Why are there still Monkeys?

[Ouroboros]

How "thermodynamic" of you!

I'm "cool" that way.

 

[FearGod]

Agree. I believe existence is motion. Being motionless would mean non-existence.

So it was motionless before singularity and before existence.

How things start to move and the incredibly small singularity to expand.

Starting point is inevitable, atheists hate to think of it as to be the work of God, so they think for other options as to exclude God since they lack the faith.

 

[NewGuyOnTheBlock]

So it was motionless before singularity and before existence.

How things start to move and the incredibly small singularity to expand.

Starting point is inevitable, atheists hate to think of it as to be the work of God, so they think for other options as to exclude God since they lack the faith.

See, that's where you are completely wrong.

First, it's not "atheists" it's "scientists"; the ones who are trying to figure all of this out according to the rules set forth in the scientific method. Scientists follow the trail of verifiable evidence to whatever conclusion it leads to.

Second, this is a game of "Infinite Permeations" or "Infinite Causality."

You will lead us down a path of "why, why, why, why" like a child would do until we have no answers; then you will claim "victory" over the "God did it debate" or press us for "guesses" and continue you're Path of Infinites until we are led, like sheep to the slaughter, to the conclusion you want us to reach.

It's not going to work.

The trail of evidence is followed to whatever conclusion that trail of evidence leads. When we reach a point where we no longer have an answer, the conversation stops and research continues until there is an answer. That's how it works.

 

[FearGod]

See, that's where you are completely wrong.

First, it's not "atheists" it's "scientists"; the ones who are trying to figure all of this out according to the rules set forth in the scientific method. Scientists follow the trail of verifiable evidence to whatever conclusion it leads to.

Second, this is a game of "Infinite Permeations" or "Infinite Causality."

You will lead us down a path of "why, why, why, why" like a child would do until we have no answers; then you will claim "victory" over the "God did it debate" or press us for "guesses" and continue you're Path of Infinites until we are led, like sheep to the slaughter, to the conclusion you want us to reach.

It's not going to work.

The trail of evidence is followed to whatever conclusion that trail of evidence leads. When we reach a point where we no longer have an answer, the conversation stops and research continues until there is an answer. That's how it works.

I don't think that i made any mistakes except of being realistic.

I said atheists don't accept God and that is a fact whereas there are many theistic scientists who believe in God and they try to unveil the secrets behind this amazing world,no contradiction between science and religion.

Isaac Newton had said

“This most beautiful system of the sun, planets and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being.”
― Isaac Newton, The Principia: Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy

“He who thinks half-heartedly will not believe in God; but he who really thinks has to believe in God.”

“God who gave Animals self motion beyond our understanding is without doubt able to implant other principles of motion in bodies [which] we may understand as little. Some would readily grant this may be a Spiritual one; yet a mechanical one might be showne, did not I think it better to pass it by.”
― Isaac Newton, The Correspondence of Isaac Newton: Published for the Royal Society. VOLUMES 1 through 7

 

[idav]

I don't think that i made any mistakes except of being realistic.

I said atheists don't accept God and that is a fact whereas there are many theistic scientists who believe in God and they try to unveil the secrets behind this amazing world,no contradiction between science and religion.

Isaac Newton had said

“This most beautiful system of the sun, planets and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being.”
― Isaac Newton, The Principia: Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy

“He who thinks half-heartedly will not believe in God; but he who really thinks has to believe in God.”

“God who gave Animals self motion beyond our understanding is without doubt able to implant other principles of motion in bodies [which] we may understand as little. Some would readily grant this may be a Spiritual one; yet a mechanical one might be showne, did not I think it better to pass it by.”
― Isaac Newton, The Correspondence of Isaac Newton: Published for the Royal Society. VOLUMES 1 through 7

Newton was not the final say on maths of cosmos and gravity. His own beliefs hindered his ability to see he needed to go further cause there were yet more answers.

 

[NewGuyOnTheBlock]

I know you don't think you made any mistakes.

You seem to have it in your head that the goal of science is to discredit God. No amount of discussion or evidence will change your mind, so I won't even try.

Isaac Newton died in 1727; almost 300 years ago. Given the knowledge, culture and religiosity of the day, it does not surprise me in the slightest that he would make such comments. They are outdated and are not credible when compared to today's knowledge.

 

[FearGod]

Newton was not the final say on maths of cosmos and gravity. His own beliefs hindered his ability to see he needed to go further cause there were yet more answers.

You're now belittling the the great works of Newton because he was a theist.

 

[FearGod]

I know you don't think you made any mistakes.

You seem to have it in your head that the goal of science is to discredit God. No amount of discussion or evidence will change your mind, so I won't even try.

Isaac Newton died in 1727; almost 300 years ago. Given the knowledge, culture and religiosity of the day, it does not surprise me in the slightest that he would make such comments. They are outdated and are not credible when compared to today's knowledge.

I ain't against science, but what i said is that atheists exclude God of being the designer of this universe even though that they had no answers except of saying that it only happened by itself and no need for God and when asking questions they got no rational answers except that we are still looking for answers but not God.

 

[sojourner]

Why are there still Monkeys?

There had to be some context for the Planet of the Apes films, didn't there?

 

[idav]

You're now belittling the the great works of Newton because he was a theist.

Has nothing to do with belittling his work. Of course we can look at the stars and feel like gods hand was doing the solar system but people since him, standing on his shoulders, went further and explained the mathematics passed his cultural perceptions.

Why would I care if he was theist?

 

[FearGod]

Has nothing to do with belittling his work. Of course we can look at the stars and feel like gods hand was doing the solar system but people since him, standing on his shoulders, went further and explained the mathematics passed his cultural perceptions.

Why would I care if he was theist?

Didn't you say that his belief had hindered his ability ?

 

[Willamena]

I ain't against science, but what i said is that atheists exclude God of being the designer of this universe even though that they had no answers except of saying that it only happened by itself and no need for God and when asking questions they got no rational answers except that we are still looking for answers but not God.

If they didn't, they wouldn't be atheists.

 

[NewGuyOnTheBlock]

Didn't you say that his belief had hindered his ability ?

It's not a matter of belittling, but a matter of fact and of observation.

As an example, I am observing that you are stubbornly and ardently clinging to your belief in spite of ample and adequate evidence that your belief is wrong.

If you hear the word "stupid" in there, then that is not what I said. I simply observed and stated the observation.

 

[FearGod]

It's not a matter of belittling, but a matter of fact and of observation.

As an example, I am observing that you are stubbornly and ardently clinging to your belief in spite of ample and adequate evidence that your belief is wrong.

If you hear the word "stupid" in there, then that is not what I said. I simply observed and stated the observation.

Which facts,observations and adequate evidence that you have to prove that my faith in God to be wrong.

You believe that the unconscious nature had did it whereas i believe instead of your stupid thoughts of randomness and chances that an intelligent supernatural entity had did it.

Tell me then who is the stupid.:sarcastic

 

[MD]

If you hear the word "stupid" in there, then that is not what I said. I simply observed and stated the observation.

Are you implying that most theists are stupid? There are a lot of deistic and pantheistic scientists out there, some of them world renowned. Physics isn't the be all to end all of knowledge out there, it can't even begin to address consciousness.

Maybe you should read less Victor Stenger and more Paul Davies.

 

[FearGod]

If they didn't, they wouldn't be atheists.

Yes indeed. :yes:

 

[idav]

Didn't you say that his belief had hindered his ability ?

Belief can do that you know, ability can be hindered by misconceptions. Thats why we strive for truth rather than belief in order to get passed personal bias.

Are you done with your plead for authority just cause he is a scientist?

 

[FearGod]

Belief can do that you know, ability can be hindered by misconceptions. Thats why we strive for truth rather than belief in order to get passed personal bias.

Are you done with your plead for authority just cause he is a scientist?

There is no contradiction between religion and science.

There are many theistic scientists striving for the truth while still believing in God.

Actually God asked us to observe the universe and how amazing it is.

 

[McBell]

So in other words and according to your opinion the one managing and driving this universe is incompetent and reckless or do you think there is no one at all managing and controlling this universe and it is only matter of accidents, chances and some luck.

This is nothing more than presenting strawmen in a false dichotomy.

 

[McBell]

I've seen at least one science documentary wherein the speaker ( a scientist)
insisted the odds are too remote for all of this to take shape as it has.....
without Someone in the background.

Really?
Did he show his math, including where and how he got the numbers he used?
No?
Then how the hell does he know?