20,000th Post

Quote: AZDuffman

Somehow, life came from nothing,

Again, you make an assumption and treat
is as fact. You can't just say 'I don't know'
and leave till you do know. You have to
fill in the blank by making something up.

As I said, that's what religion does. It makes
up answers for what it can't explain. That's
why it often ends up with egg on it's face,
conjecture and superstition are easy until
science sticks it's nose in and sets them
straight. Which happens eventually every
single time.

Quote: EvenBob

In religion, we
stand on the shoulders of lazy dreamers,
spinners of tall stories and fairy tales, instead
of doing the real work of finding the
truth. The hard work, the productive work.

Most persons have no clue about the relative and quantum, and how the two theories are in direct opposition. Things that have to be accounted for in every thing from televisions to space missions. They stand on the shoulders of popularist material, and the stuff of message boards and the movies. Do you believe that the average person's life who isn't religious is any more scientific or even logical?

Quote: AZDuffman

Why did no form of life happen on Venus or Mars? Or any other planet? By your logic, it should have, in some form.

Wrong temperature, etc. Physics and chemistry.

Quote: 1MatterToMotion

I think that avatar of EB's is of himself holding his hands over his eyes.

The difference between atheists and
god people is, atheists are willing to
admit ignorance. We can say we don't
know the answer to something and
wait for the correct explanation to come
along.

God people can't do that, they always have
to have a reason for everything, no matter
how stupid or illogical the reason is. Look
at disease. We now know it's often spread by
by germs and viruses. But for eons religion
taught it was spread by devils and demons.
No proof, no evidence, but there it was. And
even when it was discovered to be true, about
germs and viruses, religion had to be dragged
kicking and screaming into accepting it.

Never underestimate the power of ignorance
and superstition, it still lives on inside every
church.

Science can come up with knowledge that can be discovered, studied, refined completely independently by different people who never knew each other or of each others work or even lived in the same century. But it's definitely a process of 1 step forward 2 steps back, or worse.

AFAIK religion hasn't done anything similar except generalities -- with a lot of latitude they claim similarities. But mostly appears to be spread by humans not divines.

Quote: EvenBob

Never underestimate the power of ignorance
and superstition, it still lives on inside every
church.

And everywhere else, the voting booth included.

You know what bugs the smartest persons the most? It's that every thing is so balanced. What hope of ultimately profiting from such a universe?

Where were the scientists when religion was trying fill in the gap? Just as religion can't become a science, nor can science become a religion. It can't examine and explain religion. There has to be a balance of the two. And ignorance has to be relegated to persons of all stripes.

Religion really has a narrow definition, and is only a part of philosophy, in general, which, itself, has fallen to the wayside given all the new and specific sciences. Ridding religion is almost the same as banishing philosophy, which begins to sound a bit absurd. And then the arts next? And the Aryan race.

Quote: AZDuffman

Science has already said life cannot come out of nothing and matter cannot be created. Please come up with some new material.

I don't think science has said that in the way you understand it. Not sure it's worth continuing to discuss my understanding of how this works after you dismissed my previous post without consideration, but maybe it'll be worth a try to somebody.

Life can come out of light. Not sure where the initial energy came from, but the Big Bang may have been a supercompressed mass, at very high temperature. (It is a theory, but one consistent with known physical science.) It exploded, converting the super dense core into energy, in the form of light, heat, and radiation.

From there, mass comes as light and heat cooling enough to form sub-atomic particles. They have recently proven that sub-atomic particles can be created from photons, as a by-product of light particle collision. (Higgs-Boson, among others). They believe that they can prove, with the right equipment, colliding two photons together can create an electron and its opposite, a positron. The mass of these particles is negligible, but there is mass, where photons are light energy..

Gather enough electrons and positrons together, and their mass begins to add up to a proton particle, which holds an electron in its orbit in a delicate balance. This is a hydrogen atom.

All other atoms have at least one neutron, about the size of a proton, but without the electrical charge, theoretically composed of equal numbers of positrons and electrons . The number of protons (and corresponding electrons) in an atom determine what element it is.

Atoms have weak bonds that allow like particles to combine into elements, and unlike atoms to seek stability by combining into molecules. This is where physics and chemistry meet/branch.

So you have atoms and molecules, which make up matter, and there's more energy from hydrogen fusion occurring continuously in the form of the sun, creating helium molecules and giving off light, heat, and radiation. Light, heat, and matter fuse to create ever-more complex molecules and electricity powers the melding of the molecules into amino acids and other essential compounds to allow electrical conduction within a cell structure.

Electrical conduction and ambient temperature also allows the formation of oxygen as an element, and the combination of oxygen, an unstable, flammable gas at room temperature, and hydrogen, another flammable gas at room temperature, to combine into a stable liquid, water, at room temperature. Water is the medium which first hosts the simplest aerobic and anaerobic cells. This is where chemistry, physics, and biology meet (or branch, if you think of it that way).

The gravitational pull of the molten mass held the particles close as they formed, and the oceans and an atmosphere began to form from the lightest of them, in changing states from gaseous to liquid to solid (ice) as they were exposed to the extreme coldness of space. The sun is just the right relative distance from the Earth to provide for the formation and retention of water in all its forms. So the oceans formed over the molten core and provided a cooling effect.

The land started as non-water molecules, mostly elements formed by sub-atomic particles that formed into heavier elements such as iron, aluminum, non-metals that cooled enough to reach a solid state, and moved to the surface by gravitational shifts as the molten (hot) mass of the Earth continued to cool unevenly while traveling away from the universe center. Those land masses formed into plates that still float upon the molten hot core of the earth and move, pushing up mountains and changing shorelines.

The water of the oceans, in its evaporated state, began to fall on the land, forming ice, lakes, and mixing with its elements to form other molecules as soil. Water became the basis for sustainment of all the life that followed, as well as the universal solvent that allows solids to be suspended in it and sometimes combined into complex molecules which are then ingestible by plants and animals.

There are uncounted numbers of single-cell organisms in the world, most in the ocean. Virtually all of them started there (I think they ALL did, but I don't KNOW that). Some are still in their unchanged state billions of years later. But many others were washed upon the shore, and some of them were able to evolve and/or mutate into something that could survive on land. Their deaths of many generations helped change the soil from sterility to containing acids and other compounds that more complex organisms would use for nutrients.

Many other cells (both in the water and on land) changed enough to find some advantage in symbiotic relationships with closely related cells, and there began to be multi-celled organisms. At a certain point of complexity, mutation (not ignoring the continual radiation from the sun as a possible factor), and evolution, cells started to have different functions and become codependent for a more developed organism.

Some of those related cells developed into what we call plants, using the sun, its heat and light, to grow and reproduce. Some became simple shellfish, drawing calcium and carbon from the water and trace elements in the water. Each change took many generations, with many non-survival useful adaptations dying out, and many survival-superior changes being reinforced in following generations.

And so on, with ever more complex organisms developing, not universally, but through selection, which left behind the simpler organism in its native state if conditions allowed it to thrive.

Eventually, cell specialization required sensate organs, then complexity required a nervous system to process unconscious/reflex sensate input and reaction, then consciousness somehow developed. I don't know where that line is drawn. Humans, certainly. Most if not all mammals, yes. Birds, maybe. Fish, probably. Plants, probably not, except those raised by RS. Algae and paramecium, definitely not.

Life is still developing and evolving, but it moves too slowly to detect in real time. A human lifetime is a blink compared to 13.7 billion years, the latest estimate of time since the Big Bang. But evidence of the progression of complexity is everywhere, from fossils and sedimentary rock, to DNA molecular structure that shows common origins among species.

The big bang theory hypothesizes that about eighteen billion years ago, a very small yet very dense thing sprang into being and rapidly expanded.

My question: where did it come from, and what / where was it before the big bang?

How can something dense enough to become the universe just spring into being and keep expanding?

I'm no scientist, but this one's a puzzler.

Quote: MrV

How can something dense enough to become the universe just spring into being and keep expanding?

You're confusing terms here. You're
talking about our current existence
of billions of galaxies, not the universe.
The universe is where the galaxies
exist, the galaxies are not the universe.

It's interesting that thousands of years
ago they wrote in the Upanishads that
the world (galaxies) has begun and
ended countless times and will continue
to do so forever. If you really contemplate
this, it changes your whole outlook on
what life is about. It slows you down, it
gives you perspective on the transient
nature of everything.

God religions do the opposite. They're
all about the NOW, better hurry, better
behave, this is all there is, better obey
or pay the consequences. God has an
agenda, given to him by men.

Quote: MrV

The big bang theory hypothesizes that about eighteen billion years ago, a very small yet very dense thing sprang into being and rapidly expanded.

My question: where did it come from, and what / where was it before the big bang?

How can something dense enough to become the universe just spring into being and keep expanding?

I'm no scientist, but this one's a puzzler.

Some imaginary friend whose image was similar to mine made it out of some playdough that he had to hand, god only knows where he and the playdough came from.

Quote: MrV

The big bang theory hypothesizes that about eighteen billion years ago, a very small yet very dense thing sprang into being and rapidly expanded.

My question: where did it come from, and what / where was it before the big bang?

How can something dense enough to become the universe just spring into being and keep expanding?

I'm no scientist, but this one's a puzzler.

This is better explained in reverse, but, in any event, it is not knowable what a singularity or point is, let alone where it all starts and ends. Though there are working models of such. The math breaks down with every thing else. But, the space-time is subject to the same singularity. It goes, too, ie, the universe. Cosmologists work their way further back in time to the big bang. I liken this to paper money, which is backed by gold. Somewhere there is a real singularity, but we can never interact with it. Perhaps, at some time and place, and given a model to overcome the "big freeze" on the other end of the expansion, the next big crunch will, as imperfectly, "disappear" to "reappear" with a uniquely different energy. To start further back, perhaps with something even more dense, to make a longer run on the end. (But the middle is always the same, no matter the bang. No matter how far we advance and recede, there is the "same" turning point either way.)

At the rate this thread is going, EB will be up to 30k posts by February.

Quote: Ibeatyouraces

At the rate this thread is going, EB will be up to 30k posts by February.

It's a pointless discussion. God cannot
be proved or disproved. Believers believe
because they want to, there is no other
reason. It's not like gravity, where it effects
you if you believe in it or not. God is a
choice, like regular or lite beer. Nothing
more.

Atheists don't have the time or inclination
to indulge in such fantasies as gods, life
is too short to waste it playing by rules
that somebody invented to run your life
for you. We'll run our own lives, thanks
anyway..

Quote: EvenBob

It's a pointless discussion. God cannot
be proved or disproved. Believers believe
because they want to, there is no other
reason. It's not like gravity, where it effects
you if you believe in it or not. God is a
choice, like regular or lite beer. Nothing
more.

Atheists don't have the time or inclination
to indulge in such fantasies as gods, life
is too short to waste it playing by rules
that somebody invented to run your life
for you. We'll run our own lives, thanks
anyway..

Yet you've spent how much time trying to disprove God?

Quote: RS

much time trying to disprove God?

Exactly, that's why it's pointless. You
can't disprove a negative, which god
is because there is zero proof of his
existence. Unicorns are the same,
can't disprove them either. Another
negative.

Unicorns, god, and Santa, another holy
trinity. And makes about as much sense.

You've already had this fight before. Why are you doing it again? Is there really more that needs to be said?

Quote: FinsRule

You've already had this fight before.

This 'fight' goes on every day all
over the world. Atheists are
discriminated against just for
believing in nothing, like that
makes us a threat to religion.
That's how weak and rickety
organized religion is, they're
afraid of everything they can't
directly control.

Quote: FinsRule

You've already had this fight before. Why are you doing it again? Is there really more that needs to be said?

God will have the final answer. For a great clue, check out the Dead Sea Scrolls, specifically the Book of Isaiah!

Quote: EvenBob

Atheists are
discriminated against just for
believing in nothing, like that
makes us a threat to religion.

If it's nothing, then you have nothing to worry about. Maybe, it's not nothing then?

"It's not enough to succeed, your friends and God must fail." EB (Misquoted for fun.)

Quote: 1MatterToMotion

If it's nothing, then you have nothing to worry about.

'They' are the ones that're worried, not me.
Try running for office as an atheist, you'll
get no votes. You have to pretend you're
a superstitious believer in the supernatural
(virgin births, walking on water, rising from
the dead) to get elected in this country.
If you say you don't believe any of that
supernatural crap, nobody will trust you.
It's quite remarkable.

So Clinton and Bush and Obama and
Trump pretend they're religious and
people believe them because they want
it to be true.

Clearly no one in this thread had been touched by His Noodly Appendage.

Quote: miplet

Clearly no one in this thread had been touched by His Noodly Appendage.

Good grief!

God is gay?

Quote: EvenBob

'They' are the ones that're worried, not me.
Try running for office as an atheist, you'll
get no votes. You have to pretend you're
a superstitious believer in the supernatural
(virgin births, walking on water, rising from
the dead) to get elected in this country.
If you say you don't believe any of that
supernatural crap, nobody will trust you.
It's quite remarkable.

So Clinton and Bush and Obama and
Trump pretend they're religious and
people believe them because they want
it to be true.

Well, then that's not really religion. Some people think that love isn't love unless we love God first. But, love is the voice of God wherever it happens. Love of God per se is something else.

There is a difference between:

1. There is no evidence for God.
2. There is evidence God doesn't exist.
3. God doesn't exist.

It's obvious there is no evidence that's irrefutable. To me it's also apparent, if there were a God, he would be in charge of himself being provable. If God wanted privacy and control, he would leave either up to him, otherwise God couldn't be God, if man could prove he existed. Wouldn't proof of God be a weakness by definition?

Maybe it makes a bit more sense to speak of some form of "unifying force" instead of a "god?"

I reject the notion of some form of super-sentient being seeing, judging and punishing we mere mortals.

Quote: onenickelmiracle

Wouldn't proof of God be a weakness by definition?

That's the game religionists play, god is
hiding on purpose, he wants your faith
in him to be blind. Silliness personified..

The world is a much more mysterious and
powerful place without a god than with
one. God is the scapegoat for everything.
Without a scapegoat to blame everything
on, we're pretty much alone.

Quote: EvenBob

That's the game religionists play, god is
hiding on purpose, he wants your faith
in him to be blind. Silliness personified..

The world is a much more mysterious and
powerful place without a god than with
one. God is the scapegoat for everything.
Without a scapegoat to blame everything
on, we're pretty much alone.

It's common sense. You are saying confidently there isn't a God when you cannot be sure. You can only be sure there is no evidence and can only be sure there isn't a way to prove there is a God.

If you had the power to be able to prove scientifically there was a God, it wouldn't and couldn't be God. The world wouldn't be the same if God was directly interactive. Would you even ever get off the couch? God change the channel, God invent and make an iPhone please, God heal my cancer and get me a pack of smokes, God do this, God answer this. You think that's the kind of world you would create if you're God?

I'll challenge you to write a story about a world with a God everyone knows for a fact exists, and that story would have plot holes no matter what and stupid. Tell me how God would exist, how people would act in this world.

I used to have to hide from the Jehovah's Witnesses. Now I have to hide from the Atheists pushing their beliefs. This is how you know things are getting worse.

Quote: onenickelmiracle

It's common sense. You are saying confidently there isn't a God when you cannot be sure.

As sure as I am about Santa and
the Easter Bunny and Zeus. Is that
sure enough?

Quote:

You can only be sure there is no evidence and can only be sure there isn't a way to prove there is a God.

Now you're using Buddha logic. The old koen
says 'If you meet the Buddha on the road, kill
him,' This means you can't really meet god,
if you think you have, kill him, he can't be the
real god. A real god in unproveable, unknowable.

“The Tao that can be named is not the eternal Tao.”

Hey, I thought god revealed himself through Jesus, and that people witnessed god performing miracles through his only begotten son?

God was all over the place a few thousand years ago, but he's avoided us since then.

Weird, eh?

All of these posts sure have me convinced EvenBob is not 'worried'....

Quote: EvenBob

'They' are the ones that're worried, not me.

Quote: EvenBob

As sure as I am about Santa and
the Easter Bunny and Zeus. Is that
sure enough?





Now you're using Buddha logic. The old koen
says 'If you meet the Buddha on the road, kill
him,' This means you can't really meet god,
if you think you have, kill him, he can't be the
real god. A real god in unproveable, unknowable.

“The Tao that can be named is not the eternal Tao.”

Take the challenge. Explain to me how God could exist and everyone knows it. How does that universe work?

Quote: MrV

God was all over the place a few thousand years ago, but he's avoided us since then.
Weird, eh?

Sasquatch and Bigfoot were all over the
news for years in the 80's. What happened
to them, where did they go. Bigfoot, Jesus,
Sasquatch, just urban legends that go in
and out of fashion. Not weird at all.

From https://www.gotquestions.org/fool-heart-no-God.html

Question: "What does the Bible mean when it says, “The fool says in his heart, ‘There is no God’”?"

Answer: Both Psalm 14:1 and Psalm 53:1 read, “The fool says in his heart, ‘There is no God.’” Some take these verses to mean that atheists are stupid, i.e., lacking intelligence. However, that is not the only meaning of the Hebrew word translated “fool.” In this text, the Hebrew word is nabal, which often refers to an impious person who has no perception of ethical or religious truth. The meaning of the text is not “unintelligent people do not believe in God.” Rather, the meaning of the text is “sinful people do not believe in God.” In other words, it is a wicked thing to deny God, and a denial of God is often accompanied by a wicked lifestyle. The verse goes on to list some other characteristics of the irreligious: “They are corrupt; their deeds are vile; / there is no one who does good.” Psalm 14 is a study on the universal depravity of mankind.

Many atheists are very intelligent. It is not intelligence, or a lack thereof, that leads a person to reject belief in God. It is a lack of righteousness that leads a person to reject belief in God. Many people do not object to the idea of a Creator, as long as that Creator minds His own business and leaves them alone. What people reject is the idea of a Creator who demands morality from His creation. Rather than struggle against a guilty conscience, some people reject the idea of God altogether. Psalm 14:1 calls this type of person a “fool.”

Psalm 14:1 says that denying God’s existence is commonly based on a desire to lead a wicked life. Several prominent atheists have admitted the truth of this. Some, such as author Aldous Huxley, have openly admitted that a desire to avoid moral restraints was a motivation for their disbelief:

So the book of god about god says those that don't
believe are wicked, vile & corrupt? sounds like manipulative scare
tactic crap to me. Can you pull any passages that reference
anything about believers being vile, wicked & corrupt?
Catholic priests come to mind, oh and the guys with
the big church's on tv, you know the ones selling miracles.

Here is a question, if an atheist decided he was going
to believe in god which one should he choose?

Quote: rainman

So the book of god about god says those that don't
believe are wicked, vile & corrupt? sounds like manipulative scare
tactic crap to me.

Well, yeah, that's the point. If you
don't believe willingly they would
make you believe by violence.

Forced conversion by the Church
against Jews went on for centuries.
If they came back to your town and
you had reverted to your old Jewish
ways, they would torture you and
confiscate all your property for the
Vatican. It was called the Inquisition,
it went on for hundreds of years.

Gods 'love' on full display.

The bible is a book of fiction. Just like the Harry Potter books.

Quote: MrV

God was all over the place a few thousand years ago, but he's avoided us since then.

Weird, eh?

Actually, this particular God avoided us for a lot longer before he sent someone, a man, in his place.

Quote: rainman

So the book of god about god says those that don't
believe are wicked, vile & corrupt? sounds like manipulative scare
tactic crap to me. Can you pull any passages that reference
anything about believers being vile, wicked & corrupt?
Catholic priests come to mind, oh and the guys with
the big church's on tv, you know the ones selling miracles.

Here is a question, if an atheist decided he was going
to believe in god which one should he choose?

Yes, plenty of references about us being what you say.
Obviously you need to do some research.
I would say believe where the evidence leads.

Quote: 1MatterToMotion

Actually, this particular God avoided us for a lot longer before he sent someone, a man, in his place.

Uh, no, that's not quite the way it's laid out in the Old Testament.

The claims of god manifiesting himself and interacting with mankind predate the coming of Jesus.

Adam and Eve, Noah, Moses etc.; you know, back when god was doing it "old school."

Quote: Ibeatyouraces

The bible is a book of fiction. Just like the Harry Potter books.

The Book of Isaiah is a blueprint of the Life of Christ. It was written 600 years prior. It was preserved, with other writings, in clay pots, by The Essenes, a jewish sect. The Scrolls were discovered in 1948. For those who opine that The Bible has been rewritten or changed, the Scrolls are the scientific proof that the Word of God was not touched and rewritten over the last 2600 years. Very careful work by Jewish Scribes, over thousands of years have made sure that nothing has been changed.

We can look back and feel superior at the ways of the past, but how many of us are hundreds of years ahead of now. You live in the times you live in, you have to accept them for the most part, and be lucky if you're just days or years ahead of everyone else.

Quote: DeMango

Very careful work by Jewish Scribes, over thousands of years have made sure that nothing has been changed.

Changed into what. It could hardly get
any more convoluted and full of fairy
tales and stupid rules and contradictions
than it already is. They should have
changed it, they couldn't have made
it any worse. Anything would have been
an improvement.

Quote: EvenBob

Changed into what. It could hardly get
any more convoluted and full of fairy
tales and stupid rules and contradictions
than it already is. They should have
changed it, they couldn't have made
it any worse. Anything would have been
an improvement.

I have a feeling you don't
even know what you're arguing
about or else you wouldn't write
such stupid things. (You aren't
stupid, but what you write is
stupid.) Do you read your post
before you hit the 'POST' button?

Quote: MrV

Uh, no, that's not quite the way it's laid out in the Old Testament.

The claims of god manifiesting himself and interacting with mankind predate the coming of Jesus.

Adam and Eve, Noah, Moses etc.; you know, back when god was doing it "old school."

Don't forget the school of appendages. God didn't go in half-cocked with a pack of cigarettes.

Quote: 1MatterToMotion

Don't forget the school of appendages. God didn't go in half-cocked with a pack of cigarettes.

I don't get the reference.

Quote: RS

I have a feeling you don't
even know what you're arguing
about

You mean I'm wrong about the
OT being full of stupid laws
and contradictions? Really?
Do you really want to go down
that road?

Quote: gamerfreak

Sorry if you don't want to talk about it, but was there something specific that you saw/felt that made you believe something was exiting the body?

I've seen a number of people die, all strangers, and personally I've never had that feeling.

This is where the conservation of matter versus space-time comes into play. Whatever is left of us remains entombed in the universe. Where else is it going to go? Hence, the soul/spirit. It's not so much that it exists as much as it can't not exist.

Quote: EvenBob

You mean I'm wrong about the
OT being full of stupid laws
and contradictions? Really?
Do you really want to go down
that road?

I'm saying you don't know wha
t you're talking about because i
nstead of actually responding t
o what DeMango wrote, you w
ent down some rabbit trail on
a subject that wasn't even rela
ted. Sad part is, I don't think y
ou can even see the problem.

Quote: onenickelmiracle

I don't get the reference.

God was around before the Bible.