Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Big Bang, Abiogenesis, and Evolution
mark24
Member (Idle past 5195 days)
Posts: 3857
From: UK
Joined: 12-01-2001


Message 16 of 300 (419928)
09-05-2007 2:57 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by Ihategod
09-05-2007 2:21 PM


Re: Eye of the tiger
Vashgun,
It is a fairy tale, that if true would imply utter hopelessness. I choose to believe in good things instead of this disgusting theory.
The solution to poverty is not believing yourself rich.
There is no evidence of god, & there is evidence of the big bang. It never ceases to amaze me the lack of irony displayed by the religious when they insist what other people accept is a "fairy tale".
Mark
Edited by mark24, : No reason given.

There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Ihategod, posted 09-05-2007 2:21 PM Ihategod has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by Ihategod, posted 09-05-2007 4:56 PM mark24 has replied

molbiogirl
Member (Idle past 2641 days)
Posts: 1909
From: MO
Joined: 06-06-2007


Message 17 of 300 (419929)
09-05-2007 3:02 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by Ihategod
09-05-2007 2:21 PM


Just try it. What do you have to lose that you can take with you after your physical body dies?
A lifetime of sincere inquiry.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Ihategod, posted 09-05-2007 2:21 PM Ihategod has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by Ihategod, posted 09-05-2007 4:57 PM molbiogirl has not replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 18 of 300 (419930)
09-05-2007 3:20 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by Ihategod
09-05-2007 2:21 PM


Re: Eye of the tiger
Hi Vashgun,
"Evolutionist" is not a synonym for "atheist". Many evolutionists believe in God.
What evolutionists do not believe is a literal interpretation of Genesis. Rejecting a literal interpretation of Genesis is not a rejection of God.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Ihategod, posted 09-05-2007 2:21 PM Ihategod has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by Ihategod, posted 09-05-2007 4:58 PM Percy has replied

bluegenes
Member (Idle past 2477 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 19 of 300 (419931)
09-05-2007 3:24 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by Ihategod
09-05-2007 2:21 PM


Lack of Reason
Vashgun writes:
Faith. Unbending, unreasoning faith.
So you agree with many of us that the views you express here are without reason, then.
Good. Why the sudden honesty?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Ihategod, posted 09-05-2007 2:21 PM Ihategod has not replied

Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 20 of 300 (419934)
09-05-2007 3:35 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by Ihategod
09-05-2007 2:21 PM


Fallacy: appeal to consequences.
It is a fairy tale, that if true would imply utter hopelessness. I choose to believe in good things instead of this disgusting theory.
But hopelessness, good, and disgusting have nothing to do with being true or false, do they? Or are you admitting that creationists prefer to believe in a good fairy tale over a hopeless and disgusting reality?

I could tell you what I've read about evolution, the big-bang, super-universes, quantum foam, and all that stuff. Eventually you'd ask a question I can't answer, then I'd have to go look it up. Even If I had the time for that shit, in the end you'd ask a question science hasn't answered yet. So let's save time and skip ahead to "I don't know." -- jhuger

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Ihategod, posted 09-05-2007 2:21 PM Ihategod has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by Ihategod, posted 09-05-2007 5:02 PM Chiroptera has replied

Clark
Inactive Member


Message 21 of 300 (419938)
09-05-2007 4:15 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by Ihategod
09-05-2007 2:21 PM


Re: Eye of the tiger
Regarding the BB theory you say:
It is a fairy tale, that if true would imply utter hopelessness. I choose to believe in good things instead of this disgusting theory.
Are aware that the one of the orignators of the BB theory was a devout Christian (Lemaitre) and his ideas were strongly opposed by Spinozian pantheist (Einstein) and an atheist (Fred Hoyle)? Their opposition to the theory was, among other things, based on it sounding a bit too biblical. I'm not sure that it matters, just thought you might find it interesting.
quote:
The Big Bang is a scientific theory, and as such stands or falls by its agreement with observations. But as a theory which addresses, or at least seems to address, the origins of reality, it has always been entangled with theological and philosophical implications. In the 1920s and '30s almost every major cosmologist preferred an eternal universe, and several complained that the beginning of time implied by the Big Bang imported religious concepts into physics; this objection was later repeated by supporters of the steady state theory.[53] This perception was enhanced by the fact that the theory's inventor, Georges Lematre, was a Roman Catholic priest.
Big Bang - Wikipedia

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Ihategod, posted 09-05-2007 2:21 PM Ihategod has not replied

Ihategod
Member (Idle past 6030 days)
Posts: 235
Joined: 08-15-2007


Message 22 of 300 (419946)
09-05-2007 4:56 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by mark24
09-05-2007 2:57 PM


Re: Eye of the tiger
There is no evidence of god
Of course their is! Look around. People, earth, solar systems, etc...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by mark24, posted 09-05-2007 2:57 PM mark24 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by Dr Adequate, posted 09-05-2007 5:09 PM Ihategod has not replied
 Message 34 by mark24, posted 09-06-2007 8:53 AM Ihategod has not replied

Ihategod
Member (Idle past 6030 days)
Posts: 235
Joined: 08-15-2007


Message 23 of 300 (419948)
09-05-2007 4:57 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by molbiogirl
09-05-2007 3:02 PM



A lifetime of sincere inquiry.
Which gets you what when you roast in hell?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by molbiogirl, posted 09-05-2007 3:02 PM molbiogirl has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by mark24, posted 09-05-2007 5:20 PM Ihategod has not replied

Ihategod
Member (Idle past 6030 days)
Posts: 235
Joined: 08-15-2007


Message 24 of 300 (419949)
09-05-2007 4:58 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by Percy
09-05-2007 3:20 PM


Re: Eye of the tiger
Many evolutionists believe in God.
A sick retarded God perhaps.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Percy, posted 09-05-2007 3:20 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by crashfrog, posted 09-05-2007 5:11 PM Ihategod has replied
 Message 29 by Chiroptera, posted 09-05-2007 5:16 PM Ihategod has replied
 Message 32 by bluegenes, posted 09-05-2007 5:34 PM Ihategod has replied
 Message 33 by Percy, posted 09-06-2007 4:15 AM Ihategod has replied

Ihategod
Member (Idle past 6030 days)
Posts: 235
Joined: 08-15-2007


Message 25 of 300 (419950)
09-05-2007 5:02 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by Chiroptera
09-05-2007 3:35 PM


Re: Fallacy: appeal to consequences.
But hopelessness, good, and disgusting have nothing to do with being true or false, do they? Or are you admitting that creationists prefer to believe in a good fairy tale over a hopeless and disgusting reality?
If things like common descent and God were known, then there would be no debate. What is truth? What is reality? More metaphysical questions than could be observed through scientific thought.
Of course Creationists prefer their religion to meaninglessness!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Chiroptera, posted 09-05-2007 3:35 PM Chiroptera has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by Dr Adequate, posted 09-05-2007 5:13 PM Ihategod has not replied
 Message 30 by Chiroptera, posted 09-05-2007 5:17 PM Ihategod has not replied

Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 26 of 300 (419951)
09-05-2007 5:09 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by Ihategod
09-05-2007 4:56 PM


Re: Eye of the tiger
Of course their is! Look around. People, earth, solar systems, etc...
I should explain that the word "system" doesn't mean "thing created by a supernatural being" even if you write it in italics.
I'd explain what petitio principii means, too, but you seem to have got the hang of it on your own, carry on.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Ihategod, posted 09-05-2007 4:56 PM Ihategod has not replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 27 of 300 (419952)
09-05-2007 5:11 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by Ihategod
09-05-2007 4:58 PM


Re: Eye of the tiger
Vash, even the last two Popes have accepted the scientific model of evolution.
Are you saying that the Pope believes in a "sick, retarded God"?
The truth of the matter is that there is abundant, confirmatory evidence of common descent, and that the debate is over. It's over and done with! It was over in the 1800's. The only people who hang on to the failed ideas of creationism are the people who are too ignorant to know better or who have been brainwashed by religion.
The scientific debate on the issue has been over for two centuries. Creationists are simply stuck in 1799.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by Ihategod, posted 09-05-2007 4:58 PM Ihategod has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 35 by Ihategod, posted 09-06-2007 1:11 PM crashfrog has replied

Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 28 of 300 (419953)
09-05-2007 5:13 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by Ihategod
09-05-2007 5:02 PM


Re: Fallacy: appeal to consequences.
If things like common descent and God were known, then there would be no debate.
It doesn't follow. There are still people who argue that the Earth is flat. That doesn't mean that the answer to the question of the shape of the Earth is unknown per se --- it's just unknown to them.
Of course Creationists prefer their religion to meaninglessness!
Actually, you seem to have hit on an ingenious method of combining the two.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by Ihategod, posted 09-05-2007 5:02 PM Ihategod has not replied

Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 29 of 300 (419954)
09-05-2007 5:16 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by Ihategod
09-05-2007 4:58 PM


Re: Eye of the tiger
A sick retarded God perhaps.
You should read the books of Genesis, Exodus, and Joshua. Taking it all literally, it would appear that the fundamentalists worship a sick and retarded god.

I could tell you what I've read about evolution, the big-bang, super-universes, quantum foam, and all that stuff. Eventually you'd ask a question I can't answer, then I'd have to go look it up. Even If I had the time for that shit, in the end you'd ask a question science hasn't answered yet. So let's save time and skip ahead to "I don't know." -- jhuger

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by Ihategod, posted 09-05-2007 4:58 PM Ihategod has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by Ihategod, posted 09-06-2007 1:14 PM Chiroptera has not replied

Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 30 of 300 (419955)
09-05-2007 5:17 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by Ihategod
09-05-2007 5:02 PM


Re: Fallacy: appeal to consequences.
Of course Creationists prefer their religion to meaninglessness!
Meanless, much like your post. It doesn't address the point that I was making.

I could tell you what I've read about evolution, the big-bang, super-universes, quantum foam, and all that stuff. Eventually you'd ask a question I can't answer, then I'd have to go look it up. Even If I had the time for that shit, in the end you'd ask a question science hasn't answered yet. So let's save time and skip ahead to "I don't know." -- jhuger

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by Ihategod, posted 09-05-2007 5:02 PM Ihategod has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024