Definitive Proof that GOD Exists?

[daws101]

Sorry you don't understand the difference between Micro and Macro. Let me help Micro are small changes within a species Macro leads to different species like you see on the family tree according to evolutionists.

we've had this argument on the other thread, it was shit then and it's shit now and way off topic .

And to think you still don't get it.

only in your dreams...

 

[daws101]

More spiritual evidence.

Episode 67 - Full Episode: My Ghost Story Full Episodes and Videos - Biography.com

bahahahahahahahahahahaha!
you did know that show is not fact based and is for entertainment only.
most all of the "ghost" footage has been doctored and "enhanced" all of the EVP'S are too.
that alone destroys any value the "evidence might have had.
again you've proven my point.

All forms of science are entertainment to some.

here's your ass...
that program is not science it's has a little pseudoscience in it to fool asshats like you in to thinking it's substantial...
remember I'm in that biz

 

[edthecynic]

Ok here is another problem with the experiment. Miller and Urey Hypothesized that the environment did not contain raw oxygen How did they know what the environment was like that long ago ? the reason why they included an oxygen free environment was because they knew these molecules could not form with the presence of raw oxygen.

You're also ignoring the fact that it does not happen naturally in nature and this was done through intelligent human beings. You're also ignoring the presence of both amino acids being present and how would only left handed amino acids bond in the right sequence to produce proteins.

They knew what the early atmosphere was like because scientists are not stupid and can figure things out. The early Earth was very volcanic and the lava spewed into the atmosphere would trap some of the atmosphere as a result. These ancient lava rocks can be dated and the oldest ones were analyzed for what the atmosphere was like at the time, and they found there was no free oxygen. Gases produced were similar to those created by modern volcanoes (H2O, CO2, SO2, CO, S2, Cl2, N2, H2) and NH3 (ammonia) and CH4 (methane). No free O2 at this time (not found in volcanic gases).

They know what the early atmosphere was like because they are not stupid what the heck kind of response was that lol ? no one said they were stupid but it is just speculation that is all it is. They can't prove what the atmosphere was like billions of years ago. But you to missed the point the tests were done from the standpoint of intelligence not natural happenings.

I did not touch on the many things that was not produced in the tests like molecular machines and DNA. Talk about requiring faith to believe such a fairytale.

Talk about stubbornly ignoring the facts. After the method used to determine the early atmosphere of the Earth was explained to you, you still claim scientists are too stupid to figure such things out.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Exactly, every living organism is made of molecules that form naturally on Earth, there are no "designer" molecules in any living organism.

One more thing about viruses they are produced within a living organism not in the natural environment So I ask you what was your point ?

so living organisms are NOT part the natural environment?
that statement wreaks of ignorance and pseudoscience.

Daws did you misunderstand why a living organism can't be produced in the natural environment that Ed and I were discussing ?

Speaking of wreaking from ignorance

Let me make this clear for you daws. The question is yes living organisms are part of the natural environment but how did they join the natural environment if they could not form in the natural environment ? now do you see the problem for naturalists ?

 

[Youwerecreated]

we've had this argument on the other thread, it was shit then and it's shit now and way off topic .

And to think you still don't get it.

only in your dreams...

I will start replying to you when you understand the subject being discussed.

 

[daws101]

One more thing about viruses they are produced within a living organism not in the natural environment So I ask you what was your point ?

so living organisms are NOT part the natural environment?
that statement wreaks of ignorance and pseudoscience.

Daws did you misunderstand why a living organism can't be produced in the natural environment that Ed and I were discussing ?

Speaking of wreaking from ignorance

Let me make this clear for you daws. The question is yes living organisms are part of the natural environment but how did they join the natural environment if they could not form in the natural environment ? now do you see the problem for naturalists ?

odd that they did in nature and it's no problem for naturalists, it's a false declarative.

 

[daws101]

And to think you still don't get it.

only in your dreams...

I will start replying to you when you understand the subject being discussed.

the problem here is you don't understand the subject that you claim to know so much about.


btw YWC I can find no research or results that give any validity to this statement.."why a living organism can't be produced in the natural environment" YWC.
SO AS ALWAYS YOU MUST BE TALKING OUT YOUR ASS.

 

[Youwerecreated]

They knew what the early atmosphere was like because scientists are not stupid and can figure things out. The early Earth was very volcanic and the lava spewed into the atmosphere would trap some of the atmosphere as a result. These ancient lava rocks can be dated and the oldest ones were analyzed for what the atmosphere was like at the time, and they found there was no free oxygen. Gases produced were similar to those created by modern volcanoes (H2O, CO2, SO2, CO, S2, Cl2, N2, H2) and NH3 (ammonia) and CH4 (methane). No free O2 at this time (not found in volcanic gases).

They know what the early atmosphere was like because they are not stupid what the heck kind of response was that lol ? no one said they were stupid but it is just speculation that is all it is. They can't prove what the atmosphere was like billions of years ago. But you to missed the point the tests were done from the standpoint of intelligence not natural happenings.

I did not touch on the many things that was not produced in the tests like molecular machines and DNA. Talk about requiring faith to believe such a fairytale.

Talk about stubbornly ignoring the facts. After the method used to determine the early atmosphere of the Earth was explained to you, you still claim scientists are too stupid to figure such things out.

How does this answer the question they knew that the early atmosphere did not contain oxygen ?

Don't be rediculous,oxygen is throughout space. So you tell me how an atmosphere did not contain oxygen ?

 

[dblack]

As I mentioned earlier, I don't think there is any question that gods exist. The dispute is over the nature of that existence. I suspect that at some point, we'll come to accept them as creations of human societies and appreciate them without resorting to "supernatural" hand waving.

 

[daws101]

They know what the early atmosphere was like because they are not stupid what the heck kind of response was that lol ? no one said they were stupid but it is just speculation that is all it is. They can't prove what the atmosphere was like billions of years ago. But you to missed the point the tests were done from the standpoint of intelligence not natural happenings.

I did not touch on the many things that was not produced in the tests like molecular machines and DNA. Talk about requiring faith to believe such a fairytale.

Talk about stubbornly ignoring the facts. After the method used to determine the early atmosphere of the Earth was explained to you, you still claim scientists are too stupid to figure such things out.

How does this answer the question they knew that the early atmosphere did not contain oxygen ?

Don't be rediculous,oxygen is throughout space. So you tell me how an atmosphere did not contain oxygen ?

not the way you wish it was...

The Origin of Oxygen in Earth's Atmosphere

The breathable air we enjoy today originated from tiny organisms, although the details remain lost in geologic time

By David Biello


It's hard to keep oxygen molecules around, despite the fact that it's the third-most abundant element in the universe, forged in the superhot, superdense core of stars. That's because oxygen wants to react; it can form compounds with nearly every other element on the periodic table. So how did Earth end up with an atmosphere made up of roughly 21 percent of the stuff?

The answer is tiny organisms known as cyanobacteria, or blue-green algae. These microbes conduct photosynthesis: using sunshine, water and carbon dioxide to produce carbohydrates and, yes, oxygen. In fact, all the plants on Earth incorporate symbiotic cyanobacteria (known as chloroplasts) to do their photosynthesis for them down to this day.

For some untold eons prior to the evolution of these cyanobacteria, during the Archean eon, more primitive microbes lived the real old-fashioned way: anaerobically. These ancient organisms—and their "extremophile" descendants today—thrived in the absence of oxygen, relying on sulfate for their energy needs.

But roughly 2.45 billion years ago, the isotopic ratio of sulfur transformed, indicating that for the first time oxygen was becoming a significant component of Earth's atmosphere, according to a 2000 paper in Science. At roughly the same time (and for eons thereafter), oxidized iron began to appear in ancient soils and bands of iron were deposited on the seafloor, a product of reactions with oxygen in the seawater.

"What it looks like is that oxygen was first produced somewhere around 2.7 billion to 2.8 billon years ago. It took up residence in atmosphere around 2.45 billion years ago," says geochemist Dick Holland, a visiting scholar at the University of Pennsylvania. "It looks as if there's a significant time interval between the appearance of oxygen-producing organisms and the actual oxygenation of the atmosphere."

So a date and a culprit can be fixed for what scientists refer to as the Great Oxidation Event, but mysteries remain. What occurred 2.45 billion years ago that enabled cyanobacteria to take over? What were oxygen levels at that time? Why did it take another one billion years—dubbed the "boring billion" by scientists—for oxygen levels to rise high enough to enable the evolution of animals?

Most important, how did the amount of atmospheric oxygen reach its present level? "It's not that easy why it should balance at 21 percent rather than 10 or 40 percent," notes geoscientist James Kasting of Pennsylvania State University. "We don't understand the modern oxygen control system that well."

Climate, volcanism, plate tectonics all played a key role in regulating the oxygen level during various time periods. Yet no one has come up with a rock-solid test to determine the precise oxygen content of the atmosphere at any given time from the geologic record. But one thing is clear—the origins of oxygen in Earth's atmosphere derive from one thing: life.

The Origin of Oxygen in Earth's Atmosphere: Scientific American

 

[daws101]

Looking For Spiritual Evidence In A Physical World

Posted by illusion , 29 April 2013 · 144 views


As a Christian, it never bothered me that much that there wasn't evidence of anything spiritual. When anyone would challenge me and and ask for evidence of a soul, angels demons, or even God himself. I'd argue back that all those things exist in spirit, not in the physical world. So, of course, you can't have physical evidence of something spiritual. The problem of this line of reasoning is that it leaves anything "spirit" in a category of being unable to effect the physical world. If that is true, if anything spirit is unable to effect the physical, than it's equivalent to not being there at all. For example, imagine a creature that exists only as spirit. This creature cannot affect the physical world in any way. For the sake of argument this creature truly does exist. What could this creature do or what experiment could be performed to demonstrate that this creature exists? In the end, if there are no ways to detect this creature in any way, then from our perspective as living in a physical world there is no discernible difference between that creature existing or not existing.

But, that's not the claim of Christianity. Not only is the claim that spiritual beings exist, but that they protect you (as in guarding angles), they can attack you (as in demons), they communicate with you, and ultimately guide you through your life. The claim really is that not only do these spirit being exists, but that they control what happens in the physical world everyday. If this is true, then we should be able to collect data that demonstrates, at the very least, that there are forces at work that can not be accounted for by ordinary means.

In astro-physics right now there is a determined effort to explain a force that for now is simply being called "dark energy". What we can determine is that the gravitational forces that we are aware of are unable to explain the effects of distant galaxies What's even more puzzling is that this unknown force has a greater effect on these galaxies than the forces that we can account for. We don't have to be able to explain fully what's causing these effects to realize that something is happening that we can't account for and needs further investigation. It's something like this, that I believe should be present in everyday circumstances if spirit forces are at work. I'm not saying it would conclusively show that supernatural is present, but it would give credibility to the supernatural claims.

One effect that I am aware of that has been scientifically investigated are those of prayer. A list of these prayer studies are at Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia....rcessory_prayer

At the end of the article there is a final analysis. The analysis of all the prayer studies seem to be that either there was no effect, or that the effect was so small that it could be accounted for due to errors in collecting data or poor study controls.

A counter argument that has been given to me is that, there are studies that do show an effect.

http://www.m.webmd.c...er-heal?page=1

These studies showed that the persons religion (or even lack of religion) was inconsequentual. What was truly being tested was a form of meditation, and the positive result was what you would expect from placebo, or having a positive attitude. Certainly God should be able to perform better than placebo, and that still leaves the best objective scientific studies showing no positive results. Objective evidence is the only tool that we have to determine true causes, as opposed to someone's personal belief of what is causing something to happen.

I think it's possible to perform scientific tests to look for spiritual effects. And, I think that if there is anything spiritual out there, we should be able find ways in which we can detect those effects.

Looking For Spiritual Evidence In A Physical World - Ex-Christian.Net

 

[Derideo_Te]

As I mentioned earlier, I don't think there is any question that gods exist. The dispute is over the nature of that existence. I suspect that at some point, we'll come to accept them as creations of human societies and appreciate them without resorting to "supernatural" hand waving.

That does not answer the question;

As an Atheist I will defend your right to believe in that "higher power". Will you defend my right to not have your belief imposed on me?

 

[S.J.]

One thing is for sure. No one on here is gonna change anybody's mind. I've had experiences that convince me there is a higher power, and no atheist who has never had a spiritual experience (or even said a prayer) will convince me otherwise. And I'm sure I won't convince them of anything either.

As an Atheist I will defend your right to believe in that "higher power". Will you defend my right to not have your belief imposed on me?

Fine with me. Just waiting for you atheists to to stop imposing YOUR non-provable beliefs on society. It works both ways.

 

[Boss]

no, I hold three degrees and science is a major part of them.

That's impossible, ed says scientists are not stupid, and you most definitely are.

YWC has been schooling all of you on this, and all you can do is fire off your credentials, re-post the same debunked garbage, beat your chest some more, run away from his points as fast as possible, and support your own arguments with brilliance like "scientists aren't stupid!"

 

[Boss]

Exactly, every living organism is made of molecules that form naturally on Earth, there are no "designer" molecules in any living organism.

You seem to be the one indicating a "designer" molecule, which miraculously created living organisms from non-living or 'inorganic' materials. Because, otherwise, this has not been explained.

 

[dblack]

As I mentioned earlier, I don't think there is any question that gods exist. The dispute is over the nature of that existence. I suspect that at some point, we'll come to accept them as creations of human societies and appreciate them without resorting to "supernatural" hand waving.

That does not answer the question;

True. Nor was it meant to.

As an Atheist I will defend your right to believe in that "higher power". Will you defend my right to not have your belief imposed on me?

Sure. Wouldn't have it any other way. What are you getting at?

 

[Derideo_Te]

One thing is for sure. No one on here is gonna change anybody's mind. I've had experiences that convince me there is a higher power, and no atheist who has never had a spiritual experience (or even said a prayer) will convince me otherwise. And I'm sure I won't convince them of anything either.

As an Atheist I will defend your right to believe in that "higher power". Will you defend my right to not have your belief imposed on me?

Fine with me. Just waiting for you atheists to to stop imposing YOUR non-provable beliefs on society. It works both ways.

You negated your own response.

 

[S.J.]

As an Atheist I will defend your right to believe in that "higher power". Will you defend my right to not have your belief imposed on me?

Fine with me. Just waiting for you atheists to to stop imposing YOUR non-provable beliefs on society. It works both ways.

You negated your own response.

How so?

 

[numan]

As an Atheist I will defend your right to believe in that "higher power". Will you defend my right to not have your belief imposed on me?

Fine with me. Just waiting for you atheists to to stop imposing YOUR non-provable beliefs on society. It works both ways.

Count me out of this love-fest of toleration.

We atheists have a lot of religious fanatics to swindle, torture and burn alive before we catch up to what the "Christians" have done to us.

I won't be satisfied until we are even-steven.
.

 

[S.J.]

As an Atheist I will defend your right to believe in that "higher power". Will you defend my right to not have your belief imposed on me?

Fine with me. Just waiting for you atheists to to stop imposing YOUR non-provable beliefs on society. It works both ways.

Count me out of this love-fest of toleration.

We atheists have a lot of religious fanatics to swindle, torture and burn alive before we catch up to what the "Christians" have done to us.

I won't be satisfied until we are even-steven.
.

Exactly what I thought.