It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

A very simple question that seem to stumped both atheists and evolutionists alike.

page: 43
20
<< 40  41  42    44  45  46 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 01:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: edmc^2

originally posted by: earthling42
a reply to: edmc^2

Name me something that has no cause!



I can name several but let me just posit these two:

The concept of Infinity and outside of the material universe.


And to prove they have no cause, you would have to prove they exist.

You can't, so your argument, again, fails.


How did he fail?

We all know that Our universe had a beginning. So there was time before Our universe was formed. Science dont deny that.

It is not Our problem that science is laging. I Guess that is Your problem. You can never fallow Our knowlegde can you??



Here's a scientific thing for you.

Prove it.


It cant be, because science is not capable of it....


So you can't prove it either?

You fail too.


No, i have not failed. You have. Science have... Or put in better Words....Your understanding of science have failed.


So I've failed because you can't prove something you said?

Are we living in some backwards world all of a sudden?


You can not argue what i have stated.

If you can't prove it, there's nothing to argue.


I Guess not. So why are you here?


Because it's an open forum where anyone can post a reply to anyone.

Did you forget that between your little rants about things you can't prove?



No i know that much....

I Guess you just poped in for a randem trolling.....


Yes. Asking for someone to prove something is trolling.

You like failing, don't you?


I dont think i have failed at this point. You sure have not proved me wrong.......


To prove someone wrong, there has to be something from the other side to counter. Just saying something exists, doesn't mean it does.



Well, why dont you prove me wrong then?


I will prove you wrong the same way you've proven it right.

You're wrong.


Then, tell me why i am wrong please?


Because I said so.

If it's good enough for you to say that, it should be equally good enough for me too. You wouldn't want to be a hypocrite, would you?



Right, i rest my case. Be ignorent




posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 01:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: edmc^2

originally posted by: earthling42
a reply to: edmc^2

Name me something that has no cause!



I can name several but let me just posit these two:

The concept of Infinity and outside of the material universe.


And to prove they have no cause, you would have to prove they exist.

You can't, so your argument, again, fails.


How did he fail?

We all know that Our universe had a beginning. So there was time before Our universe was formed. Science dont deny that.

It is not Our problem that science is laging. I Guess that is Your problem. You can never fallow Our knowlegde can you??



Here's a scientific thing for you.

Prove it.


It cant be, because science is not capable of it....


So you can't prove it either?

You fail too.


No, i have not failed. You have. Science have... Or put in better Words....Your understanding of science have failed.


So I've failed because you can't prove something you said?

Are we living in some backwards world all of a sudden?


You can not argue what i have stated.

If you can't prove it, there's nothing to argue.


I Guess not. So why are you here?


Because it's an open forum where anyone can post a reply to anyone.

Did you forget that between your little rants about things you can't prove?



No i know that much....

I Guess you just poped in for a randem trolling.....


Yes. Asking for someone to prove something is trolling.

You like failing, don't you?


I dont think i have failed at this point. You sure have not proved me wrong.......


To prove someone wrong, there has to be something from the other side to counter. Just saying something exists, doesn't mean it does.



Well, why dont you prove me wrong then?


I will prove you wrong the same way you've proven it right.

You're wrong.


Then, tell me why i am wrong please?


Because I said so.

If it's good enough for you to say that, it should be equally good enough for me too. You wouldn't want to be a hypocrite, would you?



Right, i rest my case. Be ignorent


So we have to take your and others word on something without it being proven or any evidence being offered, but I'm not allowed to?

That's called being a hypocrite.



posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 01:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: edmc^2

originally posted by: earthling42
a reply to: edmc^2

Name me something that has no cause!



I can name several but let me just posit these two:

The concept of Infinity and outside of the material universe.


And to prove they have no cause, you would have to prove they exist.

You can't, so your argument, again, fails.


How did he fail?

We all know that Our universe had a beginning. So there was time before Our universe was formed. Science dont deny that.

It is not Our problem that science is laging. I Guess that is Your problem. You can never fallow Our knowlegde can you??



Here's a scientific thing for you.

Prove it.


It cant be, because science is not capable of it....


So you can't prove it either?

You fail too.


No, i have not failed. You have. Science have... Or put in better Words....Your understanding of science have failed.


So I've failed because you can't prove something you said?

Are we living in some backwards world all of a sudden?


You can not argue what i have stated.

If you can't prove it, there's nothing to argue.


I Guess not. So why are you here?


Because it's an open forum where anyone can post a reply to anyone.

Did you forget that between your little rants about things you can't prove?



No i know that much....

I Guess you just poped in for a randem trolling.....


Yes. Asking for someone to prove something is trolling.

You like failing, don't you?


I dont think i have failed at this point. You sure have not proved me wrong.......


To prove someone wrong, there has to be something from the other side to counter. Just saying something exists, doesn't mean it does.



Well, why dont you prove me wrong then?


I will prove you wrong the same way you've proven it right.

You're wrong.


Then, tell me why i am wrong please?


Because I said so.

If it's good enough for you to say that, it should be equally good enough for me too. You wouldn't want to be a hypocrite, would you?



Right, i rest my case. Be ignorent


So we have to take your and others word on something without it being proven or any evidence being offered, but I'm not allowed to?

That's called being a hypocrite.



The thing is, if science cant prove it neither can you. It is as simple as that.

But you could not even With Your mind Challenge me With Your knowledge. That is what i consider a failure on Your behalf.



posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 01:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: edmc^2

originally posted by: earthling42
a reply to: edmc^2

Name me something that has no cause!



I can name several but let me just posit these two:

The concept of Infinity and outside of the material universe.


And to prove they have no cause, you would have to prove they exist.

You can't, so your argument, again, fails.


How did he fail?

We all know that Our universe had a beginning. So there was time before Our universe was formed. Science dont deny that.

It is not Our problem that science is laging. I Guess that is Your problem. You can never fallow Our knowlegde can you??



Here's a scientific thing for you.

Prove it.


It cant be, because science is not capable of it....


So you can't prove it either?

You fail too.


No, i have not failed. You have. Science have... Or put in better Words....Your understanding of science have failed.


So I've failed because you can't prove something you said?

Are we living in some backwards world all of a sudden?


You can not argue what i have stated.

If you can't prove it, there's nothing to argue.


I Guess not. So why are you here?


Because it's an open forum where anyone can post a reply to anyone.

Did you forget that between your little rants about things you can't prove?



No i know that much....

I Guess you just poped in for a randem trolling.....


Yes. Asking for someone to prove something is trolling.

You like failing, don't you?


I dont think i have failed at this point. You sure have not proved me wrong.......


To prove someone wrong, there has to be something from the other side to counter. Just saying something exists, doesn't mean it does.



Well, why dont you prove me wrong then?


I will prove you wrong the same way you've proven it right.

You're wrong.


Then, tell me why i am wrong please?


Because I said so.

If it's good enough for you to say that, it should be equally good enough for me too. You wouldn't want to be a hypocrite, would you?



Right, i rest my case. Be ignorent


So we have to take your and others word on something without it being proven or any evidence being offered, but I'm not allowed to?

That's called being a hypocrite.



The thing is, if science cant prove it neither can you. It is as simple as that.

But you could not even With Your mind Challenge me With Your knowledge. That is what i consider a failure on Your behalf.


Seriously, learn how to spell and use basic grammar. Reading your posts gives me a headache.

Like I said, you didn't prove a thing. You just said it's true. Yet you want me to prove you wrong and won't accept me saying it's wrong.

You do know you can't prove a negative? You can only show evidence is wrong. So without any evidence, I can't prove you wrong and you can't prove you're right.



posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 01:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: edmc^2

originally posted by: earthling42
a reply to: edmc^2

Name me something that has no cause!



I can name several but let me just posit these two:

The concept of Infinity and outside of the material universe.


And to prove they have no cause, you would have to prove they exist.

You can't, so your argument, again, fails.


How did he fail?

We all know that Our universe had a beginning. So there was time before Our universe was formed. Science dont deny that.

It is not Our problem that science is laging. I Guess that is Your problem. You can never fallow Our knowlegde can you??



Here's a scientific thing for you.

Prove it.


It cant be, because science is not capable of it....


So you can't prove it either?

You fail too.


No, i have not failed. You have. Science have... Or put in better Words....Your understanding of science have failed.


So I've failed because you can't prove something you said?

Are we living in some backwards world all of a sudden?


You can not argue what i have stated.

If you can't prove it, there's nothing to argue.


I Guess not. So why are you here?


Because it's an open forum where anyone can post a reply to anyone.

Did you forget that between your little rants about things you can't prove?



No i know that much....

I Guess you just poped in for a randem trolling.....


Yes. Asking for someone to prove something is trolling.

You like failing, don't you?


I dont think i have failed at this point. You sure have not proved me wrong.......


To prove someone wrong, there has to be something from the other side to counter. Just saying something exists, doesn't mean it does.



Well, why dont you prove me wrong then?


I will prove you wrong the same way you've proven it right.

You're wrong.


Then, tell me why i am wrong please?


Because I said so.

If it's good enough for you to say that, it should be equally good enough for me too. You wouldn't want to be a hypocrite, would you?



Right, i rest my case. Be ignorent


So we have to take your and others word on something without it being proven or any evidence being offered, but I'm not allowed to?

That's called being a hypocrite.



The thing is, if science cant prove it neither can you. It is as simple as that.

But you could not even With Your mind Challenge me With Your knowledge. That is what i consider a failure on Your behalf.


Seriously, learn how to spell and use basic grammar. Reading your posts gives me a headache.

Like I said, you didn't prove a thing. You just said it's true. Yet you want me to prove you wrong and won't accept me saying it's wrong.

You do know you can't prove a negative? You can only show evidence is wrong. So without any evidence, I can't prove you wrong and you can't prove you're right.


The thing is..... the evidence are there. And i have explained them. Its just that you dont have the mind to see it, or you have not bothered to read. That is not my problem that is Yours.


You dont have the brians to grasp it. Not my problem.... If you did you would have brought up some questions, But you have not. That tells me soemthing about you.....

If my gramer is making Your head hurt i Guess that is Your problem no mine.
edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 01:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: spy66

We all know that Our universe had a beginning.


We do? Because many of the math guys are currently saying that it's more of a cyclical state.

For example an easy paradox, is our beginning cannot exist, without a portion of the future, that has not happened yet, so the past is in front of us currently as an inevitability. Rather than this being a cycle though of time itself in a circle, think about it more as a cycle of paradoxes that relive themselves in a circle. So you say it has a beginning? How did that happen is the hottest question after that.

All time, affects all time, is the current garbage saying is what is popular among the theorists. It has more potential with evident data.
edit on 25-8-2017 by NOISE1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 01:28 PM
link   
a reply to: spy66

You haven't done anything apart from say things are true.

Like I've said, saying things doesn't make it true.



posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 01:29 PM
link   
a reply to: NOISE1





We do? Because many of the math guys are currently saying that it's more of a cyclical state.


Then show me the Equation please. How did they come to this conclusion?



posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 01:31 PM
link   
a reply to: TerryDon79



Well if you think i am wrong..... prove me wrong. Why is that so hard?



posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 01:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: spy66
a reply to: TerryDon79



Well if you think i am wrong..... prove me wrong. Why is that so hard?



Because you haven't offered any evidence to counter. I can't prove someone's beliefs wrong.



posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 01:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: spy66
a reply to: TerryDon79



Well if you think i am wrong..... prove me wrong. Why is that so hard?



Because you haven't offered any evidence to counter. I can't prove someone's beliefs wrong.


I know you cant....

Because if i was wrong you would be able to Counter it With something solid. Until you can prove me wrong... i Guess i am right.



posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 01:38 PM
link   
a reply to: spy66

You've offered no evidence for me to counter. That means I can't counter your belief. That also doesn't automatically make you correct.

You really don't understand how this works do you?



posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 01:40 PM
link   
a reply to: spy66

The whole simulation theory nonsense sparked the ideas.

The evidence is based on quantum physics properties.

You can't prove anything exists without observing it. Pretty basic question here, does it?



posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 01:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: NOISE1
a reply to: spy66

The whole simulation theory nonsense sparked the ideas.

The evidence is based on quantum physics properties.

You can't prove anything exists without observing it. Pretty basic question here, does it?


There is no way Quantum physics would know about the void of Space prior to the forming of the singularity.

Quantum physics is the study of the properties of Our universe..... nothing else.


What is important to science is how Our universe Works. The back ground image dont matter because there is nothing science can do about it, or expand its knowledge on it.
edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 03:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: spy66
That is actually not true. There is at least one very Clear Clue we should be able to know about, and that is the state of the void of space prior to the Big Bang. The main Clue is that the singularity (a compressed energy mass) could expand as soon as it was formed. That is a major Clue. It is not a dead end.


What do you mean it could expand as soon as it was formed? Of course that COULD happen, but that's not the same as knowing that it DID happen. What if scenarios don't quality as clues or evidence.


And that gives us a general idea about the void of Space the singularity was formed within. Why do compressed energy mass expand and emitt energy? If you don't know this... you have no basis for understanding the concept of expansion.

If you grasp expansion, you would also grasp why the void of Space surrounding Our expanding universe must be a absolut vacuum.

A expansion is also measured in time (Space time). But what do we measure to observe expansion, and what can we not observe? Very important to grasp this.

A vacuum void of space is a void of Space Without expansion but With time. It must have time because it exists. It is just that it's timeline is a constant, because there are no changes or expansions (no motion) taking Place within it's void of Space that we can observe. We can only observe the Properties of Our universe moving through the vaccum void of empty Space.


Space time IS the vacuum. And there is no evidence that any sort of void exists outside of space time. You told me earlier I had no argument because we don't know what lies before the big bang or beyond space, yet here you are assuming that there is a void of some sort. We don't know that.




The infinite must exist. We would not exist if it didnt.

There was time before Our time started. The big questions is what kind of time was it before Our time began. And how could such time form Our beginning (Our universe).


No. It doesn't HAVE to exist. The only thing that HAS to exist, is something prior to the big bang, or it could not have started in the first place. That something doesn't have to be infinite. Even if there is a HUGE void as you assume, there is no reason to think it is infinite. There is literally no evidence whatsoever to support your assumption nor your assumption that time existed prior.


If Our universe is a compressed energy mass and the surrounding void of Space is not. That sort of brings up some serious questions does it not?

How can a empty void of Space form a compressed mass like Our universe?

How can something that we precieve as a constant form anything?


I already said that something could have already existed, something that is eternal, but not infinite. We don't know, but assuming there is an infinite void brings up some serious questions as well, like how did it get there, and how could it never end?

Saying that something is timeless, is much much different than saying it is infinite. What if the singularity is timeless and always existed? It's certainly not infinite.

The big issue I'm seeing in your conversations with others, is that you are telling us we have to prove you wrong, when you won't even prove yourself right. It's insulting to just tell people they don't have the mind to grasp what you are saying, when you are basing it 100% on assumptions. Burden of proof is always on the person who makes the positive claim of existence. If you are saying there is evidence of anything infinite, you need to provide it instead of making unsubstantiated assumptions and expect us to just go along with them.
edit on 8 25 17 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 03:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: edmc^2
I can name several but let me just posit these two:

The concept of Infinity and outside of the material universe.


The concept of infinity has to do with numbers and counting. It is a concept, therefor has a cause. The human mind and math. It's not a tangible thing that you can measure or even determine to exist and neither is "outside of the material universe". Nice try.



posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 04:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: Barcs

originally posted by: edmc^2
I can name several but let me just posit these two:

The concept of Infinity and outside of the material universe.


The concept of infinity has to do with numbers and counting. It is a concept, therefor has a cause. The human mind and math. It's not a tangible thing that you can measure or even determine to exist and neither is "outside of the material universe". Nice try.


I knew you will say the "human mind". But the concept itself is what I'm referring to. In other words - when someone says infinity - what does it mean - number wise or space wise (inner/outer)?

Nice try though.



posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 08:34 PM
link   
a reply to: Barcs






Saying that something is timeless, is much much different than saying it is infinite.


No it is not. No void of Space can be timeless, not even if it is infinite. It is just that it's timeline is a absolut constant.

There is only one void of Space that can be infinite and that is the void of Space that is a absolut constant.




What if the singularity is timeless and always existed? It's certainly not infinite.


Well.... if it is not infinite it must be a finite. So the singularity can not have always existed. It must have been formed like all finites have.

The singularity is not a absolut constant. It does not have the properties of being infinite.



posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 08:43 PM
link   
a reply to: spy66

You're trying to apply the laws of physics to the singularity and according to Hawking and Einstein, the laws of physics breakdown to a point of non existence once we reach the point of the singularity. You can't apply your interpretation of Space-time to the singularity that preceded the B.B. because the laws you base those interpretations on do not exist beyond the event horizon of the singularity.



posted on Aug, 26 2017 @ 03:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: peter vlar
a reply to: spy66

You're trying to apply the laws of physics to the singularity and according to Hawking and Einstein, the laws of physics breakdown to a point of non existence once we reach the point of the singularity. You can't apply your interpretation of Space-time to the singularity that preceded the B.B. because the laws you base those interpretations on do not exist beyond the event horizon of the singularity.



I have not Applied any laws to the singularity. But to the void of Space it was formed within.




You can't apply your interpretation of Space-time to the singularity that preceded the B.B. because the laws you base those interpretations on do not exist beyond the event horizon of the singularity.


Sure i can. I just have.

There are Things we can know about the void of space prior to the Big Bang. Because the singularity was allowed to expand. And it even allowes Our universe to expand today some 13,799 billions years later.
edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
20
<< 40  41  42    44  45  46 >>

log in

join