7 Questions That'll Make Atheists Think!

Visit my blog to become more informed!
OpenSourceInformation.wordpress.org

Add me on the literary visage!
https://www.facebook.com/amaq.daichi

Follow me
@Malikhivelii

I ask 7 questions that should provoke thought amongst atheists. All questions listed below...



1. Do you believe energy has always existed?

1A. Do you believe it existed within vacuum fluxes in a timeless, spaceless, matterless, void before a big bang?

1A-A. Can energy create itself?

1A-B. How so? (Give 100%, infallible, non-opinionated, empirical proof on how it does still today)

It is scientifically believed that energy can't be created or destroyed, henceforth law of conservation of energy. For something to be labeled as science, it should be able to be observed, tested, and then repeated. Since it's seemingly impossible to be able to observe whether something is eternal or not, (since you're not eternal you can't observe it) which means it's seemingly impossible to be able to test whether it's eternal or not since you can't observe it, which definitely means you can't repeat it if you've never tested it.

2. Has matter always existed?

2A. can matter create itself?

2A-A. How so? (Give 100%, infallible, non-opinionated, empirical proof on how it does still today)

3. Do you believe a mass of matter and energy rotated until it exploded?

3A. Did that mass of energy and matter create itself?

3A-A. Do you believe that all matter and energy in the Universe was created by a Big Bang 14 billion years ago?

3A-B. Were you or anyone existing today, existing at that point to observe this occurrence?

3A-C. If you didnt exist to observe it, how can you test it today? And wouldn't your tests be based on the assumption that it happened since no one was there to observe it?

3B. Can you repeat an occurrence that no one has observed?

3B-A. How so? (Give 100%, infallible, non-opinionated, empirical proof on how you can)

3B-B. If you do attempt to repeat it, wouldnt the outcome be based on the assumption that it happened like you thought it did?

3B-C. How not? (Give 100%, infallible, non-opinionated, empirical proof on how it wouldnt be)



4. If I work to solve a math problem, and I start solving it at the middle of the equation will the outcome be an assumption based on the fact that I skipped half the equation?


4A. If I started watching a movie half way through, will I truly understand the outcome since I missed the beginning the movie?

Do you see that the ending is contingent upon the beginning and the beginning on the end? If you don't have the beginning the end result will be an assumption, which cannot be regarded as science, but religion. I assume there's an intelligent designer because I can't prove 100% that there is one. I believe theres one however.

5. Since the beginning of your theory can't be proven, nor is it a part of science, how do you expect people to think it's not a religious belief, and why don't you think it's a religious belief since your theory can't be proven, nor is it a part of science

For any of the previous or following questions, if you're going to fill in the gap by saying we don't have the answer now but we will in the future, answer me these questions.

6. Isn't that just the same as saying "god did it?" You're not answering the question, nor are you admitting you don't know the answer, you're simply filling in your ignorance by giving an unreliable answer based on an assumption.

6A. Can you predict the future?

6A-A Does predicting the future based on assumptions contradict the humanistic view? If you believe that what you experience through your 5 senses are the only things that exist, how can you try to predict the future since you can't see into the future?

6A-B. How so? (Give 100%, infallible, non-opinionated, empirical, proof on how it doesn't, and how you can)

If I say what I believe is an assumption, nothing changes, I believe in the designer of the bible, and every word of the gospels of Christ. I believe the bible for its valid history that even concurs even with secular history, for the fulfilled prophesies, and also for the stories and knowledge of this book. If science claims their findings are assumptions it wouldn't have scientific data anymore, it would have assumptiontific data.

7. If you had to show me one empirically, 100%, factual, non-opinionated, proof for evolution, show it with absolute solid, unarguable, infallible proof now. Video and text responses are accepted.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• Religion
• Christian
• Catholic
• Atheist
• Destruction
• Church
• Cult
• Atheism
• Myth
• Folklore
• Fairy
• Tales
• Illogical
• Evidence
• big
• bang
• cosmology
• earth
• planets
• mason
• freemason
• illuminti
• Proof
• Nimrod
• Christmas
• Christ
• Mass
• Tree
• Semiramis
• Isis
• Horus
• Son
• God
• Zeitgeist
• Abortion
• Baby
• Killing
• Murder
• Hell
• Pain
• Pro-life
• Pro-Choice
• obama
• jesse
• jackson
• al
• sharpton
• oscar
• grant
• police
• shooting
• swag
• bet
• watching
• idiots
• delusional
• brainwashed
• Cesare
• Borgia
• the
• gathering
• of
• theamazingatheist
• venomfangx
• gorilla199
• coughlan666

[naturalistmind]

the bible is true because the bible is true because the bible is true because the bible is true....

i love circular logic.

[AetheismRules]

1. Has GOD has always existed?

1A-A. If so , Did GOD create itself?

1A-B. How so? (Give 100%, infallible, non-opinionated, empirical proof on how it did)

2. 2A-A. If Not , Who or what created god ?

2A-B. How so? (Give 100%, infallible, non-opinionated, empirical proof on how it did)

2A-C. Please continue the argument from (1) for each entity that created the gof creating entity.

2A-D How so? (Give 100%, infallible, non-opinionated, empirical proof on how)

You get the idea. Need I go on ?

[briiecheeseful]

hi, small comment about your "up" point.

you cannot arbitrarily designate any direction you choose as up. saying that you can becuase "no one can know" what direction up is is simply false based on the definition of up in the english language which is "upward from the ground".

that is all

[dimitrhil]

@naturalistmind It doesn't work like that, it's "the bible is true because god says so, i know god is the creator of the universe because the bible says so...and how do i know that this is true? oh right, because the bible says so....Repeat until complete brainwash of oneself."

[CrimsonVoid]

Oh, I forgot to mention. It has been shown that matter does actually create itself. All you have to do is read up on quantum physics. If you choose not to it's not my fault that you don't understand. However, it isn't 100% infallable, but as I said earlier, that doesn't exist so you might want to reword your questions.

[CrimsonVoid]

These questions have always confused me. Congratulations, you have come up with some questions that cannot be answered. My question to you is: why does it matter? You seem to think that not knowing is some horrible thing that will cause people to suddenly give up on what we know to be true because there are things that we can only speculate about. Why do so many people not realize that it doesn't matter. Also, there is no such thing as 100% proof. That's why science is maliable, it accepts that.

[DayDreamAscent]

Anyone that is 100% convinced there isn't a god has deigned himself to BE god, since he has the answers to everything. And that's almost as dangerous as religion.

[colouredmirrorball]

7: I'm not a biologist so I can't do that. Nobody can give you 100 % proofs but I'm sure there are some clever biologists out there that can give you the 99.99999... % valid experimental results. But signs of evolution are everywhere and you'd have to be blind to not see them.

There, filled in your comment section with answers to your questions. Stupid 500 character limit...

[colouredmirrorball]

Believing the Bible is just plain silly. It states that the Earth is flat. Everyone who has been into space knows this isn't true. That's one example of many.

All of science is based on assumptions. But at least it is based on verifiable assumptions and repeatable experiments and not on a 2000 year old fairy tale book, full of untrue facts.

[colouredmirrorball]

6A: To some extent. If I bring two charges next to each other I can predict how they will interact. But I can't predict the future of all particles in the universe since calculating that would require more matter than there is in the universe.

6A-A and B: Science is able to predict the future because of our observations. We make laws that make sense and that predict the behaviour of particles. That's how we predict the future with our five senses.

[colouredmirrorball]

6 (cont): Each time science discovers something, it explains a phenomenon that people used to explain with a theistic theory. You are now doing the same: using the big bang as evidence for the existence of god (as people used to do with lightning and such) because we don't understand it yet. But as soon as science will be able to explain it you will either close your eyes for the explanation, shout it is wrong because it isn't 100 % or just find something else we don't understand yet.

[colouredmirrorball]

6: There are lots of unknowns yet to be solved (aka "my future job"). These unknowns do not mean that god did it. People used to explain things they don't understand with a theistic explanation (for example lightning). Now we know lightning is just an electrostatic discharge. Perfectly explainable. The unknowns of these days are in particle physics and astronomy. But explaining strange occurences by a god would be making the same mistakes as our ancestors.