- Joined
- Jan 12, 2005
- Messages
- 23,581
- Reaction score
- 12,388
- Location
- New Mexico
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Scarecrow Akhbar said:Oh, in other words, the existence of extra-solar planets is an established fact, since you're using the "Big Bang" event as the standard.
Life is one thing, probable but no evidence observed. Planets are observed.
They haven't been directly imaged, but the effects they're causing are attributable only to bodies less massive than stars and more massive than gnats....planets.
AlbqOwl said:No Sweetie. I'm using the 'big bang theory' as an illustration, not a standard. There's a difference.
Otherwise we're arguing the same side of the question here. Except I can't tell if you agree with the scientists that the calculations they are doing are mostly likely indicative of planets existing. I do agree with the scientists, most of whom are going with that theory.
Now what if most scientists were disagreeing with this theory and were saying that the calculations were a real stretch? Would we still be feeling as secure with a scientific opinion that planets outside our solar system have been discovered?
Conversely, more than 90% of Americans profess belief in some sort of diety or deities, and a good number of those claim a personal experience with the deity they believe in, despite the best efforts of the Atheists to disprove their belief. That to me would suggest the preponderance of probability of the existence of a deity or deities.
Nevertheless, believers cannot prove the existence of a deity to another person any more than an Atheist can prove that no such deity exists. And at this time scientists cannot prove the existence of other planets any more than scientists can prove such other planets do not exist.
Of course there remains a possibility that we will develop technology to prove the other planet theory. I have no such confidence that that we will be able to prove the existence of God as that is definitely God's prerogative and not ours to do.
AlbqOwl said:No Sweetie. I'm using the 'big bang theory' as an illustration, not a standard. There's a difference.
AlbqOwl said:Otherwise we're arguing the same side of the question here.
AlbqOwl said:Except I can't tell if you agree with the scientists that the calculations they are doing are mostly likely indicative of planets existing. I do agree with the scientists, most of whom are going with that theory.
Now what if most scientists were disagreeing with this theory and were saying that the calculations were a real stretch? Would we still be feeling as secure with a scientific opinion that planets outside our solar system have been discovered?
AlbqOwl said:Conversely, more than 90% of Americans profess belief in some sort of diety or deities, and a good number of those claim a personal experience with the deity they believe in, despite the best efforts of the Atheists to disprove their belief. That to me would suggest the preponderance of probability of the existence of a deity or deities.
AlbqOwl said:Nevertheless, believers cannot prove the existence of a deity to another person any more than an Atheist can prove that no such deity exists.
AlbqOwl said:And at this time scientists cannot prove the existence of other planets any more than scientists can prove such other planets do not exist.
AlbqOwl said:Of course there remains a possibility that we will develop technology to prove the other planet theory.
AlbqOwl said:I have no such confidence that that we will be able to prove the existence of God as that is definitely God's prerogative and not ours to do.
i believe in tranquility said:ok i believe in evolution and all, but when atheists state that the Big Bang what started it all.......what started the Big Bang...thats where "the deity" comes in. but whatever its just a perspective that I will get bashed on for saying.
dogger807 said:And where does the deity come from.. what's his or her origin? No I find it harder to believe that a sentient being created itself out of nothingness.
Scarecrow Akhbar said:Nonsense. There's no god, and there's no god reason to pretend otherwise.
Why you people feel the need to invent one I discussed earlier,
but you people really should, in the interests of public health, not try so hard to spread you disease to others.
Scarecrow Akhbar said:Keep guessing. Someday you'll figure out it's not a religion, it's a philosophy.
dogger807 said:A new born has no religion so is therefore by definition an atheist.
Wonder and curiosity of nature are natural.
Belief in a supernatural being or beings along with sets of rules are not.
I truly do not believe in a god.
No not everyone is drawn to something higher.
The limitations you place on yourself are not universal.
I think a more accurate phrase would be " Everyone knows there is no god, but they are afraid to face the reality so they invent gods to comfort themselves."
independent_thinker2002 said:It's funny you should ask this. Religios people have no problem saying that god always existed. Yet they think everything else has a beginning and an end.
Perhaps our universe's existence is cyclical. Perhaps our universe will become what was there before the "big bang". Then we will have another "big bang". It's my wild uneducated guess. We don't know but it is as possible as any religious explanation I have heard.
FinnMacCool said:My belief in atheism has nothing to do with my belief in science. It more has to do with the fact that I find it completely stupid that there is some allmighty God up there who controls everything.
Another example is your statement “On the whole human beings want to be good, but not too good, and not quite all the time.” It sounds beautiful and true.
oracle25 said:Seeking to deny God is quite normal.
:2funny: Invent one? Please, learn basic logic. :2rofll:
Hmm, lets see, 90+% of the world has a religion. 10-% percent of the world does not, and were the ones with a mental disease? As I said, learn logic.
oracle25 said:This is because (at least the God I serve) exists outside space, time, and the laws of physics. The universe, obviously, does not.
If that is true, and you believe it, the only logical conclusion that you can reach is that religion could be true.
oracle25 said:I have often wanted to address this statement. I think perhaps a more accurate statement (if you examine human actions) would be "On the whole human beings want to be bad, but not too bad, and not quite all the time.". I mean, how often do you have to tell a child to misbehave?
Not all things have a beginning and an end.
independent_thinker2002 said:Your earlier posts about "learning logic" were hilarious. Perhaps you could brush up on logic fallacies.
My universe is cyclical example was to show you how making a wild claim without one shred of proof to back it up is absurd.
The only logical conclusion is that religion is just as absurd.
I notice how you didn't answer what was the largest positive and negative numbers.
This is why you don't understand physics.
Not all things have a beginning and an end.
independent_thinker2002 said:No, you can't prove that something doesn't exist, only that it does. But until god is proven to exist, I, myself, will believe that man created god as the first form of science and government.
Smells like religion to me..:lol:FluffyNinja said:Hey, look! The quintessential "atheist" just got caught. He actually said that he BELIEVED in something, and something which cannot be proven I might add. Can he PROVE that man created God? I don't think so, yet he clearly states that he BELIEVES in this.:lol:independent_thinker2002 said:No, you can't prove that something doesn't exist, only that it does. But until god is proven to exist, I, myself, will believe that man created god as the first form of science and government.
AlbqOwl said:Independent Thinker writes
See? You do believe in God.
That in itself does not make you religious. But acknowledging the obvious is a good first step. :smile:
oracle25 said:I have a very deep understanding of logic.
oracle25 said:Why? You do that same thing almost every day. You have done it at least three times in this paragraph.
oracle25 said:Whenever somebody makes the claim that "logically religion is absurd" I make them answer a simple question. How do you apply the three basic laws of thought (the basis of all logical thought) to your conclusion?
oracle25 said:Logically, the only conclusion that I can reach (applying the three laws of thought) is that a universe which exists completely on logic and order must have come from a being that is logical and orderly. Order does not arise from disorder (actually the opposite is the case) so there must be a creator.
oracle25 said:That is because it is 1) irrelevant, and 2) illogical.
oracle25 said:irrelevant because it has absolutely nothing to do with what we are talking about. And illogical because there is no "highest" number, you can always add more on to it, so the question itself is moot.
oracle25 said:Perhaps I don't understand physics. But I doubt this is because I know that there is no such thing as a highest number.
oracle25 said:Within the laws of nature they do. Notice you have just made a wild claim without one shred of proof to back it up.
FluffyNinja said:Hey, look! The quintessential "atheist" just got caught. He actually said that he BELIEVED in something, and something which cannot be proven I might add. Can he PROVE that man created God? I don't think so, yet he clearly states that he BELIEVES in this.:lol:
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?