Rational Response Squad vs. The Way of the Master

[granddad2002]

Got to agree. Kirk actually said the things he said... he stated he believed what he believe... and in Kirk's mind that 'qualifies' as 'proof'... kind of like watching that subway shooter being his own defense attorney. Kirk was lucky that his 'Chinese' fossil testimony wasn't challenged... the Golbi desert is filled with many geologic ages of fossils that has still remained productive to this day.If he got on the topic of why such finds are relevant.... I think he would have exposed himself.

[dsrsp]

Nobody will defeat the Super Duo: Banana-Man and Crocoduck-Boy, in their persuit of mass stupidity.

LOOK OUT!! They're coming to get ya.. with a banana...

Major fail in life for those two assholes.

[evangelical1]

I guess I agree, more or less, with your analysis of the debate. However, let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater. In EVERY debate I've ever seen between a non-believer and a Christian, the Christian side comes out WAY ahead (apart from this debate). Atheism/agnosticism is very untenable on its own and Christianity has thousands of years of solid thinking behind it. The Way of the Master debate is the exception which proves the rule.

[jerico641]

Has anybody else noticed how this "Way of the Master" title sounds like something out of a bad vampire movie? lol

[goransin01]

People who really take the bible seriously should read the older Jewish books that has a lot of the material the bible was based on yet still includes much of the crap no one in their right mind would believe. Adam, jealous of the animals having a mate and tired of having sex with them (yes, Adam was engaging in bestiality) wanted his own mate of his own species. God fucked it up more than once trying to provide one and eventually created Eve v.2.0. Some of it is down right comical.

[LingEntityNoobi]

I think Ray Comfort and Kirk are incredibly sloppy in debating for my faith. I feel quite shamed by them. On the other hand, kelly and Sapient, if you think about it, aren't all that great of considerate debaters either. They just appeal to emotion.

I want a mature debate between Bill Craig and atheist Micheal Ruse! now that is a respectful, good debate. =)

[FreddieJack]

So let me get this straight...some ignorant person makes a video on youtube from their home and it debunks everything the Bible talks about? And then a group goes and tells another group they are wrong with a cute little name "Rational Response Squad" and they win? No wonder we have such a moronic country, think through what you are saying before just randomly putting your thoughts and ideas on a public forum ok?!!? Oh and read the Bible before saying its wrong you fools...

[Shrubslice]

The RRS wasn't getting mad at god per se. They were getting irritated at the continuing stupidity and ignorance of Kirk and Ray's comments about evolution and science in general. They were pace-palming through the entire debate because of the ignorant statements Kirk and Ray were making.

[caleb7331]

One area that Ray and Kirk did very well was their attitude. While everyonelse got upset, they did not. It's funny that people who don't believe in God get very upset and have hatred toward God. Why can't they just accept the fact that others do believe in him? Why get so upset over something that "doesn't exist"? It's because if you're not for God, you're against him-friend or foe- that is biblical. This is not how people respond to someone that doesn't exist.

[caleb7331]

What will change your mind and make you realize the truth? When the mark of the beast takes place? when we move to one world government like the bible predicts? we are slowly moving towards this. OBAMA wants more USA money to go toward UN and give them all the control of what to do with it. Atheism is the step between following a god and believing that you are god.

[wade36]

CHRISTIANITY:

The belief that a cosmic Jewish Zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh & telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree..yeah makes sense like Scientology makes sense. God/Jesus/Holy Spirit=Babylonian Nimrod/Tammuz/Queen Semeramis.

[randy95023]

Read Aquinas with an open mind. You might not believe in any specific God or Gods but after the first few hundred pages or so you WILL believe in a "creator" or "designer". Any 2nd year physics student will know that the certainty of a "designer" doesn't require any faith at all...

[olsen3515]

Are you high on coke? You seem to be rattling on about nothing that makes any sense.

[clint0904]

Mario, don't ever quit standing up for what is right. Good job. God doesn't believe in atheists

[CBALLEN]

All atheists enjoy this life while you can,because there will be no humor in your life to come.

[plimbuff]

I will tell god that he gave me no evidence. If God will send a skeptical, COMPLETELY MORAL person to hell, then he is truly a cruel, unfair, unloving asshole.

[CBALLEN]

It's your sin that condemns you.

[Chuloloc]

And neither will you. Your judgement will be much worse. "To much is given, much is required."

[Chuloloc]

Interesting. You know, Kirk and Ray never have anything new and substantial to bring to the table. Just the same old piece of paper with the same intructions, reiterations and articulations. The same thing with their cronies who spread their massage. Like prostitutes, they're a dime a dozen.

[plimbuff]

Prostitutes at least have some dignity.

[Chuloloc]

No they don't. If they did, they would't sell their bodies. People with dignity don't sell their bodies because they respect themselves enough to remain sexually pure.

[plimbuff]

Still, in many ways, prostitutes have more dignity than Ray and Kirk. I don't think you'll disagree with me there.

[Chuloloc]

You're right. At lease prostitutes don't die for their pimps.

[plimbuff]

Well put.

[Chuloloc]

Thanks.

[909mario]

Dr. Peter Stoner Chairman of the Departments of Mathematics and Astronomy,Pasadena City College and Chairman of the Science Div. of Westmont College calculated the probability of one man fulfilling only a handful of the over 300 Messianic prophecies that Jesus fullfilled. He published research results in Science Speaks: Scientific Proof of the Accuracy of Prophecy and the Bible. The probability of Jesus fulfilling just eight of the specific prophecies was one chance in 10 to the 17th power

[909mario]

How about one person fulfilling just 48 of the over 300 prophecies? Stoner calculated these odds at one chance in 10 to the 157th power. way beyond just chance! OK, this can't be considered true statistical science... Can it?

Actually, the American Scientific Affiliation gave Stoner's work their stamp of approval:

[909mario]

"The manuscript for Science Speaks has been carefully reviewed by a committee of the American Scientific Affiliation members and by the Executive Council of the same group and has been found, in general, to be dependable and accurate in regard to the scientific material presented. The mathematical analysis included is based upon principles of probability which are thoroughly sound and Professor Stoner has applied these principles in a proper and convincing way."

[909mario]

Jesus fullfilled some pretty specific prophecies. His place of birth, His manner of death, his friend betraying him for an exact amount of 30 coins of silver, even his entry into the city while riding a donky was prophecied 500 years before his birth by the prophet daniel to the exact day. 444bc

[909mario]

Do the math. In Chapter 9, Daniel predicts the very day that the Messiah would enter Jerusalem and present himself as king for the first time. The prophecy states that 69 weeks of years (69 x 7 = 483 years) would pass from the decree to rebuild Jerusalem until the coming of the Messiah. 3 Since Daniel was written in Babylon during the Jewish captivity after the fall of Jerusalem, this prophecy was based on the Babylonian 360-day calendar. Thus, 483 years x 360 days = 173,880 days.

[909mario]

According to records found in the Shushan (Susa) Palace, and confirmed in Nehemiah 2:1, the decree to rebuild Jerusalem was issued by the Persian king, Artaxerxes Longimanus, on March 5, 444 BC. Remarkably, 173,880 days later (adjusting for leap years), on March 30, 33 AD, Jesus rode into Jerusalem on a donkey (fulfilling the prophecy in Zechariah 9:9)

[909mario]

Five days later, Jesus was crucified on a Roman cross just outside Jerusalem. (Actually, the form of his execution and even his last words were foretold hundreds of years earlier in Psalm 22.) Three days later, the New Testament accounts declare that Jesus rose from the dead on Easter Sunday, fulfilling numerous other prophecies of the long-awaited Messiah.

[909mario]

OK, that's all terrific stuff, but something was holding me back... I needed more... I needed something to squash my nagging doubt... Where's the evidence that this prophecy about Jesus wasn't written after the death of Jesus by a group of zealots that wanted to deify their departed religious leader...? I needed something else -- I needed one more piece of evidence showing that the prophecy about Jesus was in black and white prior to the time of Jesus... And there it was... The Dead Sea Scrolls!

[plimbuff]

The American Scientific Affiliation are CHRISTIAN SCIENTISTS. Nice try though. Now, show some evidence that's REAL SCIENCE, and I'll consider it. Scientists overwhelmingly agree that CHRISTIAN SCIENCE IS NOT SCIENCE. It's an oxymoron. Duh!

[909mario]

Who said anything about "American Scientific Affiliation"??? I was talking about Dr. Peter stoner who was the chairman of the department of mathematics and astronomy at Pasadena City college. A non christian school. The statements I have made posted above are scientifically factual

[plimbuff]

"Actually, the American Scientific Affiliation gave Stoner's work their stamp of approval". Mario, this is your quote. You are someone who denies even the most obvious evidence. YOU CLEARLY STATED THE AMERICAN SCIENTIFIC AFFILIATION AS A SOURCE (YOUR ONLY SOURCE OF PEER REVIEW). Just check you're past comments if your memory fails you.

[909mario]

A HAH, your right. my mistake. Let me ask you what you believe is the purpose for your life? Why are you here?

[plimbuff]

I think we should follow the golden rule and try to make the world a better place for younger generations. I think we should strive for enlightenment, open-mindedness, intellectual growth, peace of mind, and humility. More importantly for this discussion, I think we should be REALISTIC about what we know and don't know. I'll repeat, we should be REALISTIC about what we know and don't know.

[909mario]

Read it again. You misquoted it.

[plimbuff]

Old text is NOT evidence. Scientists know this. So why don't you just go back to your little, biased CHRISTIAN SCIENCE community and keep avoiding the ACTUAL SCIENCE.

[plimbuff]

The American Scientific Affiliation are not real scientists. Their CHRISTIAN SCIENTISTS! Nice try though. I guess you weren't counting on anyone looking up your reference.

[plimbuff]

The American Scientific Affiliation is CHRISTIAN SCIENCE. This is your mistake.

[Astrosteed]

You should check out some of the arguments that muslim apologists make about proving the Koran true using the same kind of "probabilities". Just because you can write down some numbers, that doesn't give them meaning. It's still a circular agument proving the book is true by using the book itself.

[thethikboy]

'Same old BS'- So what's your counter-arguments?

[Astrosteed]

Which claim? Pascal's wager? If you think the chance of going to hell is so bad that you better believe just in case, then shouldn't you believe whatever religion has the worst hell. How can you distinguish if your hell is the "real" one?

[thethikboy]

'Same old BS' is not an argument. Pascal's wager was not meant to be a proof. It does not talk about religion per se- simply belief in God. It is unfortunate that it is geared to Christianity. Every religion considers non-belief to have disastrous consequences since the object of belief is a supreme being.

[plimbuff]

Good point.

[bobwentz1955]

All you've done is mock Ray and Kirk

Try talking about a real argument,or are you to stupid?

[TJae1]

is this dude apart of the rational... uh.. atheist... squad?

[Vedicstar]

Also, Rob, they do know where all the matter came from. Perhaps if you studied real books and not fairy tales you would know that most elements in the universe came into existence after the Big Bang...and they also have a pretty good idea where the primary elements like Hydrogen came from as well. Enlighten yourself with the light of wisdom, don't darken your mind with fairy tales. God wants you to be smart, not dumb.

[909mario]

Where did the stuff come from that created the BIG BANG. Did it always exist? If not, where did the elements and atoms come from? Even Evolutionary scientist can only speculate. None of them have answers. If you have answers you must be smarter than them.

[Astrosteed]

If you acknowledge that we, as a species, don't know, then how can you claim complete certainty? It seems to me your arguments use the fact that we don't know as proof that we do know - God did it!

[amg391]

changedman30, i like the way you think. i think that woman, kelly, made a giant full of herself. she's annoying.

[changedman30]

Wow! You have won me over with your very compelling aurgument of "this is total crap!" Have other people heard your message? You can change the world!

[ricardor7]

Romans 1:20 For the unseen things of Him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being realized by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, for them to be without excuse. Because, knowing God, they did not glorify Him as God, neither were thankful. But they became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools...

[pdiddles03]

The only thing i see you doing really is not disproving way of the master ministry. but you are just saying that "oh i dont agree with this, total crap." that does not prove anything

[PilotMike33]

sarcasm and smart remarks doesnt help with proving or supporting anything. Grow up, listen more carefully before thinking you have the answer.

[murtreb]

I felt that both parties made asses of themselves, especially Kelly.

[Damian1975]

Thats what i expect from an immature person such as youself.

Jesus said im the way the truth and the life no one comes to the father except through me..

sorry its in scripture.

[Vedicstar]

Saying 'It's in Scripture' means nothing. The Bible itself is a collection of contradictions and illogical statements.

'Scripture' are stories written down, and translated many times by man. It is subject to political movements. They prove nothing.

[Vedicstar]

So Damien, prove to all of us that God isn't a woman?

You can't, not because we are 'immature', but because logic laughs at your deductions. You can't prove a negative. You have to prove God is real with verifiable scientific facts and not Biblical conjecture. You can't use the Bible, it is not science . No, you have to provide facts that someone who doesn't read scripture can say 'Oh my god! God is real, I can verify the evidence with experimentation.'

[909mario]

Name any supposed contradiction in the bible and it always has a logical explanation. Actually the Dead Sea Scrolls disproove that old arguement that the bible has many errors from translations. When compared to what we have now, it was like 99% accurate to the Dead Sea Scrolls said which were written before the New Testament was ever written or before Jesus was ever Born.  Deal with that one buddy...

[Astrosteed]

which bits of the dead sea scroll? I was under the impression that these were very partial documents that have not even been entirely released to the public.

[909mario]

They have a complete copy of the scroll of Isaiah. Not bits and pieces. and there are many other texts which were on display in San Diego no far from here. Do your home work and see for yourself.

[Astrosteed]

Did some more nozin around, but it seemed mostly like the Dead Sea Scrolls were the oldest copy of the hebrew bible ( Masoretic texts) found so far. This just shows that the old testament of the bible is a collection of potions of the jewish texts. They share the same Abrahamic stories, but the jews have a lot more of them. How does this make talking to a burning bush any more real?

[909mario]

Fact - the dead sae scrolls were written prior to the birth of Jesus.

Fact - The Scroll of Isaiah speaks about the messiah. Isaiah 9:6, also Isaiah 53 his death. Explaine how these prophets could know the future so accuratley unless they were inspired by God when they wrote? Keep in mind these are only 2 of hundreds of prophecies

[wade36]

CHRISTIANITY:

The belief that a cosmic Jewish Zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh & telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree..yeah makes sense like Scientology makes sense. God/Jesus/Holy Spirit=Babylonian Nimrod/Tammuz/Queen Semeramis.

[70tiimes7]

This man does not know what he's talking about. Wake up pal and grow up.

[Shoots1978]

Kelly and this man would be a perfect oouple. They both have sarcasism. And some hatred in his heart for something? I wonder what has happened in his life?

[danielukes]

how can you ask them not to give proof without the bible moron. the bible is the proof, as long as they don't resort to saying, 'well God said so so its true' then let them, see if it can be applied to 'reality', what you are asking for is like cutting someones arms off and telling them to fight you.

[tobibeer]

I do tend to nod my head quiet a lot as well on most beliefs involving supernatural, even all-encompassing beings, aka 'God(s)'. However, if you want to progress and get an idea why nontheism (having no god) makes sense, look out for Richard Dawkins.

[Damian1975]

OK prove God doesnt exist.

You always want proof of his Existence, prove he doesnt.

[IaintNoGood]

Damian...how many times does one have to introduce the argument that one cannot prove a negative. This is not some fancy scietific retort, this is basic logical reasoning. If you want to assert that your god exists simply on the "truth" that you cannot prove he does not, then please prove magical invisible unicorns do not live under my bed. PROVE IT. If you cannot, then shut up. Your argument is moot as is your god.

[servuseschristus4]

First thing that needs proof is infinite regress of MOTION and then LIFE.A base mineral does not have life but exists none the less. So what is the first motion that sience can prove (what is in motion must have been put in motion.) Then what process did minerals take to come into LIFE with out life.

[IaintNoGood]

servus...OK, back at ya. Give me evidence, scientific evidence, that god blew into dirt and created life. If you want to hold me to a higher measure, then you are intellectually dishonest and a hypocrite of the highest order. I do not assert that belief in god and evolution are antithetical. If you can use, "god is eternal," then I can use, "the universe is eternal." You offer no evidence of your HYPOTHESIS other than religious dogma and presuppostion,

[IaintNoGood]

so I offer no evidence other than big bang, abiogenesis and evolution, matched with the brightest minds of our time and history. Oh wait, I forgot, these bright minds are simply hiding in their sin and have constructed a conspiracy to fool the world so they can live life as they want now, only to pay for their conspiracy later. RIIIIIGHT, I always forget that part.

[Vedicstar]

PROVE: The Spaghetti Monster isn't God.

PROVE: God isn't a Woman

PROVE: The World isn't run by Aliens from Zeta Reticuli

[logician007]

Science is observation and always fallible. The burden is on you to prove there is no God since he has revealed himself thousands of years ago. So where is you evidence,one at a time please!! So we can examine your evidence.

[Vedicstar]

Are you really serious? First, I find it utterly amusing that someone calling themselves 'Logician' is actually using a logical fallacy as a point. Why is it amusing? Well, proving a negative is IMPOSSIBLE. You can't 'prove' something doesn't exists, you can only prove what exists. And until you can prove something exists with tangible evidence , it does not exist. What is your evidence? A domesticated Banana? How about that the Earth is the center of the universe?

[Vedicstar]

BTW, the Bible and other scripture are not proof of anything.

So for all you people trying to 'save' us, quit quoting books, IT PROVES NOTHING! Bring real evidence. Kirk and the born again surfer got creamed by a couple of run of the mill atheists on national television.

"Question with boldness even the existence of a god; because if there be one he must approve of the homage of reason more than that of blindfolded fear."

-Thomas Jefferson

[909mario]

Actually, the bible can proove God. An intelligent entity from the future could travel back in time and leave you detailed letter of events that would happen in the future. Now assume those events happened exactly as this entity said they would. The actual letters and the fullfilled prophecy would be evidence that this person existed. God has already done this through the bible. I can if you want me to take time to give you hundreds of descriptive bible prophecies that came true.

[logician007]

Really!! So stop trying.Did you get Mr.Jeffersons quote from a book?? Are you trying to convert people to your rational? Why is it wrong to quote from books?Science is fallible ,you admit maybe,you don't know so you can't be sure.OH! but your sure christians are wrong!! HOW??

[Vedicstar]

Well, let's see.....they present a domesticated banana (gee how was that made?) as 'proof', but anyone who studied agriculture knows that is pure bs. So of all the 'proof' they have, they present the dumbest and easily de-bunked 'proof'.

[Vedicstar]

You say 'rational' as if you know the meaning of the word, lol. A 'rational' person wouldn't use a logical fallacy. A 'Rational' person wouldn't use a book as proof that something exists. I am not trying to prove Thomas Jefferson existed (although there is physical evidence of that). The quote is true, and again education would show you what the founding fathers actually thought about all this. They were deists.

[Vedicstar]

Now, if you want to use the bible, let's get some quotes...

Gen 1:11 "And God said, Let the EARTH bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so"

So, by your logic, the bible proves that evolution is the job of the Earth, God told the EARTH to bring forth plant life, so right there Kirk and surfer boy are wrong, and I used the Bible, lol

[Vedicstar]

BTW, I do believe there is a God, but this is my faith, it is not science, and it is not 'real'. If science every proves there is a God, I am sure many of you born again would be surely disappointed. Usually people who resort to trying to 'save' others have serious issues themselves and should focus on 'saving' themselves. Kirk attacks people, insults them and forces his view on others....and that's a 'good' Christian?

[logician007]

"Usually people who resort to trying to 'save' others have serious issues themselves", How do you know this?? You say an awefull lot to say so little! You may be well read and a little mislead. "revelation" is the term I was thinking.

[logician007]

I don't believe hardly any of the men who penned the constitution were christian!The "Articles" were the original founding documents.Washington wasn't the first president either! Jefferson didn't believe in miricles and no one wanted to pray during the constitutional coup de ta! Patrick Henry smelled a RAT

[MatrixEBM]

Have you ever been to the the library of Congress which houses volumes of statements, which refences God. Most of the congress were Christian ministers, or held some office with in the church. Please study prior to putting out these statements. Thank You

[plimbuff]

I suggest you change your youtube name. Logician really doesn't fit you.

[mirandamovies]

You either get it, or you don't. You either believe in the historicity of Jesus Christ, and that He was the Son of God, or you don't. There is no need for debate or degradation of any sort.

[mindwis3]

So SHOULD someone who believes the historicity of Jesus Christ and that he was the sun of god, also believe in the ARK, the global flood, burning-talking Bushes, sticks changing into snakes, humans changing in saltpillars?

Wow, the above makes so much sense now. Much more than proven science , enabling technology to enable me to write this message and enabling you to read it.

Why didn't i realise that.

[mirandamovies]

Not at all. Believing in Jesus Christ in His entirety is enough!!!

[robatrhema]

You didn't realise it because you have no faith and you obviously have trouble thinking outside the square. Simple start up question for evolutionists...

Where did the matter come from in the first place? There is no rational, logical, scientific explanation for the eternal existence of matter.

GOd? No God? Both take faith

[mindwis3]

Rob.

"If you go through the curriculum material taught in schools for the 60s, 70s, 80s, and 90s you will find the age of the universe is different in each".

That may be so, however, do you really doubt that we are getting closer to the truth everytime?

It's pretty accurate now, don't believe me, look at that evidence.

[mindwis3]

Rob:

"Where did the matter come from in the first place? There is no rational, logical, scientific explanation for the eternal existence of matter.

GOd? No God? Both take faith"

You seem to over look that i may hold the opinion "i don't know"

[Vedicstar]

First, Science is only concerned with post big-bang ? Perhaps God did create, or not, however what Kirk and surfer boy are trying to do is convert people out of reason and into their narrow vision, why? They need people to tell them they are not insane, and to follow them. I wouldn't even give them a quarter if they preached on my corner.

[KatchAFlick]

I think it is impossible for Kirk Cameron to give a straight answer about evidence on this "creationist" theory because he is using a book that has very little basis on reality as his source material. Only when one opens their mind to various possibilities do things become clear. He tries to give a clear and simple answer when there is no simplicity to a complex question.

[pokerpooner]

kirk cameron is a fool and that's all i have to say:P

[jroc1987]

you call Kirk Cameron a fool? i take it u think the universe created itself.... i think ur the fool...

[mindwis3]

The fool is the one that believes anyones story of how the universe started.

Kirk is certainly a fool, allthough he clearly stated he believes in microEvolution, that's pretty smart.

He then throws the smartness out by claiming that Microevolution 'stays' within a species.

Actually 'micro-evolution' is merely an indication of timespan. So the only thing he is not allowed to believe is that 'microevolution' can actually add and add over millions of years, resulting in significant changes.

[thelastone0001]

God weeps for you and Satan laughs. I'm not mocking you I'm worried for you. I know that will not mean much to you because your and intellectual an I'm a simple minded Christian who falls for these things easily. None the less I don't want you in hell and I will pray for you.

[Shoots1978]

Brian knew what Ray Comfort was going to say at the debate. Because Ray Comfort emailed Brain with his speech and Brain new everything Ray would say and talk about. Brian even knew that Ray would use the Law. The law is not using the bible and faith, it is just the law that's it! So much hatred and anger from Kelly, I pray for her.

[xxxlgeorge]

sounds like you were pretty open minded going into this thing, huh?

[Astrosteed]

2)Evolution is a blind, brute force, exploration of parameter space. It's bound to hit upon some very unlikely and complex objects. It's like taking a big bunch of legos and gradually hooking them up in every possible configuration. At some point that process will make a lego eiffle tower, or a lego venus de milo, but it is not a directed goal or intent, just one of many combinations that happen to be interesting to us.

[robatrhema]

I agree wholeheartedly. The problem is in the numbers - time and probability. When I was at school the universe was only a handful of tens of millions of years old now it's tens of billions of years old because there just isn't enough time for everything to have gone through the 'lego' process. Neither are there enough atoms. At some point we both have to resort to blind faith.

[Astrosteed]

The Universe was the same age regardless of when you were in school (13.7 +/- 0.2 Billion years). People have just started to figure out the large scale workings of the universe in the past 100years. The advent of computers has enabled a flow of information and an ability to calculate that has never been available to humans before. The view of the universe that has emerged is not based on whether of not we like it, but rather that it matches observations of reality when put to the test.

[robatrhema]

I agree, the universe has to be how old the universe is. The question is; how long is that? And how do we determine it? If, as you say, the unvierse is roughly 14 billion years old and we have been observing it for about 0.00000013 % of that time (even less accuratly with computers) how do we know anything? The acknowledged age of the universe kept changing because scientists kept 'discovering' that their evolutionary conjectures would not work within their previously given time frames.

[mindwis3]

Roba:

" The acknowledged age of the universe kept changing because scientists kept 'discovering' that their evolutionary conjectures would not work within their previously given time frames."

That is utter nonsense.

The age of the universe is calculated, not manipulated.

Read a good cosmologybook and it will explain HOW, and you know what, YOU ARE encouraged to TEST and VERIFY all of it. Please do.

M

[robatrhema]

If you go through the curriculum material taught in schools for the 60s, 70s, 80s, and 90s you will find the age of the universe is different in each.

[Astrosteed]

1) The whole watch maker argument is just that we know man-made objects must have been made by man. There is all kinds of evidence that these objects are made by man, watchmaker shop, painter's studio etc... The argument does not address naturally occuring objects, like rocks, trees, people, etc... It just assumes that they have been made by a super person-type thing without any evidence that this is true.

[spaden2112]

You're dumb.

[MariuszJames]

just because you hear the same arguments over and over again, doesn't mean they its not the truth .. You want new argument everytime ? For what reason ? It ain't an evolution topic where new argument are brought up every years. Ray and Kirk answers are pretty simple and I dont see why they need new arguments every month to prove a point

[mdortenzio]

RATIONAL RESPONSE? GIVE ME A BREAK! Everyhing else in our world has been created by something. It is more rational to think something created us and this world then what these insecure freaks have to say. Notice HOW RUDE the atheists were! REALLY SECURE IN WHAT YOU BELIEVE IN! You must have faith to belive in what you belive in brother! Check yourself!

[converse02]

If everything is created by something, who created God?

You need to study science. We know matter and energy cannnot be created, there's no reason to suppose it was created by God.

[robatrhema]

To volley your logic back to you, you now have an eternity problem within the physical universe; Where did all the matter and energy come from if they weren't created? (And who says we "know that matter and energy cannot be created"? Finite man? Logic determines they cannot have been here forever. (i.e. if the universe is 30 billion years old where was the matter and energy before that or did it just pop up on day 1? Same problem.

[Astrosteed]

1) How do you define time before time existed?

2) You seem to grant that we don't know everything, so why would you take an extrordinary claim like a god-being as a certainty when there's no way to actually know about it (e.g. directly observed in a verifiable way?)

3) The total energy of the Universe is consistent with zero, much like it came from "nothing".

[robatrhema]

1) Einstein seems to conclude that time is merely our perception of one event following another

2) Why take an extroadinary claim like a god-being not existing as certainty when "there's no way to actually no about it"?

3) That argument is nonsensical and is beneath you.

[Astrosteed]

1)If no event follows another, then how long does that take? sorta nonsensical to me.

2)If you claim something exists, then burden of proof is on you- see bertrand russels teapot argument or the flying spaghetti monser - can't disprove em so it must be true...nope.

3) It's actually a feature of inflationary cosmology - check out Alex filippenko's Cal-Berkley lectures online.

[robatrhema]

1) one event always follows another - redundant argument

2) russel's teapot, schrodinger's cat - nonobservable philosophical claptrap

3) Miniature short lived bubble universes that pop up due to (unobservable) quantum fluxtuations? Please, yet another attempt to explain the universe without a creator. (see Paul W Lamicela's paper "antimatter and the big bang" available on line)

[Astrosteed]

1) So you're saying time exists seperate from our Universe. Any evidence for that?

2) Yes, exactly! Just like the God concepts in major religions - nonobservable philosophical claptrap.

3) Just skimmed it, and it's rubbish. 9 pages to get to Science doesn't know everything, but antimatter isn't a problem for God: he just made it that way... answers in genesis award winning indeed.

[WPOwens]

Besides, you know you can't get past it. If you were to concede that if something exists, and it has to have a maker, you would then be held to believe that you were made by someone/something. If that were to happen, you might be held accountable to that person/thing. And you don't want anyone telling you what to do.

[WPOwens]

So dude, seriously. So what? So what if it's the same arguement you hear from them over and over again? About the whole "if something exists, therefore there must be a maker". So what if you've heard it from them before?

[CMORTON8]

What if you gave faith a chance? Why so much anger toward people doing good in the world?

[holyjesus]

Isn't it convenient that hacking, falsifying stock values, molesting altar-boys, and visiting gay prostitutes weren't part of the ten commandments?

[robatrhema]

It's not convenient at all. In fact, it further justifies God's argument that we are unable to save ourselves.

[converse02]

Yeah, we can't save ourshelves. We need God to sacrifice himself to himself to save us from himself. Makes perfect sense...not.

[holyjesus]

So really this life doesn't matter? We should only be worshipful robots telling the other robots to worship while ignoring what our rationality tells us? You are truly lost, brother.