Is God's existence necessary?

[Unification]

Any statements about "not directly detected" and the like must be said about both gravity and dark energy.

Sure, acknowledge your belief in gravity and dark energy.

You've said numerous times it is stupid, and silly to believe in something not testable, detectable, and measurable. . yet do so yourself.

 

[Unification]

Of course I haven't wronged you. That's what I said.

You wronged me.

I discuss how some beliefs are irrational. I am not "judging" others. You simply want to throw stones at your own strawman of me.

You poor innocent victim you, telling others they are stupid and silly to believe in something not detectable, measurable, and testable while doing so yourself and admitting that sometimes belief is "necessary."

 

[prometheus11]

he didn't get it wrong....and I saw the documentary.....

science believes in dark energy and matter.
the effect is sufficient to convince them....

can't show it directly.

Exactly like gravity.

Do you have the same problems with gravity that you do with dark energy?

Unless you're a hypocrite, you MUST!

 

[prometheus11]

You poor innocent victim you, telling others they are stupid and silly to believe in something not detectable, measurable, and testable while doing so yourself and admitting that sometimes belief is "necessary."

That's about the seventh time you have lied and slandered me.

I don't care, but you should.

You should also pay closer attention to what I say and intend.

You can make the same points without being a jerk.

 

[prometheus11]

Sure, acknowledge your belief in gravity and dark energy.

You've said numerous times it is stupid, and silly to believe in something not testable, detectable, and measurable. . yet do so yourself.

Another lie, another epic failure.

I've said what science declares to be the case.

Gravity and dark energy are names for effects OBSERVED on matter.

I don't believe in dark energy or gravity, I accept them as the names science has provided for their measurable, consistent, ever present, omniscient effects.

You're fighting a strawman that looks nothing like me that lives on another planet. Do I need to start mocking you for being a purple carrot and spitting in babies faces for you to realize whst you are doing to me?

 

[Unification]

Another lie, another epic failure.

I've said what science declares to be the case.

Gravity and dark energy are names for effects OBSERVED on matter.

I don't believe in dark energy or gravity, I accept them as the names science has provided for their measurable, consistent, ever present, omniscient effects.

You're fighting a strawman that looks nothing like me that lives on another planet. Do I need to start mocking you for being a purple carrot and spitting in babies faces for you to realize whst you are doing to me?

So, the universe is composed of 65-70% "effects?"

 

[Unification]

That's about the seventh time you have lied and slandered me.

I don't care, but you should.

You should also pay closer attention to what I say and intend.

You can make the same points without being a jerk.

Yes, that you believe in an unseen, unchanging/consistent omnipresent and omniscient power permeating the entire universe.

That you believe in the effects that it causes.

 

[prometheus11]

Yes, that you believe in an unseen, unchanging/consistent omnipresent and omniscient power permeating the entire universe.

That you believe in the effects that it causes.

You believe in the wind without seeing it because of its effects. Same thing with science concerning dark energy and gravity.

 

[Unification]

You believe in the wind without seeing it because of its effects. Same thing with science concerning dark energy and gravity.

Nice comparison you've presented. .. so why not call it "dark wind?" Is the wind omnipresent , omniscient, changeless/consistent, and as a power permeating the entire universe?

 

[Unification]

Do you try to be obtuse? It's pretty childish behavior.

Science doesn't say that something came from nothing. Stop lying.

If you don't know the answer, the honest reply is, "I don't know the answer."

And if you understood the way telescopes work, you'd know that we can look back in time, and we have PROVED the inflation of the singularity and its subsequent expansion.

Forget about decent conversation, bendy, and go give your faith a good workout, instead.

You really haven't proved the singularity. The singularity may have not even existed. You believe and have faith in the singularity.

 

[McBell]

Is the wind omnipresent , omniscient, changeless/consistent, and as a power permeating the entire universe?

Nope.
And near as I can tell, neither is dark energy.
Of course, I have no idea where you got the idea that anyone thinks dark energy is "omnipresent , omniscient, changeless/consistent, and as a power permeating the entire universe"...

 

[Unification]

Nope. Not talking about red shift at all. I'm talking about the microwave background radiation.

Science does not and cannot comment on anything before the initial moment of the singularity's inflationary epoch.

We don't even know enough to call the singularity an "occurrence,"

It cannot comment on anything "at" or before the belief in the singularity.

All of physics' laws become null "at" or "before".... not just before.

 

[Unification]

Nope.
And near as I can tell, neither is dark energy.
Of course, I have no idea where you got the idea that anyone thinks dark energy is "omnipresent , omniscient, changeless/consistent, and as a power permeating the entire universe"...

From "prometheus11."

 

[McBell]

From "prometheus11."

post # please

 

[raw_thought]

Actually ,science does say that something can come from nothing. It happens all the time!
1-1=0 .....0=1-1 . Nothing (zero) separated into positive and negative .

 

[Unification]

A Mathematical Proof That The Universe Could Have Formed Spontaneously From Nothing
Cosmologists assume that natural quantum fluctuations allowed the Big Bang to happen spontaneously. Now they have a mathematical proof
https://medium.com/the-physics-arxi...aneously-from-nothing-ed7ed0f304a3#.44swh0ap1

Isn't "spontaneously" just a clever word for "magically?"

post # please

They are there, search yourself please. . there are a combination of two of them, with one recent. Using my phone, I don't have post numbers.

 

[raw_thought]

Is it necessary that 1-1=0? YES !

 

[prometheus11]

Nice comparison you've presented. .. so why not call it "dark wind?" Is the wind omnipresent , omniscient, changeless/consistent, and as a power permeating the entire universe?

Because they're two different things.

No, obviously wind is not ubiquitous and omnipresent. Also, we understand its mechanism. Not so with gravity and dark energy.

We watch matter moving. One set of movements per one force. Gravity is one. Dark energy is another.

 

[raw_thought]

Is the fact that from nothing one can derive +1 and -1 magical?

 

[McBell]

They are there, search yourself please. . there are a combination of two of them, with one recent. Using my phone, I don't have post numbers.

I ask because I have looked and have not found any such post.
Which leads me to wondering if it was actually claimed or if you are making assumptions based upon what was actually said.