I am presuming that a default position of nothing existing would be from the not unreasonable question Where did stuff come from? I know I know old thinking ways and we now accept mass can pop in and out of existence but still.... You know until I see it for myself well..... Yes Dr Scientists Expert Theorists Professor I hear what you say but I don't really understand it so I will go into my nod and smile sweetly mode until I find someone who can explain it better Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Anybody with a better deal? Something with a bit of a explanation meat on the bone Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
^^^ I am not certain what you mean by we but I certainly do not accept that anything pops in & out of existence. <>
Energy seems to be the one constant, everything is in motion. If I were to try explaining phenomena regarding the origin of life and matter--to view it with the eyes of a rationalist--I would point my finger at the source of constant change, the energy that appears everywhere we look.
I applaud your sentiments in principle, but this was posted in the Religion section and seemed to make assertions about religion. It is perhaps my fault for picking that up and challenging the apparent assumptions of the OP. I shall now make a separate post about the two questions asked in the OP.
I've explained what I consider is the "truth" on this issue, together with an argument in support of my contention, viz. what you will find if you conduct the experiment of attending a church service on a Sunday. If you conduct that experiment, you will not find a load of people with the" poop" scared out of them. That is an easily verifiable fact.
^^^ I have explained the truth I have experienced with people in & out of churches & the vast research I have done. How the heck do you assume that I have never been in church??? I do not know what you have experienced & you obviously do not know what I have experienced & learned. Sometimes I wonder what planet you have been living on. Or what wilderness cave. <>
We have strong evidence that there was an epoch in the universe in which there was no life. And now there is. Ergo, it seems practically a fact that life came from non-life. So I don't think that is the question that remains to be answered. What is however unknown, so far, is how life arose from non-life: in other words the mechanisms involved in abiogenesis. On that issue, all we have are some tantalising hypotheses and clues. I think it is one of the most interesting questions in modern science, certainly to somebody like me with a chemistry background, as it involves the development of biochemistry from chemistry. And there is progress on this subject every year, so it's an active field. As for matter coming from non-matter, we do already have a theory for that, so we are in a lot better shape on that issue than we are on abiogenesis. "Pair production" is an established process and we have considerable evidence in support of the big bang hypothesis, according to which matter would have condensed from EM radiation at the very beginning - I think, though I must admit I don't myself understand how the theory of cosmic inflation works.
You don't speak like someone with experience of churchgoers, to my mind. But maybe you live in a more unreasonable country, with more primitive forms of religion, than I do.
And here I am thinking I had hidden it so well I will endeavour to tuck it in deeper Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
That seems to be a subjective and tendentious assertion, of an entirely rhetorical nature. Can you support it?
^^^ You keep saying things I should be saying to you if not for my patience, understanding & tolerance. Believing in, or claiming to believe in, something 1 does not reasonably know to be true is primitive superstition. <>
That is a reasonable view. Though I think everyone does it, to some extent. The things we reasonably know (i.e. have a high degree of confidence in) are usually a lot less that the sum of people's convictions.
