If you are following the thread, then you realize you are asking a question i have answered several times.Perhaps the same place(s) God (allegedly) came from. Where did God originate from?
If everything existing had an intelligent creator then what created that (allegedly existing) intelligent creator?
If you are following the thread, then you realize you are asking a question i have answered several times.
The God that causes you to spend so much of your time here on this site trying to attack peoples belief in His existence...the God that has rules, roles and standards that you hate.
Here's a clue for you...even a blind/deaf person has evidence if they acknowledge it...Do you have any evidence for “his” existence?
We don't know but there are a number of viable ideas and hypotheses, such as a singularity or several ideas coming from quantum mechanics (which is well outside my ability to understand). The key point is that all of those ideas are being tested and assessed against objective evidence and where the evidence contradicts any aspect, it is reassessed and potentially changed or even dropped as a result. That is not faith.Where did all the matter in the known cosmos come from? What was the energy source that initiated the big bang? Where did it originate from.
Like what?I think there is a tremendous amount to be learned from the concept of intelligent design
See? You cant let your hatred and bigotry get out of your way. Your pretense of concern over intellectual discourse is laughably tragic.Like what?
We walked on the moon. We have a helicopter on Mars. We have a satellite that’s now left our solar system and it’s still working.
We have a telescope in space that can see things never before known to man.
We fully understand how to design intelligently.
What could be “learned” from accepting the concept that a supernatural entity can just poof shit into existence?
Technically there’s millions that believe that. What have they taught us? You know, other than the “fact” that being gay will doom your eternity to pain a torture.
There ya go.We don't know
Where did god come from?Where did all the matter in the known cosmos come from? What was the energy source that initiated the big bang? Where did it originate from.
Why do you always deflect with the dumbest bullshit?See? You cant let your hatred and bigotry get out of your way. Your pretense of concern over intellectual discourse is laughably tragic.
I'm not deflecting anything. Your posts seethe hatred and bigotry. A discussion on the value of what 'design' of the cosmos might look ike...the science, values, formulas, measures, compounds...etc...degrades into "What could be “learned” from accepting the concept that a supernatural entity can just poof shit into existence?"Why do you always deflect with the dumbest bullshit?
You're deflecting and avoiding questions. That's quite disingenuous.I'm not deflecting anything. Your posts seethe hatred and bigotry. A discussion on the value of what 'design' of the cosmos might look ike...the science, values, formulas, measures, compounds...etc...degrades into "What could be “learned” from accepting the concept that a supernatural entity can just poof shit into existence?"
And then you have the nerve to talk about "the dumbest bullshit"?
Its ever and always with you.
Irony is funny because it’s irony.Your posts seethe hatred and bigotry.
Except there is no irony here. I have attempted )(still try) to have civil discussions with you...and you are incapable because at your core you dont WANT a civil discussion. For you this isnt about a civil discussion...its all about attacking religious people and their faith...primarily because the values and standards religious people maintain are in opposition to you and yours.Irony is funny because it’s irony.
Projection.Except there is no irony here. I have attempted )(still try) to have civil discussions with you...and you are incapable because at your core you dont WANT a civil discussion. For you this isnt about a civil discussion...its all about attacking religious people and their faith...primarily because the values and standards religious people maintain are in opposition to you and yours.
Do you have any response to any more than the three words you cut out of my reply? The point remains that nobody has faith in (any form of) the Big Bang Theory and so that is not comparable or equitable to faith in any particular god.There ya go.
And you would say yes, based on faith. You LITERALLY believe a theory predicated on an answerDo you have any response to any more than the three words you cut out of my reply? The point remains that nobody has faith in (any form of) the Big Bang Theory and so that is not comparable or equitable to faith in any particular god.
If someone asked me if the Big Bang happened, I wouldn't say "Yes".
If someone asked you if God exists, you would say "Yes".
I literally didn't say "Yes" though. I said "We don't know" and went on to explain how there are a range of ideas and hypotheses which can be supported by evidence but aren't definitive. The key thing is that if new evidence comes to light, those ideas and hypotheses will be adjusted or replaced to account for that evidence. The Big Bang Theory wasn't always a leading hypothesis for the origin of the universe, it was only developed based on the observed evidence. That is the exact opposite of faith.And you would say yes, based on faith. You LITERALLY believe a theory predicated on an answer
Stop the bullshit. You pull the same dumb crap in these threads all the time.Except there is no irony here. I have attempted )(still try) to have civil discussions with you
Your posts seethe hatred and bigotry.
Mea culpa...I misread your comment. You WOULDNT say yes.I literally didn't say "Yes" though. I said "We don't know" and went on to explain how there are a range of ideas and hypotheses which can be supported by evidence but aren't definitive. The key thing is that if new evidence comes to light, those ideas and hypotheses will be adjusted or replaced to account for that evidence. The Big Bang Theory wasn't always a leading hypothesis for the origin of the universe, it was only developed based on the observed evidence. That is the exact opposite of faith.
Stop the bullshit. You pull the same dumb crap in these threads all the time.
You immediately go with an attack against me, just like this:
then try to claim some idiocy like you've got the high-road to the discussion, and it's everyone else who is being hateful.
Which is totally ironic seeing as how the entire body of DP knows for a fact you are the one who "seethes" more than anyone else here.
Back in the day when Isrial was just thinking up YAWH, YAWH started out as a storm god who received Isrial as an inheritance from a higher god. YAWH (who also had a wife btw) only had dominion over Isrial and you had to physically be inside Isreals geographical borders in order to worship YAWH. Isrial was already worshiping Baal, the resident storm god, so it was old-storm-god vs new-storm-god and that's why Moses had a fit when he came down from the mountain with the ten commandments to find Isrial worshiping Baal with the golden calf.Kinda puts it all in perspective...
All scientific hypotheses and theories are based on structured assumptions for some starting point or grounding. Otherwise, we'd have to go back to the origins of the universe for everything. That said, there are aspects of the field which includes ideas and hypotheses about what the nature of that starting point could have been. It certainly doesn't just ignore or dismiss that part of the question.Point STILL remains the same. The "leading hypothesis for the origin of the universe" still REQUIRES that it is taken as a given that all the materials existed. The "leading hypothesis for the origin of the universe" (which some people cite as if it were gospel) still has the same answer as the origin of God question.
Yes, you keep repeating that despite the fact I have repeatedly explained why that is not the be-all and end-all (you know, all the parts of my earlier post that you ignored to focus on just the first three words?).We dont know.
Which is what i have maintained all along.
That's easy. From the minds of people (most likely mainly men) trying to make sense of the world around them with no scientific foundation to assist,Kinda puts it all in perspective...
For some reason, anti-religious people really really really really dont like acknowledging the fact that their positions are predicated on faith. Accept on faith that all the stuff was just 'there'....now what....All scientific hypotheses and theories are based on structured assumptions for some starting point or grounding. Otherwise, we'd have to go back to the origins of the universe for everything. That said, there are aspects of the field which includes ideas and hypotheses about what the nature of that starting point could have been. It certainly doesn't just ignore or dismiss that part of the question.
Yes, you keep repeating that despite the fact I have repeatedly explained why that is not the be-all and end-all (you know, all the parts of my earlier post that you ignored to focus on just the first three words?).
The various scientific ideas about the origins of the universe (including but certainly not exclusively, entirely or definitively The Big Bang Theory) are based on starting from the "We don't know" and trying to work it out with evidence and logic. The faith option is starting with the "We don't know" and just coming up with a definitive answer for all time regardless of, even in spite of, any actual evidence. The two approaches are still not equitable.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?