't think there is indeterminism. It's like with the particle decay, many causes or a single unknown cause can give an indeterministic look to something. Still, if the measurements are not precise enough...we can't know. I agree with Bell's theorem which states that no local variable theory can reproduce the predictions of QM. But I don't agree with the absence of local hidden variables. Can you give an example of such an experiment? I think non-local variables and local hidden variable form one variable.

Hidden variables can be non-local. Particle decay has a pretty logic explanation I think. Particles are open systems and lose energy to its environment. Particles want to be in the lowest possible energy state they can reach. This is evolution on a quantum level. If an effect or event is not caused by anything then it's not adjusted/adapted to the properties of its environment. How is that possible? If experiments show there are no local hidden variables that doesn't prove in any way that there are no local hidden variables. If our knowledge/technology shoots short then every experiment will show there are no hidden variables...even when there are local hidden variables. Our knowledge/technology looks very evolved but that does not prove we can explain quantum effects. If there are no local hidden variables then something like quantum teleportation should not be possible...when you add a classical channel. It seems that entanglement holds DNA together. This is not possible without local hidden variables.

Thanks for the explanation. The theorem states quantum effects can't be explained by local hidden variable theories. If evidence of experiments is in line with the theorem, doesn't that show that our knowledge/technology did not evolve enough to explain hidden variables on a quantum level? I'm talking about the theorem, not the inequalities. A hidden variable is any factor which is unmeasurable/unobservable and influences your measurement. How can anything else then hidden variables cause correlation? That's impossible, it's very well known that correlation does not imply causation. The transmission of information is a property of quantum teleportation. Which means our knowledge/technology shoots short. There is no explanation, that's what the theorem states. Can you give an example of things which don't have a cause? Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Done:)