This is what atheist believe? Atheist believe that nothing created everything

[Dusty]

You really need to move your proselytizing to the religion forum.

I thought that nothing creating everything was considered science?

LOL you are a clueless buffoon who does not even know what you believe yourself

"Nothing creating everything is certainly not science. And is not what Darwin said at all.

Darwin never addressed the origins of the Universe. He addressed the biodiversity we see in the world. He addressed the changes, via mutation, change and outside forces.

Biologists believe that all cells came from preexisting cells. As for where the original cells came from, that is more difficult because of the length of time since it happened. The best theory is the primordial soup, lightning and other factors were the origins of the first cellular organisms.

Except poppy that this post is not about Darwin it is about atheist and nothing created nothing is exactly what atheist say. Now stick to the topic and stop trying to derail the thread. Do try to behave like the mod that you claim that you are

Anyone who believes that nothing created something is simply uneducated. I am sticking with the topic, junior.

What scientific theory claims nothing created something?

Nothing created everything is exactly what atheist and Darwinist believe. I will not however argue that this is uneducated because it is. So thanks for agreeing

No, it is not.

If you are talking about the Big Bang, all of the matter involved already existed.
If you are talking about biogenesis or Darwinism, all of the matter and cellular material existed.

No scientific theory states that something was created from nothing.

Yes it is, according to atheist all life was created because nothing decided to create everything. Get over it pop you are making my argument for me, so please continue on

 

[WinterBorn]

You really need to move your proselytizing to the religion forum.

I thought that nothing creating everything was considered science?

LOL you are a clueless buffoon who does not even know what you believe yourself

"Nothing creating everything is certainly not science. And is not what Darwin said at all.

Darwin never addressed the origins of the Universe. He addressed the biodiversity we see in the world. He addressed the changes, via mutation, change and outside forces.

Biologists believe that all cells came from preexisting cells. As for where the original cells came from, that is more difficult because of the length of time since it happened. The best theory is the primordial soup, lightning and other factors were the origins of the first cellular organisms.

Except poppy that this post is not about Darwin it is about atheist and nothing created nothing is exactly what atheist say. Now stick to the topic and stop trying to derail the thread. Do try to behave like the mod that you claim that you are

Anyone who believes that nothing created something is simply uneducated. I am sticking with the topic, junior.

What scientific theory claims nothing created something?

Nothing created everything is exactly what atheist and Darwinist believe. I will not however argue that this is uneducated because it is. So thanks for agreeing

No, it is not.

If you are talking about the Big Bang, all of the matter involved already existed.
If you are talking about biogenesis or Darwinism, all of the matter and cellular material existed.

No scientific theory states that something was created from nothing.

Yes it is, according to atheist all life was created because nothing decided to create everything. Get over it pop you are making my argument for me, so please continue on

No, I am not. You are simply ignoring parts of what I say and claiming to win.

Name one thing that atheists say was created from nothing.

 

[Dusty]

Knowing that a dog's, or a chimpanzee's brain are made from the same stuff as a human brain isn't it reasonable to think that even the human brain has a limit as to what types of information is can process?

Exactly

We cannot understand Creation and yet it happened

Looking at nature its obvious to me that there must be a Creator

We could not have come to exist though dumb luck as Darwin claims

Some higher intelligence must be responsible

I see no reason why creation, meaning the beginning of the universe, is something humanity can never understand.

I see nothing in nature that points to any creator. In any event, any creator implies a hierarchy of creators.

lastly, Darwin never made any claims to dumb luck about a force of nature. In fact, his theory proposed clearly identifiable circumstances that guided the evolution of species.

The universe can not actually have a beginning, perhaps the current phase that we are in had a beginning but the matter always had to exist.

Or you can babble that everything just popped into existence because nothing wanted to make a universe.

That is pure non scientific babble

 

[Hollie]

Knowing that a dog's, or a chimpanzee's brain are made from the same stuff as a human brain isn't it reasonable to think that even the human brain has a limit as to what types of information is can process?

Exactly

We cannot understand Creation and yet it happened

Looking at nature its obvious to me that there must be a Creator

We could not have come to exist though dumb luck as Darwin claims

Some higher intelligence must be responsible

I see no reason why creation, meaning the beginning of the universe, is something humanity can never understand.

I see nothing in nature that points to any creator. In any event, any creator implies a hierarchy of creators.

lastly, Darwin never made any claims to dumb luck about a force of nature. In fact, his theory proposed clearly identifiable circumstances that guided the evolution of species.

The universe can not actually have a beginning, perhaps the current phase that we are in had a beginning but the matter always had to exist.

Or you can babble that everything just popped into existence because nothing wanted to make a universe.

That is pure non scientific babble

You makes statements presuming 100% certainty supported by 0% facts.

 

[WinterBorn]

Knowing that a dog's, or a chimpanzee's brain are made from the same stuff as a human brain isn't it reasonable to think that even the human brain has a limit as to what types of information is can process?

Exactly

We cannot understand Creation and yet it happened

Looking at nature its obvious to me that there must be a Creator

We could not have come to exist though dumb luck as Darwin claims

Some higher intelligence must be responsible

I see no reason why creation, meaning the beginning of the universe, is something humanity can never understand.

I see nothing in nature that points to any creator. In any event, any creator implies a hierarchy of creators.

lastly, Darwin never made any claims to dumb luck about a force of nature. In fact, his theory proposed clearly identifiable circumstances that guided the evolution of species.

The universe can not actually have a beginning, perhaps the current phase that we are in had a beginning but the matter always had to exist.

Or you can babble that everything just popped into existence because nothing wanted to make a universe.

That is pure non scientific babble

There is no scientific theory that the universe had a beginning.

I am not babbling that everything popped into existence. You are the one claiming scientists claim that. They don't.

 

[Mac-7]

I see nothing in nature that points to any creator. In any event, any creator implies a hierarchy of creators.

I do

Our existence here on earth is too perfect to be by mere chance

To which you seem to agree when you say that Darwins theory of evolution is not dumb luck

And I agree with that

It is scientific engineering to a degree that no human can understand much less replicate

 

[Mac-7]

The only thing that's obvious is that we don't know what happened just prior to the beginning of the universe.

Nor do I have to know before I accept the existence of God

 

[Dusty]

Knowing that a dog's, or a chimpanzee's brain are made from the same stuff as a human brain isn't it reasonable to think that even the human brain has a limit as to what types of information is can process?

Exactly

We cannot understand Creation and yet it happened

Looking at nature its obvious to me that there must be a Creator

We could not have come to exist though dumb luck as Darwin claims

Some higher intelligence must be responsible

I see no reason why creation, meaning the beginning of the universe, is something humanity can never understand.

I see nothing in nature that points to any creator. In any event, any creator implies a hierarchy of creators.

lastly, Darwin never made any claims to dumb luck about a force of nature. In fact, his theory proposed clearly identifiable circumstances that guided the evolution of species.

The universe can not actually have a beginning, perhaps the current phase that we are in had a beginning but the matter always had to exist.

Or you can babble that everything just popped into existence because nothing wanted to make a universe.

That is pure non scientific babble

You makes statements presuming 100% certainty supported by 0% facts.

Again atheist believe that everything was produced by nothing.

Those are your facts

Play on

 

[Dusty]

I see nothing in nature that points to any creator. In any event, any creator implies a hierarchy of creators.

I do

Our existence here on earth is too perfect to be by mere chance

To which you seem to agree when you say that Darwins theory of evolution is not dumb luck

And I agree with that

It is scientific engineering to a degree that no human can understand much less replicate

I agree however the human race understands nature and DNA better everyday, one day we will understand where DNA came from or be able to write new DNA itself

 

[Hollie]

I see nothing in nature that points to any creator. In any event, any creator implies a hierarchy of creators.

I do

Our existence here on earth is too perfect to be by mere chance

To which you seem to agree when you say that Darwins theory of evolution is not dumb luck

And I agree with that

It is scientific engineering to a degree that no human can understand much less replicate

I guess I don’t see the perfection here on earth that a creator would have created. Death, disease, natural disasters, etc., don’t speak to perfection.

We live in a profoundly violent and chaotic universe, but are spared direct experience with most of that chaos because it occurs on cosmic and geologic time scales, while we exist on a human time scale. This (luckily for us) means most of us live our lifetimes in the brief moments of calm between supernovae, asteroid impact, and cometary bombardment.

Remember Schumaker-Levy? How about that little dalliance that occurred on this planet 65 million years ago?

 

[Hollie]

Knowing that a dog's, or a chimpanzee's brain are made from the same stuff as a human brain isn't it reasonable to think that even the human brain has a limit as to what types of information is can process?

Exactly

We cannot understand Creation and yet it happened

Looking at nature its obvious to me that there must be a Creator

We could not have come to exist though dumb luck as Darwin claims

Some higher intelligence must be responsible

I see no reason why creation, meaning the beginning of the universe, is something humanity can never understand.

I see nothing in nature that points to any creator. In any event, any creator implies a hierarchy of creators.

lastly, Darwin never made any claims to dumb luck about a force of nature. In fact, his theory proposed clearly identifiable circumstances that guided the evolution of species.

The universe can not actually have a beginning, perhaps the current phase that we are in had a beginning but the matter always had to exist.

Or you can babble that everything just popped into existence because nothing wanted to make a universe.

That is pure non scientific babble

You makes statements presuming 100% certainty supported by 0% facts.

Again atheist believe that everything was produced by nothing.

Those are your facts

Play on

Religionist make nonsense statements unsupported by facts.

 

[WinterBorn]

Knowing that a dog's, or a chimpanzee's brain are made from the same stuff as a human brain isn't it reasonable to think that even the human brain has a limit as to what types of information is can process?

Exactly

We cannot understand Creation and yet it happened

Looking at nature its obvious to me that there must be a Creator

We could not have come to exist though dumb luck as Darwin claims

Some higher intelligence must be responsible

I see no reason why creation, meaning the beginning of the universe, is something humanity can never understand.

I see nothing in nature that points to any creator. In any event, any creator implies a hierarchy of creators.

lastly, Darwin never made any claims to dumb luck about a force of nature. In fact, his theory proposed clearly identifiable circumstances that guided the evolution of species.

The universe can not actually have a beginning, perhaps the current phase that we are in had a beginning but the matter always had to exist.

Or you can babble that everything just popped into existence because nothing wanted to make a universe.

That is pure non scientific babble

You makes statements presuming 100% certainty supported by 0% facts.

Again atheist believe that everything was produced by nothing.

Those are your facts

Play on

Feel free to show me evidence of your claims.

This idea that you know what all (or even most) atheists believe is laughable. You don't.

 

[zaangalewa]

Hawking radiation certainly does not come from nothing

Indeed, It comes from Steven Hawking's imagination, who literally developed the "theoretical argument for its existence in 1974." Meanwhile, black holes emit stuff

No. Black holes (only defined by mass, rotation and electric charge) emit nothing - also not in case of the Hawking radiation. The particle from a couple of virtual particle+anti-particle, which falls into a black hole lowers the gravitation of this black hole. So the black hole loses energy because something falls into the black hole what makes the anti-partner to a real particle within the universe outside of the black hole.

that Hawking couldn't really imagine (let alone explain) because Einstein declared the Aether superfluous for a few minutes, thus ending electrical science and ushering in a new dark age of endless quantum mechanical fairy dust chasing its tail.

The Michelson-Morley-experiment (1881+1887) "declared" Aether superflous.

 

[zaangalewa]

You really need to move your proselytizing to the religion forum.

Can nothing write genetic code?

The only thing that comes from nothing, is nothing

Except the whole universe, as far as I know. ... Oh - and perhaps not to forget the virtual particles in a vacuum which are called "Hawking radiation" if this particles become real in an event horizon of a black hole ...

Hawking radiation certainly does not come from nothing

The vacuum bears continously virtual particles and their anti-particles which destroy each other. N teh evnet fpuezeof a black hole it could be possible on a virtual particle falls into the black hole and the other particle beionme a real particle and starts to travel through the universe. A vacuum is this what comes most nearest to the idea "nothing". Someone calculated by the way that it is physically possible that the whole universe came out of a quantum fluctuation. On the other sode: such a quantum fluctuation is nearly nothing - but not really nothing. Nevertheless a very astonishing result.

LOL what is a virtual particle? and how does a virtual particle get drawn into a black hole?

Good grief. Where to begin now? I hate to say so - but what about "google"? Did you not find what it is?

Virtual particles are not real, this is why they are termed virtual and virtual particles are not gravitationally drawn into a black holes sphere of influence

Take your meds

You are wrong if Stephen Hawking is right. And he took a long time in his life his medicine, so I am really not shy to call you an arrogant asshole, who should first learn some manners.

 

[Dusty]

Knowing that a dog's, or a chimpanzee's brain are made from the same stuff as a human brain isn't it reasonable to think that even the human brain has a limit as to what types of information is can process?

Exactly

We cannot understand Creation and yet it happened

Looking at nature its obvious to me that there must be a Creator

We could not have come to exist though dumb luck as Darwin claims

Some higher intelligence must be responsible

I see no reason why creation, meaning the beginning of the universe, is something humanity can never understand.

I see nothing in nature that points to any creator. In any event, any creator implies a hierarchy of creators.

lastly, Darwin never made any claims to dumb luck about a force of nature. In fact, his theory proposed clearly identifiable circumstances that guided the evolution of species.

The universe can not actually have a beginning, perhaps the current phase that we are in had a beginning but the matter always had to exist.

Or you can babble that everything just popped into existence because nothing wanted to make a universe.

That is pure non scientific babble

You makes statements presuming 100% certainty supported by 0% facts.

Again atheist believe that everything was produced by nothing.

Those are your facts

Play on

Religionist make nonsense statements unsupported by facts.

Atheist make the statement not supported by fact that nothing created everything.

This is fact

So did you pick a cannabis equity yet?

 

[Dusty]

You really need to move your proselytizing to the religion forum.

Can nothing write genetic code?

The only thing that comes from nothing, is nothing

Except the whole universe, as far as I know. ... Oh - and perhaps not to forget the virtual particles in a vacuum which are called "Hawking radiation" if this particles become real in an event horizon of a black hole ...

Hawking radiation certainly does not come from nothing

The vacuum bears continously virtual particles and their anti-particles which destroy each other. N teh evnet fpuezeof a black hole it could be possible on a virtual particle falls into the black hole and the other particle beionme a real particle and starts to travel through the universe. A vacuum is this what comes most nearest to the idea "nothing". Someone calculated by the way that it is physically possible that the whole universe came out of a quantum fluctuation. On the other sode: such a quantum fluctuation is nearly nothing - but not really nothing. Nevertheless a very astonishing result.

LOL what is a virtual particle? and how does a virtual particle get drawn into a black hole?

Good grief. Where to begin now? I hate to say so - but what about "google"? Did you not find what it is?

Virtual particles are not real, this is why they are termed virtual and virtual particles are not gravitationally drawn into a black holes sphere of influence

Take your meds

You are wrong if Stephen Hawking is right. And he took a long time in his life his medicine, so I am really not shy to call you an arrogant asshole, who should first learn some manners.

Actually kiddy Hawking admitted that he was wrong, so did Einstein

 

[Hollie]

Knowing that a dog's, or a chimpanzee's brain are made from the same stuff as a human brain isn't it reasonable to think that even the human brain has a limit as to what types of information is can process?

Exactly

We cannot understand Creation and yet it happened

Looking at nature its obvious to me that there must be a Creator

We could not have come to exist though dumb luck as Darwin claims

Some higher intelligence must be responsible

I see no reason why creation, meaning the beginning of the universe, is something humanity can never understand.

I see nothing in nature that points to any creator. In any event, any creator implies a hierarchy of creators.

lastly, Darwin never made any claims to dumb luck about a force of nature. In fact, his theory proposed clearly identifiable circumstances that guided the evolution of species.

The universe can not actually have a beginning, perhaps the current phase that we are in had a beginning but the matter always had to exist.

Or you can babble that everything just popped into existence because nothing wanted to make a universe.

That is pure non scientific babble

You makes statements presuming 100% certainty supported by 0% facts.

Again atheist believe that everything was produced by nothing.

Those are your facts

Play on

Religionist make nonsense statements unsupported by facts.

Atheist make the statement not supported by fact that nothing created everything.

This is fact

So did you pick a cannabis equity yet?

You’re repeating a falsehood. That’s dishonest.

 

[zaangalewa]

Knowing that a dog's, or a chimpanzee's brain are made from the same stuff as a human brain isn't it reasonable to think that even the human brain has a limit as to what types of information is can process?

Exactly

We cannot understand Creation and yet it happened

Looking at nature its obvious to me that there must be a Creator

We could not have come to exist though dumb luck as Darwin claims

Some higher intelligence must be responsible

I see no reason why creation, meaning the beginning of the universe, is something humanity can never understand.

I see nothing in nature that points to any creator. In any event, any creator implies a hierarchy of creators.

lastly, Darwin never made any claims to dumb luck about a force of nature. In fact, his theory proposed clearly identifiable circumstances that guided the evolution of species.

The universe can not actually have a beginning, perhaps the current phase that we are in had a beginning but the matter always had to exist.

Or you can babble that everything just popped into existence because nothing wanted to make a universe.

That is pure non scientific babble

You makes statements presuming 100% certainty supported by 0% facts.

Again atheist believe that everything was produced by nothing.

Those are your facts

Play on

Religionist make nonsense statements unsupported by facts.

What's a nonsense statement without facts.

 

[dblack]

Nothing Created Everything

Richard Dawkins is arguably the modern poster boy for Charles Darwin. However, a key difference radically separates the two men. Darwin b...

www.goodreads.com

It's really that simple, everything that is, came to be what it is, because nothing decided to write genetic code

Atheism makes no claim about how things came to be.

 

[zaangalewa]

Or, God was created from something, who created God? Another God? And who created that God?

Do you believe in infinite regression?

I don't believe in anything.

I don't believe in God. I don't believe there isn't a God. I don't believe we exist. I don't believe we don't exist.

Aha. And so you don't believe you are funny.

Believing is ridiculous. It's literally saying "I don't know this, so I'm just going to pretend this is true".

And what do you know?