Evidence that universe created itself

[ChemEngineer]

It is one thing to look an elusive millisecond electron trace in a collider and come to the conclusion that matter can be created out of nothing and quite another thing to claim that the universe made itself out of nothing.

This is why YOU are "The Flash."

 

[LittleNipper]

Rocks and fundamentalist kooks seem to be the exceptions to things you claim not to worship.

You are a biased individual --- but at least you are not vulgar as was the individual I finally blocked. I will debate anyone except with one who only knows 4 letter expletives. Do believe me when I say that fundamentalism is not simply found among religious believers ------- and that goes double for kooks!

 

[Flash]

This is why YOU are "The Flash."

One of these days I will tell you how I got the moniker Flash. It has to do with a Vietnamese whorehouse.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You are a biased individual --- but at least you are not vulgar as was the individual I finally blocked. I will debate anyone except with one who only knows 4 letter expletives. Do believe me when I say that fundamentalism is not simply found among religious believers ------- and that goes double for kooks!

Oh no, i wont get to make fun of the one trick pony doing his one trick. Wait yes i will.

 

[Dadoalex]

Dadoalex

I'm not the one worshiping material things religiously, nor do I waste my time trying to make light of atheists.

Not sure what this has to do with anything I posted.

 

[Hollie]

You are a biased individual --- but at least you are not vulgar as was the individual I finally blocked. I will debate anyone except with one who only knows 4 letter expletives. Do believe me when I say that fundamentalism is not simply found among religious believers ------- and that goes double for kooks!

Well, yes, I'm biased. Facts and evidence will suggest a bias not in favor of rumor and superstition. In the case of humans writing the bible, no evidence has yet been offered which substantiates the claims to supernaturalism. To say that the bible is true because the bible says it's true (and because you want to believe it to be true), is circular reasoning, and proves nothing.

Do you think that biblical fables are enough to convince scientists to abandon the search for our origins? (apparently so). But that's not good enough. You have to provide hard evidence as to why evolution is not true, not just claiming science is false because it contradicts biblical fables. All the creationer ministries and all the screeching preachers have failed to offer a viable alternative to science. Nothing in any rebuttal to science offered by creationers and lD'iot advocates has yet provided ANY evidence that disproves evolution. Creationers have to come up with a viable, scientific alternative to evolution. Creationers (and let's identify the culprits as fundamentalist Christian creationers) have been unable to do so... all they can do is quote bible verses. We're looking for a viable argument here.

 

[LittleNipper]

Well, yes, I'm biased. Facts and evidence will suggest a bias not in favor of rumor and superstition. In the case of humans writing the bible, no evidence has yet been offered which substantiates the claims to supernaturalism. To say that the bible is true because the bible says it's true (and because you want to believe it to be true), is circular reasoning, and proves nothing.

Do you think that biblical fables are enough to convince scientists to abandon the search for our origins? (apparently so). But that's not good enough. You have to provide hard evidence as to why evolution is not true, not just claiming science is false because it contradicts biblical fables. All the creationer ministries and all the screeching preachers have failed to offer a viable alternative to science. Nothing in any rebuttal to science offered by creationers and lD'iot advocates has yet provided ANY evidence that disproves evolution. Creationers have to come up with a viable, scientific alternative to evolution. Creationers (and let's identify the culprits as fundamentalist Christian creationers) have been unable to do so... all they can do is quote bible verses. We're looking for a viable argument here.

Galatians 5:16-26

16 So I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the flesh. 17 For the flesh desires what is contrary to the Spirit, and the Spirit what is contrary to the flesh. They are in conflict with each other, so that you are not to do whatever[c] you want. 18 But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law.
19 The acts of the flesh are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; 20 idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions 21 and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.
22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law. 24 Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires. 25 Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit. 26 Let us not become conceited, provoking and envying each other.

Can a person walk by the SPIRIT if the SPIRIT doesn't exist? And can a person be a prisoner of flesh if the flesh isn't an issue to contend with? Will a non-believer see his shortcomings and have the hope of not having to be perfect and yet see a value for being Christlike?

Can a scientist also be a Creationist? I would have to say that both believers and nonbelievers alike would have to say such is very possible. Anyone who thinks otherwise is merely trying to make science their own bedfellow and nothing more. Such are certainly not being honest in their evaluation.

 

[james bond]

haha, you poor little guy. You embarrass yourself with this dancing and prancing and preening, when you couldn't pass a 6th grade science quiz.

You and the atheists still fail as we need PROTEINS to form from the 23 different amino acids. However, this doesn't happen unless you have a living cell. This is what you are suppose to be watching for billions and billions of years.

 

[james bond]

In the case of humans writing the bible, no evidence has yet been offered which substantiates the claims to supernaturalism.

I just gave you the evidence on a silver platter. One needs life to produce life. Thus, abiogenesis doesn't just happen from loose amino acids.

 

[Flash]

I just gave you the evidence on a silver platter. One needs life to produce life. Thus, abiogenesis doesn't just happen from loose amino acids.

If all we needed to created life was water, the right temperature and a few chemicals then every Jr High science class in the country would be doing it as a lab assignment.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You and the atheists still fail as we need PROTEINS to form from the 23 different amino acids.

We find them in asteroids and meteorites...but you dumbasses think they cant form without a magical sky daddy who cares what we do with our weiners. So keep flapping your gums numbnuts... You are embarrassing yourself.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

If all we needed to created life was water, the right temperature and a few chemicals then every Jr High science class in the country would be doing it as a lab assignment

Well that might be the dumbest post of the thread. We also need millions of years with trillions of reactions every second. But someone who knows less than nothing about any of this would probably not think of that.

 

[ChemEngineer]

Curious as to what my Friend Flash was responding to (which he should not have), I clicked on the link to read the ignored material (which I should not have). All that the Ignorees had to say was insult and pretend that they have science credentials which they never EVER demonstrate.

Here is what I mean. Humans are made of about 10,000 proteins. The largest of these is 33,450 amino acid residues in length. Do any of the pretentious atheists know what an amino acid residue is? If so, please elaborate.
Do any of the atheist pretenders know about the issue of chirality? If so, please elaborate.
Do any of the atheist pretenders know of the insuperable statistics of original synthesis, much less the requirement of useful intermediary proteins REQUIRED for the Darwinian Magic of *Selection*? If so, please elaborate.
How about folding these extremely long proteins?

What is Richard Dawkins' statistical definition of "impossible"?
How does it compare with the probability of original synthesis of titin?
Elaborate or else stop lying about how much YOU pretend to know, and how little everyone else knows about science.

 

[james bond]

We find them in asteroids and meteorites...but you dumbasses think they cant form without a magical sky daddy who cares what we do with our weiners. So keep flapping your gums numbnuts... You are embarrassing yourself.

That's why I brought up PROTEINS. You need a living cell to form them and organic life. You're still stuck on amino acids which are found in outer space. It also means no aliens. No wonder abiogenesis and atheism are such a fail.

 

[Hollie]

Curious as to what my Friend Flash was responding to (which he should not have), I clicked on the link to read the ignored material (which I should not have). All that the Ignorees had to say was insult and pretend that they have science credentials which they never EVER demonstrate.

Here is what I mean. Humans are made of about 10,000 proteins. The largest of these is 33,450 amino acid residues in length. Do any of the pretentious atheists know what an amino acid residue is? If so, please elaborate.
Do any of the atheist pretenders know about the issue of chirality? If so, please elaborate.
Do any of the atheist pretenders know of the insuperable statistics of original synthesis, much less the requirement of useful intermediary proteins REQUIRED for the Darwinian Magic of *Selection*? If so, please elaborate.
How about folding these extremely long proteins?

What is Richard Dawkins' statistical definition of "impossible"?
How does it compare with the probability of original synthesis of titin?
Elaborate or else stop lying about how much YOU pretend to know, and how little everyone else knows about science.

Of course, the religious extremist is copying and pasting the ''proteins'' slogans directly from any of the quack fundie ministries.

Do any of the hyper-religious know about the issue of chirality?

What is Jimmy Swaggert's statistical definition of ''it's too complicated''?

 

[Hollie]

If all we needed to created life was water, the right temperature and a few chemicals then every Jr High science class in the country would be doing it as a lab assignment.

On the other hand, if all we needed to create gods were ignorance of the natural world, fear of the unknown and a subset of people willing to exploit fear and ignorance, we would have human history literally drenched in thousands of gods.

Oh, wait. We do.

 

[Hollie]

That's why I brought up PROTEINS. You need a living cell to form them and organic life. You're still stuck on amino acids which are found in outer space. It also means no aliens. No wonder abiogenesis and atheism are such a fail.

Religious extremists would be best advised to let scientists deal with science matters. No wonder slaughtering livestock in the hopes of satiating angry gods is timewasting and messy.

 

[Hollie]

Galatians 5:16-26

16 So I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the flesh. 17 For the flesh desires what is contrary to the Spirit, and the Spirit what is contrary to the flesh. They are in conflict with each other, so that you are not to do whatever[c] you want. 18 But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law.
19 The acts of the flesh are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; 20 idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions 21 and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.
22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law. 24 Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires. 25 Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit. 26 Let us not become conceited, provoking and envying each other.

Can a person walk by the SPIRIT if the SPIRIT doesn't exist? And can a person be a prisoner of flesh if the flesh isn't an issue to contend with? Will a non-believer see his shortcomings and have the hope of not having to be perfect and yet see a value for being Christlike?

Can a scientist also be a Creationist? I would have to say that both believers and nonbelievers alike would have to say such is very possible. Anyone who thinks otherwise is merely trying to make science their own bedfellow and nothing more. Such are certainly not being honest in their evaluation.

Cutting and pasting bible verses about spirits and witchcraft didn't address anything I wrote earlier. Proselytizing is not appropriate in the Science and Technology forum.

 

[LittleNipper]

Cutting and pasting bible verses about spirits and witchcraft didn't address anything I wrote earlier. Proselytizing is not appropriate in the Science and Technology forum.

You are not a scientific person. If proselytizing is not appropriate in the "Science and Technology Forum" then you should also stick to that which is observable, testable, and repeatable ----- leave opinions, hypothesis, and educated guesses to Philosophy Classes. Don't imagine that your values and opinions are anymore valuable than anyone else's and that others should remain quiet so that you may spread YOUR views uninhibited.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You are not a scientific person.

These religious fundies have spent so much time being gaslit and gaslighting each other that they say things like this without batting an eye. They have no understanding that this childish gaslighting is not only not effective but also just embarrasses them.