Ever bother about the end of the world?
March 28, 2008 11:01pm CST
As far as Science is concerned, the world is gonna end, one way or another. There is a host of alternatives - it could be a comet slamming our planet, or when the inner magma of our earth dries up, or when our sun reaches its supernova. Surely, the end of the world is not just a speculation one may or may not opt to believe. It is instead a scientifically established fact, just as it is only matter of time. As a matter for religion however, the end of the world is just as factual. Many world religions accede to a belief that there is at one point an end to human historicity. Christians for instance take reference to the Book of Revelation and the writings of St. Paul, as indeed the words of Christ himself, as telling references that tell of a day called apocalypse - when the end of times would come and the whole human race is ushered into a new existence. Both Science and Religion claims that the end of the world as something that we should expect. Ever bother to think about the end of the world yourself? And, how do you think would it be like?
2 people like this
29 Mar 08
Hi kulaskulasito, If one had to choose, I'd be placing my bets with the religious freaks rather than with anything a bunch of "scientists" dream up. At least the mystics and others like them make reference to someone that should be in a position to know what He or She is talking about - especially if He or She created it all in the first place. Or otherwise they're talking from an eye-witness perspective, ie, just passing on what they've seen when looking into the future, so to speak (and we all have that particular faculty to a certain extent). BUT when it comes to "science", I'm personally very skeptical. These clowns know very little about anything, yet persist in making up whatever fairy story suits them and then teach it as fact! The truth is, we really have no clue what's inside the Earth, or why it's there or how it works. All we have is fanciful stories that are taught to us as though they are "facts", when in reality they're not. Same with the stars, including the Sun - we actually have little to no idea what the Sun and stars actually are, or how they do what they do, or why. Don't let all the haughty confidence of the university lecturers and astronomers fool you - they just make it up as they go along, and (yes, you guessed it) teach us their fairy stories as though they're fact! Strange as it may seem, the "scientists" are actually embroiled in their own religious experience - a religion of ego, you might say. If you challenge any of the nonsense that they teach, then they'll try to burn you at the stake! The best example of this is that great ongoing battle between he two opposing religions, Creationism and Evolutionism - neither side has any more substantive evidence than the other, yet if you choose not to accept either theology, you will be accused of the heresy of aligning yourself with the opposing camp. Many other dogmas of "science" fall into what I'd consider to be a religious conviction unsupported by the available evidence. In fact, the "scientists" continue to teach their beliefs as fact even when they've been demonstrated to be wrong - which goes to show how the judgment of the scientific community is biased by the collective egoes and vested interest of the status quo. I have no desire to get dragged into a bottomless debate with proponents of popular scientific theories, but note that no-one actually has any evidence or track record relating to the life history of stars or planets, how they are created and what their ultimate fate may be. All we have is conjecture which is treated as though it's fact - which it's not. As I suggested earlier, I'd be much more inclined to take the word of someone who was there at the time.
• United States
29 Mar 08
Insightful. Really. This is by far the first time I have encountered a strain of argument such as yours. Chances are, we are often trying to test the verifiability of our religious belief with the standards and measures of science. That is the natural process to follow. Science is objective; it is evidenced, in asmuchas it is provable. But the way you tread your line of thought, it kind of reverses the process. This is unsual, but very plausible. And I admire the fact that you are able to draw the attitude that science seems to take from the religious convictions we have. Did you study philosophy? Coz I had come across this kind of 'reversing' tendencies just once in my course called 'philosophy of science.;?
31 Mar 08
Hi kulaskulasito, Thanks for your kind words - no, I'm not a philosopher, at least not in any formal sense. It seems to me that if we take enough steps backward in order to see the larger picture, eventually the objective material view has to acknowledge encapsulation by a larger "unknown", so that synthesis of a world view based entirely on material observations is doomed to come up short. There IS a larger reality, and for most people, a structured set of religious beliefs helps to resolve their understanding of just what that larger reality might be. In a general sense, everyone has a religion, even atheists - it's whatever their view of reality happens to be, irrespective of any formal allegiances that a person might profess. As to the fate of the world and the Universe, etc, I'm quite firmly convinced that the many mystical sources of knowledge available to us do a far better job of coherently resolving where we've come from, where we are now and where we're going, than the "extrapolation from a single point" approach that seems to be favored by the scientific community. If there does happen to be a co-ordinating intelligence superior to and outside the tapestry of experience that we perceive as our material reality, it would seem sensible to me to listen to what that intellect might have to say about the world, than to try to work it all out from within the confines of our goldfish bowl. We simply cannot determine the basis of our material reality by internally referencing that same material reality - we NEED outside help for that. And as for just what our planet has been doing in the time that we've occupied it, it seems sensible to me to listen to people who have the gift of being able to see further than most of us into the future and past. It's hard to do better than an eye-witness account. Even the traditions passed down from generation to generation in each culture around the world often originated from eye-witness accounts of historical events, and have commensurate value - especially when such tradition correlates across geographically and culturally diverse sources. Out of curiosity, unrelated to this subject, can you tell me if your name "kulaskulasito" has particular meaning?
29 Mar 08
People are here for many many years to come, but, i think there will be a point when someone will do a mistake and pull a nuclear bomb that will drown us all men kind, or, our earth will staumble with other objects from space. I think some animal will stay here after us, the bridges and ston buildings will fall only after 500 years after us (I sow it on TY program). This world is part of something big, we are not alon. Did you look up to the sky and ask yourself where dose it ends? we are too small for the rest of the Galaxy, from my point of view there is a big thing out ther we dont know. I know scientist are researching all the time for answers, that may be we will know in our time, or not. Take car.
29 Mar 08
It's something I don't really give a lot of thought to I must admit. I suppose because there's nothing we can really do about it anyway, well unless it's a man-made end of course! Personally I think it will most likely end in billions of years time when the sun burns itself out, but of course there will be thousands of major events before that happens, some of which could have devastating effects such as comets, etc.
• Murfreesboro, Tennessee
29 Mar 08
It doesn't bother me, really. On the scientific side, sure, the planet is going to eventually be either destroyed or uninhabitable or whatever. However, the theories on when this will happen all vary based on how it will happen, and a lot of them are millions of years out. I don't even like to worry about what will happen a couple of years from now, so why would I think millions of years out? The religious idea of the end of the world offers some more exact dates, some of which are coming up pretty soon. However, there have always been people who believed the world was going to end "any day now" so these are really just as unpredictable. There's no way to know if the Mayans were right or any random doomsday cult is right, or if my neighbor down the street who has visions is right. *shrugs* My religion has a huge focus on cycles, so I'm more used to thinking of this world as part of a continuing cycle. There isn't really any idea of "the end of the world" but if the world were to end in some way, we'd all be in the spirit world. And the Celtic cosmology is one spirit world layered on top of another, some of which are quite a bit like our world, so likely the world could end and I'd wind up living in a world very like it anyway. Not really something worth thinking about for me.
29 Mar 08
I would be happy if this world ends. There is so much sin around. people have lost their morales. I want God to rebuild everything and erase the sinners. One of the days predicted is 21st dec 2012 the doomsday, according to mayan calender. Lets see what happens.