the reason I fear the God of the bible: science

Originally posted by spy66
Prove to me that you can think on your own. Prove to me that you have at least some common sense.

Because i bag to differ that you dont know what your denaying.

Tell me what is the truth about everything. Where dose everything come from.

Do you dare to tell us. Or are you to scared to be denied. Or that your are wrong.

Please Go a head tell me. From the beginning.

That's the difference between you and me.
I don't claim to know everything in our universe and out of it.
Because I don't claim to know, how can I form an accurate theory?
I can make guesses which have more bases and logic than your God, but ultimately, I'm a truth seeker. I don't want to cap myself off by simply falling for the first thing that sounds good.
While creationists cap themselves off, atheists aquire more knowledge, and that knowledge gives us more understanding.

You want me to tell you how the Universe began?
How the Hell would I know?
Similarly, how the Hell would you know?
You don't. You simply fell for the first thing that looked good.
You're not seeking the truth, you're merely seeking to substantiate your belief system - and there's nothing special about that.

Originally posted by Annon Omas

There seems to be a re-occuring theme to your replies.
The evidence may lead a logic driven person toward this line of thinking
Bottom line is it hasn't happened, is is not fact

it works in facts and thats still just outdated research the szostak labs have been able to observe basic protocells form under natural conditions

they meet all the 7 qualaties of life, science isnt saying that it is life even though its self replicating and self contained simply becasue there is no clear cut deffinition of life

it has happened were here, were just working it all out 1 step at a time

and look at that last line 'the evidence may lead a logic driven person' no matter how much evidence exists if your not following logic your not going to get to the conclusion

Originally posted by TruthParadox

Originally posted by spy66
Prove to me that you can think on your own. Prove to me that you have at least some common sense.

Because i bag to differ that you dont know what your denaying.

Tell me what is the truth about everything. Where dose everything come from.

Do you dare to tell us. Or are you to scared to be denied. Or that your are wrong.

Please Go a head tell me. From the beginning.

That's the difference between you and me.
I don't claim to know everything in our universe and out of it.
Because I don't claim to know, how can I form an accurate theory?
I can make guesses which have more bases and logic than your God, but ultimately, I'm a truth seeker. I don't want to cap myself off by simply falling for the first thing that sounds good.
While creationists cap themselves off, atheists aquire more knowledge, and that knowledge gives us more understanding.

You want me to tell you how the Universe began?
How the Hell would I know?
Similarly, how the Hell would you know?
You don't. You simply fell for the first thing that looked good.
You're not seeking the truth, you're merely seeking to substantiate your belief system - and there's nothing special about that.

Tell me is infinite reale or is it not.

What dose truth tell you about that. Can Infinity exist?

How can you Deny others if you dont know.

[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]

Originally posted by spy66

Then i say!!! who will SQUASH what. What source will do what you say here. It won't happen on it's own will it?
That's impossible.

and i say why do you need a 'WHO' its a matter of what and there are several possibles

Have can time create it self?

who said it did? again there are several possables to what created time or if time was created, but as we dont really understand what time is your basic its observation of change in matter falls flat

and still doesnt prove god just that we dont have a great understanding of what time is

Have can Matter create it self?

again who said it did?

your playing with strawmen, not what science actually says as a possible or a deffinate

It needs a source. Tell me what that source is. Because your are talking about a source that is doing something,but your not defying it.

well as we dont know what that source is deffinatley then if i hang my hat on it id be using faith and thats a bad habit im trying to get rid of entirely

but while im unwilling to say for certain becasue we honestly dont know yet you see that as proof of somthing else which it really isnt

Energy. Is a form of something that exists.
Can you put Eternal or infinity into the equation of energy?
Explain to me have that is possible without a external source.

well energy is neither eternal or infinate it cannot be destroyed but can be locked in matter where it will stay until its changed again to raw ebergy or other matter

so again your making assumptions not based on what science says but on what you think it says, this is again strawman

and again becasue we dont know for certain 100% does not mean what you say must be right, where we have partial evidence for it and can go find more yours has none and its impoosible to find any becasue you wont look just say well if you dont have all the answers i must be right ...which is wrong illogical and child like

What could make energy if it is Eternal or infinite!

well it isnt so

What would make it have the form or life that it has if it didn't have a source or a beginning?

who says it has a form of life?

Nothing could of made it real or exist. So energy cant exist until it was created by something or a source.

it wouldnt be made it would be released form one state into another

So energy can only be finite meaning it has to be created by a source.

no released from a state again your doing the same if you dont know everything then i must be right

If not we wouldent know that energy even existed. Energy is a form of something.

energy is energy, matter is a form of energy but energy is always just that energy

And something has to exist if not its not real.

well we can prove energy exists so shall we try this argument agiant god and see how it measures up?

so far all you have done is use strawmen and logic to show that your strawmen are wrong

it hasnt proven god it hasnt done anything except show the strawmen your creating to be flawed, for someone that talks about logic so much one would expect you to avoid repeated use of the most common logical fallacies

Originally posted by spy66
Tell me is infinite reale or is it not.

What dose truth tell you about that. Can Infinity exist?

I can tell you what I believe is probable, but I don't know one way or the other.
I believe that there is a "multiverse" or "megaverse" outside of our universe and that our universe is only a bubble (so to speak). What's outside of our universe would encompass our universe and would either appear to be infinite to us (as anything we could imagine could potentially be possible) or would truly be infinite in the form of an infinite number of parallel universes in which anything and everything is.

If you were a 2 deminsional being trying to understand 3 deminsions, then depth may appear to be 'infinite' to you ,as it would be all and more than you could possibly understand.
Perhaps existence is a never ending level of deminsions and universes which encompass one another in a way we can't comprehend.
How can you possibly think that you could know such things?
All we can do is guess.

The one guess that I could take that would probably be the most accurate would be to say that all of our guesses are flawed in one way or another - as the understanding of such things are beyond our capacity.

Originally posted by spy66
How can you Deny others if you dont know.

How can you pretend to know when you don't?
I'm not the one pretending to know these things which lie outside our line of sight. I only have guesses which I take with a grain of salt.

Originally posted by TruthParadox

Originally posted by spy66
Tell me is infinite reale or is it not.

What dose truth tell you about that. Can Infinity exist?

I can tell you what I believe is probable, but I don't know one way or the other.
I believe that there is a "multiverse" or "megaverse" outside of our universe and that our universe is only a bubble (so to speak). What's outside of our universe would encompass our universe and would either appear to be infinite to us (as anything we could imagine could potentially be possible) or would truly be infinite in the form of an infinite number of parallel universes in which anything and everything is.

If you were a 2 deminsional being trying to understand 3 deminsions, then depth may appear to be 'infinite' to you ,as it would be all and more than you could possibly understand.
Perhaps existence is a never ending level of deminsions and universes which encompass one another in a way we can't comprehend.
How can you possibly think that you could know such things?
All we can do is guess.

The one guess that I could take that would probably be the most accurate would be to say that all of our guesses are flawed in one way or another - as the understanding of such things are beyond our capacity.

Originally posted by spy66
How can you Deny others if you dont know.

How can you pretend to know when you don't?
I'm not the one pretending to know these things which lie outside our line of sight. I only have guesses which I take with a grain of salt.

This is actually very good

If Infinity exists can it act,create or do anything. Whats you thoughts on that.

And can Finite be out side of Infinite. Is that possible.



[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]

Originally posted by spy66
This is actually very good

If Infinity exists can it act,create or do anything. Whats you thoughts on that.

Observing the actions of something that is outside of our reach may give it the appearance of having a purpose or being 'alive'.
That's merely an illusion as we don't understand the laws that it works on.
We can't understand the existence of our universe, so the alternative is to say that it was created.
It's a flawed human perception.

"If infinity exists can it act, create, or do anything?"

Infinity could simply be - all that is, inside and outside our universe, without end.
I don't see why it would be conscious or have free will.
Also, as I said before, our understanding of things are exceptionally limited.
3 deminsions may appear to be infinite to a 2 deminsional being, but do 3 deminsions have a conscious mind or free will?
Everything runs on laws.
Just because we don't understand those laws does not make it a conscious being.

Originally posted by TruthParadox

Originally posted by spy66
This is actually very good

If Infinity exists can it act,create or do anything. Whats you thoughts on that.

Observing the actions of something that is outside of our reach may give it the appearance of having a purpose or being 'alive'.
That's merely an illusion as we don't understand the laws that it works on.
We can't understand the existence of our universe, so the alternative is to say that it was created.
It's a flawed human perception.

"If infinity exists can it act, create, or do anything?"

Infinity could simply be - all that is, inside and outside our universe, without end.
I don't see why it would be conscious or have free will.
Also, as I said before, our understanding of things are exceptionally limited.
3 deminsions may appear to be infinite to a 2 deminsional being, but do 3 deminsions have a conscious mind or free will?
Everything runs on laws.
Just because we don't understand those laws does not make it a conscious being.

Very good.

And your right it dosent make Infinite a being. Your quite right. God is just a name humans have given the "Infinite".

God is just a definition. That's all God it is.

But since we have given it "the Infinite" a name. We for some reason image God as a human or a Being of some sort.

And it is because we dont know the Infinite source. We dont know it.
And that's why religion becomes hard to grasp. It's be on our understanding.

But the Infinite could make anything possible. Because it has no limits.

The Infinite is more intelligent then we ever could become. That to is be on our understanding. It's intelligence is unlimited. It cant have limits.



[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]

Originally posted by spy66
And your right it dosent make Infinite a being. Your quite right. God is just a name humans have given the "Infinite".

God is just a definition. That's all God it is.

But since we have given it "the Infinite" a name. We for some reason image God as a human or a Being of some sort.

And it is because we dont know the Infinite source. We dont know it.
And that's why religion becomes hard to grasp. It's be on our understanding.

But the Infinite could make anything possible. Because it has no limits.

The Infinite is more intelligent then we ever could become. That to is be on our understanding. It's intelligence is unlimited. It cant have limits.

And then you go and give God a human trait - right after saying that's not the way to go.
Just because we don't understand certain laws of nature does not make those laws "intelligent". They are simply laws.

Originally posted by TruthParadox

Originally posted by spy66
And your right it dosent make Infinite a being. Your quite right. God is just a name humans have given the "Infinite".

God is just a definition. That's all God it is.

But since we have given it "the Infinite" a name. We for some reason image God as a human or a Being of some sort.

And it is because we dont know the Infinite source. We dont know it.
And that's why religion becomes hard to grasp. It's be on our understanding.

But the Infinite could make anything possible. Because it has no limits.

The Infinite is more intelligent then we ever could become. That to is be on our understanding. It's intelligence is unlimited. It cant have limits.

And then you go and give God a human trait - right after saying that's not the way to go.
Just because we don't understand certain laws of nature does not make those laws "intelligent". They are simply laws.

Ehm i see.

Because i say that the Infinite is intelligent it has to be a human or a being. It's not what i am saying at all. I am saying that Infinite has unlimited intelligence. Infinite has no limits.It is unlimited. So it has to have intelligence to.

Don't think only a human source could be intelligent. Don't limit your self. That much.

[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]

Originally posted by spy66
Ehm i see.

Becuase i say that the Infinite is intelligent it has to be a human or a being.

Dont think only a human source could be intelligent. Dont limit your self. That much.

I see the truth outside our reach as a system of laws we can't understand.
Is gravity intelligent? Of course not - it's simply a law.
You haven't said why something infinite would posses the trait of intelligence.
You're grasping at straws.

Originally posted by TruthParadox

Originally posted by spy66
Ehm i see.

Becuase i say that the Infinite is intelligent it has to be a human or a being.

Dont think only a human source could be intelligent. Dont limit your self. That much.

I see the truth outside our reach as a system of laws we can't understand.
Is gravity intelligent? Of course not - it's simply a law.
You haven't said why something infinite would posses the trait of intelligence.
You're grasping at straws.

Well i think we are moving on a lot,but in small steps.

Gravity is intelligent but with limits within its own existence. I know that's hard to grasp. But we will probably get to that soon And dont ask me why we cant talk to it please

Laws.
Laws are limits or restrictions. But are they unbreakable! Or always constant.
Can you push or stretch a limit or a law! I bet you can with some intelligence.

The thing is that intelligence is measurable within its "parts" own existence. So intelligence is a law or a limit of a part.

You are made out of many different parts. And your very intelligent. If your different parts didn't have intelligence of some sort you would be nothing.

You parts wouldent interact to create you.

One part intelligence + one more part intelligence and so on. Can create something. Even gravity or a human.



So the Infinite source is quite intelligent right. When it has a infinite amount if intelligence.



[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]

Originally posted by spy66
Well i think we are moving on a lot,but in small steps.

I think we're standing still, personally .

Originally posted by spy66
Gravity is intelligent but with limits within its own existence. I know that's hard to grasp. But we will probably get to that soon

And dont ask me why we cant talk to it please

Well then you're using a different definition of intelligence than I am...

intelligence: the ability to learn or understand or to deal with new or trying situations : reason ; also : the skilled use of reason (2): the ability to apply knowledge to manipulate one's environment or to think abstractly as measured by objective criteria (as tests)

Gravity can do none of those things, and until you can prove that it can, I will label your response a baseless assumption.

reply to post by TruthParadox

I will label your response a baseless assumption.

More like a delusion. Gravity is a force that acts on everything equally. Why would anyone try to pass it off as intelligent?! Bollocks.

Originally posted by Good Wolf
More like a delusion. Gravity is a force that acts on everything equally. Why would anyone try to pass it off as intelligent?! Bollocks.

Well not so fast now...
Gravity is biased towards fat people, old people, and pregnant women.
So.. yeah ... let's not forget that...
Wow. I have the lamest "jokes" of anyone I know... I'll have to fix that.

NO i am not using a different intelligence than you. I have just broken it down.
From scratch humans are made up of what ever selected intelligent parts this Finite system needed and had, to create a human. "Evolution"
Our intelligence is the result of the interaction of the intelligent parts.

Gravity is the result of the same thing.It interacts with other intelligent parts but on a different level, because it is a different creation and a different interaction of intelligent parts.




[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]

Originally posted by LeoVirgo
reply to post by Annon Omas

 

Hello Annon Omas,


I would like to quote something you said in reply to Good Wolf.

"No.....you enjoy thinking your right, which is questionable at best."

How is his sharing his thoughts on the matter any different then a religious believer sharing what they think is right also. How is what Grandma says and what Good Wolf says...any different from each other. Arent they both thinking they are right? Are you not choosing a side, by stating that it is only Good wolf who is here because he gets kicks out of thinking he is right...and that Grandma is more right because you side with her thinking?



Just thoughts,
LV

Hi LV,

Yes, I do side with Grandma, made the decision a long time ago.
About my quote, I added "questionable at best" because I see no conclusive evidence that life began on this planet.
Noobfun and I are having an ongoing discussion on this very topic.

Originally posted by noobfun

Originally posted by Annon Omas

There seems to be a re-occuring theme to your replies.
The evidence may lead a logic driven person toward this line of thinking
Bottom line is it hasn't happened, is is not fact

it works in facts and thats still just outdated research the szostak labs have been able to observe basic protocells form under natural conditions

they meet all the 7 qualaties of life, science isnt saying that it is life even though its self replicating and self contained simply becasue there is no clear cut deffinition of life

it has happened were here, were just working it all out 1 step at a time

and look at that last line 'the evidence may lead a logic driven person' no matter how much evidence exists if your not following logic your not going to get to the conclusion

I am not against science.

Science, logic, working things out one step at a time to aquire knowledge is a good thing. Without science life would be alot worse.

Someday science may create "life" in the lab, but there would still be a problem with your theory. If this happens, you could state life "could have" began on earth. Could you prove conclusivly thats how life started. I don't think so.

reply to post by Annon Omas


We all side with people, nothing wrong with that.

But you were actually playing a little reverse psychology (many religious folks do ).

Good Wolf claimed, he discusses these topics because he enjoys it.

You came back and told him that he discusses these topics because he enjoys feeling like he is right.

Its the pot calling the kettle black, to make yourself not look as though you might also be here because you get joy out of showing others you think you are right and they are not.

So often religious people do things like this....like they are the only ones here to discuss things for a humble purpose.

I didnt find it very Christian of you to basically call someone a liar in their claims for their reasons to discuss something with you.

Peace,
LV

Originally posted by Annon Omas
I am not against science.

Science, logic, working things out one step at a time to aquire knowledge is a good thing. Without science life would be alot worse.

aint that the truth

Someday science may create "life" in the lab, but there would still be a problem with your theory. If this happens, you could state life "could have" began on earth. Could you prove conclusivly thats how life started. I don't think so.

if they are using conditions similar to the early earth to create life it will show not that it conclusivley formed that way but the probability of it becomes a whole lot better

it then forces the differeing view points to step up and actually try and prove thier claims, you like the word conclusive nothing in science is ever conclusive because it subject to better information

its a past event that had no observers so probability based on evidence is all we have

panspermia(microbes from space) is again based on evidence or at least the search for evidence its a hypothesis in action so can lower its odds of probability by finding it

the two other main ones relie on a lack of evidence and circumstancial evidence from myth with mass unsuported assumption rather then actually looking for evidence so the probability of those just climbs becasue of the evidence chemical evolution rna world and panspermia produces

they require faith negative proof (you cant prove its wrong so there - sillyness)

its a case of following the evidence or following a myth, personally ill take the first option

in the same way id rather see someone convicted for a crime by evidence then his eyes are to close together and his eyebrows meet in the middle so he must be suspicious and guilty of somthing so may as well be this



[edit on 22/12/08 by noobfun]