Topic: Scientific proof that God exists? - page 190. (Read 845650 times)
There are lot pf proof that God truly exist and most of them was already been written by the scholars in the old and new testament. There are still alot of physical evidence that are sill being preserve including the cloth that was being apply to his face and to His body after His crucifixion. Either way we just need to believe wether theres a proof or none because at the end He was still our savior and no one can change that. AMEN!!
so once again our delusional willfully ignorant godswilling badecker has his ass handed to him by horace
and all he can come up with is his silly merry go round lincs back to himself and some ridiculous shit about gods wrath and punishment. zzzzzzzz
does not address any of horace's points because he cant.
dude... let go of your mythical sky fairy beliefs and get out of your little bitcointalk thread echo chamber.
embrace science. cut the crap with your pseudo intellectual bullshit.
and all he can come up with is his silly merry go round lincs back to himself and some ridiculous shit about gods wrath and punishment. zzzzzzzz
does not address any of horace's points because he cant.
dude... let go of your mythical sky fairy beliefs and get out of your little bitcointalk thread echo chamber.
embrace science. cut the crap with your pseudo intellectual bullshit.
'The proof that Badecker is far less intelligent than a rock is' or 'When idiots try to act like scientists':
First of all, this is not a reply to you, Badecker, so I do not expect a reply from you. This is me proving how stupid you are and discrediting your idiotic persona as much as possible. Even if you do reply, I do not give a tiny fuck about what you say anymore.
First, Badecker said : 'We simply don't understand the programming because it is so extremely complex.' to which Astargath replied with 'Im sorry but you keep saying we simply don't understand it, then how is it that YOU understand it? If you say something is not understood how can you claim it's true? You realize the logic fallacy, right?'. What comes next is a bit shocking because we rarely see people that get so stupid while trying to scientifically prove something: Badecker replied to Artargath with this ' - Are you trying to be funny? First, who is the we? Second, if anyone says it is not so, they have suggested that they don't understand it. It isn't me stating that you don't understand it. At least not until after you suggested it. Third, who says that it is not understood? I understand it. There are lots of things that some people understand while others don't. This doesn't make them to be not true. However, if this is the extent of your ability to think, it is easy to see why you don't understand.. Let us analyze for a second: first, Badecker said we don't understand the programming. The same Badecker then asked who is the we, which proves that he barely knows what is coming out of his primitive brain. He actually stated something and then asked what was that about. After that, Badecker claims that if someone says something is not in a certain way, he suggests that he does not understand it. Logic failure example: if someone states that the flying spaghetti monster does not exist that actually means that the person is just suggesting he does not understand it. After that Badecker denied the fact that he stated that Astargath does not understand it...although he just did say that about all of us. Right after that he asks who said it is not understood proving to us again how stupid he is and not realizing that he just said it is not understood. Next thing, he claims he understands it, basically doing exactly what Astargath said he was doing, the logic fallacy. Later on, Badecker went full retard by stating evolution doesn't work not knowing parts of the evolution are now used even in computer technology, the very thing that he is typing from, which means it actually works. Not to talk about medicine and other science that uses the principles of evolution successfully. But hey, you can't expect to see butterflies coming out of a piece of shit, can you? Another thing to notice is this: Badecker is part of the apologist idiots who say that they can not trust in evolution because 'evolution theory is still a theory because blah blah blah'...but they believe in God, which is not even at the level of theory, it's a myth, it's primitive science fiction. Logic fallacy again. This is how Badecker ended: 'God set everything in place according to cause and effect... even the cause and effect that made the pollution. But don't blame God for pollution. He only acted according to the request of people, many of whom didn't even know that they were requesting.'. God is the cause and everything we know is the effect, he says, even the pollution. But he is not responsible for the pollution, people are...although he is the cause. However, he only acted at the request of people, even though when he created everything there were no people, but somehow he predicted their request which was not really a request because people did not know they were requesting. In conclusion, God is the cause of pollution but he is not responsible because some people who were also an effect of God were requesting while not knowing they were requesting it. If there would have been a prize for the most insanely stupid person alive at the moment, I would hands down hand it to Badecker. This brainless creature tries to bring 'scientific proof' for God and he actually demands that we take it seriously. That is the effect of religion on some people, mostly dumb ones. I bet that if you give him a gun and the 'legal' right to shoot those who do not believe in his God, he would immediately slaughter at least as much as any islamic terrorist does. Thank you for your time and remember: Badecker is as stupid as a pineapple covered slice of pizza, there is no way he could ever scientifically prove anything. Stay tuned for more soon.
First of all, this is not a reply to you, Badecker, so I do not expect a reply from you. This is me proving how stupid you are and discrediting your idiotic persona as much as possible. Even if you do reply, I do not give a tiny fuck about what you say anymore.
First, Badecker said : 'We simply don't understand the programming because it is so extremely complex.' to which Astargath replied with 'Im sorry but you keep saying we simply don't understand it, then how is it that YOU understand it? If you say something is not understood how can you claim it's true? You realize the logic fallacy, right?'. What comes next is a bit shocking because we rarely see people that get so stupid while trying to scientifically prove something: Badecker replied to Artargath with this ' - Are you trying to be funny? First, who is the we? Second, if anyone says it is not so, they have suggested that they don't understand it. It isn't me stating that you don't understand it. At least not until after you suggested it. Third, who says that it is not understood? I understand it. There are lots of things that some people understand while others don't. This doesn't make them to be not true. However, if this is the extent of your ability to think, it is easy to see why you don't understand.. Let us analyze for a second: first, Badecker said we don't understand the programming. The same Badecker then asked who is the we, which proves that he barely knows what is coming out of his primitive brain. He actually stated something and then asked what was that about. After that, Badecker claims that if someone says something is not in a certain way, he suggests that he does not understand it. Logic failure example: if someone states that the flying spaghetti monster does not exist that actually means that the person is just suggesting he does not understand it. After that Badecker denied the fact that he stated that Astargath does not understand it...although he just did say that about all of us. Right after that he asks who said it is not understood proving to us again how stupid he is and not realizing that he just said it is not understood. Next thing, he claims he understands it, basically doing exactly what Astargath said he was doing, the logic fallacy. Later on, Badecker went full retard by stating evolution doesn't work not knowing parts of the evolution are now used even in computer technology, the very thing that he is typing from, which means it actually works. Not to talk about medicine and other science that uses the principles of evolution successfully. But hey, you can't expect to see butterflies coming out of a piece of shit, can you? Another thing to notice is this: Badecker is part of the apologist idiots who say that they can not trust in evolution because 'evolution theory is still a theory because blah blah blah'...but they believe in God, which is not even at the level of theory, it's a myth, it's primitive science fiction. Logic fallacy again. This is how Badecker ended: 'God set everything in place according to cause and effect... even the cause and effect that made the pollution. But don't blame God for pollution. He only acted according to the request of people, many of whom didn't even know that they were requesting.'. God is the cause and everything we know is the effect, he says, even the pollution. But he is not responsible for the pollution, people are...although he is the cause. However, he only acted at the request of people, even though when he created everything there were no people, but somehow he predicted their request which was not really a request because people did not know they were requesting. In conclusion, God is the cause of pollution but he is not responsible because some people who were also an effect of God were requesting while not knowing they were requesting it. If there would have been a prize for the most insanely stupid person alive at the moment, I would hands down hand it to Badecker. This brainless creature tries to bring 'scientific proof' for God and he actually demands that we take it seriously. That is the effect of religion on some people, mostly dumb ones. I bet that if you give him a gun and the 'legal' right to shoot those who do not believe in his God, he would immediately slaughter at least as much as any islamic terrorist does. Thank you for your time and remember: Badecker is as stupid as a pineapple covered slice of pizza, there is no way he could ever scientifically prove anything. Stay tuned for more soon.
Hey, man. Thanks again for helping to support the fact that God exists, as proven by the proof at the links, by not being able to refute the science:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.10718395
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.14047133
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1662153.40
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.16803380.
And thank you, also, that you are constantly proving yourself to be a troll by going to great lengths, and taking great pains, to attempt to tear somebody else down, simply because he is a bit smarter than you. We all really want to know the kind of people we are talking to. So, thanks for proving yourself.
I know, I know. Your masters are probably getting after you for being paid by them, yet not being able to refute the fact that God exists. You are in danger because of this. After all, denying God, no matter what the reasons, leaves you open to His wrath and punishment. Your choice, however.
God exists as a word! Meaning of the word is: "anything that is missing"!
Not only is probability math science law, but it is one of the foundational pieces of physics in the universe. Probability math, alone, shows us that evolution is impossible.
Can you win the lottery if you are only 1 in 10 million people playing? Yes, you can. The odds are that you won't.
The odds against evolution is so great that ... forget it.
False, if that was the case no scientist would support evolution:
''1987 estimate found that "700 scientists ... (out of a total of 480,000 U.S. earth and life scientists) ... give credence to creation-science".[23] A 1991 Gallup poll found that about 5% of American scientists (including those with training outside biology) identified themselves as creationists.[24][25]
This simply shows that most scientists have not deeply considered probability math. In fact, most scientists probably have not deeply considered evolution, but simply have accepted the conclusions of fellow scientists, often without even meeting or knowing those fellow scientists.Can you win the lottery if you are only 1 in 10 million people playing? Yes, you can. The odds are that you won't.
The odds against evolution is so great that ... forget it.
False, if that was the case no scientist would support evolution:
''1987 estimate found that "700 scientists ... (out of a total of 480,000 U.S. earth and life scientists) ... give credence to creation-science".[23] A 1991 Gallup poll found that about 5% of American scientists (including those with training outside biology) identified themselves as creationists.[24][25]
You keep mentioning probability math. What is your point, what probability are you talking about?
The thing we were talking about is evolution. What are the odds that the atoms and molecules that make up a simple living cell could come together in just the right places to form what a living cell would be? The odds against this happening even once are literally impossible.
Add to this the proper motions for each and every atom and molecule so that the cell can be alive, and you have another big impossibility.
Add to this the fact that any "soup" that we can envision that would allow the above to happen, would immediately kill the new living cell. This means that the cell would have to be ejected from the soup at exactly the time it formed and became alive. This is another impossibility.
But, if the above happened, it would have to happen over and over each time there was an advancement in the cell, to the next level of evolution.
The probability math odds against this happening even once are so strong that it is impossible, and impossible, and impossible, beyond any chance of a possibility. Do the math.
you sir are so willfully phucking ignorant it is beyond comprehension.
for chrissakes get outta your delusional echo chamber .and do some research on these subjects you crow about.
oh no wait a minute never mind..you wont listen to the real science. you got yer fingers in your ears if it goes against your retarded fairy tale beliefs.
Well, do the math. The smallest possible living cell would have at least 200 molecules. What are the odds that these 200 molecules of different varieties and substances could ever come together to form a cell? It is essentially impossible. But if they did, they would still have to move into the right motions to make the cell alive.
How in the world ignorant are you? The 200-molecule cell would barely be alive, because cells that small are specialized for a specific job. In nature the cell would have to be a whole lot larger, and the odds against its coming together a whole lot greater.
You evolutionists are so dense that it amazes one how you can even live without riding a bicycle all the time:
You see, you keep showing how ignorant you are, evolution does not try to determine how the first cell or how life was created, you obviously do not understand evolution at all, thanks for clarifying that.
Evolution is change in the heritable characteristics of biological populations over successive generations.
The first cell would be the easiest. You're only going down hill with further cells. That simply shows that people are devolving... at least the ones who think that evolution is real.
No, stop it, stop embarrassing yourself, evolution has nothing to do with cells forming. How can you be so ignorant about it?
Peppered moth - This moth had a light coloring darkened after the Industrial Revolution, due to the pollution of the time. This mutation came about because the light colored moths were seen by birds more readily, so with natural selection, the dark colored moths survived to reproduce.
Italian Wall Lizards - These lizards were taken to an island and left there to see any changes that occurred. They shifted their diet and ate more vegetation, causing a change to their head size, giving them a stronger bite. They also developed cecal valves in their intestine which gives bacteria more time to break down the vegetation.
2 Easy examples of evolution for you so you can understand what it is about. It has nothing to do with probability math or cells forming, please inform yourself before talking because it's going to make you look stupid.
Cause and effect has to do with everything. This means that all natural transformations are essentially programmed in. We simply don't understand the programming because it is so extremely complex. More than likely it ties into dimensions that we know very little about yet... and dimensions that we couldn't hold enough of the knowledge in our minds at once, so that we could even envision them vaguely.
The evolution you talk about is only the recent understanding of the word "evolution." And it is not an all-inclusive understanding. There are many people who still hold that abiogenesis is part of evolution, and that "evolution" includes abiogenesis, and many more things that you have left out of your explanation of what evolution means.
Im sorry but you keep saying we simply don't understand it, then how is it that YOU understand it? If you say something is not understood how can you claim it's true? You realize the logic fallacy, right? - Are you trying to be funny? First, who is the we? Second, if anyone says it is not so, they have suggested that they don't understand it. It isn't me stating that you don't understand it. At least not until after you suggested it. Third, who says that it is not understood? I understand it. There are lots of things that some people understand while others don't. This doesn't make them to be not true. However, if this is the extent of your ability to think, it is easy to see why you don't understand.
And no abiogenesis is not a part of evolution. ''Many people'' hold that abiogenesis is? Who are these people? I would like you to show them to us and tell us if they are scientists. - Before the word "abiogenesis" was used in standard everyday life, that which it encompasses was considered to be part of evolution by almost everyone.
Stop evading the questions, you clearly didn't understand how evolution works. - Not only doesn't evolution "work," but it has been proven to be impossible for several reasons. I have listed some of them in this thread, already.
And yes cause and effect, if you actually read what I posted you would understand: ''Peppered moth - This moth had a light coloring darkened after the Industrial Revolution, due to the pollution of the time''
The cause is the pollution, you get it? That ''transformation'' was not programmed in, it was not God, it was just a mutation due to environmental causes.
God set everything in place according to cause and effect... even the cause and effect that made the pollution. But don't blame God for pollution. He only acted according to the request of people, many of whom didn't even know that they were requesting.
First of all, this is not a reply to you, Badecker, so I do not expect a reply from you. This is me proving how stupid you are and discrediting your idiotic persona as much as possible. Even if you do reply, I do not give a tiny fuck about what you say anymore.
First, Badecker said : 'We simply don't understand the programming because it is so extremely complex.' to which Astargath replied with 'Im sorry but you keep saying we simply don't understand it, then how is it that YOU understand it? If you say something is not understood how can you claim it's true? You realize the logic fallacy, right?'. What comes next is a bit shocking because we rarely see people that get so stupid while trying to scientifically prove something: Badecker replied to Artargath with this ' - Are you trying to be funny? First, who is the we? Second, if anyone says it is not so, they have suggested that they don't understand it. It isn't me stating that you don't understand it. At least not until after you suggested it. Third, who says that it is not understood? I understand it. There are lots of things that some people understand while others don't. This doesn't make them to be not true. However, if this is the extent of your ability to think, it is easy to see why you don't understand.. Let us analyze for a second: first, Badecker said we don't understand the programming. The same Badecker then asked who is the we, which proves that he barely knows what is coming out of his primitive brain. He actually stated something and then asked what was that about. After that, Badecker claims that if someone says something is not in a certain way, he suggests that he does not understand it. Logic failure example: if someone states that the flying spaghetti monster does not exist that actually means that the person is just suggesting he does not understand it. After that Badecker denied the fact that he stated that Astargath does not understand it...although he just did say that about all of us. Right after that he asks who said it is not understood proving to us again how stupid he is and not realizing that he just said it is not understood. Next thing, he claims he understands it, basically doing exactly what Astargath said he was doing, the logic fallacy. Later on, Badecker went full retard by stating evolution doesn't work not knowing parts of the evolution are now used even in computer technology, the very thing that he is typing from, which means it actually works. Not to talk about medicine and other science that uses the principles of evolution successfully. But hey, you can't expect to see butterflies coming out of a piece of shit, can you? Another thing to notice is this: Badecker is part of the apologist idiots who say that they can not trust in evolution because 'evolution theory is still a theory because blah blah blah'...but they believe in God, which is not even at the level of theory, it's a myth, it's primitive science fiction. Logic fallacy again. This is how Badecker ended: 'God set everything in place according to cause and effect... even the cause and effect that made the pollution. But don't blame God for pollution. He only acted according to the request of people, many of whom didn't even know that they were requesting.'. God is the cause and everything we know is the effect, he says, even the pollution. But he is not responsible for the pollution, people are...although he is the cause. However, he only acted at the request of people, even though when he created everything there were no people, but somehow he predicted their request which was not really a request because people did not know they were requesting. In conclusion, God is the cause of pollution but he is not responsible because some people who were also an effect of God were requesting while not knowing they were requesting it. If there would have been a prize for the most insanely stupid person alive at the moment, I would hands down hand it to Badecker. This brainless creature tries to bring 'scientific proof' for God and he actually demands that we take it seriously. That is the effect of religion on some people, mostly dumb ones. I bet that if you give him a gun and the 'legal' right to shoot those who do not believe in his God, he would immediately slaughter at least as much as any islamic terrorist does. Thank you for your time and remember: Badecker is as stupid as a pineapple covered slice of pizza, there is no way he could ever scientifically prove anything. Stay tuned for more soon.
Not only is probability math science law, but it is one of the foundational pieces of physics in the universe. Probability math, alone, shows us that evolution is impossible.
Can you win the lottery if you are only 1 in 10 million people playing? Yes, you can. The odds are that you won't.
The odds against evolution is so great that ... forget it.
False, if that was the case no scientist would support evolution:
''1987 estimate found that "700 scientists ... (out of a total of 480,000 U.S. earth and life scientists) ... give credence to creation-science".[23] A 1991 Gallup poll found that about 5% of American scientists (including those with training outside biology) identified themselves as creationists.[24][25]
This simply shows that most scientists have not deeply considered probability math. In fact, most scientists probably have not deeply considered evolution, but simply have accepted the conclusions of fellow scientists, often without even meeting or knowing those fellow scientists.Can you win the lottery if you are only 1 in 10 million people playing? Yes, you can. The odds are that you won't.
The odds against evolution is so great that ... forget it.
False, if that was the case no scientist would support evolution:
''1987 estimate found that "700 scientists ... (out of a total of 480,000 U.S. earth and life scientists) ... give credence to creation-science".[23] A 1991 Gallup poll found that about 5% of American scientists (including those with training outside biology) identified themselves as creationists.[24][25]
You keep mentioning probability math. What is your point, what probability are you talking about?
The thing we were talking about is evolution. What are the odds that the atoms and molecules that make up a simple living cell could come together in just the right places to form what a living cell would be? The odds against this happening even once are literally impossible.
Add to this the proper motions for each and every atom and molecule so that the cell can be alive, and you have another big impossibility.
Add to this the fact that any "soup" that we can envision that would allow the above to happen, would immediately kill the new living cell. This means that the cell would have to be ejected from the soup at exactly the time it formed and became alive. This is another impossibility.
But, if the above happened, it would have to happen over and over each time there was an advancement in the cell, to the next level of evolution.
The probability math odds against this happening even once are so strong that it is impossible, and impossible, and impossible, beyond any chance of a possibility. Do the math.
you sir are so willfully phucking ignorant it is beyond comprehension.
for chrissakes get outta your delusional echo chamber .and do some research on these subjects you crow about.
oh no wait a minute never mind..you wont listen to the real science. you got yer fingers in your ears if it goes against your retarded fairy tale beliefs.
Well, do the math. The smallest possible living cell would have at least 200 molecules. What are the odds that these 200 molecules of different varieties and substances could ever come together to form a cell? It is essentially impossible. But if they did, they would still have to move into the right motions to make the cell alive.
How in the world ignorant are you? The 200-molecule cell would barely be alive, because cells that small are specialized for a specific job. In nature the cell would have to be a whole lot larger, and the odds against its coming together a whole lot greater.
You evolutionists are so dense that it amazes one how you can even live without riding a bicycle all the time:
You see, you keep showing how ignorant you are, evolution does not try to determine how the first cell or how life was created, you obviously do not understand evolution at all, thanks for clarifying that.
Evolution is change in the heritable characteristics of biological populations over successive generations.
The first cell would be the easiest. You're only going down hill with further cells. That simply shows that people are devolving... at least the ones who think that evolution is real.
No, stop it, stop embarrassing yourself, evolution has nothing to do with cells forming. How can you be so ignorant about it?
Peppered moth - This moth had a light coloring darkened after the Industrial Revolution, due to the pollution of the time. This mutation came about because the light colored moths were seen by birds more readily, so with natural selection, the dark colored moths survived to reproduce.
Italian Wall Lizards - These lizards were taken to an island and left there to see any changes that occurred. They shifted their diet and ate more vegetation, causing a change to their head size, giving them a stronger bite. They also developed cecal valves in their intestine which gives bacteria more time to break down the vegetation.
2 Easy examples of evolution for you so you can understand what it is about. It has nothing to do with probability math or cells forming, please inform yourself before talking because it's going to make you look stupid.
Cause and effect has to do with everything. This means that all natural transformations are essentially programmed in. We simply don't understand the programming because it is so extremely complex. More than likely it ties into dimensions that we know very little about yet... and dimensions that we couldn't hold enough of the knowledge in our minds at once, so that we could even envision them vaguely.
The evolution you talk about is only the recent understanding of the word "evolution." And it is not an all-inclusive understanding. There are many people who still hold that abiogenesis is part of evolution, and that "evolution" includes abiogenesis, and many more things that you have left out of your explanation of what evolution means.
Im sorry but you keep saying we simply don't understand it, then how is it that YOU understand it? If you say something is not understood how can you claim it's true? You realize the logic fallacy, right? - Are you trying to be funny? First, who is the we? Second, if anyone says it is not so, they have suggested that they don't understand it. It isn't me stating that you don't understand it. At least not until after you suggested it. Third, who says that it is not understood? I understand it. There are lots of things that some people understand while others don't. This doesn't make them to be not true. However, if this is the extent of your ability to think, it is easy to see why you don't understand.
And no abiogenesis is not a part of evolution. ''Many people'' hold that abiogenesis is? Who are these people? I would like you to show them to us and tell us if they are scientists. - Before the word "abiogenesis" was used in standard everyday life, that which it encompasses was considered to be part of evolution by almost everyone.
Stop evading the questions, you clearly didn't understand how evolution works. - Not only doesn't evolution "work," but it has been proven to be impossible for several reasons. I have listed some of them in this thread, already.
And yes cause and effect, if you actually read what I posted you would understand: ''Peppered moth - This moth had a light coloring darkened after the Industrial Revolution, due to the pollution of the time''
The cause is the pollution, you get it? That ''transformation'' was not programmed in, it was not God, it was just a mutation due to environmental causes.
God set everything in place according to cause and effect... even the cause and effect that made the pollution. But don't blame God for pollution. He only acted according to the request of people, many of whom didn't even know that they were requesting.
So you take a scientific theory backed by virtually every scientist in the world, studied for years and you simply deny it and then you say NOPE, it was god, how do you know? Where is the evidence that God did it and it wasn't random? If nothing is random, you still don't know that it was God.
I believe the god is exist. why we cant see it, cause our eyes it limitless we cant seen the tiny creature kind a larva whitout any help of googles but we can see them at the television . lol
I believe it, cause logicly there is nothing in this world , create whitout any of creator. same like us humans. the darwins theory is still the theory. there is no fact,
even darwin it self never said it was the fact. if the fact is 100% valid . but the theory is 50-50 so many scientist doesnt agree to darwin. but this all is about faith
even darwin it self never said it was the fact. if the fact is 100% valid . but the theory is 50-50 so many scientist doesnt agree to darwin. but this all is about faith
Not only is probability math science law, but it is one of the foundational pieces of physics in the universe. Probability math, alone, shows us that evolution is impossible.
Can you win the lottery if you are only 1 in 10 million people playing? Yes, you can. The odds are that you won't.
The odds against evolution is so great that ... forget it.
False, if that was the case no scientist would support evolution:
''1987 estimate found that "700 scientists ... (out of a total of 480,000 U.S. earth and life scientists) ... give credence to creation-science".[23] A 1991 Gallup poll found that about 5% of American scientists (including those with training outside biology) identified themselves as creationists.[24][25]
This simply shows that most scientists have not deeply considered probability math. In fact, most scientists probably have not deeply considered evolution, but simply have accepted the conclusions of fellow scientists, often without even meeting or knowing those fellow scientists.Can you win the lottery if you are only 1 in 10 million people playing? Yes, you can. The odds are that you won't.
The odds against evolution is so great that ... forget it.
False, if that was the case no scientist would support evolution:
''1987 estimate found that "700 scientists ... (out of a total of 480,000 U.S. earth and life scientists) ... give credence to creation-science".[23] A 1991 Gallup poll found that about 5% of American scientists (including those with training outside biology) identified themselves as creationists.[24][25]
You keep mentioning probability math. What is your point, what probability are you talking about?
The thing we were talking about is evolution. What are the odds that the atoms and molecules that make up a simple living cell could come together in just the right places to form what a living cell would be? The odds against this happening even once are literally impossible.
Add to this the proper motions for each and every atom and molecule so that the cell can be alive, and you have another big impossibility.
Add to this the fact that any "soup" that we can envision that would allow the above to happen, would immediately kill the new living cell. This means that the cell would have to be ejected from the soup at exactly the time it formed and became alive. This is another impossibility.
But, if the above happened, it would have to happen over and over each time there was an advancement in the cell, to the next level of evolution.
The probability math odds against this happening even once are so strong that it is impossible, and impossible, and impossible, beyond any chance of a possibility. Do the math.
you sir are so willfully phucking ignorant it is beyond comprehension.
for chrissakes get outta your delusional echo chamber .and do some research on these subjects you crow about.
oh no wait a minute never mind..you wont listen to the real science. you got yer fingers in your ears if it goes against your retarded fairy tale beliefs.
Well, do the math. The smallest possible living cell would have at least 200 molecules. What are the odds that these 200 molecules of different varieties and substances could ever come together to form a cell? It is essentially impossible. But if they did, they would still have to move into the right motions to make the cell alive.
How in the world ignorant are you? The 200-molecule cell would barely be alive, because cells that small are specialized for a specific job. In nature the cell would have to be a whole lot larger, and the odds against its coming together a whole lot greater.
You evolutionists are so dense that it amazes one how you can even live without riding a bicycle all the time:
You see, you keep showing how ignorant you are, evolution does not try to determine how the first cell or how life was created, you obviously do not understand evolution at all, thanks for clarifying that.
Evolution is change in the heritable characteristics of biological populations over successive generations.
The first cell would be the easiest. You're only going down hill with further cells. That simply shows that people are devolving... at least the ones who think that evolution is real.
No, stop it, stop embarrassing yourself, evolution has nothing to do with cells forming. How can you be so ignorant about it?
Peppered moth - This moth had a light coloring darkened after the Industrial Revolution, due to the pollution of the time. This mutation came about because the light colored moths were seen by birds more readily, so with natural selection, the dark colored moths survived to reproduce.
Italian Wall Lizards - These lizards were taken to an island and left there to see any changes that occurred. They shifted their diet and ate more vegetation, causing a change to their head size, giving them a stronger bite. They also developed cecal valves in their intestine which gives bacteria more time to break down the vegetation.
2 Easy examples of evolution for you so you can understand what it is about. It has nothing to do with probability math or cells forming, please inform yourself before talking because it's going to make you look stupid.
Cause and effect has to do with everything. This means that all natural transformations are essentially programmed in. We simply don't understand the programming because it is so extremely complex. More than likely it ties into dimensions that we know very little about yet... and dimensions that we couldn't hold enough of the knowledge in our minds at once, so that we could even envision them vaguely.
The evolution you talk about is only the recent understanding of the word "evolution." And it is not an all-inclusive understanding. There are many people who still hold that abiogenesis is part of evolution, and that "evolution" includes abiogenesis, and many more things that you have left out of your explanation of what evolution means.
Im sorry but you keep saying we simply don't understand it, then how is it that YOU understand it? If you say something is not understood how can you claim it's true? You realize the logic fallacy, right? - Are you trying to be funny? First, who is the we? Second, if anyone says it is not so, they have suggested that they don't understand it. It isn't me stating that you don't understand it. At least not until after you suggested it. Third, who says that it is not understood? I understand it. There are lots of things that some people understand while others don't. This doesn't make them to be not true. However, if this is the extent of your ability to think, it is easy to see why you don't understand.
And no abiogenesis is not a part of evolution. ''Many people'' hold that abiogenesis is? Who are these people? I would like you to show them to us and tell us if they are scientists. - Before the word "abiogenesis" was used in standard everyday life, that which it encompasses was considered to be part of evolution by almost everyone.
Stop evading the questions, you clearly didn't understand how evolution works. - Not only doesn't evolution "work," but it has been proven to be impossible for several reasons. I have listed some of them in this thread, already.
And yes cause and effect, if you actually read what I posted you would understand: ''Peppered moth - This moth had a light coloring darkened after the Industrial Revolution, due to the pollution of the time''
The cause is the pollution, you get it? That ''transformation'' was not programmed in, it was not God, it was just a mutation due to environmental causes.
God set everything in place according to cause and effect... even the cause and effect that made the pollution. But don't blame God for pollution. He only acted according to the request of people, many of whom didn't even know that they were requesting.
Not only is probability math science law, but it is one of the foundational pieces of physics in the universe. Probability math, alone, shows us that evolution is impossible.
Can you win the lottery if you are only 1 in 10 million people playing? Yes, you can. The odds are that you won't.
The odds against evolution is so great that ... forget it.
False, if that was the case no scientist would support evolution:
''1987 estimate found that "700 scientists ... (out of a total of 480,000 U.S. earth and life scientists) ... give credence to creation-science".[23] A 1991 Gallup poll found that about 5% of American scientists (including those with training outside biology) identified themselves as creationists.[24][25]
This simply shows that most scientists have not deeply considered probability math. In fact, most scientists probably have not deeply considered evolution, but simply have accepted the conclusions of fellow scientists, often without even meeting or knowing those fellow scientists.Can you win the lottery if you are only 1 in 10 million people playing? Yes, you can. The odds are that you won't.
The odds against evolution is so great that ... forget it.
False, if that was the case no scientist would support evolution:
''1987 estimate found that "700 scientists ... (out of a total of 480,000 U.S. earth and life scientists) ... give credence to creation-science".[23] A 1991 Gallup poll found that about 5% of American scientists (including those with training outside biology) identified themselves as creationists.[24][25]
You keep mentioning probability math. What is your point, what probability are you talking about?
The thing we were talking about is evolution. What are the odds that the atoms and molecules that make up a simple living cell could come together in just the right places to form what a living cell would be? The odds against this happening even once are literally impossible.
Add to this the proper motions for each and every atom and molecule so that the cell can be alive, and you have another big impossibility.
Add to this the fact that any "soup" that we can envision that would allow the above to happen, would immediately kill the new living cell. This means that the cell would have to be ejected from the soup at exactly the time it formed and became alive. This is another impossibility.
But, if the above happened, it would have to happen over and over each time there was an advancement in the cell, to the next level of evolution.
The probability math odds against this happening even once are so strong that it is impossible, and impossible, and impossible, beyond any chance of a possibility. Do the math.
you sir are so willfully phucking ignorant it is beyond comprehension.
for chrissakes get outta your delusional echo chamber .and do some research on these subjects you crow about.
oh no wait a minute never mind..you wont listen to the real science. you got yer fingers in your ears if it goes against your retarded fairy tale beliefs.
Well, do the math. The smallest possible living cell would have at least 200 molecules. What are the odds that these 200 molecules of different varieties and substances could ever come together to form a cell? It is essentially impossible. But if they did, they would still have to move into the right motions to make the cell alive.
How in the world ignorant are you? The 200-molecule cell would barely be alive, because cells that small are specialized for a specific job. In nature the cell would have to be a whole lot larger, and the odds against its coming together a whole lot greater.
You evolutionists are so dense that it amazes one how you can even live without riding a bicycle all the time:
You see, you keep showing how ignorant you are, evolution does not try to determine how the first cell or how life was created, you obviously do not understand evolution at all, thanks for clarifying that.
Evolution is change in the heritable characteristics of biological populations over successive generations.
The first cell would be the easiest. You're only going down hill with further cells. That simply shows that people are devolving... at least the ones who think that evolution is real.
No, stop it, stop embarrassing yourself, evolution has nothing to do with cells forming. How can you be so ignorant about it?
Peppered moth - This moth had a light coloring darkened after the Industrial Revolution, due to the pollution of the time. This mutation came about because the light colored moths were seen by birds more readily, so with natural selection, the dark colored moths survived to reproduce.
Italian Wall Lizards - These lizards were taken to an island and left there to see any changes that occurred. They shifted their diet and ate more vegetation, causing a change to their head size, giving them a stronger bite. They also developed cecal valves in their intestine which gives bacteria more time to break down the vegetation.
2 Easy examples of evolution for you so you can understand what it is about. It has nothing to do with probability math or cells forming, please inform yourself before talking because it's going to make you look stupid.
Cause and effect has to do with everything. This means that all natural transformations are essentially programmed in. We simply don't understand the programming because it is so extremely complex. More than likely it ties into dimensions that we know very little about yet... and dimensions that we couldn't hold enough of the knowledge in our minds at once, so that we could even envision them vaguely.
The evolution you talk about is only the recent understanding of the word "evolution." And it is not an all-inclusive understanding. There are many people who still hold that abiogenesis is part of evolution, and that "evolution" includes abiogenesis, and many more things that you have left out of your explanation of what evolution means.
Im sorry but you keep saying we simply don't understand it, then how is it that YOU understand it? If you say something is not understood how can you claim it's true? You realize the logic fallacy, right?
And no abiogenesis is not a part of evolution. ''Many people'' hold that abiogenesis is? Who are these people? I would like you to show them to us and tell us if they are scientists.
Stop evading the questions, you clearly didn't understand how evolution works.
And yes cause and effect, if you actually read what I posted you would understand: ''Peppered moth - This moth had a light coloring darkened after the Industrial Revolution, due to the pollution of the time''
The cause is the pollution, you get it? That ''transformation'' was not programmed in, it was not God, it was just a mutation due to environmental causes.
Frank my flying unicorn says your links are full of shit and are nothing but your own personal assumptions.
The Irish Rovers - The Unicorn Song
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_EPsuOEH1fY
^^^^^ However, proof that God exists gives you a firm foundation for your faith.
Imagine that you want a new car. Is your faith strong enough that, poof, the car will exist, right in your driveway, out of thin air? Probably not. But which would be easier to have faith for?:
1. a Ford Mustang just like the one down at the dealer?;
2. a new type of car, that you can't even envision because it has never been made, and nobody knows what it looks like, not even you?
While we could debate the car thing a bit, the point is that when you know that God exists, you have a firm foundation for believing what He says. You have a firm foundation for your faith in what He says. Your foundation is God, Himself, and the knowledge that He exists.
Imagine that you want a new car. Is your faith strong enough that, poof, the car will exist, right in your driveway, out of thin air? Probably not. But which would be easier to have faith for?:
1. a Ford Mustang just like the one down at the dealer?;
2. a new type of car, that you can't even envision because it has never been made, and nobody knows what it looks like, not even you?
While we could debate the car thing a bit, the point is that when you know that God exists, you have a firm foundation for believing what He says. You have a firm foundation for your faith in what He says. Your foundation is God, Himself, and the knowledge that He exists.
If there would ever be proof of God, you would not need faith anymore, it would be fact. But your car example is absolutely delicious, regarding the fact that number one is science and number two is God. However, the sad truth is that most people choose number two. What I also observed is the subtle propaganda: 'Is your faith strong enough that, poof, the car will exist, right in your driveway, out of thin air?' - Why did you specifically ask this? Is there anyone who can make cars appear using his faith? Is it possible for people to do this? Could faith ever get strong enough to make things appear out of nothing? If yes, can you prove it?
Okay. One more time. Does Horacewoodwood exist? Since the only things that we know about Horacewoodwood are things that show up in this forum, we have to say, "YES." Whatever Horacewoodwood is outside and off this forum, who knows? But because he responds in this forum, we know for a fact that he exists. It is a fact, and the evidence is the forum and his posts.
The next thing we have to ask is, do we believe in Horacewoodwood? The answer is maybe. Why maybe? Because some of the things that Horacewoodwood says match reality (at least as we know it), and some don't. Because of this, we can't say that we believe for sure in Horacewoodwood, even though we know for a fact that he exists.
My bad. Horacewoodwood doesn't exist. It's his dog that has been posting all this while.
P.S. That would still make my dog more intelligent than you.
Why wouldn't I admit how "dumb" I am? Nobody can contain enough knowledge within himself to do the things that God does, or even know about all but a little of it. It's a fact, so why not admit it? Continue to walk around thinking that you are smart, and you will only be showing that you are "dumb."
The first, important thing is believing that God exists. Next is having faith that He will fulfill the things that He says. We are so blessed that we have SEEN that God exists... we have scientific knowledge that He exists. Yet, He says through His Son, Jesus, "Blessed are they who have not seen and yet have believed."
Having faith in God might seem a long way off for you. But, really. It is an easy transformation. And it is easier still, now that we have the scientific knowledge that He exists:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.10718395
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.14047133
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1662153.40
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.16803380.
1. Do you mind answering me what he will fulfill? What are the things God says he fulfills and he will?
2. How can you determine Jesus was the son of God? What evidence do you base your claim on?
3. Do you admit that you believe in a biblical God? If you do, how can you claim scientific proof of something that is 90% scientifically wrong from the start?
4. Also, why did you try to leave out religion since that's where the God thing started from all along?
5. Why should I believe that your God is the real one and not the one from Islam, or from classical Greece, or any other God that ever existed?
6. Why do you believe in specifically that God? Why don't you believe in all of the other Gods?
7. If your God is the biblical one, why was it necessary for him to kill, to sustain slavery, to interact with free will, etc?
8. Why did he have an apple tree in the Garden of Eden since they needed no food because there was no death, they were immortals?
9. How come a God with such a complex programming skill, all knowing, all powerful got to fuck up things so bad in the beginning?
10. Do you believe in the writings in the bible? If no, then how can you believe in that God?
Can you answer these? Scientifically, we first need to establish if the God that influenced your view on life is a fraud or not. To do that, we trace things back to the revelation, to where God 'revealed' himself to the people so guys like you today could claim proof of him. Why do we do that? Well, in order to see if there was a revelation or not. If there was no revelation, if the whole book is a lie, a simple explanation for what people did not understand in those days, if it is just a work of literature and bears actually no truth whatsoever, than your premise that God may exist are false from the beginning. That means that you are trying to prove that something that started as a lie is in fact truth because you were raised believing in that lie, because the whole community around you believed in the same lie and your mind can only report itself to that lie in order to explain things that are already explained or things that are not explained but you think you can explain just by tagging them with that lie, God.
When you learn enough science that you can understand the proof, come back with these questions. Then I will show you the proof that the Bible is the Word of God.
I probably shouldn't even be responding to somebody as base and ignoble as you... even if you are a step above noWman13666.
^^^^^ However, proof that God exists gives you a firm foundation for your faith.
Imagine that you want a new car. Is your faith strong enough that, poof, the car will exist, right in your driveway, out of thin air? Probably not. But which would be easier to have faith for?:
1. a Ford Mustang just like the one down at the dealer?;
2. a new type of car, that you can't even envision because it has never been made, and nobody knows what it looks like, not even you?
While we could debate the car thing a bit, the point is that when you know that God exists, you have a firm foundation for believing what He says. You have a firm foundation for your faith in what He says. Your foundation is God, Himself, and the knowledge that He exists.
Imagine that you want a new car. Is your faith strong enough that, poof, the car will exist, right in your driveway, out of thin air? Probably not. But which would be easier to have faith for?:
1. a Ford Mustang just like the one down at the dealer?;
2. a new type of car, that you can't even envision because it has never been made, and nobody knows what it looks like, not even you?
While we could debate the car thing a bit, the point is that when you know that God exists, you have a firm foundation for believing what He says. You have a firm foundation for your faith in what He says. Your foundation is God, Himself, and the knowledge that He exists.
If there would ever be proof of God, you would not need faith anymore, it would be fact. But your car example is absolutely delicious, regarding the fact that number one is science and number two is God. However, the sad truth is that most people choose number two. What I also observed is the subtle propaganda: 'Is your faith strong enough that, poof, the car will exist, right in your driveway, out of thin air?' - Why did you specifically ask this? Is there anyone who can make cars appear using his faith? Is it possible for people to do this? Could faith ever get strong enough to make things appear out of nothing? If yes, can you prove it?
Okay. One more time. Does Horacewoodwood exist? Since the only things that we know about Horacewoodwood are things that show up in this forum, we have to say, "YES." Whatever Horacewoodwood is outside and off this forum, who knows? But because he responds in this forum, we know for a fact that he exists. It is a fact, and the evidence is the forum and his posts.
The next thing we have to ask is, do we believe in Horacewoodwood? The answer is maybe. Why maybe? Because some of the things that Horacewoodwood says match reality (at least as we know it), and some don't. Because of this, we can't say that we believe for sure in Horacewoodwood, even though we know for a fact that he exists.
My bad. Horacewoodwood doesn't exist. It's his dog that has been posting all this while.
P.S. That would still make my dog more intelligent than you.
Why wouldn't I admit how "dumb" I am? Nobody can contain enough knowledge within himself to do the things that God does, or even know about all but a little of it. It's a fact, so why not admit it? Continue to walk around thinking that you are smart, and you will only be showing that you are "dumb."
The first, important thing is believing that God exists. Next is having faith that He will fulfill the things that He says. We are so blessed that we have SEEN that God exists... we have scientific knowledge that He exists. Yet, He says through His Son, Jesus, "Blessed are they who have not seen and yet have believed."
Having faith in God might seem a long way off for you. But, really. It is an easy transformation. And it is easier still, now that we have the scientific knowledge that He exists:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.10718395
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.14047133
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1662153.40
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.16803380.
1. Do you mind answering me what he will fulfill? What are the things God says he fulfills and he will?
2. How can you determine Jesus was the son of God? What evidence do you base your claim on?
3. Do you admit that you believe in a biblical God? If you do, how can you claim scientific proof of something that is 90% scientifically wrong from the start?
4. Also, why did you try to leave out religion since that's where the God thing started from all along?
5. Why should I believe that your God is the real one and not the one from Islam, or from classical Greece, or any other God that ever existed?
6. Why do you believe in specifically that God? Why don't you believe in all of the other Gods?
7. If your God is the biblical one, why was it necessary for him to kill, to sustain slavery, to interact with free will, etc?
8. Why did he have an apple tree in the Garden of Eden since they needed no food because there was no death, they were immortals?
9. How come a God with such a complex programming skill, all knowing, all powerful got to fuck up things so bad in the beginning?
10. Do you believe in the writings in the bible? If no, then how can you believe in that God?
Can you answer these? Scientifically, we first need to establish if the God that influenced your view on life is a fraud or not. To do that, we trace things back to the revelation, to where God 'revealed' himself to the people so guys like you today could claim proof of him. Why do we do that? Well, in order to see if there was a revelation or not. If there was no revelation, if the whole book is a lie, a simple explanation for what people did not understand in those days, if it is just a work of literature and bears actually no truth whatsoever, than your premise that God may exist are false from the beginning. That means that you are trying to prove that something that started as a lie is in fact truth because you were raised believing in that lie, because the whole community around you believed in the same lie and your mind can only report itself to that lie in order to explain things that are already explained or things that are not explained but you think you can explain just by tagging them with that lie, God.
When you learn enough science that you can understand the proof, come back with these questions. Then I will show you the proof that the Bible is the Word of God.
^^^^^ However, proof that God exists gives you a firm foundation for your faith.
Imagine that you want a new car. Is your faith strong enough that, poof, the car will exist, right in your driveway, out of thin air? Probably not. But which would be easier to have faith for?:
1. a Ford Mustang just like the one down at the dealer?;
2. a new type of car, that you can't even envision because it has never been made, and nobody knows what it looks like, not even you?
While we could debate the car thing a bit, the point is that when you know that God exists, you have a firm foundation for believing what He says. You have a firm foundation for your faith in what He says. Your foundation is God, Himself, and the knowledge that He exists.
Imagine that you want a new car. Is your faith strong enough that, poof, the car will exist, right in your driveway, out of thin air? Probably not. But which would be easier to have faith for?:
1. a Ford Mustang just like the one down at the dealer?;
2. a new type of car, that you can't even envision because it has never been made, and nobody knows what it looks like, not even you?
While we could debate the car thing a bit, the point is that when you know that God exists, you have a firm foundation for believing what He says. You have a firm foundation for your faith in what He says. Your foundation is God, Himself, and the knowledge that He exists.
If there would ever be proof of God, you would not need faith anymore, it would be fact. But your car example is absolutely delicious, regarding the fact that number one is science and number two is God. However, the sad truth is that most people choose number two. What I also observed is the subtle propaganda: 'Is your faith strong enough that, poof, the car will exist, right in your driveway, out of thin air?' - Why did you specifically ask this? Is there anyone who can make cars appear using his faith? Is it possible for people to do this? Could faith ever get strong enough to make things appear out of nothing? If yes, can you prove it?
Okay. One more time. Does Horacewoodwood exist? Since the only things that we know about Horacewoodwood are things that show up in this forum, we have to say, "YES." Whatever Horacewoodwood is outside and off this forum, who knows? But because he responds in this forum, we know for a fact that he exists. It is a fact, and the evidence is the forum and his posts.
The next thing we have to ask is, do we believe in Horacewoodwood? The answer is maybe. Why maybe? Because some of the things that Horacewoodwood says match reality (at least as we know it), and some don't. Because of this, we can't say that we believe for sure in Horacewoodwood, even though we know for a fact that he exists.
My bad. Horacewoodwood doesn't exist. It's his dog that has been posting all this while.
P.S. That would still make my dog more intelligent than you.
Why wouldn't I admit how "dumb" I am? Nobody can contain enough knowledge within himself to do the things that God does, or even know about all but a little of it. It's a fact, so why not admit it? Continue to walk around thinking that you are smart, and you will only be showing that you are "dumb."
The first, important thing is believing that God exists. Next is having faith that He will fulfill the things that He says. We are so blessed that we have SEEN that God exists... we have scientific knowledge that He exists. Yet, He says through His Son, Jesus, "Blessed are they who have not seen and yet have believed."
Having faith in God might seem a long way off for you. But, really. It is an easy transformation. And it is easier still, now that we have the scientific knowledge that He exists:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.10718395
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.14047133
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1662153.40
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.16803380.
1. Do you mind answering me what he will fulfill? What are the things God says he fulfills and he will?
2. How can you determine Jesus was the son of God? What evidence do you base your claim on?
3. Do you admit that you believe in a biblical God? If you do, how can you claim scientific proof of something that is 90% scientifically wrong from the start?
4. Also, why did you try to leave out religion since that's where the God thing started from all along?
5. Why should I believe that your God is the real one and not the one from Islam, or from classical Greece, or any other God that ever existed?
6. Why do you believe in specifically that God? Why don't you believe in all of the other Gods?
7. If your God is the biblical one, why was it necessary for him to kill, to sustain slavery, to interact with free will, etc?
8. Why did he have an apple tree in the Garden of Eden since they needed no food because there was no death, they were immortals?
9. How come a God with such a complex programming skill, all knowing, all powerful got to fuck up things so bad in the beginning?
10. Do you believe in the writings in the bible? If no, then how can you believe in that God?
Can you answer these? Scientifically, we first need to establish if the God that influenced your view on life is a fraud or not. To do that, we trace things back to the revelation, to where God 'revealed' himself to the people so guys like you today could claim proof of him. Why do we do that? Well, in order to see if there was a revelation or not. If there was no revelation, if the whole book is a lie, a simple explanation for what people did not understand in those days, if it is just a work of literature and bears actually no truth whatsoever, than your premise that God may exist are false from the beginning. That means that you are trying to prove that something that started as a lie is in fact truth because you were raised believing in that lie, because the whole community around you believed in the same lie and your mind can only report itself to that lie in order to explain things that are already explained or things that are not explained but you think you can explain just by tagging them with that lie, God.
When you learn enough science that you can understand the proof, come back with these questions. Then I will show you the proof that the Bible is the Word of God.
We don't need proof. Take a good look inside yourself. Most people fail to look inside themselves for God. Instead, they look to their surroundings and conclude that since the world is such a mess, God must not be there, if He ever existed at all. They forget that since God created us, we bear His fingerprints and those fingerprints point to His existence.
This is good^^^. But the scientific proof exists. And even St. Paul talks about the evidence of nature.
We don't need proof. Take a good look inside yourself. Most people fail to look inside themselves for God. Instead, they look to their surroundings and conclude that since the world is such a mess, God must not be there, if He ever existed at all. They forget that since God created us, we bear His fingerprints and those fingerprints point to His existence.
^^^^^ However, proof that God exists gives you a firm foundation for your faith.
Imagine that you want a new car. Is your faith strong enough that, poof, the car will exist, right in your driveway, out of thin air? Probably not. But which would be easier to have faith for?:
1. a Ford Mustang just like the one down at the dealer?;
2. a new type of car, that you can't even envision because it has never been made, and nobody knows what it looks like, not even you?
While we could debate the car thing a bit, the point is that when you know that God exists, you have a firm foundation for believing what He says. You have a firm foundation for your faith in what He says. Your foundation is God, Himself, and the knowledge that He exists.
Imagine that you want a new car. Is your faith strong enough that, poof, the car will exist, right in your driveway, out of thin air? Probably not. But which would be easier to have faith for?:
1. a Ford Mustang just like the one down at the dealer?;
2. a new type of car, that you can't even envision because it has never been made, and nobody knows what it looks like, not even you?
While we could debate the car thing a bit, the point is that when you know that God exists, you have a firm foundation for believing what He says. You have a firm foundation for your faith in what He says. Your foundation is God, Himself, and the knowledge that He exists.
If there would ever be proof of God, you would not need faith anymore, it would be fact. But your car example is absolutely delicious, regarding the fact that number one is science and number two is God. However, the sad truth is that most people choose number two. What I also observed is the subtle propaganda: 'Is your faith strong enough that, poof, the car will exist, right in your driveway, out of thin air?' - Why did you specifically ask this? Is there anyone who can make cars appear using his faith? Is it possible for people to do this? Could faith ever get strong enough to make things appear out of nothing? If yes, can you prove it?
Okay. One more time. Does Horacewoodwood exist? Since the only things that we know about Horacewoodwood are things that show up in this forum, we have to say, "YES." Whatever Horacewoodwood is outside and off this forum, who knows? But because he responds in this forum, we know for a fact that he exists. It is a fact, and the evidence is the forum and his posts.
The next thing we have to ask is, do we believe in Horacewoodwood? The answer is maybe. Why maybe? Because some of the things that Horacewoodwood says match reality (at least as we know it), and some don't. Because of this, we can't say that we believe for sure in Horacewoodwood, even though we know for a fact that he exists.
My bad. Horacewoodwood doesn't exist. It's his dog that has been posting all this while.
P.S. That would still make my dog more intelligent than you.
Why wouldn't I admit how "dumb" I am? Nobody can contain enough knowledge within himself to do the things that God does, or even know about all but a little of it. It's a fact, so why not admit it? Continue to walk around thinking that you are smart, and you will only be showing that you are "dumb."
The first, important thing is believing that God exists. Next is having faith that He will fulfill the things that He says. We are so blessed that we have SEEN that God exists... we have scientific knowledge that He exists. Yet, He says through His Son, Jesus, "Blessed are they who have not seen and yet have believed."
Having faith in God might seem a long way off for you. But, really. It is an easy transformation. And it is easier still, now that we have the scientific knowledge that He exists:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.10718395
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.14047133
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1662153.40
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.16803380.
1. Do you mind answering me what he will fulfill? What are the things God says he fulfills and he will?
2. How can you determine Jesus was the son of God? What evidence do you base your claim on?
3. Do you admit that you believe in a biblical God? If you do, how can you claim scientific proof of something that is 90% scientifically wrong from the start?
4. Also, why did you try to leave out religion since that's where the God thing started from all along?
5. Why should I believe that your God is the real one and not the one from Islam, or from classical Greece, or any other God that ever existed?
6. Why do you believe in specifically that God? Why don't you believe in all of the other Gods?
7. If your God is the biblical one, why was it necessary for him to kill, to sustain slavery, to interact with free will, etc?
8. Why did he have an apple tree in the Garden of Eden since they needed no food because there was no death, they were immortals?
9. How come a God with such a complex programming skill, all knowing, all powerful got to fuck up things so bad in the beginning?
10. Do you believe in the writings in the bible? If no, then how can you believe in that God?
Can you answer these? Scientifically, we first need to establish if the God that influenced your view on life is a fraud or not. To do that, we trace things back to the revelation, to where God 'revealed' himself to the people so guys like you today could claim proof of him. Why do we do that? Well, in order to see if there was a revelation or not. If there was no revelation, if the whole book is a lie, a simple explanation for what people did not understand in those days, if it is just a work of literature and bears actually no truth whatsoever, than your premise that God may exist are false from the beginning. That means that you are trying to prove that something that started as a lie is in fact truth because you were raised believing in that lie, because the whole community around you believed in the same lie and your mind can only report itself to that lie in order to explain things that are already explained or things that are not explained but you think you can explain just by tagging them with that lie, God.
^^^^^ However, proof that God exists gives you a firm foundation for your faith.
Imagine that you want a new car. Is your faith strong enough that, poof, the car will exist, right in your driveway, out of thin air? Probably not. But which would be easier to have faith for?:
1. a Ford Mustang just like the one down at the dealer?;
2. a new type of car, that you can't even envision because it has never been made, and nobody knows what it looks like, not even you?
While we could debate the car thing a bit, the point is that when you know that God exists, you have a firm foundation for believing what He says. You have a firm foundation for your faith in what He says. Your foundation is God, Himself, and the knowledge that He exists.
Imagine that you want a new car. Is your faith strong enough that, poof, the car will exist, right in your driveway, out of thin air? Probably not. But which would be easier to have faith for?:
1. a Ford Mustang just like the one down at the dealer?;
2. a new type of car, that you can't even envision because it has never been made, and nobody knows what it looks like, not even you?
While we could debate the car thing a bit, the point is that when you know that God exists, you have a firm foundation for believing what He says. You have a firm foundation for your faith in what He says. Your foundation is God, Himself, and the knowledge that He exists.
If there would ever be proof of God, you would not need faith anymore, it would be fact. But your car example is absolutely delicious, regarding the fact that number one is science and number two is God. However, the sad truth is that most people choose number two. What I also observed is the subtle propaganda: 'Is your faith strong enough that, poof, the car will exist, right in your driveway, out of thin air?' - Why did you specifically ask this? Is there anyone who can make cars appear using his faith? Is it possible for people to do this? Could faith ever get strong enough to make things appear out of nothing? If yes, can you prove it?
Okay. One more time. Does Horacewoodwood exist? Since the only things that we know about Horacewoodwood are things that show up in this forum, we have to say, "YES." Whatever Horacewoodwood is outside and off this forum, who knows? But because he responds in this forum, we know for a fact that he exists. It is a fact, and the evidence is the forum and his posts.
The next thing we have to ask is, do we believe in Horacewoodwood? The answer is maybe. Why maybe? Because some of the things that Horacewoodwood says match reality (at least as we know it), and some don't. Because of this, we can't say that we believe for sure in Horacewoodwood, even though we know for a fact that he exists.
My bad. Horacewoodwood doesn't exist. It's his dog that has been posting all this while.
P.S. That would still make my dog more intelligent than you.
Why wouldn't I admit how "dumb" I am? Nobody can contain enough knowledge within himself to do the things that God does, or even know about all but a little of it. It's a fact, so why not admit it? Continue to walk around thinking that you are smart, and you will only be showing that you are "dumb."
The first, important thing is believing that God exists. Next is having faith that He will fulfill the things that He says. We are so blessed that we have SEEN that God exists... we have scientific knowledge that He exists. Yet, He says through His Son, Jesus, "Blessed are they who have not seen and yet have believed."
Having faith in God might seem a long way off for you. But, really. It is an easy transformation. And it is easier still, now that we have the scientific knowledge that He exists:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.10718395
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.14047133
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1662153.40
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.16803380.
1. Do you mind answering me what he will fulfill? What are the things God says he fulfills and he will?
2. How can you determine Jesus was the son of God? What evidence do you base your claim on?
3. Do you admit that you believe in a biblical God? If you do, how can you claim scientific proof of something that is 90% scientifically wrong from the start?
4. Also, why did you try to leave out religion since that's where the God thing started from all along?
5. Why should I believe that your God is the real one and not the one from Islam, or from classical Greece, or any other God that ever existed?
6. Why do you believe in specifically that God? Why don't you believe in all of the other Gods?
7. If your God is the biblical one, why was it necessary for him to kill, to sustain slavery, to interact with free will, etc?
8. Why did he have an apple tree in the Garden of Eden since they needed no food because there was no death, they were immortals?
9. How come a God with such a complex programming skill, all knowing, all powerful got to fuck up things so bad in the beginning?
10. Do you believe in the writings in the bible? If no, then how can you believe in that God?
Can you answer these? Scientifically, we first need to establish if the God that influenced your view on life is a fraud or not. To do that, we trace things back to the revelation, to where God 'revealed' himself to the people so guys like you today could claim proof of him. Why do we do that? Well, in order to see if there was a revelation or not. If there was no revelation, if the whole book is a lie, a simple explanation for what people did not understand in those days, if it is just a work of literature and bears actually no truth whatsoever, than your premise that God may exist are false from the beginning. That means that you are trying to prove that something that started as a lie is in fact truth because you were raised believing in that lie, because the whole community around you believed in the same lie and your mind can only report itself to that lie in order to explain things that are already explained or things that are not explained but you think you can explain just by tagging them with that lie, God.
Not only is probability math science law, but it is one of the foundational pieces of physics in the universe. Probability math, alone, shows us that evolution is impossible.
Can you win the lottery if you are only 1 in 10 million people playing? Yes, you can. The odds are that you won't.
The odds against evolution is so great that ... forget it.
False, if that was the case no scientist would support evolution:
''1987 estimate found that "700 scientists ... (out of a total of 480,000 U.S. earth and life scientists) ... give credence to creation-science".[23] A 1991 Gallup poll found that about 5% of American scientists (including those with training outside biology) identified themselves as creationists.[24][25]
This simply shows that most scientists have not deeply considered probability math. In fact, most scientists probably have not deeply considered evolution, but simply have accepted the conclusions of fellow scientists, often without even meeting or knowing those fellow scientists.Can you win the lottery if you are only 1 in 10 million people playing? Yes, you can. The odds are that you won't.
The odds against evolution is so great that ... forget it.
False, if that was the case no scientist would support evolution:
''1987 estimate found that "700 scientists ... (out of a total of 480,000 U.S. earth and life scientists) ... give credence to creation-science".[23] A 1991 Gallup poll found that about 5% of American scientists (including those with training outside biology) identified themselves as creationists.[24][25]
You keep mentioning probability math. What is your point, what probability are you talking about?
The thing we were talking about is evolution. What are the odds that the atoms and molecules that make up a simple living cell could come together in just the right places to form what a living cell would be? The odds against this happening even once are literally impossible.
Add to this the proper motions for each and every atom and molecule so that the cell can be alive, and you have another big impossibility.
Add to this the fact that any "soup" that we can envision that would allow the above to happen, would immediately kill the new living cell. This means that the cell would have to be ejected from the soup at exactly the time it formed and became alive. This is another impossibility.
But, if the above happened, it would have to happen over and over each time there was an advancement in the cell, to the next level of evolution.
The probability math odds against this happening even once are so strong that it is impossible, and impossible, and impossible, beyond any chance of a possibility. Do the math.
you sir are so willfully phucking ignorant it is beyond comprehension.
for chrissakes get outta your delusional echo chamber .and do some research on these subjects you crow about.
oh no wait a minute never mind..you wont listen to the real science. you got yer fingers in your ears if it goes against your retarded fairy tale beliefs.
Well, do the math. The smallest possible living cell would have at least 200 molecules. What are the odds that these 200 molecules of different varieties and substances could ever come together to form a cell? It is essentially impossible. But if they did, they would still have to move into the right motions to make the cell alive.
How in the world ignorant are you? The 200-molecule cell would barely be alive, because cells that small are specialized for a specific job. In nature the cell would have to be a whole lot larger, and the odds against its coming together a whole lot greater.
You evolutionists are so dense that it amazes one how you can even live without riding a bicycle all the time:
You see, you keep showing how ignorant you are, evolution does not try to determine how the first cell or how life was created, you obviously do not understand evolution at all, thanks for clarifying that.
Evolution is change in the heritable characteristics of biological populations over successive generations.
The first cell would be the easiest. You're only going down hill with further cells. That simply shows that people are devolving... at least the ones who think that evolution is real.
No, stop it, stop embarrassing yourself, evolution has nothing to do with cells forming. How can you be so ignorant about it?
Peppered moth - This moth had a light coloring darkened after the Industrial Revolution, due to the pollution of the time. This mutation came about because the light colored moths were seen by birds more readily, so with natural selection, the dark colored moths survived to reproduce.
Italian Wall Lizards - These lizards were taken to an island and left there to see any changes that occurred. They shifted their diet and ate more vegetation, causing a change to their head size, giving them a stronger bite. They also developed cecal valves in their intestine which gives bacteria more time to break down the vegetation.
2 Easy examples of evolution for you so you can understand what it is about. It has nothing to do with probability math or cells forming, please inform yourself before talking because it's going to make you look stupid.
Cause and effect has to do with everything. This means that all natural transformations are essentially programmed in. We simply don't understand the programming because it is so extremely complex. More than likely it ties into dimensions that we know very little about yet... and dimensions that we couldn't hold enough of the knowledge in our minds at once, so that we could even envision them vaguely.
The evolution you talk about is only the recent understanding of the word "evolution." And it is not an all-inclusive understanding. There are many people who still hold that abiogenesis is part of evolution, and that "evolution" includes abiogenesis, and many more things that you have left out of your explanation of what evolution means.
^^^^^ However, proof that God exists gives you a firm foundation for your faith.
Imagine that you want a new car. Is your faith strong enough that, poof, the car will exist, right in your driveway, out of thin air? Probably not. But which would be easier to have faith for?:
1. a Ford Mustang just like the one down at the dealer?;
2. a new type of car, that you can't even envision because it has never been made, and nobody knows what it looks like, not even you?
While we could debate the car thing a bit, the point is that when you know that God exists, you have a firm foundation for believing what He says. You have a firm foundation for your faith in what He says. Your foundation is God, Himself, and the knowledge that He exists.
Imagine that you want a new car. Is your faith strong enough that, poof, the car will exist, right in your driveway, out of thin air? Probably not. But which would be easier to have faith for?:
1. a Ford Mustang just like the one down at the dealer?;
2. a new type of car, that you can't even envision because it has never been made, and nobody knows what it looks like, not even you?
While we could debate the car thing a bit, the point is that when you know that God exists, you have a firm foundation for believing what He says. You have a firm foundation for your faith in what He says. Your foundation is God, Himself, and the knowledge that He exists.
If there would ever be proof of God, you would not need faith anymore, it would be fact. But your car example is absolutely delicious, regarding the fact that number one is science and number two is God. However, the sad truth is that most people choose number two. What I also observed is the subtle propaganda: 'Is your faith strong enough that, poof, the car will exist, right in your driveway, out of thin air?' - Why did you specifically ask this? Is there anyone who can make cars appear using his faith? Is it possible for people to do this? Could faith ever get strong enough to make things appear out of nothing? If yes, can you prove it?
Okay. One more time. Does Horacewoodwood exist? Since the only things that we know about Horacewoodwood are things that show up in this forum, we have to say, "YES." Whatever Horacewoodwood is outside and off this forum, who knows? But because he responds in this forum, we know for a fact that he exists. It is a fact, and the evidence is the forum and his posts.
The next thing we have to ask is, do we believe in Horacewoodwood? The answer is maybe. Why maybe? Because some of the things that Horacewoodwood says match reality (at least as we know it), and some don't. Because of this, we can't say that we believe for sure in Horacewoodwood, even though we know for a fact that he exists.
My bad. Horacewoodwood doesn't exist. It's his dog that has been posting all this while.
P.S. That would still make my dog more intelligent than you.
Why wouldn't I admit how "dumb" I am? Nobody can contain enough knowledge within himself to do the things that God does, or even know about all but a little of it. It's a fact, so why not admit it? Continue to walk around thinking that you are smart, and you will only be showing that you are "dumb."
The first, important thing is believing that God exists. Next is having faith that He will fulfill the things that He says. We are so blessed that we have SEEN that God exists... we have scientific knowledge that He exists. Yet, He says through His Son, Jesus, "Blessed are they who have not seen and yet have believed."
Having faith in God might seem a long way off for you. But, really. It is an easy transformation. And it is easier still, now that we have the scientific knowledge that He exists:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.10718395
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.14047133
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1662153.40
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.16803380.
Jump to: