Evolution vs. Creation

High school senior Zack Kopplin is leading the fight to repeal the Louisiana Science Education Act of 2008. Full Story
FREE SERVANT

Bellevue, WA

#73530 Feb 2, 2013
We know the heavens and all the earth were created in six days and the Word of God is what they were created by. My only question is, what took him so long to speak it all and make everything? God must have put a lot of energy and work into seeing that everything was good.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#73531 Feb 2, 2013
The Dude Wrote:

"Particle/anti-particle pairs have been scientifically observed to spontaneously appear in a vacuum. There is no cause."

So your implying that any time there is a vacuum, Particles/anti-particles spontaneously appear?

How many?

If a vacuum is all that's required to produce Particles/anti-particles, then any vacuum would produce an infinite number of Particles/anti-particles.(?)

and again, if this be the case, then the vacuum itself would be the cause, and the effect would be the Particles/anti-particles.

And what would be the cause of the vacuum? The absents of Particles/anti-particles, that create the vacuum.

So the law of cause and effect would still apply even under this scenario.Would it not?

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#73532 Feb 2, 2013
FREE SERVANT wrote:
We know the heavens and all the earth were created in six days and the Word of God is what they were created by. My only question is, what took him so long to speak it all and make everything? God must have put a lot of energy and work into seeing that everything was good.
For fun, let's pretend your mythology is correct ... based on your above statement your god is a total failure, since it also had to hit the reset button several times, according to your own mythology. It formulated a "plan" that required people making a mistake before even being capable of knowing they were making a mistake then your god had to wipe out all life later one because of that mistake, then your god had to come "down" here and live a mortal life for a short time only to sacrifice itself to itself for that mistake it planned in the first place.

That's a very inept god.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#73533 Feb 2, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
The Dude Wrote:
"Particle/anti-particle pairs have been scientifically observed to spontaneously appear in a vacuum. There is no cause."
So your implying that any time there is a vacuum, Particles/anti-particles spontaneously appear?
How many?
If a vacuum is all that's required to produce Particles/anti-particles, then any vacuum would produce an infinite number of Particles/anti-particles.(?)
and again, if this be the case, then the vacuum itself would be the cause, and the effect would be the Particles/anti-particles.
And what would be the cause of the vacuum? The absents of Particles/anti-particles, that create the vacuum.
So the law of cause and effect would still apply even under this scenario.Would it not?
I can't believe someone on here knows less about quantum physics than I do ... and then I see your idiotic notions and feel like a genius on the subject. Sheesh. Even I can see that you're just spouting made up nonsense now.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#73534 Feb 2, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Now you are reading more than what was stated. Created implies an act of will, rocks from a volcano erupting were not created by the volcano, were they? Learn to think before you try to be intelligent.
I did not imply that they where not. The subject was the creation of the life and the Universe.Not rocks coming from an erupting volcano ....pay attention.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#73535 Feb 2, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
I can't believe someone on here knows less about quantum physics than I do ... and then I see your idiotic notions and feel like a genius on the subject. Sheesh. Even I can see that you're just spouting made up nonsense now.
Well address my statements and prove me wrong.Instead of just saying I'm wrong.

Should be very easy on your part, if that be the case.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#73536 Feb 2, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
I did not imply that they where not. The subject was the creation of the life and the Universe.Not rocks coming from an erupting volcano ....pay attention.
No, we are talking about rocks resulting from a volcanic eruption. Same thing. They are not created, they are the result of natural processes .... and so far we have no evidence that the rest of the universe is not the result of other natural processes. You assume it was "created," scientists make no assumption on that matter.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#73537 Feb 2, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
No, we are talking about rocks resulting from a volcanic eruption. Same thing. They are not created, they are the result of natural processes .... and so far we have no evidence that the rest of the universe is not the result of other natural processes. You assume it was "created," scientists make no assumption on that matter.
I disagree...you are assuming natural processes...and claim you make no assumptions.

“Swimming With Ignorant Snarks”

Since: Nov 10

Great White Snark

#73538 Feb 2, 2013
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
This is because man made god in his image, not in apes image and I suppose most apes (except some homo sapiens) dont give a sh|t
The mind of god is where you think, your imagination
Actually God exists in a few cells in the right hemisphere of the brain...Temporal area....God has been recreated in the lab with electro-magnetic stimulation as well as out of body experiences.

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#73539 Feb 2, 2013
FREE SERVANT wrote:
We know the heavens and all the earth were created in six days and the Word of God is what they were created by. My only question is, what took him so long to speak it all and make everything? God must have put a lot of energy and work into seeing that everything was good.
YHVH had to wait till we could spell and construct sentences properly.

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#73540 Feb 2, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>Where is your evidence for your claim?
You already know.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#73541 Feb 2, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
I disagree...you are assuming natural processes...and claim you make no assumptions.
Natural processes is not an assumption.
FREE SERVANT

Bellevue, WA

#73542 Feb 2, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
For fun, let's pretend your mythology is correct ... based on your above statement your god is a total failure, since it also had to hit the reset button several times, according to your own mythology. It formulated a "plan" that required people making a mistake before even being capable of knowing they were making a mistake then your god had to wipe out all life later one because of that mistake, then your god had to come "down" here and live a mortal life for a short time only to sacrifice itself to itself for that mistake it planned in the first place.
That's a very inept god.
The Creator is not foolish, but man is inept.

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#73543 Feb 2, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
The Dude Wrote:
"Particle/anti-particle pairs have been scientifically observed to spontaneously appear in a vacuum. There is no cause."
So your implying that any time there is a vacuum, Particles/anti-particles spontaneously appear?
How many?
If a vacuum is all that's required to produce Particles/anti-particles, then any vacuum would produce an infinite number of Particles/anti-particles.(?)
and again, if this be the case, then the vacuum itself would be the cause, and the effect would be the Particles/anti-particles.
And what would be the cause of the vacuum? The absents of Particles/anti-particles, that create the vacuum.
So the law of cause and effect would still apply even under this scenario.Would it not?
Cause frameshift.(i love that answer, says anything and nothing) But since humbee i got a bit allergic to it.
(Effin forever about the bloody rockets and Einstein popularised -which gives eactly the wrong ideas-, buttons in space on elastics a.s.o. If school was like that i would be absent every day.)
Yep the Dude is right.
M space however has it's own vacuum, non occupied. So i imagine it as compressing space-time and therefore creating it. Fringe physics. If at near absolute nill=vacuum nothing much moves you can easily imagine huge amounts of vacuum.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#73544 Feb 2, 2013
FREE SERVANT wrote:
<quoted text>The Creator is not foolish, but man is inept.
So now you are projecting your god's idiocy onto humanity.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#73545 Feb 2, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
You already know.
If I knew the evidence, I wouldn't have asked for it. Where is your evidence? When you say something is fact you are asserting that you have the evidence and can present it when requested, so are you lying or do you have evidence?

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#73546 Feb 2, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Natural processes is not an assumption.
That would imply "self evident."

You said before that "nothing was self evident."

and if it's not self evident it would be and assumption, would it not?

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#73547 Feb 2, 2013
You can only speak of cause and effect if there is space-time, something to act upon and that seems to be lacking, till the little blighters move in.
So they are comparable to Schrdingers cat thought-experiment.
Mind we are talking about the physical laws that govern our universe. They might be capable of maurauding in other physical law governed realms.

Spacy enough.

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#73548 Feb 2, 2013
And don't forget to read up on entanglement.

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#73549 Feb 2, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
That would imply "self evident."
You said before that "nothing was self evident."
and if it's not self evident it would be and assumption, would it not?
No it would be a fallacy to go for that implication.
And you are adding to it.
But the mistake is yours.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Weird Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Sometimes I do this naughty thing xx 3 min emmapassmore 1
Some day, I would love to_______________? (Sep '12) 7 min NinaRocks 388
Denny Crain's Place (May '10) 9 min NinaRocks 17,800
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 14 min wichita-rick 157,757
What Turns You Off (Jun '11) 15 min SLY WEST 6,056
3 Word Advice (Good or Bad) 20 min Guest 918
New "Drop one Word" With Famous People's Names (Oct '12) 29 min Independent1 598
Five Weird Signs You're Smarter Than Average 2 hr Chilli J 46
Couple filmed 'having sex on Charlton Athletic'... 4 hr Dr Wu 6
More from around the web