@philster00700 as long as you can make some life material from non life material, thats enough for me to believe that hey, life could have came from non life.
@sniped101 Let me propose a situation: If I said I can make a nuclear reactor in a laboratory, do you believe that it could just randomly occur in nature? Probably (and most certainly) not. Life is too complicated to just "appear" out of a "fusing of a couple of proteins" or w/e. When they "simulated" those experiments to "create" life from non-life, they did not use conditions of actual primordial earth; they did the experiment and said that that's what primordial earth was like.
Scientific definition of living being: Any part of nature that is an open system, has the capacity to replicate intself into other organism that can replicate themselves as well and that's composed by cells.
a fantasy like a god has unlimited powers ,greater intelligence then a human.
Intelligence has been defined in different ways, including the abilities for abstract thought, understanding, communication, reasoning, learning, planning.
but a gods lacks communication , its reasoning is weird.
we create things that help us , a god creates stupid weaker things .
maybe its learning from us then , but that woulld destroy the idea of all powerfull.
Topics: WINNING ARGUMENTS FOR CREATIONISM-EVOLUTIONISM DEBATE (See Subchapter 10.2.2, Chapter 10, of Part Two.), The Issue On The Criminal Liability Of Foretelling The END OF THE WORLD, Other Debated Issues, Terrorism, War, Law, Politics, Religion, Philosophy, Science, Others.
Websites: balancedway.yolasite.com
balancedway1.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com
I can disprove god right now using nothing but the theistic definition of god:
If god created everything, and god cannot be created, then god is not a thing. If god is not a thing, he is no thing.. Nothing. God is nothing; aka god doesn't exist.
@DaFleegsta right, i agree :) because thats the thing ,religion keeps saying themself. its this entity that doesnt exist goz it created existance before it existed. it created time and space before that entity had time to do it. it created everything out of nothing or out of gods dimension . so if god isnt here in this existance . and he created us somehow somewhere else . then he doesnt exist. you dont even have to be an Atheist to agree.
There has NEVER been a successful experiment where non living matter was used to create life. These guys are stretching this bullshit. Building blocks for life is not life. There are three things that determine whether a thing is alive. It eats, shits, and reproduces. That has never been done and I suspect that it never will.
Things didnt end with Miller. Lots of new studies have been done. Adenine forms remarkably easily. The latest and best work suggests that the snowball phase of earth was critical....Cyanide (common in early earth's atmosphere) has an interesting trait of forming complex organic molecules (again including Adenine) when it sits in an arsenic rich environment.
MATT is A MORON!! No one has made Proteins!! or even the building blocks of life!! and Racemic mixtures have everything to do with the origin of Life!! atheists need to learn Homochirality!!
Lol no you don't. I can write down that the big bang took place and it would hold the same bearing as your "proof" of God. None whatsoever because neitger written account provided science to back it up.
you can't prove at all that life came from non life so how can you be sure that God didn't create the world. you have NO proof that the big bang happened. I have proof that God created the world. :)
Abiogenesis is analogous to Stephen Hawking's claim about our universe's spontaneous creation due to gravity. The Big Bang model is a model of cosmological evolution i.e. the formation of galaxies, stars, planets. Then due to abiogenesis, life can spontaneously arise from the right atmospheric conditions. Then everything is in the hands of natural selection. Now, here we are in an elegant universe and on an elegant planet called Earth!
Miller's experiment was conducted around the same time microbiologists discovered the structure of DNA. Creationists bring that half century old experiment to back up their claim of divine intervention. Guess what, scientists actually do things to better understanding and the human race constantly unlike religion which only hinders human progress. I think its debauching to the intellectual capabilities that human's poses to believe in a 3,400 year old mythology written during the Bronze Age.
@Arcflash67 i don't quite understand why I have to explain it to you, you could just research it yourself specially before you make any claims about it.
To be quick about it. Proteins consist of Aminoacids. They are created during the translation of the protein syntehsis, they arrive in triplets (3 base pairs = 1 aminoacid), after having read one of the aminoacids they are linked togehter, and when all nessecary ones are done the protein has been created.
@Arcflash67 there are both books and online animations who explains these processes, the reason why you don't believe what scientists tells you is because you haven't bothered taking the time to actaully understand it, which means you are intellectually dishonest. Please open a book, or read up on the subject before critisizing something. Have a nice day.
If you want people to believe in what you have to say than why don't you educate them. Not just to believe you and to take the words of others as the truth. But teach them all to understand and to do the expeiments to prove everything themselves. Free education for all ages and all levels.
Do keep the people in the dark and expect them to take your word a something of importance.
If you do you are just writing a new Bible and nothing more.
@Arcflash67 I believe i a missing your point, because it seems that you are saying to me, that i need to educate the entire world myself. No i am not a scientist yet, though i am working on it, studying Biomedicin. But it is an 7 year education so that will take some time.
Prove it? i just told you were you could check up on what i just explained (if you saw the post where i explained it) there are books on this subject and it all has been proven, there is no faith involved here.
@Arcflash67 Why don't you try it out? i haven't been enormously specific and i might add that 2 triplets are read at the time during the translation. Now go look it all up. There are plenty book upon biology and the simple process of protein synthesis i have 11 of them, they aren't hard to find. Or go online as i said. And ofcourse we have to trust science at times, we can't check every single little thing ourselves that is absurd. that would demand an enormous mind and memory.
@Arcflash67 i do not expect people to see my word as something important in the sense that they should accept it because i am saying it. They know they can go check up on it, and when they do, they will see that i was right. just writing a bible ? you are on an unbelieveble discourse here, you aren't making sense at all. try and read it all again. and if youd didnt see my very first post.. read it.
I'm curious, at 1:50 he says "from non-living material, we have produced living material". Are amino acids defined as "living material"? I know they're the basic building blocks of life, and that they're organic, but isn't it misleading to call it "living material"? Wouldn't it be more accurate to say "from inorganic material, we have produced organic material"?
But that's the thing "life" is a man-made concept, in reality "life" is just a certain arrangement of atoms, there are certain combinations of carbon that we label alive however, in the same way creationists misunderstand terms, we as humans have an anthropic need to categorize things and see them in black and white whereas in reality they are in shades of grey. If you are interested in abiogenesis then watch cdk007 interesting and informing video on the subject. :D
@atheism616 I don't think that argument holds water, "life" is also a scientific concept or definition. That's what we're discussing here and the point is that amino acids don't fall under any of those definitions. There's no debating that point obviously, so my question's still unanswered. The presenter stated that living matter had been created from non-living matter and that sounds rather dishonest to me. I think the whole thing is fascinating, I just think his answer is part bs.
virus is a non living thing it contains only dna so abiogenis existe cause it is only molecule in motion but let me tell you you can be very hill from virus
Fox, Douglas (2007-03-28). "Primordial Soup's On: Scientists Repeat Evolution's Most Famous Experiment". Scientific American (Scientific American Inc.). Retrieved 2008-07-09.
performed the miller yuri experiment with a better model of the early earth's atmosphere and composition and had better results.
I myself believe in a God (Thats all I believe no Religous ties) I am open to non believers view points.These Guys make sense to me. They look at it from a logical point. And I agree their are a lot of things that don't match up.The one thing that stands out to me is when Adam and Eve supposedly ate from the tree why was God Surprised he is after all supposed to kno everything that has and will happen right? And as far as making man from dirt I dnt believe that either.
Welllll... I balk at Matt's assertion that we've made "living material" out of non-living material. Amino acid chains do not a homeostatic cell make.
Don't get me wrong, the (several) hypotheses for abiogenesis look pretty strong; evidence is fairly abundant. But that doesn't mean we can assert things recklessly. I think the caller here was reassured with the wrong arguments.
@mcmadbat3 What you fail to realize is that your an idiot, so go read a book or something and stay off the internet, you might make someone else dumber.
@mcmadbat3 Wrong, the fact that you said God made people is illogical so any preceding or following statements is irrelevant. The core of your argument is illogical, I hardly call that using logic. Fail.
when theists ask what my bases for morality is i do not scream out myself, that is the answer they want you to give so they can say , see they are selfish its all about themself. I scream out "EMPATHY" instead.
life came from non living materials but we were the ones who created the life and in which that we are alive too does not prove or disprove creationism or abiogenesis
Morality is derived solely from social necessity and common sense. The basis for morality are the fundamental liberties and protections that people must have in order to coexist with each other in a sustainable society.
I would be exited if it turns out that under no circumstance life could have formed by itself on earth. It would mean that there might have been a UFO on the ancient earth that seeded the first bacteria.
Just a thought....things are either "living" or "non living".If you argue that "living" things cannot come from "non living" things, then you must think that living things i.e Life has always existed.
Wrong!!!!...miller made nothing that could sustain life..amino acids can not assemble into proteins.and then a cell u need clear information and instructions from a Intelligence..not chance alone....MATT U ARE FULL OF SHIT !!!!!!!
@5tonyvvvv — You should read up on Emergence... complexity is commonplace. BTW, it's not chance... it's chemical probability... those aminio acids had billions of years to form into cells.
@5tonyvvvv The instructions for forming amino acids into fully formed proteins does exist! It's called RNA and DNA. The formation of RNA and DNA does not need a designer. The formation of lipids, ions, and protiens into living cells doesn't need a designer either. Look cdk007's abiogenesis video and learn something.
Sure it's one theory, but it fits the facts with evidence (unlike design theory which has no evidence and is unsupported by fact).
@5tonyvvvv Until now only ribonucleotides have been created, which are component molecules of RNA. Still this is a big leap forward and eventually scientists will get there
if the right materials in an area as small as a lab, during a time far shorter than our lifetimes, can form the basic building blocks for life. Imagine what can happen in an area the size of the entire planet and it goes on for millions of years.
It's not good enough because humans are wicked creatures and simply saying that "we" can chose whatever morality we want is dangerous. I'm completely open to discussing any of these issues. I think they bring up a good point. The issue is not intellectual, it's a question of will. Humans want to be God and determine what is right and wrong. We think we want control. Just like in Genesis. These guys are taking the fruit...blindly.
No. Even if you did generate "life" from non-life in an experiment in a lab you are only proving that it requires a lot of intelligence to create just the basis of life, more or less the complexity of modern life. Magically believing,despite the 2nd law of thermodynamics, that soup can turn into shakesphere over billions of years is an act of faith, not Science and not intelligence. Materialism can't lead into objecitvy morality.
@Achristianresponse omg lol yes, it could've generated life from non-life,..i mean nature can do things that we can't, and the second law of thermodynamics only apply to closed are i mean earth isn't closed. plus god didn't intervene during evolution, what's more complex evolution or abiogenesis? or formation of solar system which is complex too,...we know for a fact that it forms naturally,...also things like gallaxies we know that they formed naturally and their more complex, so y can't life?
@Achristianresponse — LOL... The scientists didn't *design* anything... they are merely reproducing the natural conditions that produce life... you see, there weren't any labs billions of years ago.
@Speede2fst04 If he designed proteins better, why did he design every living creature in terribly, INCREDIBLY stupid, bloody deranged and sadistic ways?
@Speede2fst04 in fact, if we can make proteins that means the universe does not need god to create lives, that is the point you stupid + god does not design better, just you thought you are better but yo are just normal like everyone else, maybe you believe in god that is the difference.
@tranquility4all - I would like to know why the Pope hasn't been indicted yet, he knowingly covered up hundreds of molestations, he possibly was involved in some of them himself...such low-life's!
@tranquility4all - yes indeed, they are called clergy, i.e.the POPE, Bishops, Cardinals, Priest, etc...god surely was created by these men, not the other way around.
@JOHNINCOLUMBUS Also MANY Kings, Queens & Political Leaders Partnered with religious charlatans in order to strengthened their strangle hold on the Public.
Many People Blindly accepted their supreme authority.
In some countries People who didn't accept the Ruler's & the church's absolute sovereignty were EXECUTED !
@tranquility4all - That is correct, not to mention the involvement the Vatican had with the Nazi's during WWII...religion is a divisive tool to control people.
@JOHNINCOLUMBUS Religion is the MOST Divisive Force on Earth !
Many Religious People CONDEMN People of different religions or People who aren't religious ! Leadres of the catholic condemns Gays, However they circle the wagons as they continue to try & cover up the many rapes of minors committed by members of the clergy !
@tranquility4all - I would like to know why the Pope hasn't been indicted yet, he knowingly covered up hundreds of molestations, he possibly was involved in some of them himself...such low-life's!
@tranquility4all - I was raised in a Roman Catholic family, when to Catholic school for 12 years, that's why I'm not religious anymore. The Catholic church is shielding their criminal Pope from prosecution. It's the same scenario when they move child molesting priests from one Parish to another, sooner of later the Pope is going to have to face his crimes, just like the priests are doing now.
@JOHNINCOLUMBUS HALLELUJAH ! I was raised Roman Catholic. From K thru 8th. grade I attended daily religious classes including bible study. Served as an alter boy. The more they attempted to indoctrinate me the more I QUESTIONED their preachings. They said god gives EVERYONE free will. However if You exercised Free Will & Questioned god's existence they would give You Hell for having the audacity to Question a god whose existence has never been proven.
@JOHNINCOLUMBUS When i was 14 i realized there religion was designed as a means to control people. All religion requires is blind faith from people who are willing to accept unproven claims as absolute truths.
Anything positive can be accomplished without religion.
People don't need religion or a belief in a god to be moral.
If childhood indoctrination was criminalized, all religions would suffer a swift death !
@tranquility4all - You are correct, belief is where they hook people, and the gullible are driven by fear, so they blindly believe religious fairytale's...try telling them stories about some far fetched thing that supposedly happened now, they would laugh at you or brush you aside. Just because stories are in an old moldy book doesn't make them any more relevant or true.
@JOHNINCOLUMBUS What I find sad about many theists is not only can't they provide verifiable factual proof to support their positive claim that a god exists.
They can't even define their god !
How can people believe & worship something which they can't define or provide ANY Proof to support its' existence ?
@tranquility4all - Before they start to tell me how wonderful god is, I ask them, which god are you referring too, at which point they usually assume I'm asking about the Judeo-Christian god or Abrahamic god. Also most don't have any knowledge of the thousands of other gods people have, or presently believe or believed in for centuries, this is where their argument has no validity. You are right, it is sad, but religion is still dangerous.
@tranquility4all Theists have learned something and then once they learn it, there is nothing else that you can do to convince some of them. They know there is a god and that is final.
@tranquility4all Theists have learned something and then once they learn it, there is nothing else that you can do to convince some of them. They know there is a god and that is final. - Now bow down to my god , your sinful tranquility
@heart79605 It's because no god does not exist ? That's a double negative. What are You trying to state ? Do You mean No god exists Or a god doesn't exist ? The Energy of each Universe connects all of us to WHAT ? Please present evidence to support this statement.
@tranquility4all What goes on in laboratories like what Craig venter and jack szostak do, Is controlled experiments in controlled conditions and would never occur on there primordial earth!!
They also dont create anything!!!!, they borrow and copy pre existing INFORMATION to get there experiments Going!!!! rearranging DNA and genomes, is not creating life!
@WONDOCTORJ Science gathers evidence in an attempt to explain Natural Phenomena. Theists ASSert a god/higher power is the cause for life & all Natural Phenomena without presenting ANY evidence. Science never claimed to be the cause of life. Science tries to EXPLAIN the the cause of Life & all Natural Phenomena. Theists attempt to INDOCTRINATE willfully ignorant people to accept without question the existence of a god. Is this too difficult for You to Understand ?
@tranquility4all I never said anything about god....although i belive that we are all god. I belive in other dimentions, supported by the experiments these guys refer to and quantum mechanics. People who believe everything just magically appeared from nothing without a higher power making it happen are moronic to say the least. My personal favorite, is the "big bang" theory. Yes, everything was just blank, and all of the sudden, a big bang created everything out of nothing.......LMAO
@WONDOCTORJ Actually theists believe everything was magically created from nothing by an imaginary unproven god/creator. You believe We're all god ? Please elaborate. Do all of us have supernatural powers ? Did all of us magically create the Universe from nothing ? You have me an other People laughing Our Asses off ! What is a DIMENTION ? Do You mean Other DIMENSIONS ? Please DEFINE Other Dimensions in Specific terms & Present EVIDENCE supporting their existence
@tranquility4all there is tons of research, from the experiments that these guys are talking about to quantum mechanics. I have been studying this shit for years to come to my conclusion. Why don't you show me evidence that everything just POOFED, and here we are?
@WONDOCTORJ Are You DENSE ? I never said Everything just POOFED into existence. Creationist believe this. Why don't You ask a Creationist. We're not sure How everything came into existence. You concluded We're all god & other dimensions exist. Please define other dimensions & god in specific terms & present evidence which supports Your ASSertion that We're all gods & other dimensions exist. You're the one making positive claims & the burden of proof rests with You to present EVIDENCE.
@tranquility4all existence are the particles and space and time we know. before existance i believe there was also space and time. maybe waves of something. thats what im curious about. was there waves and fields before our big bang is our big bang a repeat of a previous big bang. :) grazy idea right? thats why i CERN and there machine the LHC we gonna find out grazy shit beyond our fantasy. youll see
@ImmortalUniverse There are some claims We can support with evidence. The existence of an all powerful super natural deity isn't 1 of these claims. We will continue to increase Our understanding of many things. Abandoning the absolute certitude that an all powerful deity exists is the first step to increasing our base of knowledge & understanding.
@ImmortalUniverse Faith is nothing more than an excuse to believe something without evidence or in the presence of contradictor evidence. Religion is a panacea for the intellectually lazy willfully ignorant masses. If childhood indoctrination was criminalized all religions (especially christianity), with the possible exception of Buddhism would die a swift death.
Well, not really anything to say for the creators being religious themselves if they include a religious story such as that in Assassin's Creed, but I'm sure you know that. Just clarifying.
Human beings are a composit of "molecules and proteins", meaning we are a new structure fighting for survival, and "morality" is the tool we use in order to survive! Christians think that life is something basic and definable, but it isn't! Every kind of living creatures are a sum of many parts, from the most basic to the most complex. Humans are a result of billions of smaller parts.
Their "god" must be the result of smaller, less "godly" parts. If god does exist, than he's just a composit!!!
You're certainly as religious as your fundamentalist christian counterparts. Perhaps even moreso than the islamists who blow up buildings, except you resort to intellectual terrorism first, and then death camps later.
> "The Nazi's [endorsed the rape, murder and enslavement of other races] and it worked for them, so was it right for them? Your view MUST say yes."
No, it didn't work for the Nazis. Six years after they started a war, their 1000 year empire was bombed into the ground, their great leader was dead, and the war criminals from that period didn't go free. Maybe they didn't all get caught, but there is not much left of the Nazi empire. Indirectly, they only founded the state of Israel.
@TheAtheistExperience Yes, but that is the point no? Nazi society did not crumble from within but from and external source but the main point here is that WITHIN Nazi society, their ethic worked for them so if there is no absolute ethical standard that transcends different societies and cultures, you can't say they were "wrong". If you do you will be inconsistent, the guy said that we create our own morality, how could any morality be better than any other in that view?
@TheAtheistExperience Also, the Nazi's lost the war because the allies were more powerful, so does more power make one right? What if the Nazi won the war (which almost happened) would they be right? But ultimately, If morality originates with us, you are standing on a cloud if you try and say any ethical system is better than any other, you have nothing
@TheAtheistExperience OK, I see. That was a convo stopper but in response I must quote from the wise philosopher/sage Jeffrey Lebowski who said, "Well.... that's just like..... your opinion man..." :);):)
Morals are an opinion. In their own idea, the Nazis were the good guys. They didn't want to get robbed, they didn't want to die, and they had ideals. The same goes for all the "good" Jews, all the "good" Muslims, all the "good" Communists, and all te "good" Christian American patriots. No matter who you ask, people's morals are always based on the idea that they are the good guys; better than the rest, and better than in the past. "Good" morals are always relative to other ideas.
So then why do we (collective we) tell China and North Korea to improve their human rights? Who cares how they treat their people, right? Especially if it allows us to buy cheap stuff at big box stores!
Surely if morals are nothing more than mere opinions, we would have complete and utter anarchy... not to mention the fact that pedophilia would be completely justifiable.
@AA32m7io1 Yeah, this is the trump card argument in my mind for theism and is what converted CS Lewis. If the atheist denies God, he MUST deny absolute morality but once he does that, he is up an ontological doodoo creek without a moral paddle. Morality would then be as arbitrary as hair color and could be changed just as easily. They can't see that when they call out the "evils" of religion, they are standing on a cloud
- "[Atheists] can't see that when they call out the "evils" of religion, they are standing on a cloud."
Atheists get their morals from exactly the same source as you: not from an ancient book of gruesome fairy tales about a cruel, sadistic and psychopathic god, but simply from their parents and other people around them. The only difference is that atheists feel responsible for their own actions, instead of blaming it on the devil and expecting to be forgiven by Jesus.
@TheAtheistExperience Yeah here is your atheist hall of fame of "we are responsible for our own actions" atheists: 1) Lenin-Tyrant 2) Stalin- Mass murderer 3) Mao- Mass murderer 4) Pol Pot- Wow! another mass murderer, go figure 5) Ho chee- OMG! Another mass murderer 6) Kim ill- ego nut job 7) Castro- ditto 8) Ohare- bonified bitch 9) Dawkins- biligerent biologist 10) Harris- ignoramous par excellence great examples of humanity fo sho
- "... atheist hall of fame... great examples of humanity fo sho"
The last three are indeed great examples. The rest of your list is irrelevant, because whatever those people (or their followers) did was not done in the name of atheism. The first seven may have been atheists too, but but that is just as irrelevant as the fact that some of them had a moustache, orf that some of them are Asians. They are all "great leaders" and idolized "gods" of a dogmatic ideology: Communism.
@TheAtheistExperience Dawkins line does not fly. I understand that not all atheists are mass murderers but if you guys are going to throw the crusades (done 1,000 yrs ago) and the inquisition (done 500 years ago), done by Catholics then you are going to get Communists (who committed all their stuff in the last century) dumped in your lap. But here's the thing, do you think what those atheistic Communists or religious nutjobs did was wrong?? Remember they thought they were the good guys right?
Empathy? Can such things as emotions and feelings be scientifically measured by empirical processes? Is empathy a social convention or the result of chemical reactions in our brains?
.
Also, where does empathy fit into Herbert Spencer's five categories: time, space, matter, force and action? If empathy is not a physical part of nature, how can it possibly have a natural explanation?
Finally, if "morals are an opinion," as you claim, then you (and Dawkins et al.) have absolutely no grounds to ever accuse Christians of "lying" about God and Creationism. That's completely inconsistent with your own view!
Hmm? You're comparing apples and oranges with this statement. Morals, depending on how you view things, could be subjective. One person may think prostitution is immoral, another many not.
However, whether or not a god exists and made the world CANNOT be subject to opinion. You may have an opinion, one way or the other, but either god exists or he doesn't. And when creationists fail to provide evidence for god, it's perfectly fine for atheists to criticize them.
"when creationists fail to provide evidence for god, it's perfectly fine for atheists to criticize them."
.
Just like your evidence for abiogenesis?
.
Paul Davies says in "Taking Science on Faith" (NYT, Nov 2007), "Clearly, then, both religion and science are founded on FAITH...until science comes up with a testable theory of the laws of the universe, its claim to be free of faith is manifestly bogus."
"Morals, depending on how you view things, could be subjective."
.
So given a person's perspective, pedophilia, murder and stealing might be perfectly justifiable, right? Surely you can't be serious? Also, if you carry this out to its logical conclusion, anarchy would be the ultimate result.
Somehow you made the leap from the statement "if "morals are an opinion," as you claim".. to the conclusion " then you have absolutely no grounds to ever accuse Christians of "lying" about God and Creationism."
My point is this doesn't make sense. Whether or not god exists is an empirical fact, right? Personal opinions are irrelevant.
Now, some people, believe morals are subjective. So your conclusion doesn't follow.
"Now, some people, believe morals are subjective. So your conclusion doesn't follow."
.
And some people believe in Santa Clause, but that does not make it so. If morals are subjective, we would have utter anarchy!
.
Also, how could you know anything at all? Wouldn't that make everything subjective? After all, what's right to you may not be right to me (see relativism).
" If morals are subjective, we would have utter anarchy! " - You're gonna have to back that statement up with some evidence, or reasoning. Morals are OBVIOUSLY subjective. For example, people used to think it was moral to own slaves and beat them, while others believed it was immoral.
In more modern terms, some people think prostitutions is immoral, and some don't. Yet, the world still isn't succumbing to anarchy, is it?
Moral relativism, doesn't imply everything is relative.
"Whether or not god exists is an empirical fact, right?"
.
Since I believe Romans 1:18-23, then yes! However, I can no more prove the existence of God by empirical methods, or how Jesus raised Himself from the dead, than you can prove abiogenesis, the initial cause of the Big Bang, or the species from which primates evolved from. Yet, you still "believe" in all those things.
Well, true. However, we agree that is an empirical fact, and one's opinion won't change it. Someday it may be provable that there is a god, you can't rule that out.
I "accept" rather than believe those things, and if evidence to the contrary was presented them mind would change.
My only point though, was to distinguish between the empirical nature of the question of gods existence, to the subjective nature of morality.
Holding up Scandinavia as a society that functions well on atheistic principles utterly fails since they have laws against stealing, murder, rape, pedophilia, etc. If everyone engaged in these activities, logically it would lead to absolute anarchy. And that is the reasons such laws are in place.
"Everything [we think, remember, feel] is the result of something that happens in our brains."
.
Then empathy and the laws of logic would not be universal as they wouldn't extend beyond our brains. But we know the Law of Non-Contradiction states that any contradiction is false (i.e., the car can't be in the garage and out of the garage at the same time). This is knowable and clearly exists outside our brains.
"As long as that's possible, the rest is possible." Wow, that is laughable.
philster00700 1 month ago
@philster00700 how do you mean?
blindedbro 1 month ago
@philster00700 as long as you can make some life material from non life material, thats enough for me to believe that hey, life could have came from non life.
sniped101 2 weeks ago in playlist More videos from TheAtheistExperience
@sniped101 Let me propose a situation: If I said I can make a nuclear reactor in a laboratory, do you believe that it could just randomly occur in nature? Probably (and most certainly) not. Life is too complicated to just "appear" out of a "fusing of a couple of proteins" or w/e. When they "simulated" those experiments to "create" life from non-life, they did not use conditions of actual primordial earth; they did the experiment and said that that's what primordial earth was like.
philster00700 1 week ago
i kinda feel like putting some molecules in motion.
enuvune 1 month ago
They initially found 7 amino acids (not proteins), but later found more in the samples stored away from the original experiments.
gimmethegepgun 2 months ago
@gimmethegepgun
After he was already dead sadly :c
BeBoBli 2 months ago
well put
CarlSagan6 3 months ago
Scientific definition of living being: Any part of nature that is an open system, has the capacity to replicate intself into other organism that can replicate themselves as well and that's composed by cells.
Theologic definition of living being: ???
AndrusPr8 4 months ago
"shake up a test tube, apply electricity and a frog comes out"
matt just described most christians idea of abiogenesis, and all creationists idea of evolution
managarm1349 5 months ago in playlist Weitere Videos von TheAtheistExperience
@managarm1349 Sadly, I think that you're right. :/
ndrthrdr1 5 months ago
thats why i love CERN i ment. and their machine.
the large hadron collider.
ImmortalUniverse 5 months ago
disprove god is easy.
a fantasy like a god has unlimited powers ,greater intelligence then a human.
Intelligence has been defined in different ways, including the abilities for abstract thought, understanding, communication, reasoning, learning, planning.
but a gods lacks communication , its reasoning is weird.
we create things that help us , a god creates stupid weaker things .
maybe its learning from us then , but that woulld destroy the idea of all powerfull.
so god is a myth
ImmortalUniverse 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NEW BOOK (Donated) For Debates And Governance
Topics: WINNING ARGUMENTS FOR CREATIONISM-EVOLUTIONISM DEBATE (See Subchapter 10.2.2, Chapter 10, of Part Two.), The Issue On The Criminal Liability Of Foretelling The END OF THE WORLD, Other Debated Issues, Terrorism, War, Law, Politics, Religion, Philosophy, Science, Others.
Websites: balancedway.yolasite.com
balancedway1.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com
announcements-balancedway.yolasite.com
TheServiceWeb 6 months ago
I can disprove god right now using nothing but the theistic definition of god:
If god created everything, and god cannot be created, then god is not a thing. If god is not a thing, he is no thing.. Nothing. God is nothing; aka god doesn't exist.
DaFleegsta 6 months ago
ImmortalUniverse 5 months ago
they look ridiculous.lol full of shit , just close ur mouth and let your ass talk
sweetdip27 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Atheist are as bad as Christians.
bastardoftheparty1 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
There has NEVER been a successful experiment where non living matter was used to create life. These guys are stretching this bullshit. Building blocks for life is not life. There are three things that determine whether a thing is alive. It eats, shits, and reproduces. That has never been done and I suspect that it never will.
bastardoftheparty1 6 months ago
Things didnt end with Miller. Lots of new studies have been done. Adenine forms remarkably easily. The latest and best work suggests that the snowball phase of earth was critical....Cyanide (common in early earth's atmosphere) has an interesting trait of forming complex organic molecules (again including Adenine) when it sits in an arsenic rich environment.
ThieleM 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
MATT is A MORON!! No one has made Proteins!! or even the building blocks of life!! and Racemic mixtures have everything to do with the origin of Life!! atheists need to learn Homochirality!!
5tonyvvvv 8 months ago
Comment removed
5tonyvvvv 8 months ago
6:15
<3 those words of wisdom, offered a insite onto the subject, as I struggled with this subject. Thank you for posting this video.
Boss5414 8 months ago
Comment removed
Boss5414 8 months ago
★★★★★
Katalyzt 9 months ago
Lol no you don't. I can write down that the big bang took place and it would hold the same bearing as your "proof" of God. None whatsoever because neitger written account provided science to back it up.
TheRidgenator 9 months ago
you can't prove at all that life came from non life so how can you be sure that God didn't create the world. you have NO proof that the big bang happened. I have proof that God created the world. :)
gumdrop1421 9 months ago
Abiogenesis is analogous to Stephen Hawking's claim about our universe's spontaneous creation due to gravity. The Big Bang model is a model of cosmological evolution i.e. the formation of galaxies, stars, planets. Then due to abiogenesis, life can spontaneously arise from the right atmospheric conditions. Then everything is in the hands of natural selection. Now, here we are in an elegant universe and on an elegant planet called Earth!
FallofDarkness55 9 months ago 11
Miller's experiment was conducted around the same time microbiologists discovered the structure of DNA. Creationists bring that half century old experiment to back up their claim of divine intervention. Guess what, scientists actually do things to better understanding and the human race constantly unlike religion which only hinders human progress. I think its debauching to the intellectual capabilities that human's poses to believe in a 3,400 year old mythology written during the Bronze Age.
Rainbowsixoperator1 9 months ago
I am sorrry but as far as I can reseach, Stanley Miller and Harold Urey only produced Amino acids.
Amino acid is a molecule and not a life form.
Can some one please post a link to where they created a living protein as claimed in this vidoe?
Arcflash67 9 months ago
@Arcflash67 Do you know what a protein is, and what aminoacids are ? xD haha
Dimajo 9 months ago
@Dimajo
Please Explain..... I am all ears!
Arcflash67 9 months ago
@Arcflash67 i don't quite understand why I have to explain it to you, you could just research it yourself specially before you make any claims about it.
To be quick about it. Proteins consist of Aminoacids. They are created during the translation of the protein syntehsis, they arrive in triplets (3 base pairs = 1 aminoacid), after having read one of the aminoacids they are linked togehter, and when all nessecary ones are done the protein has been created.
Dimajo 9 months ago
@Arcflash67 there are both books and online animations who explains these processes, the reason why you don't believe what scientists tells you is because you haven't bothered taking the time to actaully understand it, which means you are intellectually dishonest. Please open a book, or read up on the subject before critisizing something. Have a nice day.
Dimajo 9 months ago
@Dimajo
Are you a scientist?
If you want people to believe in what you have to say than why don't you educate them. Not just to believe you and to take the words of others as the truth. But teach them all to understand and to do the expeiments to prove everything themselves. Free education for all ages and all levels.
Do keep the people in the dark and expect them to take your word a something of importance.
If you do you are just writing a new Bible and nothing more.
Arcflash67 9 months ago
@Arcflash67 I believe i a missing your point, because it seems that you are saying to me, that i need to educate the entire world myself. No i am not a scientist yet, though i am working on it, studying Biomedicin. But it is an 7 year education so that will take some time.
Prove it? i just told you were you could check up on what i just explained (if you saw the post where i explained it) there are books on this subject and it all has been proven, there is no faith involved here.
Dimajo 9 months ago
@Arcflash67 Why don't you try it out? i haven't been enormously specific and i might add that 2 triplets are read at the time during the translation. Now go look it all up. There are plenty book upon biology and the simple process of protein synthesis i have 11 of them, they aren't hard to find. Or go online as i said. And ofcourse we have to trust science at times, we can't check every single little thing ourselves that is absurd. that would demand an enormous mind and memory.
Dimajo 9 months ago
@Arcflash67 i do not expect people to see my word as something important in the sense that they should accept it because i am saying it. They know they can go check up on it, and when they do, they will see that i was right. just writing a bible ? you are on an unbelieveble discourse here, you aren't making sense at all. try and read it all again. and if youd didnt see my very first post.. read it.
Dimajo 9 months ago
There is no such thing as living material. There are only living systems. The material is just ordinary stuff that makes these systems.
kshackleton 10 months ago
I'm curious, at 1:50 he says "from non-living material, we have produced living material". Are amino acids defined as "living material"? I know they're the basic building blocks of life, and that they're organic, but isn't it misleading to call it "living material"? Wouldn't it be more accurate to say "from inorganic material, we have produced organic material"?
jamilor 11 months ago
@jamilor
But that's the thing "life" is a man-made concept, in reality "life" is just a certain arrangement of atoms, there are certain combinations of carbon that we label alive however, in the same way creationists misunderstand terms, we as humans have an anthropic need to categorize things and see them in black and white whereas in reality they are in shades of grey. If you are interested in abiogenesis then watch cdk007 interesting and informing video on the subject. :D
atheism616 11 months ago
@atheism616 I don't think that argument holds water, "life" is also a scientific concept or definition. That's what we're discussing here and the point is that amino acids don't fall under any of those definitions. There's no debating that point obviously, so my question's still unanswered. The presenter stated that living matter had been created from non-living matter and that sounds rather dishonest to me. I think the whole thing is fascinating, I just think his answer is part bs.
jamilor 11 months ago
@jamilor seriously, there's a vid on the side called "the origin of life-abiogenesis-dr.jack szostak". all you questions will be answered there.
Drgamedood 10 months ago
ITS FUCKING ABILENE TEXAS IDIOTS
heart79605 11 months ago
WON'T YOU LISTEN TO REASOONNNN...
ViperRob42 1 year ago
virus is a non living thing it contains only dna so abiogenis existe cause it is only molecule in motion but let me tell you you can be very hill from virus
mystisme 1 year ago
Fox, Douglas (2007-03-28). "Primordial Soup's On: Scientists Repeat Evolution's Most Famous Experiment". Scientific American (Scientific American Inc.). Retrieved 2008-07-09.
performed the miller yuri experiment with a better model of the early earth's atmosphere and composition and had better results.
rns13 1 year ago
life will find a way
carbonfconfusion 1 year ago
I myself believe in a God (Thats all I believe no Religous ties) I am open to non believers view points.These Guys make sense to me. They look at it from a logical point. And I agree their are a lot of things that don't match up.The one thing that stands out to me is when Adam and Eve supposedly ate from the tree why was God Surprised he is after all supposed to kno everything that has and will happen right? And as far as making man from dirt I dnt believe that either.
Gerow100 1 year ago
Welllll... I balk at Matt's assertion that we've made "living material" out of non-living material. Amino acid chains do not a homeostatic cell make.
Don't get me wrong, the (several) hypotheses for abiogenesis look pretty strong; evidence is fairly abundant. But that doesn't mean we can assert things recklessly. I think the caller here was reassured with the wrong arguments.
Polymeron 1 year ago
what some people fail to understand that creationism is a "form" of abiogenesis. God made people from non life, thats abiogenesis!
mcmadbat3 1 year ago
@mcmadbat3 What you fail to realize is that your an idiot, so go read a book or something and stay off the internet, you might make someone else dumber.
zpgJiggleBilly 1 year ago
@zpgJiggleBilly So using logic is idiotic? Fail.
mcmadbat3 1 year ago
@mcmadbat3 Wrong, the fact that you said God made people is illogical so any preceding or following statements is irrelevant. The core of your argument is illogical, I hardly call that using logic. Fail.
zpgJiggleBilly 1 year ago
@zpgJiggleBilly um.. didn't god make adam from dirt (abiogenesis- life from non life)? I don't believe that shit but it is a form of abiogenesis.
mcmadbat3 1 year ago
@mcmadbat3
And god fell from a duck's arse on a Monday many eons ago.
That's creatogenesis.
tellnet 1 year ago
when theists ask what my bases for morality is i do not scream out myself, that is the answer they want you to give so they can say , see they are selfish its all about themself. I scream out "EMPATHY" instead.
fireflygirl246 1 year ago
spirit is better
carbonfconfusion 1 year ago
life came from non living materials but we were the ones who created the life and in which that we are alive too does not prove or disprove creationism or abiogenesis
carbonfconfusion 1 year ago
Morality is derived solely from social necessity and common sense. The basis for morality are the fundamental liberties and protections that people must have in order to coexist with each other in a sustainable society.
VerumAdNauseam 1 year ago
I would be exited if it turns out that under no circumstance life could have formed by itself on earth. It would mean that there might have been a UFO on the ancient earth that seeded the first bacteria.
DutchNordic 1 year ago
Just a thought....things are either "living" or "non living".If you argue that "living" things cannot come from "non living" things, then you must think that living things i.e Life has always existed.
lewisner 1 year ago
Wrong!!!!...miller made nothing that could sustain life..amino acids can not assemble into proteins.and then a cell u need clear information and instructions from a Intelligence..not chance alone....MATT U ARE FULL OF SHIT !!!!!!!
5tonyvvvv 1 year ago
@5tonyvvvv — You should read up on Emergence... complexity is commonplace. BTW, it's not chance... it's chemical probability... those aminio acids had billions of years to form into cells.
bozzutoman 1 year ago
@5tonyvvvv The instructions for forming amino acids into fully formed proteins does exist! It's called RNA and DNA. The formation of RNA and DNA does not need a designer. The formation of lipids, ions, and protiens into living cells doesn't need a designer either. Look cdk007's abiogenesis video and learn something.
Sure it's one theory, but it fits the facts with evidence (unlike design theory which has no evidence and is unsupported by fact).
drfoxcourt 1 year ago
@drfoxcourt Bullshit..RNA has never been made there are no instructions ,or ingredients,RNA is incredibly complex...
5tonyvvvv 1 year ago
@5tonyvvvv Until now only ribonucleotides have been created, which are component molecules of RNA. Still this is a big leap forward and eventually scientists will get there
wHisperis001 1 year ago
if the right materials in an area as small as a lab, during a time far shorter than our lifetimes, can form the basic building blocks for life. Imagine what can happen in an area the size of the entire planet and it goes on for millions of years.
Nails077 1 year ago
It's not good enough because humans are wicked creatures and simply saying that "we" can chose whatever morality we want is dangerous. I'm completely open to discussing any of these issues. I think they bring up a good point. The issue is not intellectual, it's a question of will. Humans want to be God and determine what is right and wrong. We think we want control. Just like in Genesis. These guys are taking the fruit...blindly.
Achristianresponse 1 year ago
No. Even if you did generate "life" from non-life in an experiment in a lab you are only proving that it requires a lot of intelligence to create just the basis of life, more or less the complexity of modern life. Magically believing,despite the 2nd law of thermodynamics, that soup can turn into shakesphere over billions of years is an act of faith, not Science and not intelligence. Materialism can't lead into objecitvy morality.
Achristianresponse 1 year ago
@Achristianresponse omg lol yes, it could've generated life from non-life,..i mean nature can do things that we can't, and the second law of thermodynamics only apply to closed are i mean earth isn't closed. plus god didn't intervene during evolution, what's more complex evolution or abiogenesis? or formation of solar system which is complex too,...we know for a fact that it forms naturally,...also things like gallaxies we know that they formed naturally and their more complex, so y can't life?
Atheist603 1 year ago
@Achristianresponse — LOL... The scientists didn't *design* anything... they are merely reproducing the natural conditions that produce life... you see, there weren't any labs billions of years ago.
bozzutoman 1 year ago
yehh it's just as retarded saying the satan exists as it is god .....
IDMWEIGHTSIDM 1 year ago
I can't find what the prebiotic soup came from. Can anyone help?
ExtremeWorship 1 year ago
@ExtremeWorship Yakult!
omgiwaswrong 1 year ago
Hey I love the show
Blackguy811 1 year ago
I have a question ok they said they created proteins from non living materials? WOW God did that too except he did it better.
Speede2fst04 1 year ago
@Speede2fst04 Can you back up that claim with evidence? Or are you just taking the Bible's word for it? Odin loves you.
viridismonasteriense 1 year ago 33
@Speede2fst04 What are you talking about? Proteins will aways be proteins, just like water will aways be water.
DominateKiller6 1 year ago
@Speede2fst04 If he designed proteins better, why did he design every living creature in terribly, INCREDIBLY stupid, bloody deranged and sadistic ways?
DaneWeber88 1 year ago
@Speede2fst04 in fact, if we can make proteins that means the universe does not need god to create lives, that is the point you stupid + god does not design better, just you thought you are better but yo are just normal like everyone else, maybe you believe in god that is the difference.
iwanttoloveher 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
why is the guy on the left's eyebrows shaped like that?
is he a satan worshipper?
oh wait, aLL athietst are devil worshppiers
ClythiaMystica 1 year ago
@ClythiaMystica Please fix your grammer because it makes you look stupid.
Also, atheists don't worship anything they don't believe exists. So I hope you're kidding.
viridismonasteriense 1 year ago
@ClythiaMystica how are atheists devil worshipers when they dont believe in god or the devil?
ThePiranhaHead 1 year ago 3
@ClythiaMystica How would devil worshipping affect the shape of one's eyebrows?
The arguments from you people just keep getting more stupid and childish as time goes on. What's next? You start throwing fecies like monkeys?
byteresistor 1 year ago
@ClythiaMystica funny
Blackguy811 1 year ago
@ClythiaMystica
Ur a tool. Athiests believe in the devil as much as they believe in God.
rattlehead66666 1 year ago
@ClythiaMystica why does the pope wear that big hat?
is he an allah worshipper?
oh wait, aLL christians are allah worshppiers
RowanRawrLovesYou 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@tranquility4all - I would like to know why the Pope hasn't been indicted yet, he knowingly covered up hundreds of molestations, he possibly was involved in some of them himself...such low-life's!
JOHNINCOLUMBUS 1 year ago
Mankinid created god, not the other way around.
JOHNINCOLUMBUS 1 year ago
@JOHNINCOLUMBUS Some People created god to control mankind !
tranquility4all 1 year ago
@tranquility4all - yes indeed, they are called clergy, i.e.the POPE, Bishops, Cardinals, Priest, etc...god surely was created by these men, not the other way around.
JOHNINCOLUMBUS 1 year ago
@JOHNINCOLUMBUS Also MANY Kings, Queens & Political Leaders Partnered with religious charlatans in order to strengthened their strangle hold on the Public.
Many People Blindly accepted their supreme authority.
In some countries People who didn't accept the Ruler's & the church's absolute sovereignty were EXECUTED !
tranquility4all 1 year ago
@tranquility4all - That is correct, not to mention the involvement the Vatican had with the Nazi's during WWII...religion is a divisive tool to control people.
JOHNINCOLUMBUS 1 year ago
@JOHNINCOLUMBUS Religion is the MOST Divisive Force on Earth !
Many Religious People CONDEMN People of different religions or People who aren't religious ! Leadres of the catholic condemns Gays, However they circle the wagons as they continue to try & cover up the many rapes of minors committed by members of the clergy !
tranquility4all 1 year ago
@tranquility4all - I would like to know why the Pope hasn't been indicted yet, he knowingly covered up hundreds of molestations, he possibly was involved in some of them himself...such low-life's!
JOHNINCOLUMBUS 1 year ago
@JOHNINCOLUMBUS I have asked many devout catholics that Question.
So far no one can offer a reply.
tranquility4all 1 year ago
@tranquility4all - I was raised in a Roman Catholic family, when to Catholic school for 12 years, that's why I'm not religious anymore. The Catholic church is shielding their criminal Pope from prosecution. It's the same scenario when they move child molesting priests from one Parish to another, sooner of later the Pope is going to have to face his crimes, just like the priests are doing now.
JOHNINCOLUMBUS 1 year ago
@JOHNINCOLUMBUS HALLELUJAH ! I was raised Roman Catholic. From K thru 8th. grade I attended daily religious classes including bible study. Served as an alter boy. The more they attempted to indoctrinate me the more I QUESTIONED their preachings. They said god gives EVERYONE free will. However if You exercised Free Will & Questioned god's existence they would give You Hell for having the audacity to Question a god whose existence has never been proven.
tranquility4all 1 year ago
@tranquility4all - It's really ridiculous isn't it, and what they don't realize is HOW crazy it really is. Glad you broke away too!
JOHNINCOLUMBUS 1 year ago
@JOHNINCOLUMBUS When i was 14 i realized there religion was designed as a means to control people. All religion requires is blind faith from people who are willing to accept unproven claims as absolute truths.
Anything positive can be accomplished without religion.
People don't need religion or a belief in a god to be moral.
If childhood indoctrination was criminalized, all religions would suffer a swift death !
tranquility4all 1 year ago
@tranquility4all - You are correct, belief is where they hook people, and the gullible are driven by fear, so they blindly believe religious fairytale's...try telling them stories about some far fetched thing that supposedly happened now, they would laugh at you or brush you aside. Just because stories are in an old moldy book doesn't make them any more relevant or true.
JOHNINCOLUMBUS 1 year ago
@JOHNINCOLUMBUS What I find sad about many theists is not only can't they provide verifiable factual proof to support their positive claim that a god exists.
They can't even define their god !
How can people believe & worship something which they can't define or provide ANY Proof to support its' existence ?
tranquility4all 1 year ago 29
Comment removed
JOHNINCOLUMBUS 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@tranquility4all - Before they start to tell me how wonderful god is, I ask them, which god are you referring too, at which point they usually assume I'm asking about the Judeo-Christian god or Abrahamic god. Also most don't have any knowledge of the thousands of other gods people have, or presently believe or believed in for centuries, this is where their argument has no validity. You are right, it is sad, but religion is still dangerous.
JOHNINCOLUMBUS 1 year ago
@tranquility4all Theists have learned something and then once they learn it, there is nothing else that you can do to convince some of them. They know there is a god and that is final.
socomplete 1 year ago
@tranquility4all Theists have learned something and then once they learn it, there is nothing else that you can do to convince some of them. They know there is a god and that is final. - Now bow down to my god , your sinful tranquility
;-)
socomplete 1 year ago
@socomplete Many theists R short sighted & close minded.
As far as bowing down to any deity.
I hope this is nothing more than Sarcasm.
tranquility4all 1 year ago
@tranquility4all The flying spaghettii monstor has spoken!!!!
socomplete 1 year ago
@socomplete And the marinara sauce has listened.
tranquility4all 1 year ago
@tranquility4all its because no God does not exsist but there is the energy of each Universe that connects us all.
heart79605 11 months ago
@heart79605 It's because no god does not exist ? That's a double negative. What are You trying to state ? Do You mean No god exists Or a god doesn't exist ? The Energy of each Universe connects all of us to WHAT ? Please present evidence to support this statement.
tranquility4all 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@tranquility4all What goes on in laboratories like what Craig venter and jack szostak do, Is controlled experiments in controlled conditions and would never occur on there primordial earth!!
They also dont create anything!!!!, they borrow and copy pre existing INFORMATION to get there experiments Going!!!! rearranging DNA and genomes, is not creating life!
5tonyvvvv 9 months ago
@tranquility4all The Moronic atheist needs to learn Homochirality and Racemic mixtures!!
5tonyvvvv 9 months ago
@5tonyvvvv Will the STUPID theist explain how these support the existence of a deity ?
tranquility4all 9 months ago 10
@tranquility4all No, but we can prove that life is not from science. Have you not listened to the vid?
WONDOCTORJ 6 months ago
@WONDOCTORJ Science gathers evidence in an attempt to explain Natural Phenomena. Theists ASSert a god/higher power is the cause for life & all Natural Phenomena without presenting ANY evidence. Science never claimed to be the cause of life. Science tries to EXPLAIN the the cause of Life & all Natural Phenomena. Theists attempt to INDOCTRINATE willfully ignorant people to accept without question the existence of a god. Is this too difficult for You to Understand ?
tranquility4all 6 months ago
@tranquility4all I never said anything about god....although i belive that we are all god. I belive in other dimentions, supported by the experiments these guys refer to and quantum mechanics. People who believe everything just magically appeared from nothing without a higher power making it happen are moronic to say the least. My personal favorite, is the "big bang" theory. Yes, everything was just blank, and all of the sudden, a big bang created everything out of nothing.......LMAO
WONDOCTORJ 6 months ago
@WONDOCTORJ Actually theists believe everything was magically created from nothing by an imaginary unproven god/creator. You believe We're all god ? Please elaborate. Do all of us have supernatural powers ? Did all of us magically create the Universe from nothing ? You have me an other People laughing Our Asses off ! What is a DIMENTION ? Do You mean Other DIMENSIONS ? Please DEFINE Other Dimensions in Specific terms & Present EVIDENCE supporting their existence
tranquility4all 6 months ago
@tranquility4all there is tons of research, from the experiments that these guys are talking about to quantum mechanics. I have been studying this shit for years to come to my conclusion. Why don't you show me evidence that everything just POOFED, and here we are?
WONDOCTORJ 6 months ago
@WONDOCTORJ Are You DENSE ? I never said Everything just POOFED into existence. Creationist believe this. Why don't You ask a Creationist. We're not sure How everything came into existence. You concluded We're all god & other dimensions exist. Please define other dimensions & god in specific terms & present evidence which supports Your ASSertion that We're all gods & other dimensions exist. You're the one making positive claims & the burden of proof rests with You to present EVIDENCE.
tranquility4all 6 months ago
ImmortalUniverse 5 months ago
@ImmortalUniverse There are some claims We can support with evidence. The existence of an all powerful super natural deity isn't 1 of these claims. We will continue to increase Our understanding of many things. Abandoning the absolute certitude that an all powerful deity exists is the first step to increasing our base of knowledge & understanding.
tranquility4all 5 months ago
@tranquility4all
i think if someone believes in a all power deity that has intelligence, you have a great fantasy.
nothing proves different.
nothing points to great intelligence at work.
ImmortalUniverse 5 months ago
@ImmortalUniverse AGREED !
tranquility4all 5 months ago
@ImmortalUniverse Belief in the existence of an all powerful creator who has always existed is supported with nothing more than blind faith.
tranquility4all 5 months ago
@tranquility4all true.
just like the faith for afterlife.
fantasy can make lots of people happy i guess.
and religious people make great fantasy videogames like Assassins Creed or movies.
hell and demons work well in movies.
ImmortalUniverse 5 months ago
@ImmortalUniverse Faith is nothing more than an excuse to believe something without evidence or in the presence of contradictor evidence. Religion is a panacea for the intellectually lazy willfully ignorant masses. If childhood indoctrination was criminalized all religions (especially christianity), with the possible exception of Buddhism would die a swift death.
tranquility4all 5 months ago
@ImmortalUniverse
Well, not really anything to say for the creators being religious themselves if they include a religious story such as that in Assassin's Creed, but I'm sure you know that. Just clarifying.
BeBoBli 2 months ago
We can now produce artificial cells. Look it up on popsci.con
kitwol 1 year ago
Comment removed
Futochu 1 year ago
Comment removed
Futochu 1 year ago
Human beings are a composit of "molecules and proteins", meaning we are a new structure fighting for survival, and "morality" is the tool we use in order to survive! Christians think that life is something basic and definable, but it isn't! Every kind of living creatures are a sum of many parts, from the most basic to the most complex. Humans are a result of billions of smaller parts.
Their "god" must be the result of smaller, less "godly" parts. If god does exist, than he's just a composit!!!
armelix73 1 year ago
Much ass was kicked that day.
LordCustard 1 year ago
You're certainly as religious as your fundamentalist christian counterparts. Perhaps even moreso than the islamists who blow up buildings, except you resort to intellectual terrorism first, and then death camps later.
tgz1000 1 year ago
Comment removed
agnostaxian 1 year ago
@agnostaxian
> "The Nazi's [endorsed the rape, murder and enslavement of other races] and it worked for them, so was it right for them? Your view MUST say yes."
No, it didn't work for the Nazis. Six years after they started a war, their 1000 year empire was bombed into the ground, their great leader was dead, and the war criminals from that period didn't go free. Maybe they didn't all get caught, but there is not much left of the Nazi empire. Indirectly, they only founded the state of Israel.
TheAtheistExperience 1 year ago
@TheAtheistExperience Yes, but that is the point no? Nazi society did not crumble from within but from and external source but the main point here is that WITHIN Nazi society, their ethic worked for them so if there is no absolute ethical standard that transcends different societies and cultures, you can't say they were "wrong". If you do you will be inconsistent, the guy said that we create our own morality, how could any morality be better than any other in that view?
agnostaxian 1 year ago
@TheAtheistExperience Also, the Nazi's lost the war because the allies were more powerful, so does more power make one right? What if the Nazi won the war (which almost happened) would they be right? But ultimately, If morality originates with us, you are standing on a cloud if you try and say any ethical system is better than any other, you have nothing
agnostaxian 1 year ago
@agnostaxian
> "If morality originates with us...."
It does. Period. End of discussion.
TheAtheistExperience 1 year ago
@TheAtheistExperience OK, I see. That was a convo stopper but in response I must quote from the wise philosopher/sage Jeffrey Lebowski who said, "Well.... that's just like..... your opinion man..." :);):)
agnostaxian 1 year ago
@agnostaxian
Morals are an opinion. In their own idea, the Nazis were the good guys. They didn't want to get robbed, they didn't want to die, and they had ideals. The same goes for all the "good" Jews, all the "good" Muslims, all the "good" Communists, and all te "good" Christian American patriots. No matter who you ask, people's morals are always based on the idea that they are the good guys; better than the rest, and better than in the past. "Good" morals are always relative to other ideas.
TheAtheistExperience 1 year ago
@TheAtheistExperience
"Morals are an opinion."
So then why do we (collective we) tell China and North Korea to improve their human rights? Who cares how they treat their people, right? Especially if it allows us to buy cheap stuff at big box stores!
Surely if morals are nothing more than mere opinions, we would have complete and utter anarchy... not to mention the fact that pedophilia would be completely justifiable.
AA32m7io1 1 year ago
@AA32m7io1
> "So then why do we ... tell China and North Korea to improve their human rights?"
Because we empathize with the people over there, and because we also want to guarantee our own safety.
> "Surely ... we would have complete and utter anarchy..."
Then surely all those godless heathens in Scandinavia must be on a killing spree of biblical proportions by now.
> "pedophilia would be completely justifiable"
Not if you have any empathy with the victims. The key word is empathy, not God.
TheAtheistExperience 1 year ago
Comment removed
AA32m7io1 1 year ago
@AA32m7io1 Yeah, this is the trump card argument in my mind for theism and is what converted CS Lewis. If the atheist denies God, he MUST deny absolute morality but once he does that, he is up an ontological doodoo creek without a moral paddle. Morality would then be as arbitrary as hair color and could be changed just as easily. They can't see that when they call out the "evils" of religion, they are standing on a cloud
agnostaxian 1 year ago
@agnostaxian
- "[Atheists] can't see that when they call out the "evils" of religion, they are standing on a cloud."
Atheists get their morals from exactly the same source as you: not from an ancient book of gruesome fairy tales about a cruel, sadistic and psychopathic god, but simply from their parents and other people around them. The only difference is that atheists feel responsible for their own actions, instead of blaming it on the devil and expecting to be forgiven by Jesus.
TheAtheistExperience 1 year ago
agnostaxian 1 year ago
@agnostaxia
- "... atheist hall of fame... great examples of humanity fo sho"
The last three are indeed great examples. The rest of your list is irrelevant, because whatever those people (or their followers) did was not done in the name of atheism. The first seven may have been atheists too, but but that is just as irrelevant as the fact that some of them had a moustache, orf that some of them are Asians. They are all "great leaders" and idolized "gods" of a dogmatic ideology: Communism.
TheAtheistExperience 1 year ago
@TheAtheistExperience Dawkins line does not fly. I understand that not all atheists are mass murderers but if you guys are going to throw the crusades (done 1,000 yrs ago) and the inquisition (done 500 years ago), done by Catholics then you are going to get Communists (who committed all their stuff in the last century) dumped in your lap. But here's the thing, do you think what those atheistic Communists or religious nutjobs did was wrong?? Remember they thought they were the good guys right?
agnostaxian 1 year ago
@TheAtheistExperience
.
"Because we empathize..."
.
Empathy? Can such things as emotions and feelings be scientifically measured by empirical processes? Is empathy a social convention or the result of chemical reactions in our brains?
.
Also, where does empathy fit into Herbert Spencer's five categories: time, space, matter, force and action? If empathy is not a physical part of nature, how can it possibly have a natural explanation?
.
PS-does Scandinavia have laws? Why?
AA32m7io1 1 year ago
@AA32m7io1
- "Is empathy ... the result of chemical reactions in our brains?"
Everything that we can think, remember, feel or be as persons is the result of something that happens in our brains.
- "where does empathy fit into Herbert Spencer's five categories?"
I don't know, and I don't care.
- "If empathy is not a physical part of nature..."
Our brains are natural.
- "does Scandinavia have laws? Why?"
Why do you even ask such a pointless question?
TheAtheistExperience 1 year ago
@TheAtheistExperience 4 of 4
Finally, if "morals are an opinion," as you claim, then you (and Dawkins et al.) have absolutely no grounds to ever accuse Christians of "lying" about God and Creationism. That's completely inconsistent with your own view!
AA32m7io1 1 year ago
@AA32m7io1
Hmm? You're comparing apples and oranges with this statement. Morals, depending on how you view things, could be subjective. One person may think prostitution is immoral, another many not.
However, whether or not a god exists and made the world CANNOT be subject to opinion. You may have an opinion, one way or the other, but either god exists or he doesn't. And when creationists fail to provide evidence for god, it's perfectly fine for atheists to criticize them.
Havenfall 1 year ago
@Havenfall 2 of 2
.
"when creationists fail to provide evidence for god, it's perfectly fine for atheists to criticize them."
.
Just like your evidence for abiogenesis?
.
Paul Davies says in "Taking Science on Faith" (NYT, Nov 2007), "Clearly, then, both religion and science are founded on FAITH...until science comes up with a testable theory of the laws of the universe, its claim to be free of faith is manifestly bogus."
AA32m7io1 1 year ago
@Havenfall 1 of 2
.
"Morals, depending on how you view things, could be subjective."
.
So given a person's perspective, pedophilia, murder and stealing might be perfectly justifiable, right? Surely you can't be serious? Also, if you carry this out to its logical conclusion, anarchy would be the ultimate result.
AA32m7io1 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@AA32m7io1
Don't misunderstand the point of what I said.
Somehow you made the leap from the statement "if "morals are an opinion," as you claim".. to the conclusion " then you have absolutely no grounds to ever accuse Christians of "lying" about God and Creationism."
My point is this doesn't make sense. Whether or not god exists is an empirical fact, right? Personal opinions are irrelevant.
Now, some people, believe morals are subjective. So your conclusion doesn't follow.
Havenfall 1 year ago
@Havenfall 2 of 2
"Now, some people, believe morals are subjective. So your conclusion doesn't follow."
.
And some people believe in Santa Clause, but that does not make it so. If morals are subjective, we would have utter anarchy!
.
Also, how could you know anything at all? Wouldn't that make everything subjective? After all, what's right to you may not be right to me (see relativism).
AA32m7io1 1 year ago
@AA32m7io1
" If morals are subjective, we would have utter anarchy! " - You're gonna have to back that statement up with some evidence, or reasoning. Morals are OBVIOUSLY subjective. For example, people used to think it was moral to own slaves and beat them, while others believed it was immoral.
In more modern terms, some people think prostitutions is immoral, and some don't. Yet, the world still isn't succumbing to anarchy, is it?
Moral relativism, doesn't imply everything is relative.
Havenfall 1 year ago
@Havenfall 1 of 2
"Whether or not god exists is an empirical fact, right?"
.
Since I believe Romans 1:18-23, then yes! However, I can no more prove the existence of God by empirical methods, or how Jesus raised Himself from the dead, than you can prove abiogenesis, the initial cause of the Big Bang, or the species from which primates evolved from. Yet, you still "believe" in all those things.
AA32m7io1 1 year ago
@AA32m7io1
Well, true. However, we agree that is an empirical fact, and one's opinion won't change it. Someday it may be provable that there is a god, you can't rule that out.
I "accept" rather than believe those things, and if evidence to the contrary was presented them mind would change.
My only point though, was to distinguish between the empirical nature of the question of gods existence, to the subjective nature of morality.
Havenfall 1 year ago
@TheAtheistExperience 3 of 4
.
"Why do you even ask such a pointless question?"
.
Holding up Scandinavia as a society that functions well on atheistic principles utterly fails since they have laws against stealing, murder, rape, pedophilia, etc. If everyone engaged in these activities, logically it would lead to absolute anarchy. And that is the reasons such laws are in place.
AA32m7io1 1 year ago
@TheAtheistExperience 2 of 4
"Everything [we think, remember, feel] is the result of something that happens in our brains."
.
Then empathy and the laws of logic would not be universal as they wouldn't extend beyond our brains. But we know the Law of Non-Contradiction states that any contradiction is false (i.e., the car can't be in the garage and out of the garage at the same time). This is knowable and clearly exists outside our brains.
.
Why is this law true?
AA32m7io1 1 year ago