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: 6
12
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 15 2017 @ 02:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: edmc^2

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: edmc^2

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: edmc^2

If something has no cause, does it have a beginning?



If "something" exists - - why would it exist without a cause?



good question. here lies the conundrum.

The ultimate question to our existence.

Can something exist without a cause?



Something meaning what? I'm getting the feeling this is a Creation question.

I believe everything is energy and evolved from energy.

What is the source of energy?


It's a scientific question - as well as philosophical.



How is it in any way scientific?




posted on Apr, 15 2017 @ 02:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: hiddenNZ
If a tree falls down and nobody is there to hear it,dies it make a sound? I'm three sheets to the wind now,so please do entertain that Pearl of beer wisdom.


This question has to do with human consciousness and whether the universe exists only because we are here. Might as well say...if there were no humans in the universe would it still exist?

The answer is yes there are sound waves with humans or not.



posted on Apr, 15 2017 @ 02:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: Ksihkehe

originally posted by: rockintitz

originally posted by: Ksihkehe

originally posted by: rockintitz

originally posted by: Ksihkehe

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


If something has no cause, does it have a beginning?


If something exists, it had a beginning.

If something exists, there was a time that it did not exist.

Infinity is an impossibility.


You would have to first prove there is a finite number of things. Until that is proven you could never assume there was ever a time prior to a thing.


No.

You need to prove that infinity as a concept is possible.

Which is impossible.


I don't have to prove infinity just because I was proofing the logic of your statement.

What you said requires proof of a finite number of things. I'm not agreeing or disagreeing. I'm pointing out that your logic didn't prove your premise.


You do though. Asking me to prove the universe is finite would require an amount of data that the entire human race hasn't amassed yet.

So I'm asking you to make this easy, and give me any example of where infinity is an observable reality.


That's not how logical argument works. There is no counter-proof. A logical argument either is true or not based on its own content. I don't have to prove infinity is true for your logical argument not to be sound.


How would I go about proving to you that the universe is finite?



posted on Apr, 15 2017 @ 02:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: rockintitz

No, we're suggesting something beyond our understanding. Both are unknowable. Both are therefore equal as theories.


Something outside of our singularity is unknowable since it would be outside of our universe. We could be talking about the same thing with different names. In either case time is not a part of it.



posted on Apr, 15 2017 @ 02:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: rockintitz

Either what is here always was, or it wasn't.


That is not necessarily true. What we conceive as our universe can have a beginning, what goes on outside of our universe has no meaning to us. Time is a product of our universe, what if time did not exist?


edit on 15-4-2017 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 15 2017 @ 02:36 AM
link   
a reply to: edmc^2

If it had no cause it had no beginning. Some claim that the universe had no cause, some claim that there was a point of energy before the universe that had no cause. Some have faith that there is an eternal God who had no cause.

In all instances whatever is the correct answer, what or whomever has always been in existence did not have a cause and thus never had a beginning.

Thinking logically this is the only correct conclusion. For something cannot come from nothing. And we exist and reason and have thinking ability and logic. Therefore we are proof of an eternal thing or person which was never caused to come into existence, and thus has always been eternally into the past with no beginning.



posted on Apr, 15 2017 @ 02:37 AM
link   
Also in response to the Evolution thing, life on this planet was not formed in a vacuum, the sun constantly bombards the earth with energy which could give rise to life. So the claim that somehow this stumps evolution i think is simply misguided.



posted on Apr, 15 2017 @ 02:43 AM
link   
a reply to: Xtrozero




Something outside of our singularity is unknowable since it would be outside of our universe. We could be talking about the same thing with different names. In either case time is not a part of it.



Agreed.




what if time did not exist?



If time did not exist before our universe then time had a beginning.



posted on Apr, 15 2017 @ 02:45 AM
link   
First of all, the chicken and the egg question was solved way back when DNA was discovered. See, DNA doesn't change throughout the life of a species. Therefore, since that is true, whatever came before what we classify as a chicken today was NOT a chicken.

The egg was the first chicken. End of discussion.

Secondly, is cause a requisite to action? Of course it is, dummies.

Name one action that is without cause. I'll wait.
edit on 15-4-2017 by Tempter because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 15 2017 @ 02:45 AM
link   
It is both the beginning and the cause, though it is also neither because it's waiting for you to measure it. Once measured, it's one or the other. But that now means that you're either the beginning or the cause by measuring it, so it will always end up being both.



posted on Apr, 15 2017 @ 02:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: edmc^2

originally posted by: rockintitz

originally posted by: edmc^2

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




If something has no cause, does it have a beginning?

There is no/thing that has no cause, therefore no/thing has no beginning.


When you say "no/thing" do you mean the emptiness, the void - absolute no/thing?


The human mind cannot fathom the concept of nothing. No matter what you tell yourself.


Of course. How can you fathom nothing if there's nothing to fathom?

But was there really 'no/thing' to begin with?





First there was one. then zero.

what about negative zero.

? explain those magnets to me !!



posted on Apr, 15 2017 @ 02:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Ksihkehe

I don't have to prove infinity just because I was proofing the logic of your statement.

What you said requires proof of a finite number of things. I'm not agreeing or disagreeing. I'm pointing out that your logic didn't prove your premise.


The problem is infinity suggests time is part of the equation, what do you have if there is no time?


I had an answer typed out, but I think it would end up causing serious thread drift. Would make a great thread all by itself.



posted on Apr, 15 2017 @ 02:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: rockintitz

If time did not exist before our universe then time had a beginning.



That is true time has a beginning...we call it the singularity...



posted on Apr, 15 2017 @ 02:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: rockintitz

If time did not exist before our universe then time had a beginning.



That is true time has a beginning...we call it the singularity...


Therefore anything beyond that is speculation.

Be it infinite universes, god, anything. Each are equally unknowable.



posted on Apr, 15 2017 @ 02:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: edmc^2
There's a question that had been asked around. But somehow, it's baffling why smart thinking people are unable to give a straight answer.
They go round and round explaining how stuffs work and how science work but never giving an answer. Sometimes they say the question doesn't make sense. Some say we don't know the answer. But some protest that it's a leading question. But really, are they being honest as to what they know or is it that they don't want to admit the obvious?

Well let's see where you stand.

But first let me please state this scientific and incontrovertible fact:

Everything that has a beginning has a cause.

So, what's the answer to this simple question:

If something has no cause, does it have a beginning?

What say you?

If something has no cause then you need to ask does it actually exist in the first place and if it doesn't exist in the first place then how can it be something. Maybe its just nothing! And why should or would something have a beginning if it doesn't really exist or isn't really anything! Something or nothing, beginning or end or just maybe nothing!!



posted on Apr, 15 2017 @ 02:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: rockintitz

originally posted by: Ksihkehe

originally posted by: rockintitz

originally posted by: Ksihkehe

originally posted by: rockintitz

originally posted by: Ksihkehe

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


If something has no cause, does it have a beginning?


If something exists, it had a beginning.

If something exists, there was a time that it did not exist.

Infinity is an impossibility.


You would have to first prove there is a finite number of things. Until that is proven you could never assume there was ever a time prior to a thing.


No.

You need to prove that infinity as a concept is possible.

Which is impossible.


I don't have to prove infinity just because I was proofing the logic of your statement.

What you said requires proof of a finite number of things. I'm not agreeing or disagreeing. I'm pointing out that your logic didn't prove your premise.


You do though. Asking me to prove the universe is finite would require an amount of data that the entire human race hasn't amassed yet.

So I'm asking you to make this easy, and give me any example of where infinity is an observable reality.


That's not how logical argument works. There is no counter-proof. A logical argument either is true or not based on its own content. I don't have to prove infinity is true for your logical argument not to be sound.


How would I go about proving to you that the universe is finite?


That's just it. I don't think you can. I'm not able to. When discussing very conceptual things it's hard to make sound logical arguments. That's why logic learning starts with simple proofs and advances slowly from there.

If you're not working from very simple and agreed upon assumptions it gets complicated fast.



posted on Apr, 15 2017 @ 02:59 AM
link   
a reply to: Ksihkehe

But i can prove that infinity does not exist.



posted on Apr, 15 2017 @ 02:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: Tempter

The egg was the first chicken. End of discussion.

Secondly, is cause a requisite to action? Of course it is, dummies.

Name one action that is without cause. I'll wait.


What was the first egg?

Can you have a cause without an action?




edit on 15-4-2017 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 15 2017 @ 03:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: edmc^2

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

Got an easier one, but no less unsolvable.

"What came first the chicken or the egg"?

Hint: No one knows the answer no matter how smart they sound.


That's easy. Scientifically speaking - the chicken.

Why?

Because there are things in the chicken that are not in the egg. However - everything in the egg can be found to be in the chicken.

You need to study up more.

ty.


But where did the chicken come from?



posted on Apr, 15 2017 @ 03:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: rockintitz

Be it infinite universes, god, anything. Each are equally unknowable.



It seems to me that God would just be an expression of what was prior to a singularity. If we suggest intelligent design then that seems like nothing more than a human concept to explain the explainable.

I don't think there are different unknowables just different ways we name it.




top topics



 
12
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join