Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
No, you're just embarrassing yourself, but that comes as no real surprise. {"How" was your word.. Do you even remember what you started off arguing?} You don't have to respond at all to my opinions any more than I need respond to yours. But if you really must, at least make some attempt to rebut the alternative scientific explanations I share instead of just clutching your pearls and slinging mud.No it doesn't. What an absurd thing to say. Now i rightfully question your motives for saying such an absurd thing. Lemme guess: you have a fantastic "theory" for which you have zero evidence or research, and which has been ignored by the scientific community.I think we'll always need scientists regardless. But the premise that "physicists don't {yet} understand how all these things work" clearly indicates they've been barking up the wrong tree while wasting a lot of time and money.
Nailed it, i bet.
None of that follows, but I get that you angrily disagree. Defending the establishment's current version of physics has never been my problem. Yours always, I know. And I certainly have nothing against scientists or teachers in general. Aaron Murakami has related experiencing many of the same visceral reactions I've had while being told to ingest much of this same bullshit still widely being peddled in schools and on the net today in the name of "physics". You've always seemed fine with it. Not me. Get used to it.Teachers also do research. What is causing you to say so many stupid fucking things? Sober up.Just read through this snooty BS:Seems like exactly the sort of question any decent, upstanding theory should be able to answer
Theories don't answer "why". They answer "how".
Again, "science" is just a word. Words obviously don't "do" anything in isolation. Pompous assholes like that unfortunate student's professor there and Feynman are typical of those who teach because they've grown so drunk with their own authority they can no longer do anything of practical use other than perhaps splitting hairs while blowing gas.
Logically, the first cause must be eternal and unchanging. That rules out matter and energy."God" is just your substitute for "nothing". You want a nothing that cares where you put your peepee, because you think you are a special, unique boy and can maybe live forever.What makes more sense, nothing deciding to create everything, or God creating everything?Nothing except some magical being living in the sky.It's really that simple, everything that is, came to be what it is, because nothing decided to write genetic code
You are pretty vague about your alternative scientific explanations.No, you're just embarrassing yourself, but that comes as no real surprise. {"How" was your word.. Do you even remember what you started off arguing?} You don't have to respond at all to my opinions any more than I need respond to yours. But if you really must, at least make some attempt to rebut the alternative scientific explanations I share instead of just clutching your pearls and slinging mud.No it doesn't. What an absurd thing to say. Now i rightfully question your motives for saying such an absurd thing. Lemme guess: you have a fantastic "theory" for which you have zero evidence or research, and which has been ignored by the scientific community.I think we'll always need scientists regardless. But the premise that "physicists don't {yet} understand how all these things work" clearly indicates they've been barking up the wrong tree while wasting a lot of time and money.
Nailed it, i bet.
I'll quote Lil Nipper as my source. While I don't mean to generalize about every Christian, let's just say that the attitude projected in Post #595 is a common one. In short, I draw on many interactions with Christian people, some who I find reasonable people practicing their faith with quiet dignity, others who insist that in God "we" trust in this one country "under" God.How does Christianity define God? What are you using as your source for what Christians believe and can you quote the relevant part of that source that supports your contention?The world has its share of injustice and suffering, the victims often being innocent. Let's put it this way... if there is a God, he isn't anything like Christianity defines.
I believe that no Christian expects the world or people to be perfect or blames God when they aren't. They take it on faith that God's ways are inscrutable and that everything works for good even when they don't understand how.I'll quote Lil Nipper as my source. While I don't mean to generalize about every Christian, let's just say that the attitude projected in Post #595 is a common one. In short, I draw on many interactions with Christian people, some who I find reasonable people practicing their faith with quiet dignity, others who insist that in God "we" trust in this one country "under" God.How does Christianity define God? What are you using as your source for what Christians believe and can you quote the relevant part of that source that supports your contention?The world has its share of injustice and suffering, the victims often being innocent. Let's put it this way... if there is a God, he isn't anything like Christianity defines.
Surely, you don't mean to suggest that most Christians do not believe their God to be loving and all-powerful? Surely, you don't mean to say that God isn't a god at all? Rather, you appear inclined to lean on Socrates and the Strawman as a means to dodge the obvious.
For the most, I agree with the opinion suggested in your first sentence but only in the sense that there is something intuitively agreeable about it. However, said sentence is not logical argument. Rather, it is a declarative statement, a simple opinion. Your second conclusion is entirely bogus because it rest upon the false premise in the first sentence.Logically, the first cause must be eternal and unchanging. That rules out matter and energy."God" is just your substitute for "nothing". You want a nothing that cares where you put your peepee, because you think you are a special, unique boy and can maybe live forever.What makes more sense, nothing deciding to create everything, or God creating everything?Nothing except some magical being living in the sky.It's really that simple, everything that is, came to be what it is, because nothing decided to write genetic code
The presence of matter creates space and time which precludes matter from being an eternal source.For the most, I agree with the opinion suggested in your first sentence but only in the sense that there is something intuitively agreeable about it. However, said sentence is not logical argument. Rather, it is a declarative statement, a simple opinion. Your second conclusion is entirely bogus because it rest upon the false premise in the first sentence.Logically, the first cause must be eternal and unchanging. That rules out matter and energy."God" is just your substitute for "nothing". You want a nothing that cares where you put your peepee, because you think you are a special, unique boy and can maybe live forever.What makes more sense, nothing deciding to create everything, or God creating everything?Nothing except some magical being living in the sky.It's really that simple, everything that is, came to be what it is, because nothing decided to write genetic code
Try organizing your supposed logic into a syllogism... and get back to me.
Read up, dummy. You've got years of deprogramming yet to do before you can begin marching forward..You are pretty vague about your alternative scientific explanations.
The Riddle that you either did not see, or perhaps suggest is not a riddle, was at Post# 589.I don't see a riddle. I see confusion on your part.Solve the Riddle.
If you can't summarize it in a few short sentences in your own words then maybe you are the dummy.Read up, dummy. You've got years of deprogramming yet to do before you can begin marching forward..You are pretty vague about your alternative scientific explanations.
You are making assumptions that just aren't true. I've addressed this a number of times. God created existence. All existence is good. You are blaming God for man's failure.The Riddle that you either did not see, or perhaps suggest is not a riddle, was at Post# 589.I don't see a riddle. I see confusion on your part.Solve the Riddle.
Yes, I confess to a certain amount of confusion, unlike yourself and many religious people who profess to have all the answers.
The invention of your gods as they are described in the Bible, to include the Hebrew scripture co-opted by Christianity, clearly refute your comments about the "just and perfect" gods.GOD is absolute and entirely just and perfect in every way. GOD is LOVE. GOD treats everyone better than they deserve (certainly better than HE is treated). HE offers salvation to everyone who will request it. The issue is that if GOD had destroyed Adam and Eve, HE would be destroying us all as well -- since we are their decedents. So GOD out of LOVE for those HE knew would seek HIM out and be saved, HE had to allow some very arrogant people go to HELL, as they so choose for themselves. GOD is GOD because HE is better than we are. HE created us for his pleasure and satisfaction and not the other way around. People like Carl Sagan maybe in HELL this very moment, unless at some point in life they called out for salvation. We do not know what his childhood was like or moments before he died. He likely had at least some Christian friends. He certainly has no better excuse than anyone else. He didn't live under a rock ------- and neither do you. So, you may say anything you wish concerning GOD; however, you are only digging your own hole and pulling the dirt in on top of yourself.Are you familiar with the the Epicurean Riddle? I have seen it presented in different forms, all pointing to the same paradox which you raise.Things to ponder besides your belly button..If God created the universe, is earth the only planet in the trillions of planets in the millions of solar systems that He put life on?? If not, does that mean there other 'people' in other parts of the universe who are wondering if there is really a God?? Closer to home, why would a benevolent God create life than sit back and watch it get ravaged by incurable diseases??
“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?”
I believe you are confusing my conviction with all knowing. Just because I have thought these things through and they make sense - which is the reason for my conviction - does not mean I claim to know everything. Just more than others who have not thought these things through.Yes, I confess to a certain amount of confusion, unlike yourself and many religious people who profess to have all the answers.
You mean like believing that Einstein got it all wrong like you believe.You've got years of deprogramming yet to do before you can begin marching forward..
Also excellent:Read up, dummy. You've got years of deprogramming yet to do before you can begin marching forward..You are pretty vague about your alternative scientific explanations.
Correct. And at no point did i even imply science understands the "how" of everything, nor would i need to do so for my correct point to be correct. So your continuing, childish rant against that idea is a waste of everyone's time."How" was your word
Still grasping at straws? Who accused you of saying "science understands" anything? It studies all. You get over it and move on.Correct. And at no point did i even imply science understands the "how" of everything, nor would i need to do so for my correct point to be correct. So your continuing, childish rant against that idea is a waste of everyone's time."How" was your word
Science deals in the"how", not the "why". Get over it and move on.
I accept that you are attempting to softening your position. You don't know everything. Thanks, I agree with that while confessing the same.I believe you are confusing my conviction with all knowing. Just because I have thought these things through and they make sense - which is the reason for my conviction - does not mean I claim to know everything. Just more than others who have not thought these things through.Yes, I confess to a certain amount of confusion, unlike yourself and many religious people who profess to have all the answers.
Sorry, but you are running in circles.You are making assumptions that just aren't true. I've addressed this a number of times. God created existence. All existence is good. You are blaming God for man's failure.The Riddle that you either did not see, or perhaps suggest is not a riddle, was at Post# 589.I don't see a riddle. I see confusion on your part.Solve the Riddle.
Yes, I confess to a certain amount of confusion, unlike yourself and many religious people who profess to have all the answers.
