To me, theism is a big hole in itself. As it instills fear in people's mind and requires anyone to believe in something that has no evidence of existence. Atheism doesn't ignore anything, anything at all. The only quest that atheism follows is to find an answer for everything. But again, you can't understand. You are not allowed to ask questions, you are supposed to blindly believe whatever your religion tells you. If you ask questions then you are a follower of the devil. And you will rot in hell till eternity. There is a fundamental difference between theist and atheists. theists made an assumption and they don't care whether the assumption is true. They have assumed that their assumption is true.. The whole concept is based on assumptions over assumption and they are not allowed to question it. Atheist on the other hand, when we assume anything, we seek evidences that can prove that assumption either true or false. We seek answers, we question everything. You think that we don't have any point? Ohh mate, I love to burst your bubble but only we have points that we can prove right, what you have are assumptions and blind faith for unseen, unheard, non-existent super being... Mate, that's such a pathetic analogy. Yes as far as physics is concerned, same laws apply to both you and the door. You are confused between laws and behavior. How do you possibly know God from creations? Have you seen god? Have you heard God? Has God told you that? No, you don't know, you believe, you assume that these are the creation of God. And you have no evidence to back up your assumption. Exactly, you believe what you have been told. You've been told to believe in your religion and not to question it.. A Muslim will disagree to what you believe, he will tell you that your book is a big stinking pile of lies, because that's what he has been told his entire life.
All of you referring to religions, please stop. Gods in terms of religions is wrong. Thats a fact. Im talking about a God which is simply a spirit. God is not a man, woman, or even a human being. That is also a fact (if god exists). God (in logical terms) has nothing to do with religion. So please stop posting things referring to this.
What makes it a fact? Can you prove it? Even followers of any religion will disagree with you, let alone the atheists.. This is not a fact, this is merely your opinion, your belief. I have you asked you twice and I'm asking you again, how do you possibly know that there is actually a spirit that you refer to as God as a matter of fact? Do you have an answer for that?
Obvcourse im not 100% sure. But there is absolutely NO explanation of how the universe was created. Something must have created another thing. Something cant just pop out of nowhere. Your probally going to say, well how did God "pop out of nowhere". Well spirits are unexplained, and are not produced by anything. It is 'possible' that a spirit can appear.
God and Logical Terms should never be muttered in the same sentence. You are basically saying you can't answer the question with a logical answer so God exists through divine right. Don't get me wrong, I think it's great you can believe in something like this, and if it makes you a happier person leading a better life that's fantastic, but through logic and basic understanding, everything points to you being wrong. Don't waste your life on the illogical.
Do you not see how patently illogical it is to claim something is impossible then make your explanation for it violate the very impossibility that required it? Seriously, you have to stop saying such a stupid thing. If you say nothing can come from nothing, then neither can your god. You don't get to say "spirits can appear" as though that allows you to make it up as you go along. If "spirits can appear", so can universes. The rules apply to all of us so stop acting like you can opt out of them as and when you need to.
zzz , zzz , zzz don't the atheist ever come up with something new ? you guys are beginning to bore me . I'm starting to think that i should just create a browser plug in that can post a debunking answer ever time you guys start post aberrations . Let me guess every atheist posting here agrees with Hawking's opinion that the universe spontaneously created itself . Lets see if any of you so called logical people knows where he drew inspiration from and why his opinion is dead wrong .
If you actually listened to what we say and altered your argument accordingly we wouldn't have to repeat ourselves, but if you keep making the same facile "points" and "arguments" then it stands to reason that we have to offer the same arguments to prove you wrong. You aren't allowed to get away with making the same stupid points over and over again just because you constantly ignore the arguments against them. It seems to be a requirement of the religious to be intellectual cowards and ignorant fools because let's face it, if you entered these discussions with anything even resembling a genuine desire for an honest discussion you wouldn't be religious and you'd accept that your entire world view is illogical and infantile.
Wishful thinking but you can't do that. It requires a completely different level of intelligence, that unfortunately is beyond your capability. The best you can do is to pray to your god that someone creates the said browser plugin for you.
I knew you wont get the amazing thing. Science says everything likes to be on zero potential. The universe hates burdens or energy or anything. You say matter came because their was energy, energy was their because blah blah but actually the most stable thing is when their is simply nothing. Next time dont qoute this post because i know you wont get the simplicity and big meaning of this point. We are so much usual to living like this that we think something should be there. Bullshit. I am not arguing for science but for what humans have understood science. The old thing like force=mass*acceleration is simple and old (even thought its not true also) but 1. For the complicated things like radioactivity and coordination compounds you have 10's and hundreds theories and none of them comes close to explaing 90% of things. The biggest phenomenon like resonance and hyperconjugation have not been observed but we only believe because they explain stabilty of compounds but many scientists have said that chances are that it is not feasible that these phenomenon occur. 2. I am not saying there is no basic thing, but if you go logically then we cant even imagine what it would be. It doesnt appear to be a sphere,it is a sphere. The guy, stephen hawkings whose qoutes you keep posting here, his daddy albert einstein said that universe is a sphere and he was in favor of god and was a much better scientist than this hawking. What. Can you throw consciousness in anything. You are changing the topic and yes every organism has consciousness so what does that mean. This is what you morons do. Use the religious sarcasm when i point out your logic flaws. I havent even said how happy believers are etc but now you change the topic. According to science their is no fucking way your life is meaningless or that you should not be burnt alive. This i can say you are lying to yourself. No matter how good points one give you are going to say illogical etc. You hardly come to this forum nowdays because their is hardly any worthy believer to talk who can give you arguements and after so long you got one and you did post a very long post for my each point which is rare for stox(2010-2011). The old stox(2009-2010) posted long shit everyday no mater what. Just for your information if you ask me what to believe more science or god for a human i would say science. If you see then i am not against science. If god exists how much effort would he need to stay away from human eyes. Have you thought so. My points are arguing qualitavely on a bigger picture. I am not saying one should be a believer to live a fruitful life or that a atheist goes to hell. Science never gives morality, you have to find it yourself. For a guy like you who has spent his last 6 years on this forum posting 6 posts a day that god does not exist, got his sig devoted to athiesm,open the group "atheim" which has barely 50 members (Even though there is no group as god believers), you have devoted your life on something that doesnt exist for you. If you had spent this brainpoower in something constructive it would have been better.
ahh yes, if science had a religion, this would be it: quantum mechanics/quantum physics. where anything that is atomically or sub-atomically observable is possible, fuck what we know at a little more macroscopic levels than microscopic/atomic levels measured. schrodinger's cat? what thought experiment is that? the radioactive material either decays or not simple as that. it is all that it is predicated on. even in schodinger's own writing translated into english he writes: ""Schrödinger wrote: One can even set up quite ridiculous cases. A cat is penned up in a steel chamber, along with the following device (which must be secured against direct interference by the cat): in a Geiger counter, there is a tiny bit of radioactive substance, so small that perhaps in the course of the hour, one of the atoms decays, but also, with equal probability, perhaps none; if it happens, the counter tube discharges, and through a relay releases a hammer that shatters a small flask of hydrocyanic acid. If one has left this entire system to itself for an hour, one would say that the cat still lives if meanwhile no atom has decayed. The psi-function of the entire system would express this by having in it the living and dead cat (pardon the expression) mixed or smeared out in equal parts. It is typical of these cases that an indeterminacy originally restricted to the atomic domain becomes transformed into macroscopic indeterminacy, which can then be resolved by direct observation. That prevents us from so naively accepting as valid a "blurred model" for representing reality. In itself, it would not embody anything unclear or contradictory. There is a difference between a shaky or out-of-focus photograph and a snapshot of clouds and fog banks. The above text is a translation of two paragraphs from a much larger original article that appeared in the German magazine Naturwissenschaften ("Natural Sciences") in 1935"" source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schrödinger's_cat did you see the bold text in that quote? it's like saying if the number 2 was the number 2 then 2 + 2 = 4, but wait what if the number 2 is not the number 2 then 2 + 2 does not equal 4. gee, thanks. why is steven hawkings freaking out about this thought experiement? a particle like an electron moves like a wave but has mass, but when you look deeper into it you are only measuring apples and oranges. the electron=the new car, the wave movement=how fast the car goes from 0-60. how is one measurement making the other part more mystifying that the other measurement? water is in a fluid state so the water particles move like a wave because the fluidity allows it base on weight, size and other measurements. an electron moves like a wave because it exploits the gas state like water particles because of the particle's weight and size and other measurements, so better understanding of gas with it's connections with fluid and it's basic properties from this stand-point is needed. there is denisty, and other characteristic properties that differ in amount but are followed by solid, liquid and gas states, hey, further define this and be the next einstein i guess. lets go webby, get that nobel peace prize in physics. so in science terms what do we have, diddly squat. what a concept though, possibility but can it be proven? sounds like religious beliefs? hehehe. yes i did, look we all know that a nuclear fission bomb creates a massive amount of energy from a collision and subsequent collisions. yes that is known and wondered about, wow, what energy stored in a release of energy from collisions, that's a lot of tiny particles colliding and causing a chain reaction with that much energy from that many particles. i think your "valid in limited circumstances" is condescending to other observations. you are talking about how you manipulate particles as being definitive about most things. if nature wanted it that way it would be prevalent. quantum mechanics is a definition of how things can be not how things are, sounds like religion a little bit right? when two unmeasurable resting mass photons form their unrest slow each other down by resisting each other and can be measured. so a bond is formed, something was released to allow the bond, something holds the bond together. their unrest was sufficiently matching each others. when two greco-roman wrestlers of the same weight class engage for the first time they stop in the middle of the wrestling mat, their inertia was stopped and their kinetic energy was translated into potential energy. i could not find anything about the observed photon-photon pair that you described on google but i think these concepts are the basis of further understanding of this pairing. does a photon have mass? is mass needed for these pairings? an energy form pairs? if you can measure things smaller than a photon then we got something, or else we are speculating on what is holding these photons together, like religion right? hehehe physicists are looking for a "God-particle" for crying out loud, hehehe. what it isn't possible that quarks and leptons can have smaller components? with science it's what you can observe, the smaller things get the more difficult it gets to observe. well, the more macroscopic we get, the more difficult it gets to observe. smaller than a quark, lepton, or photon<--->this is where we are and what we can observe, so far<--->beyond the known universe
Yes stOxy if i would accept to have my brain washed by your 2 bit pseudo science then everything would be so perfect . It seems to be a requirement of all religions fanatics to repeat themselves telling the same 2 bit propaganda again and again . The fact that you repeat yourself it only shows the lack of creativity and the fact that you're not making any progress . What's even more pathetic is that despite your (the whole militant atheist community) pseudo scientific barking the number of religious people is on the rise and the number of fanatics like Israeli(SP for friends) is exploding . What you're trying to promote is a way of life without a code of ethics , you're trying to build a house with no support structure . Give it up dude , your propaganda skills are better used in other fields . Zzz , zzz , zzz ... did you took you meds today ? It seems that all you can garble up is insults . It also appears that your intellect missed that question about dr. Hawkings opinion . Is that 2 much for you to comprehend ? Wow congratz , took you a while thou .
He was a great addition to P&R, kinda like yourself. Recently banned, I hope wherever he is, he's doing well.
Aww, stop being such a sissy girl, I haven't even insulted you yet.. As far as Dr. Hawking's opinion is concerned, its his opinion. It is an interesting observation but I simply do not have enough information to state whether his opinion is true or false. So I must be helvetti? I knew Shrooms damage brain cells.... And wow, I joined in Jan 2011, that's been 8 months, but to know that I've been actively posting since June, you must have gone through my posts thoroughly. obsessed much? Bloody scary mate, what have I gotten myself, an e-stalker? Are you a Romanian as well? Why was he banned? @eric - Stay tuned, you have written a small book there.. It took you two days, give me one day to gather up my information and research to make the counter reply.
You've just made that up. Strawman. Next... No, it appears to be a sphere, we have no way of knowing what shape it actually is because the universal constant, the speed of light, means we can only see (detect) 13 billion light years in all directions, thus making the universe, the visible universe, all that we can see and detect, look like a sphere. What Einstein said was that the universe is "finite but unbounded", which is sometimes explained to children, and people like you, as being like a ball - in that it's size is finite, but with no edge. You can't get off or out of it by travelling in a linear fashion. That is a very simplified explanation just to give slow people a way of understanding what finite but unbounded means. But then you're already lying about what he thought of god, so why wouldn't you lie about his scientific claims. It's "there". The arrogance of someone who doesn't know the different between their and there thinking they have the right to question the validity of science is frankly sickening. Stop making this mistake, it makes it hard for me to take you seriously. Again, "there". fix your brain up.