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.
Originally posted by David291
I always find this silly. "He always" existed, he or she or whatever else was always there!"
So wait a minute...this "God" can create himself out of nothing or always be there, yet we cannot? So the idea of life accidently popping into existence and evolving into what we are now is wrong but God can do it? please...
Originally posted by ChaoticOrder
L I F E comes only from pre-existing L I F E
I just have to say this is one of the silliest threads I've ever read.
And I only have one question: where did the original life (God) come from?
It's always funny seeing the whole "humans and life are TOO complex to not have been designed. But, God, our creator, who is mountains more complex, has always just been."
so listen up you silly people who listen to logic and reason and beleive in science..... your all just silly, silly, silly....
Originally posted by randyvs
Anyways no and I don't think I want to if I'm going to end up believing something can come from nothing. And all that hocus pocus. Sorry I'm content with reality.
Originally posted by randyvs
reply to post by Shark_Feeder
No there is no growing weakness because I never said God doesn't defy logic.
God is equally absurd from the neutral position. It boils dowm to simple choice. In the way you make sense of your uni-verse. It is completely obvious God would defy logic. I just don't speak from the neutral.
What is illogical in my view ? Is to claim full knowledge of the universe by saying God does not exist. You can't even stop there if you say that. It sets off a chain reaction of illiminations . Soon the paranormal doesn't exist. Then things like love, Jesus Christ, other dimensions the soul and spirituality of man and with those things right there ? Soon the whole uni-verse doesn't exist. This I have seen coming from your side of this arguement.edit on 2-6-2012 by randyvs because: (no reason given)
#1: At no point did I claim to have complete knowledge of the universe...where did you read such ego? I didn't even claim knowledge of a creator. I was simply pointing out the lack of evidence for the existence of an all powerful all loving creator. Doesn't mean that can't ever change...but I am looking for real observable evidence.
#2: May I ask you why things like the paranormal, love, other dimensions, the soul, and spirituality of man apparently depend on the existence of an all powerful creator? Also, how do you make jumps like "soon the whole uni-verse doesn't exist"?
God... this whole thread just fails at logic so hard, it makes my teeth hurt.
That was just epic, using "Hocus Pocus" as an argument against science. The irony caused me physical pain.
Originally posted by randyvs
reply to [url=http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread846772/pg3#pid14249482]post by Shark_Feeder[/url
I only said that if you say God does not exist ? You are claiming complete knowledge of the uni-verse
Look for evidence of your own soul. You'll never find that either.
Do you have one. Yes or no only please.
Why? Certainly all things would. What kind of a quetion is that ?
Originally posted by MrXYZ
It's a hypothesis, which means it hasn't been proven yet and not fully backed up by objective evidence. There's still much that hasn't been explained yet...which is why it isn't a theory like evolution.
There's some evidence suggesting abiogenesis could be a possibility...but not enough to call it "proven".
Fact is, we don't know (yet) how life first started on earth. Claiming otherwise is silly. That's why scientists call abiogenesis a "hypothesis".
“One only has to contemplate the magnitude of this task to concede that the spontaneous generation of a living organism is impossible. Yet here we are—as a result I believe, of spontaneous generation.”
“universally accepted not because it can be proved by logically coherent evidence to be true, but because the only alternative, special creation, is clearly incredible.”
How do you build a structure, a house, a building, a system, a theory with a very shaky or even a missing foundation?
Originally posted by Kandinsky
reply to post by edmc^2
Once upon a time the inanimate became animate.
It's a heck of a concept to grasp and yet there's no other way it could be. Same goes for the 'Big Bang' Theory, it could be wrong in the details and yet is basically a case of something from nothing.
If you choose to add a layer of complexity and attribute it all to God that's fair enough. The unavoidable thing about that is your logic should take you to a point in space and time when even this deity didn't exist. That puts us straight back to...
Once upon a time the inanimate became animate.
How do you build a structure, a house, a building, a system, a theory with a very shaky or even a missing foundation?