Topic: Proof that God exists - page 61. (Read 62290 times)
But today Facebook scientifically proved God does exist with a little blue check mark. I dunno, that's kind of tough to refute.
i dont endorse religion but i do believe in one universal power. i have read some of the ignorance of the users in here..its their thought, and i have mine.
If the proposal in the theory is true, the so-called theory is not a theory. Rather, it is a law.
In general, I don't make the determination. I simply apply what science has said when they say law or theory.
The problem is... you don't have the first clue what you are talking about...
The theory of evolution cannot become a law... it's not possible... theory is literally the best it gets for evolution... theory is the epitome of science
A law is a completely different concept, and usually requires a mathematical proof (the only "proof" science accepts as objective fact)
Please learn the terminology of science
No point explaining it to him. He only knows what his handlers told him.
People like him convince themselves that God exist, then come up with some pseudo-scientific reasons to justify their belief.
It is the same reaction, as people who make a really bad investment (say by buying a shitty stock), once the stock starts tanking, they will still try to find reasons to justify their original decision. It is the inability to think critically that makes them keep the stock all the way down until it is de-listed.
I suspect the same psychological mechanism is at work here.
PS. Any new scientific discovery is bad news for the GOD stock.
If the proposal in the theory is true, the so-called theory is not a theory. Rather, it is a law.
In general, I don't make the determination. I simply apply what science has said when they say law or theory.
The problem is... you don't have the first clue what you are talking about...
The theory of evolution cannot become a law... it's not possible... theory is literally the best it gets for evolution... theory is the epitome of science
A law is a completely different concept, and usually requires a mathematical proof (the only "proof" science accepts as objective fact)
Please learn the terminology of science before spewing more bullshit
...
The greater complexity has more order within it.
...
The greater complexity has more order within it.
...
Chaos can be quite complex.
Chaos Theory can be complex. There is no real chaos. Everything acts according to the laws of nature as cause and effect dictate. Chaos, like randomness, exist only in the minds of people who can't see (understand) the reason why.
So now you are going to dismiss reality because it is conflicting with your ancient world view.
Cause and effect shows that there is no real chaos. Chaos theory is not necessarily about chaos.
Chaos theory is theory; it has not been proven to be true. Cause and effect is truth. In fact, cause and effect are the basis for scientific examination and discovery.
Why are trying to turn reality into fiction and fiction into reality?
Could you just do ONE thing so we can settle this whole discussion?
Define how YOU decide a theory is true. Then we'll be able to discuss. Cause all you're saying is "the laws that makes my point are true, the others are just theories".
I don't and can't decide a theory is true. If the proposal in the theory is true, the so-called theory is not a theory. Rather, it is a law.
This doesn't mean that people know that it is a law. Scientists may not have figured out that it is a law. Maybe it is complex enough that they will never figure out that it is a law. If this is the case, it will always remain a theory in their understanding.
This doesn't meant that it is a theory in reality. It may be a law in reality. But because scientists haven't determined that it is a law, they will always have to consider it a theory... at least until they can prove that it is a law.
If you mean, how do I decide if a theory is a theory, well, I'm not into formulating theories. I simply take their word for it when they say it is a theory.
In addition, I am not simply saying something like "the laws that makes my point are real laws." What I am doing is stating the laws so that anybody that wants to see that they are laws can, once he has confirmed that they are laws, start calculating for himself that they prove the existence of God.
If you are really that interested, you need to do a little research... but not all that much.
Which is why we all ask you this question: how do you make the difference between a true proposal and a false one?
Because for scientists, the proposals of the laws you say are true are less proven than the ones you say are wrong!
My question is about this sentence: " If the proposal in the theory is true, the so-called theory is not a theory. Rather, it is a law. " how do you determine the proposal is true?
In general, I don't make the determination. I simply apply what science has said when they say law or theory.
If a proposal in a theory is the truth, the fact that the theory is still theory shows that nobody has proven the proposal to be truth. It doesn't mean that the proposal is not truth. It simply means that nobody knows for sure if it is truth or not.
Proving the proposal to be true, or to be so blatantly false that it is not even a theory, is what the scientists are continually trying to do. When it is proven, they will call it law. If it is not proven, it will either remain theory, or when appropriate, it will be dropped from the ranks of theory altogether.
...
The greater complexity has more order within it.
...
The greater complexity has more order within it.
...
Chaos can be quite complex.
Chaos Theory can be complex. There is no real chaos. Everything acts according to the laws of nature as cause and effect dictate. Chaos, like randomness, exist only in the minds of people who can't see (understand) the reason why.
So now you are going to dismiss reality because it is conflicting with your ancient world view.
Cause and effect shows that there is no real chaos. Chaos theory is not necessarily about chaos.
Chaos theory is theory; it has not been proven to be true. Cause and effect is truth. In fact, cause and effect are the basis for scientific examination and discovery.
Why are trying to turn reality into fiction and fiction into reality?
Could you just do ONE thing so we can settle this whole discussion?
Define how YOU decide a theory is true. Then we'll be able to discuss. Cause all you're saying is "the laws that makes my point are true, the others are just theories".
I don't and can't decide a theory is true. If the proposal in the theory is true, the so-called theory is not a theory. Rather, it is a law.
This doesn't mean that people know that it is a law. Scientists may not have figured out that it is a law. Maybe it is complex enough that they will never figure out that it is a law. If this is the case, it will always remain a theory in their understanding.
This doesn't meant that it is a theory in reality. It may be a law in reality. But because scientists haven't determined that it is a law, they will always have to consider it a theory... at least until they can prove that it is a law.
If you mean, how do I decide if a theory is a theory, well, I'm not into formulating theories. I simply take their word for it when they say it is a theory.
In addition, I am not simply saying something like "the laws that makes my point are real laws." What I am doing is stating the laws so that anybody that wants to see that they are laws can, once he has confirmed that they are laws, start calculating for himself that they prove the existence of God.
If you are really that interested, you need to do a little research... but not all that much.
Which is why we all ask you this question: how do you make the difference between a true proposal and a false one?
Because for scientists, the proposals of the laws you say are true are less proven than the ones you say are wrong!
My question is about this sentence: " If the proposal in the theory is true, the so-called theory is not a theory. Rather, it is a law. " how do you determine the proposal is true?
just BADECKER cannot understand this way of thinking..
Well, you proved that one theory is law, anyway... that you know how to talk idiocy.
...
The greater complexity has more order within it.
...
The greater complexity has more order within it.
...
Chaos can be quite complex.
Chaos Theory can be complex. There is no real chaos. Everything acts according to the laws of nature as cause and effect dictate. Chaos, like randomness, exist only in the minds of people who can't see (understand) the reason why.
So now you are going to dismiss reality because it is conflicting with your ancient world view.
Cause and effect shows that there is no real chaos. Chaos theory is not necessarily about chaos.
Chaos theory is theory; it has not been proven to be true. Cause and effect is truth. In fact, cause and effect are the basis for scientific examination and discovery.
Why are trying to turn reality into fiction and fiction into reality?
Could you just do ONE thing so we can settle this whole discussion?
Define how YOU decide a theory is true. Then we'll be able to discuss. Cause all you're saying is "the laws that makes my point are true, the others are just theories".
I don't and can't decide a theory is true. If the proposal in the theory is true, the so-called theory is not a theory. Rather, it is a law.
This doesn't mean that people know that it is a law. Scientists may not have figured out that it is a law. Maybe it is complex enough that they will never figure out that it is a law. If this is the case, it will always remain a theory in their understanding.
This doesn't meant that it is a theory in reality. It may be a law in reality. But because scientists haven't determined that it is a law, they will always have to consider it a theory... at least until they can prove that it is a law.
If you mean, how do I decide if a theory is a theory, well, I'm not into formulating theories. I simply take their word for it when they say it is a theory.
In addition, I am not simply saying something like "the laws that makes my point are real laws." What I am doing is stating the laws so that anybody that wants to see that they are laws can, once he has confirmed that they are laws, start calculating for himself that they prove the existence of God.
If you are really that interested, you need to do a little research... but not all that much.
Which is why we all ask you this question: how do you make the difference between a true proposal and a false one?
Because for scientists, the proposals of the laws you say are true are less proven than the ones you say are wrong!
My question is about this sentence: " If the proposal in the theory is true, the so-called theory is not a theory. Rather, it is a law. " how do you determine the proposal is true?
just BADECKER cannot understand this way of thinking..
...
The greater complexity has more order within it.
...
The greater complexity has more order within it.
...
Chaos can be quite complex.
Chaos Theory can be complex. There is no real chaos. Everything acts according to the laws of nature as cause and effect dictate. Chaos, like randomness, exist only in the minds of people who can't see (understand) the reason why.
So now you are going to dismiss reality because it is conflicting with your ancient world view.
So now you are expressing that you don't understand the words of my post that you quoted above. You really need to go back to school, if simply for your own posting dignity in this forum.
Oh, I think I'm getting closer. I think I just hit a nail on the head.
Woodworking class again.
With you it is.
...
The greater complexity has more order within it.
...
The greater complexity has more order within it.
...
Chaos can be quite complex.
Chaos Theory can be complex. There is no real chaos. Everything acts according to the laws of nature as cause and effect dictate. Chaos, like randomness, exist only in the minds of people who can't see (understand) the reason why.
So now you are going to dismiss reality because it is conflicting with your ancient world view.
Cause and effect shows that there is no real chaos. Chaos theory is not necessarily about chaos.
Chaos theory is theory; it has not been proven to be true. Cause and effect is truth. In fact, cause and effect are the basis for scientific examination and discovery.
Why are trying to turn reality into fiction and fiction into reality?
Could you just do ONE thing so we can settle this whole discussion?
Define how YOU decide a theory is true. Then we'll be able to discuss. Cause all you're saying is "the laws that makes my point are true, the others are just theories".
I don't and can't decide a theory is true. If the proposal in the theory is true, the so-called theory is not a theory. Rather, it is a law.
This doesn't mean that people know that it is a law. Scientists may not have figured out that it is a law. Maybe it is complex enough that they will never figure out that it is a law. If this is the case, it will always remain a theory in their understanding.
This doesn't meant that it is a theory in reality. It may be a law in reality. But because scientists haven't determined that it is a law, they will always have to consider it a theory... at least until they can prove that it is a law.
If you mean, how do I decide if a theory is a theory, well, I'm not into formulating theories. I simply take their word for it when they say it is a theory.
In addition, I am not simply saying something like "the laws that makes my point are real laws." What I am doing is stating the laws so that anybody that wants to see that they are laws can, once he has confirmed that they are laws, start calculating for himself that they prove the existence of God.
If you are really that interested, you need to do a little research... but not all that much.
Which is why we all ask you this question: how do you make the difference between a true proposal and a false one?
Because for scientists, the proposals of the laws you say are true are less proven than the ones you say are wrong!
My question is about this sentence: " If the proposal in the theory is true, the so-called theory is not a theory. Rather, it is a law. " how do you determine the proposal is true?
Ok ok! Jeez. No need to get mad. There is no God! There. Happy? We're agreed.
Meh? Not getting mad at you.
And my problem is about how BADecker talks and decide arbitrarily that this is truth and this is not...
He has to. He is like a cornered animal. People like that will hang on to their belief regardless of the evidence that completely refutes their claims.
Look at Kurt Wise (PhD in Geology from Harvard) He said that even if all the evidence in the universe flatly contradicted Scripture (which it does) , and even if he had reached the point of admitting this to himself, he would still take his stand on Scripture and deny the evidence.
That is profound. This virus runs deep in his veins....
I know. Everytime I think I got him, he just ignores a fact and go on xD
...
The greater complexity has more order within it.
...
The greater complexity has more order within it.
...
Chaos can be quite complex.
Chaos Theory can be complex. There is no real chaos. Everything acts according to the laws of nature as cause and effect dictate. Chaos, like randomness, exist only in the minds of people who can't see (understand) the reason why.
So now you are going to dismiss reality because it is conflicting with your ancient world view.
So now you are expressing that you don't understand the words of my post that you quoted above. You really need to go back to school, if simply for your own posting dignity in this forum.
Oh, I think I'm getting closer. I think I just hit a nail on the head.
...
The greater complexity has more order within it.
...
The greater complexity has more order within it.
...
Chaos can be quite complex.
Chaos Theory can be complex. There is no real chaos. Everything acts according to the laws of nature as cause and effect dictate. Chaos, like randomness, exist only in the minds of people who can't see (understand) the reason why.
So now you are going to dismiss reality because it is conflicting with your ancient world view.
Cause and effect shows that there is no real chaos. Chaos theory is not necessarily about chaos.
Chaos theory is theory; it has not been proven to be true. Cause and effect is truth. In fact, cause and effect are the basis for scientific examination and discovery.
Why are trying to turn reality into fiction and fiction into reality?
Could you just do ONE thing so we can settle this whole discussion?
Define how YOU decide a theory is true. Then we'll be able to discuss. Cause all you're saying is "the laws that makes my point are true, the others are just theories".
I don't and can't decide a theory is true. If the proposal in the theory is true, the so-called theory is not a theory. Rather, it is a law.
This doesn't mean that people know that it is a law. Scientists may not have figured out that it is a law. Maybe it is complex enough that they will never figure out that it is a law. If this is the case, it will always remain a theory in their understanding.
This doesn't meant that it is a theory in reality. It may be a law in reality. But because scientists haven't determined that it is a law, they will always have to consider it a theory... at least until they can prove that it is a law.
If you mean, how do I decide if a theory is a theory, well, I'm not into formulating theories. I simply take their word for it when they say it is a theory.
In addition, I am not simply saying something like "the laws that makes my point are real laws." What I am doing is stating the laws so that anybody that wants to see that they are laws can, once he has confirmed that they are laws, start calculating for himself that they prove the existence of God.
If you are really that interested, you need to do a little research... but not all that much.
Ok ok! Jeez. No need to get mad. There is no God! There. Happy? We're agreed.
Meh? Not getting mad at you.
And my problem is about how BADecker talks and decide arbitrarily that this is truth and this is not...
...
The greater complexity has more order within it.
...
The greater complexity has more order within it.
...
Chaos can be quite complex.
Chaos Theory can be complex. There is no real chaos. Everything acts according to the laws of nature as cause and effect dictate. Chaos, like randomness, exist only in the minds of people who can't see (understand) the reason why.
So now you are going to dismiss reality because it is conflicting with your ancient world view.
Cause and effect shows that there is no real chaos. Chaos theory is not necessarily about chaos.
Chaos theory is theory; it has not been proven to be true. Cause and effect is truth. In fact, cause and effect are the basis for scientific examination and discovery.
Why are trying to turn reality into fiction and fiction into reality?
Could you just do ONE thing so we can settle this whole discussion?
Define how YOU decide a theory is true. Then we'll be able to discuss. Cause all you're saying is "the laws that makes my point are true, the others are just theories".
Ok ok! Jeez. No need to get mad. There is no God! There. Happy? We're agreed.
...
The greater complexity has more order within it.
...
The greater complexity has more order within it.
...
Chaos can be quite complex.
Chaos Theory can be complex. There is no real chaos. Everything acts according to the laws of nature as cause and effect dictate. Chaos, like randomness, exist only in the minds of people who can't see (understand) the reason why.
So now you are going to dismiss reality because it is conflicting with your ancient world view.
Cause and effect shows that there is no real chaos. Chaos theory is not necessarily about chaos.
Chaos theory is theory; it has not been proven to be true. Cause and effect is truth. In fact, cause and effect are the basis for scientific examination and discovery.
Why are trying to turn reality into fiction and fiction into reality?
Could you just do ONE thing so we can settle this whole discussion?
Define how YOU decide a theory is true. Then we'll be able to discuss. Cause all you're saying is "the laws that makes my point are true, the others are just theories".
Wait. So what you're saying is that there are no actual atheists?
Fact: Religion is for stupid people (or makes people stupid)
I saw a good study explaining and proving that religious children were less forgiving and less generous than normal children.
Another proof of the useless aspect of religion.
you are right.. religious children are bullying other ones than not religious ones..
There aren't any children other than religious children. The only difference is the religion they adhere to.
...
The greater complexity has more order within it.
...
The greater complexity has more order within it.
...
Chaos can be quite complex.
Chaos Theory can be complex. There is no real chaos. Everything acts according to the laws of nature as cause and effect dictate. Chaos, like randomness, exist only in the minds of people who can't see (understand) the reason why.
So now you are going to dismiss reality because it is conflicting with your ancient world view.
Cause and effect shows that there is no real chaos. Chaos theory is not necessarily about chaos.
Chaos theory is theory; it has not been proven to be true. Cause and effect is truth. In fact, cause and effect are the basis for scientific examination and discovery.
Why are trying to turn reality into fiction and fiction into reality?
...
The greater complexity has more order within it.
...
The greater complexity has more order within it.
...
Chaos can be quite complex.
Chaos Theory can be complex. There is no real chaos. Everything acts according to the laws of nature as cause and effect dictate. Chaos, like randomness, exist only in the minds of people who can't see (understand) the reason why.
So now you are going to dismiss reality because it is conflicting with your ancient world view.
That was precious. But I'm sure he'll have some kind of an answer for this one too. He'll get inspired or something.
Could you please stop spamming like hell!!!! This is very upsetting to see you doing that!!!
Is this you only comment? The fact that it's hard to read? Long posts are too heavy for you?
He's talking about mrflibblehat and the fact that he does 3 consecutive posts of one sentence. This is just pure spam. He can compile his 3 answers in one post it will be far easier to read! And the upsetting part of it is that he's doing so in at least 3 or 4 threads!
...
The greater complexity has more order within it.
...
The greater complexity has more order within it.
...
Chaos can be quite complex.
Chaos Theory can be complex. There is no real chaos. Everything acts according to the laws of nature as cause and effect dictate. Chaos, like randomness, exist only in the minds of people who can't see (understand) the reason why.
So now you are going to dismiss reality because it is conflicting with your ancient world view.
That was precious. But I'm sure he'll have some kind of an answer for this one too. He'll get inspired or something.
Could you please stop spamming like hell!!!! This is very upsetting to see you doing that!!!
Is this you only comment? The fact that it's hard to read? Long posts are too heavy for you?
Jump to: