PRO

Where Your Ideas can change Minds

Please visit our new forum at

http://www.4forums.com

CON


YouDebate.com Forum
» back to YouDebate.com
Register | Profile | Log In | Lost Password | Active Users | Help | Board Rules | Search | FAQ |
Custom Search
» You are not logged in.   log in | register

  YouDebate.com Forum
   Creationism vs Evolution Debates
     Who made God?
       The creator of the creator

Topic Jump
« Back | Next »
Multiple pages for this topic [ 1 2 ]
Forum moderated by: admin
    

    
ProEvo

|     |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

If there is a God, then surely he has a creator. Just as creationists say that life could not have started out of nothing, then how did God come to be out of nothing? Does God have a creator? Im interested in what the creationists views are on the subject.
 


Posts: 49 | Posted: 7:28 PM on August 11, 2007 | IP
creationest6

|      |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

He never was created. he has been around forvever.


-------
"If God wanted us to be concerned for the plight of toads, he would have made them cute and fluffy."

-Dave Barry
 


Posts: 451 | Posted: 8:08 PM on August 11, 2007 | IP
ProEvo

|     |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

"He never was created. he has been around forvever"

Really, wow. So he appeared out of nothing? (I am assigning God here as a male). How is that possible? Sure he was designed intelligently?
 


Posts: 49 | Posted: 8:19 PM on August 11, 2007 | IP
creationest6

|      |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

nope. ask any creationest/christian. he was never created. he has been around forever


-------
"If God wanted us to be concerned for the plight of toads, he would have made them cute and fluffy."

-Dave Barry
 


Posts: 451 | Posted: 8:24 PM on August 11, 2007 | IP
ProEvo

|     |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

How is that possible?
 


Posts: 49 | Posted: 8:33 PM on August 11, 2007 | IP
creationest6

|      |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

it isnt possible for us, and it isnt possible for us to understand. but all things are possible with god.


-------
"If God wanted us to be concerned for the plight of toads, he would have made them cute and fluffy."

-Dave Barry
 


Posts: 451 | Posted: 9:37 PM on August 11, 2007 | IP
ProEvo

|     |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Thats just too convenient. So how do we know if its only one god?
 


Posts: 49 | Posted: 9:55 PM on August 11, 2007 | IP
creationest6

|      |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

because that is clearly stated by all christians


-------
"If God wanted us to be concerned for the plight of toads, he would have made them cute and fluffy."

-Dave Barry
 


Posts: 451 | Posted: 10:14 PM on August 11, 2007 | IP
Demon38

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

because that is clearly stated by all christians

You've demonstrated that christians are frequently wrong, why should we believe you now?
 


Posts: 1664 | Posted: 10:06 PM on August 17, 2007 | IP
superman1575

|      |       Report Post




Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
+1

Rate this post:

haha. Wow, because we christians have faith in somthing does not make that true for others.
Personally, i dont think that anyone will ever be able to answer that question. But as scientist say, time is a property of the universe and therefore before the "big bang" time did not exist. So to say that he has been around forever really just means before the big bang. I belive God exist outside our universe and set things in motion, and that his conciousness has existed forever, or at least since the big bang. If there were another creator before the big bang who created this god now, he would not matter.


-------
Fight the battles that need to be fought.
 


Posts: 6 | Posted: 12:52 AM on August 30, 2007 | IP
Architect

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

The Flying Spaghetti Monster created God to test our faith.
 


Posts: 6 | Posted: 05:47 AM on September 2, 2007 | IP
creationest6

|      |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

ha ha ha.


-------
"If God wanted us to be concerned for the plight of toads, he would have made them cute and fluffy."

-Dave Barry
 


Posts: 451 | Posted: 09:35 AM on September 2, 2007 | IP
Dino

|      |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

The question you ask is flud because you are asuming that god is affected by time space and matter but he is outside of that and he is not effect by time. it is like a computer the creater of the computer is outside of it he is not affected by the computer.


-------
Dr. dino
 


Posts: 3 | Posted: 9:47 PM on March 11, 2008 | IP
EntwickelnCollin

|        |       Report Post



Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from Dino at 9:47 PM on March 11, 2008 :
The question you ask is flud because you are asuming that god is affected by time space and matter but he is outside of that and he is not effect by time. it is like a computer the creater of the computer is outside of it he is not affected by the computer.


That's very nice, but being outside of the computer's reach doesn't mean our own existence wasn't caused by something else. We made the computer, and sex made us. God made the universe, and something made him. Where's the problem?



-------
http://ummcash.org/officers.html
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2007/08/wow_1.php
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2007/08/a_triumphant_beginning.php
We're official!
 


Posts: 729 | Posted: 12:32 PM on March 12, 2008 | IP
forfunt1

|      |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

God is an artifact of consciousness.


-------
-yo
 


Posts: 163 | Posted: 8:50 PM on March 14, 2008 | IP
Ethmi

|     |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

What, is it a crime to believe in God?  Are you so stuck up as to tell us we can't worship?  Do you have a burning hatred against Christians, Jews, or Muslims?  Who do you think you are?  Why do you hate us?  Is your own life bitter?  Do you have to demean us to make yourself feel better?  


-------
I like Swedish women.
 


Posts: 68 | Posted: 7:55 PM on March 17, 2008 | IP
Demon38

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

It's not a crime to believe in any silly thing.  You want to believe in God, go ahead, hope it makes you happy.  But don't force your superstitions, like creationism, on the rest of us.
 


Posts: 1664 | Posted: 8:49 PM on March 17, 2008 | IP
brutus2001x

|      |       Report Post



Junior Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Okay, God doesn't exist, he was never created, because, indeed, he never did.

First law of thermodynamics - mass-energy can neither be created nor destroyed...


God is not REAL.  

Faith is for fools
 


Posts: 15 | Posted: 8:49 PM on March 17, 2008 | IP
orion

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I think the real debate here is not about God, but whether Creationism should be taught in a science class in public schools.

Evolution doesn't rule out God.  There are plenty of people who have no problem believing in both evolution and God.  The problem occurs when some fundamentalists try to pass on Creationism as an alternative scientific theory to evolution.  The problem with this is that Creationism depends on a supernatural being (God) to create the world.  That is outside the ability of science to prove or disprove.  Therefore Creationism is outside the scope of scientific process/method, and that's why it cannot be considered science.  And that's why it shouldn't be taught in a science classroom.  Philosophy or religious studies - yes.  Science - NO.

Creationism should not be passed off as a science.  It's okay if you want to believe it as an alternative to evolution.  But don't call Creationism science.  It's not science, and cannot be conducted as a science.  

By the same token, science shouldn't be taught in church.  That's why religion and science are considered two different things.  Science is based on reason.  Religion is based on faith.  Those are two different things.

Evolution, on the other hand, lends itself nicely to testing by the scientific method.  Like it or not, it is the best SCIENTIFIC theory developed thus far that explains life as we see it on earth today.  

Evolution has nothing to say about whether God exists or not.  As I mentioned earlier, plenty of people (including many scientists) believe in both God and evolution.


 


Posts: 1460 | Posted: 1:41 PM on March 18, 2008 | IP
Ethmi

|     |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from brutus2001x at 8:49 PM on March 17, 2008 :

Okay, God doesn't exist, he was never created, because, indeed, he never did.

First law of thermodynamics - mass-energy can neither be created nor destroyed...


God is not REAL. 

Faith is for fools



That's the same bigotry that I'm talking about!


-------
I like Swedish women.
 


Posts: 68 | Posted: 9:14 PM on March 22, 2008 | IP
Demon38

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

That's the same bigotry that I'm talking about!

I don't think this is bigotry, it's what brutus2001x believes.  You believe, he doesn't.
Does that make you bigotted because you believe in God?
 


Posts: 1664 | Posted: 03:50 AM on March 25, 2008 | IP
Phearful

|     |       Report Post




Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from Ethmi at 2:55 PM on March 17, 2008 :
What, is it a crime to believe in God?  Are you so stuck up as to tell us we can't worship?  Do you have a burning hatred against Christians, Jews, or Muslims?  Who do you think you are?  Why do you hate us?  Is your own life bitter?  Do you have to demean us to make yourself feel better?  


I have no hatred of religious folk, if it is in your mind that you need to set your belief system upon the assumpion of some supreme ethereal being that knows all, sees all, and judges all, then by all means, do so.  The problem I have with religious folk (primarily Christians, who are most notorious for this in my area) is the need to spread and convert people to believe in their God.  The problem there is that these people complain that we non-religious people attack their belief system by trying to disprove God, but in that same hand, they turn around and force their own beliefs onto as many people as they can.  It says in each individual religious text that it's worshipers should go forth and spread their beliefs, but then these people complain that we, those whom do not believe in God/a creator, should not try to influence others with our "myth" of evolution.



 


Posts: 3 | Posted: 3:13 PM on March 27, 2008 | IP
DiggzDime

|     |       Report Post




Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from creationest6 at 8:24 PM on August 11, 2007 :
nope. ask any creationest/christian. he was never created. he has been around forever



Why was it a Christian God? Why not a Buddahist God...or the flying spaghetti monster?

If were just going to assume then we can assume anything right?

I believe that there is no God of our world. I believe our world was created by a race of space aliens on a galaxy far far far far away as some alien kids science assignment.

And since my theory cant be proved or dissproved. This is what happened.




-------
Yes!
 


Posts: 7 | Posted: 6:35 PM on November 20, 2008 | IP
wisp

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

As for God being created, it makes no sense. For God, by definition, is outside of time.

Thus the question of why didn't He create the Earth earlier also makes no sense.

Non in tempore, sed cum tempore Deus creavit caela et terram.
Saint August said it. It means "Not in time but with time God created Heavens and Earth."

Which is pretty smart, for a creationist. xD

Since we've lost all creationist in this forum, perhaps i should play one. Or perhaps we should recruit.



-------
Quote from Lester10 at 2:51 PM on September 21, 2010 in the thread
Scientists assert (by Lester):

Ha Ha. (...) I've told you people endlessly about my evidence but you don't want to show me yours - you just assert.
porkchop
Would we see a mammal by the water's edge "suddenly" start breathing underwater(w/camera effect of course)?
Contact me at youdebate.1wr@gishpuppy.com
 


Posts: 3037 | Posted: 05:54 AM on November 21, 2008 | IP
oct08

|     |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

That's an infinite regress if you answer who created the creator then who created him. And what about evolution what came before the big bang and what came before that. Basically their is no answer we can fully understand.
 


Posts: 44 | Posted: 9:11 PM on December 21, 2008 | IP
Demon38

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

That's an infinite regress if you answer who created the creator then who created him.

Yeah, so God isn't a good explaination for the begining of everything.

And what about evolution what came before the big bang and what came before that.

What does evolution have to do with the Big Bang????  When Life arises and it's an imperfect replicator, that's when evolution begins.

Basically their is no answer we can fully understand.

Yet!  Ever bother doing any research on string theory or m-brane theory?  Or do you just throw up your hands and say "
goddidit!  There are physicists actively trying to find answers to your questions.  
 


Posts: 1664 | Posted: 01:26 AM on December 22, 2008 | IP
oct08

|     |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

All I'm saying is what made the first cell then what made that.
 


Posts: 44 | Posted: 12:26 PM on December 22, 2008 | IP
tonechild

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

How was the first cell made?  Good question, I would recommend you get a book that introduces biology.  You can find one at the library, or take a 7th grade Science class.  Once you have a keen understanding of what cells are made of, it it is by far easier to understand and come up with even your own hypothesis on how the first cell could have been made.  There are theories out there, one of which is widely accepted in the scientific community.  I believe it's called abiogenesis - but it is by far harder to grasp abiogensis if you do not understand what cells are even made up of and how closely related cells of all life are to each other.
 


Posts: 8 | Posted: 1:24 PM on December 22, 2008 | IP
tonechild

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
-1

Rate this post:

"If there is a God, then surely he has a creator. Just as creationists say that life could not have started out of nothing, then how did God come to be out of nothing? Does God have a creator? Im interested in what the creationists views are on the subject."

This one is simple: God is outside of space and time, thus he does not need a creator.  

(Edited by tonechild 12/22/2008 at 1:33 PM).
 


Posts: 8 | Posted: 1:31 PM on December 22, 2008 | IP
oct08

|     |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
-1

Rate this post:

I was just trying to make a point. And as for your question about who made God, couldn't I ask the same thing about abiogenesis.
 


Posts: 44 | Posted: 8:32 PM on December 22, 2008 | IP
Demon38

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
-1

Rate this post:

All I'm saying is what made the first cell then what made that.

The first life arose from natural, chemical, physical processes, that's what all the evidence points to.  As to what made those natural processes, they could of started with the Big Bang or even operated before the Big Bang.  What's your point?  Just because we don't know exactly how the universe came about, evolution can't be true???   I guess that applies to other sciences also, right?  Just because we don't know how the universe came about, chemistry can't be true, after all, we don't know where the elements came from, so we can't know how they'll react with each other...Seems kind of silly, doesn't it.
 


Posts: 1664 | Posted: 9:37 PM on December 22, 2008 | IP
oct08

|     |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
-1

Rate this post:

Quote from Demon38 at 9:37 PM on December 22, 2008 :
All I'm saying is what made the first cell then what made that.

The first life arose from natural, chemical, physical processes, that's what all the evidence points to.  As to what made those natural processes, they could of started with the Big Bang or even operated before the Big Bang.  What's your point?  Just because we don't know exactly how the universe came about, evolution can't be true???   I guess that applies to other sciences also, right?  Just because we don't know how the universe came about, chemistry can't be true, after all, we don't know where the elements came from, so we can't know how they'll react with each other...Seems kind of silly, doesn't it.


My statement in no way disproves evolution all I'm saying is that just as I have no definite answer for the beginning of God you have no definite answer either for creation of time



 


Posts: 44 | Posted: 9:47 PM on December 22, 2008 | IP
Demon38

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
-1

Rate this post:

I have no definite answer for the beginning of God you have no definite answer either for creation of time

No definitive answer, but a lot of theories.  Like I said, look up string theory, m-brane theory, read Steven Hawking.  Until you understand these theories, you can't argue intelligently about the subject.
 


Posts: 1664 | Posted: 10:18 PM on December 22, 2008 | IP
wisp

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
-1

Rate this post:

And yet it doesn't matter to evolution.

Even if we all looked at time and concluded "Goddidit", that wouldn't add anything to "Creationism vs Evolution" (Young Earth Creationism, of course).


(Edited by wisp 12/23/2008 at 12:35 AM).


-------
Quote from Lester10 at 2:51 PM on September 21, 2010 in the thread
Scientists assert (by Lester):

Ha Ha. (...) I've told you people endlessly about my evidence but you don't want to show me yours - you just assert.
porkchop
Would we see a mammal by the water's edge "suddenly" start breathing underwater(w/camera effect of course)?
Contact me at youdebate.1wr@gishpuppy.com
 


Posts: 3037 | Posted: 12:35 AM on December 23, 2008 | IP
Demon38

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
-1

Rate this post:

You're absolutely correct, wisp.  The evidence for the theory of evolution is overwhelming.
If God created the universe, doesn't matter, evolution is still valid.  If God created the first life, doesn't matter, evolution is valid.  
Go where the DATA leads!
 


Posts: 1664 | Posted: 02:33 AM on December 23, 2008 | IP
wisp

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
-1

Rate this post:

Quote from oct08 at 6:47 PM on December 22, 2008 :
My statement in no way disproves evolution all I'm saying is that just as I have no definite answer for the beginning of God you have no definite answer either for creation of time
Oh, he was aware of it...

It's actually kind of unfair to Bible-Literalists/Young-Earth-Creationists that we can attack pretty much any part of the bible (because if any part is wrong, it can't be God-made, which brings Bible literalism down).

It works only one way:
·If somehow anyone was able to prove the Big Bang, Young Earth Creationism is over (well, they just wouldn't accept it, just like the evidence for Evolution, but bear with me).
·If someone proved God puffed the Universe into existence (not that such thing could happen, but bear with me) Evolution would still be valid.

But their "advantage" is that they don't have ONE theory, but a lot. If one gets refuted they can just go to the next.

But then our "advantage" is that our theory can't get refuted, and all of theirs can (some by evidence, some by logic).



-------
Quote from Lester10 at 2:51 PM on September 21, 2010 in the thread
Scientists assert (by Lester):

Ha Ha. (...) I've told you people endlessly about my evidence but you don't want to show me yours - you just assert.
porkchop
Would we see a mammal by the water's edge "suddenly" start breathing underwater(w/camera effect of course)?
Contact me at youdebate.1wr@gishpuppy.com
 


Posts: 3037 | Posted: 08:36 AM on December 23, 2008 | IP
flippo

|     |       Report Post




Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
-1

Rate this post:

Quote from creationest6 at 8:24 PM on August 11, 2007 :
nope. ask any creationest/christian. he was never created. he has been around forever



So if that's possible (i.e. a complex being having existed forever), then why not have a complex universe with complex laws having existed forever?  There seems to be no need for God, then.


 


Posts: 14 | Posted: 04:23 AM on January 18, 2009 | IP
JSF16

|       |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
-1

Rate this post:

If there is no god, we would not be alive. Like wisp said, use logic. If our planet was 1 degree closer to the sun, we would be burned to crisp. 1 degree farther, we would freeze. We are at a perfect axis tilt to have four seasons, we have the right, just right atmospheric gas combination to breathe. If we had a little more oxygen, the earth would actually burst into flames. A little less oxygen, we would suffocate. If earth was smaller, we could not have an atmosphere. If we were bigger, the gravity would make everything much to difficult to move. And you say it was by chance? Please, use logic.


-------
Everyone says expect the unexpected, but since now everyone expects the unexpected, the unexpected is now the expected and the expected is the unexpected. So if you are expecting the unexpected, you are actually expecting the expected, so if you start expecting the expected, you will be expecting the unexpected. So everyone should start expecting the expected again and the expected will be expected and the unexpected will be unexpected again, then we can start expecting the unexpected again.
 


Posts: 103 | Posted: 5:21 PM on January 23, 2009 | IP
Demon38

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
-1

Rate this post:

If there is no god, we would not be
alive.


Baseless claim, which you can't logically support.

If our planet was 1 degree closer to the sun, we would be burned to crisp. 1 degree farther, we would freeze.

The earth orbits between 91 million miles and 94 milion miles, how many degrees is 4 million miles????  Kind of kills your argument!

And you say it was by chance? Please, use logic.

You first!  Haven't seen you use any logic yet!  It doesn't matter what the position of the earth is.  It was here first.  We evolved to live on what was already here.  Still no evidence that it was intellegently created and much evidence that it was not.  Your claim is wrong.
 


Posts: 1664 | Posted: 11:17 PM on January 23, 2009 | IP
orion

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
-1

Rate this post:

JSF16 writes -
If there is no god, we would not be alive. Like wisp said, use logic. If our planet was 1 degree closer to the sun, we would be burned to crisp. 1 degree farther, we would freeze. We are at a perfect axis tilt to have four seasons, we have the right, just right atmospheric gas combination to breathe. If we had a little more oxygen, the earth would actually burst into flames. A little less oxygen, we would suffocate. If earth was smaller, we could not have an atmosphere. If we were bigger, the gravity would make everything much to difficult to move. And you say it was by chance? Please, use logic.


Fortunately science does not use your logic!

Earth’s habitable zone:
Life on earth is found in a wide range of environments, ranging from -70 C in Antarctica to hydrothermal vents at 113 C.  The Goldilocks zone (habitable zone) for the earth is surely wider than the narrow range that you specify.  Keep in mind that the earth’s climate and global temperatures have varied quite a bit over the past 4.5 billion years, and life has persisted.

Consider:  Evidence is accumulating with the increasing discoveries of exosolar planets that planet formation must be a fairly common occurrence when a star forms.  This is not to say that there are planets around every star, but the evidence points to the fact that the universe must have countless number of planets.  Given this, there must be numerous planets within our very own galaxy alone that lie within their star’s habitable zone – that area in which liquid water can exist.  

And liquid water surely existed on Mars in the distant past.  What if Mars had been larger and and retained more of its atmosphere and retained a liquid water environment?  Jupiter's moon, Ganymede may even have liquid water beneath a surface of ice.  

Do not develop a bias that life can only survive on a planet exactly like our own.

Atmospheric Oxygen:
Life on earth surely evolved without the benefit of oxygen in the atmosphere.  For some microbes oxygen is poisonous.  It was the evolving life on earth (the cyanobacteria) that released oxygen through photosynthesis.  Volcanism also played a part in the oxygenation of the earth’s atmosphere beginning 2.4 billion years ago according to recent studies.

Volcanoes key to Earth's Atmosphere

During the Paleozoic (about 300 million years ago) there were giant insects - dragonflies with 2 1/2 foot wingspans, ro example - the earth's atmosphere had an oxygen content of about 35 %.  Apparently insects trachael system that carries oxygen through their bodies is a limiting factor for the smaller insect size in today's oxygen atmosphere of 21%.  But the richer oxygen atmosphere of the Paleozoic allowed the evolution of giant insects.

Giant Insects and Earths Oxygen Rich Atmosphere

By chance?  No - by evolution.  

 


Posts: 1460 | Posted: 11:28 PM on January 23, 2009 | IP
flippo

|     |       Report Post




Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
-1

Rate this post:

Quote from JSF16 at 5:21 PM on January 23, 2009 :
If there is no god, we would not be alive. Like wisp said, use logic. If our planet was 1 degree closer to the sun, we would be burned to crisp. 1 degree farther, we would freeze. We are at a perfect axis tilt to have four seasons, we have the right, just right atmospheric gas combination to breathe. If we had a little more oxygen, the earth would actually burst into flames. A little less oxygen, we would suffocate. If earth was smaller, we could not have an atmosphere. If we were bigger, the gravity would make everything much to difficult to move. And you say it was by chance? Please, use logic.



Define:  1 degree closer.   Degrees are a measure of either temperature or angles, not distance.

Life on our planet is adapted to it's current climate.  Plenty of bacterial life forms can live at extremes of heat (up to 112 degrees Celsius) or cold (some have been found in water pockets in deep ice, at temperatures well below -40).  As long as there is some liquid water, there's probably plenty of organisms that can survive.  

This drastically increases the number of sun-earth constellations that can support life.  Humans are not the only life forms, you know.


 


Posts: 14 | Posted: 10:39 PM on January 27, 2009 | IP
wisp

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
-1

Rate this post:

Quote from JSF16 at 8:21 PM on January 23, 2009 :
If there is no god, we would not be alive. Like wisp said, use logic. If our planet was 1 degree closer to the sun, we would be burned to crisp. 1 degree farther, we would freeze. We are at a perfect axis tilt to have four seasons, we have the right, just right atmospheric gas combination to breathe. If we had a little more oxygen, the earth would actually burst into flames. A little less oxygen, we would suffocate. If earth was smaller, we could not have an atmosphere. If we were bigger, the gravity would make everything much to difficult to move. And you say it was by chance? Please, use logic.


I understand you. It's really awesome. But it's not logic.

By the same logic we could conclude that, since the chances of you being here by a natural process (your little particular sperm bug finding your egg, multiplied by the similar chances that your parents underwent, times your grandparents, etc) are ridiculously low, you must not be here by such a process.

Yet we know that's how it happened.

If you shuffle a deck of cards and tell me the order of the cards, i could say "Do you expect me to believe that you got that particular order out of the 8,0658175170943878571660636856404e+67 possible ones???"

My bet is that there are lots of possibilities that would amaze you and me just like this one does (well, if you or me could live in any of those possibilities).



-------
Quote from Lester10 at 2:51 PM on September 21, 2010 in the thread
Scientists assert (by Lester):

Ha Ha. (...) I've told you people endlessly about my evidence but you don't want to show me yours - you just assert.
porkchop
Would we see a mammal by the water's edge "suddenly" start breathing underwater(w/camera effect of course)?
Contact me at youdebate.1wr@gishpuppy.com
 


Posts: 3037 | Posted: 01:09 AM on February 1, 2009 | IP
Zucadragon

|      |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
-1

Rate this post:

Quote from wisp at 02:09 AM on February 1, 2009 :
Quote from JSF16 at 8:21 PM on January 23, 2009 :
If there is no god, we would not be alive. Like wisp said, use logic. If our planet was 1 degree closer to the sun, we would be burned to crisp. 1 degree farther, we would freeze. We are at a perfect axis tilt to have four seasons, we have the right, just right atmospheric gas combination to breathe. If we had a little more oxygen, the earth would actually burst into flames. A little less oxygen, we would suffocate. If earth was smaller, we could not have an atmosphere. If we were bigger, the gravity would make everything much to difficult to move. And you say it was by chance? Please, use logic.


I understand you. It's really awesome. But it's not logic.

By the same logic we could conclude that, since the chances of you being here by a natural process (your little particular sperm bug finding your egg, multiplied by the similar chances that your parents underwent, times your grandparents, etc) are ridiculously low, you must not be here by such a process.

Yet we know that's how it happened.

If you shuffle a deck of cards and tell me the order of the cards, i could say "Do you expect me to believe that you got that particular order out of the 8,0658175170943878571660636856404e+67 possible ones???"

My bet is that there are lots of possibilities that would amaze you and me just like this one does (well, if you or me could live in any of those possibilities).



On top of that, you've got the "these are the only living conditions" which is a bullshit claim in the first place.

Different conditions would allow for different life to evolve.

You could see it as a lottery.


Sure, the chances of John Hershley to win the lottery is about 1 in a billion.. But the chances of 1 person out of 1 billion to win.. Well that chance is nearly inevitable.

That same mind set can be used on life, evolution, geology.. Its not about chances, because in general, the chance that a life would evolve, is higher enough to make it very very probable.

 


Posts: 103 | Posted: 05:30 AM on February 1, 2009 | IP
PatrickGood21

|      |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
-1

Rate this post:

Honestly, people can debate this forever, and nobody will likely EVER be proven right or wrong. This is all a matter of opinion. Personally, I'm not even sure what I believe. I know that evolution makes a whole lot more sense based on actual Scientific fact than Creationism (which has more holes in it than a wiffle ball). However, I don't know what is true because I wasn't around when the Earth was created, and I damn sure wasn't around when God was created, if he/she was created...and I don't think ANYBODY should be arrogant enough to say they know the answers to all these questions.


-------
P-Good
 


Posts: 1 | Posted: 5:37 PM on February 2, 2009 | IP
Fliszt

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
-1

Rate this post:

The question of who created God is really an attempt by people to evade the clear implications of what the laws of thermodynamics and modern science has been telling us for a century or so.  For instance, Albert Einstein at one time thought that there was no God because he assumed that the Universe was eternal, that it had no beginning. He was forced to change his mind on the matter when he was made aware of the scientific discoveries that very strongly point to the fact that all matter, space and even time had a beginning. As a result, Einstein realized that there had to be a Being who began it all. Since this Being created time, he would necessarily have to be Eternal and uncaused. If someone objects to the idea of there being a God who is eternal because it seems to hard to imagine or believe, then you are left with the other alternative. That is, the Universe caused itself into being out of nothing. But this is a logical fallacy(i.e. you can't get something from nothing) and a scientific fallacy(contradicts one of the laws of thermodynamics, matter cannot be created or destroyed).Therefore we are led and directed by reason and the evidence to conclude that there was an uncreated being who brought everything into existence. If this is too hard to fathom and comprehend, that in of itself does not invalidate the truth of the matter, for by way of analogy there are many things in nature which defy human comprehension. One prime example of this is the dual nature of light. It has been scientifically proven that light is both a wave and a particle at the same time. This is a paradox, a conundrum that baffles even the most brilliant scientists, but nonetheless it is a fact.Hope this helps.


-------
Michael
 


Posts: 6 | Posted: 10:07 PM on February 2, 2009 | IP
VividPicnic

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Who created God? Let's just assume a greater being than God created God. Then another being created that one. We could just keep going on like this forever. It makes perfect sense that "some being" was not created. That he had an exitense going backwards into eternity.

I would like to know more about Albert Einstien's findings on all matter having a beginning Michael. This would invalidate the argument that the universe just "was" and had no beginning.

But look, its not just the position of the earth from the sun (which if we are to believe the big bang theory came about by blind chance), its also the position of the moon from the earth and also the positions of the other planets in the galaxy. They all have a bearing on the earth. Big Bangers will then have us believe that the sun, the moon, the earth and the rest of the planets all found their way into position by accident. No driving force required. Very logical people.
 


Posts: 10 | Posted: 08:00 AM on March 20, 2009 | IP
Demon38

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

It makes perfect sense that "some being" was not created. That he had an exitense going backwards into eternity.

I don't understand how this makes perfect sense.  It seems more like you creationists can't explain it so you just stop.  "something had to start it all, so we pick God!"  You ignore the lessons learned from physics, not everything needs a cause.


This would invalidate the argument that the universe just "was" and had no
beginning.


Our universe began roughly 13.7 billion years ago....What are you talking about?

But look, its not just the position of the earth from the sun (which if we are to believe the big bang theory came about by blind chance)

The Big Bang theory says no such thing.  The position of the earth has nothing to do with blind chance, guess you don't know what you're talking about.

its also the position of the moon from the earth and also the positions of the other planets in the galaxy. They all have a bearing on the earth.

And that "bearing" whatever the hell that means, has nothing to do with blind chance.

Big Bangers will then have us believe that the sun, the moon, the earth and the rest of the planets all found their way into position by accident.

No they wouldn't, you're the only one mAking that claim.  Can you offer us any evidence to support the claim that astrophysicists say the universe formed by blind chance?  Didn't think you could.

No driving force required.

Ever hear of gravity?

Very logical people.

Says the guy who doesn't have a clue aqbout science!  Now that's funny!
 


Posts: 1664 | Posted: 5:38 PM on March 20, 2009 | IP
VividPicnic

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I admit I don't know a great deal of scientific facts. But logic alone can tell us alot of things. For instance if we don't pick God, what do we pick? Nothing? And please elaborate on something that doesn't need a cause?

Fine. The universe is 13.7 billion years old. I was actually trying to dispute something written in another forum that said the universe could have had no beginning. At any rate. If the universe is that old, give me another cause besides God that triggered it?

Position of the earth has nothing to do with blind chance? So you're saying theres a guiding force behind the positioning? This seems to indicate intelligence right?

The other planets in the solar system have a direct effect on the earth's climate. And once again, if this positioning isn't blind chance, guidance is required?

Astrophysicists are by and large anti-creation right? If this is the case, what else can you suggest manipulates the forces in the universe besides chance? If there is an ordered guidance this means there is a guider?

You'll have to explain exactly how gravity manouvered all the planets and the sun and the moon into alignment with each other.

And scientific knowledge does not equate to a logical mind.
 


Posts: 10 | Posted: 8:04 PM on March 20, 2009 | IP
VividPicnic

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

As an addendum, there must been something in the beginning that sparked the big bang. Raw energy? Random matter? I don't know. Please enlighten me on the big bang theory. Cliche as it may sound, I will ask, where did this something originate from and if laws governed the big bang, where did these laws come from?

The obvious rebuttal is: where did God come from then? I've already stated that something needs to have required no beginning. And if not God, then what? Non-intelligent energy?
 


Posts: 10 | Posted: 8:27 PM on March 20, 2009 | IP
orion

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

VividPicnic -
Position of the earth has nothing to do with blind chance? So you're saying theres a guiding force behind the positioning? This seems to indicate intelligence right?


Maybe you're not aware that astonomy is currently experiencing something of a revolution right now.  Astronomers have detected numerous planets orbiting stars in our neighborhood of the Milky Way galaxy.  And more planets are being discovered all the time.  Just the other week NASA put into an earth-trailing orbit a spacecraft that has the ability to detect even more planets, including earth-size ones orbiting other stars - the Kepler mission.

It is becoming evident that planetary formation is a common consequence of stellar formation.  No chance involved.  Planetary formation is part of a common natural process.  No ID needed.

The other planets in the solar system have a direct effect on the earth's climate. And once again, if this positioning isn't blind chance, guidance is required?

I would really, really like to know where you came by this piece of information.  How do the other planets in our solar system affect Earth's climate?

Astrophysicists are by and large anti-creation right?

I would guess that most astrophysicists believe that there is a natural explanation for our universe, one that does not require a 'God explanation'.  But that is just my guess.  I don't have any polls to base that statement on.

If this is the case, what else can you suggest manipulates the forces in the universe besides chance? If there is an ordered guidance this means there is a guider?

I don't think there is anything that manipulates the forces in the universe.  Why does there have to be a guider?  There is no evidence of one.  Natural forces dictate what happens in the universe.

You'll have to explain exactly how gravity manouvered all the planets and the sun and the moon into alignment with each other.

You wouldn't by chance be an astrologer, would you?
 


Posts: 1460 | Posted: 9:15 PM on March 20, 2009 | IP
    
Multiple pages for this topic [ 1 2 ]

Topic Jump
« Back | Next »
Multiple pages for this topic [ 1 2 ]
Forum moderated by: admin
    

Topic options: Lock topic | Unlock topic | Make Topic Sticky | Remove Sticky | Delete thread | Move thread | Merge thread

 

© YouDebate.com
Powered by: ScareCrow version 2.12
© 2001 Jonathan Bravata. All rights reserved.