For example I have learnt that for life to be possible you need DNA which contains the necessary information to make up a given living thing; RNA to transport the information and proteins to build the actual living thing. How can you possibly have all this much together without nobody making it happen? that is nonsense for me. How could the information in the DNA make itself? how could the chains of amino acids that form the proteins appear by accident and get it just right? you know the simple and weak explanation provided by evolutionary theory: "given enough time and opportunities anything is possible". I just don't buy it anymore
If you had any basic education at all you would know that abiogenesis deals with how life started and the theory of evolution deals with what happened to life after it started. Because of this above I don't think that you had any education at all. Therefore I don't buy it when you claim that you had an education.
The human brain contrary to what some of you say IS the most complex thing in the known universe and the vast majority of those brains (people) believe in some form of God, so why isn't that overwhelming majority taken seriously from a scientific point of view as 'evidence' for God?
Firstly, because an Argumentum ad populum is a very bad argument.
Secondly, I don't know why you would even try an Argumentum ad populum, because it works against you.
Only around 33% of the World population present themselves as being Christian. So, around 67% of the world population don't believe in your chosen God or Gods.
Around 50% of Christians are Catholic. This means that around 16.5% of the world population are Catholic. And around 16.5% of the world population are all those different Protestants, Eastern Orthodox, Greek Orthodox, etc. Muslims around 21% of the world population. Hindus around 13% of the world population . Non-religious people around 13% of the world population.
The country you live in, divermike1974, is not representative of the world population. Think before you write. An Argumentum ad populum doesn't work for you.
Actually, human brains exist and beliefs originate in the brain, therefore beliefs can be scientifically investigated; for example scans can be done on human brains to determine where beliefs originate from.
Gods can't be considered as scientific at all, because there's not even one bit of empirical, verifiable evidence for the existence of a Supernatural God or Gods.
I had a quick look at other parts (on 'cosmology', but not really on cosmology) written by Richard Deem (who's claimed to have an M in Microbiology). Doesn't bode well for his knowledge on Physics or Cosmology.
Maybe ViperAce should start a thread on it. I could learn from the people who know more than me on those subjects.
I'm still trying to get my head around many of the posts on Cosmology and Physics on the other thread mentioned. The Physics 1 I did years ago is not of too much help at all.
My fear is that it's just going to be the same regurgitated, yet totally unconvincing, arguments presented.
Reading books is a great way to learn. As a beginning.
Going to University and study the subject , then do some research, then publish it, where every specialist in the world can read it reject it or accept it, would be a lot better than just reading books and claiming that all those specialists are all wrong.