Prove there's a god.

“There's a feeling I get...”

Since: Jun 11

...when I look to the West

#644237 Jul 23, 2013
True Truth wrote:
<quoted text>
There is a division in NASA that specializes in postulating that if there would be macro life on a certain planet, what it would look like. For example, in Jupiter, a macro organism would be like an air baloon constantly rising and falling upon different temperatures. I saw that on natgeo once.
I'm not sure how reasonable such postulations are though.
Do you think Optimus Prime could be out there somewhere?
I think I saw it once, too.

Thing is, it is impossible to say. Macro organisms function within a food chain. There must be a base food source (on earth it is plankton, grass and shrubs). Herbivora eats the grass and gets hunted by carnivora.

Now, Population dynamics show that there is a relationship between herbivora and carnivora. If herbivores are defenceless against carnivores, they all get eaten and die out. However, if they are too well defended, carnivores die out.

For this reason there is an evolutionary (for want of a better term, I will call it "mechanism") mechanism we call "The Red Queen".

Ever watch Alice in Wonderland? Where the Red Queen tells Alice that no matter how fast she runs, she will stay in the same place. How this applies to evolution, is that yes, herbivores evolve defences, but carnivores evolve brains, cunning, teeth and claws. And somehow this is perpetuated throughout the fossil record.

Think Lions and Buffalo. Think Great White Shark and Fur Seal. Tyrannosaurus Rex and Triceratops. Allosaurus and Stegosaurus.

And the defences vary. Sone animals like gazelle evolved to be very fast and agile. Some herbivkres, like mice, breed by the thousands (so a single kill does not hurt the population). Triceratops evolved into arguably the most dangerous animal ever to walk on land. Parasauralophus involved infrasound and could warn other memebers over many miles, Giant Sauropods just grew too damn big to be killed. Even cows, chicken and sheel - they grew easy to domesticate. Humans kill them by the million, but they are bred by the billion.

Niw, for every change a herbivore undergoes, a carnivore needs to go through changes to counteract that. Leopards evolved ambush technique. Human beings evolved to be smart enough to build tools to hunt. T-Rex evolved giant jaws and banana shaped teeth. Lions evolved to be smart, fast, agile and powerful.

All the while, keeping that balance.

How is this relevant to the discussion? That we cannot possibly know what mechanisms or behaviour extra terrestrial employ to either kill prey, or fight off predators

“Listen to the sounds”

Since: Feb 09

of your own extinction......

#644239 Jul 23, 2013
Double Fine wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, you ask a good and fair question. Double Fine, in his unspeakable wisdom, his tireless tact, his clever wit and sheer awesomeness, will reply to this question.
Firstly, Double Fine is the creator of all things on earth, thus needs no experimentation. Doubke Fine created life on earth with a demonstratable DNA signature to be found in every living organism. Indeed, the very scientist that discovered it, fell on his knees and worshipped Double Fine, for giving humanity such an obvious calling card.
Double Fine can tell you many such stories. The Moonlanding? When the cameras went off, Aldrin turned to Armstrong and proclaomed Double Fine ruler, creator and overseer of all. Hkw about the pyramids? Modern archeologists have it all wrong. The pyramids were created to the glory of Double Fine.
Even your Bible. "God" is a wrong translation. Substitute the word God with the name of Double Fine.
See? Proven beyond a shadow of a doubt
Don't forget, you were nailed to the cross sideways by Leonidas and his 300 spartans and you cried out for beer. But you were such an amateur, that one sip gave you a hangover for three days!

“The Edge”

Since: Dec 10

Of Tomorow

#644240 Jul 23, 2013
Double Fine wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, this is how I see it.
Would you agree that at the very least, such creatures would need:
1) a language
2) a way of transferring knowledge from generation to generation
3) an opposable thumb, or tentacle of sorts, in order to manipulate tools
Would you agree on those points?
Yes

Since: Jul 09

Location hidden

#644241 Jul 23, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
-----Hiding------
You find this "christophobic" post to be acceptable?
what part did you find "phobic"

Since: Jul 09

Location hidden

#644242 Jul 23, 2013
nanoanomaly wrote:
<quoted text>And you have not proven that the supernatural does not exist.
that which is advanced without evidence

may be dismissed without evidence

Since: Jul 09

Location hidden

#644243 Jul 23, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Indoctrination:
teaching someone to accept a set of beliefs uncritically.
Is that what you think Christianity is all about?
for children (learners)

“THE LORD IS MY SHEPHERD;”

Since: Apr 09

Location hidden

#644244 Jul 23, 2013
Portia the Rossi wrote:
<quoted text>That is a fib. Math relies of proof, so does alcohol, but science does not, but Christianity does. "Faith is the evidence of things not seen, the substance of things hoped for." Substance is proof. Both math and Christianity have proof, only science does not. With science you are left with science without proof and evidence to disprove what they can not prove.
Welcome, Portia.. To the den of Atheist/evolutionist, etc etc....

You have made many good points in your post's, and i agree.

Although, you will be mocked and attacked and called many names.

So hope you have thick skin around that heart:>
Good luck!!


Ephesians 1:

17 That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him:

18 The eyes of your understanding being enlightened; that ye may know what is the hope of his calling, and what the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints,

19 And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power,

20 Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places,

21 Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come:

Since: Jul 09

Location hidden

#644245 Jul 23, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
At least you could've posted the link...
http://www.positiveatheism.org/writ/dovewing....
Lol, you atheists sure do spend a lot of time on a belief you claim to not believe in.
you are so devastated all you can do is beg for your belief system to be left alone.

that time is past.

Since: Jul 09

Location hidden

#644246 Jul 23, 2013
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>I take it that your ultimate objective when praying for your horse was the glory of god, right?
that laugh teared me up

“The Edge”

Since: Dec 10

Of Tomorow

#644247 Jul 23, 2013
True Truth wrote:
<quoted text>
Okay, you seem to be jumping in and trying to get a foot into the conversation, with lots of confusion demonstrated.
Firstly, welcome to the thread.
So if I may ask, where do you stand on the following matters?
Theist or atheist?
If theist, what theist?
If atheist, what atheist?
Politics: Left wing, right wing, other, considered balanced?
Economics: capitalism, socialism, or communism?
Creation or evolution, or other, or blend?
If creation, creation by evolution, or young earth, or old earth creationism?
Hetero, Homo, bi, or A?
Abortion: evil, or not?
And in the interest of myself and my fellow saffer: Bra size?
Last question is compulsory.
:)
You should have asked for their sock size.

Since: May 11

UK

#644248 Jul 23, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
The left and right have divided this country, and are tearing it apart. I see this poster exactly like Piers Morgan, his input not wanted or needed, in short stay over there across the sea where you belong, and stop trying to shape America the way they want it.
The right is just as retarded, but they do agree on this point.
...*a single tear rolls down my cheek*

LMFAO

“The Edge”

Since: Dec 10

Of Tomorow

#644249 Jul 23, 2013
MisterCharrington wrote:
<quoted text>
...*a single tear rolls down my cheek*
LMFAO

Crybaby

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#644250 Jul 23, 2013
MisterCharrington wrote:
<quoted text>
...*a single tear rolls down my cheek*
LMFAO
Here, have a hankie.

It's clean, even.

“There's a feeling I get...”

Since: Jun 11

...when I look to the West

#644251 Jul 23, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes
The second point, in particular, is very important.

Human beings evolved to this point, because of the social influences their ancestors underwent.

Nurture of infants is a trait most seen in mammals. If you take a look at the very oldest of macro organisms, such as arachnids, insects and fish, you see a lack of parental care. Sure, some spiders do carry around their young on their backs, but when the infant attains size, it is left to fend for itself. Fish, we see the female laying eggs, the male fertilising it and that is the last bit the parents ever will care about.

When you look down the evolutionary path, you see amphibians give very little parental care and then reptiles, the first species exclusively land dwelling. Current reptiles sometimes build elaborate nests. Crocodiles and alligators actually provide attentive care for their babies. We can assume therefore, that early reptiles also displayed these characteristics.

It is from a group of such reptiles, called synopsidae, that our ancient ancestors stemn from, the so called "Proto-mammals". It is relatively safe to assume that that they gave much better parental care than other groups of reptiles. Obviously, two mass extinctions followed, and after the Jurassic, the Synopsidae and Age of Reptoles were over, and the Age of Dinosaurs began. t the end of the reign of dinosaurs, we see small groups of mammals and we know they had to contend for food with other small animals - birds, small therapods, snakes, etc.

But what won the battle for mamms in the end, is the ability to give great parental care to young. Firstly, the parents can keep the young ones from dying by protecting them. Death rate decreases. Also, infants engage in playfighting, so they learn plenty of skills to use in hunting and defending. Therefore, they are better prepared.

I know that you know most of this stuff, but would you agree that any intelligent race out there would have to have evolved from a similar taxonomic class of animals to ours?
RogerThat

AOL

#644253 Jul 23, 2013
.

1 obvious solution to USA's RACISM ...

http://youtu.be/1tFxM_Vsg5g

.

“I speak my mind”

Since: Sep 10

It hurts to bite my tongue

#644254 Jul 23, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
At this time, I can't imagine a person being denigrated for their work because of their religious affiliation. However, brilliant men and women were burned for their religious beliefs in previous centuries, and Americans lost jobs for being communist or being accused of being communist in the 50's, so it's not a huge step to imagine such a thing.
Scientists who have a religion generally don't put their religious beliefs into their science - it's not tenable. Science can only deal in the material, testable, disprovable. The moment you add nonmaterial to that is the moment you are no longer doing science.
agreed :)

Since: Sep 08

Westcliffe, CO

#644255 Jul 23, 2013
Double Fine wrote:
<quoted text>
The second point, in particular, is very important.
Human beings evolved to this point, because of the social influences their ancestors underwent.
Nurture of infants is a trait most seen in mammals. If you take a look at the very oldest of macro organisms, such as arachnids, insects and fish, you see a lack of parental care. Sure, some spiders do carry around their young on their backs, but when the infant attains size, it is left to fend for itself. Fish, we see the female laying eggs, the male fertilising it and that is the last bit the parents ever will care about.
When you look down the evolutionary path, you see amphibians give very little parental care and then reptiles, the first species exclusively land dwelling. Current reptiles sometimes build elaborate nests. Crocodiles and alligators actually provide attentive care for their babies. We can assume therefore, that early reptiles also displayed these characteristics.
It is from a group of such reptiles, called synopsidae, that our ancient ancestors stemn from, the so called "Proto-mammals". It is relatively safe to assume that that they gave much better parental care than other groups of reptiles. Obviously, two mass extinctions followed, and after the Jurassic, the Synopsidae and Age of Reptoles were over, and the Age of Dinosaurs began. t the end of the reign of dinosaurs, we see small groups of mammals and we know they had to contend for food with other small animals - birds, small therapods, snakes, etc.
But what won the battle for mamms in the end, is the ability to give great parental care to young. Firstly, the parents can keep the young ones from dying by protecting them. Death rate decreases. Also, infants engage in playfighting, so they learn plenty of skills to use in hunting and defending. Therefore, they are better prepared.
I know that you know most of this stuff, but would you agree that any intelligent race out there would have to have evolved from a similar taxonomic class of animals to ours?
Why didn't they just self assemble and develop like the Borg?

You do believe in self assembling after a certain random chance event created the first building block, don't you?

Gee, maybe a sleeping rock with the chance distribution of elements and compounds just came alive after getting zapped by some input of energy that it then trapped within its self, requiring just a little to maintain its flow. Either by tapping into the stream that zapped it, or dissembling other matter. The earth itself has done some of that, using carbon. That carbon then learned how to construct machines using the same principles of redirecting energy using other elements.

What is so holy about carbon? Just a different geometry for energy redirection.

There may be a rock up there eyeballing you for dinner, DF.

“There's a feeling I get...”

Since: Jun 11

...when I look to the West

#644256 Jul 23, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
Why didn't they just self assemble and develop like the Borg?
You do believe in self assembling after a certain random chance event created the first building block, don't you?
Gee, maybe a sleeping rock with the chance distribution of elements and compounds just came alive after getting zapped by some input of energy that it then trapped within its self, requiring just a little to maintain its flow. Either by tapping into the stream that zapped it, or dissembling other matter. The earth itself has done some of that, using carbon. That carbon then learned how to construct machines using the same principles of redirecting energy using other elements.
What is so holy about carbon? Just a different geometry for energy redirection.
There may be a rock up there eyeballing you for dinner, DF.
A magnetic, EM infused rock, perhaps?
Myth Buster

Phoenix, AZ

#644257 Jul 23, 2013
nanoanomaly wrote:
You and your buds here don't know the first thing about decency.
The blind hypocrisy of one of the most retarded and revolting redneck godbots in the history of topix is almost beyond belief.
Myth Buster

Phoenix, AZ

#644258 Jul 23, 2013
Portia the Rossi wrote:
my plethora of proof
A religiously retarded imbecile's personal delusions and willful ignorance of science are proof of religious brainwashing not the mythical deity of their barbaric cult.

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
Has anyone ever heard of the Coudenhoven-Kalerg... 24 min One Planet One Pe... 6
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 1 hr Just Think 603,568
is it wrong i like to wear womens underwear (Nov '12) 1 hr Lace dream 276
Ask me a trivia question (Oct '08) 2 hr hellohelloem 213,278
What Steps we can take to preserve and conserve... 2 hr blueair india 1
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 2 hr Peace_Warrior 613,084
ye olde village pub (Jun '07) 3 hr Ruby88 53,495
gay bottom in gurgaon (May '14) 3 hr cutepie 581
Poll If you're Christain what kind are you? (Oct '07) 5 hr dollarsbill 8,359
Which is the Oldest Indian Language? Sanskrit V... (Jul '08) 5 hr sangili karuppan 7,656
The Christian Atheist debate 5 hr Critical Eye 4,082
More from around the web