Conjoint Gaming [Game On]
CG Main => Debate Forum => Topic started by: Holy on January 16, 2011, 08:13:35 AM
-
Question:
How did life get here?
Stipulation:
-All posts must contain the word "life" or a variant of the word "life" in it at least once.
Trendy ways to start this:
-Big Bang
-God
-Dark Emo's chest hairs
-
I think my chest hairs are pretty much the answer.
/seriousface
Well, that's a good question. I always thought something along the lines of the Big Bang and then God (or a god) was made from that.
-
ya i had the same thought but the real question is how do u know that their really ever was a big bang
how do u know what came before the dinosaurs and before that
how do u know if were really going to all die in 2012
is their any scientific proof of any of this NO. thats the real problem, their really isnt an anwser its more a matter of belief
-
Egg came first that is all
-
Egg came first that is all
And out from it a Riolu hatched :P
-
Well, basically what i believe is the membrane theory, which also leads to another one, which states that two of the branes could crash and create energy.
As you all know the energy in the big bang would be very powerfull, and it could be looked at like when a sun goes boom =P (even though it for implodes for then to explode =))
So in all posibilitie some strai atoms were created probly some Hydrogen atoms, that gathered in hydrogen clouds, and then move on to make the first sun, which then went on to make more atoms and so forth (I did leave out dark matter but that is besides the point right now).
After this a red giant was formed millions of years later perhaps billions who the hell knows, that red giant was then bombarded by astroids and so forth until the molten part was blocked inside generating a magnetosphere eventually.
Then atoms that were inside of that are started reacting and so forth, lets just say it was not made in a day.
Then most likely small carbon chains started reacting with things around it acids were made, aminoacids so forth.
From those small carbon chains came larger chains, in my mind then very simple bacteria was formed that then "ate" other bacteria forms of the time, acquireing their features and so forth.
Trough more time, evolution took form and so forth y'all know this drill.
most likely some1 will say TLDR now herp derp
-
Well, basically
ANd thats where I stopped reading and played Tetris (True story, cause I'm doing it right now)
-
Oh come ON! We already had those discussions. Please stop trying to convince everybody into another faith (Or non faith (Atheists) )
-
I ain't trying to convince any1 I am simply writing what i believe..
-
This is what I believe, your belief is bollocks.
-
I ain't trying to convince any1 I am simply writing what i believe..
Well, guess I am wrong (maybe ;P) But, Then why you you tell it to them? Just a question.
-
because that is the reason for this thread maybe?
the thread is about telling your beliefs not mocking others, or questioning others, just to write your belief.
So y'all need to gtfo of the debate forum...
-
The farthest-back cause would be the Big Bang. The first organisms were probably prokaryotic bacteria-like dudes, and then it's all Go-Go Gadget Evolution.
-
The farthest-back cause would be the Big Bang. The first organisms were probably prokaryotic bacteria-like dudes, and then it's all Go-Go Gadget Evolution.
go go gadget god
-
Um. Coincidence? Higher Power? Really, how do we exist?
What make Life?
-
Um. Coincidence? Higher Power? Really, how do we exist?
What make Life?
I assume I'll go with Dark Emo's chest hair as the most plausible explanation of life...
-
ya i had the same thought but the real question is how do u know that their really ever was a big bang
how do u know what came before the dinosaurs and before that
how do u know if were really going to all die in 2012
is their any scientific proof of any of this NO. thats the real problem, their really isnt an anwser its more a matter of belief
ERROR! We have proof things came before Dinosaurs.
Fossils (of Triobites). That is all on that post.
Also the reason your all alive is because I took a shit. I feel like taking another right now.
-
Some one said let there be life and there was... it was GOD
i really don't know and nobody really does. all i know that this might be best it ever gets so treat it like it is :D
-
I think my chest hairs are pretty much the answer.
/seriousface
Well, that's a good question. I always thought something along the lines of the Big Bang and then God (or a god) was made from that.
What chest hairs? trollface
I think there was a god because I don't understand how any of this could happen without intelligent design. It seems we were all programmed in a way, not just a bunch of cells somehow creating life.
-
God dammit I was going to dis myself on that... :C
anyways idk, I think the whole God thing was possibly peoples answers to things back then. they didn't know better or something. To explore more into that side, possibly some sort of weird and in that time, satyrical humor book was written. When it was found we had believes it to be a real way of life? I have no idea, but that sums up the universe. You have no damn idea.
-
I have been biding my time to say what my beliefs are. Rest assured, this is different than the religion thread, although religion is an acceptable answer to what you believe, this is meant to gather all knowledge shared by this community to perhaps give a hint to this answer. It's also beneficial that we correct mistakes and show where we got our information from to make a more valid point to avoid bickering.
I believe what the Bible says in that God created everything and I have scientific reasoning for this.
The Second Law of Thermodynamics states that the amount of usable energy in a closed system (the universe) is decreasing. In layman's terms, that states that the universe is slowly coming to an end over time. So it did have a beginning. Aristotle's causality (cause and effect) says that every effect must have a cause. This is to not say the Big bang didn't occur, but rather, that it must of had something or some being (God) make it happen. So If the big bang could occur, and a being (God) is capable of doing such a thing. Then it is a plausible to consider that the creation story has credibility to it and even that the Big Bang was part of the creation story. In Genesis, it says the first day water was formed [Jorgen brought up hydrogen being composed in the start of earth.] Science's explanation of land forming, then plants and animals goes hand in hand with God's creation.
Answers to where life came from similar to Jorgen's answer made me do some research. I found an error with:
Then most likely small carbon chains started reacting with things around it acids were made, aminoacids so forth.
Although this is a plausible guess, it has already been tested:
Evolutionists speculated that life came from chemical pools containing carbon, nitrogen, hydrogen and ammonia which combined randomly to form DNA molecules. In the 1950s, Stanley Miller performed a simple experiment to see if these theories would actually work. He succeeded in producing some simple amino acids, and his experiment was hailed as proving that life could be generated spontaneously from non-living matter. However, the proclamations were premature. No one has yet produced life from a pool of chemicals in spite of a lot of tinkering. Astrophysicist Hugh Ross comments: “Even under highly favorable conditions of a laboratory, these soups have failed to produce anything remotely resembling life. One problem is that they produce only a random distribution of left- and right-handed pre-biotic molecules… Life chemistry demands that all the molecules be either right- or left-handed. With all our learning and technology we cannot even come close to bringing life together in the lab” (This quote is located in "The Creator and the Cosmos", Ross, 1993, p. 148)
With that being said. I feel that this doesn't necessarily prove God, but rather states what the law of biogenesis states which is that life can only come from other life. This means that life demands a life giver, which points more to a deity which I believe to be God.
I also believe that science cannot disprove God because science is the study of the natural, not the super natural. Thus science can only disprove itself.
Jorgen, where did you read up on your beliefs? I'd like to check them out and do more research.
-
Holy, your belief is more than plausible. It is completely possible that God may of caused such a thing. There are countless possibilities alongside that, though. So it's very unlikely we'll ever get it right.
The only counter argument to that, is:
That perhaps our universe isn't space as we know it. We know everything around us to a point. We know there's an earth, we discovered that first, then we figured out those things in the sky are actually other entities in the sky, like earth. Then we discovered the other planets, stars and such; then the solar system. We understood the concept of space, and that it's just a bunch of shit we can never get to. That's where we still are really, except we can look at it better and go out there and explore locally. We really, don't, know, what the fuck goes on beyond what we can see. For all we know, at some point, the universe does in fact, stop. (As opposed to the possibility it doesn't ever stop) I highly, HIIIIGHLY, doubt, it all ends right there.
Yes, you are correct, something has to of caused that. Though the whole rubber band theory does make sense of the big bang. It would make sense that the universe itself, would be able to collapse, and then recreate the universe via rubber banding back. This plays along with the (I think proven?) theory that space is expanding. I honestly haven't done too much research on it, but I remember hearing it in school a lot and from friends. So if the universe were expanding, perhaps it will one day, snap back, and then BOOM. Big bang.
If not, then either A) The universe is infinite. B) The universe is something, inside of something. Like an electron to an atom, a planet to a solar system, our solar system to the Milky Way, the Milky way to.. Space? The space to the universe, then the universe to... the biverse? or Triverse? Uni is the prefix for one, isn't it? lol
Perhaps outside of the universe is something completely different, that defies all laws and rationality as we know it.
We will never know, we can only speculate, and try proving theorys that work with other things. The only thing that will prove the bible, is if God comes out of nowhere, and spawns a planet somewhere we can see. Etc.
-
The only thing is holy you can't know how the world was in the begining, maybe it got triggered by something maybe not, who knows.
We have yet to make it work, I know this but you know amino acids drawing to eachother depends alot about what kind of aminoacids were formed.
there are some binding aminoacids, that bind for example Sulfur to it oddly enough, and other that drags other things into it.
forming protein (theoretically) if it is suplied with all kinds of aminoacids. A basic assumption is that when everything was free, free hydrogen (not to much H2O) if i might think and lots of other free atoms.
I am not done with my eduacation, so I can't really say much more than this, God as the trigger for life was long my thought to. I don't know what happened to change my mind, it might have been dumb off me and maybe not who knows. A part of me just wanted to keep the scientific version and exclude the spiritual one, lots of reasons lets not go in on them here =)
As for my membrane theory it is a branch of string theory, you might google string theory and what is off it, if you want to =) There is a lot to read though =P
Most of my beliefs are just drawn together by me
I know several things about physics, Biology and chemistry I kinda just formed my own beliefs as to how things could have gone down.
do you know what our DNA consists of?
the amino acids: cytosine, tymine, adenin, Guanin and in RNA uracil
not sure if those are the english names, seeing that they are straight from the top of my head =)
-
Origin of life on earth?
Oh and Jorgen, understand the creation of humans, with acids and whatnot, were with ancient molecules, atoms and the such. There may of been elements on the earth that are now extinct. Perhaps there (in the pool theory) were a few protiens and whatnot, but element X jumped in the equation and we have life. That may be the reason for the creation of a lot of things. We're the answer to an equation we can't solve. We won't find x.
Perhaps the earth was at a certain temperature for some event after creation, or some other event, that caused element X to form, and there may of been other factors too. Once again though, this is speculation.
Let's play minecraft irl and dig up every square till we can be sure there is no more. :D
I could come up with semi-plausible ideas for how life started all day. God's idea wasn't too creative, can I be him instead? Oh well, I guess for it to be a "God" grade idea, it'd have to be completely un-explainable so people think I'm amazing and worth praying and devoting their life to. I guess that's all they really had back then though, "He said he just made em up outta dirt man, that's all it was". So yes, of course their knowledge was limited back then, I know, I know, but everything just seems so much like human ideals of the time, not.. a gods. I'm usually less bashy than this, and I apologize. Perhaps it's the baby crying in my house non-stop.
Fuck that baby.
Plz.
-
I also believe that science cannot disprove God because science is the study of the natural, not the super natural. Thus science can only disprove itself.
Science is the study of the natural, not the supernatural, because the supernatural is a figment of the imagination unsupported by a single piece of evidence. Belief in the Christian God is no different than belief in the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Just because your fantasy is impossible to disprove doesn't mean it should be taken seriously. There's no logic behind randomly choosing to subscribe to one superstition while rejecting however many others the human species has concocted over the course of its existence.
-
Molecule binding only works between some atoms ya know =P ancient would not be different to our molecules, granted we would not have those unstable ones that we force together for a brief moment, but that is something else =P
what i did say though was that there were several atoms that were free, like H not bound to O and stuff like that =P
but I am not that eduacated in prebiotic time here on earth, I am merely saying what seems logical to me=P
-
Well I mean I remember reading about shit that was going on, idk if it was a pressure thing in the atmosphere, or something, but it- oh fuck it, i don't remember.
There was an explanation somewhere, that made sense. lol
-
there was a lot of loose magma, if that is what your hinting at?
giving the air a CO2 filled layer.
alot of things were definatly different, but I don't know about the pressure thought that was pretty much stable but i don't really know
-
I know it had something to with electromagnetic shit, and like, lightning. Me and my friend "Kiyka" were talking about this shit once a while back and he was reading it to me from the internet and were talking about it.
-
Science is the study of the natural, not the supernatural, because the supernatural is a figment of the imagination unsupported by a single piece of evidence. Belief in the Christian God is no different than belief in the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Just because your fantasy is impossible to disprove doesn't mean it should be taken seriously. There's no logic behind randomly choosing to subscribe to one superstition while rejecting however many others the human species has concocted over the course of its existence.
No evidence? That explains the 1,000,000's of hours of paranormal footage and audio recordings. Not to mention the enormous amount of personal stories and claims of personal experiences. Now there is not much telling us what exactly these entities are, but it's more likely that they are, in fact, existent. I'd appreciate it if you didn't troll and take out your anger on religion here. This is a group effort to educate each other which what knowledge we have, not an out lashing with the "fantasy" and "flying spaghetti monster" comments. You make it sound like you know everything there is to know about life, it makes you seem arrogant and distasteful. Also if you read my post, my beliefs aren't random and do contain logic.
Pillz you brought up an interesting point:
There may of been elements on the earth that are now extinct. Perhaps there (in the pool theory) were a few protiens and whatnot, but element X jumped in the equation and we have life. That may be the reason for the creation of a lot of things. We're the answer to an equation we can't solve. We won't find x.
I am not to familiar with carbon dating or whatever method would be used, but wouldn't traces of element x be able to be traced on fossils that were dated a long time ago. Also, I would think that the element x would be abundant in living animals assuming it is the building blocks of life.
-
No evidence? That explains the 1,000,000's of hours of paranormal footage and audio recordings. Not to mention the enormous amount of personal stories and claims of personal experiences. Now there is not much telling us what exactly these entities are, but it's more likely that they are, in fact, existent. I'd appreciate it if you didn't troll and take out your anger on religion here. This is a group effort to educate each other which what knowledge we have, not an out lashing with the "fantasy" and "flying spaghetti monster" comments. You make it sound like you know everything there is to know about life, it makes you seem arrogant and distasteful. Also if you read my post, my beliefs aren't random and do contain logic.
Hang on while I cut out the parts that don't have anything to do with whether or not my point is correct.
No evidence? That explains the 1,000,000's of hours of paranormal footage and audio recordings. Not to mention the enormous amount of personal stories and claims of personal experiences. Now there is not much telling us what exactly these entities are, but it's more likely that they are, in fact, existent. I'd appreciate it if you didn't troll and take out your anger on religion here. This is a group effort to educate each other which what knowledge we have, not an out lashing with the "fantasy" and "flying spaghetti monster" comments. You make it sound like you know everything there is to know about life, it makes you seem arrogant and distasteful. Also if you read my post, my beliefs aren't random and do contain logic.
Right.
No evidence? That explains the 1,000,000's of hours of paranormal footage and audio recordings. Not to mention the enormous amount of personal stories and claims of personal experiences. Now there is not much telling us what exactly these entities are, but it's more likely that they are, in fact, existent.
There are countless hoaxes, errors, natural anomalies, delusional idiots, gullible idiots, and insane or otherwise mentally handicapped people in the world. Obscure footage and audio recordings, especially the phenomenally forgeable latter, are not scientific evidence. The fact that there is a lot of wrongness in the world doesn't make wrongness any less wrong. For every true statement there are literally infinite false variations.
Also if you read my post, my beliefs aren't random and do contain logic.
Okay, let's go back.
We really, don't, know, what the fuck goes on beyond what we can see.
Gaps in our knowledge of the universe are the reason for and purpose of science.
For all we know, at some point, the universe does in fact, stop. (As opposed to the possibility it doesn't ever stop) I highly, HIIIIGHLY, doubt, it all ends right there.
Study up. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metric_expansion_of_space)
The Second Law of Thermodynamics states that the amount of usable energy in a closed system (the universe) is decreasing. In layman's terms, that states that the universe is slowly coming to an end over time. So it did have a beginning. Aristotle's causality (cause and effect) says that every effect must have a cause. This is to not say the Big bang didn't occur, but rather, that it must of had something or some being (God) make it happen. So If the big bang could occur, and a being (God) is capable of doing such a thing.
There are many scientific theories on the beginning and end of the universe. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultimate_fate_of_the_universe) Do not resort to supernatural answers until all other options are exhausted. That's the mistake ancient polytheists made when they thought worship of the rain god pleased him and led him to cause rainstorms. That's the mistake Christians made when they thought the earth, as the crown jewel of God's creation, was the center of the universe, and when they rejected overwhelming evidence of evolution. The list of religious beliefs rendered false by scientific discovery goes on and on, and it will continue to grow with the passage of time.
Then it is a plausible to consider that the creation story has credibility to it and even that the Big Bang was part of the creation story. In Genesis, it says the first day water was formed [Jorgen brought up hydrogen being composed in the start of earth.] Science's explanation of land forming, then plants and animals goes hand in hand with God's creation.
How do you know water wasn't said to have been formed on the first day because every human since the birth of the species knew that water was crucial to life, or for some other symbolic reason? How do the hilariously numerous scientific inaccuracies present in the Book of Genesis, among other parts of the Bible, figure into your theory of metaphor for scientific truth? And why would God resort to metaphor in the first place? If that was his intention then he was deceiving his followers by using extraordinarily complex and difficult-to-interpret imagery to divert them from the raw truth.
-
Things like this about how life started are completly retarded. :\ YOUR NEVER GONNA FIND OUT!!!!
unless some aliens drop down and are like "pfft guys we did this trollface btw Jesus was a space zombie"
(http://i54.tinypic.com/2dhi6o6.png)
-
I know it had something to with electromagnetic shit, and like, lightning. Me and my friend "Kiyka" were talking about this shit once a while back and he was reading it to me from the internet and were talking about it.
do you mean early magnetic poles?
and warmth coliding with cold is known indeed, making lightning.
the creation (if we see the scientific way) was a REALLY VIOLENT one =P
earth is like a post rape victim, and now we are raping her again, quite sad actually.
-
This is turning into another religion thread. Lock it for all our sanity.
-
If you don't want debate then get the fuck out of the Debate Forum; no one is forcing you to read it.
-
How do the hilariously numerous scientific inaccuracies present in the Book of Genesis, among other parts of the Bible...
Quotes of these "errors" would be much appreciated.
Actually, scratch that. Did it ever occur to you that science is fallible? If you agree, then saying that the Bible contains errors according to something that contains errors itself is illogical in my eyes.
Matthew 7:3 "Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?" This is probably a terrible example, but imagine that you are science, now imagine that your brother is the Bible and that the speck of sawdust isn't really there but is only being perceived by you due to the plank in your eye which is man's utter foolishness and willful separation from God. THAT is the point I'm making here.
2 Peter 3:5 "But they deliberately forget that long ago by God's word the heavens existed..."
Psalm 14:1 "The fool says in his heart, "There is no God." They are corrupt, their deeds are vile; there is no one who does good.
You think you don't believe in God because of how smart you think you are? Right there is the reason, man's corrupt heart. Which came about how? The Fall, of course. Which came about how?! MAN'S FREE WILL, CORRUPT HEART, AND WAY OF THINKING!! To explain the last part of that sentence, man tries to compare the Bible to science (as you have so clearly demonstrated) instead of comparing science to the Bible.
Science is the study of the natural, not the supernatural, because the supernatural is a figment of the imagination unsupported by a single piece of evidence. Belief in the Christian God is no different than belief in the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Just because your fantasy is impossible to disprove doesn't mean it should be taken seriously. There's no logic behind randomly choosing to subscribe to one superstition while rejecting however many others the human species has concocted over the course of its existence.
1. The supernatural is not made up, anything man thinks is unexplainable (creation, the existence of God, etc.) he dubs as supernatural. Creation has been explained, and God's existence has been revealed to us (but not explained further beyond "He was and He always will be.") through the Bible, which has yet to be found to contain errors.
2. Um...randomly? Do people just spin a wheel in their heads with all the religions on them and go with whatever it lands on? A definition of superstition: "A belief, practice, or rite irrationally maintained by ignorance of the laws of nature or by faith in magic or chance."
Evolutionist - "See? God has nothing to do with nature because it came into existence because of a few molecules that thought they both looked hot hooked up and made humans."
Creationist - "God has a lot to do with nature, He created it."
E - "Well I think God used evolution to make nature."
C - "If He used evolution, which took billions of years, then what do you think about this? Genesis 1:8 "...And there was evening, and there was morning--the second day." If God created during a six day (morning to evening) period, how do you translate that into billions of years?"
E - "Because of this. 2 Peter 3:8 "But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day." So God must have used thousands of years to make the earth."
C - "That verse is explaining that God is not bound by a dimension that we are: time."
E - "I don't care! I'll never believe what you believe because I think I'm smarter than God!"
/endlengthyargument
This might be an utterly failed attempt at defending my faith, but I'm still learning and I wanted to try out these arguments on some adamant (not meaning that in a harsh way) atheists/evolutionists/the like... So you guys could consider yourselves test subjects. :)
Also, please don't interpret anything I said as bashing or an attack on you guys and your beliefs.
-
Quotes of these "errors" would be much appreciated.
If you can't find the glaring scientific inaccuracies in the Bible then I don't know why I bother arguing with you.
Actually, scratch that. Did it ever occur to you that science is fallible? If you agree, then saying that the Bible contains errors according to something that contains errors itself is illogical in my eyes.
Scientific theories may be fallible. Science is not fallible. Until they are disproved, tested and approved theories are held to be true.
Matthew 7:3 "Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?" This is probably a terrible example, but imagine that you are science, now imagine that your brother is the Bible and that the speck of sawdust isn't really there but is only being perceived by you due to the plank in your eye which is man's utter foolishness and willful separation from God. THAT is the point I'm making here.
2 Peter 3:5 "But they deliberately forget that long ago by God's word the heavens existed..."
Psalm 14:1 "The fool says in his heart, "There is no God." They are corrupt, their deeds are vile; there is no one who does good.
You think you don't believe in God because of how smart you think you are? Right there is the reason, man's corrupt heart. Which came about how? The Fall, of course. Which came about how?! MAN'S FREE WILL, CORRUPT HEART, AND WAY OF THINKING!! To explain the last part of that sentence, man tries to compare the Bible to science (as you have so clearly demonstrated) instead of comparing science to the Bible.
None of these quotes rebut my actual points (unsurprising; theists tend not to sufficiently rebut any point made by atheists), but hey, congratulations! You just pointed out some of the many instances where your precious God condemns freethinking. Thank you for reminding the us how much of an iron-fisted tyrant he is.
With respect to your commentary on the first quote, the mere possibility that atheists was wrong is not even remotely a legitimate argument against our conclusions.
1. The supernatural is not made up, anything man thinks is unexplainable (creation, the existence of God, etc.) he dubs as supernatural. Creation has been explained, and God's existence has been revealed to us (but not explained further beyond "He was and He always will be.") through the Bible, which has yet to be found to contain errors.
Superstitions use the supernatural to answer the questions that science has not yet found an answer to. There is a long and deep history of superstitions diminishing with scientific advances. You ("you" generally) are stupidly jumping to absurd and unsupported conclusions just because you don't have answers immediately at hand. The fact that something is unexplainable does not give you the license to shit out whatever fantasy you find most appealing. Superstitions are a human construct. The supernatural is a device functioning within that human construct.
2. Um...randomly? Do people just spin a wheel in their heads with all the religions on them and go with whatever it lands on? A definition of superstition: "A belief, practice, or rite irrationally maintained by ignorance of the laws of nature or by faith in magic or chance."
Yes, RANDOMLY. One person is RANDOMLY born in the United States and so is RANDOMLY a Christian. Another person is RANDOMLY born in Iran and so is RANDOMLY a Muslim. Another person is RANDOMLY born in India and so is RANDOMLY a Hindu. Another person was born in ancient Greece two and a half millennia ago and so RANDOMLY yearned to suck Zeus' dick. Then, if you DO consider conversion to another religion, or if, godforfuckingbid, you convert from atheism, you RANDOMLY reject one unprovable religion in favor of whichever other tickles your culturally prejudiced fancy.
Evolutionist - "See? God has nothing to do with nature because it came into existence because of a few molecules that thought they both looked hot hooked up and made humans."
Creationist - "God has a lot to do with nature, He created it."
E - "Well I think God used evolution to make nature."
C - "If He used evolution, which took billions of years, then what do you think about this? Genesis 1:8 "...And there was evening, and there was morning--the second day." If God created during a six day (morning to evening) period, how do you translate that into billions of years?"
E - "Because of this. 2 Peter 3:8 "But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day." So God must have used thousands of years to make the earth."
C - "That verse is explaining that God is not bound by a dimension that we are: time."[/quote]
COOL! MORE ABSURDITY THAT HAS NO LOGICAL SUPPORT OR EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE! THANKS FOR GIVING ME FURTHER EVIDENCE THAT RELIGION IS LOLOLOL.
E - "I don't care! I'll never believe what you believe because I think I'm smarter than God!"
Do not fucking mischaracterize atheists with "I don't care" when the crux of the entire debate (deciding whether or not to be—how do I say this without offending you?—rational) is staring you in the face. If you DON'T know the answer's staring you in the face, then you need a fucking high school–level education in science and theology.
This might be an utterly failed attempt at defending my faith
(http://www.smiley-faces.org/smiley-faces/smiley-face-popcorn.gif)
Also, please don't interpret anything I said as bashing or an attack on you guys and your beliefs.
And I quote: "'I don't care! I'll never believe what you believe because I think I'm smarter than God!'" Looks like an attack to me. Don't be afraid to "attack" someone else's beliefs with every ounce of rhetorical force you can muster. It's a debate thread in an online gaming forum. You're not going to hurt anyone's feelings. If someone does manage to get his feelings hurt here then it's probably more his problem than yours. Attacking is a lot better than attacking and then begging us not to interpret attacks as attacks.
-
Our whole universe was in a hot dense state, then nearly 14 billion years ago expansion started... WAIT!
The Earth began to cool, autotrophs began to drool, neaderthals developed tool, we built a wall (we built the pyramids) MATH, SCIENCE, HISTORY, unravelling the mystery, it all started with the BIG BANG(BANG!)
That is my explination of how life started... The Big Bang theory Theme Song
-
If you can't find the glaring scientific inaccuracies in the Bible then I don't know why I bother arguing with you.
An excuse to not answer the given question, as I too am curious seeing that as said before, science can only explain the natural.
Scientific theories may be fallible. Science is not fallible. Until they are disproved, tested and approved theories are held to be true.
Theories are falliable.. good good.. science is not falliable.. a matter of opinion, but I like it. The last sentence is wrong. "Until they are disproved, tested and supported theories are more likely to be true."
None of these quotes rebut my actual points (unsurprising; theists tend not to sufficiently rebut any point made by atheists), but hey, congratulations! You just pointed out some of the many instances where your precious God condemns freethinking. Thank you for reminding the us how much of an iron-fisted tyrant he is.
With respect to your commentary on the first quote, the mere possibility that atheists was wrong is not even remotely a legitimate argument against our conclusions.
Not sure what this has to do with the origin of life.
Superstitions use the supernatural to answer the questions that science has not yet found an answer to. There is a long and deep history of superstitions diminishing with scientific advances. You ("you" generally) are stupidly jumping to absurd and unsupported conclusions just because you don't have answers immediately at hand. The fact that something is unexplainable does not give you the license to shit out whatever fantasy you find most appealing. Superstitions are a human construct. The supernatural is a device functioning within that human construct.
It's extremely unlikely that science, study of natural, will never be able to explain the supernatural. Beyond sentence one is just bickering until you get to sentence five which is a true statement, well the explanation of what a superstition is man made anyway. Real supernatural events are in no way, shape, or form conceived by the human mind or brought on upon by a human. If it were, it would be a natural prank or natural lie and not supernatural.
Yes, RANDOMLY. One person is RANDOMLY born in the United States and so is RANDOMLY a Christian. Another person is RANDOMLY born in Iran and so is RANDOMLY a Muslim. Another person is RANDOMLY born in India and so is RANDOMLY a Hindu. Another person was born in ancient Greece two and a half millennia ago and so RANDOMLY yearned to suck Zeus' dick. Then, if you DO consider conversion to another religion, or if, godforfuckingbid, you convert from atheism, you RANDOMLY reject one unprovable religion in favor of whichever other tickles your culturally prejudiced fancy.
There are some random elements which come into play. When parents have sex, they know that it's possible for them to have a kid. If they are really trying for a kid then it is not random, it is that child's future to be a child of those parents. As far as faith, yes, parents have something to do with that. It isn't random though. Once the child grows up to.. let's say a teen, that teen is given the option to decide on it's own. It isn't random at all. Also, there are those who decide to convert.. they don't flip a coin and say, "Uh oh, it's heads today, I'm going Christian!"
COOL! MORE ABSURDITY THAT HAS NO LOGICAL SUPPORT OR EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE! THANKS FOR GIVING ME FURTHER EVIDENCE THAT RELIGION IS LOLOLOL.
If you consider that one sentence which was an example evidence, I can see where you get your "facts" from.
Do not fucking mischaracterize atheists with "I don't care" when the crux of the entire debate (deciding whether or not to be—how do I say this without offending you?—rational) is staring you in the face. If you DON'T know the answer's staring you in the face, then you need a fucking high school–level education in science and theology.
Lol, that just sounded like "You don't agree with me so you are stupid."
-
Proverbs 14:16 "A wise man fears the LORD and shuns evil, but a fool is hotheaded and reckless."
I'm sure you guys can tell what I'm trying to say by that verse alone..
-
Sometimes I wonder if we are a flicked booger off the finger of God.
But then, I go back to worrying about more pressing things...
-
I am not really a fan of people using quotes from the bible when discussing if god is realy...
By using them you are pretty much just stating to the atheists why even bother? Also by saying them you start it with the thought that he exists, when I walk into a discusson I make myself ready to hear other thoguhts.
-
If I directed this conversation into one about if He exists or not, I'm sorry.
Also, a statement that is not aimed towards the current conversation, but rather towards the main topic:
How can people believe in the big bang at all? Since when has an explosion caused more order than disorder? If it were true, it all would have had to have been a matter of luck. I would like to see the "numbers" of the possibility of a cosmic explosion, or whatever, shooting planets and such into just the right spots and somehow creating life.
Ooh, look what I found: http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/Encyclopedia/03-ss5.htm (http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/Encyclopedia/03-ss5.htm)
Now, I have not read over any of these articles, but I have heard a few of them from my pastor and Bible teacher. Crypto, since I see you as being much more intelligent than me and might have a different perspective than me while reading these, please go over them and give me your thoughts. (I meant all of that honestly, not in any way did I mean it derogatorily.)
-
...
big bang was a surge of energy, E=MC^2, during the big bang it happened like a sun going into a super nova fusion and so forth.
making HYDROGEN the sole reason for life
Hydrogen went into Hydrogen clouds, which when they get large enough make a innwards drag, making the Hydrogen atoms crash into eachother until they FUSE together in a process called fusion.
if you read my previous posts you'd see this
-
Sorry about that. :D
But, I'm still don't completely understand how fusing hydrogen atoms can form life.
-
AH Headache! :p I just totally spaced out. :o
-
Sorry about that. :D
But, I'm still don't completely understand how fusing hydrogen atoms can form life.
It is the fact that when Hydrogen gets fused it makes Helium Helium fuses on, until carbon is created.
Carbon makes a conection to Hydrogen, and makes basic Carbonhydrogen molecules, that in terms become larger more advanced carbonhydrogen molecules involving NH2 which makes it an AMIN, and a COOH making it an acid, an aminoacid. From there it can take many routes and so forth.
-
Jorgen, you said that theoretically amino acids can come together to form proteins. After that, how is DNA created and how is the human body formed?
-
Bacteria first, then multicellular organisms =)
aye Amino acids are the corner stone in DNA, Cytosin, Guanin, Tymin and Adenin in RNA you change Guanin with Urasil and after that it gets back to guanin when it changes back into a DNA strain =)
DNA also consists of sugar and Phospore, which is easy to come by when you have lots of early carbonhydrogen molecules (sugar that is) =)
From there you see my first statement, bacteria sorta "ate" other bacteria gaining their strains and so forth gaining whatever that other bacteria had going for it.
until one forms a multicellular organisms (not quite sure what they are called in english but yeah) then it made really simple creatures after A LONG LONG LONG time, like trillobites (or what they are called in english) =)
eventually things started getting more complicated, according to Darwin they mated with the creatures of their species that had feats they wish the specie could gain, because it would be benefactory.
After a while probly something happened with the water or something (it might've soured or got contaminated in another way, maybe large quantities of CO2 got into the water making H2CO3 i don't really have all the facts straigths so I couldn't know =)), and the specie found it benefactory to mate on mutations that were closer to land based breathing and so forth =P
-
Jorgen, read up on this: http://www.sciencecodex.com/lost_millerurey_experiment_created_more_of_lifes_building_blocks (http://www.sciencecodex.com/lost_millerurey_experiment_created_more_of_lifes_building_blocks)
Stanley Miller had an experiment to product simple amino acids with his experiments, but he was not happy with his results. If it is that hard for Miller (after 3 different attempts) to make amino acids in perfect lab conditions, it is highly unlikely for amino acids to form in nature. Also, considering the complexity of a strand of DNA (which you should know is no simple thing to make) I assume, out of probability, that the likelihood of DNA strands forming in nature is slim to none.
-
Did I ever say it was a likely thing to happen?
It is just the way it can be explained, but hell the prehistoric earth is way different than Stanley Millers lab, maybe the prehistoric earth conditions were perfect not his?
An earth where violent thunderstorms roared, lava always poured over, CO2 WAS IN LARGE quantities. The magnetosphere was not yet fully made, so many conditions that are not there in his studies.
Lots of free atoms not yet bounded everywhere =) all the things that were there, asteroids crashed into the earth making a MASSIVE surge of energy, a earth under constant bombardment, then rapidly it went into a ice age, cold molecules create short time Dipols some of which are needed for some of the carbonhydrogen molecoules to be made.
It is all so different from a sterile lab =)
I am not saying it is very bloody likely I am just saying we can't remake the prehistoric earth atleast not yet.
-
I see you stance and agree that one day science will be able to do some pretty mind blowing things. I just cannot fathom the idea of such events happening in nature to create life, that's all.
-
as community leader i confirm the truth of everything crypto has said in this thread
-
but but you are company leader D=
-
Who's crypto? I only know about ****gots
-
I Don't understand why people keep arguing about these things (Origin of Life,God,Evolution) It servers no purpose, If your lucky you have maybe 70 years to live are you really going to spend your life trying to prove that the big bang really happened or that there is a god. I could never figure out why people keep bringing this topic up What happens if one side managed to prove what they believe (By the way no ones going to prove either belief fully) nothing people well keep believing in their god(s). I say give up on trying to figure out these things, If you spend your entire life trying to find out how the everything got here you are never going to see anything here.
Also About the size of Mickey Rooney
-
I think there was a god because I don't understand how any of this could happen without intelligent design. It seems we were all programmed in a way, not just a bunch of cells somehow creating life.
You are stating that a formed intelligence was necessary to create intelligent lifeforms. For the existence of complex creatures, an invariably more complex "creature", in this case God, was needed.
The argument shoots itself in the foot, as Richard Dawkins stated. Following your line of logic, an even more complex creature would be required to create God. And so forth and so forth.
Please, DO NOT justify yourself by stating "God has always existed. God is timeless". Just don't.
-
I Don't understand why people keep arguing about these things (Origin of Life,God,Evolution) It servers no purpose, If your lucky you have maybe 70 years to live are you really going to spend your life trying to prove that the big bang really happened or that there is a god. I could never figure out why people keep bringing this topic up What happens if one side managed to prove what they believe (By the way no ones going to prove either belief fully) nothing people well keep believing in their god(s). I say give up on trying to figure out these things, If you spend your entire life trying to find out how the everything got here you are never going to see anything here.
Also About the size of Mickey Rooney
It is called scientific curiousity if you do not understand it kindly GTFO =P How can I be interested you ask, well fact is I guess I am wired that way. People will never be the same had no one been like us and been curious at this level we'd be no more than animals...
-
Please, DO NOT justify yourself by stating "God has always existed. God is timeless". Just don't.
Christians live by the bible, the bible says he is omnipresent. It isn't a justification, it is what He is. To say a mortal made everything is quite silly. Telling Christians to not say what they believe doesn't make things easier.
I Don't understand why people keep arguing about these things (Origin of Life,God,Evolution) It servers no purpose, If your lucky you have maybe 70 years to live are you really going to spend your life trying to prove that the big bang really happened or that there is a god. I could never figure out why people keep bringing this topic up What happens if one side managed to prove what they believe (By the way no ones going to prove either belief fully) nothing people well keep believing in their god(s). I say give up on trying to figure out these things, If you spend your entire life trying to find out how the everything got here you are never going to see anything here.
We are arguing because this is a debate forum. The advancement of the human race serves no purpose? I'm sure past prodigies who invented air condition, vehicles, the internet (which you are using right now) would laugh. Thanks to other people devoting their life to something future generations may live on. The origin of life is an interesting topic. Deep down it's only natural to want to know more. Also, you stating a general assumption that because someone like me, who ponders about where it all happened, takes life for granted. You are dead wrong. I enjoy my life.
-
I like the ambiguity.
But if anything, it had to be an unnatural series of events. I'm leaning more towards the Big Bang rather than the God stuff.
-
Please, DO NOT justify yourself by stating "God has always existed. God is timeless". Just don't.
Christians live by the bible, the bible says he is omnipresent. It isn't a justification, it is what He is. To say a mortal made everything is quite silly. Telling Christians to not say what they believe doesn't make things easier.
Considering that some of the believers in this thread are trying to justify God's existence with some sort of rational argument, I am simply asking them to leave ANY irrational, completely faith based ones out of the way.
As a matter of fact, the only reason this discussion is on-going is because the believers decided to get logic and reason involved. If not, it would have ended this way:
"The Bible states that God created everything in 7 days. This is true and what really happened because I believe on it. The religious Christian based side of this argument is now over"
It has not ended that way. Therefore, reason still has some ground here. Let's keep it that way, specially considering that no debate is possible when only blind faith is involved, and this IS the debate forum.
-
Considering that some of the believers in this thread are trying to justify God's existence with some sort of rational argument, I am simply asking them to leave ANY irrational, completely faith based ones out of the way.
As a matter of fact, the only reason this discussion is on-going is because the believers decided to get logic and reason involved. If not, it would have ended this way:
"The Bible states that God created everything in 7 days. This is true and what really happened because I believe on it. The religious Christian based side of this argument is now over"
It has not ended that way. Therefore, reason still has some ground here. Let's keep it that way, specially considering that no debate is possible when only blind faith is involved, and this IS the debate forum.
Firstly, you can cut the whole blind faith routine. I have my reasons for what I believe as do you, I didn't randomly decide to go Christian one day.
If you are taking Creation into account, you must use the bible as it is the source of the idea. It tells you about God. As Paul says that 1 day is 1000 years and 1000 years is 1 day to God. So saying the Christian argument is limited to the earth being created in 7 days is not accurate. It is still possible to logically interpret creation as well as lines from the bible.
My main argument is that DNA couldn't have formed from chemical pools in nature without aid. It's extremely unlikely even in perfect lab conditions so alternate origin of life theories must be made.
-
Considering that some of the believers in this thread are trying to justify God's existence with some sort of rational argument, I am simply asking them to leave ANY irrational, completely faith based ones out of the way.
As a matter of fact, the only reason this discussion is on-going is because the believers decided to get logic and reason involved. If not, it would have ended this way:
"The Bible states that God created everything in 7 days. This is true and what really happened because I believe on it. The religious Christian based side of this argument is now over"
It has not ended that way. Therefore, reason still has some ground here. Let's keep it that way, specially considering that no debate is possible when only blind faith is involved, and this IS the debate forum.
Firstly, you can cut the whole blind faith routine. I have my reasons for what I believe as do you, I didn't randomly decide to go Christian one day.
If you are taking Creation into account, you must use the bible as it is the source of the idea. It tells you about God. As Paul says that 1 day is 1000 years and 1000 years is 1 day to God. So saying the Christian argument is limited to the earth being created in 7 days is not accurate. It is still possible to logically interpret creation as well as lines from the bible.
My main argument is that DNA couldn't have formed from chemical pools in nature without aid. It's extremely unlikely even in perfect lab conditions so alternate origin of life theories must be made.
I never said that you randomly turned to Christianity. I merely stated that your reasons for choosing it were not based on proof, in evidence, but on faith. If you would like to prove me wrong by showing me any concise, scientifically viable proof of God's existence, I am all ears. I apologize if the word "blind" caused you to misinterpret what I was trying to convey.
I was generalizing when I used the 7 days creation story. I understand what you mean.
Your argument against the theoretically DNA creation is, in my opinion, flawed. As Jorgen already stated, scientists cannot yet ACCURATELY know just what exactly where the conditions back then. The earth might have been a burning (not literally) at temperatures that could never be achieved by modern technology. Specific, complicate and unique chemical interactions could have taken place which we know nothing about. You cannot dismiss this theory on the grounds that if did not work on modern experiments, therefore its highly unlikely. Even if we knew everything about that time, the odds of us being able to replicate the conditions using modern equipment...yeah.
-
Science has not yet found the answer, therefore God.
trollface.jpg
-
Science has not yet found the answer, therefore God.
trollface.jpg
Christians have not yet found God, therefore science.
frogface
-
Except that God is not the logical default. Having said that, I do kind of dig the idea of botched irrationality, therefore rationality.
Oh, frogface.jpg.
trollface.jpg
-
Some one has probably already said this but just to make sure big bang=/= abiogenesis, abiogenesis =/= evolution, abiogenesis=/= spontaneous generation. Also the big bang does have evidence, look up Cosmic microwave backround radiation which was predicted by the big bang model before it was discovered(the sign of a good hypothesis).
-
Y'all just got fucking owned by krolin.
-
and hypotheses will remain theory until proven otherwise. Albeit substantial evidence, unless we can somehow serendipitously discover a way to recreate the big bang, it makes about as much sense as the Lockness monster masturbating.
-
I believe in the development or random biological compunds that slowly evolved into a living sentient race, which oddly enough is be quite common
http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=6091116 (http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=6091116)
here's a paper by Cambridge stating that complex organic structures are formed inside unburnt nebulae, believed that these gathered onto larger masses such as asteroids and meteors and then fell to earth later on during its forming
-
and hypotheses will remain theory until proven otherwise. Albeit substantial evidence, unless we can somehow serendipitously discover a way to recreate the big bang, it makes about as much sense as the Lockness monster masturbating.
>.> i may have misunderstood but it sounds to me like you just said a theory and hypothesis are the same thing. science doesn't go hypothesis/theory>law or even hypothesis>theory>law.
To my understanding the big bang is just a hypothesis at this point but one with quite a bit of evidence. I'm sure all those scientists who have an education in theoretical physics and papers published about the big bang are wrong but you here on the internet know exactly what you are talking about. Also just to preempt what always happen when i say this, sorry if you see this as an ad hominem, I don't think you're stupid but I'm kind of tired of the internet "expert".
-
and hypotheses will remain theory until proven otherwise. Albeit substantial evidence, unless we can somehow serendipitously discover a way to recreate the big bang, it makes about as much sense as the Lockness monster masturbating.
>.> i may have misunderstood but it sounds to me like you just said a theory and hypothesis are the same thing. science doesn't go hypothesis/theory>law or even hypothesis>theory>law.
To my understanding the big bang is just a hypothesis at this point but one with quite a bit of evidence. I'm sure all those scientists who have an education in theoretical physics and papers published about the big bang are wrong but you here on the internet know exactly what you are talking about. Also just to preempt what always happen when i say this, sorry if you see this as an ad hominem, I don't think you're stupid but I'm kind of tired of the internet "expert".
Krolin is back I see
-
I heard a quote from some scientist that basically said that information does not come from matter, information must come from information, that comes from information, that ultimately comes from an intelligence (cells cannot make a human). Also, I heard another quote that said that during a mutation (like the ones in evolution) information is lost, not gained, meaning that a mess of cells cannot magically gain information that tells them to form a human.
Sorry for not being able to give the quotes directly from a source, I saw them in a video in Bible class and forgot to write them down :( but I do remember what they said.
Also, crypto, I don't think I've received an answer from you yet about what you think about http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/Encyclopedia/03-ss5.htm#Delicate (http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/Encyclopedia/03-ss5.htm#Delicate) Rings
And a section taken out of it for those that don't want to click the link..
_____________________________________________
The rings of Saturn are primarily composed of solid ammonia, along with pebbles of various sizes. Scientists are trying to figure out how such a delicate substance as ammonia, which should rather quickly vaporize off into space, could be formed into these equally delicate rings. How could those rings—and Saturn inside them—have been accidentally formed from gas, collisions, or some other such chance occurrence? But, the fact that they exist directs our attention to several age problems:
"The theory that explained how Saturn's rings could persist through 4.6 billion years of solar system evolution also explained why Saturn was the only planet that could have a ring.
"Then those theories had to be revised to account for the rings of Uranus. The revisions implied that Jupiter would not have a ring. Now Jupiter has been found to have a ring, and we have to invent a theory to explain it . .
"Dust and grain-sized particles can be fueled out as major constituents of the ring [of Jupiter]. The intense radiation in Jupiter's magnetic field would sweep them out . . No theory has yet been developed that explains how all three of these planets could have rings for so long."—*Bradford Smith, quoted in Mark Tippetts, "Voyager Scientists on Dilemma's Horns," in Creation Research Society Quarterly, December 1979, p. 185.
And then there are its 17 moons which never collide with the rings. The farthest out is Phoebe, which revolves in a motion opposite Saturn and its rings. How could that happen? How could it continue without self-destructing?
"Saturn, a planet of nearly one hundred times the mass of our earth, has millions of amazing and fragile solid bodies in orbit in the form of its familiar relatively thin rings. According to the spectrum measurements by Dr. G.P. Kuiper of the University of Arizona, these rings are composed mainly of solid ammonia. Since solid ammonia has much higher vapor pressure than ice, for instance, it is questionable whether the ammonia could have survived for the supposed life of the planet of some 4.5 billion years.
"The eminent astronomer, Dr. H. Alfven has stated that it is unlikely that any force acting today could have caused the ring structure of Saturn, and that probably the rings were formed at the same time as Saturn itself. He points out that it is doubtful that such a fragile ring-like structure could survive the tremendous tidal forces (gravitational, as well as other forces) acting on it if its age is actually, as generally believed, 4.5 billion years old. Many scientists agree with Dr. Alfven that it is indeed unlikely that any force acting today could have caused the ring structure of Saturn."—H.M. Morris, W.W. Boardman, and R.F. Koontz, Science and Creation (1971), p. 73.\
_____________________________________________
-
Sorry, myLord, I haven't been keeping up with this thread.
I haven't looked closely at the stuff on that link and I'm really not a science guy, but I'm loath to place my trust in discoveries that evidently haven't been accepted by the mainstream scientific community.
-
I found a picture a couple months ago that I saved; it was about life, and what the afterlife is like. If you have the time, read this, because it's absolutely mind blowing(in my experience at least)
Go here -> http://i.imgur.com/w8lwt.jpg (http://i.imgur.com/w8lwt.jpg)
-
Meteorite discovered with fossilized alien bacteria. Fuck your beliefs.
-
Meteorite discovered with fossilized alien bacteria. Fuck your beliefs.
They were sceptical.
Oh NASA!
Ah well...
God does not exist, you're just to afraid of not convincing someone, and therefore you thing you go to hell.
Just a side question... Why did they make a second bible. Like wasn't it convincing enough. about the whole flat earth and sun orbits around the world...
PS
What if (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjX5JpqJ-e8#)
-
"Who farted, ya'll?"
Perhaps that is what happened...
-
42.
-
42.
Bull. Shit.
-
42
-
24
-
Please stop this. Just please, for the love of me and ... yourself.
You are just wasting time...
-
We don't know for sure, and you should accept that.