What proof do you want? And in turn, what proof do you have?

[LucyLouWho]

So, a lot of times, when religion is mentioned, especially on TeenHelp, there are people that demand proof at every single debate. And that's not a bad thing, but if I'm arguing for Christianity and you're arguing that there is no god, now it's your turn to prove it. No, I can't prove with scientific facts that God is, indeed, real, but neither can you prove that he's not real.

I've heard that Christians are delusional. I've heard it said that Christians are crazy or insane for praying because it's just them "talking to no one". I've heard brainwashing. Speaking in tongues being of demons. All kinds of things.

Proof? Prove that there is no god. Prove that faith isn't the answer. Prove that you're right and every Christian in the world and I are wrong.

[Jack]

Well the burden of proof lies on the person claiming something is real. I can claim that there is an invisible fire breathing dragon in my garage, however without proof I would be deemed "delusional". Especially if I let my belief in that invisible dragon dictate almost all my actions and decisions in my life and told everyone else that they should do the same.

[Blackwing]

Religion is about Faith not so much God exist because of scientific Evidence.

[LucyLouWho]

Originally Posted by Jack

Well the burden of proof lies on the person claiming something is real. I can claim that there is an invisible fire breathing dragon in my garage, however without proof I would be deemed "delusional". Especially if I let my belief in that invisible dragon dictate almost all my actions and decisions in my life and told everyone else that they should do the same.

Yeah. I know. And I'm not trying to push it on anyone. This thread is strictly about what proof is and what would be considered as proof. I'm not worried about the general argument, "Christian vs. Atheist"... It's more of, if I don't prove myself right, you prove me wrong. Meh... I'm not sure I know really how to explain what I'm trying to say. I'll think about it and be back later.

[InSovietRussiaORGASMGotU]

Originally Posted by ThereIsHope

neither can you prove that he's not real.

I've heard that Christians are delusional. I've heard it said that Christians are crazy or insane for praying because it's just them "talking to no one". I've heard brainwashing. Speaking in tongues being of demons. All kinds of things.

Proof? Prove that there is no god. Prove that faith isn't the answer. Prove that you're right and every Christian in the world and I are wrong.

You've conveniently missed that atheists are also called delusional, lacking morals, etc... . Christians aren't the only ones getting this, so don't try to make it seem like they are.

The part in bold make this a rather silly idea because you openly admitted that it cannot be done. Proving that I'm right/wrong also falls under this.

As for proving the faith isn't the answer, this begs the question, what "answer" are you referring to? Is it about creation of humankind and the universe or is it simply about how you can be "blessed" and live your day-to-day life.

[Jack]

I think it's more the idea that there is no God is infinitely more plausible than the idea that there is one. The fact that Atheists go "OMG YOU HAVE NO PROOF LOL" is more due to the fact that it is the person claiming that something exists that should provide the proof rather than the other way around.

Imagine it as an experiment. You have a hypothesis and a null hypothesis. The hypothesis is God exists, the null hypothesis must therefore be that God does not exist. If you cannot prove your hypothesis you must take the null hypothesis as being true.

[Acheron]

Originally Posted by ThereIsHope

Proof? Prove that there is no god. Prove that faith isn't the answer. Prove that you're right and every Christian in the world and I are wrong.

There is no way to logically prove that something doesn't exist, and assuming that something is true simply because it hasn't been disproved is fallacious.

[R.K.]

now it's your turn to prove it.

Owrly?

Right... I suggest you read abour Russel's Teapot.

"If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is an intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense. If, however, the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books, taught as the sacred truth every Sunday, and instilled into the minds of children at school, hesitation to believe in its existence would become a mark of eccentricity and entitle the doubter to the attentions of the psychiatrist in an enlightened age or of the Inquisitor in an earlier time."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell's_teapot

[LucyLouWho]

Originally Posted by Jack

I think it's more the idea that there is no God is infinitely more plausible than the idea that there is one. The fact that Atheists go "OMG YOU HAVE NO PROOF LOL" is more due to the fact that it is the person claiming that something exists that should provide the proof rather than the other way around.

Imagine it as an experiment. You have a hypothesis and a null hypothesis. The hypothesis is God exists, the null hypothesis must therefore be that God does not exist. If you cannot prove your hypothesis you must take the null hypothesis as being true.

Hmm... That does make a lot of sense.

And yes, I know that it can't really be proven either way, which is why this thread was made. Because I can't prove anything, but neither can anyone else in the world.

[R.K.]

Originally Posted by ThereIsHope

Hmm... That does make a lot of sense.

And yes, I know that it can't really be proven either way, which is why this thread was made. Because I can't prove anything, but neither can anyone else in the world.

Maybe because there is nothing to prove??

Like could you prove there is not an invisible, transcendent fairies sitting on everyone's heads? The claim is ridiculous & UNTESTABLE, that doesn't make it true or EVEN WORTH WASTING TIME OVER. It is possible... but I think even you would agree it is moronic to suggest the fairy theory as true.

[Acheron]

Originally Posted by ThereIsHope

And yes, I know that it can't really be proven either way, which is why this thread was made. Because I can't prove anything, but neither can anyone else in the world.

Yep, none of the religious can prove that their particular deities exist, therefore the logical position is not to believe in any of them.

[Gram Negative]

Originally Posted by ThereIsHope

Proof? Prove that there is no god. Prove that faith isn't the answer. Prove that you're right and every Christian in the world and I are wrong.

There are studies that show that prayer do not work when it comes to medical affairs. http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/31/health/31pray.html

[Katieeee]

First off, i'm agnostic.
Secondly, i'm curious, can you guys give scientific facts beside "It's not plausible" or "It's like saying there's a giant talking lawn gnome in my bedroom that can fly and grant magical wishes". Please, if possible, someone state scientific evidence that God doesn't exist. Only facts. No speculation and no assumptions.

[Jack]

Originally Posted by Katieeee

First off, i'm agnostic.
Secondly, i'm curious, can you guys give scientific facts beside "It's not plausible" or "It's like saying there's a giant talking lawn gnome in my bedroom that can fly and grant magical wishes". Please, if possible, someone state scientific evidence that God doesn't exist. Only facts. No speculation and no assumptions.

Well obviously that's impossible to do. To outright give scientific evidence that God doesn't exist is at this point ludicrous and will be for a long time yet.

If you think about it, "gods work" has been disproved plenty of times. In the past God has been credited with everything from the sun rising to conception. However we now know that God has nothing to do with these things and science has filled in the gap in our knowledge of these things that God used to fill. It seems infinitly plausible that science will continue to do this, of course the more we understand about the universe the more questions are raised and this is where people place God, into any areas of uncertainty. The concept of God constantly changes and adapts to new scientific breakthroughs making it more difficult to disprove it, for example if you disprove a passage in the bible a plenthora of experts will come forward and say: "Ha! That passage was a metaphor and not meant to be taken literally" or they reinterpret it in relation to the modern breakthrough and the nature of God will change again.

Secondly there is evidence from which you can imply that God does not exist. For example, the link that Gram posted. That rather shows that either God does not exist or he does not respond to prayer does it not?

The fact is that nobody needs to disprove God. People need to prove it. The default position in this debate should be disbelief.

[Double X]

Throughout history humans keep proving 'god' wrong, it is quite logical to see that god could only exist as the most simple of ideas. Really though, god is only a temporary answer for questions until science discovers the real one.

Originally Posted by Katieeee

First off, i'm agnostic.
Secondly, i'm curious, can you guys give scientific facts beside "It's not plausible" or "It's like saying there's a giant talking lawn gnome in my bedroom that can fly and grant magical wishes". Please, if possible, someone state scientific evidence that God doesn't exist. Only facts. No speculation and no assumptions.

Fact:

You can't disprove something that doesn't exist.

How is this so hard to see?

[Algernon]

Originally Posted by ThereIsHope

So, a lot of times, when religion is mentioned, especially on TeenHelp, there are people that demand proof at every single debate. And that's not a bad thing, but if I'm arguing for Christianity and you're arguing that there is no god, now it's your turn to prove it. No, I can't prove with scientific facts that God is, indeed, real, but neither can you prove that he's not real.

I've heard that Christians are delusional. I've heard it said that Christians are crazy or insane for praying because it's just them "talking to no one". I've heard brainwashing. Speaking in tongues being of demons. All kinds of things.

Proof? Prove that there is no god. Prove that faith isn't the answer. Prove that you're right and every Christian in the world and I are wrong.

Amen. Preach it sister!

Originally Posted by ThereIsHope

Hmm... That does make a lot of sense.

And yes, I know that it can't really be proven either way, which is why this thread was made. Because I can't prove anything, but neither can anyone else in the world.

Did you notice that most of people replying sound like they have no emotions whatesoever? Some sound true and honest, but some sound like this.

If God really exists then the facts would be upfront and science would be able to prove them because science makes the world go round. If I put Jesus as test subject b and God as test subject J then I added some NaCl2 then the facts don't line up in the correct order as science states in area code 836-2x4(bxt) negative-alpha. If you were correct Mary should have appeared on a bicycle with Gabriel running after her. So since this didn't happen when I tested the hypothesis, I got a grotesque head, which you would tell me is John the baptist, but I don't believe that.

[InSovietRussiaORGASMGotU]

Originally Posted by Katieeee

First off, i'm agnostic.
Secondly, i'm curious, can you guys give scientific facts beside "It's not plausible" or "It's like saying there's a giant talking lawn gnome in my bedroom that can fly and grant magical wishes". Please, if possible, someone state scientific evidence that God doesn't exist. Only facts. No speculation and no assumptions.

Have you not read the first post and other posts? Science is based off of theories and laws, none of which are 100% true or false. Something may be accepted as a fact, such as evolution among the biological scientist community, however, it is still a theory regardless of how you view it. So, you wanting facts shows a) you haven't read any of the previous posts, b) you want evidence for something that requires no evidence and c) you fail to understand that science is not based off of solid facts, which is something that you are demanding.

xHolyValorx: Having no emotions is a good thing as there are no stupid things to obscure your vision of what there is, proper reasoning and how to achieve something. Also, how can you tell from these few statements that it is written as though there is no emotion?

Originally Posted by Double X

You can't disprove something that doesn't exist.

Unfortunately, you've already jumped the gun by stating that god doesn't exist. This in itself requires some evidence and reasoning, which you have failed to provide. So, before you say that you cannot disprove that something does not exist, you must prove that said thing does not exist. Then, you can prove that you cannot disprove that said thing does not exist.

[Algernon]

Originally Posted by YourNightmare

Have you not read the first post and other posts? Science is based off of theories and laws, none of which are 100% true or false. Something may be accepted as a fact, such as evolution among the biological scientist community, however, it is still a theory regardless of how you view it. So, you wanting facts shows a) you haven't read any of the previous posts, b) you want evidence for something that requires no evidence and c) you fail to understand that science is not based off of solid facts, which is something that you are demanding.

xHolyValorx: Having no emotions is a good thing as there are no stupid things to obscure your vision of what there is, proper reasoning and how to achieve something. Also, how can you tell from these few statements that it is written as though there is no emotion?



Unfortunately, you've already jumped the gun by stating that god doesn't exist. This in itself requires some evidence and reasoning, which you have failed to provide. So, before you say that you cannot disprove that something does not exist, you must prove that said thing does not exist. Then, you can prove that you cannot disprove that said thing does not exist.

YourNightMare: Are you saying the Human Beings are just mammals? We're just lifeforms with no emotions with no personality? Having no emotion in life is a negative side effect of anyone, especially people with no faith. When I say faith, I don't mean people who believe in God. I mean people with faith in nothing, not science, themselves, Confucius, or Darwin.

People need to feel. And when people don't feel, that means something is wrong.

I don't think there's a strong chance that all of them were writing with belief and emotion at the same time.

Originally Posted by Katieeee

First off, i'm agnostic.
Secondly, i'm curious, can you guys give scientific facts beside "It's not plausible" or "It's like saying there's a giant talking lawn gnome in my bedroom that can fly and grant magical wishes". Please, if possible, someone state scientific evidence that God doesn't exist. Only facts. No speculation and no assumptions.

At least she gives a higher belief a chance. I admire when people call themselves agnostics, that means that the world still believes something.

[Jack]

Originally Posted by xHolyValorx

YourNightMare: Are you saying the Human Beings are just mammals? We're just lifeforms with no emotions with no personality? Having no emotion in life is a negative side effect of anyone, especially people with no faith. When I say faith, I don't mean people who believe in God. I mean people with faith in nothing, not science, themselves, Confucius, or Darwin.

People need to feel. And when people don't feel, that means something is wrong.

I don't think there's a strong chance that all of them were writing with belief and emotion at the same time.

If you're referring to me then I assure you I wrote it with a great deal of emotion, I would get very heated over the debate. There is just no need to make my point less coherent by throwing unecessary emotions into the face of the person I'm trying to explain things too. I "have faith" in a great deal of things and I can't see anything in this thread that you can extrapolate "I am dead inside" from.
I mean what are you? Sigmund Freud or something? Being able to look at one sentence and decifer someone's whole emotional outlook, that's just amazing.

There is a huge difference between making sense and talking a jumble of nonsense words.

[InSovietRussiaORGASMGotU]

Originally Posted by xHolyValorx

YourNightMare: Are you saying the Human Beings are just mammals? We're just lifeforms with no emotions with no personality? Having no emotion in life is a negative side effect of anyone, especially people with no faith. When I say faith, I don't mean people who believe in God. I mean people with faith in nothing, not science, themselves, Confucius, or Darwin.

People need to feel. And when people don't feel, that means something is wrong.

I don't think there's a strong chance that all of them were writing with belief and emotion at the same time.

No, i didn't say that at all. Allow me to quote myself because you seem to have read it then took off with it:

Originally Posted by YourNightmare

Having no emotions is a good thing as there are no stupid things to obscure your vision of what there is, proper reasoning and how to achieve something. Also, how can you tell from these few statements that it is written as though there is no emotion?

No where in here did I say that humans are life forms with no emotions and certainly never mentioned personality. Also, I never even commented that we were mammals or animals, so I don't know where you assumed that from.

People need to feel emotions of others. Feeling your own emotions allows one to be a depressed person and commit disgusting acts such as suicide. I consider it rather a great thing to have no emotions (except anger at times), not a disorder. It allows you to see things objectively. You can call it a disorder, I call it paradise.

Also, explain how you supposedly concluded that some had no emotions in their writing. I'm sure you could make psychoanalysts and psychodynamics thrilled. Share this wealth of knowledge.

[Double X]

Originally Posted by YourNightmare

Unfortunately, you've already jumped the gun by stating that god doesn't exist. This in itself requires some evidence and reasoning, which you have failed to provide. So, before you say that you cannot disprove that something does not exist, you must prove that said thing does not exist. Then, you can prove that you cannot disprove that said thing does not exist.

So how does someone prove something does not exist?

Originally Posted by xHolyValorx

People need to feel. And when people don't feel, that means something is wrong.

I don't think there's a strong chance that all of them were writing with belief and emotion at the same time.

I used to be a happy christian too. Then my best friend, uncle, and my neighbor's 3 year old died within a week of each other. So buzz off because people have their reasons, anything written has 'feeling' attributed to it. Don't assume just because people believe in science they have no emotions.

[InSovietRussiaORGASMGotU]

Originally Posted by Double X

So how does someone prove something does not exist?

The same way someone would prove something does exist. If you're going to make those statements, then it requires proof and evidence. Otherwise it's simply garbage.

[Algernon]

Originally Posted by Double X

So how does someone prove something does not exist?



I used to be a happy christian too. Then my best friend, uncle, and my neighbor's 3 year old died within a week of each other. So buzz off because people have their reasons, anything written has 'feeling' attributed to it. Don't assume just because people believe in science they have no emotions.

I've been a Christian since I was probably 13. I'm not a happy go lucky Christian. I believe people from the church actually look down upon my beliefs, as in I believe I'm one of the Christians that break the mold. I can assume anything I want, such as I'm assuming when you were a child, God was forced down your throat.

I hope a mod notices that was a rude comment and gives you a warning/infraction.

[Jack]

Originally Posted by YourNightmare

The same way someone would prove something does exist. If you're going to make those statements, then it requires proof and evidence. Otherwise it's simply garbage.

Surely the only way to prove something doesn't exist is lack of proof that it does exist? Otherwise why not believe in unicorns or the tooth fairy?

[Algernon]

Originally Posted by Jack

If you're referring to me then I assure you I wrote it with a great deal of emotion, I would get very heated over the debate. There is just no need to make my point less coherent by throwing unecessary emotions into the face of the person I'm trying to explain things too. I "have faith" in a great deal of things and I can't see anything in this thread that you can extrapolate "I am dead inside" from.
I mean what are you? Sigmund Freud or something? Being able to look at one sentence and decifer someone's whole emotional outlook, that's just amazing.

There is a huge difference between making sense and talking a jumble of nonsense words.

I wasn't referring to you at all, Jack. If you wrote it with a great deal of emotion, then that's good. That's means you're not one of the crazy science driven people who believe science rules the Earth and there's no reason for emotion in humanity.

I can get very heated as well, but since I'm Christian, people might as well spit in my face, burn my bibles, beat me up, and I shouldn't turn into a violent raging monster. Even though I'm not fully for the "peace be with you" side of Jesus, him and I know how each other works.

We all took English since we were children. Hopefully a few people have the same "amazing" ability as to "read" and "decifer" as I have.

Originally Posted by Jack

Surely the only way to prove something doesn't exist is lack of proof that it does exist? Otherwise why not believe in unicorns or the tooth fairy?

Funny. They just might have existed. Unicorns, that is.

And the unicorns shall come down with them, and the bullocks with their bulls. (Isaiah 34:7)

And as I was considering, behold, a he-goat came from the west over the face of the whole earth, and touched not the ground: and the goat had a notable horn between his eyes. (Daniel 8:5)

[Jack]

Originally Posted by xHolyValorx

Funny. They just might have existed. Unicorns, that is.

And the unicorns shall come down with them, and the bullocks with their bulls. (Isaiah 34:7)

And as I was considering, behold, a he-goat came from the west over the face of the whole earth, and touched not the ground: and the goat had a notable horn between his eyes. (Daniel 8:5)

I mean unicorns as the mythical fairy creatures with supernatural powers that put a curse on you if you kill them.

Anyway, forgive me if I don't value the bible as a great source of evidence for unicorns. Also, it doesn't literally mean unicorn in those passages, it is simply the bad translation of the hebrew word "Re’em" which referred to a wild, un-tamable animal of great strength and agility, with a mighty horn or horns.
The translators of the Authorized King James Version of the Bible employed unicorn to translate re'em, providing a recognizable animal that was proverbial for its un-tamable nature.

[Kryptonite]

Just a friendly reminder to stay on topic, remember what the OP started off with, etc.

[Algernon]

Originally Posted by Alex

Just a friendly reminder to stay on topic, remember what the OP started off with, etc.

Aren't we on topic I think so.

Originally Posted by Jack

I mean unicorns as the mythical fairy creatures with supernatural powers that put a curse on you if you kill them.

Anyway, forgive me if I don't value the bible as a great source of evidence for unicorns. Also, it doesn't literally mean unicorn in those passages, it is simply the bad translation of the hebrew word "Re’em" which referred to a wild, un-tamable animal of great strength and agility, with a mighty horn or horns.
The translators of the Authorized King James Version of the Bible employed unicorn to translate re'em, providing a recognizable animal that was proverbial for its un-tamable nature.

You're not wrong if you don't value the bible as a great source. It's my foundation, but that doesn't mean it has to be yours. And by the way, I believe that science and faith go hand-in-hand. I find it fascinating how God uses pattern and created all of this. If you don't believe that, you don't have to.

I said they might have existed. I didn't say they did Hey it could be right. Maybe unicorns could exist. In physical appearance, it might be possible.

[Jack]

Originally Posted by xHolyValorx

You're not wrong if you don't value the bible as a great source. It's my foundation, but that doesn't mean it has to be yours. And by the way, I believe that science and faith go hand-in-hand. I find it fascinating how God uses pattern and created all of this. If you don't believe that, you don't have to.

I said they might have existed. I didn't say they did Hey it could be right. Maybe unicorns could exist. In physical appearance, it might be possible.

And I never said they didn't. I just said that the evidence you put forth as evidence for unicorns was incorrect . Though obviously the fact that I don't believe unicorns existed, except perhaps as a short lived genetic mutation probably in the goat family (I seem to remember a news article about a goat born with one horn in spain a few years back but it died rather quickly, so I'd assume there have been others), is evident in my last post.

In order to clarify, I do not think that there has ever been a species of horse with a single horn upon it's forehead with any magical powers or properties.

[Double X]

Originally Posted by xHolyValorx

I've been a Christian since I was probably 13. I'm not a happy go lucky Christian. I believe people from the church actually look down upon my beliefs, as in I believe I'm one of the Christians that break the mold. I can assume anything I want, such as I'm assuming when you were a child, God was forced down your throat.

I hope a mod notices that was a rude comment and gives you a warning/infraction.

My dad is atheist and my mom is a fundy christian. Honestly it didn't matter whether I was Hindu or Roman Catholic, because I would have dropped whatever beliefs I'd have. I think an extreme situation can make people realize things they would have never thought in a normal setting. Sometimes it makes people closer to 'god', and other times it tears them away from it all.

[Algernon]

Originally Posted by Double X

My dad is atheist and my mom is a fundy christian. Honestly it didn't matter whether I was Hindu or Roman Catholic, because I would have dropped whatever beliefs I'd have. I think an extreme situation can make people realize things they would have never thought in a normal setting. Sometimes it makes people closer to 'god', and other times it tears them away from it all.

Well my point, is that you need to stay respectful like everyone else. Please. Telling someone to "buzz off" isn't respectful and I don't appreciate it.

I believe the same thing. Certain situations can bring you closer to God. I know mine did. All I'll say now is that the night of my 18th birthday was one of the most valuable days of my life.

[Double X]

Originally Posted by xHolyValorx

Well my point, is that you need to stay respectful like everyone else. Please. Telling someone to "buzz off" isn't respectful and I don't appreciate it.

buzz off meant 'don't say that', I thought it was pretty obvious. I don't think it was respectful for you to say that science isn't fueled by emotions. People are driven to find answers and giving scientific answers only shows it.

[Hyper Sonic]

Originally Posted by xHolyValorx

I hope a mod notices that was a rude comment and gives you a warning/infraction.

Originally Posted by xHolyValorx

one of the crazy science driven people who believe science rules the Earth.

Oh the irony

There have been no events taken place that cannot be explained plausibly by science. More importantly and good science has reproducibility whereas religion is all hearsay with not a shred of empirical evidence to back it up.

And science does rule the Earth - feel free to post up some aspects of it for testing.

• Earth's Magnetic Field - Electromagnetism and compasses
• The structure of the Earth - Analysis of Seismic Waves
• Origin of the Earth - Likely to be the big bang deduced from cosmic radiation and the Doppler Effect
• Life today - Evolution by Natural Selection
• Hurricanes - Low pressure and high seas combined with Coriolis Effect
• Floods - Water levels are too high for the river/stream/sea

[Algernon]

Originally Posted by Hyper Sonic

Oh the irony

There have been no events taken place that cannot be explained plausibly by science. More importantly and good science has reproducibility whereas religion is all hearsay with not a shred of empirical evidence to back it up.

And science does rule the Earth - feel free to post up some aspects of it for testing.

• Earth's Magnetic Field - Electromagnetism and compasses
• The structure of the Earth - Analysis of Seismic Waves
• Origin of the Earth - Likely to be the big bang deduced from cosmic radiation and the Doppler Effect
• Life today - Evolution by Natural Selection
• Hurricanes - Low pressure and high seas combined with Coriolis Effect
• Floods - Water levels are too high for the river/stream/sea

If you didn't read my above posts, I'm not saying science isn't true. It most certainly is indead, I believe all of the examples you gave us. I just believe the God is also behind science, and science is behind God.

Oh. And I didn't directly point to any of you. So in your reference to me getting an infraction/warning, I've been nothing but respectful. And seeing as you believe that offering my views is "disrespectful" then that's wrong. When someone tells you to "buzz off" Hm. That's direct. Thank you.

[Hyper Sonic]

Originally Posted by xHolyValorx

If you didn't read my above posts, I'm not saying science isn't true. It most certainly is indead, I believe all of the examples you gave us. I just believe the God is also behind science, and science is behind God.

That's kinda my point - I made a rational argument based on empirical facts and then you come along and say God is behind it. It's the same thing as intelligent design - religion realised Biblical creationism was a load of horse manure and so tacked on Darwin's idea of evolution so to try and gain some credibility.

[Algernon]

Originally Posted by Hyper Sonic

That's kinda my point - I made a rational argument based on empirical facts and then you come along and say God is behind it. It's the same thing as intelligent design - religion realised Biblical creationism was a load of horse manure and so tacked on Darwin's idea of evolution so to try and gain some credibility.

Something had to be created for something to evolve.

[Hyper Sonic]

Originally Posted by xHolyValorx

Something had to be created for something to evolve.

The Big Bang theory I touched upon before for the Earth and it's believed that the effect of lightning on amino acids created single cell organisms.

Anyway, this is getting off topic so a new thread would be better.

to the OP: It's hard to prove that something doesn't exist. I could say my cup keeps away meteors and since there are no meteors I have proven it

[Algernon]

Originally Posted by Hyper Sonic

The Big Bang theory I touched upon before for the Earth and it's believed that the effect of lightning on amino acids created single cell organisms.

Anyway, this is getting off topic so a new thread would be better.

to the OP: It's hard to prove that something doesn't exist. I could say my cup keeps away meteors and since there are no meteors I have proven it

That could have happened. I'm not saying it didn't. It's actually quite logical.

[Khadra]

Originally Posted by xHolyValorx

Something had to be created for something to evolve.

So who created god?

[Algernon]

Originally Posted by Khadra

So who created god?

That's the million dollar question isn't it? None of us know. And this isn't a question that is only a downfall to believers. It's a downfall to others as well, as they cannot tell us who created anything either.

So we're stuck in a rut, and we choose sides.

What a pickle