Since: Jul 08

Columbus, OH

#1477 Oct 8, 2012
nanoanomaly wrote:
<quoted text>Yeah! That is an odd combination. I'm visualizing the cryptkeeper with mothballs in its hair.
How's that working for you?

“There is no such thing”

Since: May 08

as a reasonable person

#1478 Oct 8, 2012
Chess Jurist wrote:
<quoted text>
If you don't want to be treated as a child, don't post as one, child.
But yet you defend the delusional sociopath

“There is no such thing”

Since: May 08

as a reasonable person

#1479 Oct 8, 2012
nanoanomaly wrote:
<quoted text>Yeah! That is an odd combination. I'm visualizing the cryptkeeper with mothballs in its hair.
Really? I was thinking of a guy in a windowless van with a bag full of candy.

Since: Jul 08

Columbus, OH

#1480 Oct 8, 2012
Lil Ticked wrote:
<quoted text>But yet you defend the delusional sociopath
Really?

Or are you projecting?

Since: Jul 08

Columbus, OH

#1481 Oct 8, 2012
Lil Ticked wrote:
<quoted text>Really? I was thinking of a guy in a windowless van with a bag full of candy.
Were you?

“There is no such thing”

Since: May 08

as a reasonable person

#1482 Oct 8, 2012
Chess Jurist wrote:
<quoted text>
Really?
Or are you projecting?
That makes no sense.

“There is no such thing”

Since: May 08

as a reasonable person

#1483 Oct 8, 2012
Chess Jurist wrote:
<quoted text>
Were you?
Why, are you offering?

“The Intrepid”

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#1484 Oct 8, 2012
Lil Ticked wrote:
<quoted text>Really? I was thinking of a guy in a windowless van with a bag full of candy.
Hard candy or chocolate?

“There is no such thing”

Since: May 08

as a reasonable person

#1485 Oct 8, 2012
nanoanomaly wrote:
<quoted text>Hard candy or chocolate?
Probably meth with a side of cloroform.

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#1487 Oct 9, 2012
Ben_Masada wrote:
<quoted text>
---------
I am here to learn, but not what you are not interested to teach.
Ben
That is entirely up to you

However may I suggest college or university if you really want to benefit from education.

Since: Jul 08

Columbus, OH

#1488 Oct 9, 2012
Lil Ticked wrote:
<quoted text>That makes no sense.
Then why do you do it?

Since: Jul 08

Columbus, OH

#1489 Oct 9, 2012
Lil Ticked wrote:
<quoted text>Why, are you offering?
You do not need my permission to fantasize anything you wish.

But, ultimately, your fantasies reveal you, not me.

Child.

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#1490 Oct 10, 2012
Chess Jurist wrote:
<quoted text>
You do not need my permission to fantasize anything you wish.
But, ultimately, your fantasies reveal you, not me.
Child.
Ouch! You'd think that'd leave a mark.

“The Intrepid”

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#1491 Oct 10, 2012
Saint Augustine wrote:
<quoted text>
Ouch! You'd think that'd leave a mark.
Nah, something that petrified would prolly bust open like a dry seed husk.

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#1497 Oct 15, 2012
Doctor Who Two wrote:
Ok let's get this straight. Your Science claims there was a Big Bang and it happened (so far) one of two ways
1) when nothing exploded and created everything (this statement is one of Einstein's)
2) when a singularity (black hole) started to expand.
I'll deal with number two sense the first definition it ludicrous.
Science tells us now, that the universe started when a singularity started to expand. This of course is also ludicrous sense we know many laws of physics this would break. First off look at the gravitatisonal pull you would have over come for this to have happened. The universe started once the singularity started to expand this would also mean that the laws of phyics also started at that Exact same time. With all the mass in the whole universe (they claim) was the size of a pin head. That black hole would have such a large gravitational pull that as soon as this made up expansion started the laws of phyics would slam this pin head size singularity back together. This should be called
"The Big Nothing Happened Theory"
Ahh been here before, methinks you were wearing a different sock back then. Funny how fundies seem to go round and round in circles as though next time it will all be different and work out for them

No “our” science makes no such claim, the big bang idea was based on Edwin Hubbles 1929 observation of the theory first proposed by Georges Lemaître in 1927 that the universe is expanding and was therefore in the past smaller. Science has move on since then, however the universe is still expanding and it was smaller than when that theory was formed.

Now there are around 27 serious theories and many more not so serious ones, the majority of cosmologists no longer subscribe to the big bang idea of something from nothing theory. The blasphemy of theorising “something before the big bang” of 10 years ago is now history.

Actually not ludicrous, one of those theories depends on your interpretation of nothing. I’ll leave you to work that one out, perhaps the work of Michio Kaku will help you out here.

No science does not tell us that the universe erupted from an exploding black hole, a few cosmologists are investigating that possibility, there is quite a big difference between “science tells us” and a few scientists are thinking about it. However have you ever seen a recording of atomic bomb tests? Funny how so much energy can defy the gravity of the matter encompassed in that device is it not?

Whatever the cause the laws of physics do not come into it. They did not start at exactly the same time as the event as you claim, they did not exist prior to 10^-34 of a second after the event and resolved (in that time scale) slowly to become hard and fast laws around 10^-11 of a second later. It is not known whether time it self was relevant, did it exist in that first 10^-34th of a second?

Your claim seems to hinge that the event would collapse into itself because of gravity. You are assuming that C in E=MC^2 is less than 1 m/s, it is actually around 300,000 metres per second. You claim would not pass muster in any serious scientific discussion.

Since: Nov 09

Location hidden

#1498 Oct 16, 2012
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
God may exist.
But.
It is highly unlikely that this "god" does exist.
Let me repeat that: It may exist, but so far? There is no reason to think It does exist.
Why?
Because of the complete and total lack of all objective evidence for this "god" of yours.
Just for starters.
As soon as you present >>evidence<< for this god?
You >>might<< have a case.
Might.
Begin:
-------

Listen Bob, do you believe that your great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great grand mother existed? Yes,
you do. Would you tell me about her? No, you won't. But you do believe she existed. Yes, you do. What's the evidence that she did exist? Yourself alive today. If I went billions of great grand mothers back in time, would you still believe she existed? Yes. But evidence that God exists, you can't accept. No, you cannot. Even in spite of your existence today? Well... Well, did you swallow your tongue?

Ben

Since: Nov 09

Location hidden

#1499 Oct 16, 2012
Chess Jurist wrote:
<quoted text>
No you're not, Ben.
<quoted text>
See?
------

Are you interested to learn what I have to teach? No, you are not.
See what I mean now? We are here to exchange what we know, and not
to fatten a turkey to be cooked tomorrow.

Ben

Since: Nov 09

Location hidden

#1500 Oct 16, 2012
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
That is entirely up to you
However may I suggest college or university if you really want to benefit from education.
-------

Do they teach Atheism in college or university?

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#1501 Oct 17, 2012
Ben_Masada wrote:
<quoted text>
-------
Listen Bob, do you believe that your great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great grand mother existed? Yes,
you do. Would you tell me about her? No, you won't. But you do believe she existed. Yes, you do. What's the evidence that she did exist? Yourself alive today. If I went billions of great grand mothers back in time, would you still believe she existed? Yes. But evidence that God exists, you can't accept. No, you cannot. Even in spite of your existence today? Well... Well, did you swallow your tongue?
Ben
Sorry to butt in but I have to say that as a guy who holds such store in the OT this seems to be something you have not actually thought through.

According to the babble there are not billions of great grand mothers to go back to. According to evolution there are not billions of great grand mothers to go back to. Hell, even according to the history of the universe there are not billions of great grand mothers to go back to.

We have approximately 100 (Hundred) generations between Jesus of the NT and the present time assuming the average generation is 20 years.

According to Mathew (you claim to be knowledgeable of the babble) there are either 41 or 42 generations between Jesus and Abraham, he does seem to get confused here.

And Genesis gives 14 generations between Adam and Abraham

Work it out 14 + 41 + 100 – that’s approximately 155 generations to the beginning of mankind. So are you saying that mankind existed before Adam or that the babble account is total phooey?

Well, did you swallow your pride?

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#1502 Oct 17, 2012
Ben_Masada wrote:
<quoted text>
-------
Do they teach Atheism in college or university?
Some do (I just googled it). Can you imagine a course in atheism:-

Tutor : Do you believe in god?

Student : No

Tutor : Course over, you pass with a first

All the rest, the lies, contradictions and horrors of the babble, the way fundy religions try and debunk learning and freedom of speech, the way christians hate anyone not in there particular sect of christianity etc are just down to learning from personal experience.

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
Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 14 min Richardfs 233,062
Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038 (Apr '12) 1 hr Richardfs 23,248
Christians More Supportive of Torture Than Non-... 1 hr QUITTNER Dec 26 2014 9
Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... 7 hr Even Steven 2,607
Can Atheists Know God Does Not Exist When They ... 8 hr Richardfs 166
God' existence 9 hr polymath257 84
Is 'naturalism' a bleak philosophical outlook? ... 13 hr Mikko 5
More from around the web