Noah's flood real

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#3678 May 5, 2013
LJV wrote:
<quoted text>
Getting a bit snooty when faced with the fact your BB could not have come from nothing.
Which is not the claim.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#3679 May 5, 2013
KJV wrote:
IMPOSSIBLE!
Your science can't explain the impossible.
If it was not possible we would not be here.

Now, YECism is for all intents and purposes impossible. Which is why you have to invoke Jewish magic to rescue the claims.

Doesn't actually EXPLAIN anything though.(shrug)

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#3680 May 5, 2013
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
You miss understand me. I'm talking about 2 D not parallel universe.
Does a 2 D line really exist in our universe or is it just theory?
First of all, lines are one dimensional by definition mathematically. So even you basic question is non-sense (you seem to like to do that).

Second, 1D lines (and 2D surfaces) are not a 'theory'. They are not even a hypothesis. They can be parts of a larger model. For that matter, even 3D is a (very good) model helping to organize our understanding.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#3681 May 5, 2013
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
Doc. Your BB is BS. The absents of everything cannot in anyway create everything.
What you see is Gods handy work not nothings handy work.
And again, that is NOT the scientific claim.

There was no time when there was nothing. There was no location where there was nothing. Nothing simply does not exist. What the *science* says is that the universe (or multiverse) is *all there is*. It isn't claiming that there was nothing and then after a while there was everything.

Part of the problem is in the language. Nothing is not a 'thing' that exists. it is not something that has a causal connection to anything. When we say that there was 'nothing' before the Big Bang, we don't mean there was 'something called nothing'. We mean that existence is limited to after the Big Bang.

Now, some version of the Big Bang *do* have previous contraction phases or multiverses, or some other causal connection that lead to the current expansion. Some even have the universe arising as a quantum fluctuation out of a vacuum. But even then, the vacuum has structure, obeys the laws of physics, etc. it isn't 'nothing'. Nothing does not exist.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#3682 May 5, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
And again, that is NOT the scientific claim.
There was no time when there was nothing. There was no location where there was nothing. Nothing simply does not exist. What the *science* says is that the universe (or multiverse) is *all there is*. It isn't claiming that there was nothing and then after a while there was everything.
Part of the problem is in the language. Nothing is not a 'thing' that exists. it is not something that has a causal connection to anything. When we say that there was 'nothing' before the Big Bang, we don't mean there was 'something called nothing'. We mean that existence is limited to after the Big Bang.
Now, some version of the Big Bang *do* have previous contraction phases or multiverses, or some other causal connection that lead to the current expansion. Some even have the universe arising as a quantum fluctuation out of a vacuum. But even then, the vacuum has structure, obeys the laws of physics, etc. it isn't 'nothing'. Nothing does not exist.
I understand what you are saying-- but I very much doubt the godbot can.

His little mind is incapable of grasping the necessary ideas, and holding on to them-- they fall through his brains like water through a screen...

:D

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#3683 May 5, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
No True Scotsman. Look it up.
Couple that logical falacy?
With the fact that you have a >>massively<< over-inflated ego?
And there you go!
Nobody in the WHOLE WORLD is good enough to fit your definition of "True Christian™"
Not even you...
.... very sad.
there are some ppl ... Quality over qaunity.
matt 7: 22, 23
22Many will say to me in that day,‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and expel demons in your name, and perform many powerful works in your name?’23And yet then I will confess to them: I never knew &#8203;YOU! Get away from me, &#8203;YOU&#8203; workers of lawlessness."

When jesus was here he told his deciples to preach about his fathers kingdom. he wants people to save lives. when this system falls its going to be a test for everyone.

Remember satan that humans are selfish and only serve God for the things he gives them.

Satan does not want anyone to survive .

And your right , just like it was in the past its the same today.

Only 8 people survived the flood. Not noahs dad nor his brothers etc no one cared to listen . It was the same with Isrealites.

humans have always been the same they actually saw adam and eve .

Today we have our own choice .
He already knows what is going to happen but he gives us a way out but it is up to us if we want to accept it.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#3684 May 5, 2013
spidersandsnakes wrote:
<quoted text>
there are some ppl ... Quality over qaunity.
matt 7: 22, 23
22Many will say to me in that day,‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and expel demons in your name, and perform many powerful works in your name?’23And yet then I will confess to them: I never knew &#8203;YOU! Get away from me, &#8203;YOU&#8203; workers of lawlessness."
When jesus was here he told his deciples to preach about his fathers kingdom. he wants people to save lives. when this system falls its going to be a test for everyone.
Remember satan that humans are selfish and only serve God for the things he gives them.
Satan does not want anyone to survive .
And your right , just like it was in the past its the same today.
Only 8 people survived the flood. Not noahs dad nor his brothers etc no one cared to listen . It was the same with Isrealites.
humans have always been the same they actually saw adam and eve .
Today we have our own choice .
He already knows what is going to happen but he gives us a way out but it is up to us if we want to accept it.
The god you worship?

Is a monster.

Good thing your god is also myth.

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#3685 May 5, 2013
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong
You posted
KJV wrote, "
The Big Bang
Evolution Says .....
I posted
KJV wrote, "
The Big Bang Evolution Says .....
Note no comma!
Poor try you must try harder.
No you didn't

Why do you lie when you know you'll burn for that?

Here's your post...

http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/atheism/T...
KJV wrote:
The Big Bang

Evolution Says .....
The universe started with a huge explosion called the‘Big Bang’ 20 billion years ago. This formed the stars and galaxies. The galaxies are swirling and rapidly moving apart. This is proof of the Big Bang.
It appears exactly as it is above.

Despite your lies, evolution says nothing about how the universe started.

Sad that creationists are so desperate to peddle their delusions that they have to resort to so many lies.

Now than, what about Langoliers?

Was he also lying when he said there was no global flood? Or are you lying when you say there was?
KJV

United States

#3687 May 6, 2013
Richardfs wrote:
<quoted text>The fall back position of the uneducated.
It what you want to hear.
KJV

United States

#3691 May 6, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>You are still claiming "magic" here...

... which is not a real answer, of course.
Explain your myth.

Time, matter, energy, space & everything else is 13.7 billion years old.
There is not one thing in our universe older then that. What exploded 13.7 billion years ago and where did it come from. Why did it explode? Where did it come from? How slow was the explosion? And where did it come from?

A complete void of everything cannot explode and create everything. It's impossible. It goes against all the laws of physics. Was it magic? Where did it come from?
KJV

United States

#3692 May 6, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>No, it does not. It most certainly does NOT say that there is a causal link from 'nothing' to 'everything', which is what you say.
Please explain how a complete absents of everything exploded and created everything with out science magic.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#3694 May 6, 2013
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
Explain your myth.
Time, matter, energy, space & everything else is 13.7 billion years old.
There is not one thing in our universe older then that. What exploded 13.7 billion years ago and where did it come from. Why did it explode? Where did it come from? How slow was the explosion? And where did it come from?
A complete void of everything cannot explode and create everything. It's impossible. It goes against all the laws of physics. Was it magic? Where did it come from?
Quantum Mechanics describes what happened.

The Universe is an uncaused event-- these happen all the time under Quantum Mechanics.

More to the point?

Under QM, an omniscient god cannot exist-- omniscience would destroy a QM universe, by collapsing it due to observation.

So there goes your god...*poof* eliminated in a puff of science.
KJV

United States

#3696 May 6, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>First of all, lines are one dimensional by definition mathematically. So even you basic question is non-sense (you seem to like to do that).

Second, 1D lines (and 2D surfaces) are not a 'theory'. They are not even a hypothesis. They can be parts of a larger model. For that matter, even 3D is a (very good) model helping to organize our understanding.
Ok a zero thickness line is one demential. So it the effort to try and extract an answer I will ask. Does a 1 D line or a 2 D plain exist?

No models, just do they really exist?
KJV

United States

#3697 May 6, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>And again, that is NOT the scientific claim.

There was no time when there was nothing. There was no location where there was nothing. Nothing simply does not exist. What the *science* says is that the universe (or multiverse) is *all there is*. It isn't claiming that there was nothing and then after a while there was everything.

Part of the problem is in the language. Nothing is not a 'thing' that exists. it is not something that has a causal connection to anything. When we say that there was 'nothing' before the Big Bang, we don't mean there was 'something called nothing'. We mean that existence is limited to after the Big Bang.

Now, some version of the Big Bang *do* have previous contraction phases or multiverses, or some other causal connection that lead to the current expansion. Some even have the universe arising as a quantum fluctuation out of a vacuum. But even then, the vacuum has structure, obeys the laws of physics, etc. it isn't 'nothing'. Nothing does not exist.
"There was no time when there was nothing. "

Very good

"Nothing is not a 'thing' that exists. it is not something that has a causal connection to anything. When we say that there was 'nothing' before the Big Bang, we don't mean there was 'something called nothing'."

Hmmm ok so when I say

A complete and total lack of anything, no matter, no energy, no space, no time, "nothing". You somehow think I believe that there was something called
Nothing?

I'm not sure I can make it any clearer.

There was nothing (as in an absent of anything and everything) then there was everything. Two still photo graphs no time involved one shows nothing the other our universe. No magic involved?

Lets hear the scientific explanation on this.
KJV

United States

#3698 May 6, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>I understand what you are saying-- but I very much doubt the godbot can.

His little mind is incapable of grasping the necessary ideas, and holding on to them-- they fall through his brains like water through a screen...

:D
And then there's bobby you pretends to keep up. LOL

Richardfs

“Formerly "Richard"”

Since: Mar 12

In the beginning e=mc^2

#3699 May 6, 2013
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
"Your lack of understand does not make the theory wrong."
Ok I'm all ears go ahead and explain
How a complete absent of everything could explode and create everything. There was no matter there was no energy there was no space there was no time there was nothing and then Bang! There was everything.
Please explain, I'm waiting.
You may be all ears but there is nothing between them.

It is pointless even trying to explain anything to you as all you will say is:-

"That's impossible goddidit."

People have been very patient with you and have explained cosmology extremely well, you simply can not or will not learn.

In short you are a laughing stock.

Richardfs

“Formerly "Richard"”

Since: Mar 12

In the beginning e=mc^2

#3701 May 6, 2013
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
Ok I accept your defeat.
Would you prefer to surrender on the Missouri instead?
What defeat? The fact that you are incapable of learning. The problem is your's not mine.

You are just another silly little godbot who thinks the bibull actually contains knowledge.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#3702 May 6, 2013
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
Please explain how a complete absents of everything exploded and created everything with out science magic.
Since that isn't what any scientific thoery claims, why should I?

BTW, the word is *absence*.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#3703 May 6, 2013
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
You did say that when there was no time there was nothing.
Are you back peddling AGAIN?
No, you are simply not grasping my point.

There was no existence at all when there was no time. We not NOT have a situation where 'nothing explodes'. At any *time*, there is matter. Whenever anything exists, there is time and matter. What we find at the beginning of the current expansion, which may be the beginning of time (but may not), is a very hot, dense, expanding universe.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#3704 May 6, 2013
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
You are wrong it took some doing I must admit but Doc (poly) stated that then there was no time that nothing existed. Do you believe in another myth of how the Big Bang happened?
Please elaborate, this should be good.
Once again, the phrase 'when there was no time' is self-contradictory. What I have claimed is that at any point where *anything* exists, time exists.

Time may or may not have a beginng. If it did, it is likely that it was 13.7 billion years ago when the current expansion started. In that case, anything that has existed has existed in the last 13.7 billion years.

When *you* make the statement 'nothing exploded and gave rise to eveyrthing', you imply that there was a time when nothing existed (self-contradictory since time would exist) and that at some later time,an explosion out of that nothing happened which gave rise to everything.

THAT IS NOT THE SCIENTIFIC CLAIM.

The scientific claim is that time, matter, and enery all exist when any of them do. It also claims that *if* time goes only finitely far into the past, then all of existence is since that point in the past and that the universe has *always* been expanding, but was hotter and denser in the past.

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.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Athetists' best bet is that there is a God. 10 min Amused 31
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 49 min One way or another 48,577
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 1 hr Thinking 21,872
The Dumbest Thing Posted by a Godbot (Jun '10) 6 hr Richardfs 5,694
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 6 hr karl44 23,504
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 18 hr New Age Spiritual... 258,040
News The war on Christmas (Dec '10) Dec 3 Eagle 12 4,907
More from around the web