If you belief in evolution and are atheist let me ask you a question ?

[QUOTE="Schwah"]

Sorry, I'm coming in WAY late but I'm going to answer the original question.

Answer: As an atheist I don't need to have an answer to all of the difficult questions. I believe in the big bang only so much as it's the leading theory of our times. The same goes for evolution. I don't need to have all of the answers and I don't feel the need to fill that unknown void with a god or god magic. 1. I put my faith in humanity and our ability to transcend our nature both individually and as a whole.

The same question could be asked of those who believe in God. 2. What came before a God? Was it always there? Yeah, well maybe the same is true of the singularity that spawned our universe. We don’t have the answers, the best we can do is keep looking.

tycoonmike

1. The nice thing is that it's because of nature and the theory of evolution that we are the way we are. Ultimately, humanity is an animal who will compete with other organisms, whether sentient or non-sentient, violently if necessary.

2. That depends on your own personal beliefs. I believe that before our God there was a different God who reigned over the previous universe. Once our God discovered His God's secret, our God dethroned His God and created our universe, whereas once we discover our God's secret, we essentially become God and as such can create our own universe.

In response to 1. I agree

In response to 2. That's nice, but where did you pull that belief from? Seems a little out there to me... which is fine of course, but where did it come from?

[QUOTE="tycoonmike"][QUOTE="Schwah"]

Sorry, I'm coming in WAY late but I'm going to answer the original question.

Answer: As an atheist I don't need to have an answer to all of the difficult questions. I believe in the big bang only so much as it's the leading theory of our times. The same goes for evolution. I don't need to have all of the answers and I don't feel the need to fill that unknown void with a god or god magic. 1. I put my faith in humanity and our ability to transcend our nature both individually and as a whole.

The same question could be asked of those who believe in God. 2. What came before a God? Was it always there? Yeah, well maybe the same is true of the singularity that spawned our universe. We don’t have the answers, the best we can do is keep looking.

Schwah

1. The nice thing is that it's because of nature and the theory of evolution that we are the way we are. Ultimately, humanity is an animal who will compete with other organisms, whether sentient or non-sentient, violently if necessary.

2. That depends on your own personal beliefs. I believe that before our God there was a different God who reigned over the previous universe. Once our God discovered His God's secret, our God dethroned His God and created our universe, whereas once we discover our God's secret, we essentially become God and as such can create our own universe.

In response to 1. I agree

In response to 2. That's nice, but where did you pull that belief from? Seems a little out there to me... which is fine of course, but where did it come from?

It's a combination of the theories of religion (God being the creator of all life and the universe) and the theory of the big bang, and what caused the infintesimally small point of matter to be there in the first place.

[QUOTE="Schwah"][QUOTE="tycoonmike"][QUOTE="Schwah"]

Sorry, I'm coming in WAY late but I'm going to answer the original question.

Answer: As an atheist I don't need to have an answer to all of the difficult questions. I believe in the big bang only so much as it's the leading theory of our times. The same goes for evolution. I don't need to have all of the answers and I don't feel the need to fill that unknown void with a god or god magic. 1. I put my faith in humanity and our ability to transcend our nature both individually and as a whole.

The same question could be asked of those who believe in God. 2. What came before a God? Was it always there? Yeah, well maybe the same is true of the singularity that spawned our universe. We don’t have the answers, the best we can do is keep looking.

tycoonmike

1. The nice thing is that it's because of nature and the theory of evolution that we are the way we are. Ultimately, humanity is an animal who will compete with other organisms, whether sentient or non-sentient, violently if necessary.

2. That depends on your own personal beliefs. I believe that before our God there was a different God who reigned over the previous universe. Once our God discovered His God's secret, our God dethroned His God and created our universe, whereas once we discover our God's secret, we essentially become God and as such can create our own universe.

In response to 1. I agree

In response to 2. That's nice, but where did you pull that belief from? Seems a little out there to me... which is fine of course, but where did it come from?

It's a combination of the theories of religion (God being the creator of all life and the universe) and the theory of the big bang, and what caused the infintesimally small point of matter to be there in the first place.

That's a pretty hefty leap from the big bang, singulartity theory and modern day religious ideologies.

That's a pretty hefty leap from the big bang, singulartity theory and modern day religious ideologies.

Schwah

That's a pretty hefty leap from the big bang, singulartity theory and modern day religious ideologies.

Schwah

It is because I do not see sense in either side alone. How could God have created humanity without anything else to go on? How could the universe have been created through, what seems to me to be an accident in science. It is like two sides to an equation coming together to form the answer.

1. Evidence for them, just as evidence for a defendant in a court of law can prove that they were involved in the purported crime, and just like it, if there is even one piece of evidence that cannot be disputed, proving that they were not participating in the crime, then that pretty much could disprove their guilt, despite all the other evidence.

tycoonmike

Yes, but as of right now, there is no evidence that suggests natural selection is wrong. If you believe that evolution by natural selection is wrong, then you hold a belief that is contrary to the evidence. To use your crime analogy, it would be as if you were a juror who thought a defendent was innocent despite there being absolutely zero evidence to support that claim.

2. No it isn't. For all we know, it is God that turns on the specific genes in our body that codes for our eyecolor, or our hair color. If it were a proof of evolution, then I would have evolved a set of tentacles instead of arms, or gills instead of lungs. All the fact that I am different from my parents proves is that their genes combined and chose what properties, physical and mental, I would have.

tycoonmike

When a biologist speaks of evolution, they simply mean a change in the gene pool of a population. That this happens, is a fact.

3. Then why do you shoot down a thiest's beliefs? To us we have "damn good proof" that God exists. Proof is in the eye of the beholder. I look at the Bible, and the Torah, and the Qu'ran, and I see "damn good proof" that God exists. You look at them and see really old story books.

tycoonmike

What proof? Feel free to post what evidence you have for God's existence.

As far as proof being in the eye of the beholder, you are quite wrong. Proof isn't a subjective matter. Something either is or is not proof of something.

4. And yet, it still isn't a proven concept, in spite of all the evidence for it.

tycoonmike

Before the big bang whier the universe started their was no time , space , or matter . HOW COULD THE UNIVERSE HAVE BEEN CREATED FROM NOTHINGNESS . YOU CANNOT CREATE SOMETHING OUT OF NOTHING . It it not one of the laws of psychics ? Their for their had to be a god to to create something from nothing . If you have a answer for me please tell me .

???

azargushasb

[QUOTE="Schwah"]

That's a pretty hefty leap from the big bang, singulartity theory and modern day religious ideologies.

tycoonmike

It is because I do not see sense in either side alone. How could God have created humanity without anything else to go on? How could the universe have been created through, what seems to me to be an accident in science. It is like two sides to an equation coming together to form the answer.

I can certainly understand being unsettled with our current pool of theories, but I still don't understand why you came to that conclusion among a near infinite number of other possibilities. That's all I'm saying.

[quote="tycoonmike"]

1. Evidence for them, just as evidence for a defendant in a court of law can prove that they were involved in the purported crime, and just like it, if there is even one piece of evidence that cannot be disputed, proving that they were not participating in the crime, then that pretty much could disprove their guilt, despite all the other evidence.

Decessus

Yes, but as of right now, there is no evidence that suggests natural selection is wrong. If you believe that evolution by natural selection is wrong, then you hold a belief that is contrary to the evidence. To use your crime analogy, it would be as if you were a juror who thought a defendent was innocent despite there being absolutely zero evidence to support that claim.

Just because we haven't discovered the proof that disproves natural selection (if it exists) doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

[quote="tycoonmike"]
2. No it isn't. For all we know, it is God that turns on the specific genes in our body that codes for our eyecolor, or our hair color. If it were a proof of evolution, then I would have evolved a set of tentacles instead of arms, or gills instead of lungs. All the fact that I am different from my parents proves is that their genes combined and chose what properties, physical and mental, I would have.

Decessus

When a biologist speaks of evolution, they simply mean a change in the gene pool of a population. That this happens, is a fact.

And yet, I wasn't disproving that it doesn't exist. I was proving that your example is a complete fallacy. Our gene pool,  more or less, has stayed the same over the last five thousand years. People still have arms and legs, we still have hair on our heads, we still spread our genes through the same manner. Just because we are born to our parents and yet look different doesn't prove that evolution exists.

[quote="tycoonmike"]

3. Then why do you shoot down a thiest's beliefs? To us we have "damn good proof" that God exists. Proof is in the eye of the beholder. I look at the Bible, and the Torah, and the Qu'ran, and I see "damn good proof" that God exists. You look at them and see really old story books.

Decessus

What proof? Feel free to post what evidence you have for God's existence.

As far as proof being in the eye of the beholder, you are quite wrong. Proof isn't a subjective matter. Something either is or is not proof of something.

Then why can't you accept the Bible as proof that God exists and I can?

[quote="tycoonmike"]

4. And yet, it still isn't a proven concept, in spite of all the evidence for it.

Decessus

Actually, I havent refused to believe that it's true. I believe that evolution exists. That's called playing the Devil's advocate, but I see the most minute chance in this universe that what we know as evolution is a fallacy.

And let's stop doing this, using multiple quotes in our posts, it's giving me a headache.

I think people need to start tolerating eachother. :|Media_geek20

 if god came first, what would he walk upon? Toaster_Cell

why would he have senses and limbs if nothing to sense never existed. and how long was he just floating around until he wanted to create the universe? Why? and if he didn't create the universe, where could he exist if there is nothing to exist in?
Toaster_Cell

[QUOTE="Toaster_Cell"]
if god came first, what would he walk upon? withouthatred

why would he have senses and limbs if nothing to sense never existed. and how long was he just floating around until he wanted to create the universe? Why? and if he didn't create the universe, where could he exist if there is nothing to exist in?
Toaster_Cell

thank you, one more. why wouldn't he need to walk, Toaster_Cell

if he created us in his likenes, he wouldn't have given us legs he he didn't have them. oh, and why didnt he stop all those wars fought over religion. millions of jews, christians, and muslims killing eachother cause god said it was a good idea. crusades, the holuocaust, man, this god loves death and destruction. and how come he doesn't talk to us anymore?
Toaster_Cell

[QUOTE="Toaster_Cell"]
thank you, one more. why wouldn't he need to walk, withouthatred

if he created us in his likenes, he wouldn't have given us legs he he didn't have them. oh, and why didnt he stop all those wars fought over religion. millions of jews, christians, and muslims killing eachother cause god said it was a good idea. crusades, the holuocaust, man, this god loves death and destruction. and how come he doesn't talk to us anymore?
Toaster_Cell

[QUOTE="withouthatred"]

[QUOTE="Toaster_Cell"]
thank you, one more. why wouldn't he need to walk, Toaster_Cell

if he created us in his likenes, he wouldn't have given us legs he he didn't have them. oh, and why didnt he stop all those wars fought over religion. millions of jews, christians, and muslims killing eachother cause god said it was a good idea. crusades, the holuocaust, man, this god loves death and destruction. and how come he doesn't talk to us anymore?
Toaster_Cell

[QUOTE="Toaster_Cell"][QUOTE="withouthatred"]

[QUOTE="Toaster_Cell"]
thank you, one more. why wouldn't he need to walk, withouthatred

if he created us in his likenes, he wouldn't have given us legs he he didn't have them. oh, and why didnt he stop all those wars fought over religion. millions of jews, christians, and muslims killing eachother cause god said it was a good idea. crusades, the holuocaust, man, this god loves death and destruction. and how come he doesn't talk to us anymore?
Toaster_Cell

Before the big bang whier the universe started their was no time , space , or matter . HOW COULD THE UNIVERSE HAVE BEEN CREATED FROM NOTHINGNESS . YOU CANNOT CREATE SOMETHING OUT OF NOTHING . It it not one of the laws of psychics ? Their for their had to be a god to to create something  from nothing . If you have a answer for me please tell me .

???

azargushasb

Such a onesided argument.  Try critical empathy next time.  You do not need the energy to create the big bang when multiple universes exist (which is currently the case according to current observations).  Two universes colliding creates enough energy for a great many things. 

The question that you should be asking is...if God is all powerful, omniscient, omnipresent, and the like, then why would he even need human beings?  Seriously, why does he need human beings?  Because, if you say that it's because God wants to be loved, adored, and worshipped, then God is actually breaking one of his own commandments...Thou shall not covet.  I think God just has a psychological complex. 

i believe in islam:)

Just because we haven't discovered the proof that disproves natural selection (if it exists) doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

tycoonmike

This is beside the point.  The point is that as of today, there is no proof that is contrary to natural selection.  If you believe that natural selection is wrong, you are holding an unreasonable belief because there is nothing to support your claim that evolution by natural selection is wrong.  It would be no different than if I were to believe that tomorrow I was going to get hit by a meteorite.  Such a belief is contrary to all evidence and it is a belief that should not be taken seriously because it is irrational.

And yet, I wasn't disproving that it doesn't exist. I was proving that your example is a complete fallacy. Our gene pool, more or less, has stayed the same over the last five thousand years. People still have arms and legs, we still have hair on our heads, we still spread our genes through the same manner. Just because we are born to our parents and yet look different doesn't prove that evolution exists.

tycoonmike

It does prove evolution exists.  Your DNA is not the same as your parents DNA, thus your genes are not the same.  A change in genes has occured, thus evolution has occured.

Then why can't you accept the Bible as proof that God exists and I can?

tycoonmike

I'm not going to directly answer this question, but instead I'm going to try to the concept that I think you are misunderstanding.  When stating a proposition, that proposition is going to be either true, or it's going to be false.

    Example: "Evolution is caused by natural selection".

This statement is either true or it's false.  As I present evidence for this proposition, that evidence is either going to support my claim, or it isn't.  Our disagreement is going to come from whether or not we believe that the evidence is in fact support for the claim.  However, this doesn't alter the idea that it either is or is not proof for the proposition.  That is why it is objective.  A subjective statement is something that does not have any kind of truth value.

     Example: "Vanilla ice cream is good"

The reason this is a subjective statement is because of the nature of the word "good".  Something is good based on personal preference, thus there is no universal truth to it.  That's why it is subjective and not objective.

Actually, I havent refused to believe that it's true. I believe that evolution exists. That's called playing the Devil's advocate, but I see the most minute chance in this universe that what we know as evolution is a fallacy.

And let's stop doing this, using multiple quotes in our posts, it's giving me a headache.

tycoonmike

Such a onesided argument. Try critical empathy next time. You do not need the energy to create the big bang when multiple universes exist (which is currently the case according to current observations). Two universes colliding creates enough energy for a great many things.

The question that you should be asking is...if God is all powerful, omniscient, omnipresent, and the like, then why would he even need human beings? Seriously, why does he need human beings? Because, if you say that it's because God wants to be loved, adored, and worshipped, then God is actually breaking one of his own commandments...Thou shall not covet. I think God just has a psychological complex.

drj077

[QUOTE="tycoonmike"]

Just because we haven't discovered the proof that disproves natural selection (if it exists) doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Decessus

This is beside the point.  The point is that as of today, there is no proof that is contrary to natural selection.  If you believe that natural selection is wrong, you are holding an unreasonable belief because there is nothing to support your claim that evolution by natural selection is wrong.  It would be no different than if I were to believe that tomorrow I was going to get hit by a meteorite.  Such a belief is contrary to all evidence and it is a belief that should not be taken seriously because it is irrational.

As well as...

[quote="tycoonmike"]

Then why can't you accept the Bible as proof that God exists and I can?

Decessus

I'm not going to directly answer this question, but instead I'm going to try to the concept that I think you are misunderstanding.  When stating a proposition, that proposition is going to be either true, or it's going to be false.

    Example: "Evolution is caused by natural selection".

This statement is either true or it's false.  As I present evidence for this proposition, that evidence is either going to support my claim, or it isn't.  Our disagreement is going to come from whether or not we believe that the evidence is in fact support for the claim.  However, this doesn't alter the idea that it either is or is not proof for the proposition.  That is why it is objective.  A subjective statement is something that does not have any kind of truth value.

     Example: "Vanilla ice cream is good"

The reason this is a subjective statement is because of the nature of the word "good".  Something is good based on personal preference, thus there is no universal truth to it.  That's why it is subjective and not objective.

In the centennial version of 1984 by George Orwell, released by Borders, the afterword goes into detail to prove that proof is subjective. Since I don't have the book in front of me, I cannot recall it verbatim, so bear with me:

If I worked for company A, which is in direct competion with company B, each of whom produce a similar product (for sake of argument, soda, meaning company A is Coca-Cola and company B is Pepsi-Cola) Because I work for Coca-Cola, no matter what position, whether I be a CEO or a technician on the bottling machines, Coca-Cola is the better product and Pepsi is crap. Whether or not I believe this doesn't matter, it must be the better product, and the only proof I need to confirm that is the paycheck with my name on it and the Coca-Cola logo on it, and not the Pepsi-Cola logo. Now, through the inner machinations of big business, I end up working for Pepsi-Cola. Now, because I work for them, no matter the position, Pepsi is the better product, and Coca-Cola is crap. Whether or not I believe this doesn't matter, the only proof I need comes with the paycheck I recieve that has both my name and the Pepsi-Cola logo on it and not the Coca-Cola logo. How can both items be the better product over each other if proof wasn't subjective?

[quote="tycoonmike"]

And yet, I wasn't disproving that it doesn't exist. I was proving that your example is a complete fallacy. Our gene pool, more or less, has stayed the same over the last five thousand years. People still have arms and legs, we still have hair on our heads, we still spread our genes through the same manner. Just because we are born to our parents and yet look different doesn't prove that evolution exists.

Decessus

It does prove evolution exists.  Your DNA is not the same as your parents DNA, thus your genes are not the same.  A change in genes has occured, thus evolution has occured.

And yet, the genes themselves stayed the same. As I said, I still have 206 bones, two arms, two legs, a brain, a heart, two lungs, a stomach, and all the other things that my parent's have, the only reason I am different is because of my personality, my own beliefs, or my mental state, which is easily altered by the world around me.

[quote="tycoonmike"]

Actually, I havent refused to believe that it's true. I believe that evolution exists. That's called playing the Devil's advocate, but I see the most minute chance in this universe that what we know as evolution is a fallacy.

And let's stop doing this, using multiple quotes in our posts, it's giving me a headache.

Decessus

Actually, I have been using the word fallacy correctly: ( Link )

1.a deceptive, misleading, or false notion, belief, etc.: That the world is flat was at one time a popular fallacy.

2.a misleading or unsound argument.

3.deceptive, misleading, or false nature; erroneousness.

That's what I mean, using this absurd system that requires us to go back and forth between our quotes. Just italicise what you find to be wrong and number it, and put the number below and respond to that number.

[QUOTE="azargushasb"]

Before the big bang whier the universe started their was no time , space , or matter . HOW COULD THE UNIVERSE HAVE BEEN CREATED FROM NOTHINGNESS . YOU CANNOT CREATE SOMETHING OUT OF NOTHING . It it not one of the laws of psychics ? Their for their had to be a god to to create something  from nothing . If you have a answer for me please tell me .

???

poponche

due, I'm catholic, but u are walking tru thin ice........

they'll ask. but then, where did God come from?, if he exists since always so could matter and stuff..........

Before the big bang whier the universe started their was no time , space , or matter . HOW COULD THE UNIVERSE HAVE BEEN CREATED FROM NOTHINGNESS . YOU CANNOT CREATE SOMETHING OUT OF NOTHING . It it not one of the laws of psychics ? Their for their had to be a god to to create something from nothing . If you have a answer for me please tell me .

???

azargushasb

Yeah I don't know what to believe anymore. I don't really believe in that Adam and Eve stuff because then how were there dinosaurs, and the Big Bang doesn't really make since because explosions usually don't create stuff.Trickshot771

Before the big bang whier the universe started their was no time , space , or matter . HOW COULD THE UNIVERSE HAVE BEEN CREATED FROM NOTHINGNESS . YOU CANNOT CREATE SOMETHING OUT OF NOTHING . It it not one of the laws of psychics ? Their for their had to be a god to to create something from nothing . If you have a answer for me please tell me .

???

azargushasb

Haha, you wouldn't know the first thing about the Big Bang.

Yeah I don't know what to believe anymore. I don't really believe in that Adam and Eve stuff because then how were there dinosaurs, and the Big Bang doesn't really make since because explosions usually don't create stuff.Trickshot771

Yeah I don't know what to believe anymore. I don't really believe in that Adam and Eve stuff because then how were there dinosaurs, and the Big Bang doesn't really make since because explosions usually don't create stuff.Trickshot771

[QUOTE="Trickshot771"]Yeah I don't know what to believe anymore. I don't really believe in that Adam and Eve stuff because then how were there dinosaurs, and the Big Bang doesn't really make since because explosions usually don't create stuff.Ninja-Vox

If you think about it, though, you can easily have both dinosaurs and humans in the same story. God probably had the idea of creating a master species on earth long before ever creating the universe. He then creates the universe through what we know as science, and thus evolution takes place. The dinosaurs evolve after a few billion years and God destroys them knowing that they would be the only true threat to destroy His master species. He then creates our species. I don't believe that God created the universe and all that may inhabit it in six days, I believe that it is a metaphor for the scientific explination.

Before the big bang whier the universe started their was no time , space , or matter . HOW COULD THE UNIVERSE HAVE BEEN CREATED FROM NOTHINGNESS . YOU CANNOT CREATE SOMETHING OUT OF NOTHING . It it not one of the laws of psychics ? Their for their had to be a god to to create something from nothing . If you have a answer for me please tell me .

???

azargushasb

Before the big bang whier the universe started their was no time , space , or matter . HOW COULD THE UNIVERSE HAVE BEEN CREATED FROM NOTHINGNESS . YOU CANNOT CREATE SOMETHING OUT OF NOTHING . It it not one of the laws of psychics ? Their for their had to be a god to to create something  from nothing . If you have a answer for me please tell me .

???

azargushasb

1.
As well as...

tycoonmike

2.
In the centennial version of 1984 by George Orwell, released by Borders, the afterword goes into detail to prove that proof is subjective. Since I don't have the book in front of me, I cannot recall it verbatim, so bear with me:

If I worked for company A, which is in direct competion with company B, each of whom produce a similar product (for sake of argument, soda, meaning company A is Coca-Cola and company B is Pepsi-Cola) Because I work for Coca-Cola, no matter what position, whether I be a CEO or a technician on the bottling machines, Coca-Cola is the better product and Pepsi is crap. Whether or not I believe this doesn't matter, it must be the better product, and the only proof I need to confirm that is the paycheck with my name on it and the Coca-Cola logo on it, and not the Pepsi-Cola logo. Now, through the inner machinations of big business, I end up working for Pepsi-Cola. Now, because I work for them, no matter the position, Pepsi is the better product, and Coca-Cola is crap. Whether or not I believe this doesn't matter, the only proof I need comes with the paycheck I recieve that has both my name and the Pepsi-Cola logo on it and not the Coca-Cola logo. How can both items be the better product over each other if proof wasn't subjective?
tycoonmike

3.
And yet, the genes themselves stayed the same. As I said, I still have 206 bones, two arms, two legs, a brain, a heart, two lungs, a stomach, and all the other things that my parent's have, the only reason I am different is because of my personality, my own beliefs, or my mental state, which is easily altered by the world around me.

tycoonmike

4.
Actually, I have been using the word fallacy correctly: ( Link )

1.a deceptive, misleading, or false notion, belief, etc.: That the world is flat was at one time a popular fallacy.

2.a misleading or unsound argument.

3.deceptive, misleading, or false nature; erroneousness.

That's what I mean, using this absurd system that requires us to go back and forth between our quotes. Just italicise what you find to be wrong and number it, and put the number below and respond to that number.

tycoonmike

I also think the example of a big corporation is a bad analogy. The problem is, again, in the term better. The term "better" is by its nature a subjective term. It's the same as my example about ice cream being good. "My product is better" is simply an opinion and does not offer any kind of truth.

Suppose I tell you that I just bought a new big screen TV. You don't believe me so you ask me for evidence. In response I produce a picture of my living room with the new TV. That picture either IS or IS NOT proof. You may not believe the picture, but that doesn't change the fact that it either is or isn't proof of the TV in my living room.

3. If you were to compare your genetic makeup, with that of your parents, you would find that they are not the same. Yes, you still have the same major parts that make you human. There are differences in your physical appearance however, which is a direct result of your DNA. If your DNA were the exact same as your parents, you would look EXACTLY like that parents. Not counting any environmental factors anyway. You would more or less be a twin to your parent, which you are not because your DNA isn't the same as your parents.

4.  Yes, you're right.  Usually though, the term fallacy is used when the argument itself is flawed in some way.  It's a minor thing though and not really worth arguing about.

Before the big bang whier the universe started their was no time , space , or matter . HOW COULD THE UNIVERSE HAVE BEEN CREATED FROM NOTHINGNESS . YOU CANNOT CREATE SOMETHING OUT OF NOTHING . It it not one of the laws of psychics ? Their for their had to be a god to to create something from nothing . If you have a answer for me please tell me .

???

azargushasb

[QUOTE="azargushasb"]

Before the big bang whier the universe started their was no time , space , or matter . HOW COULD THE UNIVERSE HAVE BEEN CREATED FROM NOTHINGNESS . YOU CANNOT CREATE SOMETHING OUT OF NOTHING . It it not one of the laws of psychics ? Their for their had to be a god to to create something from nothing . If you have a answer for me please tell me .

???

cmhawk

1. Did you mean to type something else?

No, the first passage is connected to the second passage through my response.

2. I think you need to read the passage again. The point of that paragraph ( I have the book and I've read the part you are talking about ) isn't to say that proof is subjective. One of the main themes of 1984 is how truth as an objective judgement is abolished. It does nothing to argue that truth itself is subjective.

I also think the example of a big corporation is a bad analogy. The problem is, again, in the term better. The term "better" is by its nature a subjective term. It's the same as my example about ice cream being good. "My product is better" is simply an opinion and does not offer any kind of truth.

Suppose I tell you that I just bought a new big screen TV. You don't believe me so you ask me for evidence. In response I produce a picture of my living room with the new TV. That picture either IS or IS NOT proof. You may not believe the picture, but that doesn't change the fact that it either is or isn't proof of the TV in my living room.

There are such things as half-truths, things where the statement itself is true, but not all the facts are given. "Better" may be subjective by nature, but so long as you work for Coca-Cola, all the proof that you need that Coca-Cola is better than Pepsi-Cola is your paycheck with the Coca-Cola logo on it.

Truth itself is subjective. Many of the greatest thinkers on Earth have proved that. Galileo, for instance (forgive the spelling) believed the Earth was not the center of the solar system, whereas, overall, the rest of the world did believe this. Skip ahead to today, now we're taught that the Earth isn't the center of the solar system, and, overall, everyone on Earth believes this. Both were true because both sides could find the proof they needed to determine their opinion to be right, in the case of the Geocentric theory, the thiests determined that the Bible was proof enough, and in the case of the Heliocentric theory, Galileo found proof by studying the stars.

If truth wasn't subjective then we would still believe that the Earth was the center of the solar system and Galileo would have been written off as a crackpot.

3. If you were to compare your genetic makeup, with that of your parents, you would find that they are not the same. Yes, you still have the same major parts that make you human. There are differences in your physical appearance however, which is a direct result of your DNA. If your DNA were the exact same as your parents, you would look EXACTLY like that parents. Not counting any environmental factors anyway. You would more or less be a twin to your parent, which you are not because your DNA isn't the same as your parents.

And yet that is not evolution. The environment doesn't demand any major changes like gills or tentacles or thicker skin. If it did, we would evolve to adapt to our environment. Saying that my genetic code is different from my parents means nothing except that I am different. I am not more highly evolved from my parents because I still have the parts they had to get along with (minus the female reproduction system, of course). And besides, because of our ability to create technology, I am convinced that humanity has escaped from evolution.Decessus

Oh, and did you get the PM I sent to you in regards to a previous topic we were debating?

i dont know, you dont know and no scientists really knows either. Unlike the bible and them "holy" books, science doesnt pretend to know everything! There are still many things that science cannot disprove, fairies, goblins, orcs, science cant exactly "disprove" this but at the same time you dont believe it!

so in short, science doesnt know but it doesnt pretend to know everything, unlike the bible.

Well the way that it works is the same way that you were to make spagehtti Bolinase.

All the ingreditents are there to make it but they are all apart and need some sort of force for it to be created, in the cooking sence you are the force that adds the meat, onions, peppers, mushrooms ect.

Where the big bang was the force that moved all the things towards the cooking pot where the sun is just now then boom, the sheer compression and heat that was caused caused all the planets and set them in motion.

I will not even try to get into discussion about the Big Bang. Tolerance and acceptance of other peoples and cultures is more important that arguing over whether or not God/Big Bang exists/happened. Ignorance may be bliss but that ignorance can lead to useless deaths and suffering.

WHAT CREATED GOD?

:lol:
Sylux3