Why do atheist believe something can come from nothing?

[leov]

It was a trial in which the judge ruled that Creationism (repackaged as ID) was not based in science and was a religious concept.
Science does not owe anyone a refutation of an idea which does not even present a scientific theory to be tested against the evidence.

Maybe this will help you understand:

Browse the Talk.Origins Archive

I figured it out what it was , I asked for link of trial that that refutes ic concept, that was not it.

 

[leov]

That claim is extremely dubious. Start your own thread.

I can't speak for architects, but from my experience their scientific education is lacking, but structural engineers tend to know the difference between steel and aluminum.

And massive steel center core columns should have been left standing intact unless kerosene fire melted them...

 

[Thief]

I do not believe in hell

but you are likely to end up alongside someone else.....perhaps many....
who think and feel like you do

you think of God as dark and ugly?

I might retort...…
it gets mighty ugly
in the dark

 

[shunyadragon]

I figured it out what it was , I asked for link of trial that that refutes ic concept, that was not it.

Scientific hypothesis and theories are not refuted, they are falsified. The failure of ID at Dover was because the proponents of ID could not present objective verifiable evidence to falsify the hypothesis necessary in science, and taught in schools.

 

[Thief]

science is refuted....until
the experiment repeats

 

[leov]

Scientific hypothesis and theories are not refuted, they are falsified. The failure of ID at Dover was because the proponents of ID could not present objective verifiable evidence to falsify the hypothesis necessary in science, and taught in schools.

This is the post I responded to “Irreducible complexity has been totally debunked in court. I am surprised people are still bringing it up”

 

[Subduction Zone]

And massive steel center core columns should have been left standing intact unless kerosene fire melted them...

Oh my, so you are neither an architect nor an engineer.

Start your own thread. You can do it.

 

[Subduction Zone]

This is the post I responded to “Irreducible complexity has been totally debunked in court. I am surprised people are still bringing it up”

Creationists are very slow to learn.

 

[Milton Platt]

I figured it out what it was , I asked for link of trial that that refutes ic concept, that was not it.

Yes, the trial was relevant only in that the trail established that t ID was not a scientific concept, but a religious one.

 

[Milton Platt]

I understood that it was a refutation but I did not really found, science also said that kerosene melts steel...

I don't understand what steel and kerosene has to to with a refutation of ID.
Interesting, though...provide a link to a scientific paper which has as it's conclusion "kerosene melts steel"

 

[Road Warrior]

BINGO! And since we have zero examples of anything-- any phenomena at all-- being "outside"? (if such an idea is even rational or makes sense)

We can dismiss all such phenomena as unlikely in the extreme.

It's akin to asking "what is North of the North Pole?"

So you think the Multiverse theory or parallel universe theories are just Woo Woo?

Does Stephen Hawking’s final theory tame the multiverse? | EarthSky.org
Hawking and Hertog’s latest study deals specifically with a subset of Big Bang theory, called eternal inflation. Most modern Big Bang theories incorporate the idea of an inflation, which calls for an exponential expansion of space in the universe’s first fraction of a second. Eternalinflation suggests that some pockets of space keep expanding exponentially forever, while some (like the one we inhabit) don’t.

If this theory is an accurate description of the cosmos, then we live in a multiverse consisting of many isolated bubble universes.

If it’s true, then our entire known cosmos of galaxies and stars exists inside a sort of bubble, but many other bubbles – forever unknowable – exist outside ours. Some might have laws of physics similar to (or even the same as) ours. Some would operate very differently. The University of Cambridge issued a statement about Hawking’s final study this week. It explained:

The observable part of our universe would then be just a hospitable pocket universe, a region in which inflation has ended and stars and galaxies formed.​

 

[Milton Platt]

In what way do you mean this? (this will be good )

It is argued by theists that "something cannot come from nothing", yet when asked what their god came from, they say he always existed. But if you conjecture that then everything else could have existed, they find that hard to accept. You cannot say that everything else has to have had a cause and then special plead your god into existence.

 

[Milton Platt]

This is, after all, the very crux of the matter..when you can't explain something no matter how hard you try, you have to either say "I don't know," or invent something "outside the rules" that does the explaining for you.

I'm on the "I don't know" side.

Yep. I've been doing this for a long time. There are no new arguments, only the ones debunked long ago. They keep getting re-posted as if they had never been heard before. Willful ignorance seems to be the order of the day.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Yep. I've been doing this for a long time. There are no new arguments, only the ones debunked long ago. They keep getting re-posted as if they had never been heard before. Willful ignorance seems to be the order of the day.

As I like to say, there is no debate any longer. Now there is only correction.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

That deep emotional conviction of the presence of a superior reasoning power, which is revealed in the incomprehensible universe, forms my idea of God.

Albert Einstein​

“I regard the brain as a computer which will stop working when its components fail. There is no heaven or afterlife for broken down computers; that is a fairy story for people afraid of the dark.” (Interview with Ian Sample in Guardian Magazine, May 15, 2011)

“There is a fundamental difference between religion, which is based on authority, and science, which is based on observation and reason. Science will win because it works.” (In an interview with Diane Sawyer on June 7, 2010)

“We are each free to believe what we want, and it’s my view that the simplest explanation is; there is no God. No one created our universe, and no one directs our fate. This leads me to a profound realization that there probably is no heaven and no afterlife either. We have this one life to appreciate the grand design of the universe and for that, I am extremely grateful.” (Discovery Channel, August 15, 2011)

Stephen Hawking



I can play that game too...

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Alright high-and-mighty, give us dumb people one single shred of evidence for your 'no god' theory. Aside from a hypothesis that you like, what is your evidence?

Blatant shift of the burden of proof.
It's the theist that makes the claim (god exists), so it's the theist that has the burden of proof.

Atheists don't make claims. What defines an atheist is simply that the person doesn't accept the claim of the theist, that's it.

And the reason the atheist doesn't accept that claim, is because the theist fails to meet his burden of proof.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

There is anatomical reason. We have organs to sense spiritual 'broadcast', organs that too many lost function of or in a process of losing. 99.99% of us.

You make zero sense with these bizar bare claims.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

so you don't really give a damn either

maybe you're closer to God than you think

Consider how little impact the following threats would have on you:
- if you don't do this or that, santa won't bring you presents next year
- if you don't convert to islam, you'll find yourself in islamic hellfire after death
- if you don't worship the norse gods and show courage on the battlefield, you won't be entering whalhalla
- if no coins are placed on your eyes when you die, you won't be able to pay the boatman to cross the Styx river
- .....


Now consider how christian inspired threats, will have the exact same effect us non-christians as the above threats have impact on you.........

So, does ending up in islamic hell keep you awake at night?
Do you "care" at all?

I'm going to go ahead and assume that no, it doesn't keep you awake and no, you don't care.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Ball is in your court now, show that what I said is not valid

He already did, in the very post you are responding to.
Your claim is not in evidence.

, just give scientific proof that there is no soul.

1. blatant shift of the burden of proof: YOU are the one claiming there is a soul. Support your own claims. If you fail to support your claim, then we get to reject your claim. Because as the saying goes: what is asserted without evidence, can be rejected without evidence.


2. I will show you scientific proof that there is no soul, as soon as you give me scientific evidence that there are no rainbow farting unicorns.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I gave your scientific examples of pollution changing dna

And what are the examples supposed to prove?