If there is a God...

[ding]

Logic dictates that if space and time were created for a reason then that reason could be found in what the universe ultimately produced. The ultimate creation of the universe is intelligence.

I agree with your first statement. The second is entirely subjective, though.

The universe could be said to have created a whole lot of things, most of which we probably know nothing about. Why assume intelligence is the "ultimate creation of the universe"?

Because consciousness is the pinnacle of creation. Nothing even comes close in complexity. Nothing has evolved beyond it.

That is a subjective and, frankly, pretty arrogant statement. How do you know that nothing in the universe comes close to consciousness in complexity, or that nothing has evolved beyond it?

You'd be more accurate to say that consciousness is the pinnacle of creation on Earth....and even then, that is still a subjective statement. There is no real way to know if an intelligence that created space and time would agree with that, or if consciousness was an intentional product of the universe, or if consciousness would even be considered a positive product of the universe.

Saying that consciousness is the pinnacle of creation, that intelligence is the ultimate creation of the universe, and therefore the reason the universe was created, is in effect saying that you know the mind of god.

Name something? You can't. That's how I know.

That's ridiculous.

First, there is no reason someone must agree that complexity is the definition to use for the pinnacle of creations.

Second, that you, or I, or all of humanity does not know of something more complex than consciousness, in no way means such a thing does not exist. Do you think humanity knows everything there is to know about the universe?

There are other points that could be made, but those two should be more than enough.

Don't be silly. In evolutionary terms there is nothing more advanced than beings that know and create. The phenomenon that sets them apart is consciousness and intelligence. Consciousness exists as it's own unique phenomenon and is subject to evolution.

And since you still have not named anything more advanced than consciousness, you have no evidence for your beliefs.

The requirement to know everything in the universe before you can know anything in the universe is laughable.

You have zero evidence for your beliefs. Say it with me.

 

[ding]

My evidence that intelligence does not necessarily come from intelligence is, in fact, the lack of evidence involved in how human intelligence came to be.

It's called evolution. First we had to leave the sea because ain't no one building a technological civilization under the sea. Then we had to develop locomotion because that is a requirement for intelligence to emerge. It seems that Nature has determined that is best done by quadrapeds which is why we have four limbs. Then we needed to be warm blood so that we could evolve a larger central nervous systems. BTW, did you know that the central nervous system of every single mammal species has gotten larger as it has evolved. That's just intelligence trying to get out. But the big break through was opposable thumbs as that allowed for spatial intelligence to develop. That was when our central nervous system exploded and intelligence emerged.

That's how it came to be. There is no lack of knowledge on this.

I was speaking more in terms of the origin of life; if an intelligence purposely created humanity to be intelligent, then our intelligence could be said to arise from that other intelligence, whether or not evolution is involved.

If you just want to speak in evolutionary terms, then I don't see how your argument that intelligence must rise from intelligence holds water. Or are you also arguing that there is evidence that evolution arose from an intelligence?

No one knows how life made the leap from inorganic matter. But however it made it, the laws of nature are such that given enough time and the right conditions beings that know and create were predestined to arise.

Why? Because it was written into the Laws of Nature. Laws which existed before space and time itself. It wasn't an accident.

You do realize that there are natural laws which govern biological life, right?

The laws of nature existed before space and time? What? The laws of nature existed before nature?

And what, specifically, are the laws of nature that make intelligence "predestined to arise"?

Yes, it is too bad you don't know anything about the origin of the universe.

But yeah, science proves that the laws of nature existed before space and time. Don't you love science?

 

[ding]

Evolution is when anything moves from a less advanced state to a more advanced state and applies to everything in the universe.

The Stages of the Evolution of Matter

1. Cosmic evolution: the formation of hydrogen and helium from sub atomic particles in the very early universe.

2. Stellar evolution: the formation of structures in the early universe from hydrogen and helium.

3. Chemical evolution: the ongoing generation of all the elements from supernovas and all subsequent chemical reactions.

4. Biological evolution: the leap to life from inorganic material and it's evolution towards beings that know and create.

5. Evolution of consciousness: the most complex thing that the universe has created. Who knows where its evolution will take us.

You certainly do have a high opinion about your knowledge of the universe.

Evolution does not "move from a less advanced state to a more advanced state," at least not biological evolution. It is not about advancement, just survival ability. If that involves simplification, that can happen, too. For example, snakes could be said to have become less advanced by losing their legs through evolution. Biological evolution is about the survival of those traits which best allow a species to survive and reproduce.

Actually biological evolution has two component; functional advantage and transfer of functional advantage and this has led to our ever increasing march to intelligence whose potential existed before space and time.

But evolution is not limited to just biological evolution. Our universe and everything in it has been evolving since the creation of space and time.

 

[Montrovant]

I agree with your first statement. The second is entirely subjective, though.

The universe could be said to have created a whole lot of things, most of which we probably know nothing about. Why assume intelligence is the "ultimate creation of the universe"?

Because consciousness is the pinnacle of creation. Nothing even comes close in complexity. Nothing has evolved beyond it.

That is a subjective and, frankly, pretty arrogant statement. How do you know that nothing in the universe comes close to consciousness in complexity, or that nothing has evolved beyond it?

You'd be more accurate to say that consciousness is the pinnacle of creation on Earth....and even then, that is still a subjective statement. There is no real way to know if an intelligence that created space and time would agree with that, or if consciousness was an intentional product of the universe, or if consciousness would even be considered a positive product of the universe.

Saying that consciousness is the pinnacle of creation, that intelligence is the ultimate creation of the universe, and therefore the reason the universe was created, is in effect saying that you know the mind of god.

Name something? You can't. That's how I know.

That's ridiculous.

First, there is no reason someone must agree that complexity is the definition to use for the pinnacle of creations.

Second, that you, or I, or all of humanity does not know of something more complex than consciousness, in no way means such a thing does not exist. Do you think humanity knows everything there is to know about the universe?

There are other points that could be made, but those two should be more than enough.

Don't be silly. In evolutionary terms there is nothing more advanced than beings that know and create. The phenomenon that sets them apart is consciousness and intelligence. Consciousness exists as it's own unique phenomenon and is subject to evolution.

And since you still have not named anything more advanced than consciousness, you have no evidence for your beliefs.

The requirement to know everything in the universe before you can know anything in the universe is laughable.

You have zero evidence for your beliefs. Say it with me.

I did not in any way require you to know everything in the universe before you know anything in the universe. Instead, you made a claim about everything in the universe; i.e. that consciousness is the pinnacle of creation and that intelligence is the ultimate creation of the universe. In order to know if something is the ultimate creation of the universe, you would need to know (or, at least, have a pretty good idea) everything that is in the universe.

Or do you actually think it makes sense to assume that because intelligence is "the ultimate creation" of the extraordinarily tiny portion of the universe you can observe (a totally subjective descriptor, but we'll ignore that for now), it must be the same for the rest of the universe that you cannot observe?

Which beliefs, specifically, do I have that I have zero evidence for? The belief that whether something is "the ultimate creation" is subjective? The belief that if you cannot observe 99.99999% of what is in the universe, you cannot be sure about what else might be in that universe? The belief that I don't have to name something "more advanced than consciousness" (which, by the way, you haven't clearly defined: what makes consciousness more advanced than other things?) to say that there could be something more advanced than consciousness somewhere in the vastness of the universe which humanity cannot observe?

 

[Montrovant]

Evolution is when anything moves from a less advanced state to a more advanced state and applies to everything in the universe.

The Stages of the Evolution of Matter

1. Cosmic evolution: the formation of hydrogen and helium from sub atomic particles in the very early universe.

2. Stellar evolution: the formation of structures in the early universe from hydrogen and helium.

3. Chemical evolution: the ongoing generation of all the elements from supernovas and all subsequent chemical reactions.

4. Biological evolution: the leap to life from inorganic material and it's evolution towards beings that know and create.

5. Evolution of consciousness: the most complex thing that the universe has created. Who knows where its evolution will take us.

You certainly do have a high opinion about your knowledge of the universe.

Evolution does not "move from a less advanced state to a more advanced state," at least not biological evolution. It is not about advancement, just survival ability. If that involves simplification, that can happen, too. For example, snakes could be said to have become less advanced by losing their legs through evolution. Biological evolution is about the survival of those traits which best allow a species to survive and reproduce.

Actually biological evolution has two component; functional advantage and transfer of functional advantage and this has led to our ever increasing march to intelligence whose potential existed before space and time.

But evolution is not limited to just biological evolution. Our universe and everything in it has been evolving since the creation of space and time.

That humanity has gained more intelligence than other species does not mean intelligence is an inevitable component of evolution, nor does it mean evolution is about moving from a less advanced to a more advanced state. One might ask why species which have been around for far longer than humanity have not evolved the same level of intelligence, if that is the case.

 

[Montrovant]

My evidence that intelligence does not necessarily come from intelligence is, in fact, the lack of evidence involved in how human intelligence came to be.

It's called evolution. First we had to leave the sea because ain't no one building a technological civilization under the sea. Then we had to develop locomotion because that is a requirement for intelligence to emerge. It seems that Nature has determined that is best done by quadrapeds which is why we have four limbs. Then we needed to be warm blood so that we could evolve a larger central nervous systems. BTW, did you know that the central nervous system of every single mammal species has gotten larger as it has evolved. That's just intelligence trying to get out. But the big break through was opposable thumbs as that allowed for spatial intelligence to develop. That was when our central nervous system exploded and intelligence emerged.

That's how it came to be. There is no lack of knowledge on this.

I was speaking more in terms of the origin of life; if an intelligence purposely created humanity to be intelligent, then our intelligence could be said to arise from that other intelligence, whether or not evolution is involved.

If you just want to speak in evolutionary terms, then I don't see how your argument that intelligence must rise from intelligence holds water. Or are you also arguing that there is evidence that evolution arose from an intelligence?

No one knows how life made the leap from inorganic matter. But however it made it, the laws of nature are such that given enough time and the right conditions beings that know and create were predestined to arise.

Why? Because it was written into the Laws of Nature. Laws which existed before space and time itself. It wasn't an accident.

You do realize that there are natural laws which govern biological life, right?

The laws of nature existed before space and time? What? The laws of nature existed before nature?

And what, specifically, are the laws of nature that make intelligence "predestined to arise"?

Yes, it is too bad you don't know anything about the origin of the universe.

But yeah, science proves that the laws of nature existed before space and time. Don't you love science?

I don't think such proof exists. I would appreciate your providing it. Defining the "laws of nature" first would probably help. Also, was there even a "before" the creation of time? Before is a temporal concept. Is it, as in the Stephen Hawking quote, like asking "What is north of the north pole?"

 

[ding]

Because consciousness is the pinnacle of creation. Nothing even comes close in complexity. Nothing has evolved beyond it.

That is a subjective and, frankly, pretty arrogant statement. How do you know that nothing in the universe comes close to consciousness in complexity, or that nothing has evolved beyond it?

You'd be more accurate to say that consciousness is the pinnacle of creation on Earth....and even then, that is still a subjective statement. There is no real way to know if an intelligence that created space and time would agree with that, or if consciousness was an intentional product of the universe, or if consciousness would even be considered a positive product of the universe.

Saying that consciousness is the pinnacle of creation, that intelligence is the ultimate creation of the universe, and therefore the reason the universe was created, is in effect saying that you know the mind of god.

Name something? You can't. That's how I know.

That's ridiculous.

First, there is no reason someone must agree that complexity is the definition to use for the pinnacle of creations.

Second, that you, or I, or all of humanity does not know of something more complex than consciousness, in no way means such a thing does not exist. Do you think humanity knows everything there is to know about the universe?

There are other points that could be made, but those two should be more than enough.

Don't be silly. In evolutionary terms there is nothing more advanced than beings that know and create. The phenomenon that sets them apart is consciousness and intelligence. Consciousness exists as it's own unique phenomenon and is subject to evolution.

And since you still have not named anything more advanced than consciousness, you have no evidence for your beliefs.

The requirement to know everything in the universe before you can know anything in the universe is laughable.

You have zero evidence for your beliefs. Say it with me.

I did not in any way require you to know everything in the universe before you know anything in the universe. Instead, you made a claim about everything in the universe; i.e. that consciousness is the pinnacle of creation and that intelligence is the ultimate creation of the universe. In order to know if something is the ultimate creation of the universe, you would need to know (or, at least, have a pretty good idea) everything that is in the universe.

Or do you actually think it makes sense to assume that because intelligence is "the ultimate creation" of the extraordinarily tiny portion of the universe you can observe (a totally subjective descriptor, but we'll ignore that for now), it must be the same for the rest of the universe that you cannot observe?

Which beliefs, specifically, do I have that I have zero evidence for? The belief that whether something is "the ultimate creation" is subjective? The belief that if you cannot observe 99.99999% of what is in the universe, you cannot be sure about what else might be in that universe? The belief that I don't have to name something "more advanced than consciousness" (which, by the way, you haven't clearly defined: what makes consciousness more advanced than other things?) to say that there could be something more advanced than consciousness somewhere in the vastness of the universe which humanity cannot observe?

Have you named anything more evolutionary advanced than consciousness? No.

Can you name anything more evolutionary advanced than consciousness? No.

 

[ding]

Evolution is when anything moves from a less advanced state to a more advanced state and applies to everything in the universe.

The Stages of the Evolution of Matter

1. Cosmic evolution: the formation of hydrogen and helium from sub atomic particles in the very early universe.

2. Stellar evolution: the formation of structures in the early universe from hydrogen and helium.

3. Chemical evolution: the ongoing generation of all the elements from supernovas and all subsequent chemical reactions.

4. Biological evolution: the leap to life from inorganic material and it's evolution towards beings that know and create.

5. Evolution of consciousness: the most complex thing that the universe has created. Who knows where its evolution will take us.

You certainly do have a high opinion about your knowledge of the universe.

Evolution does not "move from a less advanced state to a more advanced state," at least not biological evolution. It is not about advancement, just survival ability. If that involves simplification, that can happen, too. For example, snakes could be said to have become less advanced by losing their legs through evolution. Biological evolution is about the survival of those traits which best allow a species to survive and reproduce.

Actually biological evolution has two component; functional advantage and transfer of functional advantage and this has led to our ever increasing march to intelligence whose potential existed before space and time.

But evolution is not limited to just biological evolution. Our universe and everything in it has been evolving since the creation of space and time.

That humanity has gained more intelligence than other species does not mean intelligence is an inevitable component of evolution, nor does it mean evolution is about moving from a less advanced to a more advanced state. One might ask why species which have been around for far longer than humanity have not evolved the same level of intelligence, if that is the case.

I already explained that to you.

 

[ding]

It's called evolution. First we had to leave the sea because ain't no one building a technological civilization under the sea. Then we had to develop locomotion because that is a requirement for intelligence to emerge. It seems that Nature has determined that is best done by quadrapeds which is why we have four limbs. Then we needed to be warm blood so that we could evolve a larger central nervous systems. BTW, did you know that the central nervous system of every single mammal species has gotten larger as it has evolved. That's just intelligence trying to get out. But the big break through was opposable thumbs as that allowed for spatial intelligence to develop. That was when our central nervous system exploded and intelligence emerged.

That's how it came to be. There is no lack of knowledge on this.

I was speaking more in terms of the origin of life; if an intelligence purposely created humanity to be intelligent, then our intelligence could be said to arise from that other intelligence, whether or not evolution is involved.

If you just want to speak in evolutionary terms, then I don't see how your argument that intelligence must rise from intelligence holds water. Or are you also arguing that there is evidence that evolution arose from an intelligence?

No one knows how life made the leap from inorganic matter. But however it made it, the laws of nature are such that given enough time and the right conditions beings that know and create were predestined to arise.

Why? Because it was written into the Laws of Nature. Laws which existed before space and time itself. It wasn't an accident.

You do realize that there are natural laws which govern biological life, right?

The laws of nature existed before space and time? What? The laws of nature existed before nature?

And what, specifically, are the laws of nature that make intelligence "predestined to arise"?

Yes, it is too bad you don't know anything about the origin of the universe.

But yeah, science proves that the laws of nature existed before space and time. Don't you love science?

I don't think such proof exists. I would appreciate your providing it. Defining the "laws of nature" first would probably help. Also, was there even a "before" the creation of time? Before is a temporal concept. Is it, as in the Stephen Hawking quote, like asking "What is north of the north pole?"

Space and time were created through a cosmic tunneling event that followed the laws of quantum mechanics and the conservation of energy. Therefore, natural laws were in place before space and time itself because the creation of space and time followed the laws of nature.

 

[Taz]

And you agreed with him,

Yes, I agreed with him/her that he/she did not have enough knowledge to discuss the origin of space and time.

Of course, that's not actually what I said. What I said was that I don't know enough about the possible origin of space and time to make a determination about it; in other words, I have no firm opinion on how space and time came about. That in no way means I cannot discuss it.

You just can't discuss it intelligently. No shame in that.

I can. I've studied it.

“You just can't discuss it intelligently”
You’re the dumbest guy here, a complete clown. You’re the Babe Ruth of stupidity and can hit a stupid homer at will. It’s really the only thing you’ve ever proven here.

Do you feel better?

Are you doing God's work, Taz?

God can do his own work, he doesn't need me. Fool.

 

[ding]

Yes, I agreed with him/her that he/she did not have enough knowledge to discuss the origin of space and time.

Of course, that's not actually what I said. What I said was that I don't know enough about the possible origin of space and time to make a determination about it; in other words, I have no firm opinion on how space and time came about. That in no way means I cannot discuss it.

You just can't discuss it intelligently. No shame in that.

I can. I've studied it.

“You just can't discuss it intelligently”
You’re the dumbest guy here, a complete clown. You’re the Babe Ruth of stupidity and can hit a stupid homer at will. It’s really the only thing you’ve ever proven here.

Do you feel better?

Are you doing God's work, Taz?

God can do his own work, he doesn't need me. Fool.

Oh, but you are doing God's work, Taz. You believe that there is a universal code of common decency that everyone knows and it pisses you off when people don't follow it. You are a fine Christian soldier, Taz.

 

[Taz]

Of course, that's not actually what I said. What I said was that I don't know enough about the possible origin of space and time to make a determination about it; in other words, I have no firm opinion on how space and time came about. That in no way means I cannot discuss it.

You just can't discuss it intelligently. No shame in that.

I can. I've studied it.

“You just can't discuss it intelligently”
You’re the dumbest guy here, a complete clown. You’re the Babe Ruth of stupidity and can hit a stupid homer at will. It’s really the only thing you’ve ever proven here.

Do you feel better?

Are you doing God's work, Taz?

God can do his own work, he doesn't need me. Fool.

Oh, but you are doing God's work, Taz. You believe that there is a universal code of common decency that everyone knows and it pisses you off when people don't follow it. You are a fine Christian soldier, Taz.

Where did I ever say anything like that?

I've reduced you to having to make shit up because you have so nothing to comeback with. I think my job is done here.

 

[Meriweather]

God can do his own work, he doesn't need me. Fool.

That's like saying a hammer can build its own house, it doesn't need a builder. God knows people are in need, but they need people to help meet their physical needs. God has surrounded you with people. Are you claiming there is nothing you can do for any of them?

 

[Taz]

God can do his own work, he doesn't need me. Fool.

That's like saying a hammer can build its own house, it doesn't need a builder. God knows people are in need, but they need people to help meet their physical needs. God has surrounded you with people. Are you claiming there is nothing you can do for any of them?

So god is like a hammer that I can pick up and whack things with? Or do you mean that god is as dumb as the proverbial bag of hammers? Of which he is one?

Imagine this, I've helped people, and I don't see any god. WOW! How can that be?

 

[Mindful]

Maybe it's like this:

Are We Living in a Computer Simulation?

 

[Montrovant]

That is a subjective and, frankly, pretty arrogant statement. How do you know that nothing in the universe comes close to consciousness in complexity, or that nothing has evolved beyond it?

You'd be more accurate to say that consciousness is the pinnacle of creation on Earth....and even then, that is still a subjective statement. There is no real way to know if an intelligence that created space and time would agree with that, or if consciousness was an intentional product of the universe, or if consciousness would even be considered a positive product of the universe.

Saying that consciousness is the pinnacle of creation, that intelligence is the ultimate creation of the universe, and therefore the reason the universe was created, is in effect saying that you know the mind of god.

Name something? You can't. That's how I know.

That's ridiculous.

First, there is no reason someone must agree that complexity is the definition to use for the pinnacle of creations.

Second, that you, or I, or all of humanity does not know of something more complex than consciousness, in no way means such a thing does not exist. Do you think humanity knows everything there is to know about the universe?

There are other points that could be made, but those two should be more than enough.

Don't be silly. In evolutionary terms there is nothing more advanced than beings that know and create. The phenomenon that sets them apart is consciousness and intelligence. Consciousness exists as it's own unique phenomenon and is subject to evolution.

And since you still have not named anything more advanced than consciousness, you have no evidence for your beliefs.

The requirement to know everything in the universe before you can know anything in the universe is laughable.

You have zero evidence for your beliefs. Say it with me.

I did not in any way require you to know everything in the universe before you know anything in the universe. Instead, you made a claim about everything in the universe; i.e. that consciousness is the pinnacle of creation and that intelligence is the ultimate creation of the universe. In order to know if something is the ultimate creation of the universe, you would need to know (or, at least, have a pretty good idea) everything that is in the universe.

Or do you actually think it makes sense to assume that because intelligence is "the ultimate creation" of the extraordinarily tiny portion of the universe you can observe (a totally subjective descriptor, but we'll ignore that for now), it must be the same for the rest of the universe that you cannot observe?

Which beliefs, specifically, do I have that I have zero evidence for? The belief that whether something is "the ultimate creation" is subjective? The belief that if you cannot observe 99.99999% of what is in the universe, you cannot be sure about what else might be in that universe? The belief that I don't have to name something "more advanced than consciousness" (which, by the way, you haven't clearly defined: what makes consciousness more advanced than other things?) to say that there could be something more advanced than consciousness somewhere in the vastness of the universe which humanity cannot observe?

Have you named anything more evolutionary advanced than consciousness? No.

Can you name anything more evolutionary advanced than consciousness? No.

I'm sorry, but I reject your portrayal of evolution and advancement, at least insofar as biological evolution is concerned.

And, as I have explained, whether or not I can name anything more "evolutionary advanced" than consciousness does not prove anything about the entirety of the universe.

 

[Montrovant]

I was speaking more in terms of the origin of life; if an intelligence purposely created humanity to be intelligent, then our intelligence could be said to arise from that other intelligence, whether or not evolution is involved.

If you just want to speak in evolutionary terms, then I don't see how your argument that intelligence must rise from intelligence holds water. Or are you also arguing that there is evidence that evolution arose from an intelligence?

No one knows how life made the leap from inorganic matter. But however it made it, the laws of nature are such that given enough time and the right conditions beings that know and create were predestined to arise.

Why? Because it was written into the Laws of Nature. Laws which existed before space and time itself. It wasn't an accident.

You do realize that there are natural laws which govern biological life, right?

The laws of nature existed before space and time? What? The laws of nature existed before nature?

And what, specifically, are the laws of nature that make intelligence "predestined to arise"?

Yes, it is too bad you don't know anything about the origin of the universe.

But yeah, science proves that the laws of nature existed before space and time. Don't you love science?

I don't think such proof exists. I would appreciate your providing it. Defining the "laws of nature" first would probably help. Also, was there even a "before" the creation of time? Before is a temporal concept. Is it, as in the Stephen Hawking quote, like asking "What is north of the north pole?"

Space and time were created through a cosmic tunneling event that followed the laws of quantum mechanics and the conservation of energy. Therefore, natural laws were in place before space and time itself because the creation of space and time followed the laws of nature.

You seem pretty certain about how space and time were created. Actually, you seem pretty certain that your views of a universe of which you can observe only a very small part are correct in general.

 

[Montrovant]

Evolution is when anything moves from a less advanced state to a more advanced state and applies to everything in the universe.

The Stages of the Evolution of Matter

1. Cosmic evolution: the formation of hydrogen and helium from sub atomic particles in the very early universe.

2. Stellar evolution: the formation of structures in the early universe from hydrogen and helium.

3. Chemical evolution: the ongoing generation of all the elements from supernovas and all subsequent chemical reactions.

4. Biological evolution: the leap to life from inorganic material and it's evolution towards beings that know and create.

5. Evolution of consciousness: the most complex thing that the universe has created. Who knows where its evolution will take us.

You certainly do have a high opinion about your knowledge of the universe.

Evolution does not "move from a less advanced state to a more advanced state," at least not biological evolution. It is not about advancement, just survival ability. If that involves simplification, that can happen, too. For example, snakes could be said to have become less advanced by losing their legs through evolution. Biological evolution is about the survival of those traits which best allow a species to survive and reproduce.

Actually biological evolution has two component; functional advantage and transfer of functional advantage and this has led to our ever increasing march to intelligence whose potential existed before space and time.

But evolution is not limited to just biological evolution. Our universe and everything in it has been evolving since the creation of space and time.

That humanity has gained more intelligence than other species does not mean intelligence is an inevitable component of evolution, nor does it mean evolution is about moving from a less advanced to a more advanced state. One might ask why species which have been around for far longer than humanity have not evolved the same level of intelligence, if that is the case.

I already explained that to you.

I do not see an explanation for why a species would evolve to a 'less advanced' state if evolution is moving "from a less advanced state to a more advanced state." Perhaps I missed it.

 

[Mindful]

I can't see how our puny little brains can grasp anything.

 

[RWNJ]

Maybe it's like this:

Are We Living in a Computer Simulation?

Only if you're living in a fantasy world.