Earth and Creationism [with survey]

[sqishy]

What are your views on the general idea of creationism with regards to Earth , and if you support the general idea, what specific type of creationism do you go with?

[Miserabilia]

All evidence points to an OLD earth, not a young created earth as genesis says.
Creationism is so outdated and obviously wrong that it boggles me there are still followers of creationism.
(Some of them actualy still beleive the earth is the center of the system, with the sun revolving around it.)

[sqishy]

Just making the survey I have my opinions don't worry :P

I might do another survey on the centre of the universe being Earth or the Sun or something else, etc etc

[Apassionato]

Creationism is the single most backwards, unscientific idea that is still supported in some first world countries.

[Sir Suomi]

There are literally trees older than some Creationists believe the Earth is.

[tovaris]

crationism is redicilous

[Gamma Male]

*generic witty atheist remark about how ridiculous creationism is*

[Korashk]

*generic witty atheist remark about how ridiculous creationism is*
Let's be honest, nowadays the only real way to combat creationist bullshit is to straight up make fun of them for being complete morons.

[Kacey]

While I don't believe in it, many people do. But science has shown that the Earth is billions of years old.

[Faolan]

I've been raised in a scientific home. I believe in the Big Bang, and my father (who's an astronomer) would be adamantly upset if I believed in Genesis. For me, God and religion serve more of a familial and traditional purpose than a theological one.

[gothy]

Dont support it very much.

[sqishy]

I guess most don't go with it at all. I generally don't either.

[Camazotz]

Why did so many people choose "I don't know/don't care/don't want to know how old Earth is," ?

[Mushin]

Why did so many people choose "I don't know/don't care/don't want to know how old Earth is," ?

Ignorance, denial, blatant disregard for the progression of humanity. Pick one or all three depending on how cynical your perspective is.

I voted 'NO' for numerous reasons. The primary reason being my appreciation for simple carbon12 dating. If creationists believe the Earth was developed by a god c. 10,000 ya, then why are there fossils / rock formations that can be used to date the Earth back 4.5 mya?

[Ethe14]

My theory is this, earth was made because of scientific reasons but humans and animals were created because of god.

[TheN3rdyOutcast]

Screw all these theories, they just cause people to quibble over who's wrong or right. I say we live life here and now. We're here and we won't be here forever. Wasting time arguing over a question that no one can answer will do nothing.

My view is, Earth is a rock that was created before I was born and there are things on it. End. Of. Story.

[conniption]

Screw all these theories, they just cause people to quibble over who's wrong or right. I say we live life here and now. We're here and we won't be here forever. Wasting time arguing over a question that no one can answer will do nothing.

My view is, Earth is a rock that was created before I was born and there are things on it. End. Of. Story.

So we should all live in ignorance?

I chose no because it's the most logical and best supported theories out there. Creationism is nothing more than fiction.

[Lovelife090994]

So we should all live in ignorance?

I chose no because it's the most logical and best supported theories out there. Creationism is nothing more than fiction.

To you but not to others. You just proved this person's point.

[Gamma Male]

To you but not to others. You just proved this person's point.

Reality isn't subjective. Science IS the most logical point. Not just "to him", but objectively.

[Lovelife090994]

Reality isn't subjective. Science IS the most logical point. Not just "to him", but objectively.

That's the problem here. The story of Creation isn't always based on science when one looks to their faith for that. Who are we to ridicule them? If you reply with because they are wrong then good night. I am not going to waste my time here.

[LouBerry]

Well, as I believe that God created the Earth, I would still like to say that I'm not an idiot and I know that the Earth is way older than some Christians say. I think God created Science. I think he made all of it, so if Big Bang was how it happened, I think God was behind it. Also, the whole, created the Earth in seven days thing is nonsense because God has no sense of Human time. A day for him could easily be a billion years. Or, it could have been meant to interpret seven individual stages of creation, not seven actual days.

[Gamma Male]

That's the problem here. The story of Creation isn't always based on science when one looks to their faith for that. Who are we to ridicule them? If you reply with because they are wrong then good night. I am not going to waste my time here.

Nobody's ridiculing anyone, we're just having a friendly debate.

And if you don't want to believe science, fine, but don't say that science is subjective or that everyone has an equally correct view. You're entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts. And the big bang and the age of the earth are facts.

[phuckphace]

conclusive evidence indicates that the Earth was formed about 4.5 billion years ago. if there is a God, which I believe is highly unlikely, I don't think there's any way for us to know with absolutely certainty that he did or did not have a hand in it.

I have to say though. I'm fine with it if people believe that God created everything ~10,000 years ago. but to say he did so and purposely made everything look a lot older than it really is to troll Richard Dawkins, is quite solipsistic. I want to meet one of these people IRL and ask them if they can really be sure anything in the Bible is true...because you never know if God purposely miswrote everything in it just because he can.

[Gamma Male]

conclusive evidence indicates that the Earth was formed about 4.5 billion years ago. if there is a God, which I believe is highly unlikely, I don't think there's any way for us to know with absolutely certainty that he did or did not have a hand in it.

I have to say though. I'm fine with it if people believe that God created everything ~10,000 years ago. but to say he did so and purposely made everything look a lot older than it really is to troll Richard Dawkins, is quite solipsistic. I want to meet one of these people IRL and ask them if they can really be sure anything in the Bible is true...because you never know if God purposely miswrote everything in it just because he can.

Lol, you reminded me of this skit
Bill Hicks - God is fucking with us
Skip to 2:25 for the relevant part.
Jim_HBj7Bdk

[Miserabilia]

Screw all these theories, they just cause people to quibble over who's wrong or right. I say we live life here and now. We're here and we won't be here forever. Wasting time arguing over a question that no one can answer will do nothing.

My view is, Earth is a rock that was created before I was born and there are things on it. End. Of. Story.

It's a shame that you think of it that way because that's not a thought that encourages any kind of scientific progress.

Wasting time arguing over a question that no one can answer will do nothing.


I think science has pretty much exclusively answered the entire question.

My theory is this, earth was made because of scientific reasons but humans and animals were created because of god.

How exactly would that work?
Are you just refering to god guided evolution?

[PinkFloyd]

There are literally trees older than some Creationists believe the Earth is.

Is that a Bill Nye quote? If it is, hats off to him. Really, hats off to whoever said it.

[Korashk]

That's the problem here. The story of Creation isn't always based on science when one looks to their faith for that. Who are we to ridicule them? If you reply with because they are wrong then good night. I am not going to waste my time here.
Except young earth creationists are wrong.

Saying that the earth is 10k-6k years old is just as wrong as saying that the earth is flat, the earth is the center of the universe, or that a clear sky is green. That's how wrong they are, and people who think these things and can't be convinced otherwise when shown the tens of thousands of pieces of evidence deserve ridicule. That's all there is to it.

[Apassionato]

Both this thread and the poll results(btw, the poll adds up to about 110%...) are depressing.

[tovaris]

That's the problem here. The story of Creation isn't always based on science when one looks to their faith for that. Who are we to ridicule them? If you reply with because they are wrong then good night. I am not going to waste my time here.

You do realize that the theory tht the fliing spagety monster created the earth and settled it with pirates is yust as viable as creationism....

Well, as I believe that God created the Earth, I would still like to say that I'm not an idiot and I know that the Earth is way older than some Christians say. I think God created Science. I think he made all of it, so if Big Bang was how it happened, I think God was behind it. Also, the whole, created the Earth in seven days thing is nonsense because God has no sense of Human time. A day for him could easily be a billion years. Or, it could have been meant to interpret seven individual stages of creation, not seven actual days.

not to mention that a day is equal to one earths revolutionr around its axes... if there was no earth...

Both this thread and the poll results(btw, the poll adds up to about 110%...) are depressing.

110% in russia that is conplectly normal ;)

[Lovelife090994]

Nobody's ridiculing anyone, we're just having a friendly debate.

And if you don't want to believe science, fine, but don't say that science is subjective or that everyone has an equally correct view. You're entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts. And the big bang and the age of the earth are facts.

No, no, no, get rid of that "correct". Look below! People on this site are so anti-Creationist it's as if they look at Creationists as unhuman. Technically I am a Creationist, and I would hope that not all on this site are so asinine to that. I know of the scientific ideas but I chose to leave it. I will have it on a test just not in my heart. No apparently I'm not entitled to anything in your or the people below's world, because all I'll get is slapped and called wrong, stupid, and crazy. Honestly, if some of you listen to yourselves you'd see that here opinions only matter if they are secular.

[Gigablue]

No, no, no, get rid of that "correct". Look below! People on this site are so anti-Creationist it's as if they look at Creationists as unhuman. Technically I am a Creationist, and I would hope that not all on this site are so asinine to that. I know of the scientific ideas but I chose to leave it. I will have it on a test just not in my heart. No apparently I'm not entitled to anything in your or the people below's world, because all I'll get is slapped and called wrong, stupid, and crazy. Honestly, if some of you listen to yourselves you'd see that here opinions only matter if they are secular.

No one here thinks of you as unhuman. Saying that you're wrong is not an attack against you. Everyone holds at least some ideas that are wrong, but I think the world would be better off if everyone believed as many true things and as few false things as possible. You are entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts. The reason people keep repeating that phrase is that it's true. No matter what you believe, if your beliefs go against reality, you are wrong.

I'm not opposed to creationism because it isn't secular enough. Rather, I'm opposed to it because it isn't supported by the evidence. If creationists were to show good evidence, I would believe them. For example, if someone can show a prediction that stems only from creationism, then show that their prediction is accurate, that would be good evidence. If that were to happen many times, I would consider creationism a model worthy of serious consideration, but until that happens, I will reject it along with the infinitely many equally untestable, unproven and useless hypotheses.

I have said what it would take to change my mind, but I wonder, what would convince you, either that creationism is false, or that the current scientific understanding of the world is true? I there is something that would change your mind, we can talk about it and have a productive debate. If there isn't, we have nothing more to talk about.

[TheN3rdyOutcast]

It's a shame that you think of it that way because that's not a thought that encourages any kind of scientific progress.



I think science has pretty much exclusively answered the entire question.

One, honestly, I just don't like watching people argue. The origin od Earth and it's creatures is an important topic, it's just that It's a topic thatgets annoying to argue about after a while.

Also, science can tell how old the Earth is, but not whether the Earth was created or formed, creatures created or evolved. The olnly way to tell exactky is probably far out of technological reach right now.

[Typhlosion]

Also, science can tell how old the Earth is, but not whether the Earth was created or formed, creatures created or evolved. The olnly way to tell exactky is probably far out of technological reach right now. And this is the problem with creationsim: NMisconceptions.

There never will be the technology to know when a creature was created.
There never will be the technology to know when a creature evolved.
There never will be the technology to know when the Earth was created.
There never will be the technology to know when the Earth was formed.

No single life form was created, maybe save the first. The first forms of life, or prototypes for life are near-impossible to be registered in a fossil record. And even if we find some life near that era, we will never say "yeah, this age +- 1000 years is when life was formed."

Evolution is not something that can be registered on a calendar. Evolution is NOT like "Pokémon Evolution" where one animal transforms into another. Evolution is a long, slow and gradual process where characteristics different than a previous state accumulate, genetically, over time.

The Earth is not "formed" on a certain day. The Earth is a mixture of space rock clumped together and chipped and X and Y and Z. You can't put the date of formation on a calendar. We can put old registries of the Earth somewhat as we know it today, tops.

[phuckphace]

There never will be the technology to know when a creature was created.
There never will be the technology to know when a creature evolved.
There never will be the technology to know when the Earth was created.
There never will be the technology to know when the Earth was formed.

and even if such technology existed, there's nothing stopping a deity (who has miraculous power) from purposely concealing all evidence from such tests if he wants to. the old "magic technology" argument again

[sqishy]

One of you said the results add up to 110%, and that is because I made it multiple choice.

[Miserabilia]

One, honestly, I just don't like watching people argue. The origin od Earth and it's creatures is an important topic, it's just that It's a topic thatgets annoying to argue about after a while.

Also, science can tell how old the Earth is, but not whether the Earth was created or formed, creatures created or evolved. The olnly way to tell exactky is probably far out of technological reach right now.

The thing is science can tell all these things.
THere are things that are only generally understood, like where the universe came from and how the first life forms formed, so if you want to give examples of what science hasn't precicely simulated yet those are a few.

[Korashk]

Technically I am a Creationist,
I don't think you actually are, at least not as far as I can remember in the many topics where you discuss this. I get the vibe that your views are more along the lines of theistic evolution. Am I right?

[Lovelife090994]

No one here thinks of you as unhuman. Saying that you're wrong is not an attack against you. Everyone holds at least some ideas that are wrong, but I think the world would be better off if everyone believed as many true things and as few false things as possible. You are entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts. The reason people keep repeating that phrase is that it's true. No matter what you believe, if your beliefs go against reality, you are wrong.

I'm not opposed to creationism because it isn't secular enough. I'm opposed to it because it isn't supported by the evidence. If creationists were to show good evidence, I would believe them. For example, if someone can show a prediction that stems only from creationism, then show that their prediction is accurate, that would be good evidence. If that were to happen many times, I would consider creationism a model worthy of serious consideration, but until that happens, I will reject it along with the infinitely many equally untestable, unproven and useless hypotheses.

I have said what it would take to change my mind, but I wonder, what would convince you, either that creationism is false, or that the current scientific understanding of the world is true? I there is something that would change your mind, we can talk about it and have a productive debate. If there isn't, we have nothing more to talk about.

You are never to change a person's beliefs. Creationism like it or not is rooted to belief. And no, you won't change my mind. And my proof is my faith, but no atheist will take that as answer. So no, I guess I can't explain it with your criteria over what I can and can not say.

The thing is science can tell all these things.
THere are things that are only generally understood, like where the universe came from and how the first life forms formed, so if you want to give examples of what science hasn't precicely simulated yet those are a few.

That is the height of human ignorance. Science can not explain everything in existence.

I don't think you actually are, at least not as far as I can remember in the many topics where you discuss this. I get the vibe that your views are more along the lines of theistic evolution. Am I right?

I guess that is the word. I see evolution as possible but I give the credit to God. What I am saying is, that whether or not people do or not shouldn't be our issues. Most Creationists do know wholeheartedly about evolution. Even students know it here, but many credit it to God. I don't think we could ever know everything because humans aren't gods. But, I hope that if we come close to unraveling Creation that we don't start targeting people for believing any different.

[Korashk]

I guess that is the word. I see evolution as possible but I give the credit to God. What I am saying is, that whether or not people do or not shouldn't be our issues. Most Creationists do know wholeheartedly about evolution. Even students know it here, but many credit it to God. I don't think we could ever know everything because humans aren't gods. But, I hope that if we come close to unraveling Creation that we don't start targeting people for believing any different.
When we say "creationist" in these topics, people that believe in evolution but think that the first organism was created by god are not the people we're calling morons. With your responses you seem to be grouping everyone who thinks god had any sort of hand in creating life on earth as being a "creationist" which I think is the reason for your outrage in these threads. But the people here opposed to creationism aren't doing that. We're talking specifically about people that take the bible literally.

[Lovelife090994]

When we say "creationist" in these topics, people that believe in evolution but think that the first organism was created by god are not the people we're calling morons. With your responses you seem to be grouping everyone who thinks god had any sort of hand in creating life on earth as being a "creationist" which I think is the reason for your outrage in these threads. But the people here opposed to creationism aren't doing that. We're talking specifically about people that take the bible literally.

I do too. I take the Bible as the word of God.

[CcRoder]

I believe that God created the earth, some way or another. I don't believe in creationism though, and I was always told that Genesis was an allegorical part in the Bible to tell the story of creation.

Keep in mind that it was a Catholic Priest who first theorised the Big Bang, and the Charles Darwin never once denied God's part in the series of evolution.

Personally, I think the earth is wwaaaaaaaaayyyy older than 10,000 years I mean, that's completely foolish. Maybe God guided the creation of the earth, and it took a couple billion years. Perhaps he drew up a blueprint. I just don't know as it stands.

[phuckphace]

why would anyone want to worship a god who brazenly tricks us and calls it "faith"? sounds like an abusive relationship if there ever was one.

[CharlieHorse]

I don't believe in any creation stories as told in those old books and religious stuff. I hold my views based on facts and observable phenomena, and science. Would any other method be as logical?

[Imac350]

I am religious but I believe in science as well, and I believe that bible creation stories are simply just metaphoric to explain things simply, much like a lot of the old testament.

The Big Bang seems to be the best scientifically supported theory so I believe it is the best rational scientific explanation.

[sqishy]

Is there anyone here that is more neutral to the ideas here than being on one side more than the other? Just wondering

[Miserabilia]

Is there anyone here that is more neutral to the ideas here than being on one side more than the other? Just wondering

I don't really think that's possible; these two sides totaly contradict each other, to be neutral on them would either requiring pretending to not know or want to know anything of how the world works or accepting both ideas and somehow solving the countless paradoxes that are created with it.

[sqishy]

Well that in itself can be an opinion

[Luisss]

I believe God created the earth. It makes most sense. I don't think the BOOM makes more sense.

[tovaris]

I believe God created the earth. It makes most sense. I don't think the BOOM makes more sense.

how do you reckon than we have trees older than the bibical earth?

Is there anyone here that is more neutral to the ideas here than being on one side more than the other? Just wondering

hard to stay neutraj because creationism is an absurd new-ish idea, and even diferent religions (splintergroops within a religion) disagre on how the earth was made....

[Bmble_B]

While I have no problem with others not believing in creationism, I just find it to be a tad bit offensive that they'd just ridicule it in such a way. Just my opinion, I have no problem with others expressing how they think the earth was created, but I just hate it when people ridicule a certain person's beliefs... Maybe it's just me who thinks this

[Lovelife090994]

While I have no problem with others not believing in creationism, I just find it to be a tad bit offensive that they'd just ridicule it in such a way. Just my opinion, I have no problem with others expressing how they think the earth was created, but I just hate it when people ridicule a certain person's beliefs... Maybe it's just me who thinks this

Are you a Creationist? I must admit some are too harsh on Creationism and Creationists as if there is lunacy involved. I was taught not to ridicule someone's beliefs. I guess, many others weren't taught that.

[Korashk]

While I have no problem with others not believing in creationism, I just find it to be a tad bit offensive that they'd just ridicule it in such a way.
Why? As a belief it is deserving of ridicule because of its sheer absurdity, and anyone holding the belief in the face of overwhelming and solid evidence deserves no intellectual consideration.

[Bmble_B]

Why? As a belief it is deserving of ridicule because of its sheer absurdity, and anyone holding the belief in the face of overwhelming and solid evidence deserves no intellectual consideration.
Wow, you basically called me stupid for having my own beliefs huh?
Thats very ignorant, and insulting. It's not like I'm calling you idiotic, or stupid for having your beliefs. While I have no problem with them, I just hate the fact that you'd be rude enough to say such a thing...

Are you a Creationist? I must admit some are too harsh on Creationism and Creationists as if there is lunacy involved. I was taught not to ridicule someone's beliefs. I guess, many others weren't taught that.

Yes Im a creationist, but not a hardcore one. If you know what I mean

Merged. Please don't double post.

[StoppingTime]

Wow, you basically called me stupid for having my own beliefs huh?
Thats very ignorant, and insulting. It's not like I'm calling you idiotic, or stupid for having your beliefs. While I have no problem with them, I just hate the fact that you'd be rude enough to say such a thing...

No, he's saying that anyone who truly, absolutely believes that the earth is under 6,000 years old is in blatant disregard to any modern advances in a number of scientific fields. So for you (or anyone who strictly believes in Young Earth Creationism) to say, "I believe the Earth is something-thousand years old despite all scientific findings" it gives off the impression that you're not interested in a debate (what this forum is for), and you're not interested in any sort of scientific knowledge to back up your (now unprovable) claims.

[Bmble_B]

No, he's saying that anyone who truly, absolutely believes that the earth is under 6,000 years old is in blatant disregard to any modern advances in a number of scientific fields. So for you (or anyone who strictly believes in Young Earth Creationism) to say, "I believe the Earth is something-thousand years old despite all scientific findings" it gives off the impression that you're not interested in a debate (what this forum is for), and you're not interested in any sort of scientific knowledge to back up your (now unprovable) claims.

My apologies for me misunderstanding his response. I don't believe in young earth creationism, only a thousand years old? Thats wayyyy off of what I believe, again my deepest apologies for me misunderstanding his post :(

[StoppingTime]

My apologies for me misunderstanding his response. I don't believe in young earth creationism, only a thousand years old? Thats wayyyy off of what I believe, again my deepest apologies for me misunderstanding his post :(

It's all good, no worries man. There are a lot of terms flying around (which are sometimes defined differently by different users) so it can never hurt to have a bit of clarification :P

[Bmble_B]

It's all good, no worries man. There are a lot of terms flying around (which are sometimes defined differently by different users) so it can never hurt to have a bit of clarification :P

Thanks for understanding :D

[Lovelife090994]

Wow, you basically called me stupid for having my own beliefs huh?
Thats very ignorant, and insulting. It's not like I'm calling you idiotic, or stupid for having your beliefs. While I have no problem with them, I just hate the fact that you'd be rude enough to say such a thing...



Yes Im a creationist, but not a hardcore one. If you know what I mean

Merged. Please don't double post.

I consider myself a Creationist but I don't know how God did it all. But do we really? At any rate, I notice that whenever anyone claims they are a Creationist, people start calling you absurd... Beliefs may be absurd to others but I wouldn't say that to the person.

[Miserabilia]

Are you a Creationist? I must admit some are too harsh on Creationism and Creationists as if there is lunacy involved. I was taught not to ridicule someone's beliefs. I guess, many others weren't taught that.

Some beleifs that somehow still hold today for some people (like geocentrism and young earth creationism ) are not only unprovable, they are plain disproven; it's a scientific fact that what they beleive is a lie.

[Lovelife090994]

Some beleifs that somehow still hold today for some people (like geocentrism and young earth creationism ) are not only unprovable, they are plain disproven; it's a scientific fact that what they beleive is a lie.

I am not a young Earth Creationist. Aren't there trees even older than young Earth ideals?

[Miserabilia]

I am not a young Earth Creationist. Aren't there trees even older than young Earth ideals?

I know you're not :)
And yes there are trees, which is another reason young earth creationism doesn't make any sense.

[Lovelife090994]

I know you're not :)
And yes there are trees, which is another reason young earth creationism doesn't make any sense.

I have an issue with some Creationists, then again also with some Evolutionists. I credit the creation of all existence to God, however I think evolution is plausible but also ordained by God. To me evolution is the how and God is the who. Make sense?

[Miserabilia]

I have an issue with some Creationists, then again also with some Evolutionists. I credit the creation of all existence to God, however I think evolution is plausible but also ordained by God. To me evolution is the how and God is the who. Make sense?

Yep, that is the more logical and rational view alot of modern chistians have adapted too.

[Aajj333]

The earth was created by his noodly goodness the Flying Spaghetti Monster. dont believe me? Than why are all the planets meatball shaped?

[Stronk Serb]

The earth was created by his noodly goodness the Flying Spaghetti Monster. dont believe me? Than why are all the planets meatball shaped?

And he reigns from Jupiter, the meatballest of them all.

[Gamma Male]

The earth was created by his noodly goodness the Flying Spaghetti Monster. dont believe me? Than why are all the planets meatball shaped?

Oh my pasta, of course! It all makes sense now! How could I not have seen it before?

[Vlerchan]

Anyone still believing in a god or religion is ignorant and belongs in a cave with our ancestors.
Interesting.

I presume you've discovered evidence of some sort which contradicts the idea of a god playing any role in the universe's formation?

[Gamma Male]

Interesting.

I presume you've discovered evidence of some sort which contradicts the idea of a god playing any role in the universe's formation?

I think what he means to say is that anyone who actively worships a God and/or participates in an organized religion can't be all that bright.

[Aajj333]

And he reigns from Jupiter, the meatballest of them all.

Oh my pasta, of course! It all makes sense now! How could I not have seen it before?

Ramen

[Vlerchan]

I think what he means to say is that anyone who actively worships a God and/or participates in an organized religion can't be all that bright.
I'm willing to bet he's a just-as-irrational atheist, though.

Ignorant statement regardless.

[Lovelife090994]

The earth was created by his noodly goodness the Flying Spaghetti Monster. dont believe me? Than why are all the planets meatball shaped?

And he reigns from Jupiter, the meatballest of them all.

Just be sure to extend the same respect to others and we'll be fine.

[Gamma Male]

I'm willing to bet he's a just-as-irrational atheist, though.

Ignorant statement regardless.

I never said I agreed with him. In my opinion, religion is more about tribalism and conformity than intelligence.

[Lovelife090994]

I never said I agreed with him. In my opinion, religion is more about tribalism and conformity than intelligence.

I can't even... I can't even begin to ask where and how you got that from... You know religious or not we're still human, we're just humans with spirituality.

http://www.hdwallpapersimages.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Emma-Watson-Face-Expressions-Images-540x291.jpg

[Gamma Male]

I can't even... I can't even begin to ask where and how you got that from... You know religious or not we're still human, we're just humans with spirituality.

image (http://www.hdwallpapersimages.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Emma-Watson-Face-Expressions-Images-540x291.jpg)

I never said or even so much as implied that religious people were below human.

It t is just my opinion that the main reason we still have religion despite now being able to explain most of life's biggest mysteries(where did we come from, were did earth come from, why are we here, etc) is because of the conformist, "tribalistic" attitude that was beneficial during our hunter gatherer phase, but is now detrimental because it stifles new ideas and individuality. People still believe in religion because everyone else in their community believes in religion, and their instincts encourage them adhere to local stereotypes and conform, an instinct that was beneficial when we still lived in tribes because it helped us to work together and get along.. But that's just my theory.

[Lovelife090994]

I never said or even so much as implied that religious people were below human.

It t is just my opinion that the main reason we still have religion despite now being able to explain most of life's biggest mysteries(where did we come from, were did earth come from, why are we here, etc) is because of the conformist, "tribalistic" attitude that was beneficial during our hunter gatherer phase, but is now detrimental because it stifles new ideas and individuality. People still believe in religion because everyone else in their community believes in religion, and their instincts encourage them adhere to local stereotypes and conform, an instinct that was beneficial when we still lived in tribes because it helped us to work together and get along.. But that's just my theory.

You have that incredibly flipped and biased. You really do. First, religion is choice, you can be this or that, no one will force you to it and even if they do you could fake believe. Instincts led me to God? If so, then hallelujah. Individuality is fine but it isn't about "I" or "me" but "us" and "we." Religion can be a guide, it has history and art, religion can be a unique marker on a group, religion can be the life of someone, religion encourages community versus selfishness.

[Gamma Male]

You have that incredibly flipped and biased. You really do. First, religion is choice, you can be this or that, no one will force you to it and even if they do you could fake believe. Instincts led me to God? If so, then hallelujah. Individuality is fine but it isn't about "I" or "me" but "us" and "we." Religion can be a guide, it has history and art, religion can be a unique marker on a group, religion can be the life of someone, religion encourages community versus selfishness.

Okay. I strongly disagree with you, but don't really want to get into another debate. Have a good night. Or morning. :lol:

[Lovelife090994]

Okay. I strongly disagree with you, but don't really want to get into another debate. Have a good night. Or morning. :lol:

Oh alright. But I still strongly disagree with you nearly 99% of the time. Morning, how do you do?

[Gamma Male]

Oh alright. But I still strongly disagree with you nearly 99% of the time. Morning, how do you do?

Yeah, I don't really see us agreeing on religion or politics anytime soon, but that's okay.

It's actually still night for me. I'm tired. I should probably go to bed, but you keep responding to my posts! :P

[Lovelife090994]

Yeah, I don't really see us agreeing on religion or politics anytime soon, but that's okay.

It's actually still night for me. I'm tired. I should probably go to bed, but you keep responding to my posts! :P

Nah, I'll leave you to sleep. Forgive my bluntness. Mother had a tongue so cold it'd freeze Hell and I have that too. No hard feelings. For now at least (demented laughter).

[Stronk Serb]

Just be sure to extend the same respect to others and we'll be fine.

You do know that Pastafarianism was created as a parody of theistic religions, primarilly Christianity?

[Lovelife090994]

You do know that Pastafarianism was created as a parody of theistic religions, primarilly Christianity?

Yes, I do. But still parodying a religion is not right. Just as few parody pastafarianism I 'd ask for Christianity not to be poked at just because someone believes in something different than you.

[Stronk Serb]

Yes, I do. But still parodying a religion is not right. Just as few parody pastafarianism I 'd ask for Christianity not to be poked at just because someone believes in something different than you.

Christians started poking first by saying Creationism should be taught in science class, using the argument that a lot of people believe it, so it must be true. No, it has not be scientifically proven that Creationism happened. Pastafarianism was formed as a parody on those Christians who think that if a majority believes it, it must be true.

[Lovelife090994]

Christians started poking first by saying Creationism should be taught in science class, using the argument that a lot of people believe it, so it must be true. No, it has not be scientifically proven that Creationism happened. Pastafarianism was formed as a parody on those Christians who think that if a majority believes it, it must be true.

And that just showed your lack of humanity.

[Stronk Serb]

And that just showed your lack of humanity.


Uuuumm, explain?

[Miserabilia]

And that just showed your lack of humanity.

What?
Define what aspect of humanity it is he lacks, and what part of his post exactly it is that made him lack this. I'd be very interested to hear.

[Whight]

I don't really believe in the existence of the god the bible talks of, as I very much doubt a god that watches over me would put me through what I've been through.
But then again, i'm smart enough to know that I don't know enough to rule out the existence of god. Biblical or other.

As for the creation of earth and god? I don't think God created earth per say, but more that if there is a god or sorts, he created the universe and the rules the universe plays by - which eventually led to the creation of Earth with the right conditions.

[Lovelife090994]

Uuuumm, explain?

What?
Define what aspect of humanity it is he lacks, and what part of his post exactly it is that made him lack this. I'd be very interested to hear.

I've explained it time and time again. The one thing every human being is deserving of until they ruin it with you; respect. For you to talk about a whole group in blanket statements isn't necessarily right. Using Pastafarianism to belittle or guile isn't right either.

[Stronk Serb]

I've explained it time and time again. The one thing every human being is deserving of until they ruin it with you; respect. For you to talk about a whole group in blanket statements isn't necessarily right. Using Pastafarianism to belittle or guile isn't right either.


Please re-read my post. I didn't blanket statement Christians. In my last sentence I mentioned some, not all.

[Emerald Dream]

If this doesn't get back on topic, and soon...it is going to be locked very, very quickly. This thread is not about anyone having to defend themselves personally. It's about trying to prove/disprove creationism.

[Vlerchan]

Logically speaking, god MUST be wrong.
I've no idea how you reached the conclusion that god = bible.

[Miserabilia]

I've no idea how you reached the conclusion that god = bible.

If applied to christians who take the bible literaly or atleast that it's the word of god, then it is; the bible says it's the word of god and assuming the bible is true than it is, and that would mean god is wrong.

[Vlerchan]

If applied to christians who take the bible literaly or atleast that it's the word of god, then it is; the bible says it's the word of god and assuming the bible is true than it is, and that would mean god is wrong.
Bible Literalists are an almost purely American phenomenon.

I'm surrounded by Christians, and I literally do not know a single person who takes the bible literally.

[Miserabilia]

Bible Literalists are an almost purely American phenomenon.

I'm surrounded by Christians, and I literally do not know a single person who takes the bible literally.

Also here's a cool statistic

http://content.gallup.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/vuh2ey05lec30d_smtcpog.gif
http://content.gallup.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/b3daekon7kiqpcbpzdsgka.gif
http://content.gallup.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/a9b1nc9teuue8v3tr8fvia.gif

[Lovelife090994]

Also here's a cool statistic

image (http://content.gallup.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/vuh2ey05lec30d_smtcpog.gif)
image (http://content.gallup.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/b3daekon7kiqpcbpzdsgka.gif)
image (http://content.gallup.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/a9b1nc9teuue8v3tr8fvia.gif)

That is totally biased! Not all Christians take the Bible lierally. And one thing out of many about God is that he is perfect and never wrong. Even God acts in order.

[Vlerchan]

That is totally biased! Not all Christians take the Bible lierally.
Which is exactly what the polls show.

Also, that is interesting Cheese. Not even a majority of American's take the bible literally.

[Miserabilia]

That is totally biased! Not all Christians take the Bible lierally. And one thing out of many about God is that he is perfect and never wrong. Even God acts in order.

Sigh............................. Are you.. are you even? Nevermind. Continue.

Which is exactly what the polls show.

Also, that is interesting Cheese. Not even a majority of American's take the bible literally.

Yup, I was kind of surprised too, but it seems mos of them have adapted to bible symbolism.
It's still an incredibly large percentage compared to west europe for example, also religion in general.

[Lovelife090994]

Sigh............................. Are you.. are you even? Nevermind. Continue.



Yup, I was kind of surprised too, but it seems mos of them have adapted to bible symbolism.
It's still an incredibly large percentage compared to west europe for example, also religion in general.

West Europe is quickly becoming one of the strongest atheistic centers on Earth. But there is one they know that you are missing. Not to judge a book by it's cover for one. Just because I am under the name "Christian" doesn't mean I take the Bible literally. I do however see the Bible as A) one of history's greatest books, B) the most popular book worldwide, C) a guide of histories in the Bible, and D) as the Word of God.

[Gigablue]

Big bang, evolution...etc they're facts. God is not. Once you have facts that disprove faith, faith should become extinct. Why believe something that is proven to be a lie?
Bible says earths 10K years old. Science PROVES its 4+ billion years old.
Logically speaking, god MUST be wrong. If he's wrong, he's not god.

As soon as you say science proves anything, you are automatically wrong. Science doesn't prove anything. It never has, and it never will. Science deals with probabilities. The probability that the earth is billions of years old is absurdly high. That may be almost identical to saying it's proven, but there is a subtle difference. It is always possible that out best studies could be wrong, and science is always ready to change if the evidence were there. While I agree with what you are saying, it is important to be precise. Science is always changing, and nothing is even proven, only supported by the evidence.

[Gamma Male]

As soon as you say science proves anything, you are automatically wrong. Science doesn't prove anything. It never has, and it never will. Science deals with probabilities. The probability that the earth is billions of years old is absurdly high. That may be almost identical to saying it's proven, but there is a subtle difference. It is always possible that out best studies could be wrong, and science is always ready to change if the evidence were there. While I agree with what you are saying, it is important to be precise. Science is always changing, and nothing is even proven, only supported by the evidence.

Well of course, nothing can ever really be proven to 100% accuracy. We could all be living in the Matrix. A Matrix controlled by green flying starfish with telekinetic abilities. We really don't know.

But unless you're willing to forfeit the use of the word "prove/proof" entirely, I think it's safe to say that at a certain point we might as well consider really, really, really, really likely things like say, the existence of the sun or shape of the earth, to be proven.

[Babs]

I don't believe in god or creationism because its just plain counter-intuitive. The very idea of the earth being 6,000 years old is just... blah.

[Danny_boi 16]

I accept that the Earth is 4.5 billion years old. I also accept the fact that the Earth was created by debris from the early protoplanetary disk. If God was involved, I do not know.

[DisneyPrincess27]

Idk. I'm kinda conflicted. I'm not really sure what to believe in anymore. I want to believe that God created the Earth, but then my 'common sense', education, and logic convense me other wise.

[lumiadots]

i honestly am not sure at all how exactly the earth was created. i am agnostic, so i don't have a belief or a disbelief in any god/deities out there. it's my belief that no one knows for sure how exactly the earth was created, because there were no humans around during the very first breaths of life earth had (unless you believe in adam and eve). then again, no one knows for sure if it was or wasn't created by a supreme being. it's constantly open for interpretation. i lean more towards the science facts of earth's creation, however.

[coltonaustin]

eI've been raised in a scientific home. I believe in the Big Bang, and my father (who's an astronomer) would be adamantly upset if I believed in Genesis. For me, God and religion serve more of a familial and traditional purpose than a theological one.

Scientific evidence does point to a much older earth. So either it is that old or God made it look that old. He made full grown humans, plants, and animals; why couldn't he make the Earth seem older?

On to your point: as for the Big Bang, there is no definitive proof that it happened. But if it did, then I like to think of it this way: God spoke, and his words are power, right. And then the universe exploded into being. Kind of like the Big Bang isn't it?

One more thing, to everyone who thinks there is no God. Do you really want to believe that you were an accident? A mishap by nature or the product of 'evolution'? Look around the universe. Since your dad is an astronomer, he should be able to tell you the wonders and magnificence of space. Is everything you see a stroke of luck?

Everything happens for a reason: why not let God be that reason?

Ok fine noone can prove anything, by your logic god is in that category of make believe just like the facts are.

Yes reladiocarbon dating is not exact to the day year or even millennia, but the point is even if the tests r off by 50% (being generous beyond belief) the earth is still a minimum of 2 billion years older than your god says it is. Lets get more generous, dating is off by 99%, the bible is STILL wrong about the earths age.

The most logical answer is that the earth and cosmos are unimaginably old because even Hubble has a "light horizon" that it can't see beyond, but most respected astronomers are certain its much bigger, the reason we have a horizon is that light traveling at 186 million miles per hour hasn't had enough time to reach earth.

This implies an unbelievably ancient cosmos. What did god do create light from 14.7 billion light years away spontaneously appear in our sky? He cannot, the speed of light is fixed, its the C in E=MC2. Its a CONSTANT that is unchangeable, even by your god.

Merged double post. -Cygnus David

It never says how old the Earth is in the Bible. All it says is that it took God 6 days to make the Earth. Who's to say that our days are the same length as His days?

God can do whatever He wants: He's God. If He wants to 'spontaneously make light appear 14.7 billion light years away, why can't He? The speed of light may be fixed but He isn't; he exists outside of time. He is eternal and omnipresent; He is everywhere and nowhere all at the same time. And again, if God can create the universe, what gives you the nerve to say He can't control light?

Big bang, evolution...etc they're facts. God is not. Once you have facts that disprove faith, faith should become extinct. Why believe something that is proven to be a lie?
Bible says earths 10K years old. Science PROVES its 4+ billion years old.
Logically speaking, god MUST be wrong. If he's wrong, he's not god.

Faith: complete trust or confidence in someone or something.

You can't disprove faith, it's a state of mind or a lifestyle so to speak. The Big Bang is not fact. Just as you were not there to witness God making the universe, you weren't there to see it explode into existence.

Nowhere in the Bible does it say that the Earth is 10000 years old. All it days is that God took 6 days crafting the universe an all thats in it. Time is relative, any physicist will tell you that. God is not bound by time. 6 God days is who knows how many in Earth days.

Science is a way for man to understand the world. We use out limited knowledge and go from there. Look back a few hundred years and scoff at those who thought the Earth was flat; now we know better: we got new data. Maybe someday we'll actually have proof about what happened at the beginning of time, but for now, all we have is Faith.


Use the multiquote button instead of posting consecutively, please. ~StoppingTime

[StoppingTime]

e

Scientific evidence does point to a much older earth. So either it is that

Which is much more likely than whatever it is you're about to say

old or God made it look that old. He made full grown humans, plants, and animals; why couldn't he make the Earth seem older?

I guess..? But that reasoning doesn't exactly stand up in a debate.

The speed of light may be fixed but He isn't; he exists outside of time. He is eternal and omnipresent; He is everywhere and nowhere all at the same time. And again, if God can create the universe, what gives you the nerve to say He can't control light?


This is your only other statement to which I'm going to respond, and only because it doesn't have a place in a debate. A debate, in its simplest form, is just a conversation in which you're supposed to be able to back up your side by some form of substantial evidence. Faith, however, is not this sort of evidence. I'm not at all telling you that you're wrong or your beliefs are wrong - it's not my place and truly, I can't even know - but it is wrong to try and combat scientific hypotheses and theories with faith and religion. Those two things just don't work together in a debate because things always end up the same way- theists proclaiming an omnipotent/present God who can do anything, and everyone else saying that God doesn't have a role. There's never going to be an answer to this question in any debate on this forum, so why bring it up endlessly?

[Camazotz]

Scientific evidence does point to a much older earth. So either it is that old or God made it look that old. He made full grown humans, plants, and animals; why couldn't he make the Earth seem older?

On to your point: as for the Big Bang, there is no definitive proof that it happened. But if it did, then I like to think of it this way: God spoke, and his words are power, right. And then the universe exploded into being. Kind of like the Big Bang isn't it?

One more thing, to everyone who thinks there is no God. Do you really want to believe that you were an accident? A mishap by nature or the product of 'evolution'? Look around the universe. Since your dad is an astronomer, he should be able to tell you the wonders and magnificence of space. Is everything you see a stroke of luck?

Everything happens for a reason: why not let God be that reason?

This is my response to these claims...

"We could still imagine that there is a set of laws that determines events completely for some supernatural being, who could observe the present state of the universe without disturbing it. However, such models of the universe are not of much interest to us mortals. It seems better to employ the principle known as Occam's razor and cut out all the features of the theory that cannot be observed."

-Stephen Hawking

You seem to presume that a lack of evidence is proof that God exists, and therefore safe to assume his existence. Additionally, you seem to have some misconceptions on current scientific theory; we have sufficient evidence to support the Big Bang Theory, such as the discovery of the Higgs Boson particle. Likewise, our existence isn't "due to chance"; we are here today because of millions of years of evolution from single-celled organisms billions of years ago.

It never says how old the Earth is in the Bible. All it says is that it took God 6 days to make the Earth. Who's to say that our days are the same length as His days?

God can do whatever He wants: He's God. If He wants to 'spontaneously make light appear 14.7 billion light years away, why can't He? The speed of light may be fixed but He isn't; he exists outside of time. He is eternal and omnipresent; He is everywhere and nowhere all at the same time. And again, if God can create the universe, what gives you the nerve to say He can't control light?

Faith: complete trust or confidence in someone or something.

You can't disprove faith, it's a state of mind or a lifestyle so to speak. The Big Bang is not fact. Just as you were not there to witness God making the universe, you weren't there to see it explode into existence.

Nowhere in the Bible does it say that the Earth is 10000 years old. All it days is that God took 6 days crafting the universe an all thats in it. Time is relative, any physicist will tell you that. God is not bound by time. 6 God days is who knows how many in Earth days.

Science is a way for man to understand the world. We use out limited knowledge and go from there. Look back a few hundred years and scoff at those who thought the Earth was flat; now we know better: we got new data. Maybe someday we'll actually have proof about what happened at the beginning of time, but for now, all we have is Faith.

Again, more misconceptions: I wasn't there to see Jesus get crucified, so how do I know he existed? Well we have some archaeological evidence and some historical accounts that indicate he probably existed. Likewise, we have particle evidence that the Big Bang occurred, and observable evidence that evolution occurs. We have plenty of evidence for those scientific theories.

[Miserabilia]

Scientific evidence does point to a much older earth.

Oh wait, it does though,. Well how about that.


He made full grown humans, plants, and animals;



0% evidence.



On to your point: as for the Big Bang, there is no definitive proof that it happened.




There is extensive conclusive evidence for it, though. Well how about that. Try a simple google search.


God spoke, and his words are power, right. And then the universe exploded into being. Kind of like the Big Bang isn't it?



The universe "exploding into being" IS the big bang, regardless of what hapepend to cause that.



One more thing, to everyone who thinks there is no God. Do you really want to believe that you were an accident? A mishap by nature or the product of 'evolution'? Look around the universe. Since your dad is an astronomer, he should be able to tell you the wonders and magnificence of space. Is everything you see a stroke of luck?



Oh it's this post again.
First of all, NOT EVERYTHING IS A STROKE OF LUCK, by the reasoning I think you are referig to EVERYTHING woudl be the RESULT of luck.
Secondly, NOT ALL ATHEISTS BELEIVE THIS. They simple do not beleive in a god.



Why not let god be that reason?


Because we only know things INSIDE our niverse need a reason, and also, because I am not going to make up and beleive in a concept in my mind just to answer a question I don't know the answer to.


God can do whatever He wants: He's God. If He wants to 'spontaneously make light appear 14.7 billion light years away, why can't He? The speed of light may be fixed but He isn't; he exists outside of time. He is eternal and omnipresent; He is everywhere and nowhere all at the same time. And again, if God can create the universe, what gives you the nerve to say He can't control light?


That's all hypothetical and it doesn't proove or support your argument in any way. If if if if.





Faith: complete trust or confidence in someone or something.

You can't disprove faith, it's a state of mind or a lifestyle so to speak. The Big Bang is not fact. Just as you were not there to witness God making the universe, you weren't there to see it explode into existence.



"nobody saw it happen, so it's not true."

Sigh.






Nowhere in the Bible does it say that the Earth is 10000 years old. All it days is that God took 6 days crafting the universe an all thats in it. Time is relative, any physicist will tell you that. God is not bound by time. 6 God days is who knows how many in Earth days.




I don't think you understand what relativity of time is. Also, the bible says 6 days and doesn't say not to take that literaly anywhere, doing so is literaly making things up.




Science is a way for man to understand the world. We use out limited knowledge and go from there. Look back a few hundred years and scoff at those who thought the Earth was flat; now we know better: we got new data. Maybe someday we'll actually have proof about what happened at the beginning of time, but for now, all we have is Faith.





And, you know, all evidence pointing in the same direction.

[coltonaustin]

Oh wait, it does though,. Well how about that.

I wasn't disagreeing, you don't have to get all snappy at me.

0% evidence.

The Bible says so. Since I'm Christian, I believe that what is in the Bible is what really happened. I believe it's called FAITH!

There is extensive conclusive evidence for it, though. Well how about that. Try a simple Google search.

The Big Bang is a theory; it's what we think happened based on our current knowledge.

The universe "exploding into being" IS the big bang, regardless of what happened to cause that.

I was giving all you nonbelievers the benefit of the doubt by saying that maybe we're looking at the same event from a different perspective. We Christians believe that God spoke the universe into existence, you believe it just happened. It may have looked the same but I choose that a creator made it.

Oh it's this post again.
First of all, NOT EVERYTHING IS A STROKE OF LUCK, by the reasoning I think you are referring to EVERYTHING would be the RESULT of luck.
Secondly, NOT ALL ATHEISTS BELIEVE THIS. They simple do not believe in a god.

I never said they all did. Either God created the universe or he didn't; if he did, then there is a plan and a purpose. If he didn't, what's to say 'evolution' didn't take a wrong turn and send humans on a different path.

Because we only know things INSIDE our universe need a reason, and also, because I am not going to make up and believe in a concept in my mind just to answer a question I don't know the answer to.

It's not made up, it's been around for thousands of years. Our God has proven Himself time and time again. All you need to do is read the Bible.

That's all hypothetical and it doesn't prove or support your argument in any way. If if if if.

The Big Bang is just a theory. A theory is exactly that: a theory. It's how we humans try to explain the universe. The Big Bang is a big IF, too.

"nobody saw it happen, so it's not true."
Sigh.

I was making both sides equal in that statement. My point was no one was there at the beginning of time to tell us that either of us is right.

I don't think you understand what relativity of time is. Also, the bible says 6 days and doesn't say not to take that literally anywhere, doing so is literally making things up.

Believe me, I probably know more about physics than you do.
As for what you said: my point proven.

And, you know, all evidence pointing in the same direction.

Except for the fact that nearly every mainstream scientist immediately rules out God and the Bible whenever they try to interpret their findings. It's completely biased against a creator.

[Vlerchan]

We Christians believe that God spoke the universe into existence, you believe it just happened.
Well, actually, I believe that the universe has always been in existence.

You can't have a time before the universe because time can't exist without an object.

... if he did, then there is a plan and a purpose.
Not necessarily.

All you need to do is read the Bible.
You'll find that the Bible is only proof if we presume it is proof to begin with.

The Big Bang is a big IF, too.
It's a lot smaller an IF than anything Christian's promote.

http://gizmodo.com/astronomers-discover-first-direct-proof-of-the-big-bang-1545525927

My point was no one was there at the beginning of time to tell us that either of us is right.
And that's why scientists are looking into different ways to prove that the Big Bang occurred.

Except for the fact that nearly every mainstream scientist immediately rules out God and the Bible whenever they try to interpret their findings.
They don't 'rule out' god or the bible.

They just don't make the presumptions that Christians do about god and the bible because there's no reasonable basis to make these presumptions.

Considering that this applies evenly to all unverified claims I wouldn't consider it bias.

[coltonaustin]

Well, actually, I believe that the universe has always been in existence.

You can't have a time before the universe because time can't exist without an object.

I never said there was time before the universe and I never said you thought there was. As I mentioned before, God exists outside of time. So, even when there was no time, such as before the universe, God was still and always will be there.

Not necessarily.

Of course there was. Do you do anything without a reason? Even I you think you don't, there is some subconscious part of you that's guiding your decisions. The universe was a work of art. Don't artists have some idea what they're going to do before they start and how they want it to turn out? They do. Meaning there is a plan.


You'll find that the Bible is only proof if we presume it is proof to begin with.

Why wouldn't you? I you automatically say there's no way it happened like the Bible says, you're doing exactly what I said the scientists are doing: getting rid of a valid option.


It's a lot smaller an IF than anything Christian's promote.

http://gizmodo.com/astronomers-discover-first-direct-proof-of-the-big-bang-1545525927

Coming from the one who supports it. From my perspective, the Bible is the logical choice an what the scientists come up with is the bigger IF.

And that's why scientists are looking into different ways to prove that the Big Bang occurred.

Because their findings so far aren't enough? Guess that makes me more right, so, thanks for the support.


They don't 'rule out' god or the bible.

They just don't make the presumptions that Christians do about god and the bible because there's no reasonable basis to make these presumptions.

Considering that this applies evenly to all unverified claims I wouldn't consider it bias.

Then why is it that not once has a scientist ever truly proven the Bible to be true? It seems like you're saying millions of people have falsely believed in that for millennia, and yet there isn't proof that we're wrong.

If God verifying it isn't enough, I can't think of anything more powerful to convince you other than pure tenacity.

[Miserabilia]

The Big Bang is a theory; it's what we think happened based on our current knowledge.


Gravity is a theory. Matter and energy? Theories.
The big bang happened, as all evidence suggests and directly points to it.



The Big Bang is just a theory. A theory is exactly that: a theory. It's how we humans try to explain the universe. The Big Bang is a big IF, too.



Gravity is a theory. Matter and energy? Theories.
The big bang happened, as all evidence suggests and directly points to it.




I was making both sides equal in that statement. My point was no one was there at the beginning of time to tell us that either of us is right.


Well, in a couple of years there won't be anyone alive anymore that lived during the first world war.
Are we going to doubt that entire event because nobody is alive to tell us what happened?
As a matter of fact, objective measured data is more trustable than human sources.




Believe me, I probably know more about physics than you do.
As for what you said: my point proven.


> saying god could create the earth in 6 days
> because time is relative

You either don't know what relativity of time is, or don't know the concept of what a day is.




Except for the fact that nearly every mainstream scientist immediately rules out God and the Bible whenever they try to interpret their findings. It's completely biased against a creator.

:lol:

Actualy, they try to make a theory based on what we know of the real world. Once it would DIRECTLY require a god to work as efficient theory they would just say that.

"Oh look I found a new formula to describe the energy of whatever. I'll try to explain it using these forces!"

"That's so biased against god."

[Vlerchan]

I never said there was time before the universe and I never said you thought there was.
You said (italics added):

"We Christians believe that God spoke the universe into existence, you believe it just happened."

I don't believe anything happened. I believe it just is.

So, even when there was no time, such as before the universe, God was still and always will be there.
Sure. Though I'm not trying to disprove the existence of god because it's an impossible task.

Of course there was.
I don't pretend to understand god's (by definition) incomprehensible mind.

Do you do anything without a reason?
I've no idea why you'd consider me comparable to god.

Why wouldn't you?
It's ambiguous. Lots of people hold lots of different interpretations.

It contradicts itself in places.

It is contradicted by other historical documents in places.

It's unverifiable in places.

It's generally inadvisable to rely on just a single source.

---

It's also not actually evidence that god exists.

It's evidence that people in the past believed that god existed and people in the past believed to have interacted with this god.

I you automatically say there's no way it happened like the Bible says, you're doing exactly what I said the scientists are doing.
I never said this.

You were also wrong about the scientists.

From my perspective, the Bible is the logical choice an what the scientists come up with is the bigger IF.
Okay. Your perspective has a much lesser amount of evidence backing it.

Because their findings so far aren't enough?
I don't think you can ever have 'enough' evidence backing a historic occurrence.

I would be satisfied by the current level however.

Guess that makes me more right, so, thanks for the support.
No, it doesn't. I have no idea how you drew this conclusion.

It seems like you're saying millions of people have falsely believed in that for millennia, and yet there isn't proof that we're wrong.
If I can't prove that something is untrue, that doesn't automatically make it true.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance

If God verifying it isn't enough, I can't think of anything more powerful to convince you other than pure tenacity.
The problem is that god never verified the bible, the people who wrote about god in the bible just claimed he did.

edit: it seems he has gone and gotten himself banned. Oh well..