Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Four Questions for Atheists

page: 2
5
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 07:31 PM
link   
reply to post by snypwsd
 


I do believe the op has split.

Val valient thor? I have to ask why you believe this story?




posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 08:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Woodcarver
 


I never said I believe it. It is a theory I have come up with that can mend the two sides together so to speak. But it is very possible that if they were actually from venus that they could be our "gods" Given the fact that we are now at that point of doing the exact same thing. If we can do it in our infancy, whos to say that a alien race that looks just like us did the same?

In my eyes that makes more sence then what the bible preaches. I may be an Athiest but my mind is very open to the possiblity that we were created but not by a Single Entity.

Im the kind of person who needs proof, there is no proof in the bible, but there is evidence that tells us that Val Valiant Thor was here or at least some one claimed to be him and allowed pictures to be taken of him and his two companions.



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 08:31 PM
link   


Is it reasonable that matter has always existed?


Maybe it is. We have not yet found out. So in the absence of knowing we must form theories when you wear a science hat or have faith when you don't.



Is it reasonable that matter came from nothing?


Nothing cannot make matter. You cannot replace matter with nothing. You cannot destroy or create matter, you can only transform it. Nothing is lost and nothing is created. Now for the theory/faith part, I believe that something that transcends time and space made everything.



Is it reasonable that life came from Non-life?


No. I don't think life came from void. Again, something that transcends all that made life. Bow weak humans, we are not the masters of the universe!



Is it reasonable that man progresses and animals never do?


Do animals need jails, aside from the ones humans build? Do animals need money to play fair? Progress is relative. More species are going extinct because of our "progression". I don't see progression, I see a selfish progression. We were made to see what is right and wrong with our souls/reason/hearts, we are ignoring what is wrong and what is right most of the time. Animals stay in equilibrium with their environment, "civilized" man does what? Consume till death then takes pictures of the cosmos in search of new life to destroy. Have we progressed? (sorry for the negative tone, I just don't see the great progress that so many love)

edit on 17-2-2014 by bitsforbytes because: (no reason given)
edit on 17-2-2014 by bitsforbytes because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 09:34 PM
link   
reply to post by ChesterJohn
 


ChesterJohn it is people like you that make athiests mad. Every time one of these threads comes up (religious person asking athiest) it seems like the Religious person asking the questions never remains in the conversation. We have answered your questions in hopes of having a nice conversation about it with you, BUT YOUR NOT HERE TO ANSWER OUR QUESTIONS....

That is not fair at all... Why start a thread if you your self will not comment on it?

The least you can do is man up and have a conversation with the rest of us, is that too much to ask for?? I guess so.



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 09:44 PM
link   
reply to post by snypwsd
 


I went and read the stories of val thor. At bibliotecapleides? You do know that everyhing on that site is fiction? You say you dont believe this story but then you say your using it as part of a theory to bring together two sides of a story? A theory requires evidence. There is no more evidence for the existence of val thor on that site than there is for the existence of jesus. I dont understand what your talking about. Perhaps you can help me understand? I really don't mean to sound rude. I am genuinely curious. The OP seems to have abandoned the thread but in the spirit of not derailing the thread, perhaps you could pm me or even start another thread and bring all your evidence there to be discussed?



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 10:44 PM
link   
You know what it's fine to read about answers in a book, but it's another thing to find answers yourself. Don't judge us or anyone else for what they see as their own solution to a problem or you become just as bad as them.

I don't proclaim to know anything about the universe but if there's a word of advice I can leave for you this is it.

You are just as blind as us the only difference is you don't know it. God didn't give you answers a book did I had to learn from experience and will continue to do so. Put your own meaning into your own life and so shall we. I can't speak for all of us though it's in human nature to fight amongst each other till nothing's left.


Don't dwell on matter's like this heavily, you'll get nowhere by doing that.



posted on Feb, 18 2014 @ 01:28 AM
link   

ChesterJohn
Is it reasonable that matter has always existed?


Yes, you can't create something from nothing.


ChesterJohnIs it reasonable that matter came from nothing?


This contradicts the first question, how can matter have always existed if it was created, at any point, from nothing? (See answer to above question)


ChesterJohnIs it reasonable that life came from Non-life?


No, life comesw from life...


ChesterJohnIs it reasonable that man progresses and animals never do?


Yes, you only have to look at the abundant life forms on this planet to see that (maybe on other planets some of the "animals" are in control, who knows?)



posted on Feb, 18 2014 @ 01:48 AM
link   
reply to post by djz3ro
 





Yes, you can't create something from nothing.


But isnt that against the definition of finite?



posted on Feb, 18 2014 @ 08:53 AM
link   

blueyezblkdragon


Don't dwell on matter's like this heavily, you'll get nowhere by doing that.


Hi dragon. There are several people on this thread that are making claims that are not substantiated with any facts. This one always makes me worry though. Without asking the hard questions like these we will never come any closer to understanding them. It is up to us to talk about these topics. We may not get a clear picture of the facts but we can set the format of how to discuss the topic.

We will never progress if we take this advice.



posted on Feb, 18 2014 @ 09:35 AM
link   
I know that it seems like you cannot get something from nothing, but it is not proven beyond a reasonable doubt. All experiments that have been posited have failed to present an example of nothing (it is essential to have an example of nothing before you can make any claims of its properties). The closest has been the work of lawrence krauss.

In vacuum tubes, which theoretically have all atmosphere removed from them, the sensors still detect particles which blip in and out of the field enclosed. (Very low levels of energy) Which would seem conclusive that there really is no example of "nothing" to deal with. However this process is still on the cutting edge of science and new discoveries will always be expected. (It is very possible that there actually cannot be an example of "nothing" but it is far from settled)

It is known that matter and energy are interchangable and that matter has four very distinct states; Solid, liquid, gas, and plasma. Everyone has a good understanding of the first three, but plasma is still in the discovery stage. It seems that at extremely high temperatures, matter takes on the form of plasma. It does not respond like any of the other forms and the possible properties are still being worked out. It is my hypothesis that plasma or maybe some other state of matter that we are not aware of could describe the state of the universe before the "big bang" (if i win the nobel i'll come back and tell you all about it)




ChesterJohnIs it reasonable that life came from Non-life?



No, life comesw from life...


This is simply not true. It is known that all living organisms are a collection of non living material organised in a way to work together to become what we refer to as life. Broken down, any part of these organisms would be recognisable as non living material. Only when they work together do we percieve these mundane chemical reactions as a system of life.




edit on 18-2-2014 by Woodcarver because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 18 2014 @ 02:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Woodcarver
 


Asking questions is a great thing. However what has disappointed me is that no one here is willing to work together to support each other. On our own were weak but together were unstoppable. It's sad to see something like this split and divide many communities.



posted on Feb, 18 2014 @ 03:12 PM
link   
reply to post by blueyezblkdragon
 


I agree. But bibliotecapleides is not a reputable source for info. And these extraordinary claims are quite beyond a level of believability. I can go down some pretty deep rabbit holes but i want some hard evidence to show for my troubles. What makes this story compelling to you?



posted on Feb, 18 2014 @ 03:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Woodcarver
 





hypothesis that plasma or maybe some other state of matter that we are not aware of could describe the state of the universe before the "big bang" (if i win the nobel i'll come back and tell you all about it


If this is the case. You will have a case explaining how the stated was heated. And why and how did it cool Down to the temprature Our universe consists of today.

Finite is compressed energy. The state before the Big Bang was probably the opposite of compressed "Not compressed".
edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 18 2014 @ 05:19 PM
link   
reply to post by spy66
 


Actually, i was thinking it prob would be compressed by gravity and electro-magnetism. All the matter that a "black hole" can hold compressed into a single point (not even a point but more like a unit). Which would account for the heat. Hawkings has hinted at the possibility that a black hole can only get so big. Remember that matter really isnt solid. What we think of as solid is really only the forces that are holding the fields of atoms together. You are never really touching anything. However we still use this word "matter" which implies something solid. I think maybe mass may be a more suitable term. So imagine all this mass squeezed so hard that it literally changes it properties. Or gets squeezed through and is spit out "the other side? Creating a space between space. (Another plane of existence) (alternate universe) this pressure being released would be our "big bang"

Lots of question marks there. Im still working on the vocab to describe what im imagining.
edit on 18-2-2014 by Woodcarver because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 18 2014 @ 05:38 PM
link   

Woodcarver
reply to post by spy66
 


Actually, i was thinking it prob would be compressed. All the matter in the universe compressed into a single point (not even a point but more like a unit). Which would account for the heat. Hawkings has hinted at the possibility that it is what you get when a black hole becomes as small as it can. imagine all that matter is kind of "squeezed through?" And is spit out "the other side? Or compressed so much that its properties become what we know as matter here in this universe/plane of existence? Think of us as experiencing the inside of a black hole? From another universe?

Lots of question marks there. Im still working on the vocab to describe what im imagining.


Okay. I think i have read you wrong, because i thought you were talkig about "pre Big Bang".

That before the Big Bang the universe was a hot plasma universe.

I do agree that the singulariy was compressed into a hot lump of compressed energy mass.



posted on Feb, 18 2014 @ 05:48 PM
link   
reply to post by spy66
 


I edited that last post a bit. Tell me what you think about it now? Im glad you quoted that so it is here though.
edit on 18-2-2014 by Woodcarver because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 18 2014 @ 06:09 PM
link   

Woodcarver
reply to post by spy66
 


I edited that last post a bit. Tell me what you think about it now? Im glad you quoted that so it is here though.
edit on 18-2-2014 by Woodcarver because: (no reason given)


I have read it. But i dont know all that much about black holes. But one thing strikes me With Your theory,, and that is the part about matter being recreated over and over through the black hole.

- Point number 1. There can not be a black hole without the presence of matter.

-After one cycle the back hole would disappear. How would a New black hole re-appear and continue the cycle?



- Point numbr 2. For the black hole theory to be true. Shouldnt we have observed some kind of curveture when it comes to Our expanding universe?

edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 18 2014 @ 06:38 PM
link   
reply to post by spy66
 


In an earlier post, i stated that we can not discount that "something can come from nothing". Because It has not been sufficiently proven to be an untrue statement. It has likewise not been proven to be a true statement either.

However, it is my opinion that if mass and energy are equivalent and cannot be destroyed, only changed, then, why couldnt it be infinite? It is likewise not been proven though.



posted on Feb, 18 2014 @ 06:54 PM
link   

spy66

Woodcarver
reply to post by spy66
 


I edited that last post a bit. Tell me what you think about it now? Im glad you quoted that so it is here though.
edit on 18-2-2014 by Woodcarver because: (no reason given)


I have read it. But i dont know all that much about black holes. But one thing strikes me With Your theory,, and that is the part about matter being recreated over and over through the black hole.

- Point number 1. There can not be a black hole without the presence of matter.

I completely agree. In fact there has to be at least a certain amount. ( prob a large galaxy's worth)



-After one cycle the back hole would disappear. How would a New black hole re-appear and continue the cycle?

Well, im thinking like in our universe there are prob billions of them. Maybe they would eventually empty an entire universe? Or more likely there would always be loose debri ever expanding.



- Point numbr 2. For the black hole theory to be true. Shouldnt we have observed some kind of curveture when it comes to Our expanding universe?


Actually, we may never know how big our universe is. At the point of origin, the epicenter of the big bang, the farthest objects from the opposite side from us are moving away from us faster than the speed of light. Thats is to say, we would have to move closer to the epicenter to see more than we can see now.

So we may not be able to judge a curvature in the space that surrounds the field that is our universe.

edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 18 2014 @ 10:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Woodcarver
 


I agree some claims are beyond belief. And yes I too would like evidence perhaps something factual and not read out from the bible.

Why is it compelling? To me it's a small contained experiment going on here, it seems as though history is repeating over and over again within a small confined space, well that's how I would analyse it. It draws enough attention with each post giving momentum to this controversial topic.

Lets look at it from the perspective of a lurker or outsider for a second now he or she would either decide to join a cause, or they can do what I do. Observe the childish argument taking place and maybe attempt to quell the bitterness and hate between the two sides.

People believe what they want and I'm fine with it just don't stuff religion down people's throats.





new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join