Creationist Lies
- Started
- Last post
- 827 Responses
- TheTick0
It is illogical and downright absurd to suggest that something came from nothing.
discipler
(Jun 15 05, 10:53)
----------------In Western Christiantian and most Greek thought yes. But Buddhism has Mu and form arriving from emptiness as a very basic concept. So I suppose all civilizations west of the Iran are absurd?
- Hym0
discipler i was 8 years old and just an annoying angry kid willing to fight anything that cared to answer and losing parents early didn't really help.
But that doesn't matter, i feel satisfied with my view on life and so do you. You probably can't live in a world without a God, well i take the reverse.
- JazX0
JazX - here's something I found quick - looks pretty good:
www.physicsweb.org/art...
TheTick
(Jun 15 05, 10:45)Interesting, now there's some science.
'The strange story of the Oklo reactor
Natural uranium contains two isotopes. Uranium-235, the isotope that is useful for nuclear energy, is relatively rare and accounts for just 0.7% of all natural uranium. Its less-radioactive sibling, uranium-238, makes up the other 99.3%. In 1972 scientists from the French atomic energy commission noticed something mysterious in soil samples taken from a uranium mine in Gabon in Central Africa: the relative abundance of uranium-235 was a factor of two lower than expected..."
"One possibility was that a band of hi-tech terrorists had been stealing and stockpiling the missing uranium for purposes even more evil than blowing up innocent atolls." - wtf hahaha
That's interesting. Anomalies make my heart beat faster.
"Alexander Shlyakhter of the Leningrad Nuclear Physics Institute."
Looks like he was a Ruski.
"It should be noted that the present status of all these experiments is one of consistency. For example, the geological results do not conflict with the quasar results or the atomic-clock experiments because they probe very different epochs in the history of the universe."
hmmmm...
- TheTick0
I find intriguing the idea that if the fundamental laws of the universe do infact evolve does that suggest that god, or a creator being evolves as well. Now that is an idea that blows my mind, but also one which I find intellectually and spiritually invigorating...
And JazX in case you missed the link here it is again:
- discipler0
It is illogical and downright absurd to suggest that something came from nothing.
- discipler0
trainer -
1. WHAT??? Holy moses. I hope you aren't serious.
2. Read what I just wrote to Hym in my last post.
- TheTick0
And here's an interview with the Rupert Sheldrake guy. He's not related to the former link I put up at all. I got introduced to Sheldrake bc he was one of the talking heads on a PBS show a few years back that featured a whole bunch of scientists (evolutionary biologists, physcis guys..mostly) discussing the origin of th euniverse called The Glorious Accident or something like that - had Feynmann, Gould, Dawkins..and Rupert Sheldrake
Rupert looked like Dr. Who's anemic kid brother and talked some whacked out shit about Lamarkism and then at a roundtable makes the suggestion that maybe the fundamental laws evolve as well - which of course got him weird ass stares from around the table. But I keened into the idea as I thought their was somethingintriguing and sensible about it...anyway, here's an interview with the guy:
- trainer0
1. Darwinian Macroevolution is easily falsifiable. Just find a T-Rex skeleton with a human skeleton inside - the theory says that can't happen.
2. "Logic dictates that everything that has a beginning, has a cause"
...except for the intelligent designer. I fail to see how that isn't a contradiction. Why can the intelligent designer spring forth without cause, without a meta-designer? And if it can, why couldn't the universe itself have done the same?
- discipler0
an infinite uncaused being doesn't require a creator, by definition, Hym. You missed the point. A shame you let a misunderstanding of that truth send you into Atheism.
- JazX0
Back to that theory, TheTick, if gravity, chemistry and/or pressure were to change over time, regardless of creator or evolution, there's a possibilty that a major catastrophic event might occur. Hmmm, puts a funny slant on extinction episodes.
give me link! I demand it!
- discipler0
if anybody has a question, they can search through what has been posted (not that anybody is going to glean a tremendous amount of knowledge from it, what with all the conflicting voices and misinformation available in this monster).
- Anarchitect0
"as far as I can tell, there's three kinds of people in this world - people who know and care - people who care but don't know, and dumb fuckin people who think some huge ass motherfucker with a big white beard made this whole fuckin planet in a fuckin week, just because it says so it a god damn fuckin BOOK.(...)
caulfield
(Jun 15 05, 08:03)"exactly.
- TheTick0
JazX - here's something I found quick - looks pretty good:
- Hym0
" Logic dictates that everything that has a beginning, has a cause."
i became an athesit pretty early in childhood with that reasoning, nobody could tell me who created God
- discipler0
yep, it's going in circles. Seems like every issue has been touched. QBN should close it since any question on this topic has already been addressed, more than likely.
- JazX0
I am no longer participating in this thread. all of the posts look the same.
mrdobolina
(Jun 15 05, 10:43)I'm kind of with you on this. It's been gettin' all philosophical.
More scientific data.
- TheTick0
JazX - I'll find you some links to that...give me a few minutes
- mrdobolina0
I am no longer participating in this thread. all of the posts look the same.
- k770
wow, you guys are so smart.
- discipler0
trainer, you missed the answers to both your comments. Go back up and read thru the thread. But really quickly...
Do you also consider Darwinian Macroevolution invalid since IT is not falsifiable? No, the scientific method will not allow you to "prove" the existance of a creator.
Logic dictates that everything that has a beginning, has a cause. The universe has a beginning, therefore an uncaused first cause, which cannot have a beginning, is the intelligent designer. Your question is flawed from the start, you see.