I don't believe in there being just "one Big Bang". There was probably a universe way before the scientists think there was. The so called big bang was just a small explosion that created some stuff like planets and stars. The universe is so big that it has existed basically forever, and there are always new stars and galaxies being created.
@DrMontague Just felt the need to point out that Theory is far better than just speculation and personal bias. ^_^ Though when I say theory, I'm talking science theory, so I'm sure you don't actually understand what I'm saying.
@Moland Theory def. 2 a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural[speculative] and subject to experimentation, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact. Synonyms: idea, notion hypothesis, postulate. (on line dictionary)
We have no evidence for parallel universe therefore theory def 2 applies i.e.it is speculative. A scientific theory on the other hand is based on observation and measurement e.g. theory of gravity.
Corporate science is rigged. Look at how many times Monsanto and other globalist pharmaceutical corporations have been caught rigging and lying about their results. Some scientists actually say aspartame is safe, some scientists actually say that vaccines are safe, some scientists actually say GMO food is safe. Science is a scam.
@mustaffa1611 How do you know it's rigged? This implies that other scientists are questioning the validity of other scientists claims! Perhaps I should advise people not to to take their heart tablets because they don't work! Perhaps we should tell people not to take medicines such as warfrin for thinning the blood. At the end of the day you have a choice whether or not to take medicines.
@mustaffa1611 Of course certain plants can help but they cannot cure everything. No doubt you have a cure for cancer?! I've known people who supposedly deal in alternative medicine. One thing they they tell everyone is never to stop taking the medication their GP has prescribed them. Indeed their is no such thing as alternative medicine, a medicine either works or doesn't no matter what it's source. No doubt you get a cold you have beads and rattles shaken around your head!
@DrMontague There are many simple cures for cancer... look up gerson institute. Cure for aids is simple too... look up "house of numbers." Also a little reading at Dr. Mercola's website will be quite valuable also.
@mustaffa1611 OMG people who have got cancer are ignorant of these simplistic cures? There have been plenty of tests done on fraudulent claims of so called alternative cures. It would be all over the media if their were definite cures for these horrendous diseases. No doubt these people are making money out of peoples desperation for a cure. Next you will be claiming that no one has to die because their is a plant out their that stops the aging process altogether.You are gullible.
@DrMontague The only way corporate medicine deals with cancer is by butchering it out or giving you toxic radiation and hoping the cancer dies before the person does. Obviously you havent checked out the Max Gerson institute and see why thousand are fleeing the U.S. for help. It's common knowledge that federal swat teams have raided anyone who even uses the word "cure" for anything. Corporate toxic agriculture, tap water and vaccines are the reason for cancer, mother nature is the cure.
@mustaffa1611 Further people who live in the rain forests have used natural remedies for centuries. However they did not have a cure for diseases such as small pox. To totally dismiss modern medicine as bogus is nothing but the product of a deluded mind.
@DrMontague They didnt get small pox and by living and eating naturally they had no need for a cure. You might want to read something other than your white imperialist compulsory publik skool version of history because it was the Europeons that purposely spread small pox. Ft. Pitt in pittsburgh under the control of George Washington was using biological warfare against the native peoples. Serial Killer George passed out blankets with small pox to genocide the indigenous people.
Respond to this video... Further if corporate science is rigged then why do drug companies spend millions of dollars on research\. Surely it would be cheaper just to throw a placebo together! No doubt you have a cure for aides!
@TheSulphuric Did you ever look at a satellite photo of the earth? It is only land and water. Countries and States do not exist. Those lines they call "borders" are imaginary. They are make believe concepts that you are forced to pretend are real by men with guns. Go ahead try to cross one of those invisible lines and see what happens.
THERE IS ONE THINGS ABOUT RELIGION THE HAVE A MOUTH FULL WHEN THEY SAY GOD. BUT WHAT GOD ARE THEY TALKING ABOUT, THE GOD OF THE INCAS,THE ROMANS GODS, THE EGYPTIAN GODS, THE JEW GOD,THE MUSLIN GOD,THE HINDU GODS... NO THEY HAVE THEIR OWN PARTICULAR GOD IN MIND. SO SOME WILL SAY THE CORAN SAYS.... OR THE BIBLE SAYS, OR THE VEDA SAYS AND SO ON... SO WHEN SOME ONE SAYS GOD. REMEMBER HUMAN HAS HAD MANY GODS.. THE ONE YOU MIGHT BE BELIEVING TODAY WILL CERTAINLY BE MYTHOLOGY AS ARE SO MANY OTHERS
As someone who has got a physics degree, I would say Science has not yet proven/dis proven that the universe came out of nothing, In fact its spurious information.Some Physicists believe it might have come out of nothing, but this needs to be proven or dis proven. My personal opinion is that it is more logical to say the big bang had a cause, Something like the end of the life of a blackhole.. Which is a common phenomena and is known to almost certainly exist based on current evidence.
@Singum999 I know of such arguments e.g. two membranes might have collided, multiple universes etc.
However we can ask what was there before these events. i.e. can there be a state of nothing? Did everything come out of nothing? The nothing we experience is a vacuum and has 3 dimensions which allows light to pass through it. Is there such a thing as a void that has no dimensions? Hurts your head to try and comprehend it.
@DrMontague According to the current state of quantum physics, nothing is a very difficult state to maintain. When they removed all the quarks and gluons from an area, they would start spontaneously appearing. Keep in mind that our version of a "vacuum" is packed with something, we just can't detect it directly. When we figure out what dark energy and dark matter are, I think we'll be one step closer to answering that question.
@DrMontague - First we have to find evidence that "nothing" exists outside of a philisophical contemplation of absence of anything. We haven't found an example of nothing yet so to question whether something came out of nothing is also quite some thing. Even the vacuum is "something".
@TheSpankymonkey I agree. the vacuum has properties i.e. it can be 4 dimensional Suck all the air out of glass tank and you have a vacuum that has 4 dimensions and which light can pass through. But then the problem arises how is there a vacuum with properties? Is there any such thing as absolute nothingness. Perhaps it is beyond human comprehension. As one scientists argued brains evolved in order to survive the environment not to comprehend the universe. .
@DrMontague - I don't understand myself where this notion of nothing comes from personally, other than our own primitive ignorance. Ie, i have two goats, i have no goats... therefore i have nothing.
@TheSpankymonkey But this can be translated as meaning you do not have two goats it would not mean you have nothing. The goats would be some where else as goats or matter in another form.
@DrMontague - I know that, you know that but try telling that to someone who hasn't really thought out what "nothing" actually is/isn't. I can forgive a desert goat herder for having a concept of nothing in relation to goats. I can't forgive someone in this day and age who has every means at their disposal to consider "nothing". That sounded great eh? "Consider nothing"...
As someone who has got a physics degree, I will say there is no evidence suggesting that the universe came out of nothing, In fact its spurious information. That it might have come out of nothing, and this needs to be proven is much nearer the current scientific understanding.
There are many in this forum that are quite uneducated. They can't spell or create a grammatical sentence. Then there are those who use the word "theory" as if a tool. Evolution is a fact - not a theory. Check out a tad pole from birth - and into a frog. Watch a maggot grow into a house fly. Watch a larva grow or worm grow into their like and kind. That is evolution in front of your eyes. Watch a sperm cell change into an 85 year old man/woman. Religion is superstition and witchcraft.
@FreeeeS IIt argued that Spinoza pantheism is simply nature. Einstein believed in Spinoza's god in the sense that the tern god was simply another term for nature. Nature gave Einstein a sense of awe , to give emphasis to his emotional feeling for nature Einstein referred to nature as god. They certainly didn't believe in a personal god who sits in judgment and answers prayers.
I like how science says the universe was created out of nothing, and thats somehow more believable than religion saying there is a god. The simple fact of it all is no one will ever know for sure.
@jwpnc1 When we think of nothing then the nothing we think of has properties. E.g. a vacuum chamber can have all atoms sucked out of it. We are left with nothing. But light can pass through this nothing. So it isn't really nothing!
I loved the bit at the end of this video, explaining redshift, with the doppler effect of the passing train, and relating it to the expanding universe, in the background as the train passed was a huge observatory pointing up at the universe. Well done the tv director.
Scientific evidence suggests Evolution. Creation, religious or scientific is only conjectural. It is futile to debate. Human is getting to the point of Creation that has nothing to do with religious beliefs. Scriptures are depicting Man’s knowledge of that time. Charlatans, for eons, have used them to benefit themselves. It would be beneficial for humanity not to waste meagre resources on beliefs without evidence.
@oratadin It's a debate about the creation of the universe. It is not pro religion or science. Professor John Polkinghorne was a professor of theoretical physics at Cambridge university and held the chair for science. He is now an ordained catholic priest. Professor Peter Atkins is an atheist but held the chair for science at Oxford. Therefore it is an intellectual debate in which these two professors argue their point.
science has barely scratched the surface of possibilities. while scientists are doing a great job decoding the universe, they have limited abilities. science can't prove or disprove divine creation. science is the explanation of things that we know exist. we don't know how deep the rabbit hole goes. Before newton gravity existed, even though we didn't know it. So there's a possibility that things beyond our wildest imaginations exist, we just don't know it yet.
@Lmoseley0726 Theists claim the gods exist therefore it is for them to prove their claim . It is not for atheists to disprove god as this would be akin to asking them to prove the tooth fairy doesn't exist. Atheists simply argue that there is no reliable evidence for the gods. Faith: belief without proof ( on line dictionary) This means any bull shit can go.
@swisscheesepotatochi There's evidence for intelligent design through molecular and cellular biology. Funniest thing I've heard scientists say is that aliens seeded us here. No evidence of aliens, not to the general populations knowledge, but they're still inclined to believe that. That's crazier than someone who believes in ID. The other theory is complete randomness. Geneticists believe it's impossible that we're formed by chance.
@Lmoseley0726 I don't think any scientist has said that...and please elaborate on the evidence for intelligent design...And why are you telling me that geneticist believe its impossible that we're formed by chance? Do any scientific theories claim we do?
@Lmoseley0726 There is a possibility, but before accepting a its truth, may want to actually prove it to be truth...besides, how do prove something exist besides the use of science? Instincts, gut, perception, intuition?
@swisscheesepotatochi I would love proof of anything. Evolution is still theory not proven. But limiting what we're willing to research as truth because of atheistism is just short changing ourselves. Quantum physics is fascinating and I believe it will open more eyes the deeper we go, as to the possibilities. If higher intelligent beings could transverse matter, time, and space, wouldn't you think they understood quantum mechanics. We have no proof of them but 2000-4000 yr old testimony.
@Lmoseley0726 i don't quite understand the problem, no scientist ever claimed that there were higher and more intelligent beings exist, even if they did they may not understand quantum mechanics for even now very to none understands quantum mechanics...and evolution by natural selection is as proven as germ theory or viral resistance...it has been observed in the laboratory and tested dozens of times...just search wikipedia, or ask an evolutionary biologist...
@swisscheesepotatochi Issac Newton believed in god as did many other scientists of his time, several Islamic scientists and Christian scientists in to days world still believe in god. Not all scientists are atheists. Many still have a psychological yearning for god!
@DrMontague okay...atheism is doesn't make any claim, its just saying that if you have not proven the existence of god yet, don't treat as truth...and of course other philosophical claims that science cannot know if god exists...and science is the only test for objective reality...
@swisscheesepotatochi Agree. It is for theists to prove god as they are making the claim. However scientific research gives us a totally different view as to the creation, this along with reasoned arguments puts the notion of there being a god in the same vain for there being a tooth fairy.
@swisscheesepotatochi I would love proof of anything. Evolution is still theory not proven. But limiting what we're willing to research as truth because of atheistism is just short changing ourselves. Quantum physics is fascinating and I believe it will open more eyes the deeper we go, as to the possibilities. If higher intelligent beings could transverse matter, time, and space, wouldn't you think they understood quantum mechanics. We have no proof of them but 2000-4000 yr old testimony.
@swisscheesepotatochi I would love proof of anything. Evolution is still theory not proven. But limiting what we're willing to research as truth because of atheistism is just short changing ourselves. Quantum physics is fascinating and I believe it will open more eyes the deeper we go, as to the possibilities. If higher intelligent beings could transverse matter, time, and space, wouldn't you think they understood quantum mechanics. We have no proof of them but 2000-4000 yr old testimony.
@swisscheesepotatochi I'm 100% for scienceand proof of anything would be great. Evolution is still theory, but they believe it. I believe it's unwise to limit ourselves due to Atheism. But quantum physics is breaching what we thought we knew, for the greater good. If higher intelligent beings existed and could transverse matter, time, or space, wouldn't you think they understood quantum mechanics? We have no proof of them except 4000 yr old testimony.
@Lmoseley0726 Any thing that can be observed or measured is a scientific fact e.g. gravity is a scientific fact. All we know about how gravity behaves is known as the the theory of gravity. A scientific theory is different to our every day usage of the term which means a speculation. Evolutionary theory is a scientific theory, it is based on observation and measurement, it is therefore a fact!
Its so sad that we are the most intelligent species on the planet, yet we aren't smart enough to tell the difference between reality and fantasy. Even when the fantasy is so bullshit.
On the contrary, we are smart enough that we are willing to question our own capacity to objectively interpret reality. We are the only species smart enough to even ask this question.
Ahh but don't forget that when there are gaps in our knowledge that leaves space for all the knowledge we do have to shake around in our heads and get broken, so we need styrofoam (religion) to fill those spaces and keep the knowledge safe...
@lamjer68 Where do you come off think WE are the "most intelligent species on the planet" ?? Think again. We are the only species that kill for the fun of it. WE are the only species that willfully destroy something - even ourselves - for the thrill of it. No Other Species on Earth destroys Anything if not for survival. Humans destroy for fun. No... We are not the most intelligent. We are merely the product of a species with most advantages of reason and a brain capable of choice.
@resculptit My girlfriend hat a cat that would bring dead birds to her all the time (not eaten) outside her room. We aren't the only species that destroy something, other then survival.
Humans killing things for fun has nothing to do with our intelligence nor does it make us any less so. Monkies can't build microprocessers with millions of transistors that compute commands to perform tasks that we desire, now can they? Guess they aren't that intelligent enough to do so.
'The great crisis of humanity today is that it has lost its sense of the invisible, particularly in the West. If I were called upon to identify briefly the principal trait of the entire 20th century, I would be unable to find anything more precise and pithy than to repeat again and again 'Men have forgotten God'. The failings of human consciousness deprived of its divine dimensions have been a determining factor in the major crimes of this century.
That's all you have to say because you are a deluded fuckwit. Please mammy please keep on telling me the tooth fairy exists so I will find a bit of money under my pillow in the morning. Yes darling don't listen to those who try to give rational argument and who present scientific evidence for things such as evolutionary theory. Just keep on reading the brothers' Grimm fairy story called the Koran.
You mean those accounts of out-of-body experiences that people in extreme states of shock or disorder find themselves? My dear friend, whatever we feel or think is a result of our brain feeling or thinking it. Just because I fall on my head and see dancing zombies stripping on religious music doesn't mean it's real, nor scientifically provable that dancing zombies exist. It only means I'm delusional, much like you people are, who see, feel and hear supernatural beings.
PRAISE the almighty Singularity. it created the four forces that govern our universe. Why would god allow the Andromeda galaxy collide with ours in the next few billion years? If I could, everyone would research m-theory, f-theory, 11 dimension theory, string theory, and of course, what the Singularity was. you would never hear the word religion again.
@toyoda4life Screw the Thought of some Singularity. There are NO forces that govern anything. Our universe is made up of gas and rock. There is no God. It is superstition and witchcraft. If ANYONE believes in a God, then they MUST believe in a Satan and Witchcraft. If Witchcraft was real - as religions profess - then there would be a Flock of people lining up to make gold from lead. The thought of some "higher power" is bull.
Yep god was standing around with his finger up his arse feeling rather bored and then thought to himself I'll make the Crab, Orion, boomerang, and horsehead nebula just for the hell of it. Good idea he thought because it will make intelligent humans ask why god would want to make such things!
DrMontague, who made this video? It looks like it's from the 70s, maybe? It's very interesting as a historical document. Could you post the bibliographical information in the info perhaps?
Hmm. I think it depends on what creationists you're talking to. For example, most creationists would say God has free will, as when he said we were made in his image, he meant he gave us the same free will he has, and of course people in that area would believe God is always right morally. Continued in next comment =P
Me, on the other hand beleive in a creative force starting the universe, and life itself, and while I do think God has free will, I also think he doesn't have to be morally right. I just believe he only creates, and therefore doesn't do anything of normal moral question. I don't think he interferes with life outside of creating it in the first place, and so he's done nothing morally objectionable, or commendable. He just kind of is there.
None. It's simply that, whether do to my own lack of intelligence or otherwise, I can't think of a natural means for the creation of the universe. So, if it isn't natural, it must be supernatural. That said, I'm more than willing to be proven wrong.
Therefore you are a god of the gap type of person. What we do know is that mankind has often resorted to conjuring up supernatural beings when coming across something they cannot understand or comprehend. Another thing , not one ancient text got the creation right , non mention a big bang or expanding universe.
Another thing, if god is omnipotent then we cannot have free will, quite simply because he must know what the future holds e.g when , where and how we are all going to die. Therefore our action have to be determined, child murderer's cannot therefore be held reponsible for their actions, god is!
Fine, if that's what it's called. I'm creation of the gap. I'll have you know that I don't subscribe to any of the ancient texts. As far as I'm concerned, they are too primitive, and serve simply as a means to hold people back. All I believe in is a God that created the universe.
As stupid as I may sound, it more so stems from the laws of conservation. Whether or not this has been proven a moot point I don't know, but if matter and energy can't be created in natural means and yet they exist, and must come from somewhere, than it must be a supernatural means that created them. I kind of have a problem with "it always was." Anyway, your point on omnipotence was very good, but I don't believe I ever said god is omnipotent. Perhaps he simply has the power of creation.
You said "I can't think of a natural means of creation". And then went on to say, so if it's not natural, it must be supernatural. That reasoning just defies logic. Here is your reasoning being used to prove something else. Penguins are TV's. Because all penguins are black and white, and all TV's used to be black and white, it means penguins are TV's. Do you see how stupid that sounds? I just can't believe some thickhead actually gave you a thumbs up for the comment. Hint,.. (Cont)...
XD! The reasoning does indeed sound stupid when put like that, although I already said I may be proven stupid. However if I change it to "If there is no natural means, it's not natural" does that work? I realize one can't just say in an argument "by the way I change my argument," but let's just ignore that.
Well, The only right thing to say is this, "there is no KNOWN natural means". And this still does not allow for the supernatural. Here is the reason. If something where thought of as supernatural, once we decided to break it down and understand it, it becomes natural. Here is a good thought exercise. The only way to prove God is to have God tell me he exists. But, once he tells me he exists he is interacting with the physical and can no longer be supernatural. Therefore, he is not god.
Hint... Just because you can't think of how something works, does not mean that it must be supernatural. Do you know how a microwave works? Do you know how a suspended concrete slab can stay in place? are they supernatural? No, they are not. Hint two. If you are going to argue philosophy, you might want to understand what it is you are arguing. Religion is philosophy. Science is... well... science. The two are completely different and yet morons continue to argue that one or the other is right.
Religion: a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs. Conline dictionary)
Philosophy:the rational investigation of the truths and principles of being, knowledge, or conduct. (online dictionary)
I can't believe you actually don't know that religion is a philosophy!?! You actually study psychology or just read some books? Have you ever studied philosophy? Have you got any idea what the etymology of the word philosophy is? And religion? Don't call people MORONS when you sound like one yourself.
That's true, but 5 minutes of google searching, and I could know how a microwave works. It doesn't violate any laws of physics, while unless saying matter and energy predate time, the universe does (or do they still?) Not trying to make offence or anything, but you seem angry. What does one's belief in God do to you? I'll have you know I follow no religious rituals concerning it, nor does it impact the choices I make in my life, so therefore, I don't use it as an excuse to harm people.
That's good. sort of. I am not angry. No offence taken. I just picked a hole in your logic. How do you know that matter and energy DON'T predate time. My point was this, just because you don't know what force made matter/energy erupt from seemingly nothing, does not mean that it is, hence, supernatural. To say "if we cannot explain it, it must be supernatural" is a logically flawed argument. I pointed this out. Your reasoning cannot be taken seriously as shown in the penguin analogy.
Atheists simply argue that they do not know how the universe came into being. Science might one day give us an explanation. The difference between the religious and the atheists is that the religious claim they do know! What is their evidence? It's written down in ancient texts therefore it must be true! So is Zeus et al therefore this must must also be true.
Yes, so true. We would also have the Flying Spaghetti Monster, Kev the Big Red Orbiting Lobster and a pantheon of other deity's that we would have to contend with. The major point is (now this might be hard to follow) that although neither viewpoint (God or No God) can ever be fully proven, it is easier to disprove God then it is to either prove God, disprove Atheism, or prove Atheism.
It is not for atheists to disprove god. That would be like asking them to disprove the tooth fairy! The theist are the ones who claim that there are supernatural being/s therefore the onus is on them to prove god/s exist. Atheists simply argue that there is no reliable evidence for supernatural beings. Ancient texts and word of mouth are not reliable evidence.
I did say it would be hard to follow. It is not about proving or disproving. It is just a little mind game you play on theists. Re-read what I wrote. Think about it for a while. Break the options into four groups. Pro God you can either prove or disprove existence. Anti God you can either prove or disprove it's relevance. One of these options is easier to do than any of the others. Which one? And why?
I'm going to reupload this vid in another user name. It's strange that the a 30 second snippit of music heard at the beginning of this vid can be found and listened to in full on youtube. I think that some shit head creationist reported it as a violation in order to stop intellectual debate against creationism.
Science admits some of their theories are wrong after people realize that they were completely fabricated in the first place.....such as Oort Cloud and drawing embryos with gill slits....lol
Scientists admit that sometimes they can get things wrong. But it's other scientists who have proven other scientists to be wrong. It is still science. that is being used. Science adjusts it stance according to new evidence. It's dynamic. Science continuously questions itself. Of course an easy cop out is to simply believe without evidence that a supernatural being is behind it all. There is an angry god inside evey volcanoe!
The all-star scientists were almost all Christian, namely Copernicus, Kepler, Galileo, Newton, Boyle, Faraday, Mendel, Kelvin, and Planck...even Einstein recognized the impossibility of a non-created universe.....our modern day scientists don't hold a candle to these guys....the huge misconception is that people think that Christians believe in a God that "fills in the gaps", rather, we come to faith in God by discovering the complexity of his creation as did the scientist mentioned above
Those scientists would have looked at the evidence for the big bang and evolutionary theory.. They would recogmise that the ancient texts got it wrong. Therefore they might have changed their world view accordingly. Having a psychological yearning to believe in a super natural being does not automatically acquate with truth. This intelligent designer puts craters on the moon, allows missiles to fly around in space, makes galaxies that cannot be seen with the naked eye! How pathetic!
Further he allows life to evolve which inhvolves much suffering. This intelligent designer would know in advance before he created anything the misery and suffering he would bring into existence. Of course the psychology of mankind has been to justify this suffering by believing we have upset the god/s in some way and are therefore being punished.. Evolution shows that all life merely trys to survive in amyway it possibly can, this includes all diseases. What a sick designer!
These men also were mostly born and lived prior to Darwin's theory or modern physics. Also, Einstein was not a Theist. At the MOST he was a Deist, but is often quoted as describing himself as not believing in any personal God. Lying, yeah, not a valid form of argument. Sorry.
All of the foundations of physics were established by the men I mentioned earlier.....What do you mean, modern physics???.....I don't think that quantumn physics or einstein's theory of special relativity would've swayed their thinking....
Modern astronomers and physicists agree that the universe had a finite beginning when space, time, and matter all came into existance.....I believe God did this (like the Bible says)......others belive that ALL of this came from NOTHING
No, you're completely wrong.....he does not wish harm on us humans......we cause the harm to ourselves through our free will.....the bible gives us clear directions on how to avoid the harm that most of us self-inflict, but not many people listen to it.....
God is a JUST God, and I am thankful for that.....He was even kind enough to send JESUS to be the ultimate sacrifice for us....accept JESUS and you're promised a place in heaven, it's really not that complicated
If god knows the future e.g.. when, where and how we ar going to die then we can not have free will. Free will therefore has to be an illusion. Now Christians do alot of praying but god is not very consistant at answering prayers, he helps some people then allows a child to be tortured and murdered. He is either a sicko or doesn't exist.
then what is the point of his sick little experiment? he already knows who is going to believe, who is good, who is bad, why not just "create" the good people in heaven and be done with it? why put everyone through it, and if he loves, why would he send anyone to hell for eternity? thats a damn long time for a simple mistake, he sure isnt very forgiving...
Modern physics is a developed theory on the basis of prior theories. Einsteins theories HAVE been altered you moron, they're not as he originally presented them. Modern physics also refers to our direct evidence of cosmological events like the big bang. I didn't refer to any particular theories.
WRONG. Modern astronomers agree space and time came into existence at a finite point. Not matter. Nobody says it came from nothing you strawman fallacy creating crea-tard.
modern astronomers like gallileo? who was condemned by the church for saying the earth was round and revolved around the sun? yea... the bible was ontop of it. lol
Which version of Creation in the Bible do you like best? Genesis Chapter ONE, which has the same developmental sequence as Evolutionary theory teaches? Or chapter TWO, in which man was created before plants and animals? Chapter ONE, in which Adam and Eve were created at the same time? Or chapter TWO, in which Adam was created before the plants and Eve was created after all the animals?
i prefer the sequence when god regrets to have made man an error??? from god??? so he admits that he has been wrong but he is perfect??? and he knows everything how could he have not known what was going to happened and regrets its action
From our perspective it blatanly obvious that nature itself can be cruel. This posed a problem for early mankind. They believed in the god's and eventually the one god. Mankind had to find a way of justifying why nature and mankind could be so cruel, therefore they developed the idea that we must have at sometime in our history upset god/s. Sadely many people today still have a pychological yearning to hold onto this warped reasoning.
Why, in regards to creationism, do we immediately jump to "Christian" creationism. Why not Mesopotamian, Egyptian, Mayan or Hopi. lol. They are just as credible and just as ridiculous. I feel the atheist argument, is biased toward only Christianity's. To make them fully aware of how ridiculous they sound, we should incorporate all the faiths, dead or not. To show to them how far off each of them were.
I agree with that, im just saying the bulk of the videos i have seen, debunks the Christians/Muslims/Hebrews, which essentially have the same "genesis". I think ill make a detailed video on how the Enuma Elish and the Egyptian creation got it wrong as well. One part of the ancient Egyptian myth does make cosmological sense. "Then the sun god Ra appeared out of primeval chaos, he came out of an egg that appeared on the surface of the water" This sounds like our suns, nebulous birth.
How does the 'egg that appeared on the surface of the water' relate to the suns nebulious birth?. It is saying that the earth and water came first and then the sun appeared. Surely this is putting this cart before the horse.
Its 2d mentality, nothing more. Furthermore this is how the tale begins, earth is created later. The "heavens" or what we call space was viewed to them as "water". Thats why Ra needs a celestial "barge" to get across the sky. Im not saying the Egyptians are correct in their assumptions, just the closest out of all the "religions". You dont see me sacrificing chickens to Bast, Geb or Tefnut. lol
"How does the 'egg that appeared on the surface of the water' relate to the suns nebulious birth?"
Simple, The egg is the "Nebula" the water is "space". Ra appeared out of the egg on the surface of the water. I know its a stretch but it showed they knew the sun was born of something else. They just didn't know what that "something" could be. Quite logical, for the time and for the amount of info they had, if u ask me. Im not an advocate of religion, just an "enjoyer" of ancient myth & culture
I see. Water is space in their thinking. One thing I need to find out and you might be able to answer my question. Scholars talk about the myths and legends of differnt countries. Did the people back then really believe in the myths or were they aware that they were simply made up stories.
If we take into to consideration the modern views on religious creation tales and the fervor that the devout believe in it. I would say that the ancient population was even more susceptible to indoctrination. Furthermore there was no hard "science" to counter it. Yet, in defense of human intellect, I will say that some did not subscribe. How long those some lived is open to debate lol.
So they really believed Atlas held up the heavens and earth on his shoulders. Therefore they were not myths to the Greeks as they truely believed in Atlas. Therfore it only becomes Greek mythology after the enlightenment.
Exactly, although some of the "enlightened" Greeks deemed the story a "mythos", a story or legend. So the jury is still out if they believed in it unequivocally. I would say that the poor and lower classes believed it to be true, but some philosophers must have had some questions.
The Age of Enlightenment or The Enlightenment is a term used to describe a phase in Western philosophy and cultural life centered upon the eighteenth century, in which reason was advocated as the primary source and legitimacy for authority. (wikipedia)
There are many, many different types of religions. All of them have absolutely no evidence what so ever to back up there theory's. The only way i see that religion can relate to science is that it is a theory, it has not been proven to be true, or false. But the amount of other theory's we have today in the 21'st century seem a lot more plausible than the "God" theory which was made up centuries ago... Humans are a lot smarter now. More & more people are starting to realize what the universe is.
A scientific theory is totally different to every day usage of the word. Gravity is a scientific fact as it can be observed and measured, all the expermentations done by Newton give us Newton's Gravitational Theory.
'Erupted spontaneously out of nothing'?? Sounds clever but it is actually a meaningless statement as it tells us nothing. Nothing comes out of nothing, Surely?
So the word 'light' came before light itself?
anirvanroy84 1 week ago
I don't believe in there being just "one Big Bang". There was probably a universe way before the scientists think there was. The so called big bang was just a small explosion that created some stuff like planets and stars. The universe is so big that it has existed basically forever, and there are always new stars and galaxies being created.
creativeprojects720 1 month ago
@creativeprojects720 Well this notion of multi versus has been around for sometime now. However it is still pure speculation or pure theory.
DrMontague 1 month ago
@DrMontague Ok, that's fine. Personally, I think it's more plausible than the entire expanse of everything coming out of one small speck (big bang)
creativeprojects720 1 month ago
@DrMontague Just felt the need to point out that Theory is far better than just speculation and personal bias. ^_^ Though when I say theory, I'm talking science theory, so I'm sure you don't actually understand what I'm saying.
Molandria 1 month ago
@Moland Theory def. 2 a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural[speculative] and subject to experimentation, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact. Synonyms: idea, notion hypothesis, postulate. (on line dictionary)
We have no evidence for parallel universe therefore theory def 2 applies i.e.it is speculative. A scientific theory on the other hand is based on observation and measurement e.g. theory of gravity.
DrMontague 1 month ago
2:48 - vhs tracking trouble.
creativeprojects720 1 month ago
"I grew up in a Christian family.. And then, I grew up..." - T. Easton
vinayakdev 1 month ago
I was a Christian and believed.......when I was a CHILD, LMFAO
gorwell97 3 months ago
Corporate science is rigged. Look at how many times Monsanto and other globalist pharmaceutical corporations have been caught rigging and lying about their results. Some scientists actually say aspartame is safe, some scientists actually say that vaccines are safe, some scientists actually say GMO food is safe. Science is a scam.
mustaffa1611 3 months ago
@mustaffa1611 How do you know it's rigged? This implies that other scientists are questioning the validity of other scientists claims! Perhaps I should advise people not to to take their heart tablets because they don't work! Perhaps we should tell people not to take medicines such as warfrin for thinning the blood. At the end of the day you have a choice whether or not to take medicines.
DrMontague 3 months ago
@DrMontague Learn about the healing power of plants. Nature is your medicine.
mustaffa1611 3 months ago
@mustaffa1611 Of course certain plants can help but they cannot cure everything. No doubt you have a cure for cancer?! I've known people who supposedly deal in alternative medicine. One thing they they tell everyone is never to stop taking the medication their GP has prescribed them. Indeed their is no such thing as alternative medicine, a medicine either works or doesn't no matter what it's source. No doubt you get a cold you have beads and rattles shaken around your head!
DrMontague 3 months ago
@DrMontague There are many simple cures for cancer... look up gerson institute. Cure for aids is simple too... look up "house of numbers." Also a little reading at Dr. Mercola's website will be quite valuable also.
mustaffa1611 3 months ago
@mustaffa1611 OMG people who have got cancer are ignorant of these simplistic cures? There have been plenty of tests done on fraudulent claims of so called alternative cures. It would be all over the media if their were definite cures for these horrendous diseases. No doubt these people are making money out of peoples desperation for a cure. Next you will be claiming that no one has to die because their is a plant out their that stops the aging process altogether.You are gullible.
DrMontague 3 months ago
@DrMontague The only way corporate medicine deals with cancer is by butchering it out or giving you toxic radiation and hoping the cancer dies before the person does. Obviously you havent checked out the Max Gerson institute and see why thousand are fleeing the U.S. for help. It's common knowledge that federal swat teams have raided anyone who even uses the word "cure" for anything. Corporate toxic agriculture, tap water and vaccines are the reason for cancer, mother nature is the cure.
mustaffa1611 3 months ago
@mustaffa1611 Further people who live in the rain forests have used natural remedies for centuries. However they did not have a cure for diseases such as small pox. To totally dismiss modern medicine as bogus is nothing but the product of a deluded mind.
DrMontague 3 months ago
@DrMontague They didnt get small pox and by living and eating naturally they had no need for a cure. You might want to read something other than your white imperialist compulsory publik skool version of history because it was the Europeons that purposely spread small pox. Ft. Pitt in pittsburgh under the control of George Washington was using biological warfare against the native peoples. Serial Killer George passed out blankets with small pox to genocide the indigenous people.
mustaffa1611 3 months ago
@mustaffa1611 You are a fucking crank. Full stop.
DrMontague 3 months ago
Respond to this video... Further if corporate science is rigged then why do drug companies spend millions of dollars on research\. Surely it would be cheaper just to throw a placebo together! No doubt you have a cure for aides!
DrMontague 3 months ago
there is no god! every country seems to speak of a slightly different god if there were a god we would all speak of the same one surely?
TheSulphuric 6 months ago
@TheSulphuric Did you ever look at a satellite photo of the earth? It is only land and water. Countries and States do not exist. Those lines they call "borders" are imaginary. They are make believe concepts that you are forced to pretend are real by men with guns. Go ahead try to cross one of those invisible lines and see what happens.
mustaffa1611 3 months ago
THERE IS ONE THINGS ABOUT RELIGION THE HAVE A MOUTH FULL WHEN THEY SAY GOD. BUT WHAT GOD ARE THEY TALKING ABOUT, THE GOD OF THE INCAS,THE ROMANS GODS, THE EGYPTIAN GODS, THE JEW GOD,THE MUSLIN GOD,THE HINDU GODS... NO THEY HAVE THEIR OWN PARTICULAR GOD IN MIND. SO SOME WILL SAY THE CORAN SAYS.... OR THE BIBLE SAYS, OR THE VEDA SAYS AND SO ON... SO WHEN SOME ONE SAYS GOD. REMEMBER HUMAN HAS HAD MANY GODS.. THE ONE YOU MIGHT BE BELIEVING TODAY WILL CERTAINLY BE MYTHOLOGY AS ARE SO MANY OTHERS
NAVEGANTESOY 7 months ago
As someone who has got a physics degree, I would say Science has not yet proven/dis proven that the universe came out of nothing, In fact its spurious information.Some Physicists believe it might have come out of nothing, but this needs to be proven or dis proven. My personal opinion is that it is more logical to say the big bang had a cause, Something like the end of the life of a blackhole.. Which is a common phenomena and is known to almost certainly exist based on current evidence.
Singum999 7 months ago
@Singum999 I know of such arguments e.g. two membranes might have collided, multiple universes etc.
However we can ask what was there before these events. i.e. can there be a state of nothing? Did everything come out of nothing? The nothing we experience is a vacuum and has 3 dimensions which allows light to pass through it. Is there such a thing as a void that has no dimensions? Hurts your head to try and comprehend it.
DrMontague 7 months ago
@DrMontague According to the current state of quantum physics, nothing is a very difficult state to maintain. When they removed all the quarks and gluons from an area, they would start spontaneously appearing. Keep in mind that our version of a "vacuum" is packed with something, we just can't detect it directly. When we figure out what dark energy and dark matter are, I think we'll be one step closer to answering that question.
emikochan13 4 months ago in playlist More videos from DrMontague
@DrMontague - First we have to find evidence that "nothing" exists outside of a philisophical contemplation of absence of anything. We haven't found an example of nothing yet so to question whether something came out of nothing is also quite some thing. Even the vacuum is "something".
TheSpankymonkey 4 months ago
@TheSpankymonkey I agree. the vacuum has properties i.e. it can be 4 dimensional Suck all the air out of glass tank and you have a vacuum that has 4 dimensions and which light can pass through. But then the problem arises how is there a vacuum with properties? Is there any such thing as absolute nothingness. Perhaps it is beyond human comprehension. As one scientists argued brains evolved in order to survive the environment not to comprehend the universe. .
DrMontague 4 months ago
@DrMontague - I don't understand myself where this notion of nothing comes from personally, other than our own primitive ignorance. Ie, i have two goats, i have no goats... therefore i have nothing.
TheSpankymonkey 4 months ago
@TheSpankymonkey But this can be translated as meaning you do not have two goats it would not mean you have nothing. The goats would be some where else as goats or matter in another form.
DrMontague 4 months ago
@DrMontague - I know that, you know that but try telling that to someone who hasn't really thought out what "nothing" actually is/isn't. I can forgive a desert goat herder for having a concept of nothing in relation to goats. I can't forgive someone in this day and age who has every means at their disposal to consider "nothing". That sounded great eh? "Consider nothing"...
TheSpankymonkey 4 months ago
@TheSpankymonkey Perhaps they cannot not consider what nothing is because they have nothing upstairs!
DrMontague 4 months ago
As someone who has got a physics degree, I will say there is no evidence suggesting that the universe came out of nothing, In fact its spurious information. That it might have come out of nothing, and this needs to be proven is much nearer the current scientific understanding.
Singum999 7 months ago
There are many in this forum that are quite uneducated. They can't spell or create a grammatical sentence. Then there are those who use the word "theory" as if a tool. Evolution is a fact - not a theory. Check out a tad pole from birth - and into a frog. Watch a maggot grow into a house fly. Watch a larva grow or worm grow into their like and kind. That is evolution in front of your eyes. Watch a sperm cell change into an 85 year old man/woman. Religion is superstition and witchcraft.
resculptit 9 months ago
wow after reading the creation part of genesis they have the balls to say that "science has a stranger theory" fucking joke
viego215 1 year ago
science can actuly proove things religion can't
gpgpgp13322 1 year ago
@gpgpgp13322
It's more complex than that.
ivlfounder 1 year ago
pantheism says that we are all god, we are in it, we are it, everything is god :P t'was Spinoza
FreeeeS 1 year ago
@FreeeeS IIt argued that Spinoza pantheism is simply nature. Einstein believed in Spinoza's god in the sense that the tern god was simply another term for nature. Nature gave Einstein a sense of awe , to give emphasis to his emotional feeling for nature Einstein referred to nature as god. They certainly didn't believe in a personal god who sits in judgment and answers prayers.
DrMontague 1 year ago
@DrMontague uh-huh?
FreeeeS 1 year ago
I like how science says the universe was created out of nothing, and thats somehow more believable than religion saying there is a god. The simple fact of it all is no one will ever know for sure.
jwpnc1 1 year ago
@jwpnc1 When we think of nothing then the nothing we think of has properties. E.g. a vacuum chamber can have all atoms sucked out of it. We are left with nothing. But light can pass through this nothing. So it isn't really nothing!
DrMontague 1 year ago
@jwpnc1 i don't like how you've misrepresented science...Because science doesn't know what happened before the big bang, much less its cause...
swisscheesepotatochi 1 year ago
I loved the bit at the end of this video, explaining redshift, with the doppler effect of the passing train, and relating it to the expanding universe, in the background as the train passed was a huge observatory pointing up at the universe. Well done the tv director.
Excellent vid.
bonnie43uk 1 year ago
Scientific evidence suggests Evolution. Creation, religious or scientific is only conjectural. It is futile to debate. Human is getting to the point of Creation that has nothing to do with religious beliefs. Scriptures are depicting Man’s knowledge of that time. Charlatans, for eons, have used them to benefit themselves. It would be beneficial for humanity not to waste meagre resources on beliefs without evidence.
amoralis123 1 year ago
Can someone tell me if this is a 'pro' religion documentary? If that's the case, then i'm not intressted.
oratadin 1 year ago
@oratadin It's a debate about the creation of the universe. It is not pro religion or science. Professor John Polkinghorne was a professor of theoretical physics at Cambridge university and held the chair for science. He is now an ordained catholic priest. Professor Peter Atkins is an atheist but held the chair for science at Oxford. Therefore it is an intellectual debate in which these two professors argue their point.
DrMontague 1 year ago
@DrMontague really, okay. then i'll see it. i just get so tired of religious people shooting crap out of their mouths towards scientists face.
oratadin 1 year ago
science has barely scratched the surface of possibilities. while scientists are doing a great job decoding the universe, they have limited abilities. science can't prove or disprove divine creation. science is the explanation of things that we know exist. we don't know how deep the rabbit hole goes. Before newton gravity existed, even though we didn't know it. So there's a possibility that things beyond our wildest imaginations exist, we just don't know it yet.
Lmoseley0726 1 year ago
@Lmoseley0726 Theists claim the gods exist therefore it is for them to prove their claim . It is not for atheists to disprove god as this would be akin to asking them to prove the tooth fairy doesn't exist. Atheists simply argue that there is no reliable evidence for the gods. Faith: belief without proof ( on line dictionary) This means any bull shit can go.
DrMontague 1 year ago
@Lmoseley0726 The null hypothesis, the default position for every scientist to believe something does not exist if there is no evidence for it...
swisscheesepotatochi 1 year ago
@swisscheesepotatochi There's evidence for intelligent design through molecular and cellular biology. Funniest thing I've heard scientists say is that aliens seeded us here. No evidence of aliens, not to the general populations knowledge, but they're still inclined to believe that. That's crazier than someone who believes in ID. The other theory is complete randomness. Geneticists believe it's impossible that we're formed by chance.
Lmoseley0726 1 year ago
@Lmoseley0726 I don't think any scientist has said that...and please elaborate on the evidence for intelligent design...And why are you telling me that geneticist believe its impossible that we're formed by chance? Do any scientific theories claim we do?
swisscheesepotatochi 1 year ago
@Lmoseley0726 There is a possibility, but before accepting a its truth, may want to actually prove it to be truth...besides, how do prove something exist besides the use of science? Instincts, gut, perception, intuition?
swisscheesepotatochi 1 year ago
@swisscheesepotatochi I would love proof of anything. Evolution is still theory not proven. But limiting what we're willing to research as truth because of atheistism is just short changing ourselves. Quantum physics is fascinating and I believe it will open more eyes the deeper we go, as to the possibilities. If higher intelligent beings could transverse matter, time, and space, wouldn't you think they understood quantum mechanics. We have no proof of them but 2000-4000 yr old testimony.
Lmoseley0726 1 year ago
@Lmoseley0726 i don't quite understand the problem, no scientist ever claimed that there were higher and more intelligent beings exist, even if they did they may not understand quantum mechanics for even now very to none understands quantum mechanics...and evolution by natural selection is as proven as germ theory or viral resistance...it has been observed in the laboratory and tested dozens of times...just search wikipedia, or ask an evolutionary biologist...
swisscheesepotatochi 1 year ago
@swisscheesepotatochi Issac Newton believed in god as did many other scientists of his time, several Islamic scientists and Christian scientists in to days world still believe in god. Not all scientists are atheists. Many still have a psychological yearning for god!
DrMontague 1 year ago
@DrMontague okay...atheism is doesn't make any claim, its just saying that if you have not proven the existence of god yet, don't treat as truth...and of course other philosophical claims that science cannot know if god exists...and science is the only test for objective reality...
swisscheesepotatochi 1 year ago
@swisscheesepotatochi Agree. It is for theists to prove god as they are making the claim. However scientific research gives us a totally different view as to the creation, this along with reasoned arguments puts the notion of there being a god in the same vain for there being a tooth fairy.
DrMontague 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@swisscheesepotatochi I would love proof of anything. Evolution is still theory not proven. But limiting what we're willing to research as truth because of atheistism is just short changing ourselves. Quantum physics is fascinating and I believe it will open more eyes the deeper we go, as to the possibilities. If higher intelligent beings could transverse matter, time, and space, wouldn't you think they understood quantum mechanics. We have no proof of them but 2000-4000 yr old testimony.
Lmoseley0726 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@swisscheesepotatochi I would love proof of anything. Evolution is still theory not proven. But limiting what we're willing to research as truth because of atheistism is just short changing ourselves. Quantum physics is fascinating and I believe it will open more eyes the deeper we go, as to the possibilities. If higher intelligent beings could transverse matter, time, and space, wouldn't you think they understood quantum mechanics. We have no proof of them but 2000-4000 yr old testimony.
Lmoseley0726 1 year ago
@swisscheesepotatochi I'm 100% for scienceand proof of anything would be great. Evolution is still theory, but they believe it. I believe it's unwise to limit ourselves due to Atheism. But quantum physics is breaching what we thought we knew, for the greater good. If higher intelligent beings existed and could transverse matter, time, or space, wouldn't you think they understood quantum mechanics? We have no proof of them except 4000 yr old testimony.
Lmoseley0726 1 year ago
@Lmoseley0726 Any thing that can be observed or measured is a scientific fact e.g. gravity is a scientific fact. All we know about how gravity behaves is known as the the theory of gravity. A scientific theory is different to our every day usage of the term which means a speculation. Evolutionary theory is a scientific theory, it is based on observation and measurement, it is therefore a fact!
DrMontague 1 year ago
@DrMontague explain premonitions
Lmoseley0726 1 year ago
Its so sad that we are the most intelligent species on the planet, yet we aren't smart enough to tell the difference between reality and fantasy. Even when the fantasy is so bullshit.
lamjer68 1 year ago 36
On the contrary, we are smart enough that we are willing to question our own capacity to objectively interpret reality. We are the only species smart enough to even ask this question.
MrMZaccone 1 year ago
Comment removed
peterwetton 1 year ago
Comment removed
peterwetton 1 year ago
well put matey
peterwetton 1 year ago
Ahh but don't forget that when there are gaps in our knowledge that leaves space for all the knowledge we do have to shake around in our heads and get broken, so we need styrofoam (religion) to fill those spaces and keep the knowledge safe...
Religion, the Styrofoam of the mind.
ninjatoothpaste 1 year ago
That is very well said....
lamjer68 1 year ago
@lamjer68 My mother is going heap shit because some the ceiling kitchen tiles have gone missing!
DrMontague 1 year ago
@lamjer68 That is very true (: I agree with you.
KatyGore 1 year ago
@lamjer68 Where do you come off think WE are the "most intelligent species on the planet" ?? Think again. We are the only species that kill for the fun of it. WE are the only species that willfully destroy something - even ourselves - for the thrill of it. No Other Species on Earth destroys Anything if not for survival. Humans destroy for fun. No... We are not the most intelligent. We are merely the product of a species with most advantages of reason and a brain capable of choice.
resculptit 9 months ago
@resculptit My girlfriend hat a cat that would bring dead birds to her all the time (not eaten) outside her room. We aren't the only species that destroy something, other then survival.
Humans killing things for fun has nothing to do with our intelligence nor does it make us any less so. Monkies can't build microprocessers with millions of transistors that compute commands to perform tasks that we desire, now can they? Guess they aren't that intelligent enough to do so.
lamjer68 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
'The great crisis of humanity today is that it has lost its sense of the invisible, particularly in the West. If I were called upon to identify briefly the principal trait of the entire 20th century, I would be unable to find anything more precise and pithy than to repeat again and again 'Men have forgotten God'. The failings of human consciousness deprived of its divine dimensions have been a determining factor in the major crimes of this century.
John29270 2 years ago
@zernouf, yes I understand, I understand that you are blind, ignorant, brainwashed, and really fucked up.
miles101457 2 years ago
I can't wait to die, because, I wont have to deal with religion any longer.
Bl33DBL4CK 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
all i have to say is read the koran and you will understand
zernouf 2 years ago
That's all you have to say because you are a deluded fuckwit. Please mammy please keep on telling me the tooth fairy exists so I will find a bit of money under my pillow in the morning. Yes darling don't listen to those who try to give rational argument and who present scientific evidence for things such as evolutionary theory. Just keep on reading the brothers' Grimm fairy story called the Koran.
DrMontague 2 years ago
BTW I've read the Koran. It's shit. Mohammad ,shit be upon him.
DrMontague 2 years ago
@DrMontague
"Lies separate the mind from reality, and survival."
funkyplayer4212 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
science vs. religion? ok, how about this:
the afterlife has been scientifically confirmed.
"Doe's Account " google it.
fruntil8 2 years ago
Bollocks. People like you are full of shit. It would have been world news head lines, such as, 'Science Proves The After Life'.
So do me a favour fuck off.
DrMontague 2 years ago
You're retarded if you believe that bullshit. Did you actually read it? If so then it's a shame you can't get your $13 back.
diomedes39 2 years ago
you believe that its scientifically confirmed with "An anonymous account"?
you have no understanding of science, fundie.
0nier0s 2 years ago
You mean those accounts of out-of-body experiences that people in extreme states of shock or disorder find themselves? My dear friend, whatever we feel or think is a result of our brain feeling or thinking it. Just because I fall on my head and see dancing zombies stripping on religious music doesn't mean it's real, nor scientifically provable that dancing zombies exist. It only means I'm delusional, much like you people are, who see, feel and hear supernatural beings.
TudiRad 2 years ago
No it have not been confirmed stupid
swedishmetalupyours 2 years ago
PRAISE the almighty Singularity. it created the four forces that govern our universe. Why would god allow the Andromeda galaxy collide with ours in the next few billion years? If I could, everyone would research m-theory, f-theory, 11 dimension theory, string theory, and of course, what the Singularity was. you would never hear the word religion again.
toyoda4life 2 years ago 6
@toyoda4life Screw the Thought of some Singularity. There are NO forces that govern anything. Our universe is made up of gas and rock. There is no God. It is superstition and witchcraft. If ANYONE believes in a God, then they MUST believe in a Satan and Witchcraft. If Witchcraft was real - as religions profess - then there would be a Flock of people lining up to make gold from lead. The thought of some "higher power" is bull.
resculptit 9 months ago
Can a Rational Individual believe in God ?
In other words:
Can God be atheist, governed by scientific laws?
Of course
Why?
Because if God exists, he must work in an
Absolute Reference Frame and have set of Physical
and Mathematical laws to create everything
And we can find and understand this Gods Absolute House
and when we can find and understand these Cods Physical Laws
socratus1 2 years ago
Yep god was standing around with his finger up his arse feeling rather bored and then thought to himself I'll make the Crab, Orion, boomerang, and horsehead nebula just for the hell of it. Good idea he thought because it will make intelligent humans ask why god would want to make such things!
DrMontague 2 years ago
DrMontague, who made this video? It looks like it's from the 70s, maybe? It's very interesting as a historical document. Could you post the bibliographical information in the info perhaps?
Graddyooate 2 years ago
BBC Everyman documentary . See end of video (4 0f 4.) Will post the info.
DrMontague 2 years ago
Creationists please answer this for me because I am still undecided about creationism vs ecolution.
Q1)Does God have free wiil to do whatever he so wishes?
Q2)Is every action of God's, past, present or future always morally right?
Thanks
delahung 2 years ago
Hmm. I think it depends on what creationists you're talking to. For example, most creationists would say God has free will, as when he said we were made in his image, he meant he gave us the same free will he has, and of course people in that area would believe God is always right morally. Continued in next comment =P
RayLedgend 2 years ago
Me, on the other hand beleive in a creative force starting the universe, and life itself, and while I do think God has free will, I also think he doesn't have to be morally right. I just believe he only creates, and therefore doesn't do anything of normal moral question. I don't think he interferes with life outside of creating it in the first place, and so he's done nothing morally objectionable, or commendable. He just kind of is there.
RayLedgend 2 years ago
Where your evidence for a supernatural being?
DrMontague 2 years ago
None. It's simply that, whether do to my own lack of intelligence or otherwise, I can't think of a natural means for the creation of the universe. So, if it isn't natural, it must be supernatural. That said, I'm more than willing to be proven wrong.
RayLedgend 2 years ago
Therefore you are a god of the gap type of person. What we do know is that mankind has often resorted to conjuring up supernatural beings when coming across something they cannot understand or comprehend. Another thing , not one ancient text got the creation right , non mention a big bang or expanding universe.
DrMontague 2 years ago
Another thing, if god is omnipotent then we cannot have free will, quite simply because he must know what the future holds e.g when , where and how we are all going to die. Therefore our action have to be determined, child murderer's cannot therefore be held reponsible for their actions, god is!
DrMontague 2 years ago
Fine, if that's what it's called. I'm creation of the gap. I'll have you know that I don't subscribe to any of the ancient texts. As far as I'm concerned, they are too primitive, and serve simply as a means to hold people back. All I believe in is a God that created the universe.
RayLedgend 2 years ago
As stupid as I may sound, it more so stems from the laws of conservation. Whether or not this has been proven a moot point I don't know, but if matter and energy can't be created in natural means and yet they exist, and must come from somewhere, than it must be a supernatural means that created them. I kind of have a problem with "it always was." Anyway, your point on omnipotence was very good, but I don't believe I ever said god is omnipotent. Perhaps he simply has the power of creation.
RayLedgend 2 years ago
And the figment of the human imagination!
DrMontague 2 years ago
Perhaps. As I said, I'm more than willing to be proven wrong.
RayLedgend 2 years ago
You said "I can't think of a natural means of creation". And then went on to say, so if it's not natural, it must be supernatural. That reasoning just defies logic. Here is your reasoning being used to prove something else. Penguins are TV's. Because all penguins are black and white, and all TV's used to be black and white, it means penguins are TV's. Do you see how stupid that sounds? I just can't believe some thickhead actually gave you a thumbs up for the comment. Hint,.. (Cont)...
gadget133 2 years ago
XD! The reasoning does indeed sound stupid when put like that, although I already said I may be proven stupid. However if I change it to "If there is no natural means, it's not natural" does that work? I realize one can't just say in an argument "by the way I change my argument," but let's just ignore that.
RayLedgend 2 years ago
Well, The only right thing to say is this, "there is no KNOWN natural means". And this still does not allow for the supernatural. Here is the reason. If something where thought of as supernatural, once we decided to break it down and understand it, it becomes natural. Here is a good thought exercise. The only way to prove God is to have God tell me he exists. But, once he tells me he exists he is interacting with the physical and can no longer be supernatural. Therefore, he is not god.
gadget133 2 years ago
Hint... Just because you can't think of how something works, does not mean that it must be supernatural. Do you know how a microwave works? Do you know how a suspended concrete slab can stay in place? are they supernatural? No, they are not. Hint two. If you are going to argue philosophy, you might want to understand what it is you are arguing. Religion is philosophy. Science is... well... science. The two are completely different and yet morons continue to argue that one or the other is right.
gadget133 2 years ago
Religion: a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs. Conline dictionary)
Philosophy:the rational investigation of the truths and principles of being, knowledge, or conduct. (online dictionary)
So how is religion philosophy?!
DrMontague 2 years ago
I can't believe you actually don't know that religion is a philosophy!?! You actually study psychology or just read some books? Have you ever studied philosophy? Have you got any idea what the etymology of the word philosophy is? And religion? Don't call people MORONS when you sound like one yourself.
gadget133 2 years ago
That's true, but 5 minutes of google searching, and I could know how a microwave works. It doesn't violate any laws of physics, while unless saying matter and energy predate time, the universe does (or do they still?) Not trying to make offence or anything, but you seem angry. What does one's belief in God do to you? I'll have you know I follow no religious rituals concerning it, nor does it impact the choices I make in my life, so therefore, I don't use it as an excuse to harm people.
RayLedgend 2 years ago
That's good. sort of. I am not angry. No offence taken. I just picked a hole in your logic. How do you know that matter and energy DON'T predate time. My point was this, just because you don't know what force made matter/energy erupt from seemingly nothing, does not mean that it is, hence, supernatural. To say "if we cannot explain it, it must be supernatural" is a logically flawed argument. I pointed this out. Your reasoning cannot be taken seriously as shown in the penguin analogy.
gadget133 2 years ago
Atheists simply argue that they do not know how the universe came into being. Science might one day give us an explanation. The difference between the religious and the atheists is that the religious claim they do know! What is their evidence? It's written down in ancient texts therefore it must be true! So is Zeus et al therefore this must must also be true.
DrMontague 2 years ago
Yes, so true. We would also have the Flying Spaghetti Monster, Kev the Big Red Orbiting Lobster and a pantheon of other deity's that we would have to contend with. The major point is (now this might be hard to follow) that although neither viewpoint (God or No God) can ever be fully proven, it is easier to disprove God then it is to either prove God, disprove Atheism, or prove Atheism.
gadget133 2 years ago
It is not for atheists to disprove god. That would be like asking them to disprove the tooth fairy! The theist are the ones who claim that there are supernatural being/s therefore the onus is on them to prove god/s exist. Atheists simply argue that there is no reliable evidence for supernatural beings. Ancient texts and word of mouth are not reliable evidence.
DrMontague 2 years ago
I did say it would be hard to follow. It is not about proving or disproving. It is just a little mind game you play on theists. Re-read what I wrote. Think about it for a while. Break the options into four groups. Pro God you can either prove or disprove existence. Anti God you can either prove or disprove it's relevance. One of these options is easier to do than any of the others. Which one? And why?
gadget133 2 years ago
they only disabled the audio calling it copyright infringement because its an excuse for censorship
tomsawyersucks 2 years ago
I hate intellectual property laws, and the greedy, inhumane pieces of shit they help keep rich.
dagrimreefah 2 years ago
I'm going to reupload this vid in another user name. It's strange that the a 30 second snippit of music heard at the beginning of this vid can be found and listened to in full on youtube. I think that some shit head creationist reported it as a violation in order to stop intellectual debate against creationism.
DrMontague 2 years ago
I would like that a lot. Thanks
dagrimreefah 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Too bad the Bible thought the earth was flat.
And that the sun revolved around the earth.
And that humans are made of dirt.
And that snakes, donkeys, and bushes talk.
And that animals appeared AFTER man but BEFORE woman.
Other than a few minor details like that,
it's a really scientific book!
Hahahaha!!!!!
Imaginefree69 2 years ago
Science admits some of their theories are wrong after people realize that they were completely fabricated in the first place.....such as Oort Cloud and drawing embryos with gill slits....lol
ChiefClickClack 2 years ago
Scientists admit that sometimes they can get things wrong. But it's other scientists who have proven other scientists to be wrong. It is still science. that is being used. Science adjusts it stance according to new evidence. It's dynamic. Science continuously questions itself. Of course an easy cop out is to simply believe without evidence that a supernatural being is behind it all. There is an angry god inside evey volcanoe!
DrMontague 2 years ago
The all-star scientists were almost all Christian, namely Copernicus, Kepler, Galileo, Newton, Boyle, Faraday, Mendel, Kelvin, and Planck...even Einstein recognized the impossibility of a non-created universe.....our modern day scientists don't hold a candle to these guys....the huge misconception is that people think that Christians believe in a God that "fills in the gaps", rather, we come to faith in God by discovering the complexity of his creation as did the scientist mentioned above
ChiefClickClack 2 years ago
Those scientists would have looked at the evidence for the big bang and evolutionary theory.. They would recogmise that the ancient texts got it wrong. Therefore they might have changed their world view accordingly. Having a psychological yearning to believe in a super natural being does not automatically acquate with truth. This intelligent designer puts craters on the moon, allows missiles to fly around in space, makes galaxies that cannot be seen with the naked eye! How pathetic!
DrMontague 2 years ago
Further he allows life to evolve which inhvolves much suffering. This intelligent designer would know in advance before he created anything the misery and suffering he would bring into existence. Of course the psychology of mankind has been to justify this suffering by believing we have upset the god/s in some way and are therefore being punished.. Evolution shows that all life merely trys to survive in amyway it possibly can, this includes all diseases. What a sick designer!
DrMontague 2 years ago
These men also were mostly born and lived prior to Darwin's theory or modern physics. Also, Einstein was not a Theist. At the MOST he was a Deist, but is often quoted as describing himself as not believing in any personal God. Lying, yeah, not a valid form of argument. Sorry.
Ethrock 2 years ago
All of the foundations of physics were established by the men I mentioned earlier.....What do you mean, modern physics???.....I don't think that quantumn physics or einstein's theory of special relativity would've swayed their thinking....
Modern astronomers and physicists agree that the universe had a finite beginning when space, time, and matter all came into existance.....I believe God did this (like the Bible says)......others belive that ALL of this came from NOTHING
ChiefClickClack 2 years ago
Then God is god manevolent.
DrMontague 2 years ago
No, you're completely wrong.....he does not wish harm on us humans......we cause the harm to ourselves through our free will.....the bible gives us clear directions on how to avoid the harm that most of us self-inflict, but not many people listen to it.....
God is a JUST God, and I am thankful for that.....He was even kind enough to send JESUS to be the ultimate sacrifice for us....accept JESUS and you're promised a place in heaven, it's really not that complicated
ChiefClickClack 2 years ago
If god knows the future e.g.. when, where and how we ar going to die then we can not have free will. Free will therefore has to be an illusion. Now Christians do alot of praying but god is not very consistant at answering prayers, he helps some people then allows a child to be tortured and murdered. He is either a sicko or doesn't exist.
DrMontague 2 years ago
You have no clue dude...
God already knows the decisions we are going to make because he is not bounded by time, but the decsions are still ours to make....
I could run out on the street today and get hit by a car and that would be MY own decision...
It is also your own free will to reject God, which it sounds like you're doing...
I don't think that people like the idea of authority...
And NOWHERE in the Bible does it say that God will grant everything that people pray for
ChiefClickClack 2 years ago
You're a crank who worships an imaginary meanevolent god.
DrMontague 2 years ago
then what is the point of his sick little experiment? he already knows who is going to believe, who is good, who is bad, why not just "create" the good people in heaven and be done with it? why put everyone through it, and if he loves, why would he send anyone to hell for eternity? thats a damn long time for a simple mistake, he sure isnt very forgiving...
abassett22 2 years ago
Modern physics is a developed theory on the basis of prior theories. Einsteins theories HAVE been altered you moron, they're not as he originally presented them. Modern physics also refers to our direct evidence of cosmological events like the big bang. I didn't refer to any particular theories.
WRONG. Modern astronomers agree space and time came into existence at a finite point. Not matter. Nobody says it came from nothing you strawman fallacy creating crea-tard.
Ethrock 2 years ago
modern astronomers like gallileo? who was condemned by the church for saying the earth was round and revolved around the sun? yea... the bible was ontop of it. lol
abassett22 2 years ago
Oort Cloud is not a rejected Hypothesis, though we do now acknowledge the existence of the Keiper Belt.
Ethrock 2 years ago
Do the research man.....Oort Cloud is a complete hoax....what a joke!!!
ChiefClickClack 2 years ago
No it isn't. Check your science, creatard.
Ethrock 2 years ago
Did you guys see that big bang at 2:20? Computer animations fucking sucked 6 thousand years ago, that's all i have to say.
evilsinz 2 years ago
Imaginefree69 3 years ago
i prefer the sequence when god regrets to have made man an error??? from god??? so he admits that he has been wrong but he is perfect??? and he knows everything how could he have not known what was going to happened and regrets its action
mystisme 3 years ago
From our perspective it blatanly obvious that nature itself can be cruel. This posed a problem for early mankind. They believed in the god's and eventually the one god. Mankind had to find a way of justifying why nature and mankind could be so cruel, therefore they developed the idea that we must have at sometime in our history upset god/s. Sadely many people today still have a pychological yearning to hold onto this warped reasoning.
DrMontague 3 years ago
"Mankind had to find a way of justifying why nature"
For sure.
Why is religion ubiquitous?
Because fear and ignorance are ubiquitous.
Fear of the dark is the mother of all religion.
And the converse is also true-
as the society or the individual becomes more knowledgeable
the religious fervour dissipates.
Imaginefree69 3 years ago 3
Yeah I like that comment. It's pretty hard to argue with any of that.
ogjimkenobi 3 years ago
Thanks, Jiombo.
Your human impersonation is excellent!
Imaginefree69 3 years ago
I really do try.
ogjimkenobi 3 years ago
"god regrets to have made man an error???"
Yeah, that happens a lot in the Bible.
And God hear rumours about the tower at Babel
and he says "Let us go see his."
The god of the Bible is the biggest failure in all of mythology.
Everything he touches turns to shit;
humans, angels, the earth, even his son gets tortured and killed.
Poor old god.
Imaginefree69 3 years ago
god repents??
Excellent point, mystisme!
Well spoken.
Imaginefree69 3 years ago
youtube(dot)com/watch?v=3SUwMbyNQz8
Mudbikerz 3 years ago
Why, in regards to creationism, do we immediately jump to "Christian" creationism. Why not Mesopotamian, Egyptian, Mayan or Hopi. lol. They are just as credible and just as ridiculous. I feel the atheist argument, is biased toward only Christianity's. To make them fully aware of how ridiculous they sound, we should incorporate all the faiths, dead or not. To show to them how far off each of them were.
ORACLE063 3 years ago
This is an old documentary. Dawkins does indeed criticise many other creationist religions.
DrMontague 3 years ago
I agree with that, im just saying the bulk of the videos i have seen, debunks the Christians/Muslims/Hebrews, which essentially have the same "genesis". I think ill make a detailed video on how the Enuma Elish and the Egyptian creation got it wrong as well. One part of the ancient Egyptian myth does make cosmological sense. "Then the sun god Ra appeared out of primeval chaos, he came out of an egg that appeared on the surface of the water" This sounds like our suns, nebulous birth.
ORACLE063 3 years ago
How does the 'egg that appeared on the surface of the water' relate to the suns nebulious birth?. It is saying that the earth and water came first and then the sun appeared. Surely this is putting this cart before the horse.
DrMontague 3 years ago
Its 2d mentality, nothing more. Furthermore this is how the tale begins, earth is created later. The "heavens" or what we call space was viewed to them as "water". Thats why Ra needs a celestial "barge" to get across the sky. Im not saying the Egyptians are correct in their assumptions, just the closest out of all the "religions". You dont see me sacrificing chickens to Bast, Geb or Tefnut. lol
ORACLE063 3 years ago
"How does the 'egg that appeared on the surface of the water' relate to the suns nebulious birth?"
Simple, The egg is the "Nebula" the water is "space". Ra appeared out of the egg on the surface of the water. I know its a stretch but it showed they knew the sun was born of something else. They just didn't know what that "something" could be. Quite logical, for the time and for the amount of info they had, if u ask me. Im not an advocate of religion, just an "enjoyer" of ancient myth & culture
ORACLE063 3 years ago
I see. Water is space in their thinking. One thing I need to find out and you might be able to answer my question. Scholars talk about the myths and legends of differnt countries. Did the people back then really believe in the myths or were they aware that they were simply made up stories.
DrMontague 3 years ago
If we take into to consideration the modern views on religious creation tales and the fervor that the devout believe in it. I would say that the ancient population was even more susceptible to indoctrination. Furthermore there was no hard "science" to counter it. Yet, in defense of human intellect, I will say that some did not subscribe. How long those some lived is open to debate lol.
ORACLE063 3 years ago
So they really believed Atlas held up the heavens and earth on his shoulders. Therefore they were not myths to the Greeks as they truely believed in Atlas. Therfore it only becomes Greek mythology after the enlightenment.
DrMontague 3 years ago
Exactly, although some of the "enlightened" Greeks deemed the story a "mythos", a story or legend. So the jury is still out if they believed in it unequivocally. I would say that the poor and lower classes believed it to be true, but some philosophers must have had some questions.
ORACLE063 3 years ago
"after the enlightenment."
What enlightenment?
This enlightenment,
where national leaders believe in a bronze-age fairy tale?
Imaginefree69 3 years ago
The enlightenment is a period of time. 18 century.
TheFactOfEvolution 3 years ago
"The enlightenment is a period of time"
Thank you, Fact.
I am aware of the meaning of the term.
My point is that, if one can judge by the close-minded
magical thinking of the religious folks
who are lobbying for and legislating
the teaching of "Creation Science" in our schools,
much of our population is in fact NOT enlightened.
Their thinking is still that of 2,000 BC!
Imaginefree69 3 years ago
The Age of Enlightenment or The Enlightenment is a term used to describe a phase in Western philosophy and cultural life centered upon the eighteenth century, in which reason was advocated as the primary source and legitimacy for authority. (wikipedia)
DrMontague 3 years ago
"The Age of Enlightenment or The Enlightenment is a term"
Yes, yes, fine, thank you!
WTF is this, a comment programme
that reads a word or two of a comment
and responds with a more or less appropriate paragraph?
How very annoying.
Imaginefree69 3 years ago
fantastic comment oracle063.thanks
astrideuridice 3 years ago
There are many, many different types of religions. All of them have absolutely no evidence what so ever to back up there theory's. The only way i see that religion can relate to science is that it is a theory, it has not been proven to be true, or false. But the amount of other theory's we have today in the 21'st century seem a lot more plausible than the "God" theory which was made up centuries ago... Humans are a lot smarter now. More & more people are starting to realize what the universe is.
DigitaLOutpuT 3 years ago
A scientific theory is totally different to every day usage of the word. Gravity is a scientific fact as it can be observed and measured, all the expermentations done by Newton give us Newton's Gravitational Theory.
DrMontague 3 years ago
My point it is that some of these theory's have small evidence to back them up. Religion has none...
Gravity is the bending of space time & the fabric of space.
You can't possibly believe that something that was made up by humans 2000 years ago is true?
I mean the earth was formed about 13 billion years ago ffs lol.
We do have proof of that too.
DigitaLOutpuT 3 years ago
'Erupted spontaneously out of nothing'?? Sounds clever but it is actually a meaningless statement as it tells us nothing. Nothing comes out of nothing, Surely?
siochanleat82 3 years ago