How did the Universe get here?

[Derideo_Te]

He who creates is greater then the creation. The Universe made you who made the Universe ?

Fallacious correlation. We are just part of an existing Universe. That does not imply that there is any "creation" involved in the process by which we evolved.

So are you suggesting the universe is eternal ?

According to the Laws of Physics the matter/energy of the Universe has always existed and will always exist because it can neither be created not destroyed.

The current matter/energy state of the Universe where we exist is transitory but the matter/energy will continue to exist throughout eternity in some form or another.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Fallacious correlation. We are just part of an existing Universe. That does not imply that there is any "creation" involved in the process by which we evolved.

So are you suggesting the universe is eternal ?

According to the Laws of Physics the matter/energy of the Universe has always existed and will always exist because it can neither be created not destroyed.

The current matter/energy state of the Universe where we exist is transitory but the matter/energy will continue to exist throughout eternity in some form or another.

That is fine to hold that view but no one was there to see the start but the creator.Just because a law produced by man with his limited mind does not prove the assertion that matter has always existed.

I will say matter may have always existed but it appears to have been put to use if that is the case.

 

[Youwerecreated]

No. It is your side that claims they know something us atheists don't. So prove it or shut the fuck up.

It takes faith to believe as you do as it does for our side, don't be a a hypocrite. Prove your beliefs are not based in faith or just sit back and sip your coffee.

Calling atheism a religion is like calling bald a hair color, or not collecting stamps a hobby.

Atheism is simply a lack of belief in a god or gods, nothing more. If we deconstruct the term ‘atheism’ we find ‘a – theism’ which means ‘without – theism’ which, in turn, means ‘without – belief in god(s)’. It is, therefore, not a positive belief or a claim to knowledge. Instead, it is the default position of doubt, uncertainty and skepticism one may have regarding claims made by theists. Just as it takes no faith to lack belief or remain uncertain concerning any other imaginable claim, it takes none to doubt the existence of a god or gods. See also: Atheism is based on faith, Russell’s Teapot.

Every human-being ever born begins life as an implicit atheist and must be taught the concept of theism or, more commonly, indoctrinated with it.

Atheism has no sacred texts, objects, places or times, no rituals or creation stories, no positive beliefs, central tenants, modes of worship or supernatural claims, no implicit or derived moral codes, philosophies or world views and no central organisation or church. It fulfills none of the criteria that define a religion. See also: Atheism is a religion.

Atheists may subscribe to any additional ideologies, philosophies and belief systems they choose, eg. Buddhism, Jainism, Universalism, Environmentalism, Pragmatism, Liberalism, Socialism, Libertarianism, Conservatism, etc. They may even appreciate components of traditional religion and spiritualism, including any supernatural elements unrelated to a god. Common among many atheists, however, is an appreciation for secularism, rationalism, humanism, skepticism, naturalism, materialism and freethinking – none of which are implicit or derived from atheism, nor necessary in order to lack belief.

See also: A Lack of Belief in Gods for a short introduction to atheism (a must watch), Sam Harris – Misconceptions about Atheism (a must watch), Putting faith in it’s place (a must watch).

“To say that atheism requires faith is as dim-witted as saying that disbelief in pixies or leprechauns takes faith. Even if Einstein himself told me there was an elf on my shoulder, I would still ask for proof and I wouldn’t be wrong to ask.” – Geoff Mather

I wasn't addressing atheism. Paranoid much ?

 

[Youwerecreated]

Complexity does not imply design and does not prove the existence of a god.

complexity isn't intended to prove the existence of a god.....it is intended to prove the stupidity of "random shit just happens randomly" as the solution.......because complex things don't happen randomly......

Do you know that for a fact?

Calculating The Odds That Life Could Begin By Chance

 

[Youwerecreated]

I will say that atheism is your motivation for your views though.

 

[Derideo_Te]

So are you suggesting the universe is eternal ?

According to the Laws of Physics the matter/energy of the Universe has always existed and will always exist because it can neither be created not destroyed.

The current matter/energy state of the Universe where we exist is transitory but the matter/energy will continue to exist throughout eternity in some form or another.

That is fine to hold that view but no one was there to see the start but the creator.Just because a law produced by man with his limited mind does not prove the assertion that matter has always existed.

I will say matter may have always existed but it appears to have been put to use if that is the case.

Not even the "creator" was there because there was nothing to "create" the "creator" in the first place in your myth.

Mankind did not "produce" the Laws of Physics either. They have existed for as long as matter has existed and will continue to exist for as long as matter exists which is eternity in any direction of the space/time continuum.

Through scientific observation, calculation and reasoning mankind deduced the Laws of Physics. They apply on the other side of the Universe even though mankind has never been there.

What is more is that you are made of the same matter as the Universe. You are a part of the Universe whether you like it or not. Your matter will be recycled by the Universe as it sees fit and there is nothing you can do about it either.

 

[edthecynic]

All you have to do is provide an example and I will quit asking for this example that has never been produced.

Well of course, the Law expressed as its equation is not good enough for you because you can't play semantics games with an equation. You can't substitute "always increases" for "never decreases" in scientific language like you can in regular English, you must mathematically show how you eliminated the = 0 in scientific language. Pontification does not cut it.

You let me know when you have that example.This Universe will never reach maximum entropy because the creator has plans for this planet. I don't put my faith in man in his limited knowledge. Good things come from man but our knowledge is very limited.

You can post all the equations you like does not prove your beliefs correct.

I gave an example in my answer to BosS, an atom. An atom is a closed system of protons (+), electrons (-) and neutrons. If entropy could not equal zero, the electron would lose speed as its entropy increased and would be drawn into the nucleus, splitting it apart. If entropy could not equal zero no matter could exist. If atoms and matter are not good enough examples, then I can't help you understand.

 

[sealybobo]

It takes faith to believe as you do as it does for our side, don't be a a hypocrite. Prove your beliefs are not based in faith or just sit back and sip your coffee.

Calling atheism a religion is like calling bald a hair color, or not collecting stamps a hobby.

Atheism is simply a lack of belief in a god or gods, nothing more. If we deconstruct the term ‘atheism’ we find ‘a – theism’ which means ‘without – theism’ which, in turn, means ‘without – belief in god(s)’. It is, therefore, not a positive belief or a claim to knowledge. Instead, it is the default position of doubt, uncertainty and skepticism one may have regarding claims made by theists. Just as it takes no faith to lack belief or remain uncertain concerning any other imaginable claim, it takes none to doubt the existence of a god or gods. See also: Atheism is based on faith, Russell’s Teapot.

Every human-being ever born begins life as an implicit atheist and must be taught the concept of theism or, more commonly, indoctrinated with it.

Atheism has no sacred texts, objects, places or times, no rituals or creation stories, no positive beliefs, central tenants, modes of worship or supernatural claims, no implicit or derived moral codes, philosophies or world views and no central organisation or church. It fulfills none of the criteria that define a religion. See also: Atheism is a religion.

Atheists may subscribe to any additional ideologies, philosophies and belief systems they choose, eg. Buddhism, Jainism, Universalism, Environmentalism, Pragmatism, Liberalism, Socialism, Libertarianism, Conservatism, etc. They may even appreciate components of traditional religion and spiritualism, including any supernatural elements unrelated to a god. Common among many atheists, however, is an appreciation for secularism, rationalism, humanism, skepticism, naturalism, materialism and freethinking – none of which are implicit or derived from atheism, nor necessary in order to lack belief.

See also: A Lack of Belief in Gods for a short introduction to atheism (a must watch), Sam Harris – Misconceptions about Atheism (a must watch), Putting faith in it’s place (a must watch).

“To say that atheism requires faith is as dim-witted as saying that disbelief in pixies or leprechauns takes faith. Even if Einstein himself told me there was an elf on my shoulder, I would still ask for proof and I wouldn’t be wrong to ask.” – Geoff Mather

I wasn't addressing atheism. Paranoid much ?

What were you addressing when you wrote this: It takes faith to believe as you do as it does for our side, don't be a a hypocrite. Prove your beliefs are not based in faith.

We were talking about atheism. Now you are saying you weren't addressing atheism? What were you addressing? Apology accepted.

 

[AVG-JOE]

There is no clock without a clockmaker.

Think about this.

You have a pile of oddly shaped pebbles and a set of weighing scales.

How long would it take to take the pile, split it up, and achieve balance.

Yet, look at the balance around us.

Should not one variable run a muck and ruin the equation?

But it doesn't...the system is set up in a way that it cannot.

Is this the result of random chance? I think not.

If you can prove that, you win.

Survival of the most fit in a dog-eat-dog world sure fits the historical evidence better than the ancient stories of a God with a plan makes more sense to me, but that's just one humble opinion among many regarding an unprovable subject.

Statistically at least, all human speculations on origins, after-life and God, both ancient and modern, have equal odds of being correct, historical and other evidence be damned.

The good news is that we all get to weigh the evidence and decide for ourselves, and NObody can take that away.​

 

[sealybobo]

I will say that atheism is your motivation for your views though.

Atheism is the reason for my views, not the motivation.

But you would also have to admit another reason for my views is christianity and all other organized religions.

Lets say I go to a bar and I get laid every time I go but every time I go to bar #2 I never get laid.

You can't say bar number 1 is my only justification or motivation for believing like I do. Going to the second bar and having a bad experience there has something to do with it too.

 

[sealybobo]

There is no clock without a clockmaker.

Think about this.

You have a pile of oddly shaped pebbles and a set of weighing scales.

How long would it take to take the pile, split it up, and achieve balance.

Yet, look at the balance around us.

Should not one variable run a muck and ruin the equation?

But it doesn't...the system is set up in a way that it cannot.

Is this the result of random chance? I think not.

If you can prove that, you win.

Survival of the most fit in a dog-eat-dog world sure fits the historical evidence better than the ancient stories of a God with a plan, but that's just one humble opinion among many regarding an unprovable subject.

Statistically at least, all human speculations on origins, after-life and God, both ancient and modern, have equal odds of being correct, historical and other evidence be damned.

​

The existence and non-existence of a god are not equally probable outcomes. The majority of things we can possibly imagine do not exist. Thus, belief is not as valid a position as skepticism when dealing with unsupported or unfalsifiable claims. Agnostic atheism is the most rational position.

Every conceivable argument, every imaginable piece of evidence for god is not without some fatal flaw or more likely explanation which precludes it from being used as definitive proof.

 

[Youwerecreated]

According to the Laws of Physics the matter/energy of the Universe has always existed and will always exist because it can neither be created not destroyed.

The current matter/energy state of the Universe where we exist is transitory but the matter/energy will continue to exist throughout eternity in some form or another.

That is fine to hold that view but no one was there to see the start but the creator.Just because a law produced by man with his limited mind does not prove the assertion that matter has always existed.

I will say matter may have always existed but it appears to have been put to use if that is the case.

Not even the "creator" was there because there was nothing to "create" the "creator" in the first place in your myth.

Mankind did not "produce" the Laws of Physics either. They have existed for as long as matter has existed and will continue to exist for as long as matter exists which is eternity in any direction of the space/time continuum.

Through scientific observation, calculation and reasoning mankind deduced the Laws of Physics. They apply on the other side of the Universe even though mankind has never been there.

What is more is that you are made of the same matter as the Universe. You are a part of the Universe whether you like it or not. Your matter will be recycled by the Universe as it sees fit and there is nothing you can do about it either.

You have proof that God is bound by our laws of nature built on mans very limited knowledge ?

 

[Youwerecreated]

Calling atheism a religion is like calling bald a hair color, or not collecting stamps a hobby.

Atheism is simply a lack of belief in a god or gods, nothing more. If we deconstruct the term ‘atheism’ we find ‘a – theism’ which means ‘without – theism’ which, in turn, means ‘without – belief in god(s)’. It is, therefore, not a positive belief or a claim to knowledge. Instead, it is the default position of doubt, uncertainty and skepticism one may have regarding claims made by theists. Just as it takes no faith to lack belief or remain uncertain concerning any other imaginable claim, it takes none to doubt the existence of a god or gods. See also: Atheism is based on faith, Russell’s Teapot.

Every human-being ever born begins life as an implicit atheist and must be taught the concept of theism or, more commonly, indoctrinated with it.

Atheism has no sacred texts, objects, places or times, no rituals or creation stories, no positive beliefs, central tenants, modes of worship or supernatural claims, no implicit or derived moral codes, philosophies or world views and no central organisation or church. It fulfills none of the criteria that define a religion. See also: Atheism is a religion.

Atheists may subscribe to any additional ideologies, philosophies and belief systems they choose, eg. Buddhism, Jainism, Universalism, Environmentalism, Pragmatism, Liberalism, Socialism, Libertarianism, Conservatism, etc. They may even appreciate components of traditional religion and spiritualism, including any supernatural elements unrelated to a god. Common among many atheists, however, is an appreciation for secularism, rationalism, humanism, skepticism, naturalism, materialism and freethinking – none of which are implicit or derived from atheism, nor necessary in order to lack belief.

See also: A Lack of Belief in Gods for a short introduction to atheism (a must watch), Sam Harris – Misconceptions about Atheism (a must watch), Putting faith in it’s place (a must watch).

“To say that atheism requires faith is as dim-witted as saying that disbelief in pixies or leprechauns takes faith. Even if Einstein himself told me there was an elf on my shoulder, I would still ask for proof and I wouldn’t be wrong to ask.” – Geoff Mather

I wasn't addressing atheism. Paranoid much ?

What were you addressing when you wrote this: It takes faith to believe as you do as it does for our side, don't be a a hypocrite. Prove your beliefs are not based in faith.

We were talking about atheism. Now you are saying you weren't addressing atheism? What were you addressing? Apology accepted.

Origins of anything.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Have a nice day time for the Rodeo and family dance afterwards,good day to all.

 

[Derideo_Te]

That is fine to hold that view but no one was there to see the start but the creator.Just because a law produced by man with his limited mind does not prove the assertion that matter has always existed.

I will say matter may have always existed but it appears to have been put to use if that is the case.

Not even the "creator" was there because there was nothing to "create" the "creator" in the first place in your myth.

Mankind did not "produce" the Laws of Physics either. They have existed for as long as matter has existed and will continue to exist for as long as matter exists which is eternity in any direction of the space/time continuum.

Through scientific observation, calculation and reasoning mankind deduced the Laws of Physics. They apply on the other side of the Universe even though mankind has never been there.

What is more is that you are made of the same matter as the Universe. You are a part of the Universe whether you like it or not. Your matter will be recycled by the Universe as it sees fit and there is nothing you can do about it either.

You have proof that God is bound by our laws of nature built on mans very limited knowledge ?

Onus is on you to provide proof your God actually exists first!

Until you can do that the Laws of Physics take precedence over your "lawless" mythical beliefs.

 

[AVG-JOE]

Complexity does not imply design and does not prove the existence of a god.

complexity isn't intended to prove the existence of a god.....it is intended to prove the stupidity of "random shit just happens randomly" as the solution.......because complex things don't happen randomly......

There are plenty of examples of both elements and molecules interacting with each other randomly and building both toward the more complex, and toward the less complex.

'Chemistry' should be a verb! LOTS of action there!​

 

[AVG-JOE]

The roots that long ago began, and now feed the Tree of Life are CHEMISTRY!

 

[Youwerecreated]

Not even the "creator" was there because there was nothing to "create" the "creator" in the first place in your myth.

Mankind did not "produce" the Laws of Physics either. They have existed for as long as matter has existed and will continue to exist for as long as matter exists which is eternity in any direction of the space/time continuum.

Through scientific observation, calculation and reasoning mankind deduced the Laws of Physics. They apply on the other side of the Universe even though mankind has never been there.

What is more is that you are made of the same matter as the Universe. You are a part of the Universe whether you like it or not. Your matter will be recycled by the Universe as it sees fit and there is nothing you can do about it either.

You have proof that God is bound by our laws of nature built on mans very limited knowledge ?

Onus is on you to provide proof your God actually exists first!

Until you can do that the Laws of Physics take precedence over your "lawless" mythical beliefs.

Did you see his comment ? You feel the same about the law of Biogenesis ?

 

[Youwerecreated]

The roots that long ago began and now feed the Tree of Life are CHEMISTRY!
NOVA scienceNOW w/ Neil deGrasse Tyson: Where did we come from? - YouTube

Correct, precise chemical mixture

 

[Missourian]

There is no clock without a clockmaker.

Think about this.

You have a pile of oddly shaped pebbles and a set of weighing scales.

How long would it take to take the pile, split it up, and achieve balance.

Yet, look at the balance around us.

Should not one variable run a muck and ruin the equation?

But it doesn't...the system is set up in a way that it cannot.

Is this the result of random chance? I think not.

If you can prove that, you win.

Survival of the most fit in a dog-eat-dog world sure fits the historical evidence better than the ancient stories of a God with a plan, but that's just one humble opinion among many regarding an unprovable subject.

Statistically at least, all human speculations on origins, after-life and God, both ancient and modern, have equal odds of being correct, historical and other evidence be damned.

The good news is that we all get to weigh the evidence and decide for ourselves, and NObody can take that away.​

It goes beyond our planet, Joe.

How perfect do the rules that govern gravity, strong and weak nuclear forces and magnetism need to be to give us solar systems and galaxies and suns, instead of a dark universe of cosmic dust.