Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Misc Discussion Boards => Religious Debates & Threads => Topic started by: TrapsMcLats on March 31, 2009, 09:46:11 PM
-
Any of you religious folks have any scientific proof of god? Didn't think so.
-
Any of you religious folks have any scientific proof of god? Didn't think so.
Joe Montana.
nuff said. ;D
-
Got any proof that that there isnt? Didnt think so.
-
Decent amount, for sure.
GC/DEA_AGENT
-
Got any proof that that there isnt? Didnt think so.
I have powers like super man. do you have proof i don't? i choose not to display my powers to prove my point because I, like gawd, work in mysterious ways.
-
I have powers like super man. do you have proof i don't? i choose not to display my powers to prove my point because I, like gawd, work in mysterious ways.
You're dodging my question by going completely off topic because you just got owned.
-
You're dodging my question by going completely off topic because you just got owned.
;)
(http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z25/Todesfick/zavyfk2.gif)
-
Like what? Pictures? Mathematical equations? Satellite photos?
-
I have powers like super man. do you have proof i don't? i choose not to display my powers to prove my point because I, like gawd, work in mysterious ways.
Creation (intelligent design) itself testifies to God's powers. Not to mention the numerous accounts of miracles and the like. :)
CG/DEA_AGENT
-
I think this pretty much sums up my point. You people are all jsut brainwashed. Have fun when you die and nothing happens.
-
What point? That there is no "scientific proof" of God? Sounds like a straw man.
-
I think this pretty much sums up my point. You people are all jsut brainwashed. Have fun when you die and nothing happens.
You can debate all you want but there are no facts either way. Only books written by men.
-
LOL again with the russels teapot shit that deicide tried to pull a while ago and got dismissed... ::)
Heres your answer...NO
Do you have proof he doesnt? heres your answer NO
you have no more proof that God doesnt exist then we do he does...hope that helps
-
Ok then fine.....
Prove Crom doesn't exist!
See.....
8)
-
I think this pretty much sums up my point. You people are all jsut brainwashed. Have fun when you die and nothing happens.
What point? There is proof. YOU don't accept it. That's not our fault.
GC/DEA_AGENT
-
if you were alive a few thousand year ago, you'd be telling me zeus was throwing lightning bolts down. those people really believed in him. what is the difference? to you "holy trinity" believers, does zeus sound ridiculous? of course it does. I can't prove zeus doesn't exist either, but just because you can't prove something doesn't exist, it doesn't mean that it does.
we understand biology, we can manipulate it. we can clone things, we understand the building blocks of life, we've proven that through science we can do everything "god" can. we can destroy the world, we can create life, we can manipulate life to suit our needs (biological engineering), we can kill people, and resurrect them (like during a heart transplant). We can explain what used to be considered miracles. we have tests that prove the placebo effect, we have proven that the human body can heal itself. we can cure disease, we can create disease, we can explain disease. what can god do that the human can't? right now we're recreating the birth of our universe in a deep tunnel system in europe. humans are the answer. this is not arrogance, it is reality.
-
What point? There is proof. YOU don't accept it. That's not our fault.
GC/DEA_AGENT
what proof? seriously, what proof is there other than old texts that talk about supernatural events the same way that sailors used to speak of dragons and mermaids?
Edit: might I also add that these texts do not progress. they are forever stuck being thousands of years old. science progresses, the human race progresses, the world progresses. These old texts claiming to be the word of god do nothing but talk of supernatural nonsense.
-
what proof? seriously, what proof is there other than old texts that talk about supernatural events the same way that sailors used to speak of dragons and mermaids?
Edit: might I also add that these texts do not progress. they are forever stuck being thousands of years old. science progresses, the human race progresses, the world progresses. These old texts claiming to be the word of god do nothing but talk of supernatural nonsense.
Belief in God is based on faith, and faith does not require proof. The truth of the matter is all of us have faith (belief) in something. It sounds as though you have faith in science. Surely you will argue that science is made whole by facts. I would remind you that, as you stated, science progresses. A part of that progress in finding that what was once thought to be true is actually not true. Even those who choose to believe in nothing have faith. They have no proof that there is nothing.
I would like to ask you a question. It is sincerely not my intent to be antagonise you. Why would someone like yourself care what Christians think or believe? If you believe that our God has no power, then what harm could a Christian do? Is it that you want to prevent us from "brainwashing" others? I have asked this of others who do not believe in Christ or God, but I have never received a solid answer. Just curious.
-
LOL again with the russels teapot shit that deicide tried to pull a while ago and got dismissed... ::)
Heres your answer...NO
Do you have proof he doesnt? heres your answer NO
you have no more proof that God doesnt exist then we do he does...hope that helps
You never properly addressed Russell's Teapot; you are correct in that you dismissed it without actually dealing with its contents.
-
You never properly addressed Russell's Teapot; you are correct in that you dismissed it without actually dealing with its contents.
either have you brainchild you say you dont assert anything ::) LOL please, you assert that God doesnt exist so please prove that, fact is neither one of us can prove our point isnt it?
-
either have you brainchild you say you dont assert anything ::) LOL please, you assert that God doesnt exist so please prove that, fact is neither one of us can prove our point isnt it?
I have never asserted that; I have said it is extremely unlikely, as about as unlikely as Poseidon existing.
Which god do you mean anyway?
-
Belief in God is based on faith, and faith does not require proof. The truth of the matter is all of us have faith (belief) in something. It sounds as though you have faith in science. Surely you will argue that science is made whole by facts. I would remind you that, as you stated, science progresses. A part of that progress in finding that what was once thought to be true is actually not true. Even those who choose to believe in nothing have faith. They have no proof that there is nothing.
I would like to ask you a question. It is sincerely not my intent to be antagonise you. Why would someone like yourself care what Christians think or believe? If you believe that our God has no power, then what harm could a Christian do? Is it that you want to prevent us from "brainwashing" others? I have asked this of others who do not believe in Christ or God, but I have never received a solid answer. Just curious.
exactly, faith equates belief without reason= irrational by nature. I don't mind that science is wrong, because science only seeks better and more accurate answer. I have a problem with religious people (not so much religion itself) who think their beliefs dictate how the rest of the world should be run. like stem cell, abortion, gay marriage, etc... the list goes on for quite a while. I don't go around telling christians that my beliefs should limit their lives or restrict their lives, i believe in religious freedom. religious people want everyone to do as they see, or as the bible sees, fit.
-
I have powers like super man. do you have proof i don't? i choose not to display my powers to prove my point because I, like gawd, work in mysterious ways.
you dont have to try and prove your powers....i can do it by merrily aiming a bazooka at ya and hitting the trigger! ;D
there is more proof of UFOs than proof of God.....i wonder what the 12 yr old little girl that gets taken off the street ..blinded and then used for prostitution thinks of god.....
its like them pro life cunnys that abhor abortion till their daughter gets raped and prego! :)
remember ...the burden of providing proof exists on someone claiming something extraordinary(existence of god)...NOT the other way around...
cheers!
-
exactly, faith equates belief without reason= irrational by nature. I don't mind that science is wrong, because science only seeks better and more accurate answer. I have a problem with religious people (not so much religion itself) who think their beliefs dictate how the rest of the world should be run. like stem cell, abortion, gay marriage, etc... the list goes on for quite a while. I don't go around telling christians that my beliefs should limit their lives or restrict their lives, i believe in religious freedom. religious people want everyone to do as they see, or as the bible sees, fit.
I actually understand your frustration with many of my Christian brothers and sisters. Often they are a bit over zealous in their approach. We are obligated to share the Gospel, but it is never supposed to be pushed on anyone. We are to be bold in our love and declaration for Christ, but many Christians misunderstand what that truly means. It does not mean we are to try and hammer the Word of God into others. A good example of that is some of my recent posting here. I have been going back and forth with some who clearly have no interest in God. I will leave you with this: Christians do not want others to do as them. The do base everthing they do on the Bible, but above all they want the Will of God to be done.
-
I actually understand your frustration with many of my Christian brothers and sisters. Often they are a bit over zealous in their approach. We are obligated to share the Gospel, but it is never supposed to be pushed on anyone. We are to be bold in our love and declaration for Christ, but many Christians misunderstand what that truly means. It does not mean we are to try and hammer the Word of God into others. A good example of that is some of my recent posting here. I have been going back and forth with some who clearly have no interest in God. I will leave you with this: Christians do not want others to do as them. The do base everthing they do on the Bible, but above all they want the Will of God to be done.
I preach the will of Odin the One Eyed God!
(http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z25/Todesfick/oneyedgod.jpg)
-
I actually understand your frustration with many of my Christian brothers and sisters. Often they are a bit over zealous in their approach. We are obligated to share the Gospel, but it is never supposed to be pushed on anyone. We are to be bold in our love and declaration for Christ, but many Christians misunderstand what that truly means. It does not mean we are to try and hammer the Word of God into others. A good example of that is some of my recent posting here. I have been going back and forth with some who clearly have no interest in God. I will leave you with this: Christians do not want others to do as them. The do base everthing they do on the Bible, but above all they want the Will of God to be done.
but don't you see how inherently dangerous that is? I mean, people act out the will of god by running plains into buildings, blowing up themselves in crowded marketplaces, bombing abortion clinics, murdering innocent people on a daily basis since the beginning of time?
Aslo, here's a better question. If there was scientific proof that god did not exist, would you still believe in god anyway? i think most people would and would cite some BS answer like "well, god created everything, of course he can keep himself in the dark, able to hide from science." The point is that christians are not thinking criticaly, they are thinking in ideals, but as we all know, ideal is NOT reality.
All I want is some sustainable proof that can be tested that gives ANY iota of evidence to the reality of god, but there is ZERO. Saying that we can't prove god doesn't exist is not a viable answer/retort. That is simply illogical thinking. I can't prove that my dog doesn't understand Camus, that doesn't mean he does.
-
but don't you see how inherently dangerous that is? I mean, people act out the will of god by running plains into buildings, blowing up themselves in crowded marketplaces, bombing abortion clinics, murdering innocent people on a daily basis since the beginning of time?
Aslo, here's a better question. If there was scientific proof that god did not exist, would you still believe in god anyway? i think most people would and would cite some BS answer like "well, god created everything, of course he can keep himself in the dark, able to hide from science." The point is that christians are not thinking criticaly, they are thinking in ideals, but as we all know, ideal is reality.
All I want is some sustainable proof that can be tested that gives ANY iota of evidence to the reality of god, but there is ZERO. Saying that we can't prove god doesn't exist is not a viable answer/retort. That is simply illogical thinking. I can't prove that my dog doesn't understand Camus, that doesn't mean he does.
What kind of dog do you have?
-
What kind of dog do you have?
one that doesn't understand camus... but maybe shit like dan brown.
-
Creation (intelligent design) itself testifies to God's powers. Not to mention the numerous accounts of miracles and the like. :)
CG/DEA_AGENT
miracles make no sense if there is a god. Also,intelligent design has been dragged through the mud and shitted on so many times i have lost count.
-
Evolution depends on BENEFITIAL MUTATIONS that occur by CHANCE.
So maybe intelligent design is more fesable than saying we came to be by chance.
Evolution and creation are just theories, no absolute concrete proof either way.
-
but don't you see how inherently dangerous that is? I mean, people act out the will of god by running plains into buildings, blowing up themselves in crowded marketplaces, bombing abortion clinics, murdering innocent people on a daily basis since the beginning of time?
Aslo, here's a better question. If there was scientific proof that god did not exist, would you still believe in god anyway? i think most people would and would cite some BS answer like "well, god created everything, of course he can keep himself in the dark, able to hide from science." The point is that christians are not thinking criticaly, they are thinking in ideals, but as we all know, ideal is NOT reality.
All I want is some sustainable proof that can be tested that gives ANY iota of evidence to the reality of god, but there is ZERO. Saying that we can't prove god doesn't exist is not a viable answer/retort. That is simply illogical thinking. I can't prove that my dog doesn't understand Camus, that doesn't mean he does.
There are many things that are said to be done as the Will of God, but have nothing to do with God's Will. There was a time in America when the Klan (maybe it still happens) would tell you that they were doing God's Will. It could also be that these people's god is telling them to do these things. Not every believe in, or influenced by the God of Abraham. There are times when even Christians are deceived by spirits. That is why God told us that we are to challenged them (1 John: 4). Christians often underestimate the trickery of satan. We forget how quickly he can enter into a person; even sometimes a devout Christian. An example of this is when Jesus was explaining that He would be captured, tortured and killed. Peter rebuked Christ for saying these things, and Christ said to him, "Get behind me, Satan! You do not have in mind the things of God, but the things of men (Mark 8:31-33)."
I do believe that someday there will be "scientific evidence" that God does not exist. If that day should come, it will only be more tricks of satan. There will never be any true scientific evidence that God does not exist. The day is coming when God's existence will be known by all. You say that Christians do not think critically and logically. I am a Christian and I work in the Information Technology field. I understand and utilize logically thinking daily. I do this because I am in this world and that is how I support my family. As a Christian, I think spiritually because I am not of this world. This is how I feed my spirit. Christ has told us that though we are in this world, but we are not of this world (John 15:9, John 18:36).
If you are going to need proof that God exists, then you will never please God. But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him (Hebrews 11:6).
-
I am not of this world.
Have you met Johnny Falcon?
You and him would get along like peas and carrots.
-
Have you met Johnny Falcon?
You and him would get along like peas and carrots.
I am assuming this is meant as humor. That is cool, but it does kind of show how Scripture is sometimes taken out of context. Just reading that one line from my post, one could get the totally wrong impression.
By the way, who is Johnny Falcon?
-
By the way, who is Johnny Falcon?
Have no fear fitt, you are not the only E.T on GB.
-
We have plenty evidence of intelligent design, seen and unseen. For instance, a house was designed and then built by an intelligent designer. I guess, that point can't be argued, but ya never know. Anyway, how can anyone dispute that the human body was not brought about by chance, it had to be designed and built. It has so many complex systems within systems which, when compared to a house design, literally breaks the scale of complexity. Who takes credit for that? The human body, that is.
In the Hebrew and Aramaic Scriptures, the scientific evidence of there being another source of it's authorship, besides man, is there. It has already been pointed out, yet people still come up with excuses to the contrary. It's like some cigarette smokers, they will say, and I paraphrase of course, " Ha, my great granddaddy smoked until he was 101 years old, never got cancer". Or maybe " people get lung cancer all the time without smoking". So then, some will always find away to refute sound evidence with anything that they are hooked on.
There are just as many top minds in this world that accept this evidence as oppose it. I just hope that whatever ones choice is, that they are completely happy with the end result. Peace!
GC/DEA_AGENT
-
There are many things that are said to be done as the Will of God, but have nothing to do with God's Will. There was a time in America when the Klan (maybe it still happens) would tell you that they were doing God's Will. It could also be that these people's god is telling them to do these things. Not every believe in, or influenced by the God of Abraham. There are times when even Christians are deceived by spirits. That is why God told us that we are to challenged them (1 John: 4). Christians often underestimate the trickery of satan. We forget how quickly he can enter into a person; even sometimes a devout Christian. An example of this is when Jesus was explaining that He would be captured, tortured and killed. Peter rebuked Christ for saying these things, and Christ said to him, "Get behind me, Satan! You do not have in mind the things of God, but the things of men (Mark 8:31-33)."
I do believe that someday there will be "scientific evidence" that God does not exist. If that day should come, it will only be more tricks of satan. There will never be any true scientific evidence that God does not exist. The day is coming when God's existence will be known by all. You say that Christians do not think critically and logically. I am a Christian and I work in the Information Technology field. I understand and utilize logically thinking daily. I do this because I am in this world and that is how I support my family. As a Christian, I think spiritually because I am not of this world. This is how I feed my spirit. Christ has told us that though we are in this world, but we are not of this world (John 15:9, John 18:36).
If you are going to need proof that God exists, then you will never please God. But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him (Hebrews 11:6).
Good post!
GC/DEA_AGENT
-
miracles make no sense if there is a god.
A miracle, amazing to the eye of the beholder, is something beyond his ability to perform or even to understand fully. It is also a powerful work, requiring greater power or knowledge than he has. But from the viewpoint of the one who is the source of such power, it is not a miracle. He understands it and has the ability to do it. Thus, many acts that God performs are amazing to humans beholding them but are merely the exercise of his power. If a person believes in a deity, particularly in the God of creation, he cannot consistently deny God’s power to accomplish things awe-inspiring to the eyes of men. (Romans 1:20)
Also,intelligent design has been dragged through the mud
It looks like a split decision from what I can tell. ;D
CG/DEA_AGENT
-
Have no fear fitt, you are not the only E.T on GB.
I'm speechless....and that does not happen often.
-
At least I've confirmed that many of you are complete whack jobs. I just skull fucked jesus, prove I didn't.
-
At least I've confirmed that many of you are complete whack jobs. I just skull fucked jesus, prove I didn't.
Why is so hard for you to comprehend that we understand that you are going to think we are "complete whack jobs?" Do you want us to be angry with you? Do you want to argue just for the sake of arguing? Think what you will of us, but I have nothing but love for you and those like you. You keep asking for proof. As I have said many times before, we live by faith.
If you believe in your heart that Jesus and God do not exist, then so be it. If you believe we are delusional, then so be it. However, you should ask yourself why is that you spend time trying to convince Christians that they are so wrong.
-
At least I've confirmed that many of you are complete whack jobs.
Harsh words coming from a person who doesn't believe in intelligent design. When you tell your friends that the dwelling you live in "happened" by chance, what do they say? Do they really look to you as being reasonable? Just asking? :)
CG/DEA_AGENT
-
Harsh words coming from a person who doesn't believe in intelligent design. When you tell your friends that the dwelling you live in "happened" by chance, what do they say? Do they really look to you as being reasonable? Just asking? :)
CG/DEA_AGENT
There isn't much intelligence in intelligent design. I have an appendix to prove it and a big waste of space in the universe. :D
-
Faith = belief without reason. that in itself is highly delusional. There is reason behind everything scientific.
-
Faith = belief without reason. that in itself is highly delusional. There is reason behind everything scientific.
I agree. If you would study and research the Bible, you would see the evidence to back faith. Do you need a picture of the wind? Do you need a picture of gravity? Do you need a pic of the 4 forces? What's your point, my friend?
I'm glad at least you do agree that intelligent design is apparent in the world that we live in. If you believe that a house has to have a designer, how in the world can you reject the notion of the human body having one also? Does a car just happen by chance? Does a Rolex watch appear out of nowhere? Yet, these items pale miserably compared to the human body in complexity in regards to design. You guys call us, "wacky". Hey, I might need to go back to programming and check and see what all those flow charts and "stuff" was about. I think the college lied to me.
I've never ran into such illogical reasoning in my life. I hope you will reconsider you stance on design of the human body, at least.
CG/DEA_AGENT
-
I agree. If you would study and research the Bible, you would see the evidence to back faith. Do you need a picture of the wind? Do you need a picture of gravity? Do you need a pic of the 4 forces? What's your point, my friend?
I'm glad at least you do agree that intelligent design is apparent in the world that we live in. If you believe that a house has to have a designer, how in the world can you reject the notion of the human body having one also? Does a car just happen by chance? Does a Rolex watch appear out of nowhere? Yet, these items pale miserably compared to the human body in complexity in regards to design. You guys call us, "wacky". Hey, I might need to go back to programming and check and see what all those flow charts and "stuff" was about. I think the college lied to me.
I've never ran into such illogical reasoning in my life. I hope you will reconsider you stance on design of the human body, at least.
CG/DEA_AGENT
Scientific consistencies are not indicative of intelligent design. intelligent design is a newly coined term to battle evolution. there's nothing intelligent in the design of most things on this planet, but we've evolved into creatures that are better adapted to our environments. we all started out as sludge and we've been moving up ever since. That's not the prettiest picture, but it is the most accurate.
-
Harsh words coming from a person who doesn't believe in intelligent design. When you tell your friends that the dwelling you live in "happened" by chance, what do they say? Do they really look to you as being reasonable? Just asking? :)
CG/DEA_AGENT
a miracle requires a break in the natural order suggesting god had to intervene. If he knows the future and is perfect they intevening would be admitting mistake or something he never anticipated.There is no reason he couldn't have not had the event occur naturally.
Also, there is more unintelligent design then design in the world, look at birth defects, the sun eventually going to supernova killing us all,myopia in the human eye, the appendix etc etc etc....
if you beleive a perfect being made this world then you are the one who is unreasonable. Why do you assume chance is the only other option?
-
There isn't much intelligence in intelligent design. I have an appendix to prove it and a big waste of space in the universe. :D
Also, there is more unintelligent design then design in the world, look at birth defects, the sun eventually going to supernova killing us all,myopia in the human eye, the appendix etc etc etc....
Just because we don't yet know the purpose of something like the appendix, it does not follow that God doesn't exist, or that God did not design and create everything.
Even if these scientists were to be wrong about the appendix this time, it does not follow that we won't find an important purpose for the appendix in the future.
Scientists may have found appendix’s purpose
Seemingly useless organ may produce, protect good germs for your gut
MSNBC
Oct . 5, 2007
WASHINGTON - Some scientists think they have figured out the real job of the troublesome and seemingly useless appendix: It produces and protects good germs for your gut.
That’s the theory from surgeons and immunologists at Duke University Medical School, published online in a scientific journal this week.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21153898/
-
Just because we don't yet know the purpose of something like the appendix, it does not follow that God doesn't exist, or that God did not design and create everything.
Even if these scientists were to be wrong about the appendix this time, it does not follow that we won't find an important purpose for the appendix in the future.
Scientists may have found appendix’s purpose
Seemingly useless organ may produce, protect good germs for your gut
MSNBC
Oct . 5, 2007
WASHINGTON - Some scientists think they have figured out the real job of the troublesome and seemingly useless appendix: It produces and protects good germs for your gut.
That’s the theory from surgeons and immunologists at Duke University Medical School, published online in a scientific journal this week.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21153898/
Cool. good find loco.
they have any theories on the use for lazy 17 year olds? ;D
-
Cool. good find loco.
they have any theories on the use for lazy 17 year olds? ;D
Have not seen any yet, but I'm sure they have a important purpose too! ;D
-
Scientific consistencies are not indicative of intelligent design. intelligent design is a newly coined term to battle evolution. there's nothing intelligent in the design of most things on this planet, but we've evolved into creatures that are better adapted to our environments. we all started out as sludge and we've been moving up ever since. That's not the prettiest picture, but it is the most accurate.
Of course, that leaves out two simple yet fundamental questions.
1) How did that sludge or "goo", if you will, get here in the first place?
2) How exactly does it get to "moving up", without being destroyed by other forces or entities?
-
Of course, that leaves out two simple yet fundamental questions.
1) How did that sludge or "goo", if you will, get here in the first place?
2) How exactly does it get to "moving up", without being destroyed by other forces or entities?
There are many questions left unanswered, but any answered question does not mean that god created everything. We're recreating situations very close to the birth of our universe with the LHC in europe. We'll figure this out in due time. The bible and religion seek no explanation other than "God does that which we don't understand or have an answer for." That is why they (bible and religion in general) are so faulty, in addition to being a massive hinderance to progress and understanding.
-
There are many questions left unanswered, but any answered question does not mean that god created everything. We're recreating situations very close to the birth of our universe with the LHC in europe. We'll figure this out in due time. The bible and religion seek no explanation other than "God does that which we don't understand or have an answer for." That is why they (bible and religion in general) are so faulty, in addition to being a massive hinderance to progress and understanding.
he Bible has hardly been a hindrance to progress and understanding, especially in light of the fact that early men of science were also men of faith.
Listen to what you just said, “We’re re-creating situations very close to the birth of our universe…..”. In order for you to "re-create" something, someone else would have to create those situations, in the first place.
Plus, if it takes billions of dollars and countless man-hours are necessary, just to build this LHC thing (by knowledgeable scientists), how do you propose that life on Earth was due to some random “accident” with no source and no sentient guidance?
In essence, you're hemmorhaging cash just to show that there is (or may not be) a God.
-
he Bible has hardly been a hindrance to progress and understanding, especially in light of the fact that early men of science were also men of faith.
Listen to what you just said, “We’re re-creating situations very close to the birth of our universe…..”. In order for you to "re-create" something, someone else would have to create those situations, in the first place.
Plus, if it takes billions of dollars and countless man-hours are necessary, just to build this LHC thing (by knowledgeable scientists), how do you propose that life on Earth was due to some random “accident” with no source and no sentient guidance?
In essence, you're hemmorhaging cash just to show that there is (or may not be) a God.
hey, if we can prove there is a god, more power to us, because it would only prove that we are on a path to grow more powerful than said god, and if we found a god, we could ask why it doesn't intervene more, and if all the religious nutbags are truly as out of line as we think they are.
do some research on ten dimensional hyperspace, string theory, multiple universes, and how tiny bubbles spontaneously appear in a vacuum. I suggest you read "coming of age in the milky way" by timothy farris.
-
hey, if we can prove there is a god, more power to us, because it would only prove that we are on a path to grow more powerful than said god, and if we found a god, we could ask why it doesn't intervene more, and if all the religious nutbags are truly as out of line as we think they are.
do some research on ten dimensional hyperspace, string theory, multiple universes, and how tiny bubbles spontaneously appear in a vacuum. I suggest you read "coming of age in the milky way" by timothy farris.
More powerful? PLEASE!!!
It taken man hundreds of years (if not longer) to "discover" what God has known from the beginning. In fact, that's the very root of the word, "discover": to find what is already there.
Again, billions of dollars, countless man-hours......and man isn't even CLOSE to equaling (much less surpassing) the knowledge and power of God.
A being that is from everlasting to everlasting is supposed to be surpassed by an entity who (if lucky) will break the century mark? I beg to differ.
My point is that, at the end of the day, all of this is philosophical. Non-believers (atheists, in particular) obsess over the supposedly non-existent God for one simple reason: They don’t want to answer to Him or be held accountable to Him.
Therefore, any scientific theory that feeds that philosophical mindset (i.e. evolution) is exalted.
That is why I’ve often said that atheism is effectively man worshipping himself.
-
hey, if we can prove there is a god, more power to us, because it would only prove that we are on a path to grow more powerful than said god, and if we found a god, we could ask why it doesn't intervene more, and if all the religious nutbags are truly as out of line as we think they are.
do some research on ten dimensional hyperspace, string theory, multiple universes, and how tiny bubbles spontaneously appear in a vacuum. I suggest you read "coming of age in the milky way" by timothy farris.
Have you ever considered the possibility He may tell you those "religious nutbags" were right?
-
Have you ever considered the possibility He may tell you those "religious nutbags" were right?
If there is a god, i sincerely doubt he is so insecure that he would need religious NUTBAGS going around preaching his gospel. If he is so powerful, why would he need a marketing staff?
-
If there is a god, i sincerely doubt he is so insecure that he would need religious NUTBAGS going around preaching his gospel. If he is so powerful, why would he need a marketing staff?
Maybe He gave us a free will to follow Him or not. Maybe we are not the nutbags.
As I have said to you before, I understand that you feel were delusional. You do not believe in God. How can you believe in the things we do? Let us just agree to disagree.
-
I believe in what can be proven, you believe in nonsense. this is not philosophy.
-
I believe in what can be proven, you believe in nonsense. this is not philosophy.
Really? Where is the scientific proof for the origin of life on earth? Not macroevolution, but the very beginning.
-
Really? Where is the scientific proof for the origin of life on earth? Not macroevolution, but the very beginning.
there aer various theories out there, i'm fine with not knowing the exact answer. As we work out way back in time through science, we'll make these discoveries.
-
there aer various theories out there, i'm fine with not knowing the exact answer. As we work out way back in time through science, we'll make these discoveries.
Doesn't that conflict with what you just said?
I believe in what can be proven, you believe in nonsense. this is not philosophy.
We all know life originated on earth at some point, but there is no scientific proof of how life originated. It really can't be proved.
I've said a few times that all of the theories regarding the origin of life on earth (including intelligent design) sound like science fiction.
-
Doesn't that conflict with what you just said?
We all know life originated on earth at some point, but there is no scientific proof of how life originated. It really can't be proved.
I've said a few times that all of the theories regarding the origin of life on earth (including intelligent design) sound like science fiction.
not yet. There's a lot of stuff they couldn't prove a long time ago that we long didn't understand, but now we do, and we can prove it. the scary thing about science fiction is that it is becoming less like fiction and more like reality every day.
-
not yet. There's a lot of stuff they couldn't prove a long time ago that we long didn't understand, but now we do, and we can prove it. the scary thing about science fiction is that it is becoming less like fiction and more like reality every day.
True.
-
he Bible has hardly been a hindrance to progress and understanding, especially in light of the fact that early men of science were also men of faith.
Listen to what you just said, “We’re re-creating situations very close to the birth of our universe…..”. In order for you to "re-create" something, someone else would have to create those situations, in the first place.
Plus, if it takes billions of dollars and countless man-hours are necessary, just to build this LHC thing (by knowledgeable scientists), how do you propose that life on Earth was due to some random “accident” with no source and no sentient guidance?
In essence, you're hemmorhaging cash just to show that there is (or may not be) a God.
what created god? since anything that exists needs to be created based on your logic?
-
Any of you religious folks have any scientific proof of god? Didn't think so.
Do you have any scientific proof to disprove the existence of a god? Didn't think so.
-
Do you have any scientific proof to disprove the existence of a god? Didn't think so.
you can't disprove a negative, the burden or proof is on you, the one claiming something. Especially something as incredible as a god.
make sure it's proof for your god, not zeus....
-
-
More powerful? PLEASE!!!
It taken man hundreds of years (if not longer) to "discover" what God has known from the beginning. In fact, that's the very root of the word, "discover": to find what is already there.
Again, billions of dollars, countless man-hours......and man isn't even CLOSE to equaling (much less surpassing) the knowledge and power of God.
A being that is from everlasting to everlasting is supposed to be surpassed by an entity who (if lucky) will break the century mark? I beg to differ.
My point is that, at the end of the day, all of this is philosophical. Non-believers (atheists, in particular) obsess over the supposedly non-existent God for one simple reason: They don’t want to answer to Him or be held accountable to Him.
Therefore, any scientific theory that feeds that philosophical mindset (i.e. evolution) is exalted.
That is why I’ve often said that atheism is effectively man worshipping himself.
Excellent post! Especially the point(s) made in bold red!
GC/DEA_Agent
-
Joe Montana.
nuff said. ;D
i was gonna say halley berry
-
he Bible has hardly been a hindrance to progress and understanding, especially in light of the fact that early men of science were also men of faith.
Listen to what you just said, “We’re re-creating situations very close to the birth of our universe…..”. In order for you to "re-create" something, someone else would have to create those situations, in the first place.
Plus, if it takes billions of dollars and countless man-hours are necessary, just to build this LHC thing (by knowledgeable scientists), how do you propose that life on Earth was due to some random “accident” with no source and no sentient guidance?
In essence, you're hemmorhaging cash just to show that there is (or may not be) a God.
Another excellent post! It's mind boggling how some scientist can be non-believers when in fact, they are involved in intelligent design, yet, will claim that other more complex systems came about by chance.
They know better in my opinion. Like Mcway pointed out, there are people who don't want there to be a God who they have to answer too. Same with a rebellious child who doesn't want to follow their parents rules.
GC/DEA_AGENT
-
not yet. There's a lot of stuff they couldn't prove a long time ago that we long didn't understand, but now we do, and we can prove it.
Exactly! In the Hebrew scriptures there is an example of this. The Bible made it clear long before man had a clue. Scientific evidence from the Bible at it's best.
CG/DEA_AGENT
-
Exactly! In the Hebrew scriptures there is an example of this. The Bible made it clear long before man had a clue. Scientific evidence from the Bible at it's best.
CG/DEA_AGENT
Haha yea...thats why the Christian leaders persecuted and nearly put to death Galileo for having the audacity to Say the earth revolved around the sun.
-
Haha yea...thats why the Christian leaders persecuted and nearly put to death Galileo for having the audacity to Say the earth revolved around the sun.
Those were not true Christians, dawg. True Christians would not have been involved in such behaviour. This is one problem that people need to clear up in their minds. There are folks who "claim" to be Bible followers, yet do not come close to following it's teachings. Keep in mind, God has an adversary, who relentlessly continues to use the Bible as his prop, in order to defame the God of the Bible.
GC/DEA_AGENt
-
Those were not true Christians, dawg. True Christians would not have been involved in such behaviour. This is one problem that people need to clear up in their minds. There are folks who "claim" to be Bible followers, yet do not come close to following it's teachings. Keep in mind, God has an adversary, who relentlessly continues to use the Bible as his prop, in order to defame the God of the Bible.
GC/DEA_AGENt
::)
-
The proof for God's existence is all around you. Close your heart and you will never be able to see it.
-
The proof for God's existence is all around you. Close your heart and you will never be able to see it.
no...all that is required for belief in God is a closed mind.
-
The proof for God's existence is all around you. Close your heart and you will never be able to see it.
replace "God" with "Allah", "Vishnu", "Buddha", or "Zeus"... there is no difference. Personally I would replace it with "Flying Spaghetti Monster."
(http://onwhoseauthority.files.wordpress.com/2007/10/flying-spaghetti-monster.jpg)
-
mcway continually runs in a debate, never answering a direct question and spewing the same rebutted bullshit over and over.
we have already told you why atheists care if there is a god, if there was it would be a huge discovery, however religious people encroach on our rights all the time.
-
Joe Montana.
nuff said. ;D
what is a joe montana ???
nuff said ;)
-
what is a joe montana ???
nuff said ;)
I will slap you
-
There isn't much intelligence in intelligent design. I have an appendix to prove it and a big waste of space in the universe. :D
Also, there is more unintelligent design then design in the world, look at birth defects, the sun eventually going to supernova killing us all,myopia in the human eye, the appendix etc etc etc....
Just because we don't yet know the purpose of something like the appendix, it does not follow that God doesn't exist, or that God did not design and create everything.
Even if these scientists were to be wrong about the appendix this time, it does not follow that we won't find an important purpose for the appendix in the future.
Scientists may have found appendix’s purpose
Seemingly useless organ may produce, protect good germs for your gut
MSNBC
Oct . 5, 2007
WASHINGTON - Some scientists think they have figured out the real job of the troublesome and seemingly useless appendix: It produces and protects good germs for your gut.
That’s the theory from surgeons and immunologists at Duke University Medical School, published online in a scientific journal this week.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21153898/
The Appendix: Useful and in Fact Promising
Aug 24, 2009
The body's appendix has long been thought of as nothing more than a worthless evolutionary artifact, good for nothing save a potentially lethal case of inflammation.
Now researchers suggest the appendix is a lot more than a useless remnant. Not only was it recently proposed to actually possess a critical function, but scientists now find it appears in nature a lot more often than before thought. And it's possible some of this organ's ancient uses could be recruited by physicians to help the human body fight disease more effectively.
In a way, the idea that the appendix is an organ whose time has passed has itself become a concept whose time is over.
"Maybe it's time to correct the textbooks," said researcher William Parker, an immunologist at Duke University Medical Center in Durham, N.C. "Many biology texts today still refer to the appendix as a 'vestigial organ.'"
Slimy sac
The vermiform appendix is a slimy dead-end sac that hangs between the small and large intestines. No less than Charles Darwin first suggested that the appendix was a vestigial organ from an ancestor that ate leaves, theorizing that it was the evolutionary remains of a larger structure, called a cecum, which once was used by now-extinct predecessors for digesting food.
"Everybody likely knows at least one person who had to get their appendix taken out - slightly more than 1 in 20 people do - and they see there are no ill effects, and this suggests that you don't need it," Parker said.
However, Parker and his colleagues recently suggested that the appendix still served as a vital safehouse where good bacteria could lie in wait until they were needed to repopulate the gut after a nasty case of diarrhea. Past studies had also found the appendix can help make, direct and train white blood cells.
Now, in the first investigation of the appendix over the ages, Parker explained they discovered that it has been around much longer than anyone had suspected, hinting that it plays a critical function.
"The appendix has been around for at least 80 million years, much longer than we would estimate if Darwin's ideas about the appendix were correct," Parker said.
Moreover, the appendix appears in nature much more often than previously acknowledged. It has evolved at least twice, once among Australian marsupials such as the wombat and another time among rats, lemmings, meadow voles, Cape dune mole-rats and other rodents, as well as humans and certain primates.
"When species are divided into groups called 'families,' we find that more than 70 percent of all primate and rodent groups contain species with an appendix," Parker said.
Several living species, including several lemurs, certain rodents and the scaly-tailed flying squirrel, still have an appendix attached to a large cecum, which is used in digestion. Darwin had thought appendices appeared in only a small handful of animals.
"We're not saying that Darwin's idea of evolution is wrong - that would be absurd, as we're using his ideas on evolution to do this work," Parker told LiveScience. "It's just that Darwin simply didn't have the information we have now."
He added, "If Darwin had been aware of the species that have an appendix attached to a large cecum, and if he had known about the widespread nature of the appendix, he probably would not have thought of the appendix as a vestige of evolution."
What causes appendicitis?
Darwin was also not aware that appendicitis, or a potentially deadly inflammation of the appendix, is not due to a faulty appendix, but rather to cultural changes associated with industrialized society and improved sanitation, Parker said.
"Those changes left our immune systems with too little work and too much time their hands - a recipe for trouble," he said. "Darwin had no way of knowing that the function of the appendix could be rendered obsolete by cultural changes that included widespread use of sewer systems and clean drinking water."
Now that scientists are uncovering the normal function of the appendix, Parker notes a critical question to ask is whether anything can be done to prevent appendicitis. He suggests it might be possible to devise ways to incite our immune systems today in much the same manner that they were challenged back in the Stone Age.
"If modern medicine could figure out a way to do that, we would see far fewer cases of allergies, autoimmune disease, and appendicitis," Parker said.
The scientists detailed their findings online August 12 in the Journal of Evolutionary Biology.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20090824/sc_livescience/theappendixusefulandinfactpromising
-
the artical states the appendix has been around for 80 million years.Do you agree with that loco?
-
the artical states the appendix has been around for 80 million years.Do you agree with that loco?
I neither agree nor disagree. I don't know the age of the earth or the age of the universe. You don't know either. First they say the appendix is useless, now they say that it is "Useful and in Fact Promising." So they were wrong before.
My point is that just because we don't yet know the purpose of something like the appendix, it does not follow that God doesn't exist, or that God did not design and create everything. Bringing up the appendix in these discussions is a terrible argument.
-
I neither agree nor disagree. I don't know the age of the earth or the age of the universe. You don't know either. First they say the appendix is useless, now they say that it is "Useful and in Fact Promising." So they were wrong before.
My point is that just because we don't yet know the purpose of something like the appendix, it does not follow that God doesn't exist, or that God did not design and create everything. Bringing up the appendix in these discussions is a terrible argument.
First off...Who is "they"?....second so why did you even bother posting the article?I mean it seems you posted it to prove something yet you can't answer wether you agree or not with the points that are giving in the article.that the appendix has been around for 80 million years because you say you don't know.Which would be fine as long as when someone asked you about god you reply with the same answer."I don't know"...because you don't know.
-
First off...Who is "they"?....second so why did you even bother posting the article?I mean it seems you posted it to prove something yet you can't answer wether you agree or not with the points that are giving in the article.that the appendix has been around for 80 million years because you say you don't know.Which would be fine as long as when someone asked you about god you reply with the same answer."I don't know"...because you don't know.
You did not bother reading my post did you?
Necrosis and OzmO argued that because it is useless, the appendix is proof that we were poorly designed or not designed at all.
I say if you are going to argue that, the appendix is no proof and it is a poor argument because we don't even know that it is indeed useless.
You are the one getting all hung up on the age issue.
-
it has immunological tissue, this is taught in medical schools, it is a poor "design" , peyers patches and small diverticulum have immunological function. It is not necessary to have a blind diverticulum around the ilealcecal valve, pardon the spelling there, i is drunk. It is not necessary for function and its design makes it somewhat troublesome, it could of been done much better, like the eye.
-
I will slap you
does this Joe montana play an international sport?
nope...
we'll talk when he plays a real (international) sport....
globalization is here my friend...get used to it...
he wouldn't last 2 days playing soccer or cricket...the 2 biggest sports on the planet
-
does this Joe montana play an international sport?
nope...
we'll talk when he plays a real (international) sport....
globalization is here my friend...get used to it...
he wouldn't last 2 days playing soccer or cricket...the 2 biggest sports on the planet
Soccer has got to be the most boring sport on the planet next to baseball. And while the rest of the hooligans beat on each other, all the money is in the NFL.
International sport is just another way of saying not good enough for the NFL. :D ;D
-
all the money is in the NFL.
NFL players do it for the $ :-\
cricket and soccer players do it mostly for the game ;)
-
NFL players do it for the $ :-\
cricket and soccer players do it mostly for the game ;)
You can't into the NFL without "game" and its a passion for that game that gets you that game that gets you into that game.
The greatest games draw the best competition, the money is only a symptom of a great game.
-
You can't into the NFL without "game" and its a passion for that game that gets you that game that gets you into that game.
The greatest games draw the best competition, the money is only a symptom of a great game.
far more people on this planet watching and more importantly "playing" cricket and soccer than <ahem> football...
most people that watch football on the teli have nevrr played football :-\
there is a cricket and soccer game being played in every street and backyard in crick and soccer playing countries
http://ezinearticles.com/?Most-Popular-Sports-Around-The-World&id=551180
-
far more people on this planet watching and more importantly "playing" cricket and soccer than <ahem> football...
most people that watch football on the teli have nevrr played football :-\
there is a cricket and soccer game being played in every street and backyard in crick and soccer playing countries
http://ezinearticles.com/?Most-Popular-Sports-Around-The-World&id=551180
More the evidence the world is mis-guided and in the dark. 8)
-
More the evidence the world is mis-guided and in the dark. 8)
so said the fox about the grapes ;D
-
The Appendix: Useful and in Fact Promising
Aug 24, 2009
The body's appendix has long been thought of as nothing more than a worthless evolutionary artifact, good for nothing save a potentially lethal case of inflammation.
Now researchers suggest the appendix is a lot more than a useless remnant. Not only was it recently proposed to actually possess a critical function, but scientists now find it appears in nature a lot more often than before thought. And it's possible some of this organ's ancient uses could be recruited by physicians to help the human body fight disease more effectively.
In a way, the idea that the appendix is an organ whose time has passed has itself become a concept whose time is over.
"Maybe it's time to correct the textbooks," said researcher William Parker, an immunologist at Duke University Medical Center in Durham, N.C. "Many biology texts today still refer to the appendix as a 'vestigial organ.'"
Slimy sac
The vermiform appendix is a slimy dead-end sac that hangs between the small and large intestines. No less than Charles Darwin first suggested that the appendix was a vestigial organ from an ancestor that ate leaves, theorizing that it was the evolutionary remains of a larger structure, called a cecum, which once was used by now-extinct predecessors for digesting food.
"Everybody likely knows at least one person who had to get their appendix taken out - slightly more than 1 in 20 people do - and they see there are no ill effects, and this suggests that you don't need it," Parker said.
However, Parker and his colleagues recently suggested that the appendix still served as a vital safehouse where good bacteria could lie in wait until they were needed to repopulate the gut after a nasty case of diarrhea. Past studies had also found the appendix can help make, direct and train white blood cells.
Now, in the first investigation of the appendix over the ages, Parker explained they discovered that it has been around much longer than anyone had suspected, hinting that it plays a critical function.
"The appendix has been around for at least 80 million years, much longer than we would estimate if Darwin's ideas about the appendix were correct," Parker said.
Moreover, the appendix appears in nature much more often than previously acknowledged. It has evolved at least twice, once among Australian marsupials such as the wombat and another time among rats, lemmings, meadow voles, Cape dune mole-rats and other rodents, as well as humans and certain primates.
"When species are divided into groups called 'families,' we find that more than 70 percent of all primate and rodent groups contain species with an appendix," Parker said.
Several living species, including several lemurs, certain rodents and the scaly-tailed flying squirrel, still have an appendix attached to a large cecum, which is used in digestion. Darwin had thought appendices appeared in only a small handful of animals.
"We're not saying that Darwin's idea of evolution is wrong - that would be absurd, as we're using his ideas on evolution to do this work," Parker told LiveScience. "It's just that Darwin simply didn't have the information we have now."
He added, "If Darwin had been aware of the species that have an appendix attached to a large cecum, and if he had known about the widespread nature of the appendix, he probably would not have thought of the appendix as a vestige of evolution."
What causes appendicitis?
Darwin was also not aware that appendicitis, or a potentially deadly inflammation of the appendix, is not due to a faulty appendix, but rather to cultural changes associated with industrialized society and improved sanitation, Parker said.
"Those changes left our immune systems with too little work and too much time their hands - a recipe for trouble," he said. "Darwin had no way of knowing that the function of the appendix could be rendered obsolete by cultural changes that included widespread use of sewer systems and clean drinking water."
Now that scientists are uncovering the normal function of the appendix, Parker notes a critical question to ask is whether anything can be done to prevent appendicitis. He suggests it might be possible to devise ways to incite our immune systems today in much the same manner that they were challenged back in the Stone Age.
"If modern medicine could figure out a way to do that, we would see far fewer cases of allergies, autoimmune disease, and appendicitis," Parker said.
The scientists detailed their findings online August 12 in the Journal of Evolutionary Biology.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20090824/sc_livescience/theappendixusefulandinfactpromising
Scientists do NOT say that the appendix "has no purpose". The article is mis-stating scientists.
The appendix "does something", but this is a side effect of its placing in the body. Its production of beneficial bacteria was NOT its original purpose and is not its purpose in any other animals. The appendix does not do what it USED to do, and thus is a vestigial organ.
Statistically, Humans are MUCH SAFER without an appendix than with having one in nature. The risk of infection is too great, and when it is removed there is no noticeable differences. In fact, other organs take up the job of producing the bacteria once the appendix is removed, or was never there.
-
I neither agree nor disagree. I don't know the age of the earth or the age of the universe. You don't know either. First they say the appendix is useless, now they say that it is "Useful and in Fact Promising." So they were wrong before.
My point is that just because we don't yet know the purpose of something like the appendix, it does not follow that God doesn't exist, or that God did not design and create everything. Bringing up the appendix in these discussions is a terrible argument.
I know how old the earth is.
-
I know how old the earth is.
13k right? ;)
-
13k right? ;)
+ 4.5 billion years.
-
True.
8)