I asked you over and over for proof of god. Not a "higher being". God.
-
Arlon10 — 9 years ago(January 16, 2017 02:08 AM)
Science explains the cosmos, and religion does not.
Which science? Evolution? The big bang? Suspended animation? Higgs boson?
I lost nothing. I simply proved what did
not
assemble life in the first place. It was not an accident or any combination of accidents. That is science that can be proved in labs. Being science, intelligent design should be taught in schools.
Your explanation of the cosmos is not science. It is not a proof of anything. It is just a bad attitude. It is just a refusal to accept the evidence and the logic.
If you want to believe in infinite regression, fine, just realize that you are in the same position you accuse others of being in with no consistent or clear "logic and evidence." Your story is full of holes, contradictions and assumptions.
~~
Matthew 15:14 -
NoShirtNoShoesNoService — 9 years ago(January 16, 2017 07:13 AM)
Which science? Evolution? The big bang? Suspended animation? Higgs boson?
Cosmology.
Being science, intelligent design should be taught in schools.
"Intelligent Design" is not science; it is Creationism with a Lab coat draped around it.
It's not "Intelligent", because there's no evidence for any intelligent being having created the universe or life on Earth.
It's not "Design", because there's no evidence for any "designer"; or that the universe, Earth, life on Earth, or any other aspect the cosmos was in fact designed.
You have not provided any credible evidence for the existence of any god, gods, or any otherwise supernatural being.
Where is your credible evidence?
God did not create man in his own image; man created god in his own image. -
filmflaneur — 9 years ago(January 16, 2017 03:30 AM)
The notion that "natural agencies" initiated life on a previously molten Earth has been rejected as impossible by me, at least for the purposes of this discussion
Corrected.
The science of the big bang prohibits infinite regression
Which is quite untrue. There is no means of telling how many other Big Bangs there have been, even we admit Arlon's word 'regression' here, a procession of events which implies linear time - which physics tells us did not even exist before the Big Bang.
If I reject the science of the big bang and similar theories of cosmology that proceed from the simple to the complex, the onus is on you to explain how the complex appears without going through simple stages.
Corrected.
What I find often with atheists is that they are trying to persuade people that there is no magic
Yes, magical thinking can be a wonderful thing can't it, lol?
There is no need for humans to evolve from apes if they "just always existed infinitely" and hopped from planet to planet.
Just as one can say there is no need for humans to evolve from apes if they spontaneously appeared on earth due to magic?
I'm well aware that railing does no good
kurt2000 -
Arlon10 — 9 years ago(January 16, 2017 05:41 AM)
There is no means of telling how many other Big Bangs there have been,
If one big bang can't produce life, 25 of them won't either. Something (someone) must have started without any big bang.
Just as one can say there is no need for humans to evolve from apes if they spontaneously appeared on earth due to magic?
This topic sure has an appropriate title, doesn't it?
~~
Matthew 15:14 -
filmflaneur — 9 years ago(January 17, 2017 04:36 AM)
There is no means of telling how many other Big Bangs there have been,
If I don't believe one big bang can't produce life, 25 of them won't either
Corrected.
Just as one can say there is no need for humans to evolve from apes if they spontaneously appeared on earth due to magic?
This topic sure has an appropriate title, doesn't it?
Well, it appears that we have to rule out humans appearing via natural causes. What else is left except magic and the supernatural?
I'm well aware that railing does no good
kurt2000 -
graham-167 — 9 years ago(January 16, 2017 06:58 PM)
We can't have an intelligent discussion about "god" if we aren't using the same definition of god.
Go ahead and define it however you please, when giving me the evidence.
I have no idea what definition you're using.
If you're offering the proof then it's up to you to provide the definition. Define the god and show the proof.
If you actually have something to offer, that is - it's really starting to look like you're just stalling here.
If I could stop a rapist from raping a child I would. That's the difference between me and god. -
AlfredMordeir — 9 years ago(January 13, 2017 11:04 AM)
"Of course when Kitzmiller v. Dover is overturned in the courts present science will have to be revised in order to make the alien answer any good."
So then you admit you lied in your OP.
Secular Nation Podcast
http://tinyurl.com/SecNat -
cham313 — 9 years ago(January 13, 2017 12:32 PM)
Of course when Kitzmiller v. Dover is overturned in the courts
Say, that reminds me of the time that Galileo was forced to admit that he was wrong about the solar system!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_affair -
Thorshairspray — 9 years ago(January 13, 2017 03:34 PM)
What?
What does what Graham-167 might or might not have said have to do with Kitzmiller V Dover being overturned and even if it was overturned, why would science need to be re written?
they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. -
worshipper_pa — 9 years ago(January 13, 2017 04:44 AM)
Arlon10:
Atheists, do you feel stupid? You never did before, why should now be any different?
I feel stupid almost all the time, but almost never when I have an argument with a religious person.
Kitzmiller v. Dover is an example of religion causing insanity in the society. Intelligent Design is not science. It's religious nonsense without any scientific grounding. A lacklustre and intellectually dishonest effort to bring "science" into religion. Evolution on the other hand is a scientific fact supported by overwhelming evidence such as fossils and DNA. Even Darwin himself had enough evidence for evolution (that's why he released his book) and DNA wasn't found until a century later!
Somehow religious people manage to ignore all of this evidence saying there is no evidence. Religion makes people so dishonest! This is why we atheists are so frustrated. The stupidity and ignorance is so staggering. It is insane to teach ID in schools as an alternative for evolution and it is harmful for the children. Children should be teached to be able to tell apart nonsense like ID from real science. Teached to be critical and question things.