@crazymanlargemarge evolution doesnt necessarily disprove god. evolution could be the tool thats used by a higher force or being and science could be a way of observing the the universe and how it works, i just think theres to many questions for anyone who hasnt done extensive research in many respective fields to actually feel they "know" and if you can admit that you "just dont know" u now are an agnostic
science is another type of faith, take for instance the theory of relativity, a whole belief was built upon the fact that nothing could travel faster then light, whole theories were built upon this being an ultimate truth and then...one day...came someone to prove that there were particles that could break that speed. it seems all the "believers" were wrong but it was the ultimate truth when it still stood.
Science doesn't know definitively how everything was created. It's called the Big Bang theory, not the Big Bang fact. What was there before the big bang? What did the universe expand into? Who knows. But saying it was a higher-being is just as much of a theory as any other. There is no way to prove either right now. You can't attribute an unknown to "God" and call it a fact. It's faith. If someone wants to believe that then fine, it's a free country. Just don't call it a fact.
It's mind boggling how someone can believe unintelligence can create intelligence and how the universe got here, you don't know because the explanation is because something obviously caused the universe to come into existense, only thing that can do that is a higher intelligence man.
"By the seventh day God had finished the work He had been doing; so on the seventh day He rested from all His work." - Genesis 2:2. Creation is all around you, man. You just have to open your eyes and see for yourself. Humble yourself. You are not smarter than everyone else when all you can present are THEORIES on how everything originated.
So Your saying youve never seen anything being created. Have You ever seen a Baby come out of a womb of a mother, the very process of birth. If we have no creator, and we are a cause of a an atom alone, then why didnt the process of birth occur on the first human that came into existence on earth.
We don't know, but leave it at that. I'm an athiest but i'm going to defend baldy for a second in the sense that god is just as good as an explanation as the big bang. What was before that? another universe probably, but even if that was for sure, what exactly is the origin of all this matter and energy. There are still a buttload of things we can't answer yet. I say wait until we find the edge of the universe (if there is one) before we start prodding for an explanation for where it came from.
ALTHOUGH I'M A CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN (Baptist), I no longer believe that the Bible teaches eternal torment or suffering. The Bible teaches eternal punishment, but it's not eternal torment. In my popular Internet article, TRADITIONAL DOCTRINE OF HELL EVOLVED FROM GREEK ROOTS, I explain how and why teaching of eternal torment entered early into Christianity and how Scriptures have been misinterpreted and taken out of context to support that teaching. ~Babu G. Ranganathan (B.A. theology/biology)
SCIENCE SHOWS THE UNIVERSE could not have been active eternally because of entropy (energy decay, even in an open system). Einstein confirmed that space, matter, time had a beginning! That beginning had to be supernatural because natural laws have no ability to bring the universe into existence from nothing. The supernatural cannot be proved by science but science points to a supernatural intelligence for the origin and order of the universe ~ HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM (Article)
CREATIONISTS RIGHT ABOUT ENTROPY (Internet Article): Entropy occurs in both open and closed systems. In every transfer of energy some of the energy becomes useless. If universe is left to itself, all energy will become useless and the universe cannot sustain any activity. Even in an open system, there must first exist an energy-converting, directing mechanism to develop order, such as when a seed becomes a tree. Spontaneous order from chaos is not possible, not to any significant degree.
EINSTEIN CONFIRMED that space and time are just as physical as matter. That's why space and time can be altered by gravity, and space produces particles. Einstein's equations show that the universe couldn’t be eternal. It had a beginning. Einstein believed, because of science, in the existence of God behind the origin and order of the universe. He didn't believe in a personal God like Christians do, but he did believe science pointed to the existence of an all powerful and intelligent Creator.
NATURAL LIMITS TO EVOLUTION: Only evolution within "kinds" is genetically possible (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.), but not evolution across "kinds" (i.e. from worm to human). How did species survive if their vital tissues, organs, reproductive systems were still evolving? Read my Pravda Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS! I discuss: Punctuated Equilibrium, "Junk DNA," genetics, mutations, natural selection, fossils, genetic and biological similarities between species.
ALL REAL EVOLUTION ( i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.) in nature is the expression, over time, of already existing genes. Evolution is possible only if there’s information (genes) directing it. Only variations of already existing genes are possible, which means only limited evolution and adaptations are possible. Nature has no ability to invent new genes via random mutations caused by random environmental forces. That’s evolutionary faith, not science. Read my article, WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
IMAGINE A FISH WITH PART FINS, part feet with the fins evolving (transitioning) into feet. What survival benefit would there be? The fish couldn't use its fins or its feet, and there are no fossils showing such a creature ever existed. They only exist on automobile bumper stickers! There are no true transitional forms, either living or fossilized. Evolutionists realize this fact! Read my Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
DAWKINS, HITCHENS, AND HAWKING REFUSE TO DEBATE with creationists who are SCIENTISTS, such as the scientists at The Institute for Creation Research. Dawkins and his friends only debate non-scientist creationists. Read articles by scientists supporting creation at The Institute for Creation Research site. Read analysis from creation scientists about the latest news concerning genetics, fossils, astronomy, etc. that you won't read in the main stream media. Visit Institute for Creation Research.
WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS! This Internet article describes how evolutionary scientists are disagreeing over all the "evidence" traditionally used to support macro-evolution. I have given over a dozen lectures, including before evolution science faculty and students, refuting macro-evolution. At the end I would answer questions and arguments from the audience. The science faculty was mostly silent. They knew enough science to understand what I was saying was true.
EXPLAINING HOW AN AIRPLANE WORKS doesn't mean no one made the airplane. Explaining how life or the universe works doesn't mean there was no Maker behind them. Natural laws explain how the order in the universe works, but mere undirected natural laws can't explain the origin of that order. Once you have a complete, living cell then the genetic code/mechanisms exist to direct the formation of more cells, but how did the cell naturally originate when no directing code/mechanisms existed in nature?
NATURAL SELECTION IS NO BLIND WATCHMAKER because it can only "select" traits, not produce them. If a trait survives, that survival is called being "selected." Natural selection operates only once there is life and reproduction, not before, so it couldn't have been involved in life's origins. A partially-evolved cell (an oxymoron) would quickly disintegrate. It couldn't wait ("survive") millions of years for chance to complete it and then make it alive! Read: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
APES ARE QUITE COMFORTABLE IN HOW THEY WALK, just as humans are quite comfortable in how they walk. Even a slight change in the position of a muscle or bone, for either, would be excruciatingly painful and would not be an advantage for survival. There's no hard evidence that humans evolved from ape-like creatures anymore than there's hard evidence that apes evolved from four-legged-pawed dog-like creatures. Read Internet article: MISSING LINKS THAT NEVER WERE.
GENETIC AND BIOLOGICAL SIMILARITIES are better explained due to a common Designer Who designed similar functions for similar purposes in the various forms of life. Genetic information can't happen by chance, so this is the best explanation. So-called junk DNA is not junk. These "non-coding" segments of DNA have recently been found to be vital in regulating gene expression (how, when, and where genes are expressed in the body). Read my Internet article WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
THE SCIENCE SUPPORTING CREATION (Google this title to access the site). The site presents a collage of evidences from science supporting creation and refutes arguments by evolutionists (i.e. "flaws" in design of human eye, "junk" DNA, embryonic recapitulation, age of the earth, fossils, origin of life, etc.). Also, read my Internet article ANY LIFE ON MARS CAME FROM EARTH. In the Earth's past, powerful volcanic activity spewed life-containing dirt into space very possibly reaching Mars.
i've seen something created. a child. there is no more proof than that i need to believe in my loving lord and father. but it also helps when he kills millions of people, then i know, for certain he is watching over me. lol religion is amuzing in the worst way possible
WOW you are incompetent, there is no proof of GOD or evolution,therefore,they are equally possible,however,more evidence points to God,and less to evolution,They found a footprint in America older than man is supposed to be,On the other hand,they have found an artifact mentioned in the BIBLE in which a man used while paying homage to another god.
@xXdigizombieXx There is definitely a LOT of evidence that leads to evolution, and a lot yet to be discovered about it. It is only a theory, but there are insane amounts of physical proof to back up how this theory came to be, such as the fossil record and genetics, etc. If you read a nonfiction biology book such as "Your Inner Fish", you'll learn a lot about the creation of humans based on scientific facts. I'm not saying religion is wrong, but the Bible is a series of stories written by man.
What you are avoiding is that at the end something came from nothing. Something must have been pre-existing and eternal like religion believes god is. There is no answer to this question and will never be known by man. So in the end it is believing that we came from nothingness or believing we came from god, and by atheist standards both aren't reasonable faiths to follow because there is not enough empirical evidence.
THANK YOU!! That bald ass is retarded. Can you disprove unicorns? Can You disprove Leprechauns? No but you can say, no disprove? Its real!!! That's bull
@ElDuderino165 Why are you guys so damn mean? I'm not picking any sides, but it seems like most athiests (except for the guy in the video) are extremely self-centered
@ABR0733 Try constantly dealing with "christian" assholes telling you are the worst thing since Hitler and tell me how much you care for them after that..
No it doesnt mean you have too beleive in god. He was only asking a question and you dont know is a fine way of answering it. Funny part is your saying that thinking a god could have created it is making stuff up. But you really dont know so how can you response that way. His claim can be every bit as much credit as yours.
I was gonna comment on that guys video but I knew somebody already facepalmed and responded. He says it's a simple answer...*facepalm*....*exasperated sigh*....it's not. It's an answer that science has been trying to find for centuries. We don't have an answer yet. At least as science goes along it evolves and continues to put more findings into it's probable answers to come. Religion just make shit up and then just assumes its true. Religion is born partly from fear of mortality.
We actually know a lot about the origin of the Universe. It seems indeed that the Universe was created from something that is very close to what we think as nothing. Mathematically and physically it is perfectly possible to have something from nothing. Modern mathematics builds the entire field of mathematics from empty sets. Modern physics describes the vacuum as the source for everything, read God: The Failed Hypothesis: How Science Shows That God Does Not Exist byVictor J. Stenger.
The universe must have proceeded from something else (if the big bang was true)…. Something other than matter.. Something super natural, timeless, omnipresent.. You might say.. That “super natural” thing doesn’t default to God.. But based on our understanding of the nature of God there is no other logical conclusion..
@tse93s To say " "the universe must have proceeded from something supernatural" as support for your belief in the supernatural is like saying "I'm right because I must be right". You're just making a conlusion based on nothing else than what you feel like.
Ok man let me ask you something. So you say,"We don't know."So why do you believe it. Its way more stupid to say, "We don't no where the earth came from" Than to say that it was created by a supernatural, all powerful being.
That's not absolutely true. I'm not a physicist, but I'm pretty sure they were able to create matter and energy by using "black matter" or something related to it. Good points made though.
@igotkiwi I think you mean dark matter or dark energy. It's dark because we barely know anything about it, and we certainly haven't been able to study it or manipulate it, only observe its effects on celestial objects. You've been watching too much bad scifi without enough background knowledge.
@th3hammar Yeah, you're right about it being called dark matter rather than black matter (as we call it in French). Nonetheless, I remain pretty confident that my physics teacher mentioned that scientists were able to "create" matter, but that it created anti-matter in counterpart (dark matter).
"we have never seen anything be created" its what you said..then how come the universe exploded from nothing???O.o..and something(the whole universe) coming from an infinitesimal region (a dot/nothing) is basically what creating means...
@petersushch "then how come the universe exploded from nothing"
oh were you there? did you see it?
you'll notice scientists call the big bang a "theory". this theory is indeed backed up with evidence, although since we were not there, we cant definitively say this is exactly how it happened, however with what we know, its the best bet.
God, is also theory, although the only evidence we have for this is the bible. Similar to the little red ridinghood theory, and the three little pigs theory.
@nickop1991 the evolutionary theory is exactly a fary tale..in the princes and the frog it goes...frog+little magic=prince..and in evolution it is, soup+a looooooooong time=prince..i dont know but that sounds pretty rediculous!
Nothing has to be "true". Just enjoy your life, enjoy shagging whomever you enjoy shagging, and appreciate what you have while you have it! The rest seriously doesn't matter since we're all going to die eventually, anyway! "Religion" is all craziness created by man to explain why the cave opening was brighter than it was farther inside the cave ... and on and on!
The sad fact remains that if we were to follow Naturalism strictly, we shouldn't even be here on this Earth. The existence of the universe, the planets and life all DEFY the Natural laws that Naturalists live and die by. Hence why people turn to Religion since, whilst the Naturalist may not know yet, if following Natural law strictly (with no supernatural), then they will NEVER have an answer.
Good response. A little scientific literacy in this nation would push the conversation so much further. What a pity it is that all people, in this time of great privilege, are not intimately familiar with the laws of thermodynamics.
@rt36crazyfists Well, it depends on who you ask. You're just taking what you view as important and putting it above everything else and declaring it a pity that some people don't have the same interests as you. What I would like to ask you is why you feel it is important to understand why we're here? Some people just don't fucking care, and how is that a pity?
@ReignOfPraine I think it's self-evident. As Carl Sagan says, "we are a way for the Cosmos to know itself". What a shame to pass such an opportunity up. Clearly there are other important things but understanding the laws of nature is especially enlightening.
@koenvanregenmortel science is observation, testing, and the like but religion came first. on what grounds can you say people would relearn science before religion. Also how are you to say science is the only understanding of what's already there? isn't religion in place to explain what is already there as well?
@koenvanregenmortel excellent point! you say because religion appears in literature God must be man made, however, you forget to mention that science is also written in literature so therefore, according to the point you made i can also say science is man made. So the only logical way to look at this case of God existing or not let's take away literature from both religion and science, how then can we explain anything?
@jawnymude Science is the process of explaining natural phenomena via testing, observation and mathematics. Essentially, it's an understanding of what's already there. If our understanding of science were to evaporate, it's reasonably safe to say the universe would still work as it does and we'd relearn. If all religious understanding were to evaporate, it's reasonably safe to say we'd eventually replace it with different made up bullshit. (Which explains in part why there's so many religions.)
Saying you don't know is not the way to answer a question either.In fact,saying you don't know is not answering the question.Also,even if you don't know,it doesn't mean you have to be ignorant.
"God created it" isn't an answer at all...you are spot on. Because no-one can explain where God comes from, then the question becomes simply circular. No-one knows. Anyone that states they do, is misguided (trusting in faith) or a liar. I think it's probably a mixture of the 2
not trying to prove anything to you but man the universe and it intricacies are amazing. check out this video all the parts to it.. it starts off kinda slow for minute but gets deep and scientific.. search Rob Bell Everything is spiritual
@koenvanregenmortel Unfortunately, in order for your conclusion to necessarily follow from your premises, both premises have to be true. Religion is not founded in literature; it is founded by the word of God and then put into literature. So since your first premise is false, your argument is invalid.
@sunzoo1 That isnt what i was trying to say. The original argument i commented on was trying to disprove religion by assuming it was true and showing a contradiction. However, if religion is true, then it is founded by the word of God. So the original argument is invalid. Whether religion is actually founded by God or not is the real debate. I believe it is, but it is a faith. There are arguments for and against my beliefs, but there is no proof that can irrefutably prove/disprove god
@six2five3 Um.. Do you realize it is impossible to unequivocally disprove anything? You can't disprove the existence of goblins or fairies. Shall we believe in them? Shall we have faith in them? Shall we bring back the old pagan gods and challenge people to disprove their existence? It's a sophomoric point.
@koenvanregenmortel Actually that isn't true... Modern religion looks to literature, but how do you explain ancient religion? Men existed before literature, archaeological evidence shows that men have had religion just as long as we've existed.
@markybp1 The reason humans believed in religion before literature is very simple. It was a way to explained how the world worked. Some frightened prehistoric person saw the first lightning bolt, flash flood, whatever and didn't know what caused it so they believed that there must be some great power controlling the world. Eventually that got morphed into various gods depending on you region of origin and who was spewing bullshit at the time.
@sanjukumite They'll edit a line or two into the very start. 'God created the Heavens and the Earth, and some planet with aliens on it very far away.'
@sanjukumite, they'll claim that man was sent to inform them about "The Word of God" or some other shit. They'll ignore the fact that "God" left them out of the bible.
It's a philosophical question, not the scientific one. Science cannot contribute anything to the question "How did it happen that anything material exists". Science is empirical (def. by wikipedia). So it cannot contribute anything to the answer this question. The answer is philosophical: something NOT material created the first matter, and then it developed to what we have now (maybe through big bang maybe through some other way - only these are the questions that science can answer in future).
LOL this is a stupid response video. Every heard of the quantum physics fact that their must be a conscious observer for anything to take place. Atoms don't actually exist without a conscious observer, read into it, and no this is not a theory this is a fact.
@MaaNonu123 Hahaha, you can't be serious. Where is the connection between being observed and being in existence? Things exist regardless of wether we observe them or not. And before you start talking about god observing everything in the universe, prove to me the existence of god. So far, I have not observed him. :P
@Ragnarockalypse OMG, let me try to explain this to you..., The Universe, atoms, particles, etc... CANNOT exist without a conscious observer, it is a FACT.
@MaaNonu123 No, that is by no means a fact. Science does not work that way. In scientific work you form theories and find evidence that backs it up. There are plenty of generally accepted theories that have been proven wrong with new findings. The Earth being flat for example.
Also, that is not an explanation, you're just saying the same thing again louder. On what sources do you base your statement? You can't expect me just to believe such an outrageous claim without evidence.
@Ragnarockalypse first of all how do you know i am saying the statement louder? Second of all why don't I just point you towards a video that explains it -> /watch?v=dlozGOXJNFg
@MaaNonu123 Quantum mechanics, quantum physics and quantum theory are just different terms to describe the same field of research. I have yet to hear of it being referred to as "quantum fact"
@Clayful1000 : I agree that there are many Christians who are too extremely close minded to even acknowledge or comprehend this, but I'd also like to say that claiming all are close minded and ignorant compared to atheists is quite hypocritical. There's no solid proof for either claim; Science is fallible, religion requires faith. Both theories require abstract thought, but a truly open minded Christian would realized that the theory of evolution should strengthen their belief in a powerful God.
Gosh DAMNIT heres is every christians fucking answer!
It's called the concept of INFINITY. It's a fucking cycle, it doesn't start and it doesn't end. Your small minds cannot grasp that because your minds are limited. (I am not directing this too atheists, but too any monotheistic religion.) I have a custom belief, because I am open minded, and my belief doesn't revolve around ourselves and a human creator. That's too complicated for close minded, ignorant humans too understand.
A fully color blind person does not understand the concept of color. An autistic child doesn't understand the concept of emotions. Humans do not understand the concept of the creation of the universe...simple as that.
Richard Dawkins doesn't represent the athesist world just as Westborow Baptist Church does not represent the Christian world but try telling the majority of people that one :)
Thanks for you time and answer to the question. I hope that more people can show some form of respect and get over the whole us vs them mantality. Christ is more than a faith to almost all who beleive in him, we cannot label people just because they feel this way just as we cannot judge or call names to those who reject it and don't wan't to accept it. I think many forget that there is a differance between share/force and confuse the 2.
If science is to be science, we have to allow all questions that have a solid foundation to present questions to form a more solid theory by removing those holes/questions that are not answered.
If I take quantum physics and what it shows me and say that to me it shows the question of a creator, who is anyone to call me a religious zealot or to dismiss my view simply because they don't beleive it if they can't see it or it cannot be explaned by science? In other words, thats why we have it.
I won't try to speek for everyone because I can't but calling people names and being belittled shows only ignorance. I beleive that ID is a real form of science but I also beleive that the education system has attacked it and classified it as a religious thought rather than true science even though there are many non religious who do research and have presented findings only to be pushed aside and labled due to agenda and ignorance.
Because atheists hang onto either science or physical proof, the thought of a creator that they cannot physically see is a joke to most. to those who beleive and once we take that move in faith, we see Gods design in everythig everywhere. We also "know" God is real and unfortionatly this is the part you cannot explane in words, you simply know. The closer you get to "God" the more you get to know Him and experiance Him in your life but, would the atheist even consider this?
It does however come down to one thing when we look at the base of it, mans own version of what things mean. Once we put this in the mix, thats where things get messed up. If we could find a way to stick to what is being said or follow what is being taught without mixing our own opinions, it may shock some people. God however is about faith at first, I won't debate that at all. What happens however after the initial step of faith is beyond human understanding and this is the whole argument.
I respect people no matter what their views are but I also ask the same in return. I don't beleive Christians are set out to controle anyone or force their way of life on anybody simply becauseI have read Christs teachings myself and find that this is not what he directed anyone to do. Instructing to tell someone to prech and teach peace, love, unity etc.... is a far cry from the accusations we hear about today.
In saying that I have listened to both sides of the fence and have drawn my own conclusions based on what I have found through my own research and study. We will never come to terms over the is God real or not simply because those who deny them tend to confine life to humanistic thinking which if we all the sudden found out we were placed here via UFO's, people would not have a hard time saying their thinking is so more advanced, how could man think we could be on their level <EX
Well, I admit, you took a stab and gave a pretty good answer and seemed to have kept away from typical bias views.I bring up Dawkins because so many point to this guy as the genious he is not. I have listened to lectures by Chuck Missler who many atheist reject just because his stance on God yet not one person takes into account the mans educational record or the fact that to this day, he is one of the most requested to lecture in the IV schools.
If DNA cannot co exsist outside itself, then how did DNA,AKA-life, come to be? Simple question, sinple scientific fact. Quantum Physics however points to the answer being that it had to be designed by intelligence. When this question was posed to atheist hero Richard Dawkins w seen the typical reaction, name calling, accusations of the person asking the question being a religious zealot, etc, etc, etc,
@iwas1ncthr2 The answer to the question "How did life/DNA come to be" is a very lengthy one. Firstly, it is known that (R)DNA is self replicating, we see this in cell mitosis. I don't blame anyone for being skeptical on the origin of DNA/living matter. I mean, how can life come from non-living sludge? Well - It really comes down to simple chemistry, coupled with physics (biology doesn't REALLY come into it as life hasn't come about yet ;) ) In conditions on early earth, 4 (cont-)
@iwas1ncthr2(--)Important gases were prominent in the atmosphere - Hydrogen Gas (H-H), Ammonia (NH3), Hydrogen Cyanide H-C≡N and Methane (CH4) among others. A researcher called Joan Oró left Hydrogen Cyanide & Ammonia to stew in a test tube in conditions very similar to those on earth and a neucleotide base (adenine) was formed. It is thought that the other 3 neucleotide bases were formed in a similar way. This is just the base, to create a complete neucleotide, one needs (cont---)
@iwas1ncthr2 (--) Ribose (a sugar) and a phosphate group. We now have our neucleotide, from here our polyneucleotides form. As the name suggests, POLYneucleotides are simply neucleotides bonded together and in the process of this condensation reaction, H2O is given off. Lowering the activation energy for such a reaction is useful and as luck would have it (or god, w/e), montmorillonite is a very good catalyst and this was present on the primordial sea floor. Hey-presto, (cont--)
@iwas1ncthr2 (--) we have our Ribonucleic Acid (RNA). RNA is a self replicating compound. However, these copies arn't always perfect (hence random genetic mutation). Some imperfect RNA molecules would be better adapted at existing in the environment that others and so continued to develop. As they did so, other compounds were also forming, phospholipid Bi-layers have a natural tendancy to form spheres in water due to hydrophillic heads and hydrophobic tails. RNA with an (cont--)
@iwas1ncthr2 (--) ability to attract lipids that form the bi-layers would be protected (and that is the purpose they serve today (along with regulation but that deals with water potential and diffusion, different topics) and so could better survive and replicate still. And so you have primitive cells (phospholipid bi-layers are called micelles if you want to see a good cross-section diagram of one from wikipedia). Over around 4 billion years they have evolved into the (cont--)
@iwas1ncthr2 (--) complex cells we see today. The hypothesis in not yet complete in terms of scientific theory and researchers are getting close to the full answer. I hope I have helped in some way as to giving you a natural explanation in the making of life. I would also like to suggest that even if no answer is ever given, it does not warrant the jumping to a conclusion of the supernatural. Reguardless of implications, look for yourself and ask the experts, Dawkins isn't one.
@TeamoPeru27 We don't, but it's up to you to show us that it does believe; just like it's up to bigfootbelievers to make bigfootdisbelievers believe that there is a bigfoot. The main assumption just IS that there isn't a magical higher power, it's just another book like Scientology. Watch Tim Minchin's ''Storm'', it has some valid points.
We don't know yet , pffahahah! Is hard to figure out that order cannot come from chaos , a law needs a law maker , a car needs a mechanic , Very hard !
Funny thing is that those people think they are clever, LMAO
@MrFLExin If mater has always existed than , you are agreeing to something eternal , you call it matter I call it God , therefore we have reason to believe is God because the prophet who received the revelation , desribed him as eternal ,unique , most powerfull , lord of the world ! He couldn't have known those discriptions in a time where people believed in 100 gods and statues
you arent an atheist, you are an agnostic
slimmmm22 3 hours ago
We don't know yet? Well, Let us know when you find out
popitn2nd 2 days ago
@popitn2nd More evidence for Evolution then there is for God.
crazymanlargemarge 1 day ago
@crazymanlargemarge evolution doesnt necessarily disprove god. evolution could be the tool thats used by a higher force or being and science could be a way of observing the the universe and how it works, i just think theres to many questions for anyone who hasnt done extensive research in many respective fields to actually feel they "know" and if you can admit that you "just dont know" u now are an agnostic
slimmmm22 3 hours ago
lol great response
ArnoldSoissons 4 days ago
We did see and we did simulated that matter creates itself all the time. Are you stupid or simply ignorant?
funlover1977 4 days ago
@funlover1977 You're right but it is too complicated for religious people to understand. And you have a spelling error. XD
mincucio0404 1 day ago
science is another type of faith, take for instance the theory of relativity, a whole belief was built upon the fact that nothing could travel faster then light, whole theories were built upon this being an ultimate truth and then...one day...came someone to prove that there were particles that could break that speed. it seems all the "believers" were wrong but it was the ultimate truth when it still stood.
MrSinfulDevil 5 days ago
Science doesn't know definitively how everything was created. It's called the Big Bang theory, not the Big Bang fact. What was there before the big bang? What did the universe expand into? Who knows. But saying it was a higher-being is just as much of a theory as any other. There is no way to prove either right now. You can't attribute an unknown to "God" and call it a fact. It's faith. If someone wants to believe that then fine, it's a free country. Just don't call it a fact.
teknifix 5 days ago
It's mind boggling how someone can believe unintelligence can create intelligence and how the universe got here, you don't know because the explanation is because something obviously caused the universe to come into existense, only thing that can do that is a higher intelligence man.
SuperRighteous7 1 week ago
Yeah that's a real immature description of a creator.
SuperRighteous7 1 week ago
"By the seventh day God had finished the work He had been doing; so on the seventh day He rested from all His work." - Genesis 2:2. Creation is all around you, man. You just have to open your eyes and see for yourself. Humble yourself. You are not smarter than everyone else when all you can present are THEORIES on how everything originated.
TheDreadheadRockstar 1 week ago
So Your saying youve never seen anything being created. Have You ever seen a Baby come out of a womb of a mother, the very process of birth. If we have no creator, and we are a cause of a an atom alone, then why didnt the process of birth occur on the first human that came into existence on earth.
DanteIsWay 1 week ago
We don't know, but leave it at that. I'm an athiest but i'm going to defend baldy for a second in the sense that god is just as good as an explanation as the big bang. What was before that? another universe probably, but even if that was for sure, what exactly is the origin of all this matter and energy. There are still a buttload of things we can't answer yet. I say wait until we find the edge of the universe (if there is one) before we start prodding for an explanation for where it came from.
squishythedark 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ALTHOUGH I'M A CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN (Baptist), I no longer believe that the Bible teaches eternal torment or suffering. The Bible teaches eternal punishment, but it's not eternal torment. In my popular Internet article, TRADITIONAL DOCTRINE OF HELL EVOLVED FROM GREEK ROOTS, I explain how and why teaching of eternal torment entered early into Christianity and how Scriptures have been misinterpreted and taken out of context to support that teaching. ~Babu G. Ranganathan (B.A. theology/biology)
Mogley52 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
SCIENCE SHOWS THE UNIVERSE could not have been active eternally because of entropy (energy decay, even in an open system). Einstein confirmed that space, matter, time had a beginning! That beginning had to be supernatural because natural laws have no ability to bring the universe into existence from nothing. The supernatural cannot be proved by science but science points to a supernatural intelligence for the origin and order of the universe ~ HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM (Article)
Mogley52 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
CREATIONISTS RIGHT ABOUT ENTROPY (Internet Article): Entropy occurs in both open and closed systems. In every transfer of energy some of the energy becomes useless. If universe is left to itself, all energy will become useless and the universe cannot sustain any activity. Even in an open system, there must first exist an energy-converting, directing mechanism to develop order, such as when a seed becomes a tree. Spontaneous order from chaos is not possible, not to any significant degree.
Mogley52 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
EINSTEIN CONFIRMED that space and time are just as physical as matter. That's why space and time can be altered by gravity, and space produces particles. Einstein's equations show that the universe couldn’t be eternal. It had a beginning. Einstein believed, because of science, in the existence of God behind the origin and order of the universe. He didn't believe in a personal God like Christians do, but he did believe science pointed to the existence of an all powerful and intelligent Creator.
Mogley52 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NATURAL LIMITS TO EVOLUTION: Only evolution within "kinds" is genetically possible (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.), but not evolution across "kinds" (i.e. from worm to human). How did species survive if their vital tissues, organs, reproductive systems were still evolving? Read my Pravda Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS! I discuss: Punctuated Equilibrium, "Junk DNA," genetics, mutations, natural selection, fossils, genetic and biological similarities between species.
Mogley52 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ALL REAL EVOLUTION ( i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.) in nature is the expression, over time, of already existing genes. Evolution is possible only if there’s information (genes) directing it. Only variations of already existing genes are possible, which means only limited evolution and adaptations are possible. Nature has no ability to invent new genes via random mutations caused by random environmental forces. That’s evolutionary faith, not science. Read my article, WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
Mogley52 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
IMAGINE A FISH WITH PART FINS, part feet with the fins evolving (transitioning) into feet. What survival benefit would there be? The fish couldn't use its fins or its feet, and there are no fossils showing such a creature ever existed. They only exist on automobile bumper stickers! There are no true transitional forms, either living or fossilized. Evolutionists realize this fact! Read my Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
Mogley52 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
DAWKINS, HITCHENS, AND HAWKING REFUSE TO DEBATE with creationists who are SCIENTISTS, such as the scientists at The Institute for Creation Research. Dawkins and his friends only debate non-scientist creationists. Read articles by scientists supporting creation at The Institute for Creation Research site. Read analysis from creation scientists about the latest news concerning genetics, fossils, astronomy, etc. that you won't read in the main stream media. Visit Institute for Creation Research.
Mogley52 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS! This Internet article describes how evolutionary scientists are disagreeing over all the "evidence" traditionally used to support macro-evolution. I have given over a dozen lectures, including before evolution science faculty and students, refuting macro-evolution. At the end I would answer questions and arguments from the audience. The science faculty was mostly silent. They knew enough science to understand what I was saying was true.
Mogley52 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
EXPLAINING HOW AN AIRPLANE WORKS doesn't mean no one made the airplane. Explaining how life or the universe works doesn't mean there was no Maker behind them. Natural laws explain how the order in the universe works, but mere undirected natural laws can't explain the origin of that order. Once you have a complete, living cell then the genetic code/mechanisms exist to direct the formation of more cells, but how did the cell naturally originate when no directing code/mechanisms existed in nature?
Mogley52 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NATURAL SELECTION IS NO BLIND WATCHMAKER because it can only "select" traits, not produce them. If a trait survives, that survival is called being "selected." Natural selection operates only once there is life and reproduction, not before, so it couldn't have been involved in life's origins. A partially-evolved cell (an oxymoron) would quickly disintegrate. It couldn't wait ("survive") millions of years for chance to complete it and then make it alive! Read: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
Mogley52 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
APES ARE QUITE COMFORTABLE IN HOW THEY WALK, just as humans are quite comfortable in how they walk. Even a slight change in the position of a muscle or bone, for either, would be excruciatingly painful and would not be an advantage for survival. There's no hard evidence that humans evolved from ape-like creatures anymore than there's hard evidence that apes evolved from four-legged-pawed dog-like creatures. Read Internet article: MISSING LINKS THAT NEVER WERE.
Mogley52 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
GENETIC AND BIOLOGICAL SIMILARITIES are better explained due to a common Designer Who designed similar functions for similar purposes in the various forms of life. Genetic information can't happen by chance, so this is the best explanation. So-called junk DNA is not junk. These "non-coding" segments of DNA have recently been found to be vital in regulating gene expression (how, when, and where genes are expressed in the body). Read my Internet article WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
Mogley52 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
AMINO ACIDS CAN COME BY CHANCE BUT NOT PROTEINS: Find out why. Read my Pravda Internet article: NASA, FANTASY, AND SCIENCE
Mogley52 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
THE SCIENCE SUPPORTING CREATION (Google this title to access the site). The site presents a collage of evidences from science supporting creation and refutes arguments by evolutionists (i.e. "flaws" in design of human eye, "junk" DNA, embryonic recapitulation, age of the earth, fossils, origin of life, etc.). Also, read my Internet article ANY LIFE ON MARS CAME FROM EARTH. In the Earth's past, powerful volcanic activity spewed life-containing dirt into space very possibly reaching Mars.
Mogley52 1 week ago
LOL , THIS!
SevereDub 1 week ago
i've seen something created. a child. there is no more proof than that i need to believe in my loving lord and father. but it also helps when he kills millions of people, then i know, for certain he is watching over me. lol religion is amuzing in the worst way possible
0bryan6 1 week ago
1:02 ..Yeah Huh! I create stuff every day in minecraft! check out my channel lol
StackOfDiamonds 1 week ago 5
Wow. An atheist that admits he don't know.
Call the Pope. We have a miracle.
themanningsjdsjjj 1 week ago
So your mom and dad did not create you? if someone was watching them do it ....they saw you being created!
zellymusic 2 weeks ago
lol "THAT is making shit up, and that is NOOOOT how you answer a question"
that made my day, it is completely true.
Elc22 2 weeks ago
i think the univers was here always, the big bang its just a theory nothing to prove it.
pulsare21 2 weeks ago
Wow, I'm more confused that I was 1:44 seconds ago.
I honestly will say if you seen all I seen in life you will simply believe God is real.
cachemachine 2 weeks ago
Superb answer ;) You should read my comment...
JellyJakeLee 2 weeks ago
you are the fucking mann
SMVorGTFO 2 weeks ago
thank you,you handled that very clearly & simply.Keep up the good work.
tlaniganschmidt 2 weeks ago
That's exactly what I just told that guy!
FrankLightheart 2 weeks ago
WOW you are incompetent, there is no proof of GOD or evolution,therefore,they are equally possible,however,more evidence points to God,and less to evolution,They found a footprint in America older than man is supposed to be,On the other hand,they have found an artifact mentioned in the BIBLE in which a man used while paying homage to another god.
xXdigizombieXx 2 weeks ago
@xXdigizombieXx What? You do know that evolution (change over time) is a fact, right?
olwerXL 2 weeks ago
@xXdigizombieXx Stay away from museums in kentucky. Just saying. Some of them may not be legit, and this may explain why you just said what you said.
cbh09c 2 weeks ago
@xXdigizombieXx There is definitely a LOT of evidence that leads to evolution, and a lot yet to be discovered about it. It is only a theory, but there are insane amounts of physical proof to back up how this theory came to be, such as the fossil record and genetics, etc. If you read a nonfiction biology book such as "Your Inner Fish", you'll learn a lot about the creation of humans based on scientific facts. I'm not saying religion is wrong, but the Bible is a series of stories written by man.
Virginiajet4 2 weeks ago
What you are avoiding is that at the end something came from nothing. Something must have been pre-existing and eternal like religion believes god is. There is no answer to this question and will never be known by man. So in the end it is believing that we came from nothingness or believing we came from god, and by atheist standards both aren't reasonable faiths to follow because there is not enough empirical evidence.
WillyEscobar33 2 weeks ago
THANK YOU!! That bald ass is retarded. Can you disprove unicorns? Can You disprove Leprechauns? No but you can say, no disprove? Its real!!! That's bull
ElDuderino165 3 weeks ago 14
@ElDuderino165 Why are you guys so damn mean? I'm not picking any sides, but it seems like most athiests (except for the guy in the video) are extremely self-centered
ABR0733 1 week ago
@ABR0733 Try constantly dealing with "christian" assholes telling you are the worst thing since Hitler and tell me how much you care for them after that..
ArnoldSoissons 4 days ago
@ElDuderino165 I can prove unicorns :)
Watch -
Why Does the Bible Mention Unicorns?
Link -
/watch?v=7BNsjsbJLaM
ENJOY :)
Awake4Truth 2 days ago
God is bigger than atheists think of him as.
Turppa21 4 weeks ago
@Turppa21 And my god has a bigger dick than your god.
ilikemovies0 3 weeks ago
@ilikemovies0 and my god made it possible for your god to have a big dick hahaha
Turppa21 3 weeks ago
No it doesnt mean you have too beleive in god. He was only asking a question and you dont know is a fine way of answering it. Funny part is your saying that thinking a god could have created it is making stuff up. But you really dont know so how can you response that way. His claim can be every bit as much credit as yours.
kepter1 4 weeks ago
Thank you!!
brianhann0n 4 weeks ago
@mfaulkner12 Umm... I have to say that we had to come from nowhere, so energy would have to be created... so yeah...
NoGreifersAllowed 1 month ago
Give it a Lancer? Gears of War?
DAVIDsaysNO 1 month ago
Religious War - Killing eachother to see who has the best imaginary friend.
TnRgamingVideos 1 month ago
@TnRgamingVideos LOL
vMicahs 1 month ago
man came before god
Gempora3 1 month ago
I was gonna comment on that guys video but I knew somebody already facepalmed and responded. He says it's a simple answer...*facepalm*....*exasperated sigh*....it's not. It's an answer that science has been trying to find for centuries. We don't have an answer yet. At least as science goes along it evolves and continues to put more findings into it's probable answers to come. Religion just make shit up and then just assumes its true. Religion is born partly from fear of mortality.
ImOuttaBedShutUpNow 1 month ago
THAT IS MAKING SHIT UP
MrSteezxx 1 month ago
Thank you for putting basic logic into words. Come on people, it's not even a matter of science.
EchoedSentiments 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
We actually know a lot about the origin of the Universe. It seems indeed that the Universe was created from something that is very close to what we think as nothing. Mathematically and physically it is perfectly possible to have something from nothing. Modern mathematics builds the entire field of mathematics from empty sets. Modern physics describes the vacuum as the source for everything, read God: The Failed Hypothesis: How Science Shows That God Does Not Exist byVictor J. Stenger.
alive4ever1 1 month ago
THE BIG BANG IS TRASH!!
The universe must have proceeded from something else (if the big bang was true)…. Something other than matter.. Something super natural, timeless, omnipresent.. You might say.. That “super natural” thing doesn’t default to God.. But based on our understanding of the nature of God there is no other logical conclusion..
BTW BABIES..
tse93s 1 month ago
@tse93s To say " "the universe must have proceeded from something supernatural" as support for your belief in the supernatural is like saying "I'm right because I must be right". You're just making a conlusion based on nothing else than what you feel like.
Drcrazy93 1 month ago
Comment removed
tse93s 1 month ago
Ok man let me ask you something. So you say,"We don't know."So why do you believe it. Its way more stupid to say, "We don't no where the earth came from" Than to say that it was created by a supernatural, all powerful being.
XdynomightX 1 month ago
Well said man
cinavenom1 1 month ago
@cinavenom1 I agree. I wonder how old he is?
JasonGafar 1 month ago
oh God...what a turd you are
alhocarmine 1 month ago
That's not absolutely true. I'm not a physicist, but I'm pretty sure they were able to create matter and energy by using "black matter" or something related to it. Good points made though.
igotkiwi 1 month ago
@igotkiwi I think you mean dark matter or dark energy. It's dark because we barely know anything about it, and we certainly haven't been able to study it or manipulate it, only observe its effects on celestial objects. You've been watching too much bad scifi without enough background knowledge.
th3hammar 1 month ago
@th3hammar Yeah, you're right about it being called dark matter rather than black matter (as we call it in French). Nonetheless, I remain pretty confident that my physics teacher mentioned that scientists were able to "create" matter, but that it created anti-matter in counterpart (dark matter).
igotkiwi 1 month ago
@igotkiwi you cant destroy or create matter dude
iElfonzo 1 month ago
"we have never seen anything be created" its what you said..then how come the universe exploded from nothing???O.o..and something(the whole universe) coming from an infinitesimal region (a dot/nothing) is basically what creating means...
petersushch 1 month ago
@petersushch evolution=false...a beleif and religion
petersushch 1 month ago
@petersushch "then how come the universe exploded from nothing"
oh were you there? did you see it?
you'll notice scientists call the big bang a "theory". this theory is indeed backed up with evidence, although since we were not there, we cant definitively say this is exactly how it happened, however with what we know, its the best bet.
God, is also theory, although the only evidence we have for this is the bible. Similar to the little red ridinghood theory, and the three little pigs theory.
nickop1991 1 month ago
Comment removed
petersushch 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@nickop1991 the evolutionary theory is exactly a fary tale..in the princes and the frog it goes...frog+little magic=prince..and in evolution it is, soup+a looooooooong time=prince..i dont know but that sounds pretty rediculous!
petersushch 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The day will come when you will fallon your knees and confess that Jesus id Lords of Lords and Kings of Kings.
SinIsWack101 1 month ago
Good video response. Thumbs up just didn't cut it.
amoslieber 1 month ago
Comment removed
amoslieber 1 month ago
Very well stated.
millsgt 1 month ago
i am god, dammit,
Z1LT01D 1 month ago
Nothing has to be "true". Just enjoy your life, enjoy shagging whomever you enjoy shagging, and appreciate what you have while you have it! The rest seriously doesn't matter since we're all going to die eventually, anyway! "Religion" is all craziness created by man to explain why the cave opening was brighter than it was farther inside the cave ... and on and on!
justanote7 1 month ago
At least he was honest... at the start..
The sad fact remains that if we were to follow Naturalism strictly, we shouldn't even be here on this Earth. The existence of the universe, the planets and life all DEFY the Natural laws that Naturalists live and die by. Hence why people turn to Religion since, whilst the Naturalist may not know yet, if following Natural law strictly (with no supernatural), then they will NEVER have an answer.
Gilbertus1986 1 month ago
its funny that you took away my coment. i think it got to you.
ItsBrownBearJr 1 month ago
@ItsBrownBearJr or beacause you are a fail troll.
AxxingerLuddekudden 1 month ago
When we find life on an ailen planet Mormons will be all "I TOLD YOU !!"
hero19876 1 month ago
Good response. A little scientific literacy in this nation would push the conversation so much further. What a pity it is that all people, in this time of great privilege, are not intimately familiar with the laws of thermodynamics.
rt36crazyfists 1 month ago 13
@rt36crazyfists That's not a pity. It just means that some people have more important and/or exciting things to do.
ReignOfPraine 3 weeks ago
@ReignOfPraine to understand nature is to understand why we are here, what could be more pressing?
rt36crazyfists 3 weeks ago
@rt36crazyfists Well, it depends on who you ask. You're just taking what you view as important and putting it above everything else and declaring it a pity that some people don't have the same interests as you. What I would like to ask you is why you feel it is important to understand why we're here? Some people just don't fucking care, and how is that a pity?
ReignOfPraine 3 weeks ago
@ReignOfPraine I think it's self-evident. As Carl Sagan says, "we are a way for the Cosmos to know itself". What a shame to pass such an opportunity up. Clearly there are other important things but understanding the laws of nature is especially enlightening.
rt36crazyfists 3 weeks ago
we know you dumbhead
E=mc² nothing=somthing
colserra11 1 month ago
@koenvanregenmortel science is observation, testing, and the like but religion came first. on what grounds can you say people would relearn science before religion. Also how are you to say science is the only understanding of what's already there? isn't religion in place to explain what is already there as well?
jawnymude 1 month ago
@koenvanregenmortel excellent point! you say because religion appears in literature God must be man made, however, you forget to mention that science is also written in literature so therefore, according to the point you made i can also say science is man made. So the only logical way to look at this case of God existing or not let's take away literature from both religion and science, how then can we explain anything?
jawnymude 1 month ago
@jawnymude Science is the process of explaining natural phenomena via testing, observation and mathematics. Essentially, it's an understanding of what's already there. If our understanding of science were to evaporate, it's reasonably safe to say the universe would still work as it does and we'd relearn. If all religious understanding were to evaporate, it's reasonably safe to say we'd eventually replace it with different made up bullshit. (Which explains in part why there's so many religions.)
AletheianAeon 1 month ago 2
Comment removed
brainsbeer5 1 month ago
@brainsbeer5 um...... the sky fairy? (buzzer) SHIT!
tonyonly2 1 month ago
Saying you don't know is not the way to answer a question either.In fact,saying you don't know is not answering the question.Also,even if you don't know,it doesn't mean you have to be ignorant.
buzzy0016 1 month ago
1000 Internet points awarded for being smart.
LostHisMarbles 1 month ago
"God created it" isn't an answer at all...you are spot on. Because no-one can explain where God comes from, then the question becomes simply circular. No-one knows. Anyone that states they do, is misguided (trusting in faith) or a liar. I think it's probably a mixture of the 2
blueray1969 1 month ago
your a fool
Jonnymancity1 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
not trying to prove anything to you but man the universe and it intricacies are amazing. check out this video all the parts to it.. it starts off kinda slow for minute but gets deep and scientific.. search Rob Bell Everything is spiritual
wagz420 1 month ago
"that's making shit up and that's not how you answer a question" LOL yes.
aSheeple 1 month ago
Ten points to the smartest person on the internet *claps*
PrettyFlowerInc 1 month ago
God isn't magical, he's a miracle. YOU are not an answer. I'm sure once in your life you said "That's a miracle!" Therefore, you believe in miracles.
StoryOfAllTimesWTWTA 1 month ago
@StoryOfAllTimesWTWTA
No. That's a miracle doesn't mean we believe in miracles.That's just an expression. Do shut up
Polaris543 1 month ago 2
All religion is founded in literature;the so called holy scriptures;so basically all religion is literature.
All literature is man-made ; period.
The only conclusion is that god is created by man in literature
koenvanregenmortel 1 month ago 29
@koenvanregenmortel
ive been trying to tell ppl that for years........... thank you for saying before i did
leoplard2012 1 month ago
@koenvanregenmortel Unfortunately, in order for your conclusion to necessarily follow from your premises, both premises have to be true. Religion is not founded in literature; it is founded by the word of God and then put into literature. So since your first premise is false, your argument is invalid.
six2five3 1 month ago
@six2five3 ...and how do you know that it is founded by the word of god?
sunzoo1 1 month ago
@sunzoo1 That isnt what i was trying to say. The original argument i commented on was trying to disprove religion by assuming it was true and showing a contradiction. However, if religion is true, then it is founded by the word of God. So the original argument is invalid. Whether religion is actually founded by God or not is the real debate. I believe it is, but it is a faith. There are arguments for and against my beliefs, but there is no proof that can irrefutably prove/disprove god
six2five3 1 month ago
@six2five3 Um.. Do you realize it is impossible to unequivocally disprove anything? You can't disprove the existence of goblins or fairies. Shall we believe in them? Shall we have faith in them? Shall we bring back the old pagan gods and challenge people to disprove their existence? It's a sophomoric point.
jeremylhay 4 weeks ago
@koenvanregenmortel Actually that isn't true... Modern religion looks to literature, but how do you explain ancient religion? Men existed before literature, archaeological evidence shows that men have had religion just as long as we've existed.
Your argument is Retarded!
markybp1 1 month ago
@markybp1 The reason humans believed in religion before literature is very simple. It was a way to explained how the world worked. Some frightened prehistoric person saw the first lightning bolt, flash flood, whatever and didn't know what caused it so they believed that there must be some great power controlling the world. Eventually that got morphed into various gods depending on you region of origin and who was spewing bullshit at the time.
ThatManitobaGuy 3 weeks ago
spot on very well put, it saves me having to reply
RustyNex 1 month ago
When we find new life on an Alien Planet, I'm guessing fucking religion will carve their way around that too somehow.
sanjukumite 2 months ago 51
@sanjukumite You know it
RevanHorner 1 month ago
@sanjukumite ¬.¬ i'm hoping for a war if we discover life on an alien planet <.<
freakdudebob 1 month ago
@sanjukumite They'll edit a line or two into the very start. 'God created the Heavens and the Earth, and some planet with aliens on it very far away.'
weeryan2008 1 month ago
@sanjukumite About three months ago scientists found evidence of human-like DNA molecules upon an arid asteroid.
ccaves6 1 month ago
@sanjukumite, they'll claim that man was sent to inform them about "The Word of God" or some other shit. They'll ignore the fact that "God" left them out of the bible.
MrSmith2100 1 month ago
@sanjukumite Ya, somehow they will say god created them show humans the way of life or some bullshit.
canadianguy123 1 month ago
@sanjukumite They are going to find a "lost page" saying aliens are the humans retarted cousion and we have to teach them about god and all that.
K3mikGuy367 1 month ago
It's a philosophical question, not the scientific one. Science cannot contribute anything to the question "How did it happen that anything material exists". Science is empirical (def. by wikipedia). So it cannot contribute anything to the answer this question. The answer is philosophical: something NOT material created the first matter, and then it developed to what we have now (maybe through big bang maybe through some other way - only these are the questions that science can answer in future).
TheNojuss 2 months ago
LOL this is a stupid response video. Every heard of the quantum physics fact that their must be a conscious observer for anything to take place. Atoms don't actually exist without a conscious observer, read into it, and no this is not a theory this is a fact.
MaaNonu123 2 months ago
@MaaNonu123 Hahaha, you can't be serious. Where is the connection between being observed and being in existence? Things exist regardless of wether we observe them or not. And before you start talking about god observing everything in the universe, prove to me the existence of god. So far, I have not observed him. :P
Ragnarockalypse 1 month ago
@Ragnarockalypse OMG, let me try to explain this to you..., The Universe, atoms, particles, etc... CANNOT exist without a conscious observer, it is a FACT.
MaaNonu123 1 month ago
@MaaNonu123 No, that is by no means a fact. Science does not work that way. In scientific work you form theories and find evidence that backs it up. There are plenty of generally accepted theories that have been proven wrong with new findings. The Earth being flat for example.
Also, that is not an explanation, you're just saying the same thing again louder. On what sources do you base your statement? You can't expect me just to believe such an outrageous claim without evidence.
Ragnarockalypse 1 month ago
@Ragnarockalypse first of all how do you know i am saying the statement louder? Second of all why don't I just point you towards a video that explains it -> /watch?v=dlozGOXJNFg
MaaNonu123 1 month ago
@MaaNonu123 Quantum mechanics, quantum physics and quantum theory are just different terms to describe the same field of research. I have yet to hear of it being referred to as "quantum fact"
RyanMaki 1 month ago
@RyanMaki Since you seem to not understand what im saying here's another video that will definitely help you -> /watch?v=oHg5SJYRHA0
MaaNonu123 1 month ago
@MaaNonu123 Keep on trollin' on encyclopedia dramatica instead ;)
Ragnarockalypse 1 month ago
@Clayful1000 : I agree that there are many Christians who are too extremely close minded to even acknowledge or comprehend this, but I'd also like to say that claiming all are close minded and ignorant compared to atheists is quite hypocritical. There's no solid proof for either claim; Science is fallible, religion requires faith. Both theories require abstract thought, but a truly open minded Christian would realized that the theory of evolution should strengthen their belief in a powerful God.
TheCourageInside 2 months ago
Gosh DAMNIT heres is every christians fucking answer!
It's called the concept of INFINITY. It's a fucking cycle, it doesn't start and it doesn't end. Your small minds cannot grasp that because your minds are limited. (I am not directing this too atheists, but too any monotheistic religion.) I have a custom belief, because I am open minded, and my belief doesn't revolve around ourselves and a human creator. That's too complicated for close minded, ignorant humans too understand.
Clayful1000 2 months ago
A fully color blind person does not understand the concept of color. An autistic child doesn't understand the concept of emotions. Humans do not understand the concept of the creation of the universe...simple as that.
macbeasty 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@1n354a its hard and raw facts that you can read from books. look it up.
ItsBrownBearJr 2 months ago
Comment removed
ItsBrownBearJr 2 months ago
Richard Dawkins doesn't represent the athesist world just as Westborow Baptist Church does not represent the Christian world but try telling the majority of people that one :)
iwas1ncthr2 2 months ago
Thanks for you time and answer to the question. I hope that more people can show some form of respect and get over the whole us vs them mantality. Christ is more than a faith to almost all who beleive in him, we cannot label people just because they feel this way just as we cannot judge or call names to those who reject it and don't wan't to accept it. I think many forget that there is a differance between share/force and confuse the 2.
iwas1ncthr2 2 months ago
If science is to be science, we have to allow all questions that have a solid foundation to present questions to form a more solid theory by removing those holes/questions that are not answered.
If I take quantum physics and what it shows me and say that to me it shows the question of a creator, who is anyone to call me a religious zealot or to dismiss my view simply because they don't beleive it if they can't see it or it cannot be explaned by science? In other words, thats why we have it.
iwas1ncthr2 2 months ago
I won't try to speek for everyone because I can't but calling people names and being belittled shows only ignorance. I beleive that ID is a real form of science but I also beleive that the education system has attacked it and classified it as a religious thought rather than true science even though there are many non religious who do research and have presented findings only to be pushed aside and labled due to agenda and ignorance.
iwas1ncthr2 2 months ago
Because atheists hang onto either science or physical proof, the thought of a creator that they cannot physically see is a joke to most. to those who beleive and once we take that move in faith, we see Gods design in everythig everywhere. We also "know" God is real and unfortionatly this is the part you cannot explane in words, you simply know. The closer you get to "God" the more you get to know Him and experiance Him in your life but, would the atheist even consider this?
iwas1ncthr2 2 months ago
It does however come down to one thing when we look at the base of it, mans own version of what things mean. Once we put this in the mix, thats where things get messed up. If we could find a way to stick to what is being said or follow what is being taught without mixing our own opinions, it may shock some people. God however is about faith at first, I won't debate that at all. What happens however after the initial step of faith is beyond human understanding and this is the whole argument.
iwas1ncthr2 2 months ago
I respect people no matter what their views are but I also ask the same in return. I don't beleive Christians are set out to controle anyone or force their way of life on anybody simply becauseI have read Christs teachings myself and find that this is not what he directed anyone to do. Instructing to tell someone to prech and teach peace, love, unity etc.... is a far cry from the accusations we hear about today.
iwas1ncthr2 2 months ago
In saying that I have listened to both sides of the fence and have drawn my own conclusions based on what I have found through my own research and study. We will never come to terms over the is God real or not simply because those who deny them tend to confine life to humanistic thinking which if we all the sudden found out we were placed here via UFO's, people would not have a hard time saying their thinking is so more advanced, how could man think we could be on their level <EX
iwas1ncthr2 2 months ago
Well, I admit, you took a stab and gave a pretty good answer and seemed to have kept away from typical bias views.I bring up Dawkins because so many point to this guy as the genious he is not. I have listened to lectures by Chuck Missler who many atheist reject just because his stance on God yet not one person takes into account the mans educational record or the fact that to this day, he is one of the most requested to lecture in the IV schools.
iwas1ncthr2 2 months ago
Annunaki.
DevonX421 2 months ago
If DNA cannot co exsist outside itself, then how did DNA,AKA-life, come to be? Simple question, sinple scientific fact. Quantum Physics however points to the answer being that it had to be designed by intelligence. When this question was posed to atheist hero Richard Dawkins w seen the typical reaction, name calling, accusations of the person asking the question being a religious zealot, etc, etc, etc,
iwas1ncthr2 2 months ago
@iwas1ncthr2 The answer to the question "How did life/DNA come to be" is a very lengthy one. Firstly, it is known that (R)DNA is self replicating, we see this in cell mitosis. I don't blame anyone for being skeptical on the origin of DNA/living matter. I mean, how can life come from non-living sludge? Well - It really comes down to simple chemistry, coupled with physics (biology doesn't REALLY come into it as life hasn't come about yet ;) ) In conditions on early earth, 4 (cont-)
Alphacaliber 2 months ago
@iwas1ncthr2(--)Important gases were prominent in the atmosphere - Hydrogen Gas (H-H), Ammonia (NH3), Hydrogen Cyanide H-C≡N and Methane (CH4) among others. A researcher called Joan Oró left Hydrogen Cyanide & Ammonia to stew in a test tube in conditions very similar to those on earth and a neucleotide base (adenine) was formed. It is thought that the other 3 neucleotide bases were formed in a similar way. This is just the base, to create a complete neucleotide, one needs (cont---)
Alphacaliber 2 months ago
@iwas1ncthr2 (--) Ribose (a sugar) and a phosphate group. We now have our neucleotide, from here our polyneucleotides form. As the name suggests, POLYneucleotides are simply neucleotides bonded together and in the process of this condensation reaction, H2O is given off. Lowering the activation energy for such a reaction is useful and as luck would have it (or god, w/e), montmorillonite is a very good catalyst and this was present on the primordial sea floor. Hey-presto, (cont--)
Alphacaliber 2 months ago
@iwas1ncthr2 (--) we have our Ribonucleic Acid (RNA). RNA is a self replicating compound. However, these copies arn't always perfect (hence random genetic mutation). Some imperfect RNA molecules would be better adapted at existing in the environment that others and so continued to develop. As they did so, other compounds were also forming, phospholipid Bi-layers have a natural tendancy to form spheres in water due to hydrophillic heads and hydrophobic tails. RNA with an (cont--)
Alphacaliber 2 months ago
@iwas1ncthr2 (--) ability to attract lipids that form the bi-layers would be protected (and that is the purpose they serve today (along with regulation but that deals with water potential and diffusion, different topics) and so could better survive and replicate still. And so you have primitive cells (phospholipid bi-layers are called micelles if you want to see a good cross-section diagram of one from wikipedia). Over around 4 billion years they have evolved into the (cont--)
Alphacaliber 2 months ago
@iwas1ncthr2 (--) complex cells we see today. The hypothesis in not yet complete in terms of scientific theory and researchers are getting close to the full answer. I hope I have helped in some way as to giving you a natural explanation in the making of life. I would also like to suggest that even if no answer is ever given, it does not warrant the jumping to a conclusion of the supernatural. Reguardless of implications, look for yourself and ask the experts, Dawkins isn't one.
Alphacaliber 2 months ago
And how do atheist know that GOD doesnt exist?
TeamoPeru27 2 months ago
@TeamoPeru27 We don't, but it's up to you to show us that it does believe; just like it's up to bigfootbelievers to make bigfootdisbelievers believe that there is a bigfoot. The main assumption just IS that there isn't a magical higher power, it's just another book like Scientology. Watch Tim Minchin's ''Storm'', it has some valid points.
shenkeey 2 months ago
lets start by the miracles and apparitions of Virgen Mary around the world! Where science still has no answers!
TeamoPeru27 1 month ago
@TeamoPeru27 Which miracles?
shenkeey 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
We don't know yet , pffahahah! Is hard to figure out that order cannot come from chaos , a law needs a law maker , a car needs a mechanic , Very hard !
Funny thing is that those people think they are clever, LMAO
MrCobra811 2 months ago
i don't understand why it's impossible for matter to have always existed
MrFLExin 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MrFLExin If mater has always existed than , you are agreeing to something eternal , you call it matter I call it God , therefore we have reason to believe is God because the prophet who received the revelation , desribed him as eternal ,unique , most powerfull , lord of the world ! He couldn't have known those discriptions in a time where people believed in 100 gods and statues
MrCobra811 2 months ago