Religion. The evolution, creation and everything in between megathread

[Retardobot]

http://christiannews.co.nz/

for some reason the admins here wont allow any of my comments :disappoin

Wow, these guys are delusional crackpots.

[KiLL3r]

Wow, these guys are delusional crackpots.

yeah the majority of the site is like that.
http://christiannews.co.nz/2008/calling-all-atheists/#comment-2705
this was the article i was trying to comment on. i said " the reason atheist do not debate with religous types is because it gives them creability". i also wrote it totally un argumentative but alas i didnt get accepted

[cobra]

Wow, these guys are delusional crackpots.

nah - have you read the books - it is about the church cutting away joy and happiness from children in the pursuit of purity (reasonably accurate imo) - the are a reasonably direct attack on the church - good books, worth reading

[Retardobot]

nah - have you read the books - it is about the church cutting away joy and happiness from children in the pursuit of purity (reasonably accurate imo) - the are a reasonably direct attack on the church - good books, worth reading

Yeah, actually i think these books are the ONLY books i have ever read in my life.

I enjoyed them.

People are to fucken paranoid.

[ThaFleastyler]

IMO, part of the problem is that religious leaders don't want to have to answer any tricky questions - by steering their people away from this kind of material, they believe that they are removing all doubts, but at some point people are going to have questions. I think its wrong myself - anything and everything should be tried and tested, and if someone has a tricky question it should be answered, plain and simple.

KiLL3r, I'm sorry to see that the site hasn't allowed your comments. Frankly, it comes across as nothing more than a cowardly form of censorship.

[Retardobot]

IMO, part of the problem is that religious leaders don't want to have to answer any tricky questions - by steering their people away from this kind of material, they believe that they are removing all doubts, but at some point people are going to have questions. I think its wrong myself - anything and everything should be tried and tested, and if someone has a tricky question it should be answered, plain and simple.

KiLL3r, I'm sorry to see that the site hasn't allowed your comments. Frankly, it comes across as nothing more than a cowardly form of censorship.

I like you, Flea

[psyche]

this was the article i was trying to comment on. i said " the reason atheist do not debate with religous types is because it gives them creability". i also wrote it totally un argumentative but alas i didnt get accepted

We are back to religion bashing already? How boring.... is that all you people know how to do?

this was the article i was trying to comment on. i said " the reason atheist do not debate with religous types is because it gives them creability". i also wrote it totally un argumentative but alas i didnt get accepted

Wtf... if you don't want to debate why the hell are you even commenting on their website in the first place, have you not got anything better to do? They probably didn't accept it because you didn't even make any kind of argument, you just said "I don't want to argue with religious people, because i'm a huge failure and I don't know how."  Congratulations.

probably a Destiny Church-funded website or something, but they are right about Charles Dawkins book being an absolute load of shit, I've started reading bits of it and good lord that guy talks a load of bollocks, not to mention the majority of his arguments have been thoroughly picked apart by various people.

Also I found this video quite interesting:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4609561480192587449&q=ben+stein+interview&total=37&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0

I don't agree with everything they say, but they bring up some good points. If the universe is 'chaotic' and random, then the universe would not be intelligible, it would not be ordered in any kind of way and we would have no way of understanding anything. Therefore it is unreasonable to assume that the universe is completely chaotic.

Without the physical laws and constants that govern the universe, we would not exist. If any one of those well-defined laws had been even 1% different from their current values, we would not exist. Planets would not exist, starts would not exist. Where did those laws come from, and how can something that clearly and specificly defined have randomly come from nothing? The only reasonable explanation atheists can come up with for this is that we live in one of a millions of infinite universes in a huge multiverse, and we just happen to be in the one that got everything right. Sounds like a cop out to me, but those crazy atheists gotta justify their belief somehow I guess.

For an atheist to say it's CHANCE for something to have come from nothing, is again, a complete cop out - it explains nothing and leaves you with more questions than you have answers. As one of the guys in the video says, the word "chance" is a word which correlates to ignorance, if you can't explain how something happened it's easy to just say "it's because of chance, random spontaneousness"

But really, how plausible is it that something could  randomly arise from NOTHING by completely naturalistic means? To say that the existence of everything comes down to chance, just is not logical -  no matter how far you go back you will always need a cause, and an uncaused cause.

It is said that science has nothing to say about God, and nothing to say about why or what might have caused the universe. But that's exactly it... the existence of everything isn't a scientific issue, it's a philosophical issue. That's the problem these days, we have hardheaded scientists that only accept science and reject everything else. But if you do so, you're never going to figure out anything deeper than how something works, you will never figure out why something works, because it is outside the realm of science. Einstein said "God doesn't play dice." and Newton said that he was "..doing no more than explaining how God ordered the universe." These great scientific minds had no problem incorporating philosophy into their studies, why should anyone else? Should we stop referring to anything Newton or Einstein said, simply because they dared to think outside the box, and think outside the contraints of science? Of course not. Science without the external input of philosophy is a monumental failure, atleast in terms of trying to figure out our existence.

Interesting video anyway. WATCH IT FOOLS.

[mish]

It was always one of the trilogies that made me think "They should make a movie of this". I hope the movie isn't average... :disappoin

[cobra]

probably a Destiny Church-funded website or something, but they are right about Charles Dawkins book being an absolute load of shit, I've started reading bits of it and good lord that guy talks a load of bollocks, not to mention the majority of his arguments have been thoroughly picked apart by various people.

please recognise the difference between being too stupid and ignorant to understand something and something being "a load of bollocks",

and who the fuck is charles dawkins? Charles Darwin and Richard Dawkins genes put into a super evolutionist?

Without the physical laws and constants that govern the universe, we would not exist. If any one of those well-defined laws had been even 1% different from their current values, we would not exist. Planets would not exist, starts would not exist. Where did those laws come from, and how can something that clearly and specific defined have randomly come from nothing?

l2anthropomorphic principal

For an atheist to say it's CHANCE to something came out of nothing, is again, a complete cop out - it explains nothing and leaves you with more questions than you have answers. As one of the guys in the video says, the word "chance" is a word which correlates to ignorance, if you can't explain how something happened it's easy to just say "it's because of chance"

For an christian to say it's GOD to (sic) something came out of nothing, is again, a complete cop out - it explains nothing and leaves you with more questions than you have answers. As one of the guys in the video says, the word god is a word which correlates to ignorance, if you can't explain how something happened it's easy to just say "it's because of god"

 no matter how far you go back you will always need a cause, and an uncaused cause.

l2quantum physics

It is said that science has nothing to say about God, and nothing to say about why or what might have caused the universe. But that's exactly it... the existence of everything isn't a scientific issue.

science doesn't have anything to say about god because science is the study of things that exist, science looks at evidence and imaginary things cant leave evidence

Einstein said "God doesn't play dice." a......... Should we stop referring to anything Newton or Einstein said, simply because they dared to think outside the box, and think outside the contraints of science?

yeah - you dont understand what einstein was talking about (quantum physics) and it turns out he was wrong and "god" does play dice (zomg chance, quantum physicists are ignorant!!!!!!!!111!!1)

no offence but you are a good example of religion springing up from ignorance - i can understand therefore god

[psyche]

please recognise the difference between being too stupid and ignorant to understand something and something being "a load of bollocks",

and who the fuck is charles dawkins? Charles Darwin and Richard Dawkins genes put into a super evolutionist?

Calm down faggot, it's called a typo.

Dawkins is a FANATICAL atheist, his ideas are therefore fanatically atheist, in the same way that we have fanatical religious people. As I've already said a lot of the arguments in his book have already been debunked/debated/questioned/refuted... I can find some of these articles and post them for you if you like. Dawkins himself lives his life by an almost 'religious-type' belief, and that is Darwinism. He has taken the ideas of Darwin, someone just as confused about the world as most other people, and spun them into an almost 'doctrine' set of beliefs.

As Darwin himself said: “I was a young man with uninformed ideas. I threw out queries, suggestions, wondering all the time over everything; and to my astonishment the ideas took like wildfire. People made a religion of them.”

Granted, he was an amazing man and some of his amazing discoveries are turning out to be true, but people like Dawkins are taking his ideas too far and honestly I don't think Darwin would have approved of it were he still around.

l2anthropomorphic principal

That's basically just the 'multiverse' argument, is it not? The multiverse theory is not even scientific theory, because as you say, science only studies phenomena that we can physically observe.

For an christian to say it's GOD to (sic) something came out of nothing, is again, a complete cop out - it explains nothing and leaves you with more questions than you have answers. As one of the guys in the video says, the word god is a word which correlates to ignorance, if you can't explain how something happened it's easy to just say "it's because of god"

What about people who aren't Christian, and say it is more plausible for the existence of everything to be have set in motion by an intelligent 'Creator'? People like myself, and Einstein (sort of), and numerous other freethinking and scientific minds?

It might be easy to say "God did it", but I don't think that's what people are doing... they are looking at the evidence, and saying that God, or an ultimate Creator, is quite possibly the most plausible explanation. It might not be correct, as it can't necessarily be proven, but it's not something that should be readily dismissed unless you do want to submit yourself to ignorance.

science doesn't have anything to say about god because science is the study of things that exist, science looks at evidence and imaginary things cant leave evidence

'grats smart guy, did you even read my post?

l2quantum physics

Explain how something comes from nothing using quantum physics please...

no offence but you are a good example of religion springing up from ignorance - i can understand therefore god

I'm not religious. And no offence, but you are a good example of ignorance arising from more ignorance, as evidence by the fact that you don't actually listen to anything I say. I have yet to hear any plausible theories for the existence of everything from you yet...

[psyche]

Anyway, i'm done with this thread I think, back to GP forums for me. Might drop in every now and then if any actual interesting discussion comes up (I won't hold my breath though)

[Dr Woomanchu]

Anyway, i'm done with this thread I think, back to GP forums for me. Might drop in every now and then if any actual interesting discussion comes up (I won't hold my breath though)

sowing, reaping.

[psyche]

sowing, reaping.

...

I'm not religious.

[cobra]

Calm down faggot, it's called a typo.

you would make a good christian

That's basically just the 'multiverse' argument, is it not? The multiverse theory is not even scientific theory, because as you say, science only studies phenomena that we can physically observe.

no, its not the multiverse argument, l2anthropomorphic principal before you try to discuss it

.. they are looking at the evidence, and saying that God, or an ultimate Creator, is quite possibly the most plausible explanation. It might not be correct, as it can't necessarily be proven, but it's not something that should be readily dismissed unless you do want to submit yourself to ignorance.

what evidence? - can you share this?

I'm not religious. And no offence, but you are a good example of ignorance arising from more ignorance, as evidence by the fact that you don't actually listen to anything I say. I have yet to hear any plausible theories for the existence of everything from you yet...

you are religious - hate to break it to you - the ignorance, the arrogance and the angry dismissing of alternative view points with out rational

my view of existence - big bang (which is a fact) then evolution through natural selection

I do read your posts but they don't say anything - 99% misquoting scientists and abusing people who are more intelligent then you (everyone) - i am sensing a lot of anger from you from your inability to express your views through typing, have you considered an education so you can more freely express your "ideas"?

[Retardobot]

Hahaha, psyche. Old habits.

[psyche]

lol.. pathetic.

Your entire belief is in the Big Bang, but you don't even care to think what came before the Big Bang, what caused the Big Bang, or why? :sly:

Like I said, if you restrict yourself only to the limited contraints of science, you're never going to discover anything deeper than how certain things in the universe work. And that is, I think, a sad thing.

[cobra]

for your edit

Explain how something comes from nothing using quantum physics please...

you were talking about everything having a cause - hence l2quantum physics - when you l2quantum physics it will make sense

[cobra]

Like I said, if you restrict yourself only to the limited contraints of science, you're never going to discover anything deeper than how certain things in the universe work. And that is, I think, a sad thing.

can you explain what you have learnt - or does it turn out that what you just typed is meaningless as you having discovered anything deeper?

[psyche]

for your edit



you were talking about everything having a cause - hence l2quantum physics - when you l2quantum physics it will make sense

No it won't, because if it did make perfect sense then it would already be accepted as proven fact, when it is not.  Otherwise no-one in the world would even believe in God, would they? If we already knew how the existence of everything could come from nothing by completely naturalistic means? Think about it.

Ask any scientist in the world today how the existence of everything could have come from nothing, and I guarantee they will say "I don't know." or they might give some kind of theory, but it's just that, a theory, based on speculation and guesswork.

can you explain what you have learnt - or does it turn out that what you just typed is meaningless as you having discovered anything deeper?

You're not listening to what i'm saying, so i'll leave it at that.

[cobra]

No it won't, because if it did make perfect sense then it would already be accepted as proven fact, when it is not.  Otherwise no-one in the world would even believe in God, would they? If we already knew how the existence of everything could come from nothing by completely naturalistic means? Think about it.

Ask any scientist in the world today how the existence of everything could have come from nothing, and I guarantee they will say "I don't know." or they might give some kind of theory, but it's just that, a theory, based on speculation and guesswork.

"i dont know" is an honest response - but that doesn't lead on to therefore god

You're not listening to what i'm saying, so i'll leave it at that.

so it does turn out that you have nothing, who would have thought

[psyche]

Think about this; how can everything NATURAL spontaneously arise from NON-NATURAL, ie. nothing? It would have to have had the involvement of something supernatural, logically.

And what is the plausability of something like that happening completely by chance?

something to ponder.

so it does turn out that you have nothing, who would have thought

I'm a bit sick of explaining certain things over and over again, so just forget it.

"i dont know" is an honest response - but that doesn't lead on to therefore god

Maybe not scientifically, but it could.. if you are motivated to seek a deeper meaning to existence through philosophical and other means, rather than solely scientific means. And evidently it has for many people.

If you are seeking God through scientific means, I don't think you will ever what you are looking for. If you seek God outside the restraints of science however, you just may find enlightenment. If you don't want to believe in God though, or a an ultimate creator of the universe, and you form your beliefs to suit that, then it doesn't really matter and I don't know why you would bother debating it in the first place.

I guess the point i'm trying to make is, you shouldn't do yourself the injustice of limiting yourself soley to the pursuit of scientific knowledge, when there are so many other sources of limitless knowledge available to us, including your own advanced, thinking, contemplating mind.

[Dr Woomanchu]

Think about this; how can everything NATURAL spontaneously arise from NON-NATURAL, ie. nothing? It would have to have had the involvement of something supernatural, logically.

And what is the plausability of something like that happening completely by chance?

something to ponder.




I'm a bit sick of explaining certain things over and over again, so just forget it.



Maybe not scientifically, but it could.. if you are motivated to seek a deeper meaning to existence through philosophical and other means, rather than solely scientific means. And evidently it has for many people.

If you are seeking God through scientific means, I don't think you will ever what you are looking for. If you seek God outside the restraints of science however, you just may find enlightenment. If you don't want to believe in God though, or a an ultimate creator of the universe, and you form your beliefs to suit that, then it doesn't really matter and I don't know why you would bother debating it in the first place.

I guess the point i'm trying to make is, you shouldn't do yourself the injustice of limiting yourself soley to the pursuit of scientific knowledge, when there are so many other sources of limitless knowledge available to us, including your own advanced, thinking mind.

Not all of us make the mistake of thinking that speculation about some of the big questions = truth.

We all speculate about the big questions. I have a suspicion it's an inevitable side effect of sentience. Your problem is that you're dismissive of any speculation that doesn't gel with yours.

I've repeatedly said I have no issue with the concept that this universe was created as a deliberate act by an entity of some sort. I would be surprised if anyone debating here hasn't pondered that idea. The difference is that you think your speculation is some sort of truth or reality.

What is frustrating is that you don't seem to apply the same criteria to your speculation as you do to the ideas you don't like. That inconsistence makes debating with you difficult, and ultimately futile.

[psyche]

No I don't, and if it seems that way, it is not intentional.

I've got a few crazy thoughts running around in my mind about our existence too, I was thinking the other night.. what if the universe is one gigantic science experiment, our universe is but a bubble in some huge cosmological laboratory and we are being studied by supernatural/otherwordly beings. Now that's a pretty out there idea :eek:

but still, when I look at things more closely I can't help but come back to the whole 'God' thing, it does make a lot of sense and makes the puzzle of our existence fit together almost perfectly.

It's weird to think, if the Big Bang is indeed correct, that all of us, everything, time, space, matter, the essential forces of the universe, EVERYTHING, came from this one finite point... I mean wtf, it's craaazy... the universe then, and everything in it, essentialy, was created... but by what!? How could any kind of natural force "known" to do all that, or it all just happens by random coincidence, I guess is the general assumption :/ Stephen Hawking I think, and possibly a few other people, have likened the universe to some kind of supercomputer that has been intricately programmed. Which is an interesting way to look at it, considering the importance of numbers and mathematics in our daily lives and in science...

I'll admit, i'm as confused what anyone else is, but I find it a bit disconcerting that some people seem to be relying only scientific knowledge to try and explain the existence of the universe, you have to admit that.. science came from somewhere, and I think the ultimate goal of science to try and explain the existence of everything using soley the rules of science... just isn't going to happen, I think it's a futile effort in all honesty and I hope the scientific community will some day realise this and start admitting that there are some things we can't realistically explain using the method of science... I have no problem with them trying of course, my problem is more with the saps like Kill3r and Cobra who are blinded and mislead by these modern neo-darwinist fanatical atheists who are preaching their own biased, miscontrued views that there is no purpose to anything, we exist by accident, "science will explain everything", and encouraged to express hatred towards religious people, anyone who believes in God or anyone who even mentions anything about the universe being designed or created, supposedly because it's 'holding back science', which is a crock of shit.

The implications of a Darwinism-type belief on society, would mean we can wipe out entire races of "inferior" people and animals, and think nothing of it. Mass genocide? Sweet as. Sounds like a world run by Hitler, sounds like a world I would not want to live in.

I only hope that people like kill3r, Cobra, ect. will realise that there is more to life than science, if you seek answers to our existence.. I would say science is quite probably the wrong place to look. But who knows, we all have our own beliefs and ideas, maybe one day one of them will be proven. Until then I am going to keep expanding my knowledge, and will continue to believe that life was created with some kind of purpose, mostly because it is the most plausible explanation in my mind and based on what I am learning, and because I have nothing to lose by leading a good life and believing in God, i'd take eternal bliss over non-existence any day thankyouverymuch.

There's a lot more i'd like to say, but i'll leave it at that... need to get some work done >_<

[cobra]

^ everything i can't understand is a crock of shit and people who can understand these things are "blind"

dude - you are incredibly ignorant of science - you have no understanding of the basic principles, you should at least have a basic understanding of the consepts before you accuse people of being "blinded"

but if i have been blinded by education, evidence, rational arguments and my ability to understand complicated and abstract ideas so be it, better than being blinded by ignorance and an innate stupidity

We understand you have "ideas" which seem profound to you, but you need to understand you are out of your intellectual depth here, your "ideas" are not profound to people with a more advanced understanding of these concepts

[psyche]

Yet you seem to think the Big Bang explains everything.

Pfft, you're as much of a joke as kill3r. Out of my intellectual depth? You can't even spell 'concepts' mate. That's all you know how to do is insult people, you can't come up with any intelligent arguments at all just like kill3r, it's unbelievably pathetic.

This thread is a waste of my time, i'll let you guys get back to the usual boring old religion bashing since that's all you know how to do.