Why I don't think god exists

Discussion in 'Religion Archives' started by Cainxinth, Dec 3, 2001.

  1. Cainxinth Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    67
    Big Bang ->Temperature in the universe cools 100 million trillion trillion degrees and gravity appears -> Temperature in the universe cools to a billion billion billion degrees electrons and quarks are ejected during the expansion of the universe (strong force, and electroweak forces appear -> Antimatter appears -> electroweak force splits into electromagnetic and weak forces -> Temperature in the universe is now a trillion degrees and quarks combine to form protons and neutrons, and antiquarks form antiprotons and antineutrons -> For every 10 billion antielectrons and antiprotons there existed 10 billion and one protons and electrons, matter and antimatter collide causing the emergence of a new particle, the photon -> all antimatter is destroyed and a small quantity of mater remains -> Neutrons and protons begin bonding and creating elemental nuclei helium, lithium, and hydrogen.

    Scientists have placed the timeframe for the above at a tiny fraction over 1 second.

    300,000 years later -> Temperature in the universe is now only 3000 degrees, and the first atoms form when elemental nuclei attract free electrons -> 1 Billion years later, atoms form unthinkably large clouds in the universe that swirl into infant galaxies -> 2 Billion years later, matter within the galaxies coalesce further into distinct stars many with their own solar systems.

    In our original solar system, the sun was surrounded by a disk-shaped cloud of dust and gas after it formed, 4.55 billion years ago. In this cloud, or "solar nebula," innumerable particles of dust condensed out of the gas and orbited the sun in nearly circular orbits. Adjacent particles underwent collisions at relatively low speed, in the same way that high speed race cars moving around a circular track might nudge into each other. The innumerable small particles aggregate into smaller numbers of big bodies, eventually producing a system of a few planets.

    Sources:
    KurweilAI.net (Raymond Kurzweil is a writer, inventor and entrepreneur and a full time professor at MIT).
    The Planetary Science Institute (PSI) (a non-profit research and educational institute with divisions in Arizona and California. Scientists at PSI conduct a wide variety of basic research and educational opportunities in planetary science, astronomy, and astrophysics).

    I’m sure you can see there are plenty of holes in these theories, but if you think these are bad you should have seen what scientists believed 50 years ago, 150 years ago, 1000 years ago. I can assure you their understanding was much less accurate. My point is, science never gets the whole story right away, and even though the description of the origin of the universe that I describe above is incomplete it still has more evidence to back it up than anything before it. And that’s why I believe in it because there is the most empirical evidence in the form of raw scientific data. Science came to these conclusions based on studies done by hard working researchers, teachers, and students and all of it is backed by the scientific method.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Taken Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    599
    1.I propose to you that the "God" as described and referenced by what we know as the Christian church is in fact just a meager man made simulance of what "El" was and in pre-boxed form so as to fit with-in the scope of a narrow human mind.


    2.Now, I state to you that I find great truth and reliability in the scientific theorys you quote.

    Answer me this one very simplified, direct question...Did it require an energy of some form to produce the actions of which you speak?

    I propose to you, that THAT energy was and IS in FACT the sustanance of life and existance itself that we now so INADEQUATLY label GOD.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Cainxinth Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    67
    So you want to know what caused the big bang, eh? If not god then what? Obviously, I couldn’t tell you for sure, but there are plenty of opinions to go around. The one I personally subscribe to is the “Many Worlds Theory” of Quantum theory.

    “According to this interpretation, whenever numerous viable possibilities exist, the world splits into many worlds, one world for each different possibility (in this context, the term "worlds" refers to what most people call "universes"). In each of these worlds, everything is identical, except for that one different choice; from that point on, they develop independently, and no communication is possible between them. In this way, the metaverse branches endlessly. What is "the present" to us, lies in the pasts of an infinite number of different futures. Everything that can happen, does, somewhere.”

    follow this link to experimental support for the Many Worlds Theory

    So my personal belief is that our own universe popped into existence or “big banged” if you will as the result of a previous universe or dimension. When was the first universe and when will be the last? Until science tells me otherwise, I am under the impression that there is no beginning or end…that an infinity of parallel universes has been spawning andinfinity of parallel universes…and so on and so on in a never ending or beginning cycle, and that is the nature of reality, it simply exists. However, its just a theory and I’m not tied to it. It does satisfy me more than using god in the equation ever did though.

    I know this all very radical stuff. Quantum theory, superstring theory, m-theory, and p-branes are the cutting edge of theoretical physics. If you are interested Stephen Hawking’s new book “The Universe in a Nutshell” does a really excellent job of explaining them in lay terms.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    37,370
    tony1:

    <i>The existence of animals exactly proves creation since the Bible says that there are different kinds of animals, and when I look around, I see different kinds of animals.</i>

    Evolution says the same thing.

    <i>Evolution says that I should see just one kind of animal with some differences, and I don't see that.</i>

    One can only laugh at this kind of misunderstanding of the theory of evolution. Unless you mean that all animals are based on DNA, with some differences, in which case you'd be right.


    Taken:

    <i>I would still find it difficult to accept that something so complex and yet so absolutely perfect in its every detail could possibly be a happy accident.</i>

    It is one of the most common misconceptions about evolution that it is a total random or "accidental" process. This idea ignores natural selection completely. Natural selection is not a random process. The environment of every species drives its evolution. The environment includes the physical surroundings, other individuals of the same species, and other species.
     
  8. Taken Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    599
    "So you want to know what caused the big bang, eh? If not god then what? Obviously, I couldn’t tell you for sure, but there are plenty of opinions to go around."

    I'm glad you came to that conclusion along with the rest of the human race. Regardless of the scientific theory there must be an action to elicit the reaction...it is the aforemost action that science and man has yet to be able to lay hold of in the form of a substantial theory or formula...when you or I or science defines acurately and with out falicy that action we have then laid claim to God, which I summize will not happen, atleast not in our life times. But I have seen enough evidence and reason to lay claim to the fact that such a Power does in fact exist regardless of my ability to define it.
     
  9. Cainxinth Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    67
    In your view is this "power/force" conscious?
     
  10. Cainxinth Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    67
    "Every action requires an equal and opposite reaction" is a law of general or Newtonian physics. It applies to the interaction of physical bodies. It doesn't apply to philosophy. Next, The many worlds theory of reality that i described was about a consistent Metaverse of infinite size that exists without time. There was no action that created it simply because it always existed.

    I wouldn't presume that this is what's actually going on, I’ve seen science wrong too many times before. But, this is what I think at the moment is the best supported theory for explaining reality, religion included, and is merely another step on a long journey to the day when our view of reality will be so clear that we will finally see where we fit into the big picture, we will finally understand our place in the universe. We will answer the question that has vexed us since time immemorial.


    Why are we here?
     
    Last edited: Dec 10, 2001
  11. daktaklakpak God is irrelevant! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    710
    If there is only one solar system, and nothing in the night sky, then I might think of it's the work of a mighty being. Too bad there are billions of stars and galaxies, I think by chance alone is enough to have a life bearing planet like Earth.
     
  12. tony1 Jesus is Lord Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,279
    *Originally posted by Elbaz
    All living creatures nowadays have stemmed off of 4 main sea creatures eons ago. Look into it. There is overwhelming proof.
    *

    I'd be satisfied with whelming proof, or even underwhelming proof.
    So far, I've read the fairy tales.

    *Originally posted by Xelios
    What I just explained is reflection.
    *

    Well, you did give a partial description of how you understand it.

    Could you perhaps explain how the wave knows to go in the correct direction to complete the illusion of reflection?

    *Originally posted by Taken
    why would you assume that to believe in God we must dismiss evolution?
    *

    Oh, because God says he created the universe.
    He says he created different kinds of animals, among other things.
    With evolution, there is no such thing as a species, it is all one big amorphous blob of different instances of the original "species."

    *Originally posted by Cainxinth
    Its such a solid assumption in fact that virtually every scientists, scholar, and student worth his salt subscribes to it. Evolution is not fact, its still theory, but I’d be hard pressed to find another theory that is closer to being recognized as a law.
    *

    Try math.

    The human genome contains 3.3 billion base pairs.
    Evolution is claimed to have gone on for 3.8 billion years.

    Divide (sorry, it's not really math, merely arithmetic).
    You get one new base pair added to the genome at the rate of almost one per year.
    What version of evolution explains a rate that fast?

    *Originally posted by James R
    Evolution says the same thing.
    *

    Hardly.
    Evolution says there is one species, with all relatives having a different set of genes.

    *Originally posted by Cainxinth
    We will answer the question that has vexed us since time immemorial.
    *

    It only vexes you.
    We already know.
     
  13. Taken Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    599
    Tony we can not dismiss the fact that Gods creation is truely perfect and amazing in that it does evolve and change. We know it has altered to varying climates and situations and each species continues to do so.

    Just as a shallow example, the tree of knowledge, how do we know for sure what type of mentality Adam and Eve had before they ate. Did it not make an amazing difference in them when they did? It must have, even though it was a sin that they ate, they did eat and therefore evolved in mental capacity. God didn't create a stagnate life, it grows and changes and is capable of surviving in the most remarkable of circumstances. We do and have and will evolve.
     
  14. tony1 Jesus is Lord Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,279
    *Originally posted by Taken
    Tony we can not dismiss the fact that Gods creation is truely perfect and amazing in that it does evolve and change.
    *

    If something is perfect then what would it need to evolve for?

    *We know it has altered to varying climates and situations and each species continues to do so.*

    No one "knows" that evolution works like that.
    Evolutionists imagine it does, and it appears that you do, too.

    *It must have, even though it was a sin that they ate, they did eat and therefore evolved in mental capacity.*

    This is too much.
    I wonder how many evolutionists have failed to include that in their repertoire of evidence for evolution.
    I can see it now.
    The atheist position on evolution is proven by the fact that Adam and Eve ate of the fruit of the tree of knowledge.

    Simplified, the atheists are right because God himself said they were.
    Are you nuts?

    *God didn't create a stagnate life, it grows and changes and is capable of surviving in the most remarkable of circumstances. We do and have and will evolve. *

    I hope you're not including yourself in that "we."
    You're going backwards fast.
    You've actually fallen for the evo line that switches rapidly back and forth between simple change and genes randomly adding base pairs on to themselves at the rate of one new base pair per year.
     
  15. Taken Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    599
    Creation is perfect, perfect in it's form and function, which I do not believe to be stagnate. In this post I must say you sound like a close-minded, narrow sighted, brainwashed Christian. God is far bigger than our thoughts. I have never felt it in my best interest to put limits on what He does, would and can do, because I do not have the ability to comprehend His mind or ways. Open mindedness is not a sin, foolishness, and ignorance are not attributes and I prefer to be open to Gods possibilitys rather than miss out due to my own arrogance.
     
  16. Xerxes asdfghjkl Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,830
    tony1,

    Genes do a lot. Do you think we have a completely different set of genes than a worm? No we dont. Thats not how genes work. They modify their structures in spikes, basically changes in their surroundings. They adapt for certain things. Youd be surprised how rapidly it happens. They can be modified very easily.

    So why dont you look into the whole idea of genes and evolution before you go about criticizing it with A platform of info taken directly from context. Its not that hard to learn the basics. Although with you it seems that things can go in one ear and out the other without even phasing you.
     
  17. Xelios We're setting you adrift idiot Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,447
    tony1,

    No, I cannot explain how the photon wave "knows" which way to go. Doubtless there is a lot of theoretical and mathematical work involved to find the exact direction it would be emitted. If you really want to know I suggest you post your question at http:\\www.madsci.org
     
  18. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    37,370
    tony1:

    <i>Evolution says there is one species, with all relatives having a different set of genes</i>

    The idea of a "species" is a human-applied label. In the case of currently existing living things, a species consists of organisms which can mate with each other to produce fertile offspring. Clearly, since many organisms cannot mate with each other, there is more than one species.

    -------

    Regarding photons: They "know" which way to go because they "try" all paths. Along most of these paths the waves interfere with themselves destructively, so no light is seen along them. On some paths they interfere constructively, and that's where you see the light. It's simple wave mechanics.
     
  19. Xelios We're setting you adrift idiot Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,447
    Ah yes, I remember reading about that a while ago. I never did understand how they interfered though....
     
  20. tony1 Jesus is Lord Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,279
    *Originally posted by Taken
    Creation is perfect, perfect in it's form and function, which I do not believe to be stagnate.
    *

    I sense that behind that statement is the thought that creation just wasn't perfect enough, so it had to evolve because you were going to be here discussing the issue.

    *In this post I must say you sound like a close-minded, narrow sighted, brainwashed Christian.*

    That's because God is far bigger than your thoughts.

    *I have never felt it in my best interest to put limits on what He does, would and can do, because I do not have the ability to comprehend His mind or ways.*

    So the way you do that is by limiting God to evolution?

    *Open mindedness is not a sin, foolishness, and ignorance are not attributes and I prefer to be open to Gods possibilitys rather than miss out due to my own arrogance. *

    Actually, foolishness and ignorance ARE attributes.
    While you sound very open-minded and wise and all that, all you are really doing is saying that one of God's possiblities is change.
    It isn't.

    For I am the LORD, I change not; ...
    (Malachi 3:6, KJV).

    *Originally posted by Elbaz
    Genes do a lot.
    *

    Sure, but that is one more piece of evidence against evolution.

    *Do you think we have a completely different set of genes than a worm? No we dont. Thats not how genes work.*

    But that is merely a piece of evidence for Intelligent Design, not evolution.

    *They modify their structures in spikes, basically changes in their surroundings. They adapt for certain things. Youd be surprised how rapidly it happens. They can be modified very easily.*

    I use spikes and rapid changes as part of business plans.
    I got the idea from the Dilbert comic strip, where an employee presents a business plan with a huge spike in profits at the end of a two year period.
    The obvious question was, what is the justification for the spike?
    The even more obvious answer was that the business plan wouldn't be viable without it.

    *So why dont you look into the whole idea of genes and evolution before you go about criticizing it with A platform of info taken directly from context.*

    Who's been criticizing genes?

    *Its not that hard to learn the basics.*

    That's why I'm wondering why so many scientists seem unaware of them.

    *Originally posted by James R
    The idea of a "species" is a human-applied label.
    *

    Who else would apply it?

    *In the case of currently existing living things, a species consists of organisms which can mate with each other to produce fertile offspring. Clearly, since many organisms cannot mate with each other, there is more than one species.*

    Very clearly.
    Of course, that is one more nail in the coffin of evolution.
    Evolution would predict that multiple species should be able to mate with each other since they are very closely related, as in all in the same lineage.

    *They "know" which way to go because they "try" all paths. Along most of these paths the waves interfere with themselves destructively, so no light is seen along them. On some paths they interfere constructively, and that's where you see the light. It's simple wave mechanics.*

    Sounds great until you have to explain how an emitted photon knows which way to go.
    Your explanation describes reflection of a light wave/particle, i.e. photon.
    Xelios was explaining earlier how the photon which impinges on a surface is absorbed, and a different photon is emitted, but in the correct direction.
    Try explaining that explanation with simple wave mechanics.
     
  21. Cainxinth Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    67
    i know its weird quoting a quote but with Tony i have little choice.

    *Its not that hard to learn the basics.*

    "That's why I'm wondering why so many scientists seem unaware of them."

    Tony, scientists know the basics and then some. You on the other hand know very, very little about biology or any other science for that matter. As you have informed us many times, you think science is wrong about anything that conflicts with what was written by primitive civilizations a few thousand years ago. Which is why I am so impressed with your ability to discuss the subject with such wit and clarity.

    Thank goodness we have people like Tony to keep us grounded in “reality”, otherwise we might have thought that the world was round, or millions of years old, or that if we tried hard enough we could go to the moon. Three cheers for Fundamentalism, and its many great accomplishments in human history.

    P.S. Tony, as you can see I’ve stopped offering even-tempered, scientific justifications to you. Instead I’ll use what I like to call “the Tony1 method” whereas I make broad generalizations while I mock the fools who don’t see things as they so clearly are. Ignoring you didn't work, so perhaps a taste of your own medicine is in order.
     
  22. Taken Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    599
    Gee Tony, thanks for once again takeing creative liscense with my post. See, I could have sworn we were talking about CREATION changeing, not God. You seem to have a great deal of trouble takeing in complete thoughts as opposed to fragmented ideas and non existant statements.
     
  23. tony1 Jesus is Lord Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,279
    *Originally posted by Cainxinth
    scientists know the basics and then some.
    *

    They can't even divide 3.8 billion by 3.3 billion, and understand the result.

    *As you have informed us many times, you think science is wrong about anything that conflicts with what was written by primitive civilizations a few thousand years ago.*

    I see a certain misunderstanding.
    The collection of data by science is fine.
    Granted, some of the data collected by science doesn't appear in the Bible.
    The problem is the religion of science, occasionally written as Science, which persists in coming up with inane conclusions aupposedly based on the collected data.

    *Thank goodness we have people like Tony to keep us grounded in “reality”, otherwise we might have thought that the world was round, or millions of years old, or that if we tried hard enough we could go to the moon.*

    Let's not forget phlogiston.

    *I make broad generalizations while I mock the fools who don’t see things as they so clearly are. Ignoring you didn't work, so perhaps a taste of your own medicine is in order.*

    There's a trick to doing that.
    You have to be right to succeed.
    Use of the word "clearly" should be a warning sign that you are heading out into the middle of a quicksand bog.

    *Originally posted by Taken
    See, I could have sworn we were talking about CREATION changeing, not God.
    *

    We were.
    What caused you to see something different?
     

Share This Page