:angel2: Thanks Heathen!
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
And that, my friends, is a classic argument from incredulity. Lacking the ability to imagine an alternative explanation of the universe, mickiel falls back on his belief that there just had to be a complex creator, which he has no trouble imagining as a complex being that has just always existed. Physical reality itself couldn't just always have existed, because it is too complex. :areyoucra
What has always existed needs no beginning, yet our universe has a beginning, carbon dating proves that to me. Saturn is cooling off, it radiates three times more energy than it receives from the Sun, Its not massive enough to retain its primeval heat from formation 4.5 billion years ago, because its still giving off internal heat, it cannot be billions of years old.
The Earths rotation is slowing a fraction of a second per year. If the earth were billions of years old, the centrifugal force should have notably deformed the earth, and I question that.
The earths magnectic field has been measured scientifically for over 100 years, studies reveal the strength of this field is decaying exponentially at a half life of 1,400 years. If this measurement is consistent with the past, the magnectic field would have been comparable to that of a magnectic star as few as 30,000 years ago. The estimated heat produced by those currents would have melted the earth. Its academic.
The Moon is receding slowly from the earth. Both are considered to be 4.5 billion years old. The Moon never could have been closer to the earth than 11,500 miles. This distance is known as the " Roche Limit." The tidal forces of the earth on a satellite of the Moons dimensions would break it up into rings like those of Saturn. Based on the present rate of lunar recession, the Moon would have been within the Roche limit around 1 or 2 billion years ago, 50-75% too soon.
The phony nonsense of Atheist who rant at me for my views, are nothing to me, I have looked into this, and I am convinced.
Peace.
That is why I often use the term "physical reality" rather than "universe". The visible universe does have a beginning, but that does not mean that there was no physical reality before that beginning, only that we have no way of directly observing conditions before the so-called "big bang". When you make this kind of argument, you are equivocating between two senses of "universe": all of "physical reality" and the "visible universe". God is not necessary to explain physical reality, because it has no beginning. The visible universe, on the other hand, does appear to have a beginning.What has always existed needs no beginning, yet our universe has a beginning, carbon dating proves that to me...
What has always existed needs no beginning, yet our universe has a beginning, carbon dating proves that to me. Saturn is cooling off, it radiates three times more energy than it receives from the Sun, Its not massive enough to retain its primeval heat from formation 4.5 billion years ago, because its still giving off internal heat, it cannot be billions of years old.
The Earths rotation is slowing a fraction of a second per year. If the earth were billions of years old, the centrifugal force should have notably deformed the earth, and I question that.
The earths magnectic field has been measured scientifically for over 100 years, studies reveal the strength of this field is decaying exponentially at a half life of 1,400 years. If this measurement is consistent with the past, the magnectic field would have been comparable to that of a magnectic star as few as 30,000 years ago. The estimated heat produced by those currents would have melted the earth. Its academic.
The Moon is receding slowly from the earth. Both are considered to be 4.5 billion years old. The Moon never could have been closer to the earth than 11,500 miles. This distance is known as the " Roche Limit." The tidal forces of the earth on a satellite of the Moons dimensions would break it up into rings like those of Saturn. Based on the present rate of lunar recession, the Moon would have been within the Roche limit around 1 or 2 billion years ago, 50-75% too soon.
The phony nonsense of Atheist who rant at me for my views, are nothing to me, I have looked into this, and I am convinced.
Peace.
There are only two choices, creation or spontaneous evolution which started from nothing.
One choice has odds of 100 billion billion to one.
That the universe happened to create itself by certain things occuring spontaneously , is an incredible sequence of abnormal events.
Its interesting how Atheist don't believe in miracles considering spontaneous generation, if it ever did happen, is inexplicable by the laws of nature which is the very definition of a miracle.
Nonsense. How do you know that these are the only two choices. Also, "nothing" is at best a highly inaccurate term in this context. quote
Well you claim nonsense, then lets have the other choices, I am willing to listen.
And exactly how did you come about this figure? quote
I didnot come up with it, scientist did.
Perhaps, but it only had to happen once. Also, how do you know that this would have been an abnormal event? You have a statistical basis of one (1), which makes calculations of probability worthless. quote
I disagree, according to this theory, it could only have happened once, and never again. And it has not occured again, so there is relevence to it. Its so unlikely, that I believe it never happened anyway.
Actually, a miracle is a suspension of natural laws.
Again, this is pure argument from incredulity or ignorance. Your imagination fails you, so the only thing you can imagine must be true. When it comes to the observable universe, that is. When it comes to God, you feel no obligation to say that you have an understanding of that entity's origin. This type of fallacious argument is called special pleading.In my understanding of Atheism, there are no miracles, but any sensible view of how this Universe began, can only be a miracle, in my view.
I find it interesting that humanity can become so entralled with things that are really Nothing. How great movements of Nothing can literally sweep thousands of us up into it and carry us away in its dream, dreams that are full of hot air that leads to nothing. Like looking for wells without water, we reach out and grab what looks like it is nourishing, because deep down inside we thrist for that nourishment, because we are deprived. We hunger for true meaning. And then habitually look to nothing to fill that meaning.
When it becomes hard to believe in anything, it becomes easier to believe in nothing.
And I want to go into the " Represenitive of the Nothing."
Peace.
Again, this is pure argument from incredulity or ignorance. Your imagination fails you, so the only thing you can imagine must be true. When it comes to the observable universe, that is. When it comes to God, you feel no obligation to say that you have an understanding of that entity's origin. This type of fallacious argument is called special pleading.
are you talking about the invention of TV, myspace and facebook?
No, it is not. By definition, a miracle is something that can only happen through divine intervention. Since we have no real idea of precisely how the Universe came to be in it's current state, the assertion that it can only have come to exist through divine intervention has absolutely no basis.The orgin of the Universe is a miracle, by any reasonable definition, Atheist do not believe in miracles, so they do not really believe in their own orgin.
You seem to the be the only really confused person in this thread.When you talk to a person who does not believe in their orgin, nothing they say can be trusted, because they are really confused. Don't even realize their confusion, but in their minds, they try to make sense of the confusion.
Amen.I see this everyday, you cannot reason with the unreasonable, its just not possible!
No, it is not. By definition, a miracle is something that can only happen through divine intervention. Since we have no real idea of precisely how the Universe came to be in it's current state, the assertion that it can only have come to exist through divine intervention has absolutely no basis.
.
I disagree Flame, how the Universe began can only be described as a miracle , I am convinced of that. Its uniqueness, its obvious power and order, even its disorder is still controlled. When disorder is controlled, somebody is controlling it. In my maturity of thought, I see this. When we have no idea, that is not evidence that an idea does not exist. This universe is Gods idea, and its absolute proof of his existence.
Its academic, wether you can see it or not.
Peace.
Nonsense. The Universe is 99.99999% nothing. How "ordered" could it possibly be?I disagree Flame, how the Universe began can only be described as a miracle , I am convinced of that. Its uniqueness, its obvious power and order, even its disorder is still controlled.
Again, you're being childishly simplistic. The universe is "controlled" by the physical forces acting upon it. Why do you need a God in order to understand that?When disorder is controlled, somebody is controlling it.
What are you talking about?In my maturity of thought, I see this. When we have no idea, that is not evidence that an idea does not exist.
Again, you're simplifying. If that were even remotely true atheists would not exist.This universe is Gods idea, and its absolute proof of his existence.
No it's not academic, whether you admit it or not.Its academic, wether you can see it or not.
In a prision there is disorder, but it is being controlled. The earth is a giant prision, but yet its disorder is still being controlled. Its obvious! Things could easily be much worse.
Somebody is controlling it.
Think about it.
Well I think those things can apply in some cases, many people cannot enjoy simple life without those things. And those things have dramatic effect on their consciousness. Movies and films just carry them away into all kinds of thoughts and very heavily influence them. This is a well known fact, and the theory of evolution has carried away hughe numbers of people who just allow their minds to be accessed by foolishness, which they are convinced is facts. Its their moment of truth.
Its the moment of manipulation.
Peace.
Mickiel, I do not see this every day, just mainly those on which I try to engage you and other religious fundamentalists in serious discussion. And still, I entertain the hope that it is possible. I am pretty sure that you apply different rules of logic to other areas of your life. Otherwise, you probably wouldn't have made it this far to engage in these discussions. :sarcasticI see this everyday, you cannot reason with the unreasonable, its just not possible!