Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,816 Year: 3,073/9,624 Month: 918/1,588 Week: 101/223 Day: 12/17 Hour: 1/0


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 31 of 300 (419957)
09-05-2007 5:20 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by Ihategod
09-05-2007 4:57 PM


Re:
Vashgun,
Which gets you what when you roast in hell?
Interesting you make this argument. Given the religions which have a hell for unbelievers, religious people as a matter of probability should expect to go to some other gods hell.
So blind faith gets you what when you roast in someone elses hell?
Mark

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by Ihategod, posted 09-05-2007 4:57 PM Ihategod has not replied

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


Message 32 of 300 (419959)
09-05-2007 5:34 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by Ihategod
09-05-2007 4:58 PM


Sick God
Vashgun writes:
A sick retarded God perhaps.
You mean the kind of God that wants people stoned to death for working on a Sabbath or saying Goddammit? I agree with your description.
Which gets you what when you roast in hell?
Freedom from religious lunatics. It'll be heaven.

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 37 by Ihategod, posted 09-06-2007 1:16 PM bluegenes has not replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 33 of 300 (420086)
09-06-2007 4:15 AM
Reply to: Message 24 by Ihategod
09-05-2007 4:58 PM


Re: Eye of the tiger
Vashgun writes:
Many evolutionists believe in God.
A sick retarded God perhaps.
Aw, shucks! You mean I believe in the wrong God? Darn!
Your original point was that evolutionists are faux scientists motivated by a desire to deny God. But many evolutionists do believe in God, and so of course are not trying to deny him. It is only the literal inerrancy of a book written by men that they refuse to accept.
This thread is attempting to make clear that the Big Bang is a completely separate event from abiogenesis. Even if you don't accept the details of the views of modern science on this, we know that Genesis describes creation of the heaven and earth on day one and creation of the first life on day three, so you must acknowledge that even Biblically the origin of the universe and the origin of life were separate events.
--Percy
Edited by Percy, : Improve phrasing.

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 38 by Ihategod, posted 09-06-2007 1:18 PM Percy has not replied

mark24
Member (Idle past 5195 days)
Posts: 3857
From: UK
Joined: 12-01-2001


Message 34 of 300 (420102)
09-06-2007 8:53 AM
Reply to: Message 22 by Ihategod
09-05-2007 4:56 PM


Re: Eye of the tiger
Vashgun,
Of course their is! Look around. People, earth, solar systems, etc...
That's the phenomena you are trying to explain, it has no relevance as to whether god did it or they are naturally occurring.
There is no evidence of god, that's why your religion is called faith, not science.
Mark

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

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

Ihategod
Member (Idle past 6029 days)
Posts: 235
Joined: 08-15-2007


Message 35 of 300 (420161)
09-06-2007 1:11 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by crashfrog
09-05-2007 5:11 PM


Re: Eye of the tiger
Are you saying that the Pope believes in a "sick, retarded God"?
I would hardly call Satan a god, but the Pope definitely doesn't believe in the God is some parts of his book.
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.
:
You have the faith of the rock you think you came from.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by crashfrog, posted 09-05-2007 5:11 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by crashfrog, posted 09-06-2007 1:20 PM Ihategod has not replied

Ihategod
Member (Idle past 6029 days)
Posts: 235
Joined: 08-15-2007


Message 36 of 300 (420162)
09-06-2007 1:14 PM
Reply to: Message 29 by Chiroptera
09-05-2007 5:16 PM


Re: Eye of the tiger
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.
God owns people, God can kill people. It doesn't show a God as you described but more a God who doesn't like the current fallen state and puts much more stock in the true life as Jesus described.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by Chiroptera, posted 09-05-2007 5:16 PM Chiroptera has not replied

Ihategod
Member (Idle past 6029 days)
Posts: 235
Joined: 08-15-2007


Message 37 of 300 (420163)
09-06-2007 1:16 PM
Reply to: Message 32 by bluegenes
09-05-2007 5:34 PM


Re: Sick God
You mean the kind of God that wants people stoned to death for working on a Sabbath or saying Goddammit? I agree with your description.
You assume he likes it? Doubtful. If you have a pending messiah, savior of the world in the bullpen, you can't have the Jews furking cows now can you?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by bluegenes, posted 09-05-2007 5:34 PM bluegenes has not replied

Ihategod
Member (Idle past 6029 days)
Posts: 235
Joined: 08-15-2007


Message 38 of 300 (420164)
09-06-2007 1:18 PM
Reply to: Message 33 by Percy
09-06-2007 4:15 AM


Re: Eye of the tiger
Your original point was that evolutionists are faux scientists motivated by a desire to deny God. But many evolutionists do believe in God, and so of course are not trying to deny him. It is only the literal inerrancy of a book written by men that they refuse to accept.
Once you find a way to get rid of "god" by naturalistic means evolutionist thinkers will be free to make good on my claim. Too bad you just can't get life from non-life. Yes, the universe created itself, then "God" stepped in and when *poof* life, then he want back to his craps game.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by Percy, posted 09-06-2007 4:15 AM Percy has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by AdminNosy, posted 09-06-2007 1:23 PM Ihategod has not replied
 Message 41 by Admin, posted 09-06-2007 10:37 PM Ihategod has not replied

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


Message 39 of 300 (420165)
09-06-2007 1:20 PM
Reply to: Message 35 by Ihategod
09-06-2007 1:11 PM


Re: Eye of the tiger
You have the faith of the rock you think you came from.
I have no faith at all. I've seen the evidence, though, with my own two eyes.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by Ihategod, posted 09-06-2007 1:11 PM Ihategod has not replied

AdminNosy
Administrator
Posts: 4754
From: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Joined: 11-11-2003


Message 40 of 300 (420167)
09-06-2007 1:23 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by Ihategod
09-06-2007 1:18 PM


Vashgun with a 4 hour suspension
Since you seem to continue to be unable to stick to a topic and just have to rant I'm going to get you out of the discussion for a few hours.
Others are off topic too. Consider this a warning.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by Ihategod, posted 09-06-2007 1:18 PM Ihategod has not replied

Admin
Director
Posts: 12998
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 41 of 300 (420224)
09-06-2007 10:37 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by Ihategod
09-06-2007 1:18 PM


Re: Eye of the tiger
Hi Vashgun,
I never moderate in threads in which I'm a participant, but since you're already suspended I thought it might be helpful if I commented in my Admin persona.
There's really very little addressing the topic in your posts, and this seems to be your habit across most of your participation here. Nobody is perfect in their adherence to the Forum Guidelines, and moderators are accustomed to allowing lots of leeway in order to encourage a fun and freewheeling discussion, but there are limits. As more and more moderators become familiar with your style you'll experience longer and more frequent suspensions.
It's relatively easy to avoid suspension here. Most of what's required involves simply being fairly civil and staying on topic. We have three creationist moderators, AdminPhat, AdminBuzsaw and AdminNJ. You might try seeking them out for advice.

--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by Ihategod, posted 09-06-2007 1:18 PM Ihategod has not replied

Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 42 of 300 (420227)
09-06-2007 10:44 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by Percy
09-05-2007 10:22 AM


Re: Regarding The Really Hard Questions
Percy writes:
......BB is cosmology, evolution is biology......
I don't know if you noticed the preceeding paragraph where I used the phrase, "The BB advocate and the evolutionist advocate, as well as creationists........"
Then I got careless and combined the two inappropriately. I figured it was ok since most biological evolutionists go with BB cosmologically but I see that's not acceptable, so I'll try to remember to designate in future references.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Percy, posted 09-05-2007 10:22 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by Percy, posted 09-06-2007 11:34 PM Buzsaw has not replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 43 of 300 (420230)
09-06-2007 11:34 PM
Reply to: Message 42 by Buzsaw
09-06-2007 10:44 PM


Re: Regarding The Really Hard Questions
You're right that most people in science accept both evolution and the Big Bang, and other issues aside it isn't a problem assuming that someone who accepts one also accepts the other.
But creationists like Hovind create much confusion in their followers when they make it seem like scientists believe the Big Bang created the solar system with the sun, the earth and the other planets, shortly after which life began on earth.
The opening post asks, "Is abiogenesis always in direct relation with the Big Bang theory?" You may as well ask, "Is an iron mine in Colorado directly related to my Toyota Corolla?" This is the type of confusion that this thread is addressing.
The answer to both these questions is "No, not directly related, but there is a relationship of a sort since one follows the other, but by many, many steps and the passage of much time."
Certainly the Hovind claims, such as that the spin of the Big Bang could has an influence on the spin of the planets in our solar system, are just nonsense, and it creates many scientific misunderstandings about science among creationists since they look to people like Hovind for their science instead of to scientists.
Right or wrong, scientists will at least be honest about the views of science. People like Hovind will only lie about what science really believes in order to make it look as ridiculous as possible, and that's why this thread is here.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by Buzsaw, posted 09-06-2007 10:44 PM Buzsaw has not replied

Buckets
Junior Member (Idle past 5826 days)
Posts: 7
From: CA, USA
Joined: 08-27-2007


Message 44 of 300 (420437)
09-07-2007 8:24 PM


I think I must have worded my words in a misleading way. I know that these theories have almost nothing to do with eachother, and what I meant to ask was (for the first question about Big Bang/abiogenesis): If the Big Bang occurred, then how did life occur after it? Abiogenesis? Penspermia? What theories propose a non-religious view to the origin of life after the Big Bang (that are scientifically sound)?
For the 2nd question, if someone doesnt believe in God, then isn't it NECESSARY for one to support the Big Bang theory? Or are there other theories?
Lastly, is the Big Bang still valid?

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by Chiroptera, posted 09-07-2007 9:07 PM Buckets has not replied
 Message 46 by Percy, posted 09-08-2007 3:29 AM Buckets has replied
 Message 52 by Ihategod, posted 09-09-2007 12:18 AM Buckets has not replied

Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 45 of 300 (420445)
09-07-2007 9:07 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by Buckets
09-07-2007 8:24 PM


if someone doesnt believe in God, then isn't it NECESSARY for one to support the Big Bang theory?
Huh? No. Why? I don't think that most people, atheist or not, really care about the origins of the universe or its history, except for some science types and the few nutcakes that frequent fundamentalist churches.
In fact, if one really, really needed a theory that denied God, there was the Steady State Theory. In fact, Hoyle formulated the Steady State Theory because he (and others) felt that there was too much of an implication for a Creator.
But the reason that those who don't believe in God and those who do believe in God accept Big Bang is that is what the evidence shows. And that is the important thing -- the evidence. Without evidence, then those who don't believe in God (and presumably many who do believe in God) would simply answer, "I don't know," when asked about the origins or early history of the universe.
Incidentally, atheists don't need to believe abiogenesis or evolution, either.
Edited by Chiroptera, : edited the first paragraph: I didn't want anyone to think that I didn't care.

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 44 by Buckets, posted 09-07-2007 8:24 PM Buckets 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