Prove there's a god.

“let's do this thang!”

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#635611 Jul 2, 2013
Snow Bunny_ wrote:
If "God" had such an important message for ALL of mankind, then why did he choose the most inept way possible to say it, and why to only a few people? That is the nail in the coffin to me regarding Christianity.
Evolution is NOT mentioned in the bible, yet we know with scientific FACT evolution happened. We clearly have Australopithecus, then Homo Habilis, then Homo erectus, then Homo rhodesiensis, then Homo Sapien.
A pattern of evolution in humans is UNDENIABLE, and we have the fossils to prove it.
How could God/religion have gotten that so completely wrong?
Why not believe in Thor, or Apollo, or Odin, or Zeus, or Mohammed, or Allah?You Christians rationally choose to dismiss all those other gods, but fail to turn that critical thinking on to your own beliefs.
Why?
hey lil T&A bunny -

don't judge what God did by what dumb-dumbs like you have done with it!:-)

“ad victoriam”

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#635612 Jul 2, 2013
True Truth wrote:
<quoted text>
What is Allah?
The Arabic word for God ?
You said just the other day a list of names , um.. so you tell me.

“Truth is beyond wavelength ”

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#635613 Jul 2, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text> You based your whole argument on a fallacy, because molecules aren't conscious. DNA possibly is , but it is a complex chain of organic molecules. But more likely DNA is instructions to build consciousness. So the argument is actually how did DNA come about, and the answer is...Nobody knows exactly how yet.
How quickly you idiots forget. It's more like you pretend you have something.

No one knows whether there is an element of consciousness within each molecule, mostly because we haven't a clue as to what consciousness really is.

All we know it we see something that we label "consciousness" that is *associated* with molecules. Your buddy Tim admitted that we don't know whether consciousness was always in existence so why do you act like there was a time when there was no consciousness and a time that there was when you don't know? And on top of that you act like you know DNA might be conscious or that other molecules are not. You are committing an equally blind belief as the Biblebots you criticize.

Since: Mar 13

Anaheim, California

#635614 Jul 2, 2013
Snow Bunny_ wrote:
<quoted text>My my my....why so angry, lol?
Take a deep breath, this is only topix :D
You need to grow a thicker skin.
<quoted text>No, it was and is 100% OPINION.
There is no reason to it, lol.
<quoted text>lol, if you say so.
I think I would know why I say what I say, better than you...eh?
I say there might be a possibility of God, merely because we can't scientifically dis-prove it.
I assure you it has nothing to do with fear, or being afraid, lol.
If it makes you feel better to think it's out of fear (even when you are clearly told by an Agnostic it has nothing to do with fear)...then have at it. It just makes you look like a fool.
<quoted text>Really? That makes NO sense, lol. Saying there MIGHT be a god, because we can't dis-prove a God has NOTHING to do with political correctness.
*shaking head in hands/laughing
<quoted text>YES IT DOES make a huge difference...fool!
Atheist say they do NOT believe in the possibility of God!
Agnostics believe the opposite!
That's why there is a thing called ATHEIST, and a separate thing called AGNOSTIC...because they are different things = one believe in the possibility the other believes in NO possibility..
<quoted text>How can I (agnostic) be blind, when I have repeatedly said IT IS POSSIBLE!?
Can you read?
<quoted text>huh? Wow, lol
<quoted text>How can someone (anyone) be a "contradictory"?
Can you be specific as to how I contradict the nature of belief?
Oh good grief, spare me.... Atheists are thought to be closed-minded because they deny the existence of gods, whereas agnostics appear to be open-minded because they do not know for sure. This is a mistake because atheists do not necessarily deny any gods and may indeed be an atheist because they do not know for sure — in other words, they may be an agnostic as well.

And you can easily see I made a typo when I said "you are a contradictory". The "a" was not supposed to be there. It was supposed to be "you are contradictory".

You even fail at trying to be funny. Please stop it. Saying "lol" and butchering the English language with your gibberish does not make your posts integral.

“Imaginez tous les gens”

Since: Sep 09

Sunbury, OH

#635615 Jul 2, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
You you call the absence of everything something?
ZPE and the ground state is exactly that.
I'm sorry, but I do not agree that the absence of something/everything an example of something.
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
Absolute nothingness is not only unscientific it's impossible.
...only thus far! We have achieved many things in science that were once thought of as "impossible"...and THAT is my point. We really can't say what "nothing" is, until we have an example of nothing.
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
As I explained there has to be a potential, even if that potential is god.
Why does there "have to be" a potential?
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
Ground state of
absolute nothingness
god creates something(god is the potential)
or Quantum Physics
Ground state of
absolute nothingness (contains a potential)
The potential becomes something/everything
So either you think
the ground state is god
or the
ground state contains a potential
Quantum fluctuation virtual particle etc.
BUT...then that would make "ground state" something.
How can ground state it being NOTHING, when we don't even know what nothing is?

“ad victoriam”

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#635616 Jul 2, 2013
Snow Bunny_ wrote:
<quoted text>You seem to be confusing THEORY, with "FACTUALLY know".
A theory is not a fact.
The Casmir effect is NOT PROOF of nothing.
For example, there's nothing to stop small waves from fitting between, and there is an infinite number of these wavelengths. The mathematical solution is to temporarily do the calculation for a finite number of waves, because they argue that the difference remains finite as one allows the number of wavelengths to go to infinity.
I'm agree that something can come from nothing. BUT, we really don't have FACTUAL PROOF of that, because we have yet to measure what NOTHING is.
We have found nothing, that can be reduced to absolutely nothing.
So yes absolute nothing is unscientific and impossible as we know it.
But

“ad victoriam”

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#635617 Jul 2, 2013
Al Garcia wrote:
<quoted text>
Wow.... I think I got it..... Debating over nothing.
That's the thing isn't it? We can't debate if something can come from nothing until "nothing" is defined. Even physicists can't seem to agree as to what nothing is. Then you add the quantum factor and now it really gets stupid.
I just think its funny how we make something out of nothing.
So yes, something can and does come from nothing.
Think nothing of it, it happens all the time! lol

“Truth is beyond wavelength ”

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#635618 Jul 2, 2013
Double Fine wrote:
Well. Life did come from non-life. That is fact. Be it by abiogenesis, or creator. The fact is that every step.we have taken towards abiogenesis has been successful.

My question. What would you say when abiogebesis is recreated in lab?
And more of the same blind belief. Life did come from nonlife? How do you know? Science cannot make such a statement. How is it fact? You're friggin insane. And every step[ has been successful?

So please, tell me how unconscious molecules ever became aware just by organizing into groups?

“ad victoriam”

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#635619 Jul 2, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Um....
The Casimir effect (theory) demonstrates something from something....


No it demonstrates photons can pop out of nothing.

from no photons
to
some photons

Or did you think photons play hide and seek?

“Truth is beyond wavelength ”

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#635620 Jul 2, 2013
Myth Buster wrote:
<quoted text>
Science is currently studying universal "nothingness" to understand the origin of the universe. There's absolutely no scientific evidence in support of an eternal consciousness behind it.
It doesn't matter what we're studying; the true nature of consciousness is unapproachable. So you'd rather believe that an unconscious thing (a molecule or group of them) was able to become "aware" then to believe that awareness was always in existence? It is most likely that matter was always in existence rather than being created from nothing, so what gives? How exactly does awareness arise from unawareness? Please explain. In detail of course. If you can do that you will win the next 100 Nobel Prizes in advance.

“Imaginez tous les gens”

Since: Sep 09

Sunbury, OH

#635621 Jul 2, 2013
waaaz up wrote:
<quoted text>
You wrote;
Until I get some PROOF of a God, I'll continue to believe there isn't one. BUT, I'm open to proof! Anyone got any?.
Correct..I wrote that :)
waaaz up wrote:
<quoted text>
I would recommend "seeking" and going to the only one who can give you that proof. God himself.
I am 35 years old. I did "seek" it in my life. I even studied theology. I agree, ONLY God can give me proof...so why hasn't he?
GOD is the ONLY one who can give irrefutable proof...so why doesn't he?
I would much rather believe, and be easier to believe in God, and heaven, etc... What a wonderful thought that is! I WANT it to be true.
But common sense, logic, critical thinking, rational thought, and the mere fact that GOD itself doesn't care enough to make its agenda CLEAR to humanity proves otherwise.
waaaz up wrote:
<quoted text>
The Good Book says, Hebrews 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must "believe that He is", and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him.
That is NOT prof at ALL! NOt even close

“let's do this thang!”

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#635622 Jul 2, 2013
Snow Bunny_ wrote:
<quoted text>My my my....why so angry, lol?
Take a deep breath, this is only topix :D
You need to grow a thicker skin.
<quoted text>No, it was and is 100% OPINION.
There is no reason to it, lol.
<quoted text>lol, if you say so.
I think I would know why I say what I say, better than you...eh?
I say there might be a possibility of God, merely because we can't scientifically dis-prove it.
I assure you it has nothing to do with fear, or being afraid, lol.
If it makes you feel better to think it's out of fear (even when you are clearly told by an Agnostic it has nothing to do with fear)...then have at it. It just makes you look like a fool.
<quoted text>Really? That makes NO sense, lol. Saying there MIGHT be a god, because we can't dis-prove a God has NOTHING to do with political correctness.
*shaking head in hands/laughing
<quoted text>YES IT DOES make a huge difference...fool!
Atheist say they do NOT believe in the possibility of God!
Agnostics believe the opposite!
That's why there is a thing called ATHEIST, and a separate thing called AGNOSTIC...because they are different things = one believe in the possibility the other believes in NO possibility..
<quoted text>How can I (agnostic) be blind, when I have repeatedly said IT IS POSSIBLE!?
Can you read?
<quoted text>huh? Wow, lol
<quoted text>How can someone (anyone) be a "contradictory"?
Can you be specific as to how I contradict the nature of belief?
hheeeyyyyy - leave my hot lil black girlfriend alone!

she has plenty-o T&A, enough sense to love her Creator AND she's smart enough to like white dudes!

now i suggest that the 3 of us chillax in a hot tub and make things right;)

“ad victoriam”

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#635623 Jul 2, 2013
True Truth wrote:
<quoted text>
The Casimir experiment does not produce nothing. It produces vacuum. Vacuum has an enormous potential energy.
Virtual particles are not particles. They are forces, and their contribution is included as if it were a particle, in certain calculations.
You are getting caught up in the mathematical modelling parameters.
Virtual particles can become real particles.
This is empirical evidence how the uncertainty principle and entanglement actually work in reality.

http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110603/full/n...

Since: Mar 13

Anaheim, California

#635624 Jul 2, 2013
Pokay wrote:
<quoted text>It doesn't matter what we're studying; the true nature of consciousness is unapproachable. So you'd rather believe that an unconscious thing (a molecule or group of them) was able to become "aware" then to believe that awareness was always in existence? It is most likely that matter was always in existence rather than being created from nothing, so what gives? How exactly does awareness arise from unawareness? Please explain. In detail of course. If you can do that you will win the next 100 Nobel Prizes in advance.
You think the atheists are bad? Try taking a look at this snow bunny agnostic. This moron thinks he/she is no different than an atheist. Smh.

“Truth is beyond wavelength ”

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#635625 Jul 2, 2013
nanoanomaly wrote:
<quoted text>Well, there is one lunatic on here who used to claim the universe is ruled by chaos, until I showed him just how ordered the universe is. Now he claims that all chemical reactions are perfectly ordered, never random. ;)
" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronology_of_t... ;
I have yet to see a phase that was capable of creating life from nonlife. Maybe consciousness is merely a force that rides the waves of energy, manifesting at will, ensuring its own immortality through evolution, maybe not. Still, there must be a "will" somewhere in that equation.
People can believe that this "will" is "free" or not, but it's bullsh*t when they lie and say it's a fact it's one or the other, that life did come from nonlife, or awareness from unawareness.

Since: Mar 13

Anaheim, California

#635626 Jul 2, 2013
waaasssuuup wrote:
<quoted text>
hheeeyyyyy - leave my hot lil black girlfriend alone!
she has plenty-o T&A, enough sense to love her Creator AND she's smart enough to like white dudes!
now i suggest that the 3 of us chillax in a hot tub and make things right;)
Lol what the heck?

Yes I love white men you got that one right. But I dont believe in "God". I dont "believe" at all. I'm Theosophist.

“Imaginez tous les gens”

Since: Sep 09

Sunbury, OH

#635627 Jul 2, 2013
Ilovewhitemen20 wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh good grief, spare me....
Likewise :)
Ilovewhitemen20 wrote:
<quoted text>
Atheists are thought to be closed-minded because they deny the existence of gods, whereas agnostics appear to be open-minded because they do not know for sure.
I agree Atheists are more close minded, because they are closed to the fact of a God being possible.
That has nothing to do your warped view on it regarding "fear", or political correctness or being friendly, lol
Ilovewhitemen20 wrote:
<quoted text>
This is a mistake because atheists do not necessarily deny any gods and may indeed be an atheist because they do not know for sure — in other words, they may be an agnostic as well.
Then that would make them AGNOSTIC...not Atheist, lol.
I have yet to meet ONE "Atheist" that claims there IS a possibility of God...ever!
If I do meet an Atheist that claims there is a possibility of God, then I'd quickly inform them they are AGNOSTIC, not Atheist.
I hope you are smart enough to understand this. My eight year old understands this...
Ilovewhitemen20 wrote:
<quoted text>
— in other words, they may be an agnostic as well.
FINALLY! yes yes yes!
If an atheist claims there is a possibility of God, then they are Agnostic...not atheist. NOW you're getting there :)
Ilovewhitemen20 wrote:
<quoted text>
And you can easily see I made a typo when I said "you are a contradictory". The "a" was not supposed to be there. It was supposed to be "you are contradictory".
...and who's the moron (your words)?
Ilovewhitemen20 wrote:
<quoted text>
You even fail at trying to be funny.l.
I feel it was VERY funny, lol
See >LOL<
Ilovewhitemen20 wrote:
<quoted text>
Saying "lol" and butchering the English language with your gibberish does not make your posts integral.
Then why do you butcher it with >your< gibberish?
Again...hypocrite?

“ad victoriam”

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#635628 Jul 2, 2013
Pokay wrote:
<quoted text>How quickly you idiots forget. It's more like you pretend you have something.
No one knows whether there is an element of consciousness within each molecule, mostly because we haven't a clue as to what consciousness really is.
All we know it we see something that we label "consciousness" that is *associated* with molecules. Your buddy Tim admitted that we don't know whether consciousness was always in existence so why do you act like there was a time when there was no consciousness and a time that there was when you don't know? And on top of that you act like you know DNA might be conscious or that other molecules are not. You are committing an equally blind belief as the Biblebots you criticize.
Absolutely not, the 13+ billion years before it, attest to there not being any before there was. But saying you were right what would you base the presumption on, and it has to be a presumption therefore conjecture. We do not see molecules behave as if conscious, only life carries this attribute.
We also see the level of this consciousness rise to new levels as life evolved. As life developed new ways to gather information the level of creatures consciousness rose.

But if consciousness was inherit to the universe from the beginning , then it tends to reason it would be teeming with other life everywhere. We also see no apparent consciousness in galaxies or stars etc. But it does tend to reason that consciousness is inherit to life and that it evolved the same as life, I'm sorry I just don't see it any different. DNA is what caused consciousness in life, from a very low and rudimentary level, such as in plants right up to it's ability to interact via optical cables on the internet.

“Truth is beyond wavelength ”

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#635629 Jul 2, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text> Virtual particles can become real particles.
This is empirical evidence how the uncertainty principle and entanglement actually work in reality.
http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110603/full/n...
I'm not really following your rant but if you're trying to imply that 'something' can come from 'nothing' and are using virtual particles as evidence then you are completely full of it. We have all heard that it *appears* virtual particles blip into existence from nothing but that can't really be the case; it only further complicates the truth because if 'nothing' can produce 'something' then it was really not 'nothing' to begin with. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that one out.

“Imaginez tous les gens”

Since: Sep 09

Sunbury, OH

#635630 Jul 2, 2013
Ilovewhitemen20 wrote:
<quoted text>
You think the atheists are bad? Try taking a look at this snow bunny agnostic. This moron thinks he/she is no different than an atheist. Smh.
Huh?
Have you really resorted to LYING to make a point?

YOU claimed I (an agnostic) am no different than an Atheist.
Even after I CLEARLY shown the difference.

I NEVER thought I "am no different than an Atheist"...those were YOUR words....and you know attribute YOUR OWN WORDS, to what I think!

That is desperate and WEAK!

Lying will get you nowhere.

Anynie that can read can see I never said that!

LOL smh

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.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing (Mar '17) 4 min NICK 87,472
Looking to finally settle down. Need some sugge... 53 min Jayvee56 1
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 1 hr The Ragin Pagan 703,570
Why are women from USA prefer casual dating ove... 1 hr lookingforU1 1
The Good Man Donald Trump 1 hr MexicoWill Pay4Wall 2
Prostitutes at Taiji Massage in Port Charlotte 1 hr FredG5 1
School honoring Confed general 2B Renamed 4 Bar... 1 hr Omg 2