Religion...

[Chiefgroover]

TBH Evolution is something anyone should be able to see through in an instant, it just moves goal posts on a regular basis, calling it learning, to ensure its own survival, which has become hilarious.

 

Who cares where God comes from, its an irrelevant question. Hey you can always ask in person when you die and come back and spook someone out with the answer on a dark and thunder cracking night.

 

Science does claim to be the great authority on all, then usually contradicts itself on a regular basis. Science thinks it's always right, then when ideas move on to the next theory, science still claims to be right.

 

The theory that we are all in a computer simulation run by mice has as much strength as any other creationsist theory, I'm sorry but it's true!

 

That is the most biased, illfounded nonsense I have read here yet. You have obviously no knowledge of creation science or how it works, (pity you were not open minded enough to read the one single publication I mentioned) you also have confirmed approval of "survival of the fittest", and I have dealt with that Hitler style mindset in an earlier post. It's impossible for me to debate with you when you only have knowledge of your own views, and no obvious open mind to any of mine. Are Evolutionists biased and subjective? YES. Does Evolution read like a marvel comic book full of fantasy theory YES.

[Terminator]

I believe in Father Christmas and turbo faries.

 

Can I class sex as a religion? If so I love regular worship?

[Bobbeh]

Can I class sex as a religion? If so I love regular worship?

 

Amen brother

[tbourner]

I still think god's a fascist.

[chilli]

I still think god's a fascist.

 

lol so true, but gods gods god must be worse still

 

--

 

TBH Evolution is something anyone should be able to see through in an instant, it just moves goal posts on a regular basis, calling it learning, to ensure its own survival, which has become hilarious.

 

Yes so you keep saying, but try being constructive because as I have pointed out, taking digs at evolution doesn't strengthen your cause one bit (rather the contrary it makes you look vulnerable, trying desperately to defend your position by swiping at others). Like many, you are showing signs of being afraid of a proper scientific approach because it challenges something you find personally appealing.

 

I however, have no personal allegiance to any theory over another. I'll try and pick whichever is most firmly based in rational, logical thinking. Can you give me some clear rational thinking on your approach that might lead me to change my mind? Why not give it a try rather than taking digs at something that appears to threaten your own position.

 

That is the most biased, illfounded nonsense I have read here yet. You have obviously no knowledge of creation science or how it works, (pity you were not open minded enough to read the one single publication I mentioned) you also have confirmed approval of "survival of the fittest",

 

I thought that might get your attention! Unfortunately I find whenever you try and argue with anyone who believes in metaphysics or God it's really a waste of time because you can't rationally argue against faith, personal beliefs, subjectivism etc. In this respect it is very much like the example given. Calling it a science is a stretch of anyone’s imagination really.

 

and I have dealt with that Hitler style mindset in an earlier post. It's impossible for me to debate with you when you only have knowledge of your own views, and no obvious open mind to any of mine. Are Evolutionists biased and subjective? YES. Does Evolution read like a marvel comic book full of fantasy theory YES.

 

Unfortunately you haven’t actually dealt with anything have you? All you have done is try to pick fault in something else. I'd beg to differ that I am not open minded, may you should look at yourself in that respect.

 

Rather than negative criticism, why don't you try and turn it around, try a positive approach - paint me a picture of creationism, tell me what is good about it. Give it some credibility, tell me why as a rational human being, I should buy into it over anything else, evolution included... If you so strongly believe, this should be an easy task for you and what have you to loose. If you are going to call it a science, you had better base it on something a bit more concrete than metaphysics and faith though...

 

At the end of the day, us arguing is pointless, I'd say there are n number of made up theories, only the ones that stand the test of time remain. Any theory involving god and magic are for me no more valid than any 1 of a number of sci-fi (oh even these are more credible because they are often based on some element of reality) stories you can buy at your local bookshop.

 

So, come on, challenge me to rethink my position, so far you have failed dismally.

 

I have read countless books, I don't read on creationionism in the same way I doubt you read books on monsters and spooks. I have read some excellent books that don't require magic for us to exist though,

 

I'd recommend books by Daniel Dennet, such as this one:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0140283897/qid=1142241941/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl/202-5305901-9263818

 

called freedom evolves, if you havn't read it, please do so because it gives a rational view of why concious beings can elvove in a deterministic world absent of metaphysical make believe. Good luck, at the end of the day, stick to your personal beliefs, but you need something a whole lot stronger than that to convince others that it is more than just a fantasy make believe world

[Chiefgroover]

OK Chilli, thats a decent gauntlet you have thrown down. Such a reply will be lengthy and take me some time to prepare being dyslexic (though not one of the reference cases). I'll get back to you in a few days and share with you what I base my thoughts on. "Intelligent design" is whats rings true to me, Evolution to you, so by sharing each others information, we can enjoy a great debate. This reply will be a long reply to say the least, but I dont know how to shortcut it. Intelligent design is very much a science, as I shall demonstrate.

Regards

[chilli]

ok, I actually look forward to hearing it, and I promise to have an open mind

 

Maybe this thread won't be a dead end after all, it's always good to discuss differing views - even if neither of us change our minds, it might make us think twice which can only be good.

 

I hope you can detatch the science from the faith in your argument. By definition, it is impossible to argue against anyones faith and hence why it can be infuriating (for me) when it gets caught up in science.

 

Good luck, don't spend rediculous amounts of effort on it for me (unless you really want too). The key points would be a start of something we could discuss further as required.

 

cheers

[Chiefgroover]

Get comfy, this will be the longest post I have ever written on here!

 

Evolution refers to the fossil record on a regular basis. Firstly we need to ask - how do we form fossils? Well when I was at school they told me it took many years. Thats Nonsense. Any recently dead (or living) organism must be rapidly buried in sediment that can harden and exclude oxygen. Thats just what you'd expect from a worldwide catastrophic flood, something that Evolutionists dont want to hear about despite the evidence. Fossilisation and rapid formation of deep strata must occur rapidly. How else can you explain vertical fossilised trees? (without root) or a Dinosaurs neck sticking through strata that are allegedly millions of years old? Tell me how the trees or Dinosaur stayed alive for millions of years while the strata formed around it? There are thousands of examples, a catastrophic flood fits the evidence quite well.

Staying with the "Great flood"

How else do you explain the flood stories shared by dozens of unconnected cultures around the world (stories long recorded before "contaminated" bible carrying westerners arrived?

Chinese pictograms - Ancient Chinese characters clearly and explicitly describe the Genesis creation and flood accounts.

 

Scientists, an amazing bunch of smart people their community is changing, with Intelligent design becoming a more talked about and studied subject. (Non religious) scientists these days openly discuss evidence for:

Rapid (years, not millions of years) formation of coal, oil and natural gas.

Catastrophic formation of geological features such as the Grand Canyon.

The apparent impossibility of the spontaneous formation of life from non living matter.

 

Einstein , a man I greatly admire, in 1929 said the following.

"We are in the position of a little child entering a library filled with books in different languages. The child knows someone must have written the books. It does not know how. It does not know the languages in which they are written. the child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn't know what it is. That it seems to me, is the attitude of the most intelligent being towards God. We see a universe marvellously arranged and obeying certain laws, but only dimly understand those laws. Our limited minds cannot grasp the mysterious force that moves the constellations.

 

Such Humility has been lost in todays scientific world.

 

Lets tackle DNA. In order to give credibility to Intelligent design we must address Evolution's most treasured subject. Evolutionist believe it came about by chance, here are the facts that Creationists have on DNA, which tell a different story and justify their stance on DNA. You asked for it so here it is.

DNA stands for deoxyribonucleic acid (for the benefit of other readers, I dont suggest you dont know this or any of the rest of this for a moment Chilli, I am merely clarifying the subject with you). I have written the "to the power of figures" in brackets.

DNA evidence demonstrates the intelligent design view much better than it does Evolution.

Consider the complexity of this important component of living systems in order to see how ABSURD it is to believe that life came about by chance. We know that DNA is the primary information carrying molecule of living organisms. Being the "Blueprint" of living cells, it stores all the information necessary for the cell to feed and protect itself, as well as propagate itself into more living cells, also to co-operate with other living cells to make up a complex organism. If the DNA of one human cell were unravelled and held in a straight line, it would be literally be about one meter long, and yet be so thin it would be invisible to all but the most powerful microscopes. This string of DNA must be packaged into a space that is much smaller than the head of a pin, and thats this tiny string of human DNA contains enough information to fill almost 1000 books, each containing 1000 pages of text.

One human cell contains 3x10(9) nucleotide bases (genetic letters) in just one of the two copies of DNA present in the cells.)

Human engineers would have a helluva time trying to fit one book into that amount of space, one thousand books in that amount of space is mind boggling to say the least!!.

Since DNA and the machinery of the cell are co-dependent, the complete system must be co dependent from the beginning or it will be meaningless bits and pieces.

When converting DNA information into proteins, we must adhere to the following points:

every step, and I mean every step of the overall process absolutely requires proteins that are unique and extremely complex, these proteins can only be produced by the overall process in which they themselves are critically involved.

So the making of RNA (ribonucleic acid) from a DNA template is a critical first step in the process of protein formation. For RNA to be synthesised you need at least five different protein chains to co-operate. Four of these proteins from the RNA polymerase complex tells the RNA where to start reading the DNA template.

The enzyme complex must recognise where to start transcribing DNA into RNA. It must then move along the DNA strand adding individual building blocks to the growing RNA chain, and lastly it must know where to finish the transcription process.

Now we need three types of RNA to process the making of proteins, messenger RNA (mRNA), ribosomal RNA (rRNA) and Transfer RNA (tRNA).

Molecules of mRNA carry the information extracted from the DNA blueprint which encodes the protein to be synthesised; rRNA molecules make up a critical component of ribo-somes; and tRNA is responsible for carrying individual animo acids to the site where they will be added, to a new protein.

Befroe tRNA molecules can do their stuff they must be charged with a suitable animo acid in order that they can be added onto a growing protein chain at the correct time.

Then you will need 20! different aminoacyl-tRNA synthetase proteins to attach individual animo acids to the corresponding tRNA molecules (thats at least one for each type of animo acid).

One the three types of molecules have been synthesised, the info needs to translate from the mRNA into a protein molecule. This is carried out by a huge complex of proteins called the ribosome. These totally amazing protein synthesis machines contain multiple different proteins, together with various ribosomal RNA molecules all associated with two main sub units. In a simple bacterium such as E.coli ribsosmes are composed of 50 different proteins and three different rRNAs!

The above is mearly the core reactions in the process of synthesising proteins, we ALSO need the energy molecules that must be present for many of these reactions.

The cell needs to harvest energy, therefore it has to have a mechanism from pre-encoded information located in the cell.

A summation will reveal that the process of converting DNA info into proteins requires at least 75 different protein molecules. Each one of those must be synthesised in the first place, by the process in which they are involved. How could it begin without ALL the necessary proteins? Could ALL 75 proteins have arisen in the same place by chance? in the right place at the right time? and all the precursor molecules happen to be around in their energised form so the proteins could utilise them properly?

As we know, without proteins life would not exist; it is as simple as that. The same is true of DNA and RNA. It is true that they and proteins must ALL be present if any of them are going to be present in a living organism.

LIFE HAD TO HAVE BEEN CREATED COMPLETELY FUNCTIONAL OR IT WOULD BE A MEANINGLESS MESS. To claim otherwise in the light of the above scientific facts would be either ignorance or desperation:rolleyes: . No offence meant to anyone. Therefore God came first, or if anyone can explain it better I am all ears.

There are those who will insist it happened by chance. If thats what you think read on.

75 proteins coming about by chance? OK then consider a smaller than average protein of just 100 animo acid residues. IF all the necessary left handed animo acids were actually available and IF the interfering compounds including right handed animo acids were somehow eliminated and IF (thats a lotta if's lol) our pool of animo acids were able to join together into protein chains faster than the proteins normally fall apart, then the chances of this random 100 animo acid protein have the correct sequence would be one in 20(100) possible sequence combinations, 20 available animo acids raised to the power of the number of residues in the protein,

i.e. 1 in 12, 680,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,

000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,

000,000!!!.

[Chiefgroover]

cont.

 

OK then lets make a charitable and generous scenario to see how desolate the Theory of Evolution becomes in view of the probabilities.

We know the earth has a mass of around 5.97 x 10(27) grams. If it's entire mass was converted to animo acids, there would be in the order of 3.27 x 10(49) animo acids molecules available. If all these molecules were converted into 100-residue proteins, there would be 3.27 (isnt that the Supra jap diff ratio?) x 10(47) proteins. Since there are 1.27 x 10(130) possible combinations of animo acids in a 100-mer protein, a division of the number of possibilities by the number of proteins present on our hypothetical globe shows that the chances of having just one correct sequence in that entire globe of 100-mer proteins is 1 in 3.88 x 10(82) !!!.

Even if each of these could be rearranged into different sequences during the alleged time span of the earth, the chances that one correct sequence would be produced is still not close to being realistic. Considering that there are only 1.45 x 10(17) seconds since the mythical evolutionary age of the earth. It can be calculated that each and every 100-mer protein ( I am laughing writing this i think its hilarious on one hand and great evidence of a creator of the other) in the hypothetical earth would need to rearrange itself and average of 2.67 x 10(65) times for second in order to try all combinations!. (thats oversimplistic as it assumes it wont try any sequence twice lol) The 100-animo-acid molecules could not even come close to assembling and disassembling that quickly, its physically impossible. (Marvel comic stuff).

4.6 billion years, a long time for sure, but I am sure Evolutionists will increase that figure and say it took longer, hence the moving the goalposts comment. How ridiculous must we go in a time estimation?.

 

Keep in mind I have only looked at the possibilities of small protein 100 animo acids. When we calculate that at least 75 proteins mentioned above in order to have the necessary self replicating system of the same size and probability of obtaining the correct sequences for all of them comes to ............wait for it.........20 x 3.7779 x 10(9700)!!! yeah you got it, almost 9,700 zero's lmao.

 

Even if the Oceans were full of animo acids just trying all kinds of different combinations, a correctly formed molecule in the Atlantic is not going to be able to co-operate very easy with another correctly formed molecule form the Indian ocean. ( NO offence to any Indians here lol).

 

Honestly and truly, the very thought of even one single functional protein arising by chance requires blind faith that will not or cannot grasp the numbers. Such thoughts are pure fantasy and have nothing to do with science!.

 

Life in the beginning must have been created, and please dont even think of mentioning aliens!.

 

 

The great flood? could it really have shaped hard crystalline rocks so fast? Simple indunation by water is inadequate, because rocks can be submerged for ages without significant deterioration, as proven by underwater archaeological sites. The process of cavatation of water requires high speed (more than 30 m/s) and shallow (less than 10 meters deep) water, but IT CAN DESTROY HARD STEEL. Direct hydraulic pressures of high speed water are more probable destructive agents. Never underestimate the power of water.

 

This looks at a few of the things that "Intelligent design" is based on. There are so many more you can read yourself. Again I mention Darwins black box by Michael Behe if you are intersted in checking out more.

 

I'll cut you a deal, I'll read your recommended book of you read mine

 

p.s you remind me of my older brother, honours degree in applied Chemistry, and of the same views as you!. ( He gives me a hard time too lol)

[tbourner]

Well I'm converted!

[tbourner]

Seriously, some responses:

 

Any recently dead (or living) organism must be rapidly buried in sediment that can harden and exclude oxygen. Thats just what you'd expect from a worldwide catastrophic flood, something that Evolutionists dont want to hear about despite the evidence.

 

I thought there were very valid and currently open theories about a meteor wiping out the dinosaurs? Or eruptions? The meteor that created the big circular gap between North America and the Caribbean? The Yellowstone National Park super-volcano erupting? All these could quite easily create 'extinction level events' that would cause the effects you talk about. Couldn't they?

 

Lets tackle DNA............... etc.......... etc......... LOTs of information! etc....

 

Well, what can I say.

 

Except maybe what I said near the beginning of the thread, that M Theory covers that quite easily! You come at me with huge numbers to the power of huge numbers to 1........... M-Theory's response? INFINITY - beat that.

 

I also said I believe in a creator, maybe an Nth dimensional being (with N > 4), I just don't believe in a 'God', he who must be obeyed, the one who is all forgiving and listens to your prayers, thine master who shall smite thee if you don't do as you're frickin told!!! Yeah great job he's doing then (totalitarianism).

[Chiefgroover]

Seriously, some responses:

 

I thought there were very valid and currently open theories about a meteor wiping out the dinosaurs? Or eruptions? The meteor that created the big circular gap between North America and the Caribbean? The Yellowstone National Park super-volcano erupting? All these could quite easily create 'extinction level events' that would cause the effects you talk about. Couldn't they?

 

Well, what can I say.

 

Except maybe what I said near the beginning of the thread, that M Theory covers that quite easily! You come at me with huge numbers to the power of huge numbers to 1........... M-Theory's response? INFINITY - beat that.

 

I also said I believe in a creator, maybe an Nth dimensional being (with N > 4), I just don't believe in a 'God', he who must be obeyed, the one who is all forgiving and listens to your prayers, thine master who shall smite thee if you don't do as you're frickin told!!! Yeah great job he's doing then (totalitarianism).

 

M theory, string theory, call it what you will. I fail to see how M theory is even remotely likely. Cambridge Uni reckon that the force between two gravitons (the particles that mediate gravitational interactions), becomes infinite and we do not know how to get rid of these infinities to get physically sensible results.

 

I'm not trying to convert anyone, it just grieves me to see intelligent people blinded by evolutionary theories that are impossible!. What decision you make outside that I have no problem with. I, like God believe in freewill which is why we have it and YOU enjoy it

 

Whats chances of a single event, astro related, causing the entire earth to be with oxgyen for a sustained period?. There is more geologicial evidence pointing to a great flood than to any astrologicial event doing this. I forgot, the flood is biblicially mentioned ssshhhh cant be seen talking about that, sea beds raised, maybe ice caps melting? Drowning is still the nost likely way for the fossil record to start.

 

You can take a horse to the water but you cant make it drink!

[Supragal]

I am not religious at all. It annoys me that children are forced to study it and believe in it at school. I have nothing against people that are religious though, my sister wasn't at all and then had a very serious accident and then for some reason got into God stuff. I am not allowed to take the Lords name in vain or I get severly hit. It's ok to F and Blind as long as I don't say "God" of "Jesus" still, she is nuts.

[penguin]

Chief & Chilly have made some very good points - good to know we have some very bright sparks in our club

 

Personally, my views are that creation and science walk hand in hand - creation is always one step ahead though.... i can't imagine how anything can exist in our universe with such harmony unless it was created....

[penguin]

I am not religious at all. It annoys me that children are forced to study it and believe in it at school. I have nothing against people that are religious though, my sister wasn't at all and then had a very serious accident and then for some reason got into God stuff. I am not allowed to take the Lords name in vain or I get severly hit. It's ok to F and Blind as long as I don't say "God" of "Jesus" still, she is nuts.

 

 

I'm sure it annoys people that children are also taught about the "big bang" theory its a double edged sword.

[Chiefgroover]

Funny enough Rosie, I have a mate who goes Bananas everytime someone mentions religion, almost to the point of violence (he thinks he is too "Evolved" for that) and I know just how you feel, always having to watch your words etc. Live and let live, but debate all you want with those who are interested in doing so

It annoys me that children are forced to study evolutioin, which is potrayed to them as the thuth (sigh) and brainwashed by it.

[CJ]

I thought this was topical and may lighten the debate

 

JESUS AND SATAN ON THE COMPUTER

 

Jesus and Satan were having an ongoing argument about who

was better on his computer. They had been going at it for

days, and God was tired of hearing all the bickering.

Finally, God said, "Cool it. I am going to set up a test

which will take two hours and I will judge who does the

better job." So Satan and Jesus sat down at the keyboards

and typed away.

 

They moused. They did spreadsheets. They wrote reports.

They sent faxes. They sent e-mail. They sent out e-mail with

attachments. They downloaded. They did some genealogy

reports. They made cards. They did every known job. But,

ten minutes before the time was up, lightning suddenly

flashed across the sky, thunder rolled, the rain poured and,

of course, the electricity went off.

 

Satan stared at his blank screen and screamed every curse

word known. Jesus just sighed.

 

The electricity finally flickered back on, and each of them

restarted computers. Satan started searching frantically

screaming, "It's gone! It's all gone! I lost everything when

the power went out!"

 

Meanwhile, Jesus quietly started printing out all his files

from the past 2 hours.

 

Satan observed this and became even more irate.

 

"Wait! He cheated! How did he do it?"

 

God shrugged and said, "Jesus saves!"

[Chiefgroover]

LMAO cj, nice one !

[chilli]

Lol, nice one CJ.

 

Good post Chiefgroover. I shall deliberately not use any probabilities as such in this reply because, as I shall argue, it doesn’t actually prove or disprove anything, and in the context of the universe, what seems improbable to us may not be such a big deal after all. I do understand where you are coming from entirely, many of the numbers in the world around us do indeed seem incredible, totally beyond our wildest dreams - no wonder so many do turn to some notion of a creator or metaphysics to try and explain it all. But, in this vast sea in improbabilities, which applies across all the particles on all the planets (and in all the dust and matter) around all the stars in the whole universe, with all their uniquely different parameters and conditions, maybe some conditions were in fact just right. When you think of it in this context, maybe the conditions did really form here on earth as a real, physical, deterministic process with no external ‘creator’ required to make or design it all up front. Obviously it would seem to be nothing short of a complete miracle to us looking back so to speak, but then again so does a rainbow, a star, a lightening strike, radioactivity, planets, black holes and so on, all to me based firmly in the physics of the universe we reside in. The fact that we are here to marvel at the improbability, isn’t that just the anthropic principle at work? We are not asking that it had to happen here on Earth, quite the opposite, all we ask is that somewhere in the sea of possibilities (that mostly result in dead, lifeless planets) it happened somewhere – and wherever it happened, if we are consciously observing it, obviously it happened where we are now, or originated from!

 

We both agree it appears as a miracle for us. You say the miracle can only be answered by a creator. I say that just shifts the problem to who made the creator (and so on) and doesn’t actually solve anything, because ultimately someone has to ‘design the designer’ according to that line of reasoning. For me, anthropically the universe is a large sea of entropy and given _any_ mechanism (DNA included) that can store information and pass benefit from one mutated replication to another – has the makings of proving some order out of chaos.

 

Also, in a basic lab it is possible to synthesis the building blocks of life with nothing designed or created, just some based elementary physical building blocks. So, maybe the universe we lived in was inevitably going to result in organic life of some form or another, some as we know it, some not as we know it – this still does not (for me) require conscious design effort by some higher entity.

 

I’d say the improbable event has a number of aspects, such as 1) we don’t understand all the building blocks properly 2) crazy improbable numbers will occur in something the scale (physical size, number of degrees of freedom, time) of the universe!!!

 

I’d say, you simply cannot prove anything just because it appears improbable from one perspective. What does ‘improbable mean’ anyway, with at least 100 billion galaxies, on average containing a similar number of stars, let alone the number of planets and particles? The number of degrees of freedom over n billion years of time, I’d say this has the potential to turn ‘improbable’ into ‘probable’. Completely amazing when you are the end result of course, conversely, only amazing if you happen to be the end result, able to contemplate and marvel at it. A rock won’t find it amazing, however we live in the same universe and obey the same laws of physics!

 

It’s amazing what order can come out of chaos. An extremely simple version, have you seen Life program, simple pixels that take on a seeming life of their own. Have you read about concepts of designoid rather than designer? I’d say you are marvelling at designoid, not designer  and either way, it’s as real a miracle for us whichever way you decide to view it!

[JonW]

I'm a little confused about what Creationists actually believe has happend on our planet. Would someone be kind enough to explain (chiefgroover would be best placed I suppose) What i mean is, over the whole period of life on Earth can you bullet point the major events that have lead us to where we are now i.e. Is it something like

 

Adam & Eve created by magic and placed on a perfect world

 

Talking snake leads them down the garden path and fcuks it all up for everyone

 

Adam & eve (who are now sinners) shag, have a couple of male kids I seem to remember.

 

I get stuck here, where does the rest of humanity come from, do the male kids breed with there mother.

 

Anyway then what happens, how do the dinosaurs and everything else fit in. When is the flood? How long ago from the present day? Did the creator then magically repopulate the Earth with the variety we see today??

 

Apologies if I'm missing the point here. Like I said bullet points would do??

[chilli]

Talking snake leads them down the garden path and fcuks it all up for everyone

 

lol, I can't help but think of Ricky Gervais and the Animals (think it was this one) show where he does the whole bible thing, I was in stitches!

 

People do believe in essentially this (or variations on a theme). As a personal belief that's just fine, but in my mind it is nothing more than exactly that.

[tbourner]

Would someone be kind enough to explain (chiefgroover would be best placed I suppose) What i mean is, over the whole period of life on Earth can you bullet point the major events that have lead us to where we are now i.e. Is it something like

 

There's a book about it somewhere I think, called the Bible or something.

I'm not into fantasy fiction though TBH.

 

[andrew7]

It's only man's arrogance that assumes he is any different than any other lifeform on this planet and a lie you have heard a thousnd times is easier to believe than the truth you have heard only once.........

 

Why should man be any different than the rest of the life in the universe which has one thing in common, i.e. that eventually it is consumed by something else....

 

Look around you. Everything is food for something else, so maybe you (man) become food for something else when you die.

After all, nobody has come back yet to tell us otherwise.......

 

Makes far more sense to me than an all-seeing, all-knowing god who couldn't even forecast that Eve would eat the apple....

And then, for that "loving Father" to condemn all future generations to a form of punishment...what normal parent would even do that?.....

Tosh!................

[penguin]

very good site: http://www.doesgodexist.org/

 

it answers your question about pain and suffering andrew...

[Chiefgroover]

Jon W, I am talking creation of however it came about here. If you want to get into theology, then do so but leave me out. I dont intend to become a punchbag for the frustrations of humans at odds with the world in which they live.

 

In the continued absence of any SOLID and proven creation style (whatever you believe) I say why aviod a creator idea when there is NO proven alternative? Or is it just so easy to live in a creatorless world? is it easier to explain to yourself? whatever turns you on mate, in expressing my views I am not telling you how to think, but exploring the myths and proven lies that are PREACHED in schools to children to make then atheists like their teachers.

You cannot prove or disprove religion until you bite the dust, so come back and tell us wont you lol.

 

"Makes far more sense to me than an all-seeing, all-knowing god who couldn't even forecast that Eve would eat the apple...." Have you been reading these posts? where did freewill go? possible mismanagement by humans ? Another Bruce almighty.

 

Chilli

We both agree it appears as a miracle for us. You say the miracle can only be answered by a creator. I say that just shifts the problem to who made the creator (and so on) and doesn’t actually solve anything, because ultimately someone has to ‘design the designer’ according to that line of reasoning. For me, anthropically the universe is a large sea of entropy and given _any_ mechanism (DNA included) that can store information and pass benefit from one mutated replication to another – has the makings of proving some order out of chaos.

And you acuse me of fantasy? look in the mirror lol. We both know you cant actually prove either, as we were not there to witness the start. However we can dismiss many of the theory's (as I have just done) that are preached at us on BBC and the like. Just because science or evolution doesnt have a credible answer doesnt mean that we have to slag off any other possibility that you cannot disprove.

100 Billion galaxy's? whats that the total output for mars since introduction of the bar? funny how its such an even number lol, I wonder is that to the nearest 20 billion or jus a great sounding made up figure by some astronomer lmao. You think my numbers are crazy lol.