Guy Threepwood
Mighty Pirate
never say never on Bigfoot Sapiens, you don't want to look foolish!
-
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:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Can you give me an observable evidence that Evolution is true?
- Thread starter pro4life
- Start date
never say never on Bigfoot Sapiens, you don't want to look foolish!
gnostic
The Lost One
Guy Threepwood:
The irrationality is associating certain fields of science to be "atheism", while ignoring other fields to be "atheism".
I don't care if you accept one cosmology over another, but to put one cosmology as being "theistic", and others as "atheistic" as absurd.
You still failed to answer me the questions I have asked:
You keep bringing up one atheist (Hoyle), who no one accept these days, and yet nothing in the history of Big Bang does it say that the Big Bang as being theistic.
Science =/= atheism. They are not synonymous, guy.
The irrationality is associating certain fields of science to be "atheism", while ignoring other fields to be "atheism".
I don't care if you accept one cosmology over another, but to put one cosmology as being "theistic", and others as "atheistic" as absurd.
You still failed to answer me the questions I have asked:
Who among the atheist members here (at RF) accept Hoyle's steady state model over the Big Bang model?
You keep bringing up one atheist (Hoyle), who no one accept these days, and yet nothing in the history of Big Bang does it say that the Big Bang as being theistic.
Science =/= atheism. They are not synonymous, guy.
60 milion years ago there were 2 types of dinosaurs: one type would gently bite grass, knowing somthing about the earth, the other type would run around biting as if saying "it is only a planet, I can do what I like" These 2 types of dinosaurs evolved into human beings, and they both greatly improved (human rights act); so we are in the same place we were 60 mln years ago, we just look bit better;
St John the Baptist used to take people to the river, some time ago, and say "We are all crocodiles, we are all scare of death; go into the river and wash your fear of growing old and dieing off" Once people have done it, they knew which type of dinosaur they are: whether they are in Eden, or just on a planet Earth
The real problem in the world is not evolution, but people who are to scared to face the mirror, and go into the river; they end up constantly aroused, putting lots of make up on, gowing on porn websites; some of them are told "Hell! Sin!" and they end up even more scared than before and try to follow "COMMANDMENTS" or "Sharia law" (kill, rape, throw a stone, etc); so instead of being less scared, they are more scared, more aroused; and they get a promise of paradise with more sex to follow
the problem is not evolution, but people who end up outside Eden: their heart is run by fear, and they want to be God here, on planet earth, before they meet God himself; and it is a very dark place where some preachers take you to; that is the problem
St John the Baptist used to take people to the river, some time ago, and say "We are all crocodiles, we are all scare of death; go into the river and wash your fear of growing old and dieing off" Once people have done it, they knew which type of dinosaur they are: whether they are in Eden, or just on a planet Earth
The real problem in the world is not evolution, but people who are to scared to face the mirror, and go into the river; they end up constantly aroused, putting lots of make up on, gowing on porn websites; some of them are told "Hell! Sin!" and they end up even more scared than before and try to follow "COMMANDMENTS" or "Sharia law" (kill, rape, throw a stone, etc); so instead of being less scared, they are more scared, more aroused; and they get a promise of paradise with more sex to follow
the problem is not evolution, but people who end up outside Eden: their heart is run by fear, and they want to be God here, on planet earth, before they meet God himself; and it is a very dark place where some preachers take you to; that is the problem
Sapiens
Polymathematician
I suppose you have some objective evidence of this bizarre claim?
Salvador
RF's Swedenborgian
There is no objective evidence that humans have a God-given "soul", which will enable us to have a spiritual existence with God that is beyond our bodily existence. However, there is plenty of subjective evidence such as near death experiences or Holy scriptures. Do you not accept subjective evidence to support such an extraordinary claim?
McBell
Unbound
Seems my standard of evidence is much higher than yours.
Sapiens
Polymathematician
I do not consider either to be objective evidence, they are nothing and propaganda in search of a collection plate respectively.
Salvador
RF's Swedenborgian
Every time when I see one of your comments, I think there is some little critter crawling on my screen. I'm easily tricked.
BilliardsBall
Veteran Member
I think it's fortunate if atheists accept Big Bang over Steady State, since the Big Bang shows the laws of conversation did not apply when the universe was created. Thank you!
Skwim
Veteran Member
Why is it fortunate if atheists accept Big Bang over Steady State?
AndromedaRXJ
Active Member
The Big Bang simply describes an extremely dense early Universe where spacetime was curved in on itself, that then rapidly expanded. There's no issues with energy conservation.
gnostic
The Lost One
The Big Bang cosmology, like any other fields of science, is the question of people who understand the theory, and accept the evidences and data that verified theory to be "valid" and true. It is not question of atheists (or atheism) vs theists (or theism).
Guy Threepwood think that all atheists accept Steady State model over BB, just because Fred Hoyle is an atheist, just show that Guy is ignorantly generalising.
Guy think that just because Lemaître was a Belgian "Catholic monk" and physicist, that Christian theism deserve the credit, and not Lemaître's career as a physicist. Guy keep ignorantly associating Lemaître's hypothesis as a big win for Christianity and for theism, and yet NOT ONCE did Lemaître ever mention God in his hypothesis.
Guy Threepwood is the only one here, who is making scientific physical cosmology an issue of atheism vs theism.
Guy continually ignoring the history of BB theory, that Lemaître may have put the BB hypothesis forward with "hypothesis of the primeval atom" in 1927, but it was the Russian physicist Alexander Friedmann who actually first thought of the expanding universe, 5 years earlier than Lemaître.
I am not saying that Lemaître's hypothesis wasn't useful contributor to the theory, but he wasn't the only one.
Another physicist, Howard P Robertson had also independently apply Einstein's relativity to expanding universe cosmology. And Robertson predicted the redshift in 1928, one year before Edwin Hubble actually confirmed it.
In fact, the accepted theory we followed today, Lemaître's contribution is a lot smaller, because it is incomplete. George Gamow expanded Lemaître's theory even further in 1948 with his quantum theory and nuclear theory, which dwarfed Lemaître's contribution to the BB, namely his pioneering works on stellar nucleosynthesis and Big Bang nucleosynthesis.
Gamow had filled in much of the large gaps in Lemaître's original theory.
And while Einstein may have originally accepted Steady State model over the Big Bang model, later changed his mind, it is Einstein's even earlier theory in 1916 on General Relativity is another major contributor to the BB model. It is Einstein's GR that provide the framework to BB.
Lemaître himself even admitted that some equations he used in his theoretical model come from other physicists -
- Einstein's field equations and space-time model of General Relativity (1916)
- and Friedmann's Friedmann equations (1922)
Guy Threepwood don't understand this. It is the physics and each scientist that deserve what they have achieve, and not any religion or religious belief.
The Big Bang cosmology has absolutely nothing to do with atheism or with theism.
BilliardsBall
Veteran Member
Can matter or energy be created per the laws?
How did the energy (and what became the matter) get there?
outhouse
Atheistically
AndromedaRXJ
Active Member
How did the energy get where? Where else would it be?
Again, the Big Bang describes the early universe as extremely dense. How did it become dense? Who knows. But not being able to answer this doesn't put any holes in the Big Bang Theory or Energy Conservation.
gnostic
The Lost One
Creationists don't understand or don't want to understand that Big Bang only described and verified the observable universe.
If there were energy (including heat) and density BEFORE the Big Bang, then the universe wasn't made from nothing.
There can be no energy or denseness without something being there.
The whole something being created out of nothing just demonstrate the level of lack of understanding (in science) among the creationists.
gnostic
The Lost One
Energy cannot exist without matters (including subatomic particles).
You have heard of potential energy and kinetic energy in physics, haven't you?
An object at rest, will have potential energy, and energy being the ability to do work. So when object move or doing work, then kinetic energy is produced.
Energy is closely related to mass. Mass is a property of matter.
If you have ever study physics, then you should notice that many of the equations regarding to energy, often have mass as one of the variables in those equations.
Shad
Veteran Member
Creation from nothing is a creationist belief itself with just an extra parameter of "by God". God never used something to create something else after all.