<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'> Why do sexual animals get sexual urges? Why do these sexual urges naturally translate into intercourse which eventually leads to reproduction? There HAS to be an INTELLIGENCE behind all of that. It had to be SOMEONE'S idea and design. HAD TO BE!!! [/b][/quote] hey, i never looked at it like that... You're RIGHT!!!!! there must be an intelligence behind life!!! i for one am converted
The existence of God is a subject that has occupied schools of philosophy and theology for thousands of years. Most of the time, these debates have revolved around all kinds of assumptions and definitions. Philosophers will spend a lifetime arguing about the meaning of a word and never really get there. One is reminded of the college student who was asked how his philosophy class was going. He replied that they had not done much because when the teacher tried to call roll, the kids kept arguing about whether they existed or not. Most of us who live and work in the real world do not concern ourselves with such activities. We realize that such discussions may have value and interest in the academic world, but the stress and pressure of day-to-day life forces us to deal with a very pragmatic way of making decisions. If I ask you to prove to me that you have $2.00, you would show it to me. Even in more abstract things we use common sense and practical reasoning. If I ask you whether a certain person is honest or not, you do not flood the air with dissertations on the relative nature of honesty; you would give me evidence one way or the other. The techniques of much of the philosophical arguments that go on would eliminate most of engineering and technology if they were applied in those fields. The purpose of this brief study is to offer a logical, practical, pragmatic proof of the existence of God from a purely scientific perspective. To do this, we are assuming that we exist, that there is reality, and that the matter of which we are made is real. If you do not believe that you exist, you have bigger problems than this study will entail and you will have to look elsewhere. THE BEGINNING If we do exist, there are only two possible explanations as to how our existence came to be. Either we had a beginning or we did not have a beginning. The Bible says, "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth" (Genesis 1 :1). The atheist has always maintained that there was no beginning. The idea is that matter has always existed in the form of either matter or energy; and all that has happened is that matter has been changed from form to form, but it has always been. The Humanist Manifesto says, "Matter is self-existing and not created," and that is a concise statement of the atheist's belief. The way we decide whether the atheist is correct or not is to see what science has discovered about this question. The picture below on the left represents our part of the cosmos. Each of the disk shaped objects is a galaxy like our Milky Way. All of these galaxies are moving relative to each other. Their movement has a very distinct pattern which causes the distance between the galaxies to get greater with every passing day. If we had three galaxies located at positions A, B. and C in the second diagram below, and if they are located as shown, tomorrow they will be further apart. The triangle they form will be bigger. The day after tomorrow the triangle will be bigger yet. We live in an expanding universe that gets bigger and bigger and bigger with every passing day. Now let us suppose that we made time run backwards! If we are located at a certain distance today, then yesterday we were closer together. The day before that, we were still closer. Ultimately, where must all the galaxies have been? At a point! At the beginning! At what scientists call a singularity! A second proof is seen in the energy sources that fuel the cosmos. The picture to the right is a picture of the sun. Like all stars, the sun generates its energy by a nuclear process known as thermonuclear fusion. Every second that passes, the sun compresses 564 million tons of hydrogen into 560 million tons of helium with 4 million tons of matter released as energy. In spite of that tremendous consumption of fuel, the sun has only used up 2% of the hydrogen it had the day it came into existence. This incredible furnace is not a process confined to the sun. Every star in the sky generates its energy in the same way. Throughout the cosmos there are 25 quintillion stars, each converting hydrogen into helium, thereby reducing the total amount of hydrogen in the cosmos. Just think about it! If everywhere in the cosmos hydrogen is being consumed and if the process has been going on forever, how much hydrogen should be left? Suppose I attempt to drive my automobile without putting any more gas (fuel) into it. As I drive and drive, what is eventually going to happen? I am going to run out of gas I If the cosmos has been here forever, we would have run out of hydrogen long ago! The fact is, however, that the sun still has 98% of its original hydrogen. The fact is that hydrogen is the most abundant material in the universe! Everywhere we look in space we can see the hydrogen 21 cm line in the spectrum_a piece of light only given off by hydrogen. This could not be unless we had a beginning! A third scientific proof that the atheist is wrong is seen in the second law of thermodynamics. In any closed system, things tend to become disordered. If an automobile is driven for years and years without repair, for example, it will become so disordered that it would not run any more. Getting old is simple conformity to the second law of thermodynamics. In space, things also get old. Astronomers refer to the aging process as heat death. If the cosmos is "everything that ever was or is or ever will be," as Dr. Carl Sagan is so fond of saying, nothing could be added to it to improve its order or repair it. Even a universe that expands and collapses and expands again forever would die because it would lose light and heat each time it expanded and rebounded. The atheist's assertion that matter/energy is eternal is scientifically wrong. The biblical assertion that there was a beginning is scientifically correct. THE CAUSE If we know the creation has a beginning, we are faced with another logical question_was the creation caused or was it not caused? The Bible states, "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." Not only does the Bible maintain that there was a cause_a creation_but it also tells us what the cause was. It was God. The atheist tells us that "matter is self-existing and not created." If matter had a beginning and yet was uncaused, one must logically maintain that something would have had to come into existence out of nothing. From empty space with no force, no matter, no energy, and no intelligence, matter would have to become existent. Even if this could happen by some strange new process unknown to science today, there is a logical problem. In order for matter to come out of nothing, all of our scientific laws dealing with the conservation of matter/energy would have to be wrong, invalidating all of chemistry. All of our laws of conservation of angular momentum would have to be wrong, invalidating all of physics. All of our laws of conservation of electric charge would have to be wrong, invalidating all of electronics and demanding that your TV set not work!! Your television set may not work, but that is not the reason! In order to believe matter is uncaused, one has to discard known laws and principles of science. No reasonable person is going to do this simply to maintain a personal atheistic position. The atheist's assertion that matter is eternal is wrong. The atheist's assertion that the universe is uncaused and selfexisting is also incorrect The Bible's assertion that there was a beginning which was caused is supported strongly by the available scientific evidence. THE DESIGN If we know that the creation had a beginning and we know that the beginning was caused, there is one last question for us to answer--what was the cause? The Bible tells us that God was the cause. We are further told that the God who did the causing did so with planning and reason and logic. Romans 1:20 tells us that we can know God is "through the things he has made." The atheist, on the other hand, will try to convince us that we are the product of chance. Julian Huxley once said: We are as much a product of blind forces as is the falling of a stone to earth or the ebb and flow of the tides. We have just happened, and man was made flesh by a long series of singularly beneficial accidents. The subject of design has been one that has been explored in many different ways. For most of us, simply looking at our newborn child is enough to rule out chance. Modern-day scientists like Paul Davies and Frederick Hoyle and others are raising elaborate objections to the use of chance in explaining natural phenomena. A principle of modern science has emerged in the 1980s called "the anthropic principle." The basic thrust of the anthropic principle is that chance is simply not a valid mechanism to explain the atom or life. If chance is not valid, we are constrained to reject Huxley's claim and to realize that we are the product of an intelligent God.
Sadly there is still this painful misconception that the issue of the genesis of mankind and the world boils down to just spiritulality versus science. Why are folks' mind so limited to just sprituality and science? The jury is still out on which of the 2 offers the most ridiculous argument on The Begining.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'> Sadly there is still this painful misconception that the issue of the genesis of mankind and the world boils down to just spiritulality versus science. Why are folks' mind so limited to just sprituality and science? The jury is still out on which of the 2 offers the most ridiculous argument on The Begining. [/b][/quote] My own view of creation is that some cosmic bull took a shit... and here we are. :drink:
hi, sorry 2 bring this up again but i have a point for sly. the new earth theory is a completly rediculous. by examining the Earths rocks, scientists can prove that the earth is billions of years old in fact. The oldest rock found was 4.5 billion years old, but there were older ones, they were just destroyed by plate tectonics (which means volcanoes/earthquakes/mountain folding etc) how do we do this? by something called radiometric dating. What it is, is a process of measuring the radioactive decay in the radioactive isotopes of trace elements that are naturally in all rocks. we can measure their age. also the universe is estimated at 15 billion years old (give or take 3 billion i think), and our solar system is estimated at 4.5 billion or thereabouts. Rocks on meteorites from our solar system and rocks brought back from the moon all date back to 4.5 billion years ago. This consistency in determining the age of the rocks leaves no real room for any other theories. The moon has not been disturbed by plate tectonics either, so this suggests that 4.5 billion for the solar system is fairly accurate. scientists laugh at the new earth theory and rightfuly so. it's really stupid. To suggest the earth is only 20,000 years old...... is just rediculous. by the way, I hate it whe people say "He/Shes about as interesting as a rock". rocks are damn interesting!!! As for life, that is said to have come in the form of miroorganisms on a meteorite billions of years ago. or maybe not a metearite... maybe god! haha. Where did these micro orgaism come from? It's not clear. But according to science micro-organisms were on the earth. we have fossills. After that, given the conditions on earth, evolution took over. symbiosis occured. one micro organism came into contact with another. they each produced something the other could benefit from so they aggregated together. this isnt the only reason. after you have microorganisms and the raw materials, it's prettyt easy for life to evolve. its just a mater of where did they come from. after a few of them have aggregated together, a mutation could occur in the base strand of the dna which could give rise to an evolutionary advantage. if you read up about molecular taxonomy and the 16srrna molecule you'll get a better understanding. that molecule is an evolutionary chronometer. it's present in the ribosome but picks up mutations very slowly. that how we classify microorganisms, by looks for signiture sequences in their 16srrna molecules. i've said the basics. im not saying that god didnt put microbes on earth, im not saying he did. im just saying what happened, whats universally accepted. we all evolved from bacteria my friends. we do not own the earth, they do. they've been here far longer than us. people dont realise how remarkable they are. for example, some bacteria can form an endospore when consitions are not suitable (low nutrient level, etc). they just stop metabolising and the tough coat of the spore protects them from the outside. but get this, spored from the eygption tombs have been fround and put in the right conditions and have grown!!! in fact there is great controversy between scientists about this. some believe that there is evidence that the bacteria can in fact start metabolising again 250 million years after the endospore has been produced... amazing. but i have got way off the point. i know some of youu sleeping by now but i find this v. interesting obviously. i await your reply sly. i would suggest you read a science book on this kind of stuff. Hawkings has a book out about this stuff for people with little or no understading of physics. can't remember the name of it now..
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'> hi, sorry 2 bring this up again but i have a point for sly. the new earth theory is a completly rediculous. by examining the Earths rocks, scientists can prove that the earth is billions of years old in fact. The oldest rock found was 4.5 billion years old, but there were older ones, they were just destroyed by plate tectonics (which means volcanoes/earthquakes/mountain folding etc) how do we do this? by something called radiometric dating. What it is, is a process of measuring the radioactive decay in the radioactive isotopes of trace elements that are naturally in all rocks. we can measure their age. also the universe is estimated at 15 billion years old (give or take 3 billion i think), and our solar system is estimated at 4.5 billion or thereabouts. Rocks on meteorites from our solar system and rocks brought back from the moon all date back to 4.5 billion years ago. This consistency in determining the age of the rocks leaves no real room for any other theories. The moon has not been disturbed by plate tectonics either, so this suggests that 4.5 billion for the solar system is fairly accurate. scientists laugh at the new earth theory and rightfuly so. it's really stupid. To suggest the earth is only 20,000 years old...... is just rediculous. by the way, I hate it whe people say "He/Shes about as interesting as a rock". rocks are damn interesting!!! As for life, that is said to have come in the form of miroorganisms on a meteorite billions of years ago. or maybe not a metearite... maybe god! haha. Where did these micro orgaism come from? It's not clear. But according to science micro-organisms were on the earth. we have fossills. After that, given the conditions on earth, evolution took over. symbiosis occured. one micro organism came into contact with another. they each produced something the other could benefit from so they aggregated together. this isnt the only reason. after you have microorganisms and the raw materials, it's prettyt easy for life to evolve. its just a mater of where did they come from. after a few of them have aggregated together, a mutation could occur in the base strand of the dna which could give rise to an evolutionary advantage. if you read up about molecular taxonomy and the 16srrna molecule you'll get a better understanding. that molecule is an evolutionary chronometer. it's present in the ribosome but picks up mutations very slowly. that how we classify microorganisms, by looks for signiture sequences in their 16srrna molecules. i've said the basics. im not saying that god didnt put microbes on earth, im not saying he did. im just saying what happened, whats universally accepted. we all evolved from bacteria my friends. we do not own the earth, they do. they've been here far longer than us. people dont realise how remarkable they are. for example, some bacteria can form an endospore when consitions are not suitable (low nutrient level, etc). they just stop metabolising and the tough coat of the spore protects them from the outside. but get this, spored from the eygption tombs have been fround and put in the right conditions and have grown!!! in fact there is great controversy between scientists about this. some believe that there is evidence that the bacteria can in fact start metabolising again 250 million years after the endospore has been produced... amazing. but i have got way off the point. i know some of youu sleeping by now but i find this v. interesting obviously. i await your reply sly. i would suggest you read a science book on this kind of stuff. Hawkings has a book out about this stuff for people with little or no understading of physics. can't remember the name of it now.. [/b][/quote] *cough* BULLSHIT! *cough*
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'> hi, sorry 2 bring this up again but i have a point for sly. the new earth theory is a completly rediculous. by examining the Earths rocks, scientists can prove that the earth is billions of years old in fact. The oldest rock found was 4.5 billion years old, but there were older ones, they were just destroyed by plate tectonics (which means volcanoes/earthquakes/mountain folding etc) how do we do this? by something called radiometric dating. What it is, is a process of measuring the radioactive decay in the radioactive isotopes of trace elements that are naturally in all rocks. we can measure their age. also the universe is estimated at 15 billion years old (give or take 3 billion i think), and our solar system is estimated at 4.5 billion or thereabouts. Rocks on meteorites from our solar system and rocks brought back from the moon all date back to 4.5 billion years ago. This consistency in determining the age of the rocks leaves no real room for any other theories. The moon has not been disturbed by plate tectonics either, so this suggests that 4.5 billion for the solar system is fairly accurate. scientists laugh at the new earth theory and rightfuly so. it's really stupid. To suggest the earth is only 20,000 years old...... is just rediculous. by the way, I hate it whe people say "He/Shes about as interesting as a rock". rocks are damn interesting!!! As for life, that is said to have come in the form of miroorganisms on a meteorite billions of years ago. or maybe not a metearite... maybe god! haha. Where did these micro orgaism come from? It's not clear. But according to science micro-organisms were on the earth. we have fossills. After that, given the conditions on earth, evolution took over. symbiosis occured. one micro organism came into contact with another. they each produced something the other could benefit from so they aggregated together. this isnt the only reason. after you have microorganisms and the raw materials, it's prettyt easy for life to evolve. its just a mater of where did they come from. after a few of them have aggregated together, a mutation could occur in the base strand of the dna which could give rise to an evolutionary advantage. if you read up about molecular taxonomy and the 16srrna molecule you'll get a better understanding. that molecule is an evolutionary chronometer. it's present in the ribosome but picks up mutations very slowly. that how we classify microorganisms, by looks for signiture sequences in their 16srrna molecules. i've said the basics. im not saying that god didnt put microbes on earth, im not saying he did. im just saying what happened, whats universally accepted. we all evolved from bacteria my friends. we do not own the earth, they do. they've been here far longer than us. people dont realise how remarkable they are. for example, some bacteria can form an endospore when consitions are not suitable (low nutrient level, etc). they just stop metabolising and the tough coat of the spore protects them from the outside. but get this, spored from the eygption tombs have been fround and put in the right conditions and have grown!!! in fact there is great controversy between scientists about this. some believe that there is evidence that the bacteria can in fact start metabolising again 250 million years after the endospore has been produced... amazing. but i have got way off the point. i know some of youu sleeping by now but i find this v. interesting obviously. i await your reply sly. i would suggest you read a science book on this kind of stuff. Hawkings has a book out about this stuff for people with little or no understading of physics. can't remember the name of it now.. [/b][/quote] That was pretty damn interesting man. I want to hear more from you in the future dude. Welcome to the forum.
dude, dont you know radiometric dating is fallible, just ask sly hell tell ya dont waste your breathe, i posted a link about all of it and sly blatantly ducked/ignored it
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'> we all evolved from bacteria my friends. we do not own the earth, they do. they've been here far longer than us. people dont realise how remarkable they are. for example, some bacteria can form an endospore when consitions are not suitable (low nutrient level, etc). they just stop metabolising and the tough coat of the spore protects them from the outside. but get this, spored from the eygption tombs have been fround and put in the right conditions and have grown!!! in fact there is great controversy between scientists about this. some believe that there is evidence that the bacteria can in fact start metabolising again 250 million years after the endospore has been produced... amazing. [/b][/quote] So you're telling all of us that your great great great grandaddy is a bacteria! :wacko:
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'> <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'> we all evolved from bacteria my friends. we do not own the earth, they do. they've been here far longer than us. people dont realise how remarkable they are. for example, some bacteria can form an endospore when consitions are not suitable (low nutrient level, etc). they just stop metabolising and the tough coat of the spore protects them from the outside. but get this, spored from the eygption tombs have been fround and put in the right conditions and have grown!!! in fact there is great controversy between scientists about this. some believe that there is evidence that the bacteria can in fact start metabolising again 250 million years after the endospore has been produced... amazing. [/b][/quote] So you're telling all of us that your great great great grandaddy is a bacteria! :wacko: [/b][/quote] No, he's telling you that your mother is a whore!
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'> So you're telling all of us that your great great great grandaddy is a bacteria! :wacko: [/b][/quote] That's an outrage! How dare you accuse his great great great grandaddy of being a 'Bacteria'... The singular of bacteria is bacterium.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'> That's an outrage! How dare you accuse his great great great grandaddy of being a 'Bacteria'... The singular of bacteria is bacterium. [/b][/quote] So way back in his family tree is Johnny Bacterium, Patriarch of the family!
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'> <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'> That's an outrage! How dare you accuse his great great great grandaddy of being a 'Bacteria'... The singular of bacteria is bacterium. [/b][/quote] So way back in his family tree is Johnny Bacterium, Patriarch of the family! [/b][/quote] LOL @ 'Johnny Bacterium.' Yeah poor old Johnny, he sadly died after sticking his penis in Penny Penicillin.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'> <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'> <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'> That's an outrage! How dare you accuse his great great great grandaddy of being a 'Bacteria'... The singular of bacteria is bacterium. [/b][/quote] So way back in his family tree is Johnny Bacterium, Patriarch of the family! [/b][/quote] LOL @ 'Johnny Bacterium.' Yeah poor old Johnny, he sadly died after sticking his penis in Penny Penicillin. [/b][/quote] "Penicillin Penny", Doctor Hook reference???
God doesn't exist! stirpot:: Man has tried in all attempt possible to understand nature and possibly defeat it yet it hasn't been able to understand why the planets are in orbit around the sun in vast space, if man did know why the earth is in orbit around the sun he wouldn't be building space crafts for space exploration but will use the velocity of the planet earth to explore space beyond its wildest extends and still stay pure and as natural as it is. Not to mention the need for a natural earth in space explorations which is on going. :coffeekcik: There is still day and night foretold by the Holy Bible which also has not also been defeated or is it defeatable in any way to the strength and the soo call super power and supremacy of man and mankind.
Yes, what a glorious omnipotent creator, another magnificent masterpiece :bears: I'm sure she will be very happy and grateful when she realizes the cards she got dealt when she gets older :notallthere:
You do know that this is earth right? If everything was perfect, this would be heaven and you wouldn't be here.
You do know God created humans right? You do realize he created that fucked up chick with no face right? You think that is perfection or omnipotence? Of course you don't think that because you just admitted God is not perfect.
Nice ASSumption. :boohoo: We are all born into a sin filled world and disease and disfigurement is just a part of it. I didn't expect you to understand and don't expect you to understand now.
Exactly disgusting freak, go worship your monster that inflicts harm to children because they deserve it. I think a 1 in a few million chance could have been avoided altogether, praise Sadist!
:boohoo: It's funny how you think God has to fit "your standards" when you don't see how badly you don't fit his.
why when you ask "where did GOD come from" people will say "he always was" couldn't the universe have "always been"?
