Is God Real

[Spaz The Great]

Aren't we going to fell stupid when we waste our entire life trying to figure out what the meaning of life is, just to end up finding out that the meaning of life..... Is to live?

Where did you find that answer?!?!?! GOOGLE DIDN'T TELL ME THAT!!! IT TOLD ME "M(L)=42" !!1!1111!!!!!

This man in an orange and black hazardous environment suit told me.

[Ryder Johnson]

o rlyz? i used teh msn and itz teh sed to goz to hellz and sucks satins *cough*

[Harwood Butcher]

o rlyz? i used teh msn and itz teh sed to goz to hellz and sucks satins *cough*

Well that was a useful bump...

Does anyone know when this whole thing is getting re-started?

[Spaz The Great]

I heard it actually malfunctioned when they attempted to launch it. Lucky, too, I say. Black holes are no where near controllable, nor are they anywhere near predictable. And they definitely are NOT safe. FFS, science, leave shit alone sometimes.

[laggynoob]

we're still here, thres still no fucking god and im still a fucking laggynoob(this is proof that there is no god).... what the fuck man im disappointed

[Harwood Butcher]

we're still here, thres still no fucking god and im still a fucking laggynoob(this is proof that there is no god).... what the fuck man im disappointed

...Wait...what proves that there is no God?

[Ultraussie]

we're still here, thres still no fucking god and im still a fucking laggynoob(this is proof that there is no god).... what the fuck man im disappointed

...Wait...what proves that there is no God?

Homer simpson on that episode of the simpsons where he gets a crayon out of his brain rofl.

[Hansui]

we're still here, thres still no fucking god and im still a fucking laggynoob(this is proof that there is no god).... what the fuck man im disappointed

...Wait...what proves that there is no God?

Homer simpson on that episode of the simpsons where he gets a crayon out of his brain rofl.

too bad you believe in Homer, therefore your reason is just really nonsense

did you got a crayon from your brain?

[ToonSkull]

The big bang theory is just a theory, like faith unless you were there you really don't know. Just like God, unless you have his phone number in your five, you don't know if he is real. It boils down to a matter of faith. Many things are just a matter of faith and points of view. Science is just another religion, you either believe in it or you don't. Science can't answer all the questions and anyone who thinks they have all the answers are just egotists. Personally I am insulted by anyone who thinks man evolved from the apes or that God made man evolve from an ape. It is the most racist theory I have ever heard. It puts my race at the top of the evolutionary scale and depicts that the Asian and African are less evolved. I have more respect for my fellow human beings than to believe in such a perverse idea. At the end of the day, this debate is moot because you cannot convince a person who has faith in God to abandon his faith and put his hands in science. Just as you cannot sway the opinion of the egotist who thinks he has all the answers. I have faith that there is intelligent design behind the universe. We are not some microscopic dust speck in a slow motion explosion.

[chris82]

Science is just another religion, you either believe in it or you don't.

Science is based on facts, religion is based on faith. They are in no way the same thing.

[Evolution] is the most racist theory I have ever heard. It puts my race at the top of the evolutionary scale and depicts that the Asian and African are less evolved.

[Harwood Butcher]

Science is based on facts, religion is based on faith. They are in no way the same thing.

Well that all depends on what you consider science. Are you talking about the equations or other things?

[MrLlamaLlama]

Science studies things that are demonstrably true ( like why climates change and shit ). Religion is pretty much word of mouth and what a bunch of dudes (apparently) wrote in a book.

[chris82]

Science is based on facts, religion is based on faith. They are in no way the same thing.

Well that all depends on what you consider science. Are you talking about the equations or other things?

I'm talking about science...the theories, laws, and postulates that govern the laws of the Universe.

The advancement of society to today's level...life-saving healthcare techniques, life-saving food and water treatment, waste management, instant worldwide communication, worldwide travel and beyond...it certainly didn't come out of thin air, did it?

[Harwood Butcher]

I'm talking about science...the theories, laws, and postulates that govern the laws of the Universe.

... What?

Science is based on facts, religion is based on faith. They are in no way the same thing.

We certainly don't know everything about the universe(I know you didn't claim that). Science is used to better understand our Universe, but is not entirely or maybe even nearly correct.

Postulates are considered assumptions in certain circumstances. A definition for "Postulate" is "to claim or assume the existence or truth of, esp. as a basis for reasoning or arguing." So a "postulate" is some what like faith...in a way.

Although, you could consider Newton's laws fact, but I would consider them the very basics of physics and they could be disproven at any point, just like religion.

I personally think science is just as proven as religion, although we could argue whether or not science could be considered a religion. A lot of scientist actually believe in a higher power that created our universe...so in that sence science can be viewed as a religion.

You have to remember, we created mathematics to better understand things. So we're using something we created to try and explain our universe and who's to say our way is correct?

Our universe is very complicated and I don't think we'll ever fully understand it. We might get really close...but never fully understand it.

Edited December 24, 2008 by Harwood Butcher

[chris82]

Although, you could consider Newton's laws fact, but I would consider them the very basics of physics and they could be disproven at any point, just like religion.

Yes, that's how science works, logical conclusions are drawn in the wake of supporting evidence and data. The atomic theory...a theory yes, but it produces tangible results (atom bomb) whereas blind faith in religion doesn't. The atomic theory and evolution aren't perfect theories, that doesn't make them wrong. In fact they produce actual results (Evolution isn't just a method of explaining where we came from, it explains the similarities and differences in creatures due to things such as analogous structures, divergent/convergent evolution, etc...), more than religion does.

we created mathematics

We discovered mathematics and have used it extensively but we didn't create it, math has existed as long as the universe. Math is a universal system. It doesn't matter if you're a human on Earth or some alien in bfn space, math will always produce the same results; those results may be expressed differently but they will be the same because math is a universal language of quantity.

[Harwood Butcher]

Yes, that's how science works, logical conclusions are drawn in the wake of supporting evidence and data. The atomic theory...a theory yes, but it produces tangible results (atom bomb) whereas blind faith in religion doesn't. The atomic theory and evolution aren't perfect theories, that doesn't make them wrong. In fact they produce actual results (Evolution isn't just a method of explaining where we came from, it explains the similarities and differences in creatures due to things such as analogous structures, divergent/convergent evolution, etc...), more than religion does.

So you’re saying as long as there is something that slightly proves something…that it could be considered fact?

Theories are ideas that we create to explain something and if you believe in theories then you have faith. People have faith in God, which you could consider a theory that hasn’t yet been proven with physical evidence, but people still have faith in God just like you have faith in the theory of evolution. Just because your theory has more “evidence” than there is evidence in God, doesn’t mean that you’re right and that doesn’t mean that I’m right. We both have different beliefs and neither is above the other.

Like I said before, a lot of scientists believe in a higher power, namely God. Even though that isn’t speaking for the entire scientific community, that still could cause science to be part of a religion.

Religion: “A set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe.”

We discovered mathematics and have used it extensively but we didn't create it, math has existed as long as the universe. Math is a universal system. It doesn't matter if you're a human on Earth or some alien in bfn space, math will always produce the same results; those results may be expressed differently but they will be the same because math is a universal language of quantity.

Math can’t be used to explain Newton’s Laws, but we apply them to the laws to make sense of them for ourselves. We can’t use math to explain the universe, but it could help us understand it better.

You're looking at what I said in a general sence and I’m not even gonna try to further explain what I was trying to say, because it’ll probably never be understood and I'll end up repeating myself.

[chris82]

Yes, that's how science works, logical conclusions are drawn in the wake of supporting evidence and data. The atomic theory...a theory yes, but it produces tangible results (atom bomb) whereas blind faith in religion doesn't. The atomic theory and evolution aren't perfect theories, that doesn't make them wrong. In fact they produce actual results (Evolution isn't just a method of explaining where we came from, it explains the similarities and differences in creatures due to things such as analogous structures, divergent/convergent evolution, etc...), more than religion does.

So you’re saying as long as there is something that slightly proves something…that it could be considered fact?

Theories are ideas that we create to explain something and if you believe in theories then you have faith. People have faith in God, which you could consider a theory that hasn’t yet been proven with physical evidence, but people still have faith in God just like you have faith in the theory of evolution.

Slightly proves something...the atomic theory effectively proved that matter is composed to atoms and this is evidenced by a nuclear bomb. Religion proves...nothing and is evidenced by...nothing. Believing in a theory =/= having faith in religion. To be considered a scientific theory there needs to be supporting evidence. To believe in God you need faith, by definition faith is something you believe in without a way to prove it's correct.

I don't have faith in Evolution because I don't have to, it's scientifically proven to be true.

[Harwood Butcher]

"Ignore contradicting evidence"? What evidence?

[Mpilk901]

Haha thats pretty true...

I don't believe in religion but I don't necessarily bother arguing with those who do, they can believe what they want.

[Slyde]

"Ignore contradicting evidence"? What evidence?

Just because your theory has more “evidence” than there is evidence in God, doesn’t mean that you’re right and that doesn’t mean that I’m right. We both have different beliefs and neither is above the other.

BOLD: What?

Italic: If something actually has evidence (ALOT) it proves that you are wrong. Might not prove me 100% correct but it proves you wrong.

Example - Earth is (ALOT) older than a few thousand years old, meaning Christianity was wrong. And you think it's a theory? Prove it WRONG.

Why I'm right? Dinosaurs, rivers, lakes, continental drift, mountains, volcanoes, etc..(They take a long time to create)

And there is no such thing as faith in evolution. Its here, there and everywhere. Not called faith if we see it everyday.

[ToonSkull]

Science is just another religion, you either believe in it or you don't.

Science is based on facts, religion is based on faith. They are in no way the same thing.

Facts as you know them. But if you cannot trust your senses then science is the faith of your 5 senses. Five senses that according to anyone with faith in God, God created and controlls your 5 senses. According to science itself you are supposed to not trust your senses because they can be "mislead" such as UFO sightings. Think about the talk Morpheus gave Neo when explaining the "Matrix" to him. "What is real?". According to the Christian faith Jesus walked on water and so did his buddy Peter. Science says phsyically impossible unless the water was frozen. So in the mind of the truly faithful science has nothing to do with reality it is just the magicians curtain.

[Evolution] is the most racist theory I have ever heard. It puts my race at the top of the evolutionary scale and depicts that the Asian and African are less evolved.

Exactly my point.

[chris82]

Facts as you know them. But if you cannot trust your senses then science is the faith of your 5 senses. Five senses that according to anyone with faith in God, God created and controlls your 5 senses. According to science itself you are supposed to not trust your senses because they can be "mislead" such as UFO sightings.

What? Where exactly does science say not to trust your senses? You NEED your senses to make scientific observations, IT'S PART OF THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD. Also I don't know what Bible you've been reading but it certainly does not claim that God controls you or your senses. Even if you are a born-again Christian you still have free will. According to God, it's up to you what you do with it.

According to the Christian faith Jesus walked on water and so did his buddy Peter. Science says phsyically impossible unless the water was frozen. So in the mind of the truly faithful science has nothing to do with reality it is just the magicians curtain.

Yes it is physically impossible. Now, which is more believable? Believing it is provably physically impossible to walk on water which you can see today? Or to believe that a cosmic Jewish zombie who was his own father could walk on water according to an ancient text?

And another thing, I'm sick of people saying Evolution is a racist theory. Social Darwinism, a 19th century-era theory which was NOT conceived by Darwin but by a Whig supporter, Herbert Spencer, is what you're referring to. Social Darwinism is a mis-construed perspective on "Survival of the Fittest." Evolution and Atheism =/= Social Darwinism.

[Harwood Butcher]

"Ignore contradicting evidence"? What evidence?

Just because your theory has more “evidence” than there is evidence in God, doesn’t mean that you’re right and that doesn’t mean that I’m right. We both have different beliefs and neither is above the other.

BOLD: What?

One thing having more evidence than another doesn't mean that the one with more evidence disproves the one with less evidence.

Italic: If something actually has evidence (ALOT) it proves that you are wrong. Might not prove me 100% correct but it proves you wrong.

So if I ate a banana 5 minutes ago and had it on video and you ate an apple 5 minutes ago when you were alone...that means I have more evidence that I ate a banana over the evidence that you ate an apple, which means you didn't actually eat an apple?

I'm asking what the evidence is that I'm apparently ignoring.

[ToonSkull]

Facts as you know them. But if you cannot trust your senses then science is the faith of your 5 senses. Five senses that according to anyone with faith in God, God created and controlls your 5 senses. According to science itself you are supposed to not trust your senses because they can be "mislead" such as UFO sightings.

What? Where exactly does science say not to trust your senses? You NEED your senses to make scientific observations, IT'S PART OF THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD. Also I don't know what Bible you've been reading but it certainly does not claim that God controls you or your senses. Even if you are a born-again Christian you still have free will. According to God, it's up to you what you do with it.

As I said in my first post this debate is pointless -moot- because I cannot convince you ---a person of science--- that the universe is not what it seems. And you cannot convince me ---a person of faith--- that science has all the answers and I should abandon my faith and follow science. Watch the Discovery channel sometime on UFO's they will tell you that all UFO sightings are people who are seeing what they want to see and the five senses cannot be trusted. So I tell you if you cannot trust one sense how can you trust all 5? I know that if I get hurt I bleed and feel pain. But do I or is that an illusion of what I expect to happen? I don't know where you get that "born again Chirstian crap" we are only born here on Earth you are born again when you die. I am not dead yet that I am aware of...

Some faiths ---if you study--- believe you are predestined to follow your path in life. Others believe you have free will. While I believe it is your destiny to follow your free will.

According to the Christian faith Jesus walked on water and so did his buddy Peter. Science says phsyically impossible unless the water was frozen. So in the mind of the truly faithful science has nothing to do with reality it is just the magicians curtain.

Yes it is physically impossible. Now, which is more believable? Believing it is provably physically impossible to walk on water which you can see today? Or to believe that a cosmic Jewish zombie who was his own father could walk on water according to an ancient text?

And another thing, I'm sick of people saying Evolution is a racist theory. Social Darwinism, a 19th century-era theory which was NOT conceived by Darwin but by a Whig supporter, Herbert Spencer, is what you're referring to. Social Darwinism is a mis-construed perspective on "Survival of the Fittest." Evolution and Atheism =/= Social Darwinism.

Evolution is another belief system pure and simple. I know the arguments as well as you do. If I believed as you do I would be the most dangerous creature on the planet. If this is all I get: 75 or 95 years on this planet, with no afterlife, no punishment or rewards, and nothing but nonexistance after death. I would start killing today when I want, eating humans ---they are just another meat source--- , raping and stealing what I want or need to keep myself happy for the short time I live because once it is said and done they can only kill me once. Right? You don't have to answer that because I know you are going to say that mankind has higher morals than the animal kingdom we are not lions in a jungle. But if that were true, I wouldn't see the sick unmoral pornography in my email, I wouldn't be reading the horrible unmoral hoaxes and the perveted minds of men. My moral code like many others is based on punishment of what God can do - not punishment of what man can do. Fear the day that anyone teaches this 14 year old boy otherwise.

HAVE FUN!

[chris82]

So if I ate a banana 5 minutes ago and had it on video and you ate an apple 5 minutes ago when you were alone...that means I have more evidence that I ate a banana over the evidence that you ate an apple, which means you didn't actually eat an apple?

I'm asking what the evidence is that I'm apparently ignoring.

The fact that you ate the apple can be proved or dis-proved by a scientific analysis of your stomach.

I don't know where you get that "born again Chirstian crap" we are only born here on Earth you are born again when you die. I am not dead yet that I am aware of...

Christians (of most denominations) believe that when you ask Jesus to come into your life and save you, you are effectively "born again" with a soul free of the sin you "inherited" from Adam and Eve.

Evolution is another belief system pure and simple. I know the arguments as well as you do. If I believed as you do I would be the most dangerous creature on the planet. If this is all I get: 75 or 95 years on this planet, with no afterlife, no punishment or rewards, and nothing but nonexistance after death. I would start killing today when I want, eating humans ---they are just another meat source--- , raping and stealing what I want or need to keep myself happy for the short time I live because once it is said and done they can only kill me once. Right? You don't have to answer that because I know you are going to say that mankind has higher morals than the animal kingdom we are not lions in a jungle. But if that were true, I wouldn't see the sick unmoral pornography in my email, I wouldn't be reading the horrible unmoral hoaxes and the perveted minds of men. My moral code like many others is based on punishment of what God can do - not punishment of what man can do. Fear the day that anyone teaches this 14 year old boy otherwise.

No, you wouldn't go raping and killing your whole life because eventually you would get fucked up by the police. By your logic, we should use an all-powerful being which will make you suffer forever if you don't please him even though we loves you and doesn't want to hurt you. Hypocritical, no? That's saying we should live righteous lives not out of kindness, but out of fear of what will happen to us. Mankind is horrible; we lie, steal, cheat, and step on others for personal gain. It always has and always will be that way because it's our nature. That's why the rule of law is necessitated, to protect the natural rights of people. That's why Anarchy doesn't work, even if there wasn't a government and everyone was a Christian, people would still be killed and raped and whatnot. Just look at those Godfearing Catholic pedophiles. I'm sure they're really concerned what will happen to them after they die. We sacrifice some of our liberty to the government for protection. If the French Revolution taught us anything, that's it. Not saying I don't like our government currently but having a government is undoubtedly necessary.

Nature is neither kind nor cruel, but indifferent.