Reply With Quote
Just for everyone's perusal.
They say there is no such thing as an atheist or agnostic in a foxhole with explosions all around you.
Ponder that for a moment.
I don't like posting my sources but I will make an exception in this case because I want to educate the sheeple...
A skeptic or atheist is governed by two main principles: 1) all beliefs must be supported by observational evidence, and 2) beliefs that contradict observational evidence cannot be tolerated. However, strong atheism states that there is no god, even though observational evidence indicates that the universe has a cause that cannot be detected observationally. So despite the lack of observational evidence for a naturalistic cause for the universe, the strong atheist believes that the universe has a naturalistic cause and that there is no god, contradicting the tenet that all beliefs should be based upon observational evidence.Detecting the non-physical^ The introduction for non-believers showed that strong atheism contradicts its own worldview by believing the universe has a natural cause despite the lack of observational evidence for such a belief. However, since there is no direct observational evidence regarding the origin of the universe, why should one believe the equally unobserved hypothesis that God created the universe? Although there is no direct evidence for the cause of the universe, we now have a fair amount of knowledge about the early history of the universe and the laws that govern it, which provide us with indirect evidence that a super-intelligent Agent designed the universe.
Atheists tend to fall into one of two camps. First, are the atheists who say that science cannot have anything to say about the existence of God. However, recently, the "new atheists" think that they can prove the non-existence of God through science. Although science cannot directly detect God, it can examine His creation. Consider the non-physical concept of love. We all accept that love exists, although it cannot be directly measured by science. However, if we observe those who love each other, we can indirectly measure the affect of love on these individuals' actions. For example, we might notice that they spend a lot of time together, they are constantly helping each other in various ways, and they come to each other's defense when the other is threatened in some way. Although we cannot measure love directly, we can measure the indirect effects of love. Likewise, although we cannot measure God directly, we can examine the universe to detect God's imprint on the physical world.
The Big BangThe best evidence for design can be seen in the nature of the universe and how it came to be. The process of discovery continues, since one of the fundamental properties of the universe, dark energy (or the cosmological constant), was discovered late in the last century. New studies continue to add to our knowledge about the universe and its extremely unlikely makeup.
Just right laws of physicsThe Big Bang theory states that the universe arose from a singularity of virtually no size, which gave rise to the dimensions of space and time, in addition to all matter and energy. At the beginning of the Big Bang, the four fundamental forces began to separate from each other. Early in its history (10-36 to 10-32 seconds), the universe underwent a period of short, but dramatic, hyper-inflationary expansion. The cause of this inflation is unknown, but was required for life to be possible in the universe.
Universal probability boundsThe laws of physics must have values very close to those observed or the universe does not work "well enough" to support life. What happens when we vary the constants? The strong nuclear force (which holds atoms together) has a value such that when the two hydrogen atoms fuse, 0.7% of the mass is converted into energy. If the value were 0.6% then a proton could not bond to a neutron, and the universe would consist only of hydrogen. If the value were 0.8%, then fusion would happen so readily that no hydrogen would have survived from the Big Bang. Other constants must be fine-tuned to an even more stringent degree. The cosmic microwave background varies by one part in 100,000. If this factor were slightly smaller, the universe would exist only as a collection of diffuse gas, since no stars or galaxies could ever form. If this factor were slightly larger, the universe would consist solely of large black holes. Likewise, the ratio of electrons to protons cannot vary by more than 1 part in 1037 or else electromagnetic interactions would prevent chemical reactions. In addition, if the ratio of the electromagnetic force constant to the gravitational constant were greater by more than 1 part in 1040, then electromagnetism would dominate gravity, preventing the formation of stars and galaxies. If the expansion rate of universe were 1 part in 1055 less than what it is, then the universe would have already collapsed. The most recently discovered physical law, the cosmological constant or dark energy, is the closest to zero of all the physical constants. In fact, a change of only 1 part in 10120 would completely negate the effect. The physical constants required to produce carbon and oxygen in stars is also narrowly fine tuned. A value for Hoyle state 2% higher than the measured value would prevent the formation of carbon.5 A value 2% lower than the measured value would produce lots of carbon, but no oxygen.5 Both are essential atoms for life.
"Unlikely things happen all the time." This is the mantra of the anti-design movement. However, there is an absolute physical limit for improbable events to happen in our universe. The universe contains only 1080 baryons and has only been around for 13.8 billion years (1018 sec). Since the smallest unit of time is Planck time (10-45 sec),6 the lowest probability event that can ever happen in the history of the universe is:
1/1080 x 1/1018 x 1/1045 =1/10143
So, although it would be possible that one or two constants might require unusual fine-tuning by chance, it would be virtually impossible that all of them would require such fine-tuning. Some physicists have indicated that any of a number of different physical laws would be compatible with our present universe. However, it is not just the current state of the universe that must be compatible with the physical laws. Even more stringent are the initial conditions of the universe, since even minor deviations would have completely disrupted the process. For example, adding a grain of sand to the weight of the universe now would have no effect. However, adding even this small amount of weight at the beginning of the universe would have resulted in its collapse early in its history.
http://www.godandscience.org/apologe..._god_real.html
Conclusion
No, God has not left His name etched onto the surface of planets. However, there is abundant evidence that the universe was designed by super intelligent Agent, who purposed that the universe should exist and be capable of supporting advanced life. The design of the universe is just one line of evidence that tells us that God is real and created the universe. The design of the earth and solar system is also quite impressive. Likewise, chemistry and physics preclude the possibility that life evolved on earth. In addition, human beings are remarkably different from every other animal on earth, suggesting a departure from naturalistic processes.
Just for everyone's perusal.
They say there is no such thing as an atheist or agnostic in a foxhole with explosions all around you.
Ponder that for a moment.
look into alternate universes hypothesis
Serious question. Why do you need a God?
Because life is a and then you die....belief makes me feel good...it gives me hope that this existence isn't all there is...based on my Koolaid research I have no doubts God exist...he's just chosen not to make himself personal to us at the moment...for whatever his reasons...the order in the universe is to complicated to deny the existence of a Super Intellect in a different dimension. I would even say the order on earth is to complicated to deny his existence...with all due respect just look at my Avatar if you need more proof...that's not accident......designing a Rolex watch is not by accident and neither is designing a human body...
The spirit world is real...it's complications are beyond the scope of our understanding and so is human and animal suffering...we can't understand it therefore we get upset with God and write him off...but he created us and so he gets to make the rules...that is a very dumbed down explanation but this is a Spur fan site...
Your Holy book should be proof enough, but scientists have made such great strides in the world that religion finds itself trying to defend its creator. Life is what you make it. This dying and going somewhere else thing... is there something out there that you can't have here while living? I'm off to dinner but I want to address the bold section when I get back.
Please don't tell me we're going to agree about something
btw there is literally NO evidence for the existence of god. anything you put forth is just grasping at straws and trying to explain something we haven't (yet) found an answer for. quit living in delusion
That's more an indictment of the foxhole than the atheist.
Reverting to primitive survival instincts when in immediate life threatening danger is evidence of nothing other than the human mind being scared less that it's existence may be ending and it wants to continue. too easy.
besides the fact that Koolaid_man exists and is allowed to post his threads on a daily basis is proof enough there is no god
I was thinking more along the lines that a atheist doesn't find a reason to go fight a war for wealthy people who never bleed for a cause. The "evil enemy" doesn't work for us.
I find this to be particularly stupid:
"So, although it would be possible that one or two constants might require unusual fine-tuning by chance, it would be virtually impossible that all of them would require such fine-tuning. Some physicists have indicated that any of a number of different physical laws would be compatible with our present universe. However, it is not just the current state of the universe that must be compatible with the physical laws. Even more stringent are the initial conditions of the universe, since even minor deviations would have completely disrupted the process. For example, adding a grain of sand to the weight of the universe now would have no effect. However, adding even this small amount of weight at the beginning of the universe would have resulted in its collapse early in its history."
this is applicable to any one of us being born...Koolaid was one of many billions of sperm that was ejaculated from his dad's ballbag and the only that made it to his mother's womb. the chance of any person having been born is astronomical but you exist because there is the 1/7000000000 chance that the sperm that carried your essence made it to the uterus. and actually because most zygotes are terminated before anyone even realizes it the chances of your sperm making it to the uterus and then successfully fertilizing an egg and continuing to full development is more like 1/100000000000. just because the probability is small doesn't mean it won't or cannot occur. so gtfo with this "the probability exists but it was so low that a grain of sand would throw it off
The uneducated typically have a conviction toward scientifically unverified or even unverifiable beliefs, both in religion and in government subjects. These are often the conspiracy types. They lack the foundation that would normally provide the obvious exit ramp when dogma rears its head. The uneducated are easily duped. Then it becomes harder to deprogram dogma than just teaching science. Often science gets rejected by the virus of dogma.
At 3:55
Just brilliant
and where's your evidence he doesn't exist? ohh wait let me guess it's not your burden? is that the only answer they taught you...I have all the evidence I need when I look up a the gas giants lighting the universe...or when I'm bout to hit them skins..I'm very appreciative of it
Please don't tell me we're going to agree about something
Calm down got. Just because you're a and I'm a stud doesn't mean we can't find something in common.
Kool trying soooo hard to justify believing in an invisible sky man.... it's like still believing in Santa Claus or the Tooth Fairy
When you study these religions you'll find that most of them are rooted in spirituality, at least the main three and their thousands of sects are. Belief in an unseen God makes you feel good. Al Green's music makes me feel good, but I have no desire to bow down to or worship him or his music. It's the spirit/everlasting life thing that gets me in religion, so lets just deal that. Lets take miracle worker Jesus for a second... he's worshiped as a God due to his miracles. It's said that he walked on water as proof of his Godliness. Having read the bible I find that its riddled in symbolic language. Is there a chance that Jesus walking on water could represent something more rooted in reality? Water represents cleanliness... purity, and a host of other things. Could it mean that Jesus walked a clean or pure life, and not on actual water. And when he tried to teach Peter how to live/walk a clean/pure life... he tried, but failed because his faith was too weak? For me this makes more sense because there is no purpose or reason to walk on actual water to prove a point.
What about life after death? This is the gran-daddy of them all when it comes to religion. Everyone is caught up into to pleasing God in this life only to go on to an everlasting life once they die. Again... what is the purpose? For one second lets assume there is a God and he did create us. He told Abraham that due to his loyalty and faith that he would allow Abraham's seed to live forever. In those primitive times I could understand people taking that literally, but today we understand quite a bit about the human genome. Its an amazing part of our biology. This God was so smart that he possessed the wisdom to create a man and through that mans DNA he could live forever... literally. Could this be what he meant when he told Abraham that his seed would live forever? And not that the actual person would go somewhere once they die and live as a spirit for eternity?
And speaking of spirit... who can prove this? Angels and demons and a God sitting on a throne somewhere pulling the strings in his very own Muppet show. If I say the spirit of my brain is at ease knowing the Spurs didn't catch Kobe at five this past June... I'm only insinuating the mental activity produced from my brain is calm knowing the final outcome of what happened. If I say the spirit of Duncan's voice shrieked when he realized his wife was going to tell his secret of loving men... I'm only insinuating the sound his vocal cords produced was high pitched. You see where I'm going with this? The spirit of everything is produced by something of material. The spirit of wind, the spirit of sound, thought, mind, air, and anything you can think of is produced by something of matter. If there is a God and he's a spirit then we produced him, or he's produced by something of matter in the universe. There is no such thing as a life force that exist within the body that goes on living when the body dies. There is a ton of fiction out there concerning God and life after death. Its all bull that requires you to have blind faith to accept.
and where's your evidence he doesn't exist? ohh wait let me guess it's not your burden? is that the only answer they taught you...I have all the evidence I need when I look up a the gas giants lighting the universe...or when I'm bout to hit them skins
lmao at your re ed falsifiability bull . you also can't disprove that god is a loving either with two buttholes.
The style of this post proves without a doubt that you are Ghost_of_Gashir
I see no reason to argue against someone who isn't presenting an argument (you). Everything you've posted (especially in this thread) has been defeated countless times already. It's too easy to vomit out material from another site that you probably haven't even read, then sit back and see who responds. You'll have to do better if you want anything but the standard "tl;dr" type responses.I don't like posting my sources but I will make an exception in this case because I want to educate the sheeple...
Detecting the non-physical
The Big Bang
Just right laws of physics
Universal probability bounds
http://www.godandscience.org/apologe..._god_real.html
You might be right in all that...but I'm a believer...no can say for sure what each parable or example means...was it literal or figurative is always up for debate...all I'm saying is there is no way a fine woman like Natalie with succulent breasts, a nice round and firm buttocks, and sweet nectarine vagina is the product of some mutant Star Wars like piece of bacteria.....no way...and then I come along with my nice chest, abs, and penis to compliment her...stick it in her and produce more life...no way man that's not chance....that's design....and I will tell you thi...God has a funny personality...sure life is bitter sweet...but at least he did give us physical pleasure...so I will take that...I'm a believer I believe in God because Science proves he transversed spiritual realm (a different dimension) and caused the big bang into the material universe...
why he's doing what he's doing I don't know...but I accept it because if he can create all that he has...I have to believe he has an ultimate or greater plan..I beleive life on earth is nothing but a pilot in the material universe..once he's done assessing he will fine tune again and for those that believed give them a place at his throne...or whatever it is they desire...I believe in the "fairy tale"....I'm all in..there is nothing else for non-believers...I imagine life can't be to joyful to not have a higher belief system
Life is much more enjoyable because I live it to the fullest enjoyment because it's all I am ever going to have, I don't see how you theists could be happy thinking you're going to spend eternity serving some dude with no sins up in heaven everyday forever.
Curious, what about out of body experiences when someone has died, but brought back to life?
These descriptions they tell us about are all too similar to be coincidence, don't you think?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
