This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
It's quite possible that universes spring in and out of existence all the time. We now know there is dark matter in our own universe where we once thought was nothing. The hadron collider has produced partials out of mere nothingness, see higgs bosom. Or maybe everything has always been here just in another dimension connected to ours in the beautiful math of string theory.MarvinTScamper said:
99% of a human is made up of oxygen, carbon, hydrogen,nitrogen, calcium, and phosphorus. We share 96% of our DNA with chimpanzees whom we share a common ancestor and the differences caused by genetic variation are traceable.
you might have me confused with someone else. I believe I could be wrong, you apparently don't. I've ready about all of what you're talking about, and scientists are only hoping to explain some of these things.
I thought I was supporting your claim that nothing was created, it just changed form.
I don't think you and I, you and he, and he and I are having the same conversation.
I agree. I couldn't tell which side of that you were on based on the statement. I was withholding my response until I understood your point of view.
I think evolution is a reality, but the fact that we share so much DNA with a chicken and a banana makes the % shared with a chimpanzee irrelevant. I'm not suggesting we don't evolve, but I challenge some of the ideas.
Sure it does. The more dna we share the more current our common ancestor is in the evolutionary process. Chickens diverged off our evolutionary tree way before chimpanzees did.
You've got some homework to do first if you're serious about challenging anything to do with evolutionary science.
I accept the possibility. I also accept the possibly of a creator. However, their probabilities are much different. The big bang alone points to a single event that likely started our universe. I see no evidence at all about this creator you are talking about.
Evidence is information that makes something more or less likely to be true. Many people don't view "all that has been" as making it more likely that there was a creator because of the existence of a non-creator explanation that is as likely or more likely based on the information. That isn't pathetic, it's just a different and perfectly valid viewpoint than the one you appear to have.
"all that has been"? As pathetic as it sounds to you I haven't seen any evidence for a creator, do you have any?
like I said, I'm open to much. Thinking we know so much that no greater power or being may have come before us would be silly, in my opinion. And yes, the pathetic was more of a reflection of his opinions on mine, not my opinions of his.
I think there are a number of interpretations of the things around us that don't involve "ignoring." Theists and Atheists tend to have differing viewpoints in precisely this area. This "look at all that's around us" doesn't particularly move some people to believe in a benevolent, omnipotent, omniscient God when viewed as a whole.
yes, that's true. As does "evidence of the big bang theory" or "96% of our DNA is shared with chimpanzees" does little to cause those of faith to doubt their belief. Some write this off as ignorance, which I think is ironic.
I don't see any evidence of intelligent design in anything. Can you pick just one thing and show me evidence of intelligent design or how intelligent design is required? And just to avoid you turning the question around; it's not me that is making claim of supernatural being, that's your proof to bear.
I'm not sure why you think it's ironic, but yes - it's confusing to people who believe in science when people who have strong faith believe in the results of science (cell phones, air conditioners, the internal combustion engine, space travel, genetically modified foods, stem cell research, etc.) but not in the basic building blocks of that science. Which is often what it feels like during these discussions.
No, it isn't. I'm not trying to convince you of anything, other than you, like me, are merely a simple human on this lucky rock hurtling through space that is capable of giving what is needed for sustained life. I'm willing to believe that isn't due to chance, you are.
because it comes from some level of "you're clearly not smart enough to understand it" - you know, like you just did.
That's not at all anything I've said during this discussion. If you're taking that from what I'm saying, it's entirely from your interpretation, not my intention.
for instance - you've presented something here that allows for 2 conclusions: 1) simple basic building blocks of science gave you cell phones, and explain why god doesn't exist OR 2) anyone who doesn't understand this is dumb.
I've done nothing of the sort. I've tried to explain the perspective of some people who don't understand your point of view. I'm presenting you with a viewpoint.
if only everyone was as accepting of faith as you are. I accept both points of view, but I only choose one.
Actually, not religion as much as zealots for me, but that might be closer to what you meant.
Generally speaking, if an entity did create everything around us, odds are good he wouldn't be benevolent. Highly creative beings tend to be #######s.
Yes, you've made this point many times over the years. I didn't realize this was a competition between who is more or less annoying.proninja said:I don't really see too much difference between the percentage of annoying atheists and the percentage of annoying theists in these threads
You are comparing a thread created by a Star Wars fan for Star Wars fans to a thread created by a non-believer for believers and non-believers. That's an apples to oranges comparison.Yes, you've made this point many times over the years. I didn't realize this was a competition between who is more or less annoying.
The other day I chided a guy for popping in the Star Wars thread to do nothing but ridicule. I feel the same way about this thread. If your only point is to poke holes and make fun and demand evidence...you're probably being a troll.
And yeah, obviously all sides of all arguments typically have annoying people in them. I'm sure you count me as one of them!
MarvinTScamper said:
MarvinTScamper said:
MarvinTScamper said:
MarvinTScamper said:
MarvinTScamper said:
MarvinTScamper said:
This is a thread started by an atheist.Yes, you've made this point many times over the years. I didn't realize this was a competition between who is more or less annoying.
The other day I chided a guy for popping in the Star Wars thread to do nothing but ridicule. I feel the same way about this thread. If your only point is to poke holes and make fun and demand evidence...you're probably being a troll.
And yeah, obviously all sides of all arguments typically have annoying people in them. I'm sure you count me as one of them!
Really? It was about suffering -- that's all I ever asked. If you'd suffered metaphysically as much as Jesus did. It's a metaphor, you schnod.tonydead said:
Except "metaphysically" wasn't included in the OP. The OP stated no "anti-semitizm" and "as a man" and seemed to phrase the question as only physical. It was clear to me after a few posts that wasn't what you meant, but, a lot of the posters responded the way I had initially interpreted it including the one I was responding to. To be fair, it's difficult to figure out what you are talking about most of the time.
